Document Qgxb0QxjjYLZj2Jk58jKMvqR5

Monday April 4, 1983 dp~ z m , ^ sitpsj 77^ /J ^ ,. Part III Environmental Protection Agency Hazardous Waste Management System; Proposed Rule C02993 14514 Federal Register / Vol. 48, No. 65 / M onday, April 4,1983 / Proposed Rules ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 861,264,216, and 776 (SWH-FRL *315-4] Hazardoua Waste Managtmant Syatsm; Idsntffieation and Listing of Hazardous Waste; Standards for Owners and Operators of Hazardoua Waste Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities; Interim Status Standards for Owners and Operators of Hazardoua Waste Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities; and Storage and Disposal of Waste Material: Prohibition of Disposal of Tetrachlorodtbenzo-p-DloxIn AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency* ' ACTION: Proposed rule and request for comments. SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Is today proposing to amend the regulations for hazardous waste management under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act pintA ), by listing additional hazardous wastes containing certain chlorinated dioxins, -dibenzofurans, and -phenols, and by specifying certain management standards for these wastes. These wastes are being listed as acutely hazardous. EPA is also proposing to delete several commercial dierolcal products from the list of hazardous wastes since these listings *re duplicated in today's proposal. In addition, EPA Is proposing to list these materials as solid wastes when they are recycled by being used or.reuBed.-moThat these wastes remain subject to regulation when recycled In this manner. EPA also is proposing to revoke its regulation concerning the disposal of 2,3,7,8-tetrachIorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDDJ-contamlnated wastes under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). when this regulation under RCRA becomes effective. This action extends regulatory control to certain hazardous .wastes hot covered by the existing regulation. It requires handlers of such wastes to comply with thnappropriate regulatory standards. PATE: EPA will accept public comment on this amendment untiUuiie 3^1983. addresses: CommentTinSllHtt^aent to the Docket Clerk, Office of Solid"' Waste (WH-582), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401M Street S.W,, Washington, D.C. 20460. Communications should identify the regulatory docket numbers "Section 3001/Dioxin" or "OPTS 62007". Pursuant to provisions of RCRA and TSCA, requests for a hearing should be addressed to Eileen Claussen, Director. Office of Management, Information, and Analysis, Office of Solid Waste (WH662), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, S.W,, Washington, D.C 20460. Public Docket: The public docket for 40 CFR Parts 261, 264, and 265 is located In Room S-269C, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401M Street. S.W., Washington, D.C. 20460, and is available for viewing from B:00 a.m. to 4A0 pjn., Monday through Friday, excluding holidays. The public docket for 40 CFR Part 778 is located in Room E-107 at the sam e. address, and is available for viewing during the same hours. KM FURTHER INFORMATNMCONTACT: RCRA Hotline, toll free at (800) 424-4346 or at (202) 382-3000 or Jody Beilin (202) 362-1770. SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATOtC Outline L Background II. Summary o f the Proposed Listing m . Basis for Listing A. Toxicity of Contaminants of Concern & CtonlaminantConcentration lev e ls in These Wastes C. The W astes' Potential to Cause Substantial Harm If Mismanged D. Listing as Acutely Hazardous W astes IV. Removal of Certain Commercial Chemical Products Listed In 40 CFR 261.13(f) V . Regulatory Status of These Materiab When Recycled by Being U s e d Reused VI. Relation of Today's Proposal to Regulation of TCCD--Contaminated W astes Under the Toxic Subataaces Control Act VU. Proposed Management of T h en W astes A . Management at RCRA Interim Status Facilities B. Management at Fully Permitted Facilities C. Other Management Options Considered For These W astes VHI. Analytical Method for tetra-, penta-, and hexachlorodibenzo-pddoxins and dibenzofurans IX. Questions for comment X Economic, Environmental, and Regulatory Impacts A Regulatory Impact Analysis B. Regulatory Flexibility Act C. Paper Reduction Act o f 1960 XI. Rulemaking Record X U List of Subjects I. Background On May 19,1980, bb part of the final and interim final regulations Implementing Section 3001 of RCRA, EPA published a list of hazardous wastes that included hazardous wastes generated from non-specific sources. [See 40 CFR 261.31.) This list has been amended several times. In today's action, EPA is proposing to amend this section to add particular wastes ! containing certain contaminants that are, for certain animal species, among the most toxic known: these wastes < consequently are of particular [ environmental concern. EPA has j evaluated these wastes against the criteria for listing acutely hazardous and hazardous wastes (40 CFR 261.11 (aj (2J and (a) (3)), and has determined thul * they: (1) Are capable of causing or significantly contributing to an increase in serious irreversible or incapacitating reversible, illness, and (20) bIsq pose a substantial present or potential thrent t< human health or the environment when improperly treated, stored, transported, disposed of, or otherwise managed, and therefore are acutely hazardous wastes.1 n . Summary of the Proposed listing1 This proposed regulation covers principally wastes from the production of certain chlorophenols and of ; dilorophenoxy pesticides, as well a s ' discarded unused formulations j containing tri-, tetra-,or pentachlorophenol end their derivatives. Specifically, this proposed regulation designates as hazardous certain wastes (including reactor residues, still bottoms, brines, spent filter aids, spent carhop from product purification, and sludges from wastewater treatment, but not including untreated wastewater or spent carbon from hydrogen chloride purification] resulting from the following processes:1,4 | 1The RCRA definition of acutely hazardous waste laset forth at 40 CFR 281.11(e)(2). Under that definition, euch material la not neceasarily "acutely toxic" In the way that term ia used by , toxicologist*. Rather, the term ia Intended by EPA to Identify wastes which a n to hazardous that they may, either through acute or chronic exposure, j "cause, or significantly contribute to an increase in serious Irreversible, or incapacitating reversible. Illness", regardless of how they are managed. 'T he following acronyms end definitions are used to this document (and in the background document For this regulation): PCDDj = all isomers of all chlorinated dibenzop- dloxini. PCDFioall isomers of mil chlorinated dlbenio- brans IDs and CDFs--all isomers of the tetra.. peni.t. and hexatdtlorodibenio-p-dioxtna and - dibento furan*, repeclively. TCUDs and TCDFs-tU isomer* of the j tatrachlorodlbenzo-p-dloxlna and -dibentofuran*. respectively. j TCDD and TCDF-the respective 2.3.7,Miomers The prefixes D. Tr, T. Pe. and Hx denote the di-. tri*. tetra. penta-, and baxachloro-congenera, reapectivaly. 'Not all of these wastes are generated by ever> process discussed in the text *We are not proposing to tilt untreated wastewaters or spent carbon from hydrogen j chloride purification because these wastes are not expected to contain CDDs or CDFs at levels of concern. * Federal Register / Vol 4B, No. 65 / Monday, April i. IMS / ftopowd Ridae S?vfjr*.1vt7-'V.jj`` (aj th e production and manufacturing use 8of tri-, tetra*, or pentachlorophenol and intermediates used to produce their derivatives;* T \ (b) th e manufscturing'uieoftetra-, penta-, or hexechlorobenzehes under alkaline conditions; '; ^ . (c) the production of material* on equipment previously used for the production or manufacturing use of materials listed under [a] and (b) above: and (d) discarded unused formulations containing tri-, tetra-, or pentachlorophenols, or discarded unused formulations containing compounds derived from these chlorophenals.1 In the context of this lilting, "msnufscrturinf dm" meant the uh of the named chemical a i a reactant or chemical Inimmediate (for Initanco, ai in the me of X4.S.-tricfalurapfrBOol (MA-TCP) aa a feedstock for tbo ayathaiii of ZAA-T), or aa a component to a fonautatiog praona (aa, for inatanoo. In the fonnatoHoo of a mixture of 2.4.S,-, TCP and lJAA-TzCP. to which thaw component retain their dtaekal IdeatityJ. to the pneant context the tana "manafantnrtog u*e" dooa not indmto midtioa b t m (ha nao of dtlonphettoxy peatidde fonnutolion*. e a . to wood praaarvatioa.' The principal manufacturing use of chlamphenob Ii to the eyntfaaaii of dtknopbenoxy add, estere. and sipltw They are alao uaad in the synthesis of phanolic recto*. and of dye and pigment intermediate. However, only waatei from chloropheoaxy ynthraia ate listed aa haiardous wastes. because the Agency baa no data on the coodlliens of eyntbaa SKMratiea id waste*. and the level of chlorinated dibenxo-p-dkwda or - dibenxofuran coolaminatinn of waaia* from the ayntheaia of pheoollc rain*, dye*, and pigment*. The Agency eoUdta data on the extant of CDD/CSF conlamination of the Uttar waaia*. Wa alao a n presently initiating sampling of amna of the* waitea to the oourea of our ongoing Induitry Studios program. The Z.4.5.-TCP derivative Hexacblorophmie to now synthesized from a purified Z4A-TGPia an add-catalyxed condensation reaction. Because the reaction occurs at retherlow temperatures, and at acid pH. no CDD or CDF formation la expected to occur. Eariiei production tedmiques resulted to TCDD contaminalion. Waataa reaulting from Hexadilurophene production therefore are not___ included in this listing unless prepurified Z.IA TCP was not used, or the process took place on equipment contaminated with Q30* or CDFa. Thia category of listed wastes includes discarded pesticides and formulations containing tri-. telra-, or pmisrhtnwiphwvri amLngrsdienta. Some of these material*. nezisly EPA Hazardous Wastes UZ12, 230. 2S1. 24&acdtke ddoraphenoxy pesticides U23Z and IJ232 already are hatardoua wastes under 0 CPU 2SU3(Q when discarded la commercial grade, technical grade; or offspecific*lion fora, or when present aa the sola active ingrediwri to a formulation. However, discarded formulatlone mtstnii^g these chlorophenols or cMarephanoxy compounds as one of a number of lngrsdienta (for example, to a mixture of 2.4,5-T and 2.4.-D) are not presently considered to be hazardous wastes (unless they exhibit a characteristic of hazardous waste). These multi-ingrediapt formuialions nevertheless are likely to be just aa toxic as sole active ingredient mixtures, since the concentration of toxic Ingredients Is the same or higher. Today's action thus would remedy this gap to regulatory coverage by listing the multi ingredient formulations containing the discarded Iff. Basis tor Listing dmooBstrated that tb s a A. Toxicity o f contaminants o f concern defined strurtare/activity defining the scale and i^jg 1. Toxicity o f chlorinated dioxin and effects of PCDDs and PCDFs. Those -dibenzofurant. The contaminants of Isomers that have halogens In at la id concern in these wastes ora CDDs and three of the four lateral ring position CDFS, tri-, tetra-, and (numbers &&7, or 0), end that have at pentachlorophenole. and the chlorophenoxy derivatives of these least ons ring hydrogen atom, are the most toxic isomers. All the CDDs and chlorophenoli. CDDs and CDF ara, for CDFs substituted in this mnnnw have certain animal species, among the most extremely high acute toxidty. bimL potent toxic substances known.* TCDD strongly to a cytosolic protein receptor, and two HxCDD isomen are among the and are pot*n* twAiaw nf several liver most potent animal carcingena tested. enzymesTTbe Agency recognizes that, Since each of these substances are even within such congeneric groupings, carcinogenic in well-conducted tests in th e n are differences in tnxidty. There both rats and mice, they aye alio is, for instance, a 370-fold difference in considered by the Agency toBe acute tnxidty between the 1,2,3,7,9- and potential human carcinogens (see 44 FR the l (2.4Jl0-PeGDD isomers; however, 39658=39379 fluly8;' 187gttrfn laboratory even the less toxic (saner has extremely studies, TCDD has also bean shown to high acute toxldty (oral LDk In the be teratogenic, fetotoxic, and guinea p i g - 1.1 mg/kg). embryotoidc at extremely low doses 1 Only limited toxicity Information is (ng/kg/day). Based on structure-activity available on certain of the CDD and relationships, TGDF also may have CDF isomen. However, many are reproductive effects at extremely low structurally similar to other CDD and doses. Many CDDs and CDFs are acuta CDF isomers that ere potent toxicants. toxicants as tested in laboratory The Agency may permissibly infer that animals at the pg/kg/day dose rate, certain waste constituents are toxic, and, even at these very low based upon structural similarity to concentrations, have many observable known toxicants. See EDF r. EPA. 596 F. physiologic effects. Although an EPA 2d 62,76-63 (D.C Or; 1978) (prohibition Scientific Advisory Panel determin ed ! of discharge to navigable waters of lets nfl/kgtHgy weight to ba "for all chlorinated PCBs Is perndaaiblein the practical purposes" a no observed effect absence of spedfic toxicologic data due level in rodents (44 FR 72337"(Deceinber to their structural similarity to the more 13,1979)], several other scientists have chlorinated PCBs). condudad that a NOEL has not been Consequently, because most of the conclusively demonstrated. Moreover, Isomers of the listed CDDs and CDFs the Scientific Advisory Panel conduded are toxic, albeit to different degrees, that a NOEL had not been demonstrated because identification of individual for primates. In addition, the U.S. Food Isomers to the waste would be an and Drug Administration has excessive regulatory burden, and established a guideline suggesting because the Agency believes that these limitation of human consumption of fish wastes would contain a certain containing TCDD concentrations greeter percentage of the more toxic component, than 25-50 ns/kg foot). Furthermore, in the Agency has determined that it is a several enforcement actions and in two conservative public health assumption site-specific risk assessments conducted that all the Ucmera of TODD should be by the Agency regarding Times Beach considered to Mtimating itwtnxidty. Wa and Imperial in Missouri, environmental have therefore determined that all the concentrations in the not to ppb range CDDs and CDFs identified or proposed were determined .to be levels of ranram. to be Identified in Appendix VH1 should and were used to deftne c ie u u p levels. be considered as toxicants of concern in - The Agency emphasises that, for these wastes. This decision la analogous purposes of i s regulation, it considers to the finding adopted by the Agency in all CDDs and CDFs as toxicants of the case of municipal waste resource concern In these wastes- Many recovery facilities.1* biochemical and toxicology studies have Z Toxicity o fchlorophenols and their chlorophenoxy derivative. The other f m t i l wwpninwf. In m M lH n r, w *-- tK* toxicants of concern in these wastes basis It* tilting these commercial chemical products also have serious advene effects. EPA's toIncludecertainchleri**-!Idgitos anddlbepxofrnttipurtoxlcante of aranero. - n Carcinogen Assessment Group has ,,. '*V w sUteasels cm tnxidty. persistence. and \ envlrocmentel onsitemlnation outlined to this prsambto are acre fnDy explained and " Se* Interim vahiatkm of w hsxlth risks usodatsd with rnftsioes of tetrichtorinztod substanttoted is the background dncmneal for this dioxins from mimldpzl west mourez recovwp Usting which toavaltobto liarrevtow to Uw public fzdlltlcs. UZ EPA QfBot of tbs Administrates. Novsmbw It. 1SCL S tob : \ n<S/j ~ 2 5 -6 c > h is,k? ' R t f ^ Fc^ 0 ^ 2 3 h tjjL 14516 Federal Register / Vol. 48, No. 65 / Monday, April 4, 1983 / Proposed Rules determined that 2.4.6-TCP U pniwntifll humen carcinogen." In addition. chTropHnTTffiay cause liver end kidney damage. Somechlorophenoxy compounds are also known or potential human carcinogens, ana may have reproductive and teratogenic effects. Water Quality Criteria have been established for many of these compounds. For example, for 2.4.6-TCP. the criterion far the protection o fpeople from excess risk of developing cancer (Iff* risk level) from the lifetime consumption of contaminated fish and water la 12 pob.The criterion for 2.4,5TCP (based on Its chronic systemic toxic affects) Is 2.0 ppm. For several other chlorophenols, the organoleptic water quality criteria are at the ppb level (see 45 FR 78316 November 28,1980). B. Contaminant concentration levels in these wastes The toxicants of concern are likely to be present in the listed wastes at concentrations many orders of magnitude greater than the levels which, es d te d above, are ol conceWln terms or human health, hi tome cases, the Agency has inferred the presence of these contaminants from knowledge of reaction chemistry and process operating conditions. In other cases, the contamination of chemical intermediates and commercial chemical products Is analytically established. For example, analysis of distillation bottoms from manufacturing processes making or using trichlorophenols can contain several hundred ppm GDs, filter aida may contain up to 6000 ppm TCDDs, and cooling pond muds were shown to contain as much as 1200 ppm CDDs. Still bottoms from 2,4,5-TCP and 2,4,5-T ' production generated by the Vertac Chemical Corporation contained up to 111 ppm TCDDs. [U S v. Vertac Chemical Carp* 469 F. Supp. 870,679 (D. Ark. 1980]) (improper storage and disposal of dioxin-containing wastes results In Imminent and substantial endangennent warranting injunctive relief). * Some process wastes may be contaminated with CDDs or CDFs because they were generated in the course of a manufacturing process performed on equipment that was previously used for a CDD or CDFgenerating process. In the manufacture of chem luis on a production train previously used for a process generating, e,g., CDDs, both the product and the wastes generated can be contaminated with CDDs. This was shown to be the1 11U EPA. Ambient w ittr quality aitarti for cfaleropfaenolg. EPA Q /saoC M . case, for instance, for wastes resulting from the manufacture of 2,4-D. These wastes contained TCDDs at the ppb level, presumably because the equipment, used previously to produce 2.4.S-T, remained contaminated with TCDD after production shifted to 2,4-D (45 FR 32077, May 19,1880). The contamination of tri-, tetra-, and penta chlorophenols, and their phenoxy derivatives with CDDs (30-100 ppm) and CDFs (50-140 ppm) also results In the contamination of bloddes and their formulations. The concentration of higher chlorinated phenols and chlorophenoxy derivatives in these wastes also Is likely to be considerable. In the case of wastes from cholorophenol production, cholorophenols (because of their solubility characteristics) are likely to be present In reactor residues, in still bottoms, and in the sludges from wastewater treatment Wastes from the manufacturing use of these compounds likewise will contain these chlorophenols--since they are the principal raw material in the process-- as well as various chlorophenoxy derivatives. Because of the nature of the purification end precipitation processes, the latter compounds will occur principally in reactor residues, on adsorbents used for product purification, and on filter aids. These compounds are known to be present in the wastes from these processes. For example, a study of the aqueous waste of one herbicide manufacturing facility found that It contained 13.5 kg/day of mixed chlorophenols, and about 32.7 kg/day of phenoxy add. These are discharged In fairly concentrated form: a typical untreated aqueous waste stream from phenoxy a d d manufacture contains 112 ppm of mixed chlorophenols and 235 ppm of chlorophenoxy adds. Discarded pestlddes and peatidde formulations containing these chlorophenols as active ingredients obviously will contain these toxicants In high (percent) concentrations. C. The wastes 'potential to cauae substantial harm i f mismanaged Not only are the contaminants of concern present in significant concentrations, but they are capable of migrating from waste matrices and reaching environmental receptors In potentaUy dangerous concentrations. These contaminants are persistent1*-- " CDDs (and presumably CDFs) are highly retiiUnl to microbial degradation, Tha Agency thus belioyes that tbasa toxicants will ba present In wastswetcr treatment sludges, lha listed chlorophenols and their chlorophenoxy derivatives are biodegradable, but where overloading and CCDs and CDFs extremely so--'and severs lc a n .o crninlntrJivth-foQd chain. The measured bloaccumulation ^ factor (BCF) for TCDD Is species ` dependent, end varfes from 2,000 to - 48.000: structure/activity considrations \ make It reasonable to assume that the BCF for other CDDs and CDFs are within the same range. The calculated BCF for the chlorophenols ranges from 290 for 2,4,5-TCP to 610 for 2,4,8-TCP (however, the measured steady slate BCF for PCP is only 13). Thus, If these toxicants migrate from these wastes, even In extremely low concentrations, they can accumulate In biological organisms at much higher levels, increasing the likelihood of substantial harm to human health and the environment These toxicants, moreover, are mobile in the environment particularly as a result of water run-off o r wind dispersion of contaminated particles, ~ and can migrate from these wastes if they are improperly managed. Although CDDs and CDFs are relatively water Insoluble, and bind strongly to organic soil constituents. Improper land disposalcould cause substantial harm to environmental receptors. Pollution of air end surface waters can occur, perhaps s a result Of windblown dustvwater run-off or erosion, .or Hooding of waste disposal sites. All of these scenarios have occurred. In the Vertac case dtec earlier, Improper storage and disposal wastes from the manufacture of 2,4,5TCP, 2,4-D, and 2,4.5-T resulted in significant environmental contamination. Fish and other aq u a tic lifejn a local stream accumulated TCDD a tl vlsM high as 600 pot. The court concluded: Dioxins * * *can and hsve been transported off the Vertac site on dust, by ilie action oflandfill areas and equalization basin area, and when people and equipment move to and from the Vertac site. Samples how that dioxin ha been transported off the Vertac site Into fiih and sediment in (a local stream), and also Into the Jacksonville sewage treatment plant (489 F. Supp. at 879) TCDDs also have been detected at levels ot concern In the'sedimenta of streams, public sewers, and home s.urops at other sites, including Love Canal. TCDD has been reported tefiah and crayfish living In contaminated streams, In concentrations (600 ng/kfl) up to fifteen times higher than mai at which ru A advises that human consumption be limited. High ppt concentrations have been reported for other CDDs and CDFs In fish. Because of their insolubility in Inadquat treatment occur, and In the anaerehtr. _ environment of sludge disposti, they may penial; 'L'^ if i**Vi*kV. Federal Regfoter / Vol. 48. No. 85 / Monday. April 4, 1963 / Proposed Rules 14517 water, and their strong binding to { organic soil constituents. CDDs and \ CDFs are not ordinarily expected to leach to ground water if proper^' precautions are taken. However, If these wastes are co-disposed withsolubilizing lolvenis. or disposed in situations where *soil binding site are exhausted, ground water contamination could result. Although chlorophenols and chlorophenoxy compounds are subject to environmental degradation, including biodegradation by adapted communities, environmental pollution from these constituents has occurred where wastes from the production and suinfuscturing use of chloronhenols .were^mismanaged. More than twentyfiveyeaxs after the improper disposal of ddorophenolic wastes at Love Canal, tri-, tetra-, and pentachlorophenols were identified in soil^yater. and atorm ewer sediments at concentrations ranging' from 14 pph (PCP in sump water) to 490 ppm (TCPa in storm sewer sediment). A further risk to human health may be posed by improper inyineratinn of these wastes. Improper incineration of chlorophenols are prediced to form CDDs and CDFs as products of incomplete combustion, u poBing a further risk of substantial harm. Indeed . as discussed later in this preamble, the Agency is studying whether different I criteria or management standards (eg., higher destruction and removal efficiency for the incineration of these wastes) are appropriate and practical. \ D. Listing as acutely hazardous i wastes. It is clear from this discussion that , these wastfijiave4he-potentialjo.cause substjintiELhann, if mismanaged. Th Agencyls further convinced that these are acutely hazardous wastes under 40 CFR 261.11(a)(2), since they contain contaminants which, when tested in animals, are among the most toxic contaminants known, and thus are capable of causing, or significantly contributing to serious irreversible, or incapacitating reversible, illness.14This standard Is taken directly from Section 1004(5) of RCRA, and is reserved for wastes particularly likely to pass a substantial risk to human health and the " Shjub, W. M. and W. Tung, Riyaical and chemical properties of dioxins la relation to their disposal. Proceedings 2nd. International Sympoalum on Dioxins. Arlington. VA. October 1981. 14By means of a slts-speallc exclusion petition, a generator may be able to show that a waste does not contain (XDs and/or CDFs at levels sufficient to sustain regulatory ooncem as acutely hazardous i watte. Such Iavals, however, as well as the presence of chlorophenols or chlorophenoxy compounds, may still render such wastes V . hazardous. environment (see preamble to Part 261, 45 FR 33106, May IS, 1980). Additional reasons for listing these wastes as acutely hazardous ore that the wastes havq j^plirntprl in a series bf damage incidents, among them the'incidenis of iove"jEnal and Tupes Beach. The Agencyalso has been compelled lo exert regulatory control over many of these wastes under the Toxic Substances Control Act in the face of the unreasonable risk posed by ongoing end contemplated waste management practices (see further discussion in Part VI. below); The practical consequences of such a listing are two-fold. First these wastes will be aubject to the l_kg/jnonlhjunaU quantity generate limitation contained in 40 CFR 201.5(e)." The Agency deems 1 kg to be equivalent for all practical purposes, to total control of the management of these wastes since they are generated in amounts far greater than 1 kg. The Agfency solicits comments on. the appropriateness of this limitation, , however. Second, the residues in empty containers that contain these listed wastes are subject to control under Subtitle C of RCRA, unless the container has been triple-rinsed using a solvent capable of cleaning the container, or the container has been otherwise cleaned by a method that has been shown to achieve equivalent removal. In addition, as explained more fully below, we are proposing that these wastes be managed only at treatment, storage, and disposal farilitiesthat ha^rfagelTfully permitted under RCKATlexcepi aB~discussed in " Section VII.). In the Agency's Judgment, these wastes should be managed pursuant to the most stringent appropriate standards that are contained in the RCRA hazardous waste management regulations. IV. Removal of Certain Commercial Chemical Products Listed in 40 CFR 281.33(f) As discussed in the previous section, the Agency U proposing to list as acutely hazardous those unused di6'card ^ f o `iTOi^tions^intalning.tri-. telfa^-rbTpehlacKipropfienol^mti discarded formulation containing as*ol u Tbe Agency la propciing today to u n d this provision to apply to xtl scutaly hxzxrdoui wastes, ool fust to lb* cutely baurdoui w u i n listed In 40 CFR 281.33(e). At tba tints 1 9 1 3 was wriltan. there were no acutely hazardous wastes other than there In 128133(e). Now that w s are proposing to Ust wastes In | 281.31 a i acutely hazardous, ws are proposing to oonfonn the referenos to acutely hazardous waste in 1 2813. For the same reason, ws are proposing to malts the aants type of ooafonnlng change to | 281.7(b)--the provision stating when containers that have held acutely hazardous wastes are "empty." ingredients compounds derived from these chloropheoals. Some of these malerial already are hazardous wastes under 40 CFR 281.33(f) when discarded or intended for discard in commercial grade, technical grade, or offspecification form, or when the toxicant is present in formuladons as the sole active ingredient They were originally listed aa toxic (rather than acutely hazardous) because the Agency did not at that time consider the presence of CDDs and CDFs. However, as shown above, these formulations will contain chlorinated dioxins and dlbenzofurana, because the chlorophesol or chlorophenoxy derivatives will themselves be contaminated with CDDs and CDFs. Far this reason, we are now listing them as actutely hazardous.under 40 CFR 281.11(a)(2). To avoid listing the same waste under two different (and Inconsistent) provisions, we are proposing to remova EPA Hazardous Wastes U212, U230, U231, U232, U233, and U242 from 40 CFR 281.33(f). As a consequence, there should be no confusion that these wastes will be subject to a small quantity generator exclusion of 1 kg/mo. V. Regulatory Status of Thase Materials When Recycled by Being Used or Reused. On May 19,1080, EPA promulgated a definition of solid waste which, among other things, states which materials are solid wastes when recycled. In promulgating this rale, EPA established broad jurisdiction over recycled materials and recycling operations. EPA is today proposing in a separate notice to revise this rule to state that certain types of activities Involving secondary material use and reuse do not constitute solid waste management; in particular, the proposal states that secondary materials recycled by being used or reused aa ingredients in new products, or by being used or reused directly as products, ordinarily arenot solid wastes. The proposal provides that materials so used or reused may be listed individually in 1281.2(a)(3) as solid wastes if they meet two * conditions: (1) They are ordinarily disposed of (on a nationwide basisjLor contain'ioj& foaawtiKre^ ordinarily'found in raw materials or proudcfr'uMiTlar the.sam*puzpase which ooristituent*,are,not usedduring the recycling process; and (2) the materials could pose a substantial hazard to human health or the environment when so used or reused. Both these conditions are met here. These wastes are typically disposed of or incinerated, rather than recycled. i nr *r. i 1I ir | t t 14518_________ Federal Register / fo l 48, No. 65 / Monday, April 4, 1983 / Proposed Rules They also contain significant levels of hazardous constituents--CDDs and CDFs--not ordinarily found In raw materials or analogous.oommerclal products, nor would these toxicants contribute to the efflcacyof the recycling prsctice.In addition, In light of their toxicity and tbelMnvtronmental persistence, these wastes could pose the same potential for causing substantial harm when used or reused as when disposed. Since use or reuse would be unregulated, the potential for harm in fact la probably greater.1* Accordingly, we are proposing elsewhere In today's Federal Register to list these materials as solid wastes when they are used or reused. As a result, these wastes will remain subject to regulation when transported end stored under the Subtitle C regulations even when recycled by being used or reused as Ingredients In new products, or by being used or reused directly as products. V t Relation of Today's Proposal to Regulation of TCDD-Contamlnated Wastes Under tbs Toxic Substances Control Act Many wastes containing TCDD are presently regulated under 40 CFR Part 776, a regulation issued under Section 0 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).l , This regulation, promulgated on May 19, I960 (45 FR 82676), prohibits the Vertac Chemical Company from disposing of certain wastes containing TCDD, and requires the company to tore and monitor these wastes until a long-term management solution can be determined. The regulationaliio requires other persons totendlrui to dispose of TCDD wastes (defined as those resulting fromthe production of 2,4,5-TCP or its pestldde derivatives; or substances produced on equipment that was previously used for the.production of 2,4,5-TCP or Its pestldde derivatives) to notify the Agency 60 days In advance of such disposal. The regulation does not apply, however, "to persons disposing of wastes containlng TCDD at facilities permitted for disposal of TCDD under MW* Dots, howwsr, thstjvboo Moondiry materials that a n derived firm commercial pesticides (nidi as rinse waters from pestldde containers) ere pot to use ss pestlddea, they i n not considered to be RCRA wild wastes. The Agency considers this activity to constitute continued use of the pestldde, and so not to involve waste management. Any each use, of course, would have to comply with requirements fewuse of the pestldde Imposed under the Federal Insecticide. Fungidde. and Rodentldde Ad. " Tbe hazardous waste listings proposed today re more Indusive then those regulated under TSCA. Including for exempts, wastes from the production of certain tetrecUorephcnols and chlorobenzenes. Section 3665(c) of RCRA." (See 46 CFR 775.197.) On January 5,1982, EPA Issued on Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) (47 FR 193), announcing the Agency's Intent t o ___ review the TCDD disposal rule (46 CFR 775), and comment fcpaid the AgencyJn^eti^liiingjHfl most appropriateWng^tftnn solution for TCDD-contamlnated wastes. Several comments received on this ANPRM - stated that the regulation of treatment and disposal of hazardous wastes properly belongs under RCRA, and that the Agency should avoid overlapping and potentially contradictory approaches to the same problem under different regulatory authority, e.g.. TSCA and RCRA. Section 1666(b) of RCRA In fact provides that In Implementing the Act, EPA "Shall avoid duplication" with other statutes administered by the Agency. Section 9(b) of TSCA provides that the Agency must utilize Its authority under the other environmental laws It administers where these laws are adequate to protect against unreasonable risk, and where there Is no tong public Interest In taking action under TSCA. EPA agrees that RCRA provides the appropriate long-term solution for controlling the management of TCDD- contamlnated wastes. The disposal rule under TSCA was only meant as a temporary solution. See 45 FR 32682. EPA, In fact, acknowledged the advantages of using RCRA, by providing that final permits issued under RCRA for disposal of TCDD-contamlnated wastes would supersede the TSCA rule. The rule proposed today under RCRA will provide the safeguards of a final permit, and will, therefore, render the TSCA rule unnecessary. Accordingly, only the RCRA rule becomes effective, EPA proposes to revoke the TSCA rule that applies to disposal of TCDD-contamlnated wastes. The basis for this revocation Is stated In the following paragraphs. EPA promulgated the TSCA rule under Section 6(a) of that A ct Section 6(a) provides that EPA may prohibit or otherwise regulate any manner or method of disposal of chemical substances or mixtures If the Agency finds that there It a reasonable basis to conclude that such activities present or will present "an unreasonable risk of Injury to health or the environment" Determining unreasonable risk Involves an administrative Judgment which Is reached by balancing "the probability that harm will occur and the magnitude and severity of that harm against the effect of proposed regulatory action on the availability to society of the benefits . of the substance or mixture, taking into account the availability of substitute?, - for the substance or mixture which di not require regulation, and other adverse effects which such proposed action may have on society." (TSCA Legislative History at 422). In the May 19,1980 regulation, EPA determined Jhat removal for disposal of ceriain'TCDDwsflies^ V e r ^ c ^ ^ ^ Jacksonville, Arkani as^ltTwo u1d {iTBaid~ung^niiflhle.riikiirThe Agency bund that maintaining drum m ed yfqptpg on-site, wiU) monitoring, presented a relatively known and corre^tphlp risk whilejliopbiing ojth ewaates. as proposed by Vertac, posed a substantlaitV'ftreaTetrisk, particularly where case-specific assessment on the management of these wastes had not - been performed. (See Preamble to Finn! Rule at 45 FR 32660; Preamble to Proposed Rule at 45 FR 15595.) Similar considerations led EPA to determine that disposal of TCDD wastes by other persons without prior notification to EPA would present unreasonable risks. The minimal costs of notifying EPA sixty days before disposal, so that EPA could evaluate the management scheme proposed by the notifier, waS determined to be outweighed by the risks of harm that could occur from exposure to TCDD disposed of improperly. We now propose to regulate these wastes under RCRA. On May 19.198n. ' EPA believed that the then existing RCRA regulations for treatment and disposal of Hazardous waste were not appropriate for TCDD-contaminated waste because EPA bad not yet developed final permit standards for land disposal or incineration of hazardous wastes. These final regulations are not effective, and provide a means of properly evaluating the various managemet^ajternativei for TCDD-coniaminated wastes to ensure that these wastes are managed In a mannertlrart^beijipXpreserif an unreasonable risk. Thus, when the rules proposed today under RCRA become final, it will no longer present an unreasonable risk for these wastes to be treated and disposed of in RCRA facilities, and this will be the only legal waste management option. Since promulgation of these RCRA regulations will vitiate the unreasonable risk finding under TSCA, we will at the same time revoke the TSCA May 19,1986 regulation. It should be noted that by doing this, we are eliminating the 60-day notification requirement under TSCA for waste disposed at facilities not ` Federal Register. / -Voi. 48, Noi 65 / Monday, April 4, 1883 / Propoaed Rules 14519 permitted under Section 3005(c) of RCRA. However, when this rule . becomes effective, It will be Illegal to dispose of these wastes, a t facilities that have not been fully permitted. -^ Therefore, we believe the^TSCA'60-day notification requirement iitinneceBBary; in addition, notification under Section 3010(b) will still be required and thus, the Agency will still be informed of who is handling these types of wastes. We also believe that it will be lesB confusing for the regulated community, and more cost effective, both with respect to compliance and regulatory enforcement, for waste disposal to be regulated under RCRA alone, rather than under both statutes. Moreover, the technical expertise needed to issue permits far these wastes is chiefly within the Agency's office administering RCRA. We consequently believe that the public interest warrants rescission of the TSCA rule once this RCRA regulation becomes effective. VII. Proposed Management of These. Wastes A. Management at RCRA Interim Status Facilities As noted, the TSCA rule presently does not allow these wastes to be disposed or treated at interim status facilities without prior approval, because management of such waste at unscrutinized interim status facilities ordinarily presents an unreasonable risk [45 FR 32682). To avoid a decrease in regulatory coverage, and in light of the waste contaminants' hiflhJoxidtv. persistence, and potential to bioaccumulate, we are proposing to amencTthe RCRA regulations, except as noted below, for landfills, waste piles, surface impoundments, land treatment facilities, and incinerators, to require that these wastes be managed only at fully permitted facilities. The reasons for the unreasonable risk finding still hold. Interim status incinerators need not perform at 99.99% destruction and removal efficiencies, ormeel the other performance standardscorilained In Subparl O of Part 264. Interim status landfills, waste piles; surface impoundments, and land treatment facilities need not meet the monitoring requirements in Subpart F or many of the design and operating standards of Subparts K .L M , and N of Part 264 until they are permitted. In addition, we believe that any facility that manages these wastes should be evaluated individually by EPA before accepting them in order to ensure that the facility is designed and operated properly. The proposed regulation consequently prohibits interim flatus facilities from managing these wastes. We have proposed three exceptions to this prohibition. The first applies to surface impoundments In which . wastewater treatment sludges are generated. The Agency has the authority to prohibit interim status .surface impoundment* from receiving these wastesTlTwe propose this action, however, the facilities now generating the listed wastewater treatment sludges would probably have to dose down until they obtain permits for their impoundments, or build alternative treatment facilities that can efficiently treat these wastes. The Agency is not proposing this course of action, and notes that Section 3004 of RCRA (as amended by the Solid Waste Disposal Act Amendments of 1960) specifically allows the Administrator, In setting standards for hazardous waste management faculties, to distinguish between new and existing facilities. The legislative history indicates that Congress was concerned with thB costs of modifying existing wastewater treatment Impoundments installed to meet Clean Water Act requirements (although the Agency has the authority to require such modification where appropriate). See S. Rep. No. 96-172, 96th Cong. 1st Sese., at 3. We are drawing this distinction in today's proposal. Allowing these wastewater treatment sludges at Interim statue surface Impoundment! in which they are generafedsfioddji environmentally Bcceptable for the period until a permit is issued. These sludges are expected to contain lower concentrations of CDDs, CDFs, and chlorophenols than the other waste we are listing. The CDDs and CDFs present also will be adsorbed to the organic matter present; In addition, we believe that there should be little chance thatsolublllzjng solvanfiTiuch as benzene, toluene, xylene! or halogenated benzenes, wtil be present in significant concentrations (since these solvents have very limited water aolubUity). This situation therefore should not present a slgnlficantriak of leaching. Risk ofwlnd dispersal, one of theprincipal exposure pathways for CDD and CDF-containing.wastes which are stored in open piles or disposed in landfills, Is not present for these wastewater treatment sludges when they are in an impoundment . We are not proposing to allow other interim status surface Impoundments to manage these sludges, however, because other impoundments could contain CDD- or CDF-solubillzing residues from processes not related to chlorophenol or chlorophenoxy manufacture. In addition, manufacturing operations will not be curtailed if these impoundments have to obtain permits before receiving these wastes. For all of these reasons, therefore, we are proposing to allow the listed wastewater treatment sludges to be managed at the Interim status surface impoundments In which they are generated. However, we expect, as a first priority, to evaluate the Part B permit applications of those Interim status surface impoundments that manage these wastes, in order to minimize any potential rielT. In addition, if monitoHngasla. or a review of site management make it apparent that the wastes ra n n o th eprevented from mtgrafing^Jhe owner or operator of the faculty will be required to remove the waste from the surface Impoundment. The second exception Is for interim status tank and container facilities, which will be allowed to accept these wastes. These facilities, although not providing maximum protection, do provide control of these wastes to prevent them from posing a substantial environmental hazard or an r unreasonable risk since tanks or > containers at Interim status facilities must meet most of the requirements [e.g., storage in non-leaking unite, periodic inspections) required for fully permitted tank and container facilities. Therefore, these facilities should provide adequate management of these wastes in the short term. However, we do expect to give highest priority to examining the Part B permit applications of those interim status tank and container storage facilities that store these wastes, in order to minimize any potential risk. The final exception is for enclosed waste piles. An "enclosed waste pile" is defined in this proposed rule as a pile that meets the requirements of S264.250(c)--namely, that the pile Is inside a structure thatprovTdes protectionIromrun-on, precipitation, and wind dispersal; does not generate leachate, and does not contain tree liquids. Under exiitl'ng regulations, waste piles meeting these requirements are exemptlfom the otKerwise- applicaEle peratitffiigprovifllon* of Subpart LofPart 264 relating to containment (Seq 46 HI 55112, November 6,1981.) We are proposing that enclosed waste piles be allowed to accept these wastes without first obtaining a permit because enclosure of this type will guard in the short-term against the meant of exposure of concern--run-off, wind dispersal, and leaching. In addition, 14520 I Register / Vd. 45, No. 65 / Monday, April 4, 1963 / Proposed Rules allowing' this type of Interim status facility to accept these wastes should help provide management capacity tmtil disposal facilities receive permits to manage these w a ste s.!^ ; We are proposing tnlMnierim status enclosed waste piles accepting these wastes still must meet'tha remaining applicable requirements of Subpart L of Part 265: waste analysis, special requirements for lgnitable, reactive, or incompatible wastes, and closure requirements. [Post'closure requirements would not be applicable because we are assuming that these wastes wiU be removed from these piles.) We note, in addition, that to be eligible for interim status, the facility must have been In existence on November 19,1980, submitted -Part A permit application, and [If required) submitted a notification of hazardous waste activity. [See i 122.23(b) and 45 FR 70638, November 19,1980.) Enclosed piles added at Interim status facilities after November 19,1980, or accepting these wastes after that date, may be eligible for Interim status provided they meet the requirements for adding waste, increasing design capacity, and (possibly) adding a new management process. (See 112233(c) (1). (2), and (3) (permissible changes during interim status)). B. Management a t Fully Permitted RCRA Facilities 1. Management at fu lly permitted landfills, waste piles, surface Impoundments, lagoons, and land treatmentfacilities. Except as described In the previous sections, the storage, treatment, and disposal of these wastes will be allowed only at fully permitted RCRA landfills, surface Impoundments, waste piles that are not enclosed, and land treatment facilities. Enclosed waste piles that are permitted under Part 264 would not require a waste management plan prior to accepting these wastes. (The Agency made this determination because it Judged that the means of enclosure satisfies tha annum the plan would address.) In addition, before any of these particular facilities can obtain a permit and. thus, before It can accept any of the wastes proposed to be listed today, it must have a "waste management plan" that is approved by the Regional Administrator. EPA believes that the Inherent hazard of these wastes, and their mismanagement history, warrants regulatory controls an potential migration abova those oontained In tha existing permit requirements. The management plan will be the vehicle far assuring Individualized consideration that the wastes will be managed safely. Hie plan must be submitted by the owner Or operator of the facility as part of the permit application; It must describe the potential far migration of toxicants from the site via any media, and, where migration is possible, it must address measures to be taken, over and above, the applicable permitting requirement, to reduce migration of the wastes or waste constituents. At a minimum, the proposed plan must address the volume and toxicant concentrations in tha wastes to be managed at the facility, the propensity of toxicants to be emitted to the air through volatilization or as aerosols or dusts during placement of the wastes, whether toxicants may migrstefroco or with the wastes, whether the wastes will be awhsposed with other materials having mobilizing properties, and the potential for toils to attenuate migrating toxicants if the liner system (when one Is required by the regulation*) is damaged and breached. Where a potential for migration la idaitified, the proposed plan must identify design provisions and/or operating practices to be adopted to prevent that migration. These design and operating features are In addition to those that would otherwise be required by the regulations. For example, If the facility also disposes of dioxin solubilizing solvents, the applicant may propose to segregate the wastes to prevent contact If leaching Is possible, the applicant might propose lining the unit or mixing the waste with activated carbon, organic sorbents, or other materials designed to immobollze the migrating toxicants. Whatever is proposed by the applicant must be supported by data or a technical rationale. The Regional Administrator will evaluate whether these additional management and design features are adequate to prevent migration. As a general matter, the additional measures required under a waste management plan will focus on control measures not currently specifically required by the Part 264 land disposal regulations. For example. the dan may include specific waste treatment processes that will reduce the likelihood that dioxin will migrate out of the unit. In addition, the plan may include a demonstration that siting factors (eg, the attenuative properties of the soil beneath the site) would operate to control migration of dioxin. In most cases, EPA does not believe that It wilt be necessary to Impose additional structural requirements (. liner specifications) for the unit. The Agency Intends to provide detailed guidance far the preparation of a waste management plan for managing these wastes prior to issuing this regulation In final form. Waste management plans will be considered in the normal course of the permitting process, so that no special EPA review procedures are required 2. Management at fu lly perm itted incinerators. As stated, we also are proposing to allow incineration of these wastes only at fully permitted Incinerators. It is the Agency's view that incineration often Is a preferred management option for these wastes, because high temperature destorys the chlorinated dioxins and -dibenzofurans. If incineration is not properly performed, however, the original toxicants may be released undestroyed, or chlorinated dioxins, dibenzofurans. biphenyls, and phenols can be farmed from precursors such as chlorinated biphenyls, benzenes, and -phenols. The proposed regulation, therefore, allows these wastes to be burned only at fully prmitted RCRA incinerators which have proven capability to assure 99.99% DRE far principal organic hazardous constituents (POHCs) which are as difficult, or more difficult to incinerate than CTOs or CDF.1*The Agency judges that such a - demonstration of DRE is sufficiently rigorous to ensure the proper " management of these wastes, and' therefore feels that It Is not necessary to require an additional management pian for incinerator facilities treating these wastes. 3. Management at fu lly perm itted tank and container storage facilities. We also have tentatively decided against requiring felly permitted tank and container storage facilities to have a waste management plan approved by the Regional Administrator, before storing these wastes. The current storage regulations provide the Agency with sufficient information to evaluate the storage facility's ability to contain these wastes. Therefore, an additional management plan for tank and container storage facilities storing these wastes appears unnecessry. C. Other Management Cations Considered or These W astes 1. Standards fo r Interim Status Landfills, W aste Pilos. Surface Impoundments, Land Treatment Facilities, and Incinerators. The Agency considered proposing a regulation that would allow interim status land disposal and Incineration facilities to manage these wastes If they obtained prior NTb* nqalrementa for trial bum perniili are described In 40 C FR 122-27. Sac ateo, "Guidance ' manual for baaaiduua waate Indnerator permita. " U . EPA, O tte of Solid W a tta , November 1982 - Federal Register / Voi. 48, No. 65 / Monday, April 4. 1983 / Proposed Rule ` 14521 approval from the Regional Administrator. It waa felt that the CDD and CDF-contaminated waste, management standards for CDD/CDF- due to the toxicity of these wastes, their contaminated wastes, For some wastes, Agency could provide Interim status facilities the same opportunities to fiotentlal to ooze and to spill, and the ong time periods these wastes may be higih temperature Incineration might be the preferred method of treatment handle these wastes as ar provided to stored before a disposal or Incinerator whereas for other wastes lend disposal fully permitted fadlities if the Agency treatment facility can be found that is might be a better alternative. For die can b assured that such.msnegement willing to accept these wastes. (For tatter, disposal at sites having particular can be accomplished safely; The vehicle example, the wastes at the Vertac site hydrogeological and topographic or to be used to assure Individualized have been stored for many years, surface water characteristics might be consideration of prospective waste despite the repeated attempts by the needed. The Agency is presently mangement would be a waste company to find a disposal site.) This reviewing these problems, and may, for management plan that would address the faeton outlined in the previous section as well as other design and operating conditions contained in the Part 264 regulations, as deemed appropriate by the Regional or State officials. The procedures we considered for approving a waste management plan would be the same as, or similar to, those for approving a closure plan. They would allow for public participation on the plan submitted by the facility, and on a tentative decision (and a rationale therefor) of the Regional Administrator. The Regional Administrator could hold a publicnearing if he believed it would aid in elucidating the issues. However, the Agency believes that most interim status facilities probably requirement may be necessary to ensure that any spillage or release of these wastes Is contained and not released into the environment The Vertac damage incident where improper storage of these wastes was responsible for considerable harm, serves as an example of these wastes' potential for harm if stored improperly. The Agency therefore is considering a provision that would require secondary containment at container storage facilities that store* non-liquid CDD- and CDF-contaminated wastes. The Agency is also considering a provision that would require secondary containment at tank storage facilities that store CDD- and CDF-contaminated wastes, due to the wastes* toxicity and the long periods of time they might be example, propose incineration standards that could require levels of destruction and removal efficiency (DRETs) for these wastes that are greater than the 99.99% DRE presently required under RCRA. For some wastes, land disposal controls ensuring the prevention of dust formation could be Imposed, and for some wastes the Agency could prescribe the application of special technologies, such ss photodechlorination, or molten salt or critical water oxidation, which are known to cause the destruction of chlorinated aromatics such as CDDs. The Agency solicits comment with respect to the regulatory alternatives discussed above, as well as any other approaches which might realistically be considered. - could not adequately manage these wastes without significant changes. In addition, the amount and detail of information to be provided in the stored. The damage incident at Neosho, Missouri, when a concrete tank holding chlorophenol production still bottoms (a waste covered by this proposal) and VIIL Analytical Method far Tetri-, Penta-, and Hexechloro-Dibenzo-pDioxlns and -Dfbenzoforans management plan could be almost wastewater cracked, and caused In order to assist generators in the equivalent to the Information needed to considerable contamination, illustrates determination of the contamination of obtain a permit For example, as part of the potential for harm that secondary wastes with the above compounds, (e^* the waste management plan for containment could address. The Agency for delisting purposes under | i 260.20 incineration, the owner or operator of solicits comment on the suitability of and 260.22 of the RCRA regulations), the the incinerator would need to conduct a these two provisions. Agency U proposing a method of trial burn to ensure that destruction and 3. Optional Standards Consideredfor analysis for.tetra-, penta-, and removal efficiencies could be met. EPA Permitted Incinerators. Under current hexachlorodibenzo-p-dloxins and thinks it is unlikely that Interim status regulations, a facility which has shown facilities would go to the expense of that It can achieve 99.99% DRE for preparing and receiving approval on a POHCTs which are more resistant to plan, only to have to go through a later thermal degradation than are CDDs or permit proceeding when their Part B CDFs (such as carbon tetrachloride or application is processed. pentachlorophenol), may be permitted to However, the Agency solicits inclnderate CDD or CDF-containing comments on the desirability of allowing wastes without conducting an additional disposal and treatment of these wastes trial bum or modifying its permit (40 at interim status facilities having an CFR 264.342 and 264.343). Because of approved management plan for these their hazardousness, the Agency is wastes. considering proposing that a facility 2. Additional Standards for Container burning these wastes notify the Regionat and Tank Storage Facilities. The Administrator of that fact We are Agency believes that container storage considering this requirement because it facilities storing these wastes should is felt that Regional authorities might meet the most stringent requirements wish to prioritize compliance monitoring under Part 264. Present regulations for facilities incinerating these wastes. -dibenzofurans (see Appendix A). The method proposed In this regulation waa largely developed by the workers at Wright State University, and has been used for the analysis of TCDDs in a variety of wastes.?* If adopted, this method will replace the method for analysis of TCDD presently listed in the solid waste test manual ('Test Methods far Evaluating Solid Waste Physical/ Chemical Methods". EPA publication number SW-846). The present method is Inappropriate because it Is not sufficiently sensitive, and does not sufficiently eliminate Interfering substances. It also does not spedfy the procedure to be followed for the (Subpart I) do not require secondary containment for non-liquid wastes [e.g, tarry materials) if the storage area slopes, or the container is elevated. The Agency solicits comments on the desirability of requiring notification to the Regional Administrator on the part of a facility that Is burning CDD or CDF " "Anaiytteal protocol tor detoralnaUen of TCDD* Inpheaollc rim ai! w utes and soil umplet obtained thus th* proximity of chxmlca] dumps", and "Analytical protocol for detarmlnatioa However, the Agency believes that secondary containment might appropriately be required for container storage areas that store all non-liquid wastes. 4. Development o f Special Management Standards. The Agency Is considering the development of special of chlorinated dibenxo-p-dioxina and chlorinated dibenxofurana la rive water", Brehm Laboratory, Wrtjht Slata Haivarsity, Dayton. OH 4MU, January 7 ,1BS2. Tbeao protocols art available la the Docket for this Itslinf. 14522 Federal Register / Voi, 4, No. 65 / Monday, April 4. 1983 / Proposed. Rules analysis of the chlorinated dibenzoforans. The proposed method subjects the sample to extraction with petroleum ether (waste not amenable to pstroleum ether us an extractanCsuch as tar-like or carbonaceous w astes will require extraction with other organic solvents, such as toluene, hexane, or dichloromethane)."Tho extract is successively washed with alkali end acid,; subjected10 fractionation on alumina, and the eluate is analyzed by high-resolution gas chromatography, using a capillary glass column, and by low-resolution mass spectrometry. In case of interference, the alumina eluate le subjected to further cleanup with high ' pressure liquid chromatography (HPLC). Th Agency has chosen the proposed method because it Is the one that has been most successfully applied to chemical wastes. In addition. Its originators have indicated to die Agency that It,can be used for the analysis of both CDDs and CDFs.*t-wFor example, the proposed method has been used for the analysis of TCDD in chloropbenal still bottoms, reactor residues, oxidation pond sediments, cooling pond muds, contaminated soils, and sludge samples. The detection limit for TCDD established in these different matrices varied from 15 ppt (soils, O&ppb (cooling pond muds), and 1 ppb (sludges) to 0.1-1300 ppb (still bottoms, highly variable). The recovery of added TCDD varied from 14-111 percent, averaging 70 percent, hi Incinerator atack effluents, the witwhmim detectable quantity was 3.8 ng for CDDs and 3.5 ng for CDFs, and the recovery of added CDDs or CDFs averaged BOpercent DC. Questiona for Comment The Agency welcomes public comment on all aspects of this proposed rule, However, public comment is especially solicited with respect to th following questions. 1. Should EPA develop, for CDD or CDF-containing wastes, a "X ap ib tlltle ! on mathodoingy for th* analysis of letncMonxifbenzo-fHBfixfar, BatteDe Cotumbos Laboratories, Cotumbos. OH 43201. Aogsst IS. Ifltl. " Dr. M. Taylor. Wrijhl Stall (Mveiafty, to C. Gosda, U S EPA, Report of analytical data (D scom ber . 1B7B). . r "D r. T. & TTaman. Wright State University, to D. LRosvngren. Vlarand Company, t o t. Report on sample analyses (June 1. U K ). "D r. T. O. Tlenun, Wright Ststa University, to L Haas. Viar and Company. Inc, Report an sample analyse! (August B, 1S62J. " T . O. Tlentin af aL Indnarstloa a t chemical wastes containing pafycblorinatod biphenyl: assessment of tests ooaductod at Rnllina Environmental Services. Dssr Pufc. T v as, and Energy Systems Company, El Dwsdo, Arkansas. In: Detoxication ofHaiardciBi Waste, f. H. Exnsr, Ed, Ann Arbor Sdenoa. 1SB2. pp 143-10. "characteristic* definition o f hazardousness under Subpart C of Section 261 o f the RCRA regulations? Instead of listing CDD/CDF-containlng wastes as hazardous under Subpart D of the Part 261 regulations, EPA considered an alternative approach, namely, Identifying such waktes as "characteristic" hazardous wastes under Subpart C of Part 261. This approach would oblige the.Agency to make a generic determination as to the lower level of concern regarding CDD/CDF contamination, and would then require generators to either analyze or estimate the amount of CDD's or CDFs in a weate (by actual analysis or, for example, from a knowledge of reaction chemistry, process technology, and chemical engineering principles). The Agency judged that this approach, although at first glance appealing because of its apparent simplicity, would not be a suitable regulatory alternative. It would require that the Agency set a concentration (as in the EP hazardous*waste^i.aracteristcl d$fining tK elev e fatwKich" CBPYsndLCDFs constitute'a minimum leveled,concern. HeretdfcreTfePA has not attempted to set a lower limit for the concentration of a toxicant of concern In a waste, except in a limited manner. Instead, EPA has made qualitative assessments in determining that certain restes should be listed in the RCRA regulations because they present a potential threat to human health and the environment, if mismanaged. Because of the high acute and chronic toxicity properties of many of the CDD's and CDF's, as evidenced in animal studies, the Agency considered that, if a lower limit of concern were to be . developed it would be very low. Additionally, because biological availability of these .toxicants is expected to be dependent on waste matrix characteristics, it was fell that a generic risk estimation for all wastes would be extremely difficult to perform. One alternative was to set the lower limit at the limit of detection of CDD's end CDFs in the waste. However, this is not a fixed concentration. As outlined above, the limit of detection is sample and matrix-dependent Since Industrial wastes are highly variable, it may not be realistic to.establish generally applicable standards for the level of detection, recovery, and reproducibility for the analytical determination of CDD's and CDFs In these wastes. Within the above limitations, the Agency could nevertheless set a lower level of concern for the concentration of CDD's and CDFs In these restes. The Agency solicits comment on ths advisability, practicality, and desirability of doing so. If s lower level of concern Is to be established, at what * level should ft be set, and how could th , ^ . level be justified? ^ 2. A nalytical Methodology--The (^ Agency solicits comment on the proposed method of analysis for CDD'b and CDFst.ln particular, evidence that some extraction media may be more efficacious than others for particular wastes. The Agency considered whether It might be useful to develop s method of analysis that would be less detailed, and therefore less expensive, than that proposed, since, a high degree of specificity with respect to isomeric content is not necessary in the present Instance. For delisting purposes, for instance. It might be sufficient for a petitioner to show that a waste does not contain any CCD's or CDFs--even though, for example, dlchloro- or hepta- and octachlorodloxins are present. The Agency solicits comments rith respect to the usefulness, practicability, and cost, for instance, of a GC/MS analytical method which would detect total CDDYand CDFs at low levels in a waste In one analytical determination. 3. Wastes resulting from manufacturing processes conducted on equipment contaminated w ith CDD's or CDFs--The Agency is proposing to list as hazardous, wastes resulting from processes conducted on equipment previously used for a manufacturing process that generated CDD's or CDF A generator could legitimately question how this regulation can be enforced: how can they know whether the equipment In question was previously used for these processes? The Agency considers that a demonstration of historical knowledge would be deemed sufficient for this purpose (45 FR 32678 (May 19,1960); see also the Listing Background Document). If historical records are not available, or inaccurate, analysis of the listed wastes on several occasions for total CDD's and CDFs would be sufficient to establish their absence. The Agency solicits comments on the appropriate historical records and time periods to be used, and (he appropriate analytical detection limit to be used if historical records are not available; 4. Identification o f commercial chemicalproducts subject to this listing. The Agency is concerned that some users of commercial chemical products may not be able to identify which commercial chemical products contain tri-, tetra-, or pentachlorophenol, or their chtorophenoxy derivative acids, esters, and amine salts, and which, therefore, would be regulated (when discarded) as _ Federal Register / Vi. 48, No. 65 / Monday, April 4, 1883 / Proposed Rules 14523 BPA Hazardous Waste Nos. F023. Although the F1FRA regulations (40 CFR 162) do require that active ingredients be identified by their chemical name or by q usual common name, and an EPA publication ("Acceptedxommon names and chemical names fdr the ingredient statement on pesticideilabels", EPA 540/ 9-7-017) Is available to aid in their chemical identification, these aids may not convey sufficient information to the unsophisticated user. Non-pesticide. products may also be hard to identify. Therefore, the Agency is considering various mechanisms to solve this potential problem {i.e., labeling requirements for manufacturers, publishing a list of all products which contain these compounds, etc.). The Agency solicits comment on this potential problem. 5. Wastes which m ay contain CDDs and CDFs but which are not covered by the present regulation. The Agency has some data indicating that wastes, other than those covered by this proposal, may contain CDDs and CDFs. This may be the case, for Instance for residuals such as fly ash from low temperature combustion of certain industrial wastes (especially of wastes containing chlorophenols, or chlorobenzenes); residuals from dichlorophenol manufacture; and sludges from wood preserving using pentachlorophenols. In the case of the first two wastes, although the Agency, on the grounds of knowledge of reaction chemistry and process technology, believes this may be the case, it lacks sufficient data to Bupport this supposition. For this reason, studies are being conducted in order to gather more data. These wastes may be listed at a future date if further evidence demonstrates that they indeed are hazardous. With regard to waste from wood preserving, we are presently investigating whether additional wastes from this process should be listed as hazardous, and whether CDDs and CDFs should be constituents of concern in the process wastes already listed (EPA Hazardous Waste K001. Wastewater treatment sludges). Pending completion of those studies we may take further regulatory action. X. Economic, Environmental, and Regulatory Impacts A. Regulatory Impact Analysis Under Executive Order 12291, EPA must determine whether a regulation Is "major'' and therefore subject to the requirement of a Regulatory Impact Analysis, The effect of the present amendment Is judged not to be major, since it in part replaces regulation under a different statute (Section 6{d] of the impact on a substantial number of small Toxic Substances Control Act), and entities. imposes an additional regulatory burden Only one of the hazardous wastes only on three manufacturers of proposed to be listed in 1 261.31 Is chlorophenols, and five manufacturers expected to be generated by small of chlorophenols and their entities. The Agency entlclpates that chlorophenoxy derivatives. In addition, some number of manufacturers who use equipment that may be contaminated with CDDs or CDFs may also have additional regulatory burden. However, we presume that this part of the regulation is unlikely to affect many additional manufacturers other than the eight referred to above. In addition, this regulation imposes a regulatory burden on persons or entities discarding some unused formulation! containing tri-, tetra-, or peniscklarophenol or unused formulations containing compounds derived from these phenols. The disposal of many of these formulations, however, is already regulated under 1 261.33 of RCRA. Additionally, because of their inherent value, we do not believe that the regulated community will usually discard substantial quantities of these materials, further pesticide serial applicators will constitute the main segment of small business entities affected by this regulation.*However, these persons ere probably already regulated under RCRA since a large number of pesticides (both acutely hazardous and toxic) are currently covered by existing regulations. Therefore, we would not expect any aerial applicators to be newly regulated as a result of tills rule. In addition, the Agency does not believe that small entities will dispose of significant quantities of the commercial chemical products proposed for regulation. Thus, today's amendment Is unlikely to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This regulation therefore does not require a regulatory flexibility analysis; minimizing any impact C Paper Reduction A ct o f 2Q00 In addition, we believe that there till be no adverse impact on the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises in domestic or export markets. Therefore, since the Agency does not expect that the proposed action win result in either an effect on the economy of $100 million or more, or an adverse impact on U.S. based enterprises, tins proposed regulation Is not considered to be s ' The reporting or recordkeeping (Information) provisions in tills rule will be submitted for approval to tha Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under Section 3504(h) of tire Paperwork Reduction Act of ItBO, U S .C 3501 et seq. Any final rule will explain how its reporting or recordkeeping provisions respond to any OMB or public comments. major action. Because this proposed XII. S u l-- >M | P i w j amendment Is not s major regulation, no Regulatory Impact Analysis has been The public docket for 40 CFR Part 775 conducted. This amendment was submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review as required by Executive Order 12291. Any comments from OMB to EPA, and any EPA responses to those comments are is located in Room E-107 at the address listed for the U.S. Environmental . Protection Agency in the address section of tins preamble. The entire rulemaking docket for the rule being proposed today la included in the record for 40 CFR Part 775. EPA will identify the complete available for public Inspection in Room rulemaking record for 40 CFR part 775 S-269C at EPA. on or before tire date of repeal. EPA will B. Regulatory Flexibility A ct consider any time between the publication of this notice and the date Pursuant to tha Regulatory Flexibility the Agency identifies the final record Act, S U.S.C. 1 601 etseq., whenever an agency Is required to publish a general X II U st o f Subjects notice of rulemaking for any proposed or 40 CFR Part 281 final rule. It must prepare and make available for public comment a regulatory flexibility analysis that Hazardous materials. Waste treatment and disposal. Recycling. describes the impact of the rule on small entitles (/.e., small businesses, small "FSimtn m r also gravata toma of tbaaa w u tes--dlrad ad anuaad fetmulattcna--hnwovar, organizations, end small governmental . (annua v a axampt fromregulation provided tha jurisdictions}. No regulatory flexibility analysis is required however, If the head of the agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic wait* pmtlcidu v a from their own u u and am dlapoacd ofoo thatrown Cum Eaa manner cnaaLitud with tha ittnwaal tnatiactlona oa tha ptsUdda labd. Thoafom, wa So aat expad b ia v a *pha aavaraty hapartadL 14524 Foderai Register / Voi. 48, N. 65 / Monday, April 4, 1983 '/ - Proposed Rules 40 CFR Part264 Hazardous materials. Packaging and containers, Repotting requirements. Security measures. Surety bonds, Waste treatment and disposal^:' . 40 CFR Part 265 -f_ Hazardous materials; Packaging and containers, Reporting requirements, Security measures, Surety bonds. Waste treatment and disposal, Water supply. 40 CFR Part 775 Environmental protection. Hazardous materials. Pesticides and pests, Waste treatment and disposal. Dated: March 21,1BB3. John W. Hsmandex, Acting Admini&trator. For the reasons set out in the preamble, it is proposed to amend Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows: PART 261--IDENTIFICATION AND LISTINO OF HAZARDOUS WASTE 1. The authority citation for Part 281 reads as follows: Authority: Secs. 1008, 2002(1}, 3001, and 3002 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amendad by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1076, as amended [42U.S.C. 0005,0012(a). 0821. and 0822). 2. In 1 281A, paragraphs (e)(1) and (e)(2) are revised to read as follows: 281.9 Spedai requirements for hazardous ratto generated by small quantity generator ** (e) * * * (1) A total of one kilogram of acutely hazardous wastes listed in 281.31, 261.32, or 281.33(e). (2) A total of 100 kilograms of any residue or contaminated soil, waste or other debris resulting from the cleanup of a spill. Into or on any land or water, of any acutely hazardous wastes listed in 261.31,261.32, or 261.33(e). 3. In 281.7, the introductory text of paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(3) is revised to read as follows: 261.7 Residues of hazardous waste In empty containers. -- ft ft ft f t * (b][l) A container or an Inner liner removed from a container that has held any hazardous waste, except a waste that la a compressed gas or that Is Identified as an acutely hazardous waste listed in | 261.31 261.32, or 261.33(e) of this chapter is empty If: 3. A container or an inner liner removed from a container that has held an acutely hazardous waste listed in 261.31261.32, or 261.33(e) le empty ifr ft * ft ft ft 4. In 1261.31, add the following waste streams:. 261.31 Hazardous waste from nonspecific eoureea. Mvky Mmi l EPA hazardous re a ______ warns incapi hmumvi pc. irtf eW Mrtren Ian li^* DQin M ttW puScOOri) Som fa predudon or M n M clurtng Ca nMctarri. d w k S M m s asta v ooraponvft In a fanU M re prooam) o l to-, M a-, m sfc W w pfvnot or of K n iw M taad lo produca M r da- rlm tna. (TTW Wing d a n nM tocfcda *^ww mIlHi-.frU-om-W-t-vy p tv rv fern N 0 *r putoad ZA M W toroptvnol - W o m fn s ^ t M d N M i (H), and o M w rtwn Irani 1^ t t f t o (M i Ui p u N o ta i) torn t v mandactutog u n pa a ra d a * , dranaa fcv to ra d o ii a w p Q M rl to a fcrntotog procran) ol tote-, p a to . of tmacNor. ` c ta a m in fe r fetalna unlkis R 22________Ww h fm p l w d w ia r (H). and wars carbon Sent hp feogsn M o ria p u lit o li tom ta predudonol ma- tortato on qutomant pravi- oupr na d tor t v preduo- Son or im h c M ig u n Ih a m etani ctvmfca to- tornvdtoto or consonant to a tom feing procae*) or torta* btod in fe r TOO an d R C I. F023________Otocardad unund tomaia- (HV Sons eontartog tv , fete-, or santatfSoroprvnol or io n t contorting compounds 5. In 281.33(f), remove the following waste streams: 261.33 Discarded commercial chtmlesl products, off'speclflcatton species, container residues, and split residues thereof. * Hazardous vasta No. sesti U21*_______ m s T iw M r a e v M I f f _ R vnol. ZXAfrtofcholaFO-. IB M _ g.4.S.Trlchto>optvnol U330_______ ftvncri. lA S W fe rfe urn _ P tv rv i t.4,Mridfcro% " U732 s mU232______- X 4 * T . U2S3______-- U233_______ to u p to rife U H ZA X fcW ore^vnm ifr. IB U242........... V R m o l pw itKW of^ a IS & Amend Table I in Appendix IH of Part 261, by removing the entry "chlorinated dlbenzodloxlne", and adding the following entries In alphabetical order I -- Federal Register / Vol. 48, No. 65 / Monday. April 4, 1963 / Proposed Rule 14525 . A p p en d ix IU-- C h em ical A n a ly sis T est M eth ods TABLE 1.--ANALYTICALCAAACTERI8TCa OF ORGANICCHEMICALS Compound Samp* iwxAng aoaa/kacson Ueesuemem wctWQua Convantional m M ho OC/MS ------------------------- OC Dowctor OsanreWd dfconzo^aaan*---------- Extract*/BN --_--------------- -- ---------- S2S0 -- ------.-------Onom--d SS-- oAdSW ____, Erdab'BN.----------------------------- ------ S2S0 ----------------- 7. A d d the fo llo w in g en tries in num erical order to A p p en d ix V li o f Part 281: A ppendix VII-- B asis for listin g H azardous W astes EPA hazardous mm No Hazardous oariMluaots * wvch latad EPA hamrdoua mala No. Hamrdoua oomaaanm kv eh*n imed FOX ............latra-. panai . and haucNorodtoanzo-#cacuona. a**- p a ria . and haaacfaonxSbanzoAaana. and *, latra and paniacNoroonanols and ma> cnioropnanoiy danv ax a accia aatara. and a m tarts F021 _____ laaa-. para-, and hosacnlonx*nzo-0. (Soana Mr-, para-, and naxacnoroObarvotvaana. and av. latra and pantaCNoropnanola and P a r cfaornoneno*Y dmraPa aoaa. aatara. and a m tarts F022 _______ me-, pant-, and tmachtorodfcenso-pdtonna. toe-, penta. and hoxachiorodtbwuottr ans and M-. tee-, and pantartS rd p w io a and M r dtoraprianaq dwwaava acms. aatara. and arrena sans P023 _______ latra-, parue and tmacNorodtianzoo- 8. A d d the fo llo w in g c o n stitu e n ts in a lp h a b e tic a l order to A p p e n d ix V1U o f Pari 281: A ppendix VIII-- H azardous C onstituent* he xachlorodibenxo-p-dioxins hexachiorodibenzofurins pen tach lorodi be nzo-/>-dioxins pentur.hlorodibenzofurans tetrachiorodibenzo-p-dioxins te lra c h io ro d ib e n z a fu ra n s 8. A p p en d ix IX is a d d ed to Part 281 to 1.1 This method covers the determination read as follow s: A ppendix IX-- M ethod of A nalysis for of chlorinated dibenao-p-dioxins end chlorinated dibenzofurans In chemical w astes including still bottoms, filter aids, Chlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and sludges, spent carbon, and reactor residue, dibenzofurans 1,14 and In soils. M ethod 8200 1. Scope and Application. 'This method is appropriate for the analysis of tetra-. penta-. and baxachlorinated dibonxo-pdioxlns and -dibenzofunrna. 'Analytical protocol for detannuiation of TCOOt in phenolic chemical wastes and soil samplaa obtained from the proximity of chemical duapa. T.O. Tieman and h i Taylor. Brehm Laboratory. Wright Slat University. Dayton. OH 4&4S5. 'Analytical protocol far determination of chlorinated dibenxo-p-dloxina end chlorinated dibenzofurans in river water. T O. Tieman end M. Taylor. Brehm Laboratory, Wright State University, Dayton. OH 45435. `In general the techniques that should be used to handle these materials are those which are followed for radioactive or infectious laboratory materials. Assistance in evaluating laboratory practices may be obtained from industrial hygienisla end persons specializing in safe laboratory practice. Typical 12 The seneltlvtty of this method is dependent upon the level of interferences. 1.3 This method is recommended for use only by analysts experienced with residue analysis and skilled in m ess spectral analytical technique*. 1.4 Becausa of tha extrema toxicity of these compounds, the analyst must taka necessary precautions to prevent exposure to himself, or to others, of materials known or beleved to contain CDDs or CDFs. Infectious waste Incinerators a rt probably not satisfactory devices for disposal at materials highly contaminated with CDOs or CDFs. A laboratory planning to use these compounds should prepare a disposal plan to bs reviewed and approved by EPA'e Dioxin Took Faroe (Contact Conrad Klovsoa. WH-54BA, UiL EPA. 401 M S tra ti B.W, Washington. D C 304001 1 Summary of tha Method. 2.1 This method is an analytical extraction cleanup procedure, and capillary column gas chromatographty-low resolution mass spectrometry method, asing capillary column GC/MS conditions and internal standard techniques, which allow for the measurement of PGDOs and PCDFs in the extract 12 If fatarferenoes art encountered, the method provides selected general purpose cleanup procedures to aid the analyst In their elimination. 3. Interferences. 3.1 Solvents, reagents, glassware, and other sample processing hardware may yield discrete artifacts and/or elevated baselines causing misinterpretation of gas chromatograms. All of these materials must be demonatatad to be free from Interferences under the conditions of the analysis by running method blanks. Specific selection of reagents and purification of solvents by distillation in all-glass systems may be required. 3.2 Interferences co-extracted from the samples will vary considerably from source to source, depending upon the diversity od the Industry being sam pled PCDD is often associated with other interfering chlorine ted compounds such as PCB's which may be at concentrations several orders of magnitude higher than that of PCDD. While general cleanup techniques are provided as part of this m ethod unique samples may require additional cleanup approaches to achieve the sensitivity stated in Table L L I The other isomers of tetrachiorodlbenxo-p-dioxln may interfere with the measurement of 2.3,74-TCDD. Capillary column gas chromatography is required to resolve those isomers that yield virtually identical mesa fragmentation patterns. 4. Apparatus and Materials. 4.1 Sampling equipment for discrete or composite sampling. 4.1.1 Grab sample bottle--ember glass. 1Uter or 1-quart volume. French or Boston Round design is recommended. The container must be washed and solvent rinsed before use to minimize interferences. 4.1-2 Bottle ceps-- threaded to screw on to the sample bottles. Capa must be lined with Teflon. Solvent washed foil used with the shiny side towards the sample, may be substituted for the Teflon if sample is not corrosive. 4.1J Compoaiting equipment--automatic or manual compositing system. No tygon or rubber tubing may be ea ed and the system must incorporate glass sample containers far the collection of minimum of 250 m i Semple containers must be kept refrigerated after sampling. 4.2 Water bath--b e ste d with concentric ring cover, capable of temperature oontrol ( 2* C). The bath should be used in e hood 4 4 Gas chromatography mass spectrometer dele system 44.1 Gas chromatograph: An analytical systsm with a temperature-programmable gas chromatograph and all required accessories Including syringes, analytical columns, and gases. 14526 Federal Register / Vol. 48, No. 65 / Monday, April 4, 1983 / Proposed Rules & 4 3 3 Column: SP-2250 ooated on a 30 m 6.0 Calibration. long x 0 3 5 mm ID. flau column (Supelco No. 6.1 Before using any cleanup procedure, 3-3714 or equivalent). Glau capillary column the analyst must process a series of condition!: Helium carrier gas at 30 cm/sec calibration standards through the procedure linear velocity run epUtlesa.'Column temperatura la 210* ; to validate elution patterns and the absence o f interferences from reagents. ( J J Mata apectramatac Capable of 6 3 Prepare GC/MS calibration standards scanning from 35 to 450 amu every 1 aecor for the internal standard technique that will lata, utilizing 70 volta (nominal) electron allow for measurement of relative response energy in the electron im ped Ionization mode factors o f at least three TCDD/*^C1-TCDD and producing a mate apednun which meeta and TCD F/nC l-TC DFratloi.'The UCl- all tht criteria in Table 2 when M n g o f TCDD/F concentration in the standard decafluordtriphenyl-phosphlne (DFTPP) is should be fixed and selected to yield a injected through the GC InleL The eyatem reproducible response at the moat senatilve mutt also be capable of u le d e d ton salting of the mass spectrometer. monitoring (SIM) for at laaat 4 Iona simultaneously, with a cycle Urne of 1 aec or leas. Minimum integration time far SIM U 100 me. Selected ion monitoring it verified by tnjecting 4715 ng o f TCDD n (ogive minimum signal to noise ratio of 5 to 1 at m a n 320. *3.4 GC/MS interface: Any GC-to-MS Interface that gives acceptable calibration pointe at 50 ng per injection for each compound of interest and achieve acceptable tuning performance criteria (aee Sections 6.1-53) may bo used. GC-to-MS interfaces constructed of all glass or glasslined matarais are recommended. C la n can be deactivated by illanlzlng with dlchlorodlmethyUUane. U ta interface must be capable o f tram porting at l e u t 10 ng o f the components of interact from the GC to the MS. 4 3 3 Data system: A computer system must be interfaced to the mata apedrometer. The system must allow the continuous acquisition and storage on machine-readable media of all m a u spectra obtained throughout the duration o f the 6 3 Assemble the necessary GC/MS apparatus and establish operating parameters equivalent to those Indicated in Section 11.1 of this method. Calibrate the GC/MS system according to Eichelberger, et ah (1075) by tha uae o f decafluoratriphenyl phosphine (DFTPP). By injecting cellbration standards, establish the response factors for CDDs tv. rCl-TCD F. The detection limit provided in Table 1 should be verified by injecting 315 ng of HCl-TCDD which should give a minimum signal to noise ratio of 5 to 1 at m ass 320, 7. Quality Control. 7.1 Before processing any sample*, the analyst should demonstrate through the analysis of a distilled water method blank, that all glassware and reagents are Interference-free. Each time a set of samples fa extracted or there la a change In reagent, a method blank should be processed as a safeguard against laboratory contamination. 7 3 Standard quality assurance practice* must be used with this method. Field replicate* must be collected to validate the precision of the sampling technique, laboratory replicates must be analyzed to validate the precisian of the analysis. MS data file for lorn of a specific m ess and that can plot such Ion abundances versus time or lean number. This type of plot Is Fortified samples must be analyzed to establish the atsuracy o i the analysis. 6. Sample Collection, Preservation, and Handling, defined as an Extracted Ion Current Profile (EIGP). Software must also b s able to integrate the abundance, In any E1CP, 8.1 Grab and composite samples must be collected In glass container!. Conventional sampling practice should be followed, between specified time or scan number except a t tha bottle must not be prewaahed limits- with sample before collection. Composite 4 4 Plpettes-Dlsposable, Pasteur, 150 mm samples should be collected In glass long x 6 mm ID (Fisher Sdentitle Co No. 1 3- containers in accordance with toe B7B-6A or equivalent). requirements of the RCRA program. Sampling 4 3 Flint glass bottle (Teflon-lined screw equipment must ba fro* of tygon snd other cap). potential sources of contamination. * 3 Reacti-vital (ailanlzcd) (Pierca 8 3 The samples must be Iced or Chemical Co.). refrigerated from tha time of collection until 6. Reagents. extraction. Chemical preservatives should 5.1 P olasalua hydraxldiACS), 2 percent not be used in tha field unless more than 24 fn distilled water. hours will claps* before delivery to the 6 3 Sulfuric add-fACSpooncentra ted. laboratory. If an aqueous ample la taken and 5 3 Methylene chlaride. kexane, benzene, the sample w ill not be extracted within 49 petroleum ether, m ethanol tetradecane- hours of collection, the sample should be peatidde quality or equivalent adjusted to a pH rente of 6.0-63 with sodium 63! Block standards In a gJovebox. hydroxide or sulfuric sd d . prepare stock standard solutions o f TCDD and Cl-TCDD (molecular weight 528). The nci-labsllsd TCDD sod TCDF are svaUabls d ock solutions are stored in a glovebox, and checked frequently for signs of degradation or evaporation, especially Just prior to the preparation o f working standards. S 3 Alumina-basic, Woelm; 80/200 mesh. Before use activate overnight at 800*C. cool to room temperature In a desslcator. 8 3 Prepurified nitrogen gas from K .03. Isotopes, Cambridge, MA. Proper standardisation requires the usa ata specific labelled isomer for each congener to be determined. However, tbs only labelled Isomers readily available are 'C1-U.7J-TCDD and T a - z * 7 J TCDF. This method therefore uses these isomers as suirofates for tha CDDa and CDF*. When labelled CDDs and CDF* are available, their use wti) be required. 8 3 All samples must be extracted n iiii 7 days end completely anslyzed within 30 d<*ys of collection. 9. Extraction and Cleanup Procedures. 9.1 Use an aliquot of 1-10 g sample of th*/ chemical w aste or soil to be analyzed Soils . should b s dried using a stream of preptmfifd nitrogen and pulverized fn a ball-mill or similar device. Transfer the sample to a tared 125 m l flint glass bottle (Teflon-lined screw cap) and determine the weight of the sample. Add an appropriate quantity of *^C1-labelled 2.3,73-TCDD (adjust the quantity according to the required minimum detectable concentration), which is employed as an Internal standard. 9 3 Extraction. 93.1 Extract chemical waste samples by adding 10 ml methanol. 40 ml petroleum ather, 50 ml doubly distilled water, and then shaking the mixture for 2 minutes. Tare should be completely dissolved fn any or the recommended neat solvents. Activated carbon samples must be extracted with benzene using method 3540 in SW -646 (l est Methods for Evaluating Solid W a ite -- Fhyslcal/Chemlcal Methods, available from C.P.O. Stock #055-002-61001-2). Quantitatively transfer the organic extract or dissolved sample to a d e a n 250 ml flint glass bottle (Teflon lined screw cap), add 50 ml doubly distilled water and shake for Z minutes. Discard tba aqueous U yeran d proceed with Step 9 3 . 9.23 Extract soil sam ples by adding 40 ml o f petroleum ether to the sample. and then shaking for 20 minutes. Quantitatively transfer the organic extract to a d e a n 250 ml flint glass bottle (Teflon-lined screw cap), add 50 ml doubly distilled water and shake for 2 minute*. Discard the aqueous layer am proceed with Step 93. 9 3 W ash the organic layer with 50 ml o f 20% aqueous potassium hydroxide by shaking for 10 minutes and then remove and discard the aqueous layer. 9.4 W ash the organic layer with 50 ml o f doubly distilled water by shaking for 2 minutes and discard the aqueous layer. 9 3 Cautiously add 50 ml concentrated sulfuric acid and shake for 10 minutes. Allow the mixture to stand until layer1separate (approximately 10 minutes), and remove and discard the ad d layer. Repeat ad d washing until no color is visible In the a d d layer. 9 3 Add 50 ml o f doubly distilled water to the organic extract and shake for 2 minutes. Remove and discard tha aqueous layer and dry the organic layer by adding lQg o f anhydrous sodium sulfate. 9.7 Concentrate the extract to incipient ' dryness by heating in a 50* C water bath and simultaneously flawing a stream of prepurified nitrogen over the extract. Quantitatively transfer the residue to an alumina microcolumn fabricated aa follows: 9.7.1 Cut off the top section o f a 10 ml disposable Pyrex pipette at the 4 3 ml mark , and insert a plug of silanized glass w ool into tha tip of the lower portion of the pipette. 9.7 3 Add 23g of Woelm basic alumina (previously activated at BOO* C overnight and then cooled to room temperature In a desiccator Just prior to use). Federal Register / Vol, 48. No. BS / Monday, April I. 1963 / 9.8 Elute the microcolumn with 10 ml of 3% methylene chloride-in-hexane followed by 15 ml of 20% methylene chloride-in-hexane and discard these effluents.' Elute the column with 15 ml o f 50% methylenechloride-inhexane and concentrate this effluent (55* C water bath, stream of prepurified nitogren) to dhaul 0.3-0.5 ml. ft.9. Quantitatively transfer the residue (using methylene chloride to rinse the container) to a ailanized Reacti-Viel (Pierce Chemical Co.). Evaporate, using a stream oT prepurified nitrogen, almost to dryness, rinse the walls of the vessel with approximately 0.5 ml methylene chloride, evaporate fust to dryness, and tightly cap the v ia l Store the via! at 5*C until analysis, at which lime the sample is reconstituted by the addition of tridecane. 0.10 Approximately 1 hour before GC-MS (HRGC-LRMSJ analysis, dilute the residue In the micro-reaction vessel with an appropriate quantity o f tridecane. Gently swirl the tridecane on the lower portion of the vessel to ensure dissolution of the CDDs and CDFt." Analyze a sample by GC/EC to provide insight into the complexity of the problem, and to determine the manner in which the m ass spectrometer shortd be used. Inject*an appropriate aliquot o f the sample Into the GC-MS instrument, using a syringe. 9.11 If, upon preliminary GC-MS analysis, the sample appears to contain interfering substances which obscure the analyses for CDDs and CDFs. high performance liquid chromatographic (HPLC) cleanup of the extract Is accomplished, prior to further GC- MS analysts. 10. HPLC Cleanup Procedure. 10.1 Place approximately 2 ml of hexane in a 50 ml flint glass sample bottle fitted with a Teflon-lined cap. 10.2 At the appropriate retention time, position sample bottle to collect the required fraction, 10.3 Add 2 ml o f 5% (w /v) sodium carbonate to the sample fraction collected and shake for one minute. 10.4 Quantitatively remove the hexane Itiyer (top layer) end transfer to a microreaction vessel, 10.5 Concentrate the fraction to dryness and retain for further analysis. 11. GC/MS Analysts 11.1 The following column conditions are recommended: Glass capillary column conditions: SP-2Z50 costed on a 30 m long x 0.2S mm LD. glass column [Supelco No. 2 3714. or equivalent) with helium carrier gas at 30 cm /sec linear velocity, run splitless. Column temperature l i 210*C. Under these conditions the retention time for TCDDs is about 9.5 minutes. Calibrate the system daily with, a minimum, three Injections of standard mixtures. 11.2 Calculate response factors for standards relative to l1Cl-TCDD/F (see Section 12). 11.3 Analyze samples with selected ion monitoring o f at least two Ions from Table 3. Proof of the presence of CDD or CDF exists if the following conditions are met: 11.3.1 The retention time of the peak in the sample must match that In the standard within the performance specifications of the analytical system. 11.3.2 The redo of Ions must agree within 10% with that o f the standard. 11.3.3 The retention time o f the peak maximum for the Ions or interest must exactly match that o f the peak. 11.4 Quantitate the CDD and CDF peaks from the response relative to the *K?1-TC0D/ F internal standards. Recovery o f the Internal standardsh ould be greater than 50 percent, 11.5 If a response is obtained for the appropriate set of ions, but li outside the expected ratio, a co-eluting impurity may be suspected. In this case, another set o f ions characteristic of the CDD/CDF molecules should be analyzed. For TCDD a good choice o f ions to m /s 257 and m /s 259. For TCDF a good cholcs of Ions is m /s 241 and 243. These ions are useful In characterizing the molecular structure of TCDD or TCDF. For analysis o f TCDD good analytical technique would require using all four ions, m /e 257, 320.322,328, to verify detection and signal to noise ratio of 5 to 1. Suspected impurities such as DDE, DDD, or PCB residues can be confirmed by checking for their major fragments. These materials can be removed by the cleanup columns. Failure to meet criteria should be explained In the report or the sample reanalyzed. 11.0 If broad background interference restricts the sensitivity of the GC/MS analysis, the analyst should employ cleanup procedures and reanalyze by GC/MS. 11.7. fat those circumstances where these procedures do not yield a definitive conclusion, die use o f high resolution mass spectrometry to suggested. 12. Calculations 12.1 Determine the concentration o f individual compounds according to the . formula: A x A, Concentration, ug/gm G x AxR< Where:' A u g of internal standard added to the sample.4 G =gm of sample extracted A ,= a r ea o f characteristic ion of the compound being quantified A ,,n area o f characteristic Ion o f the internal standard R<TMresponse factor Response factors ere calculated using data obtained from the analysis of standards according to the formula: A,xC Rf AfcxCi *11)0 proper amount of standard to be used (s determined from the calibration curve [See Section 6.0|. Whr ^ . C* coacentrettaB o f ( C , concentration o f t 112 Report results Ini__ gram without correction Cor t When duplicate and spiked i analyzed, ell dele obtained _ be" reported. 12-3 Accuracy end Precisian. No data are available at this time. Table 1--Gas Chromatography of TCDD. Cohmn Alw^w rssJasy Oeucaen ttm apm a) tm w K i` e x Cnp? ----------- -----------_ Is 0.003 U ft/l TtW U equal to Sue u n ti w eS_fuflQSeCrvbneeWftgUracutnebdUomGeCa rwpenae aw urtng *be|Bingi oltacawe Bnof voXana M Vm t Bar a m s e extact, and aOC MKNon of I pflricroftn* O iM o n iH o li Apply to bob) ocean ce p tu * and GC/MS dUicSan. F o U M a w 44 ff lie w s (December X.t"arsi Table 2.--DFTPP Key Ions and IOn Abundance Criteria 1 * si. TO - tzr. 1S7- us. 188(7 8 - 441. 442443.. SO toSO pueanaaruaw US. Loot San ( pwoonl morn SB. On 40tosopnart <*masala . leaa Van t pareer t m o e ISO. Baw p a *. 100 parent raWhe S u to n a . 5 to S p u w rt of mam iM i to to 30 patter* c l maw ISO. Omenr sun 1 pmemt of nuw tss. P feieni but Use Sun ra w 443. O iw tor Sen 40 paresnt aT n u w ISA 17 to a percent eeaa 441 _ 'J . W. Etatwfcugw . L E.H snU , and W. L BudW. 1ST8. Retararae oonqxxmd to cUKxato tan Wundsnee m n u fa m art h g n cnrenw ugi * e maw w e e tm u ty . AnUyOcU Cbemeky 47.-908. Table 3.--U sr of Accurate Masses Moni tored Using GC Selected-Ion Monitor ing, Low Resolution, Mass Spectrom etry For Simultaneous Determination of Tetra-, Penta-, and Hexachlorinateo DtBENZ0-/>-Dioxinsand Dibenzofursns C U tao l d ta b iM or d b a u o tw n N uitaor or (N arine adbwSanta W Uonf- * lorad U / ta r d b ra o Anna CmH joo. MoNto m d riv a la r (ta e ito O w ina C ,^V A re re u msW ttwemAcalndta ed on Bw tatS ta u f due* Tee._______ P ana,,--- -------H aw ------------- 4 '*18 6 3 7 303.102 321484 321499 327J8 3 use *294839 B 353364 337.063 365S35 33S.B80 398JIS 373121 3(1413 373411 074 1.00 41 TO .57 1.00 1.00 47 tin te d pM fcL _ can ba ntyaonri In TCOO a nalym IQr 1452 Federal Register / Vol. 48, No. 05 / Monday, April 4, 1983 / Proposed Rules FART 204-STANDARDS FOR OWNERS AND OPERATORS OF HAZARDOUS WASTE TREATMENT, rgp:STORAGE, AND DISPOSAL FACILITIES 10. Tbe authority dtitiew for Part 244 reads i s EoBows: ,^ r r" Authority: Secs. 1006,2002(a), 9004, and 9006 of the Solid W aste Disposal Act. as amended by the Resource Ooaaenrarian and Recovery A ct o f 1976. as amended (42 U.S.C. 0005, 6012(b). 0024. and 6925). IL ln Subparl K of Part 284, add the following 12BL231: 1 244331 Special requIrMwnts for hazardous wastaa TO20, F021, F022, and F023L (a) Hazardous Wastes F&20LFD21, FtB3. and FQ23 m a t not be placed in a surface imjvm.rt/irryrf codes* the owner or operator operates the surface Impoundment In accordance with a management plan Ear these wastes that is approved by the Regional Administrator pursuant to the standards set out in thb paragraph, and In accord with all other applicable requirements of this P art The factors to he considered are: (1) the volume, physical, and chemical characteristics of (he wastes, including their potential to migrate through soil or to volatilize or escape into the atmosphere; (2) the attecnative properties of underlying and aamwnding soils or other materials; (3) the mobilizing properties of other materials co-dispoaed with these wastes; (4J the effectiveness of additional treatment design, or monitoring techniques. (b) The Regional Administrator may determine that additional design, operating, and monitoring requirements are necessary for surface impoundments managing hazardous wastes F020, F021, FD22, and P023 in older to reduce the possibility of migration of these wastes to ground water, surface water, or air so as to protect human health and the environment. .-rvj 12. In Subpart L of Port 284, add tbe following 1 284.259; "'"'T 1 264259 Special isquhi mwit tor hazardous wastaa FB2Q,FQ21, F022, and fo a. (a] Hazardous Wastes F020, FD21, FQ22, and F023 must not be placed in waste piles that are not otclosed (as defined In f 284.250(c)) unless the owner or operator operates the waste pile in accordance with a management plan for these wastes that is approved by the Regional Administrator pursuant to the standards set out in this paragraph, and In accord with all other applicable requirements of this P art The factors to be considered era: (1) the volume, physical, and chemical characteristics of the wastes, including their potential .to migrate through soil or to volatilise or escape into the atmosphere; (2) the a tiennative properties of underlying and surrounding satis, or other materials; (3) the mobilizing properties of other materials co-disposed with these wastes; (4) the effectiveness of additional treatment, design, or monitoring techniques. (b] The Regional Administrator may determine that additional design, operating, and monitoring requirements are necessary for piles managing hazardous wastes FQ2Q, FBZ1. F022,aod F23 in order to reduce tbe possibility of migration of these wastes to (pound water, surface water, or ah so as to protect human health and the environme n t 13. In Subpart M of Part 284, add the following S 284283: 1 264263 Special requirements tor hazardous wastes F626, FOOT, R 22, and F023. (a) Hazardous wastes F02Q, FQ21, FD22, end F023 mast not be placed in s land treatment facility unless the owner or operator operates the facility in accordance with a management plan for these waatea diet is approved by the Regional Administrator pursuant to the standards set out in this paragraph, and in accord with all other applicable requirements of the P art The factors to be considered are: (1) the volume, physical, and chemical characteristics of the wastes, including their potential to migrate through soil or to volatilize or escape into th atmosphere; (2) the attennative properties of underlying and surrounding soils or other materials; (3) the mobilizing properties of other materials co-dispoied With these wastes; (4) the effectiveness of additional treatment, design, or monitoring techniques. (b] The Regional Administrator may determine that additional design, operating, and monitoring requirements are necessary for land treatment facilities managing hazardous wastes P020, FQ21, FQ22, and F23 in order to reduce the possibility of migration of these wastes to ground water, surface water, or air so as to protect human health and the environment 14. In Subpart N of Part 264, add the following S284217: 1 264.317 Special requirements for hazardous wastes F02Q, F021, FQ22, and F023. (a) Hazardous wastes F020, F021. F22, and F023 must not be placed in landfills unless the owner or operator operates the bmdftU in accordance with a management plan for these wastes that is approved by tbe Regional Administrator pursuant to the standards set out in this paragraph, and in accord with all other applicable requirements of this Part. The factors to be considered are: (1) the volume, physical, and chemical characteristics of tbe wastes, including their potential to ralpate through the soil or to volatilize or escape into the atmosphere; (2) the attenuative properties of underlying and surrounding soils or other materials; (3) the mobilizing properties of other materials CfMsposed with these wastes; (4) the effectiveness of additional treatment, designer monitoring requirements. (b) The Regional Administrator may determine that additional design, operating, and monitoring requirements are necessary for landfills managing hazardous wastes FB2Q, FTJZ1, F022, and , F023 m order to reduce the possibility of migration of these wastes to ground water, surface water, or air so as to protect human health and the environment ,, PART 265--INTERIM STANDARDS FOR OWNERS AND OPERATORS OF HAZARDOUS WASTE TREATMENT, STORAGE, AND DISPOSAL FACILITIES 15. The authority citation for Part 265 reads as follows: Authority: Secs. 1006,20021a). 300*. and 3005 of the Solid Waste Disposai Act as mended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, as amended (42 U.S.C. 6805. (12(a). 6824. and 6925). 18.1 285.1 Is amended by adding paragraph (d). 1 265.1 Purpose, scop and appliesbatty. ,6 * * (d) The following hazardous wastes must not be managed at facilities subject to regulation under this Part. (1) EPA Hazardmis Waste Nos. FD20, F021, FQ22, and F023 unless: (1) The waste Is generated in a surface impoundment as part of the plant's wastewater treatment system. 1 Federal Register / Vol. 48. No. 85 / Monday, April 4. 1963 / Proposed Rule r (ii) The waste is stored in tanks or containers. (iii) The waste is stored or treated in ! waste piles that meet the requirements of | 264.250(c) as well as all other applicable requirements of Subpart L of this Part. PART 775 [REMOVED] 17. The authority citation for Part 775 reads as follows: Authority. Sec. 8 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Pub. L 94-469. 90 Slat 2020 115 U.S.C 2605). 18. Title 40 is amended by removing Part 775. |KRUur B3-TO0 Piled -1-0. H i <m| SM-LIMG COO SMO-SO-M 14529 I