[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 26 (Wednesday, February 8, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7536-7538]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-3116]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[SWH-FRL-5151-3]
Hazardous Waste Management System: Land Disposal Restrictions
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of approval of application for a case-by-case extension
of land disposal restrictions effective date.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is today approving the application submitted by Great
Lakes Chemical Corporation (Great Lakes), requesting an extension of
the June 30, 1994, effective date of the RCRA land disposal
restrictions (LDR) treatment standards applicable to wastewaters with
the hazardous wastes codes K117, K118, K131, K132, and F039. to be
granted such a request, the applicant must demonstrate, among other
things, that there is insufficient capacity to manage its waste and
that he has entered into a binding contractual commitment to construct
or otherwise provide such capacity, but due to circumstances beyond its
control, such capacity could not reasonably be made available by the
effective date. As a result of this action, Great Lakes will be allowed
to land dispose of its K117, K118, K131, K132, and F039 wastes, until
June 30, 1995, without being subject to the land disposal restrictions
applicable to such wastes. If warranted, EPA may grant a renewal of
this extension, for up to one additional year, which, if requested and
granted, would extend the effective date of the LDR for these
wastestreams to June 30, 1996.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This approved extension of the LDR effective date
becomes effective January 31, 1995.
ADDRESSES: The docket for this action is located at the EPA Region 6
office, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202, and is available for
review during normal business hours, 8:00 a.m. through 4:00 p.m.,
Monday through Friday.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
The RCRA/Superfund Hotline, at (800) 424-9346 (toll-free) or (703) 412-
9810, in the Washington, DC metropolitan area or Gus Chavarria, Chief
UIC Section, EPA--Region 6, telephone (214) 665-7166.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
A. Congressional Mandate
Congress enacted the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of
1984 to amend the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), to
impose additional responsibilities on persons managing hazardous
wastes. Among other things, HSWA required EPA to develop regulations
that would impose restrictions on the land disposal of hazardous
wastes. In particular, Sections 3004 (d) through (g) prohibit the land
disposal of certain hazardous wastes by specified dates in order to
protect human health and the environment except that wastes that meet
treatment standards established by EPA are not prohibited and may be
land disposed. Section 3004(m) requires EPA to set ``levels or methods
of treatment, if any, which substantially diminish the toxicity of the
waste or substantially reduce the likelihood of migration of hazardous
constituents from the waste so that short-term and long-term threats to
human health and the environment are minimized.''
In developing such a broad program, Congress recognized that
adequate alternative treatment, recovery, or disposal capacity which is
protective of human health and the environment, may not be available by
the applicable statutory effective dates. Section 3004(h)(1) authorizes
EPA to grant a variance (based on the earliest dates that such capacity
will be available, but not to exceed two years) from the effective date
which would otherwise apply to specific hazardous wastes. In addition,
under Section 3004(h)(2), EPA is authorized to grant an additional
capacity extension of the applicable deadline on a case-by-case basis
for up to one year. Such an extension is renewable once for up to one
additional year.
On November 7, 1986, EPA published a final rule (51 FR 40572)
establishing the regulatory framework to implement the land disposal
restrictions program, including the procedures for submitting case-by-
case extension applications.
On August 18, 1992, EPA published a final rule (57 FR 37194,
37252), establishing treatment standards under the land disposal
restrictions (LDR) program for certain listed hazardous wastes,
including the following:
1. K117--Wastewaters from the reactor vent gas scrubber in the
production of ethylene dibromide via the bromination of ethylene.
2. K118--Spent adsorbent solids from the purification of EDB produced
by bromination of ethylene.
3. K131--Wastewater from the reactor and acid dryer from the production
of methyl bromide.
4. K132--Spent adsorbent and wastewater separator solids from the
production of methyl bromide.
Because of a determination that available treatment, recovery, or
disposal (TRD) capacity did not exist at that time for wastewaters
K117, K118, K131, and K132 that are underground injected, EPA granted a
two-year national capacity variance for these wastes. The variance
expired June 30, 1994. The mixture of wastes for which Great Lakes
requested an extension of the LDR treatment standards also will be
subject to the treatment standards for F039 since that is a component
of the [[Page 7537]] mixture. (See the footnote in 59 FR 41742.)
On August 15, 1994, EPA proposed to approve the case-by-case
extension application submitted by Great Lakes Chemical Corporation for
the K117, K118, K131, K132 and F039 wastes generated at its main plant
(EPA I.D. ARD043195429) located in El Dorado, Arkansas. (See 59 FR
41741 for details of the proposed rule.) These waters was comprised of
recovered groundwater, leachates from two on-site closed landfills, and
process wastewater that are mixed prior to underground injection. The
proposed extension would allow Great Lakes to continue disposing of
these wastes in on-site underground injection wells until June 30,
1995, while they construct a treatment unit to treat the leachates to
Best Demonstrated Advanced Technology (BDAT) standards. As discussed
below, only one public comment was received in response to the proposed
notice. The sole commenter was Great Lakes.
B. Applicant's Demonstrations Under 40 CFR 268.5 for Case-by-Case
Extension
Case-by-case extension applications must satisfy the requirements
outlined in 40 CFR 268.5. EPA believes that Great Lakes, owner/operator
of the El Dorado, Arkansas facility, at which a treatment unit is being
constructed to provide treatment of leachates to meet BDAT standards,
has made the necessary demonstrations to be granted a case-by-case
extension. Based on the timeline submitted by Great Lakes, projecting
completion of the leachates treatment until by June 1995, EPA is
granting an extension of the current LDR effective date, until June 30,
1995. The following is a discussion of each of the seven demonstrations
of 40 CFR 268.5(a)(1)-(7) made by Great Lakes: Section 268.5(a)(1). The
applicant has made a good-faith effort to locate and contract with
treatment, recovery, or disposal facilities nationwide to manage its
waste in accordance with the effective date of the applicable
restriction (i.e., June 30, 1994).
Great Lakes initially asked ten hazardous waste management
facilities located throughout the nation whether they could treat the
waste for which the case-by-case extension is being requested. As
discussed in the proposed notice, five of these facilities indicated
they, collectively, had between 298,000 to 385,000 gallons per day of
available treatment capacity. Thus, there may be available treatment
capacity to manage approximately two-thirds of the more than 500,000
gallons per day of waste being generated by Great Lakes, for which a
case-by-case extension was requested. In order to ship these wastes
off-site, however, Great Lakes would need to obtain a permit and
construct a transfer facility. Consequently, although off-site
treatment capacity is available to treat a portion of Great Lakes'
wastewaters, EPA believes considerably less time is necessary to
construct the proposed treatment system and obtain the necessary permit
modifications than it would take for Great Lakes to construct
facilities to transport these wastewaters to off-site treatment. As
noted in its public comments, Great Lakes, subsequent to EPA's notice
proposing to grant the extension sought by Great Lakes, received
information that a commercial facility may have sufficient capacity to
manage the full quantity of leachates being generated daily at the El
Dorado, Arkansas facility. (For further information, see public comment
submitted by Great Lakes in response to the proposed approval of its
case-by-case extension (59 FR 41741). This information can be found in
Docket No. F-94-GLCP-FFFFF.) Great Lakes, given its extensive previous
experience in evaluating the feasibility of using biological treatment
for this waste, has expressed reservations regarding the acceptability
of such treatment. In any case, as pointed out by Great Lakes, use of
this treatment capacity, even if technically acceptable, poses the same
permitting and construction requirements needed to use capacity at any
other off-site commercial facility. Therefore, EPA continues to agree
that the lack of transfer facilities needed by Great Lakes to use the
available treatment capacity off-site to treat the wastes generated at
its El Dorado, Arkansas facility provide an adequate basis to fulfill
the requirements of this demonstration. Section 268.5(a)(2). The
applicant has entered into a binding contractual commitment to
construct or otherwise provide alternative treatment, recovery, or
disposal capacity that meets the treatment standards specified in 40
CFR Part 268, subpart D or, where treatment standards have not been
specified, such treatment, recovery, or disposal capacity is protective
of human health and the environment.
Great Lakes provided EPA with sufficient documentation, including
purchase orders for equipment and a contract for the installation of
equipment and the construction of the treatment system demonstrating
that it is fully committed to construction of the necessary on-site
treatment capacity. EPA is convinced that Great Lakes is making a good-
faith effort to construct a treatment unit that will treat the K117,
K118, K131, K132, and K039 wastes generated at its El Dorado, Arkansas
facility to BDAT standards. Another issue discussed in the proposed
notice was EPA's recent proposal to list certain 2,4,6-tribromophenol
(TBP) wastes as hazardous wastes and to add these wastes to the list of
hazardous constituents in appendix VIII of 40 CFR part 261 (see 59 FR
24530, May 11, 1994). In its comments submitted in response to EPA's
proposed approval of the case-by-case extension, Great Lakes noted that
these TBP wastes are not and have never been generated at the El Dorado
facility. EPA believes Great Lakes has provided the necessary
documentation to meet the requirements of this demonstration.
Section 268.5(a)(3). Due to circumstances beyond the applicant's
control, such alternative capacity cannot reasonably be made available
by the applicable effective date. This demonstration may include a
showing that the technical and practical difficulties associated with
providing the alternative capacity will result in the capacity not
being available by the applicable effective date.
As discussed in the proposed notice of approval of the Great Lakes
application for a case-by-case extension of the LDR effective date, EPA
believes that Great Lakes has made a good-faith effort to provide
treatment capacity by the effective date. Great Lakes has aggressively
pursued the development of technology capable of treating their wastes
to BDAT standards. EPA believes Great Lakes has acted in good faith to
provide the necessary treatment capacity but that such capacity could
not reasonably be made available by June 30, 1994, the effective date
of the land disposal restriction for these wastes. As such, EPA
believes this demonstration of non-availability of capacity, due to
circumstances beyond the applicant's control, is adequate for the
purposes of this demonstration.
Section 268.5(a)(4). The capacity being constructed or otherwise
provided by the applicant will be sufficient to manage the entire
quantity of waste that is the subject of the application.
Great Lakes has shown that the treatment system to be constructed
at its El Dorado, Arkansas facility has a design capacity of 28,800
gallons per day (20 gallons per minute) and thus has adequate capacity
to treat the leachates that exceed BDAT treatment standards, generated
at a rate of up to 10 gallons/minute, prior to its being managed by
underground injection. Great Lakes believes that treatment of these
leachates to BDAT standards will allow the remaining portion of the
[[Page 7538]] 500,000 gallons/day of generated wastes covered by this
extension (i.e., those wastes currently mixed with the leachates) to
meet BDAT standards without further treatment. As such, the planned
treatment system is expected to have sufficient treatment capacity.
Thus, EPA believes that Great Lakes has adequately demonstrated that
the treatment unit to be constructed will provide the necessary
treatment capacity to treat the entire quantity of these leachates for
which Great Lakes is requesting a case-by-case extension.
Section 268.5(a)(5). The applicant provides a detailed schedule for
obtaining operating and construction permits or an outline of how and
when alternative capacity will be available.
Great Lakes has provided EPA with a detailed schedule for the
construction and permitting of the treatment system to be constructed
at its El Dorado, Arkansas facility. Although Great Lakes had planned
to begin construction of the treatment system in March 1994, final
approval of required State permits has not yet been received. Great
Lakes continues to believe that the leachate treatment unit will
achieve full operational status by June 30, 1995. EPA believes that
Great Lakes has provided the necessary construction and permitting
milestones for bringing its treatment system on-line and therefore
meets the requirements of this demonstration.
Section 268.5(a)(6). The applicant has arranged for adequate
capacity to manage its waste during an extension, and has documented
the location of all sites at which the waste will be managed.
During the approved extension period, Great Lakes will inject these
wastes into its on-site Class I wells it has been using for this
purpose. Great Lakes has shown that these wells will have the necessary
capacity available to manage these wastes during the approved
extension. EPA believes that Great Lakes has met the requirements of
this demonstration.
Section 268.5(a)(7). Any waste managed in a surface impoundment or
landfill during the extension period will meet the requirements of 40
CFR 268.5(h)(2).
Great Lakes will not be using any surface impoundments or landfills
to manage this waste during the extension period.
II. Response to Comments
Only one public comment was submitted in response to EPA's notice
to propose approval of the case-by-case application submitted by Great
Lakes. This sole comment was submitted by the applicant, Great Lakes.
Where appropriate in this notice, EPA has noted and addressed those
issues raised by the applicant in its comments.
III. Consultation With State
In accordance with 40 CFR 268.5(e), EPA consulted with the State of
Arkansas (Arkansas Department of Pollution Control and Ecology) to
determine if the State had any permitting, enforcement, or other
concerns regarding this respective facility that EPA should take into
consideration in deciding to grant or deny Great Lakes' application for
a case-by-case extension of the LDR effective date. The State of
Arkansas encouraged EPA to approve the case-by-case application
submitted by Great Lakes.
IV. EPA's Action
EPA believes that Great Lakes has made and is continuing to make a
good-faith effort towards providing sufficient and appropriate
treatment capacity for the K117, K118, K131, K132, and F039 wastes that
are the subject of its case-by-case application. Therefore, EPA is
approving an extension of the applicable LDR effective date for these
wastes generated at the El Dorado, Arkansas facility, until June 30,
1995. As such, these wastes may be managed by underground injection
until June 30, 1995 (unless the extension is renewed for up to one
additional year, in which case the extension would expire no later than
June 30, 1996), which the proposed treatment system is being
constructed. This extension remains in effect unless the facility fails
to make a good-faith effort to meet the schedule for completion, the
Agency denies or revokes any required permit, conditions certified in
the application change, or the facility violates any law or regulations
implemented by EPA.
Having been granted this case-by-case extension of the LDR
effective date, Great Lakes must immediately notify EPA of any change
in the demonstrations made in the petition (40 CFR 268.5(f)). Great
Lakes must also submit monthly progress reports that describe the
progress being made towards obtaining adequate alternative capacity,
identify any delay or possible delay in developing the capacity, and
describe the mitigating actions being taken in response to the event
(40 CFR 268.5(g)). (Sections 1006, 2002(a), 3001, and 3004 of the Solid
Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act of 1976, as amended (42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), 6921, and
6924)).
Dated: January 31, 1995
O. Thomas Love,
Acting Director, Water Management Division.
[FR Doc. 95-3116 Filed 2-7-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
