[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 43 (Wednesday, March 5, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 10004-10006]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-5419]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 268
[FRL-5699-3]
RIN 2050 AE05
Land Disposal Restrictions--Phase IV: Treatment Standards for
Characteristic Metal Wastes; Notice of Data Availability
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of data availability.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA has received additional information on an issue it first
raised in the Land Disposal Restrictions (LDR) Phase III proposed rule
(60 FR 11702, March 2, 1995), that of whether the addition of iron
filings (and iron dust) to lead-contaminated spent foundry sand is a
means of diluting the waste impermissibly rather than treating it to
conform with the requirements of the LDR rules. The new information
being noticed today addresses whether this practice stabilizes (or
otherwise treats) lead, the chief hazardous constituent found in the
spent sand, so that the lead will not migrate through the environment
when the spent sand is land disposed. Stabilization as a technology-
based LDR standard (STABL) is described in 40 CFR 268.42 as using the
following reagents (or waste reagents) or combinations of reagents: (1)
Portland cement; or (2) lime/pozzolans (e.g., fly ash and cement kiln
dust)--this does not preclude the addition of reagents (e.g., iron
salts, silicates, and clays) designed to enhance the set/cure time and/
or compressive strength, or to overall reduce the leachability of the
metal or inorganic. New studies have been performed to evaluate this
hazardous waste management practice, and the studies have undergone
external Peer Review. EPA is noticing these studies, and the results of
the Peer Review, in this Notice, and soliciting public comment. EPA may
use the results of the studies to promulgate a revised final approach
on this waste management practice in an upcoming LDR rulemaking (Phase
IV).
The public has 30 days from publication of this notice to comment
on the results of the studies and the Peer Review. This notice does not
reopen for comment any other Phase III or Phase IV issue; only comments
about the waste management practice of adding iron filings or dust to
lead-contaminated spent foundry sand will be considered by the Agency.
DATES: Comments are due by April 4, 1997.
ADDRESSES: To submit comments, the public must send an original and two
copies to Docket Number F-97-PH3A-FFFFF, located at the RCRA Docket.
The mailing address is: RCRA Information Center, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (5305W), 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460. RCRA
Information Center is located at 1235 Jefferson Davis Highway, First
Floor, Arlington, Virginia. The RCRA Information Center is open for
public inspection and copying of supporting information for RCRA rules
from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, except for Federal
holidays. The public must make an appointment to review docket
materials by calling (703) 603-9230. The public may copy a maximum of
100 pages from any regulatory document at no cost. Additional copies
cost $0.15 per page.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information or to order
paper copies of this Federal Register document, call the RCRA Hotline.
Callers within the Washington Metropolitan Area must dial 703-412-9810
or TDD 703-412-3323 (hearing impaired). Long-distance callers may call
1-800-424-9346 or TDD 1-800-553-7672. The RCRA Hotline is open Monday-
Friday, 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Eastern Standard Time. For other
information on this notice, contact Mary Cunningham at (703) 308-8453,
John Austin at (703) 308-0436 or Rhonda Craig at (703) 308-8771, Office
of Solid Waste, Mail Code 5302W, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC
20460.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Paperless Office Effort
EPA is asking prospective commenters to voluntarily submit one
additional copy of their comments on labeled personal computer
diskettes in ASCII (TEXT) format or a word processing format that can
be converted to ASCII (TEXT). It is essential to specify on the disk
label the word processing software and version/edition as well as the
commenter's name. This will allow EPA to convert the comments into one
of the word processing formats utilized by the Agency. Please use
mailing envelopes designed to physically protect the submitted
diskettes. EPA emphasizes that submission of comments on diskettes is
not mandatory, nor will it result in any advantage or disadvantage to
any commenter. This expedited procedure is in conjunction with the
Agency ``Paperless Office'' campaign. For further information on the
submission of diskettes, contact Rhonda Craig of the Waste Treatment
Branch at (703) 308-8771.
This Federal Register notice is available on the Internet System
through EPA Public Access Server, www.epa.gov. For the text of the
notice, choose: Rules, Regulations, and Legislation; FR-Waste; Year/
Month/Day.
Notice of Data Availability
I. Overview
On March 2, 1995, EPA published the LDR Phase III proposal in the
Federal Register (60 FR 11702). Among other things, EPA proposed that
adding iron filings to lead-contaminated spent foundry sand constituted
impermissible dilution of hazardous lead waste rather than treatment to
meet the LDR treatment standards (60 FR 11731). As explained in the
proposed rule, the addition of iron filings seems to temporarily retard
the leachability of lead in the spent foundry sand thus allowing the
waste to pass the TCLP test, but not to be permanently treated.
Comments were mixed on this issue, and EPA decided not to finalize a
determination that the practice is a form of impermissible dilution in
the Phase III final rule without studying the issue further. See 61 FR
15569, April 8, 1996.
Since then, two studies have become available on this issue. One
study was developed by Dr. John Drexler of the University of Colorado,
and the other by Dr. Douglas Kendall of the National Enforcement
Investigations Center (NEIC). The results of these studies indicate
that the addition of iron filings or iron dust to spent foundry sand
does
[[Page 10005]]
not constitute adequate treatment of the waste because high
concentrations of lead remain available to the environment, and indeed
have been shown to leach in actual field monitoring of units receiving
the spent foundry wastes. The studies also may support a more basic
principle: a method of treatment that does not in fact result in
substantial reductions of a waste's toxicity or mobility could be
viewed as not adequately minimizing threats posed by land disposal of
the waste, and therefore, may fail to satisfy the requirements for
permissible treatment under section 3004(m) of RCRA. Cf. 62 FR 1994-
1995 (Jan. 14, 1997) (EPA discusses similar principle in connection of
treatment of hazardous waste K088).
EPA requested that these studies be reviewed by experts from the
academic community who are independent of EPA. The studies are
discussed in greater detail below.
II. Discussion of the Studies
Spent foundry sand, as generated, may fail the Toxicity
Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) for lead, and would then be
considered a characteristic hazardous waste. At a brass foundry in
Nacogdoches, Texas, EPA found that hazardous foundry sand is treated by
the addition of iron dust and iron filings. After this treatment, the
spent foundry sand passed the TCLP (and thus was no longer considered a
hazardous waste) and was disposed in the municipal landfill. EPA Region
VI commissioned studies to assess the effectiveness of this waste
management practice. The studies discuss the chemistry behind iron
treatment and conclude that the addition of iron to waste foundry sand
does not permanently prevent the release of lead into the environment.
The studies were based on samples collected from two cells at the
Nacogdoches Municipal landfill and NIBCO, Inc. in Nacogdoches, Texas by
a team from A. T. Kearney (EPA Contractor) and EPA. The landfill cells
contained waste sands and other wastes from the NIBCO facility and were
sampled so as to preserve depth information. Samples taken at the NIBCO
brass foundry included waste foundry sands, green sand, hydofilter
sludge, baghouse dust, resin sand, and silica sand. Dr. John W. Drexler
of the University of Colorado performed a geostatistical evaluation of
the Nacogdoches Landfill data and photomicrographic analysis of the
samples. Dr. Douglas Kendall with EPA's National Enforcement
Investigations Center (NEIC) evaluated total and leachate analyses
performed by the NEIC laboratory. These studies and supporting
documentation are being placed in the docket for the Phase IV rule, and
are being made available for review by today's notice.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ EPA is mentioning its enforcement activities here solely to
indicate the provenance of the studies being made available for
public comment. EPA is not seeking to influence the results of any
enforcement actions by doing so. In addition, none of the Agency
staff involved in any pending enforcement action involving any
member of the foundry industry has any substantive involvement in
the Agency's rulemaking considering the question of whether addition
of iron to foundry wastes is a permissible form of treatment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In his study, Dr. Drexler concluded the following: (1) That the
spent foundry wastes placed in the Nacodoches Municipal Landfill
remained hazardous in fact; (2) the addition of iron filings to spent
foundry sand does not cause chemical reduction (i.e., the hazardous
lead remains oxidized); (3) the addition of iron filings to the spent
foundry sand promoted a physicochemical dilution of the sample during
the TCLP by producing significant increases in surface area sorption
sites; (4) the addition of iron filings to the waste sand artificially
altered the environmental character of the TCLP test by increasing pH,
and lowering Eh (redox potential) and DO (dissolved oxygen); and (5)
in-vitro testing shows that these ``treated'' spent foundry sands
maintain a high bioavailability of lead.
In his study, Dr. Kendall concluded that when metallic iron is
mixed with lead-contaminated foundry sand there is no reaction, the
lead is not entrapped or immobilized. During the TCLP the mixture comes
in contact with an aqueous solution and the lead begins to leach into
the solution. If metallic iron is present, the lead concentration in
solution will be decreased by an oxidation/reduction reaction to levels
below the lead characteristic level. If fresh metallic iron is
regularly introduced into the mixture, then soluble lead can be kept at
low levels. If, however, the mixture is placed in a landfill and left
alone, the iron will oxidize, thereby losing its ability to reduce lead
ions. The report concludes that adding iron is not a way to permanently
treat lead-contaminated waste.
The A.T. Kearney Peer Review Report includes comments from three
reviewers: Dr. Abinash Agrawal of Wright State University; Dr. Carl
Palmer of the Oregon Institute of Science and Technology; and Dr.
Geoffrey Thyne of California State University at Bakersfield. The peer
reviewers were instructed to review each report to determine if the
reports addressed the following questions:
1. Does the report support the conclusion that treatment has not
occurred by adding iron filings to the foundry sand containing lead?
2. Do the scientific data present in the report support the
conclusions reached?
3. Is the report based on sound scientific research and fact?
The peer reviewers agree that adding iron filings to spent foundry
sand is not treatment of hazardous waste constituents. The Peer Review
report further states that the scientific data presented in the studies
support the conclusions reached by the studies. Furthermore, the Peer
Review report finds that the studies are based on sound scientific
research and fact.
The Agency is in the process of reviewing all the data that were
obtained during the NIBCO investigation. The Agency is also continuing
to review the comments submitted to the LDR Phase III proposed
rulemaking which addressed this issue (59 FR 11731, March 2, 1995).
These studies and data are being analyzed in order to determine the
treatment validity of adding iron filings to characteristic metal
wastes as a method of treatment.
The documents being placed in the docket for this NODA include:
Phase I, Characterization of Iron Filings Treatment Method
of Foundry Sands, Dr. John W. Drexler, Associate Professor, University
of Colorado Laboratory for Environmental and Geological Studies.
Impermanence of Iron Treatment of Lead-Contaminated
Foundry Sand, Douglas Kendall, Ph.D., Senior Chemist, National
Enforcement Investigations Center (NEIC).
Peer Review Report, September 3, 1996, submitted by A.T.
Kearney, Inc., Dallas, Texas to Rena McClurg, Regional Project Officer,
USEPA, Dallas, Texas.
Fax message to Bret Kendrick from Dr. Abinash Agrawal RE:
Peer Review for EPA Region 6.
Reply to Reviewers' Comments; Impermanence of Iron
Treatment of Lead-Contaminated Foundry Sand, Douglas Kendall, Ph.D.,
Senior Chemist, National Enforcement Investigations Center (NEIC).
Responses to Peer Review Comments, Characterization of
Iron Filings Treatment Method of Foundry Sands, Dr. John W. Drexler.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 268
Environmental protection, Hazardous waste, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
[[Page 10006]]
Dated: February 20, 1997.
Matthew Hale,
Acting Director, Office of Solid Waste.
[FR Doc. 97-5419 Filed 3-4-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
