[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

total halogen specification to exclude comparable fuels from the definition ofsolid waste.



  [Federal Register: September 9, 1997 (Volume 62, Number 174)]
  [Proposed Rules]
  [Page 47402-47404]
  >From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
  [DOCID:fr09se97-19]
  
  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  
  ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
  
  40 CFR Part 261
  
  [FRL-5890-2]
  
  
  Revised Technical Standards for Hazardous Waste Combustion
  Facilities
  
  AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
  
  ACTION: Notice of data availability and request for comments.
  
  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  
  SUMMARY: This document is a notice of data availability and invitation
  for comment on the following information pertaining to the proposed
  revised standards for hazardous waste combustors (61 FR 17358 (April
  19, 1996)): additional data on various fuel oils to be used to
  establish a total halogen specification to exclude comparable fuels
  from the definition of solid waste.
      Readers should note that only comments about new information
  discussed in this notice will be considered during the comment period.
  Issues related to the April 19, 1996 proposed rule and other subsequent
  notices that are not directly affected by the documents or data
  referenced in today's Notice of Data Availability are not open for
  further comment.
  
  DATES: Written comments must be submitted by September 24, 1997.
  
  ADDRESSES: Commenters must send an original and two copies of their
  comments referencing docket number F-97-CS5A-FFFFF to: RCRA Docket
  Information Center, Office of Solid Waste (5305G), U.S. Environmental
  Protection Agency Headquarters (EPA, HQ), 401 M Street, S.W.,
  Washington, DC 20460. Deliveries of comments should be made to the
  Arlington, Virginia address listed below. Comments may also be
  submitted electronically through the Internet to: rcra-
  docket@epamail.epa.gov. Comments in electronic format should also be
  identified by the docket number F-97-CS5A-FFFFF. All electronic
  comments must be submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the use of special
  characters and any form of encryption. For other information regarding
  submitting comments electronically or viewing the comments received or
  supporting information, please refer to the proposed rule (61 FR 17358
  (April 19, 1996)).
      Commenters should not submit electronically any confidential
  business information (CBI). An original and two copies of the CBI must
  be submitted under separate cover to: RCRA CBI Document Control
  Officer, Office of Solid Waste (5305W), U.S. EPA, 401 M Street, S.W.,
  Washington, DC 20460.
      Public comments and supporting materials are available for viewing
  in the RCRA Information Center (RIC), located at Crystal Gateway One,
  1235 Jefferson Davis Highway, First Floor, Arlington, Virginia. The RIC
  is open from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except for
  Federal holidays. To review docket materials, the public must make an
  appointment by calling 703-603-9230. The public may copy a maximum of
  100 pages from any regulatory docket at no charge. Additional copies
  cost $0.15 per page.
  
  FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information, contact the
  RCRA Hotline at 1-800-424-9346 or TDD 1-800-553-7672 (hearing
  impaired). In the Washington metropolitan area, call 703-412-9810 or
  TDD 703-412-3323. The RCRA Hotline is open Monday-Friday, 9:00 a.m. to
  6:00 p.m., Eastern Standard Time. The RCRA Hotline can also provide
  directions on how to access electronically some of the documents and
  data referred to in this notice via EPA's Cleanup Information Bulletin
  Board System (CLU-IN). The CLU-IN modem access phone number is 301-589-
  8366 or Telnet to clu-in.epa.gov for Internet access. The files posted
  on CLU-IN are in Portable Document Format (PDF) and can be viewed and
  printed using Acrobat Reader.
      For more detailed information on specific aspects of this notice,
  contact Mary Jo Krolewski, Office of Solid Waste (5302W), U.S.
  Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC
  20460, 703-308-7754, e-mail address: krolewski.maryjo@epamail.epa.gov.
  
  SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On April 19, 1996, EPA proposed revised
  standards for hazardous waste combustors (i.e., incinerators and cement
  and lightweight aggregate kilns) that burn hazardous waste. See 61 FR
  17358. After an extension, the comment period closed on August 19,
  1996. In that proposal, EPA included a comparable fuels provision under
  which EPA used a benchmark approach to develop a series of technical
  specifications that would allow hazardous waste similar in composition
  to a commercially available fossil fuel to be excluded under RCRA when
  burned. One of the specifications for comparable fuels was a limit on
  total halogens in comparable fuels. Although total halogens are not
  listed in Appendix VIII, Part 261, EPA proposed a total halogen
  specification to ensure that halogenated products of incomplete
  combustion (PICs) and HCl and Cl<INF>2</INF> generated from burning a
  comparable fuel would not be emitted at higher levels than from burning
  a benchmark fossil fuel. See proposal (61 FR at 17461) and a subsequent
  notice of data availability (61 FR 43501 (August 23, 1996)). PICs
  resulting from the burning of halogenated compounds can pose a
  particular hazard to human health and the environment.
      Using the benchmark approach, EPA initially proposed total halogen
  <SUP>1</SUP> specifications ranging from 10 ppmw to 25 ppmw. These
  initial total halogen specifications included both organic and
  inorganic halogens. However, the total halogen data used by EPA in the
  proposed rule for its No. 4 and No. 6 fuel oils were based on
  analytical methods measuring only total organic halogens, not both
  organic and inorganic halogens. EPA's decision to use a method that
  measured only organic halogens for No. 4 and No. 6 fuel oils was based
  on two factors. First, EPA was concerned about possible method
  interferences and poor matrix recovery when measuring total halogen in
  No. 4 and No. 6 fuel oils and used a method that measures only total
  organic halogen.<SUP>2</SUP> Second, EPA was concerned that No. 4 and
  No. 6 fuel oils
  
  [[Page 47403]]
  
  can contain widely varying levels of inorganic chlorides from
  contamination with emulsified brine during the oil extraction or
  transportation process and used a method that avoided measuring these
  inorganic chlorides.
  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
  
      \1\ Expressed as chlorine.
      \2\ The Agency has since determined that EPA Method 325.3 for
  total halogens should not result in poor matrix recovery.
  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
  
      Commenters disagreed with EPA's decision not to include inorganic
  halogens in its total halogen analyses for No. 4 and No. 6 fuel oils.
  Commenters argued that inorganic halogens are normally found in fuel
  oil and that EPA's analysis was not representative of the total halogen
  levels in fuel oil.<SUP>3</SUP> Furthermore, commenters argued that
  comparable fuel specifications should be set at levels that commercial
  fuels could consistently pass, and should be based on levels of
  constituents actually observed in commercial fuels, regardless of their
  derivation. One commenter submitted additional data on total halogen
  content for No. 6 fuel oil.<SUP>4</SUP>
  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
  
      \3\ See, e.g., RCRA Docket F-97CS5A-FFFFF, number S0001,
  Chemical Manufacturers Association letter dated June 27, 1997.
      \4\ See RCRA Docket F-97-CS5A-FFFFF, number S0002, Rohm & Haas
  letter dated April 14, 1997.
  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
  
      EPA is persuaded by commenters' arguments and is inclined to use
  data that reflect measurement of both organic and inorganic halogens to
  establish the total halogen specification. These data better represent
  the typical total halogen content found in benchmark fuels. To set a
  total halogen limit that includes both organic and inorganic halogens,
  EPA has gathered data from its own database (i.e., for Certifications
  of Compliance required by the Boiler and Industrial Furnace Rule) and
  included data submitted by one commenter <SUP>5</SUP> (see Table 1). In
  addition, EPA will continue to use its original gasoline and No. 2 fuel
  oil halogen data, which include both organic and inorganic halogens
  (see Table 2). EPA invites comment on the appropriateness of these data
  for use in determining a total halogen specification.
  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
  
      \5\ Commenter's data include 6 data points on total halogen in
  No. 6 fuel oil. EPA screened out one of the data points as an
  outlier because it was 170% greater than any data point in the total
  halogen database.
  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
  
      As in the proposed rule, EPA has used a nonparametric rank order
  statistical approach to determine the total halogen specification. See
  61 FR at 17463. Using this methodology under the composite fuel
  approach, the total halogen specification would be 25 ppmw for the 50th
  percentile composite, 260 ppmw for the 90th percentile composite, and
  500 ppmw for the 99th percentile composite. The Agency is not inviting
  additional comment on the various percentiles in this notice. Rather,
  this information is provided to enable interested persons to inspect
  EPA's use of the total halogen data and to comment thereon, including
  the practical impacts of a total halogen specification of 25, 260, or
  500 ppmw.
      In addition to new total halogen data, EPA received comment on an
  equivalency determination to qualify for the comparable fuels
  exemption. One commenter argued that the Agency should consider the
  commenter's candidate comparable fuel as a comparable fuel even though
  it cannot meet the comparable fuel specification for total halogens
  (see Fina Oil comments, docket number RCSP-00204). The commenter's
  candidate comparable fuel has an average halogen content of 1145 ppmw,
  with a standard deviation of 2400 ppmw. The commenter submitted the
  results of an emissions testing program to demonstrate that emissions
  of toxic, Appendix VIII, Part 261, compounds from burning its candidate
  comparable fuel are similar or lower than emissions from this same
  facility when burning No. 2 fuel oil.
      The Agency considered this situation and the attendant test data
  carefully, but continues to maintain that an emissions-based
  equivalency determination to the total halogen specification on a
  national regulatory basis would be inappropriate and infeasible at this
  time. EPA has consistently declined to adopt an alternative national
  approach that is based on an extensive comparison of either emissions
  or the risk from emissions because of the inherent technical complexity
  and our current inability to adequately model the risks from all
  potential burners of an unregulated hazardous waste fuel. EPA also
  expects that other commenters may well ask EPA to create emissions-
  based equivalency determinations for other individual and less
  problematic compounds. This would again put EPA administratively in the
  position of attempting to create, on a national level, a defensible and
  consistent set of equivalency determinations based on considerations of
  comparative emissions and risk, a position that EPA has indicated is
  infeasible at this time.
      Finally, if the Agency were to develop an equivalency determination
  for total halogens, the implementation details needed in a national
  regulation to ensure proper combustion of halogenated wastes would be
  numerous including, for example, provisions on operating parameters,
  performance testing, and monitoring. These details would almost
  certainly result in a complicated conditional exclusion from the
  definition of solid waste. This eventuality is viewed as both
  potentially unworkable and very difficult to implement and enforce on a
  national basis. However, there remains some discretion for EPA, through
  a separate rulemaking, to classify individual fuels as non-wastes based
  on individual circumstances.<SUP>6</SUP>
  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
  
      \6\ See 61 FR 9396-97 (March 8, 1996).
  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
  
      Therefore, EPA is not inclined at this time to consider developing
  any national equivalency determination to the total halogen
  specification as part of its final deliberations on the comparable fuel
  exclusion. At some future point, perhaps as our understanding of cause-
  and-effect relationships regarding emissions from a wider variety of
  sources grows, EPA may be able to address aspects of the commenter's
  recommendations if appropriate and feasible.
  
                                       Table 1: Additional Total Halogen Data
  
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  ------------------------------------
  
  Heat Value
               Fuel type                         Facility
  Total Halogen  (ppmw)          (Btu/lb)
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  ------------------------------------
  No. 2 fuel oil.....................  Dupont, Wilmington.........
  16...............................       19,200
  No. 2 fuel oil.....................  Dupont, Wilmington.........
  429..............................       19,200
  No. 2 fuel oil.....................  Dupont, Wilmington.........
  461..............................       19,200
  No. 2 fuel oil.....................  Dupont, Wilmington.........
  470..............................       19,200
  No. 2 fuel oil.....................  Dupont, Wilmington.........
  490..............................       19,200
  No. 2 fuel oil.....................  Dupont, Wilmington.........
  523..............................       19,200
  No. 2 fuel oil.....................  Dow Chem., Gales Ferry.....
  83...............................       19,587
  No. 2 fuel oil.....................  Dow Chem., Gales Ferry.....
  93...............................       19,587
  No. 2 fuel oil.....................  Dow Chem., Gales Ferry.....
  137..............................       19,380
  No. 6 fuel oil.....................  American Cyan., Kalamazoo..  <45
  (non-detect).................       18,571
  
  [[Page 47404]]
  
  
  
  No. 6 fuel oil.....................  American Cyan., Kalamazoo..  <45
  (non-detect).................       18,571
  No. 6 fuel oil.....................  American Cyan., Kalamazoo..  <45
  (non-detect).................       18,571
  No. 6 fuel oil.....................  Huntsman Poly, Woodbury....  <100
  (non-detect)................       18,500
  No. 6 fuel oil.....................  Huntsman Poly, Woodbury....  <100
  (non-detect)................       18,500
  No. 6 fuel oil.....................  Huntsman Poly, Woodbury....  <100
  (non-detect)................       18,500
  No. 6 fuel oil.....................  Huntsman Poly, Woodbury....  <100
  (non-detect)................       18,500
  No. 6 fuel oil.....................  Huntsman Poly, Woodbury....  <100
  (non-detect)................       18,500
  No. 6 fuel oil.....................  Huntsman Poly, Woodbury....  <100
  (non-detect)................       18,500
  No. 6 fuel oil.....................  Rohm & Haas, Philadelphia..
  109..............................       18,967
  No. 6 fuel oil.....................  Rohm & Haas, Philadelphia..
  110..............................       18,881
  No. 6 fuel oil.....................  Rohm & Haas, Philadelphia..
  171..............................       18,976
  No. 6 fuel oil.....................  Rohm & Haas, Bristol.......
  180..............................       18,400
  No. 6 fuel oil.....................  Rohm & Haas, Philadelphia..
  840..............................       18,300
  No. 6 fuel oil.....................  Rohm & Haas, Philadelphia..
  840..............................       18,600
  No. 6 fuel oil.....................  Rohm & Haas, Philadelphia..
  590..............................       18,400
  No. 6 fuel oil.....................  Rohm & Haas, Philadelphia..
  660..............................       18,300
  No. 6 fuel oil.....................  Rohm & Haas, Philadelphia..
  1000.............................       18,400
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  ------------------------------------
  
  
                                   Table 2: Total Halogen Data From Proposed
  Rule
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  ------------------------------------
  
  
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  ------------------------------------
  No. 2 fuel oil.....................  EPA sample 8835-001........  <25
  (non-detect).................       19,583
  No. 2 fuel oil.....................  EPA sample 8835-002........  <25
  (non-detect).................       19,610
  No. 2 fuel oil.....................  EPA sample 8835-003........  <25
  (non-detect).................       19,823
  No. 2 fuel oil.....................  EPA sample 8835-004........  <25
  (non-detect).................       19,755
  No. 2 fuel oil.....................  EPA sample 8835-005........  <25
  (non-detect).................       19,763
  No. 2 fuel oil.....................  EPA sample 8835-006........  <25
  (non-detect).................       19,891
  No. 2 fuel oil.....................  EPA sample 8835-007........  <25
  (non-detect).................       19,570
  No. 2 fuel oil.....................  EPA sample 8835-008........  <25
  (non-detect).................       19,865
  No. 2 fuel oil.....................  EPA sample 8835-009........  <25
  (non-detect).................       19,942
  No. 2 fuel oil.....................  EPA sample 8835-010........  <25
  (non-detect).................       20,000
  No. 2 fuel oil.....................  EPA sample 8835-011........  <25
  (non-detect).................       19,745
  Gasoline...........................  EPA sample 8835-001........  <25
  (non-detect).................       19,506
  Gasoline...........................  EPA sample 8835-002........  <25
  (non-detect).................       19,394
  Gasoline...........................  EPA sample 8835-003........  <25
  (non-detect).................       19,687
  Gasoline...........................  EPA sample 8835-004........  <25
  (non-detect).................       19,420
  Gasoline...........................  EPA sample 8835-005........  <25
  (non-detect).................       19,189
  Gasoline...........................  EPA sample 8835-006........  <25
  (non-detect).................       19,924
  Gasoline...........................  EPA sample 8835-007........  <25
  (non-detect).................       19,373
  Gasoline...........................  EPA sample 8835-008........  <25
  (non-detect).................       19,552
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  ------------------------------------
  
      Dated: August 25, 1997.
  Elizabeth A. Cotsworth,
  Acting Director Office of Solid Waste.
  [FR Doc. 97-23843 Filed 9-8-97; 8:45 am]
  BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
  
  
  
  ------------------------------