[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 163 (Wednesday, August 22, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 50622-50626]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-20504]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 268
[EPA-HQ-RCRA-2010-0851; FRL-9715-3]
Land Disposal Restrictions: Site-Specific Treatment Variance for
Hazardous Selenium-Bearing Waste Treated by U.S. Ecology Nevada in
Beatty, NV
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA (or the Agency) is granting a site-specific treatment
variance, under the Land Disposal Restrictions program, to U.S. Ecology
Nevada in Beatty, Nevada for the treatment of a hazardous selenium-
bearing waste generated by the Owens-Brockway Glass Container Company
in Vernon, California. The Agency has determined that the chemical
properties of the waste generated by the Owens-Brockway Glass Container
Corporation differ significantly from the waste used in developing the
Land Disposal Restrictions treatment standard for selenium-bearing
wastes, and as such cannot be treated to the specified treatment level
of 5.7 mg/L for selenium, as measured by the Toxicity Characteristic
Leaching Procedure (TCLP). The site-specific treatment variance
provides an alternative treatment standard of 59 mg/L TCLP for
selenium, with the condition that the waste-to-reagent ratio not exceed
1:0.45.
DATES: This final rule will be effective August 22, 2012.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-RCRA-2010-0851. All documents in the docket are listed on
the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index,
some information may not be publicly available, because for example, it
may be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information,
the disclosure of which is restricted by statute. Certain material,
such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically through http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the RCRA Docket, EPA/DC, EPA
West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC. The
Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the RCRA
Docket is (202) 566-0270. A reasonable fee may be charged for copying
docket materials.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For more information on this
rulemaking, contact Jesse Miller, Materials Recovery and Waste
Management Division, Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery (MC
5304 P), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.
NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone (703) 308-1180; fax (703) 308-
0522; or miller.jesse@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Does this action apply to me?
This action applies only to U.S. Ecology Nevada located in
Beatty, Nevada.
B. Table of Contents
I. Background
[[Page 50623]]
A. Basis for Land Disposal Restrictions Treatment Variances
B. Basis of the Current Selenium Treatment Standard
II. Basis for Today's Determination
III. Development of This Variance
A. U.S. Ecology Nevada Petition
B. Notices on Granting a Site Specific Treatment Variance to
USEN
IV. Granting USEN a Site Specific Treatment Variance
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
K. Congressional Review Act
I. Background
A. Basis for Land Disposal Restrictions Treatment Variances
Under sections 3004(d) through (g) of the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA), the land disposal of hazardous wastes is
prohibited unless such wastes are able to meet the Land Disposal
Restrictions (LDR) treatment standards (or treatment standards)
established by EPA (or the Agency). Under section 3004(m) of RCRA, EPA
is required 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.'' EPA interprets this language to authorize
treatment standards based on the performance of the best demonstrated
available technology (BDAT). This interpretation was upheld by the D.C.
Circuit in Hazardous Waste Treatment Council v. EPA, 886 F. 2d 355
(D.C. Cir. 1989).
The Agency recognizes, however, that there may be wastes that
cannot be treated to the levels specified in the regulations (see 40
CFR 268.40) because an individual waste matrix or concentration can be
substantially more difficult to treat than those wastes evaluated in
establishing the treatment standard (51 FR 40576, November 7, 1986)
.\1\ For such wastes, EPA has a process by which a generator or treater
may seek a treatment variance (see 40 CFR 268.44). If granted, the
terms of the variance establish an alternative treatment standard for
the particular waste at issue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ According to Sec. 268.44(a)(1), a petitioner may obtain a
site-specific variance if ``it is not physically possible to treat
the waste to the level specified in the treatment standard, or by
the method specified as the treatment standard. To show that this is
the case, the petitioner must demonstrate that the physical or
chemical properties of the waste differ significantly from waste
analyzed in developing the treatment standard, the waste cannot be
treated to the specified level or by the specified method.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Basis of the Current Selenium Treatment Standard
Treatment of selenium poses special difficulties. In particular, it
can be technically challenging to treat wastes containing selenium in
combination with other metals e.g., cadmium, lead and/or chromium
because of their different chemical properties and solubility curves
(62 FR 26041, May 12, 1997).
The current treatment standard for a waste exhibiting the toxicity
characteristic for selenium (RCRA Hazardous Waste D010) is based upon
the performance of stabilization on low concentration selenium wastes.
When the Agency developed the treatment standard for selenium, EPA
believed that wastes containing high concentrations of selenium were
rarely generated and land disposed (59 FR 47980, September 19, 1994).
The Agency also stated that it believed that, for most wastes
containing high concentrations of selenium, recovery of the selenium
would be feasible using recovery technologies currently employed by
copper smelters and copper refining operations (Id.). The Agency
further stated in 1994, that it did not have any performance data for
selenium recovery, but available information indicated that some
recovery of elemental selenium out of certain types of scrap material
and other wastes was practiced in the United States.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Because selenium is a non-renewable resource, and because
the wastes in question contain high selenium concentrations, EPA's
preference would be to recover the selenium in an environmentally
sound manner. However, based on information contained in the Mineral
Commodity Summaries 2010 published by the U.S. Department of the
Interior, U.S. Geological Survey, the amount of domestic production
of secondary selenium is estimated to be very small because most of
the materials eligible for possible secondary smelting (e.g., scrap
xerographic and electronic materials) were exported for recovery of
the contained selenium.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 1994, the Agency used performance data from the stabilization of
a mineral processing waste, that was characteristically hazardous (RCRA
Hazardous Waste D010), to set the national treatment standard for
selenium. At that time, we determined that this characteristically-
hazardous mineral processing waste represented the most difficult-to-
treat selenium waste. This untreated waste contained up to 700 ppm
total selenium and 3.74 mg/L selenium, as measured by the Toxicity
Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP). The resulting post-treatment
levels of selenium in the TCLP leachate were between 0.154 mg/L and
1.80 mg/L, which (after considering the range of treatment process
variability) led to EPA establishing a national treatment standard of
5.7 mg/L TCLP for D010 selenium nonwastewaters.\3\ In the Phase IV LDR
final rule, the Agency determined that a treatment standard of 5.7 mg/L
TCLP, continued to be appropriate for D010 nonwastewaters (63 FR 28556,
May 26, 1998). The Agency also changed the universal treatment standard
(UTS) for selenium nonwastewaters from 0.16 mg/L to 5.7 mg/L TCLP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The calculation of the LDR treatment standard was based on a
specific method, sometimes called ``C 99,'' which has been used in
other LDR rulemakings. This methodology seeks to account for process
variability (including variability that may be attributed to
sampling and analytical processes). See 63 FR 28556, May 26, 1998
and the document, Final--Best Demonstrated Available Technology
(BDAT) Background Document for Quality Assurance/Quality Control
Procedures and Methodology, USEPA. October 23, 1991.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Basis for Today's Determination
Under 40 CFR 268.44, facilities can apply for a site-specific
treatment variance in cases where a waste that is generated under
conditions specific to only one site cannot be treated to the specified
LDR treatment standards. In such cases, the generator(s) or the
treatment facility may apply to the Administrator, or to EPA's
designated representative, (in this case the Assistant Administrator
for Solid Waste and Emergency Response) for a site-specific variance.
The applicant for a site-specific variance must demonstrate that,
because the physical or chemical properties of the waste differ
significantly from the waste analyzed in developing the treatment
standard, the waste cannot be treated to the specified levels or by the
specified methods. There are other grounds for obtaining variances, but
this is the only provision relevant to this action.
[[Page 50624]]
III. Development of This Variance
A. U.S. Ecology Nevada Petition
On September 16, 2008, U.S. Ecology Nevada (USEN) in Beatty, Nevada
submitted a petition requesting a site-specific treatment variance from
the LDR treatment standards for hazardous selenium-bearing waste
generated by the Owens-Brockway Glass Container Company (Owens-
Brockway) in Vernon, California. Owens-Brockway operates a glass
manufacturing facility that generates approximately 50 to 100 tons per
year of electrostatic precipitator (ESP) dust requiring management as a
hazardous waste. The ESP dust is generated by the glass furnace air
emissions control system and is hazardous due to its high
concentrations of leachable arsenic (RCRA Hazardous Waste D004),
cadmium (RCRA Hazardous Waste D006), lead (RCRA Hazardous Waste D008),
and selenium (RCRA Hazardous Waste D010). USEN submitted analytical
data demonstrating that the chemical properties of the waste differed
significantly from the waste analyzed in developing the LDR treatment
standard.\4\ They also submitted data demonstrating that the waste
could not be treated to the specified level of 5.7 mg/L TCLP for
selenium. USEN requested an alternative treatment standard of 59 mg/L
TCLP, which was calculated using analytical treatment data from a
stabilization mixture of ferrous sulfate, quick lime and sodium sulfide
flakes with a 1:0.45 waste to reagent ratio.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Total selenium concentrations in the electrostatic
precipitator (ESP) dust generated at the Owens-Brockway facility
range from 2,400 mg/kg to 5,700 mg/kg. The untreated waste has a
leachable selenium concentration ranging from 228 mg/L to 440 mg/L
TCLP. In addition, the untreated waste has a leachable arsenic
concentration ranging from 3.3 mg/L to 8.6 mg/L TCLP, a leachable
cadmium concentration ranging from 3.9 mg/L to 11.0 mg/L TCLP, and a
leachable lead concentration ranging from <0.10 mg/L to 16.3 mg/L
TCLP.
\5\ The selenium concentrations used to calculate the
alternative treatment standard were (in mg/L TCLP) 49.34, 51.39,
49.39, 43.91, and 54.34. The most effective treatment recipe was
determined using a 50 gram sample of waste where reagents were
listed as a percent of waste sample weight. For example, 20% ferrous
sulfate, 15% quick lime, and 10% sodium sulfide flakes would measure
out as 10 grams of ferrous sulfate, 7.5 grams of quick lime, and 5
grams of sodium sulfide flakes for a total of 22.5 grams of total
reagent. The waste to reagent ratio was then calculated by dividing
22.5 by 50 to get a waste to reagent ratios of 1:0.45.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Notices on Granting a Site Specific Treatment Variance to USEN
On April 6, 2011, the Agency issued a Direct Final rule (76 FR
18921) and a parallel Proposal (76 FR 19003) granting a site-specific
treatment variance to USEN for the treatment and disposal of hazardous
selenium-bearing waste generated by Owens-Brockway. The site-specific
treatment variance provided for an alternative treatment standard of 59
mg/L TCLP with the condition that the waste to reagent ratio not exceed
1:0.45. The Agency concluded that USEN had demonstrated that the
chemical properties of the waste generated by Owens-Brockway differed
significantly from the waste analyzed in developing the LDR treatment
standard, and that the waste could not be treated to the specified
level of 5.7 mg/L TCLP for selenium, necessitating an alternative
treatment standard.
The Direct Final rule and the parallel Proposal also included an
action to withdraw the site-specific treatment variance issued to
Chemical Waste Management (CWM) in Kettleman Hills, California for this
same waste.\6\ The Agency issued both a Direct Final and a parallel
Proposal because EPA considered these actions to be non-controversial.
However, EPA stated that if adverse comment was received, the Direct
Final rule would be withdrawn and we would proceed with a subsequent
final rule. The Agency received no comments on granting a site-specific
treatment variance to USEN, however, one adverse comment was received
on withdrawing the CWM variance. As a result, on May 24, 2011, the
Direct Final rule was withdrawn (76 FR 30027). The comment can be found
in the docket supporting this rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ EPA considered that technology-based treatment standards,
whether adopted by generally applicable rule or through a variance
to the generally applicable rule, serve as the measure of when
threats posed by land disposal of the hazardous waste are
``minimized,'' as required by RCRA section 3004(m). See 55 FR 6640
(February 26, 1990). Thus, EPA has typically limited the standards
adopted by a variance to a single standard. See 70 FR 44505 (August
3, 2005). We continued this practice by issuing a Direct Final rule
and parallel Proposal to withdraw the current variance granted to
CWM (69 FR 6567, February 11, 2004), determining that the treatment
standard issued to CWM is less stringent than the standard we would
be granting, both with respect to potential concentrations of
selenium released to the environment and also the waste to reagent
ratios.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA is not taking action on the proposal to withdraw the existing
site-specific treatment variance granted to CWM. EPA has authorized the
State of California to grant and administer site-specific treatment
variances under 40 CFR 268.44. [See 75 FR at 60401 (September 10,
2010)]. As a result, California now has sole authority to deal with
issues pertaining to treatment variances for entities within its
borders, including whether to withdraw the treatment variance to CWM
for Owens-Brockway selenium-bearing waste, and any other issues related
to that treatment variance.\7\ Necessarily, therefore, EPA is not
responding to any of the comments submitted on this issue, since all
comments pertain to issues within the scope of the authorized
California program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ It should be noted that EPA is making a conforming change to
footnote 7 of the table in section 40 CFR 268.44. The footnote
originally read, ``D010 wastes generated by these two facilities
must be treated by Chemical Waste Management, Inc. at their
Kettleman Hills facility in Kettleman City, California.'' The two
facilities referred to Owens-Brockway and a second facility, St.
Gobain Containers, El Monte, CA, that also has an existing variance
for selenium waste. The footnote now reads, ``D010 wastes generated
by this facility must be treated by Chemical Waste Management, Inc.
at its Kettleman Hills facility in Kettleman City, California.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Granting USEN a Site-Specific Treatment Variance
EPA is promulgating, as proposed, a site-specific treatment
variance, from the LDR treatment standards, for hazardous selenium
bearing waste generated by Owens-Brockway and managed by USEN of
Beatty, Nevada. With the information provided to the Agency as part of
their petition, EPA has concluded that the chemical properties of Owen-
Brockway's selenium-bearing waste differ significantly from the waste
used in developing the LDR treatment standard and that the generated
waste cannot be treated to the specified treatment level of 5.7 mg/L
TCLP. The site-specific treatment variance provides an alternative
treatment standard of 59 mg/L for selenium with the condition that the
waste to reagent ratio not exceed 1:0.45 when the waste is treated and
disposed at USEN's permitted hazardous waste facility. The Agency
received no comments disagreeing with the Agency's proposal.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the
terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and is
therefore not subject to review under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
(76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011).
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose any new information collection burden.
This action grants a site-specific treatment variance to USEN for the
treatment of hazardous selenium-bearing waste generated by Owens-
Brockway under RCRA's LDR program. The Office of
[[Page 50625]]
Management and Budget (OMB) has previously approved the information
collection requirements contained in the existing regulations at 40 CFR
268.42 and .44 under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and has assigned OMB control number 2050-0085. The
OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40
CFR part 9.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the Agency certifies that the
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses,
small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.
This site-specific treatment variance does not create any new
requirements. Rather, it establishes an alternative treatment standard
for a specific waste that applies to only one facility, USEN located in
Beatty, Nevada. Therefore, we hereby certify that this rule will not
add any new regulatory requirements to small entities. This rule,
therefore, does not require a regulatory flexibility analysis.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
This action contains no Federal mandates under the provisions of
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C.
1531-1538 for State, local, or tribal governments or the private
sector. This action imposes no enforceable duty on any State, local or
tribal governments or the private sector. This action would not impose
any new duties on the states hazardous waste program. EPA has
determined, therefore, that this rule would not contain regulatory
requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small
governments in that the authority for this action exists with the
Federal government. Therefore, this action is not subject to the
requirements of sections 202 or 205 of the UMRA.
This rule is also not subject to the requirements of section 203 of
UMRA because it contains no regulatory requirements that might
significantly or uniquely affect small governments.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism implications. This rule will
not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government,
as specified in Executive Order 13132. This action grants a site-
specific treatment variance applicable to one facility. Thus, Executive
Order 13132 would not apply to this action.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
This action would not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action is a
site-specific treatment variance that applies to only one facility,
which is not a tribal facility or located on tribal lands. Thus,
Executive Order 13175 would not apply to this action.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997)
as applying only to those regulatory actions that are based on health
or safety risks, such that the analysis required under section 5-501 of
the Executive Order has the potential to influence the regulation. This
action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it would not
establish an environmental standard intended to mitigate health or
safety risks.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)) because it would
not be a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law 104-113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note)
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory
activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling
procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by
voluntary consensus standards bodies. NTTAA directs EPA to provide
Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use
available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
This action does not involve technical standards. Therefore, EPA
did not consider the use of any voluntary consensus standards.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 (February 16, 1994)) establishes
federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision
directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
EPA has determined that this rule will not have a
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority or low-income populations because it does not
affect the level of protection provided to human health or the
environment. The site-specific treatment variance being finalized
applies to a selenium bearing waste that will be treated and disposed
in an existing, permitted RCRA facility, ensuring protection to human
health and the environment. Therefore, the rule will not result in any
disproportionately negative impacts on minority or low-income
communities relative to affluent or non-minority communities.
K. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the Agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule, when
finalized, and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S.
House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A
Major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in
the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by
5 U.S.C. 804(2).
[[Page 50626]]
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 268
Environmental Protection, Hazardous Waste, and Variances.
Dated: August 10, 2012.
Mathy Stanislaus,
Assistant Administrator, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I of the
Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 268--LAND DISPOSAL RESTRICTIONS
0
1. The authority citation for part 268 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), 6921, and 6924.
0
2. In Sec. 268.44, the table in paragraph (o) is amended as follows:
0
a. By revising the existing entry for ``Owens Brockway Glass Container
Company, Vernon, CA.''
0
b. By adding in alphabetical order an additional entry for ``Owens
Brockway Glass Container Company, Vernon, CA.''
0
c. Republishing the entry for ``St. Gobain Containers, El Monte, CA.''
0
d. By revising footnote 7.
0
e. By adding a new footnote 15.
0
f. By adding a new footnote 16.
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 268.44 Variance from a treatment standard.
* * * * *
(o) * * *
Table--Wastes Excluded From the Treatment Standards under Sec. 268.40
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wastewaters Nonwastewaters
Regulated -------------------------------------------------------------------
Facility name\1\ and address Waste code See also hazardous Concentration (mg/
constituent Concentration (mg/L) Notes kg) Notes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Owens Brockway Glass D010 Standards under Sec. Selenium........ NA.................. NA........... 51 mg/L TCLP........ (\15\)
Container Company, Vernon, 268.40.
CA \6\.
Owens Brockway Glass D010 Standards under Sec. Selenium........ NA.................. NA........... 59 mg/L TCLP........ (\16\)
Container Company, Vernon, 268.40.
CA \6\.
* * * * * * *
St. Gobain Containers, El D010 Standards under Sec. Selenium........ NA.................. NA........... 25 mg/L TCLP........ NA
Monte, CA5 7. 268.40.
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ A facility may certify compliance with these treatment standards according to provisions in 40 CFR 268.7.
* * * * * * *
\5\ Alternative D010 selenium standard only applies to dry scrubber solid from glass manufacturing wastes.
\6\ Alternative D010 selenium standard only applies to electrostatic precipitator dust generated during glass manufacturing operations.
\7\ D010 wastes generated by this facility must be treated by Chemical Waste Management, Inc. at its Kettleman Hills facility in Kettleman City,
California.
* * * * * * *
\15\ This alternative standard applies only to D010 wastes generated by this facility and treated by Chemical Waste Management, Inc. at its Kettleman
Hills facility in Kettleman City, California.
\16\ This alternative standard applies only to D010 wastes generated by this facility and treated by U.S. Ecology Nevada at its facility in Beatty,
Nevada. This alternative treatment standard is conditioned on the waste-to-reagent ratio not exceeding 1 to 0.45.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2012-20504 Filed 8-21-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P