Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 16/Tuesday, January 26, 1999/Rules and Regulations 3869 

REFRIGERATION ANDAIR-CONDITIONINGSECTORUNACCEPTABLESUBSTITUTES 

End-use 

All refrigeration and air-conditioning end uses 

Substitute 

Hexafluoropropylene (HFP) and all HFP-containing blends. 

Decision 

Unacceptable ............. 

Comments 

Presents unacceptable 

toxicity risk. 

[FR Doc. 99–1765 Filed 1–25–99; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 261 

[SW–FRL–6223–5] 

Hazardous Waste Management 

System; Identification and Listing of 

Hazardous Waste; Final Exclusion 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) today is granting a 

petition submitted by American Steel 

Cord, formerly Kokoku Steel Cord 

Corporation, to exclude (or “delist”) 

certain solid wastes from the lists of 

hazardous wastes contained in Title 40 

of the Code of Federal Regulations, 

Subpart D of Part 261. EPA has 

concluded that the petitioned waste is 

not a hazardous waste when disposed of 

in a Subtitle D landfill. This exclusion 

applies only to the wastewater treatment 

plant (WWTP) sludge generated by 

American Steel Cord in Scottsburg, 

Indiana. Today’s action conditionally 

excludes the petitioned waste from the 

requirements of the hazardous waste 

regulations under the Resource 

Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 

when disposed of in a Subtitle D 

landfill. 

EFFECTIVE DATE : January 26, 1999. 

ADDRESSES : The regulatory docket for 

this final rule which contains the 

complete petition and supporting 

documents is located at U.S. EPA 

Region 5, 77 W. Jackson Blvd., Chicago, 

IL 60604–3590, and is available for 

viewing from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, excluding 

Federal holidays. Call Judy Kleiman at 

(312) 886–1482 for appointments. The 

public may copy material from the 

regulatory docket at cost of $0.15 per 

page. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT : For 

technical information concerning this 

notice, contact Judy Kleiman at the 

address above or at (312) 886–1842. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION : 

I. Background 

A. Authority 

Under §§ 260.20 and 260.22, facilities 

may petition EPA to remove their 

wastes from hazardous waste control by 

excluding them from the lists of 

hazardous wastes contained in Subpart 

D of Part 261. Specifically, § 260.20 

allows any person to petition the 

Administrator to modify or revoke any 

provision of Parts 260 through 266, 268 

and 273; and § 260.22 provides 

generators the opportunity to petition 

the Administrator to exclude a waste on 

a “facility-specific” basis from the 

hazardous waste lists. Petitioners must 

provide sufficient information to allow 

EPA to determine that the waste to be 

excluded does not meet any of the 

criteria under which the waste was 

listed as a hazardous waste. In addition, 

where there is reasonable basis to 

believe that factors (including 

additional constituents) other than those 

for which the waste was listed could 

cause the waste to be a hazardous waste, 

the Administrator must determine that 

such factors do not warrant retaining the 

waste as a hazardous waste. 

B. History of this Rulemaking 

American Steel Cord petitioned EPA 

to exclude its WWTP sludge from 

hazardous waste control. After 

evaluating the petition, on April 15, 

1998, EPA proposed to exclude 

American Steel Cord’s waste from the 

lists of hazardous wastes in subpart D of 

part 261 (see 63 FR 18354). This 

rulemaking addresses the public 

comments received on the proposal and 

finalizes the proposed decision to grant 

American Steel Cord’s petition. 

II. Disposition of Delisting Petition 

American Steel Cord, Route 1 Box 357K, 

Scottsburg, Indiana 47170 

A. Proposed Exclusion 

American Steel Cord petitioned EPA 

to exclude an annual volume of 3,000 

cubic yards of WWTP filtercake sludge 

from the list of hazardous wastes 

contained in § 261.3 1, and subsequently 

provided additional information to 

complete its petition. The WWTP sludge 

is listed as EPA Hazardous Waste No. 

F006. The listed constituents of concern 

for EPA Hazardous Waste No. F006 are 

cadmium, hexavalent chromium, nickel 

and cyanide (complexed) (see Appendix 

VII of part 261). 

In support of its petition, American 

Steel Cord submitted detailed 

descriptions and schematic diagrams of 

its manufacturing and wastewater 

treatment processes, and analytical 

testing results for representative 

samples of the petitioned waste, 

including (1) the hazardous 

characteristics of corrosivity, reactivity, 

and toxicity; (2) total constituent 

analysis and Toxicity Characteristic 

Leaching Procedure (SW–846 Method 

1311) analyses for the eight toxicity 

characteristic metals listed in § 261.24, 

plus copper, nickel, thallium, 

vanadium, and zinc; (3) total constituent 

and Toxicity Characteristic Leaching 

Procedure (TCLP, SW–846 Method 

1311) analyses for 121 volatile and 

semi-volatile organic compounds; (4) 

analyses for total sulfide, total cyanide, 

and TCLP analysis for cyanide; and (5) 

analysis for oil and grease. 

EPA evaluated the information and 

analytical data provided by American 

Steel Cord and tentatively determined 

that American Steel Cord had 

successfully demonstrated that the 

petitioned waste is not hazardous. See 

the proposed exclusion (63 FR 18354; 

April 15, 1998) for a detailed 

explanation of EPA’s evaluation. 

B. Response to Comments 

EPA received public comment on the 

April 15, 1998 proposal from American 

Steel Cord and from the Environmental 

Defense Fund. 

Comment: American Steel Cord 

commented that its waste is measured 

by weight, not by volume, and that the 

Agency was incorrect in assuming a 

density of one when converting from 

tons to cubic yards. The density of the 

waste is considerably less than one, so 

that the petitioned waste was more than 

950 yd 3 . Furthermore, American Steel 

Cord anticipates that the total annual 

volume of waste generated could 

increase to 3,000 cubic yards and 

requested that the exclusion be applied 

to this larger volume. 

Response: The volume specified in 

today’s final rule has been increased to 

3,000 cubic yards from the 950 cubic 

yards proposed on April 15, 1998. In so 

doing, the final allowable levels for each 

constituent have been decreased from 
3870 Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 16/Tuesday, January 26, 1999/Rules and Regulations 

the proposed levels in accordance with 

the CML model. 

Comment: Commenter stated that the 

waste was only evaluated for risk under 

the scenario of mismanagement in a 

landfill, but the proposed delisting does 

not contain language limiting 

management of the delisted waste to 

disposal in a Subtitle D landfill. 

Response: The Agency has recently 

adopted the policy that new delistings 

apply only to wastes managed in the 

type of unit modeled in the delisting 

risk assessment. In accordance with this 

policy, enforceable language has been 

incorporated into the final rule stating 

that this exclusion applies only if the 

waste is disposed in a Subtitle D landfill 

permitted by the State. 

Comment: Commenter stated that 

there is no discussion of the possibility 

that the leachability might be 

underestimated by the TCLP or that this 

procedure may be affected by the iron 

content or other attributes of the waste 

such as pH. 

Response: Although no laboratory test 

can exactly replicate environmental 

conditions for all landfills, the Agency 

has developed the TCLP to be used as 

a reasonable means of predicting 

leachability in a solid waste landfill. For 

wastes with close to neutral pH, such as 

the filtercake from American Steel Cord 

which has a pH between 8.5 and 8.9, the 

Agency believes that the TCLP is a 

reliable test in the absence of extreme 

environmental conditions. While some 

forms of iron may affect the leachability 

of lead bearing wastes, lead is not used 

in American Steel Cord’s process and 

there is no significant amount of lead in 

the waste. Furthermore, there is no 

reason to believe that excess iron was 

introduced at any time into the process 

or the wastestream for the purpose of 

reducing the leachability of lead. 

Comment: Commenter stated that the 

Agency should consider sampling and 

other requirements that will ensure that 

these factors will not change in the 

future. 

Response: The exclusion requires 

periodic testing to verify that the waste 

will remain in compliance with the 

conditions of the exclusion. The final 

rule also includes language requiring 

American Steel Cord to notify the 

Agency of any change in process. 

Comment: Commenter stated that the 

Agency should consider risks posed by 

total concentrations via the air pathway. 

No support has been offered for the 

conclusion that appreciable air releases 

are unlikely. 

Response: Air modeling was done for 

the pathways of inhalation, ingestion of 

air borne particulates and air deposition 

on soil followed by ingestion by a child. 

The concentrations of all constituents in 

American Steel Cord’s waste were 

orders of magnitude below the health 

based levels of concern for each of these 

pathways. A full discussion of the air 

modeling is contained in the docket. 

Comment: Commenter stated that 

since total concentration is used in 

evaluating risk by the air pathway, EPA 

should promulgate limits on total 

concentrations, as well as limits on the 

TCLP concentrations. 

Response: Screening levels for this 

waste were back calculated and were 

determined to be a thousand to a 

million times the levels detected in 

American Steel Cord’s waste. Thus the 

waste is not expected to pose a threat by 

the air pathway and the Agency believes 

that it is not meaningful to set limits on 

totals which would be three to six 

orders of magnitude above the 

concentrations detected in the waste. 

Comment: Commenter stated that the 

proposed TCLP limit for xylene in this 

waste exceeds the allowable level for 

xylene in storage tanks in the air 

characteristics study. 

Response: The scenario upon which 

the air characteristic study was based is 

not applicable to American Steel Cord’s 

waste. This delisting applies to a limited 

quantity of non-liquid waste which will 

be disposed in a Subtitle D landfill. 

Furthermore, the highest total 

concentration of xylene in any sample 

of this waste was 22 ppb which is well 

below air characteristics number of 200 

ppm for xylene in waste stored in tanks. 

Comment: Commenter stated that the 

proposed rule only requires the facility 

to meet the applicable delisting levels 

but does not require notification of a 

change in process which should trigger 

Agency verification activities. The EPA 

should require notification of changes in 

operating conditions. 

Response: In the event of a process 

change, the facility is required to meet 

the established delisting limits and must 

perform testing to verify that the levels 

established in this rule are being met. 

The facility must also verify that no 

additional constituents have been 

introduced. Data obtained from 

verification testing must be submitted to 

EPA. 

Comment: Commenter stated that the 

EPA should add provisions to the final 

rule stating that the delisting is only 

valid when the waste is disposed of in 

a Subtitle D landfill permitted by the 

State, since the Agency has not 

evaluated all potential mismanagement 

scenarios. 

Response: Specific language has been 

added to paragraph 1 of the final rule 

which requires that the waste must be 

disposed of in a Subtitle D landfill. 

Comment: Commenter stated that the 

EPA should add provisions to the final 

rule stating that if the facility plans to 

dispose of the waste in a landfill on site, 

it must notify the Agency at least 60 

days prior to first utilizing an onsite 

landfill. 

Response: The Agency is requiring 

that the waste be disposed of properly 

in a Subtitle D landfill regulated by the 

State. To dispose of the waste on site, 

American Steel Cord would have to 

construct a Subtitle D landfill on its 

property and obtain all necessary 

permits from the State of Indiana. The 

US EPA does not regulate which 

Subtitle D landfill the waste may be sent 

to, nor does the Agency routinely 

require notification of wastes disposed 

in units regulated by the State. 

Comment: Commenter stated that EPA 

should add provisions to the final rule 

stating that American Steel Cord must 

report to EPA receipt of any 

environmental data that departs from 

the data that were modeled or predicted 

in the initial delisting evaluation. 

Response: Language has been 

included in paragraph 4 of the final rule 

which requires the facility to report in 

writing any data which might indicate 

that the levels in paragraph 1 of this rule 

have been exceeded or that the initial 

delisting decision was inappropriate or 

wrong. 

Comment: Commenter stated that the 

proposed delisting has failed to include 

procedures for suspension or 

termination of the exclusion in the 

event of mismanagement of delisted 

waste. 

Response: The Agency has recently 

adopted a policy of incorporating 

language into all new exclusions which 

will allow the Agency to reopen, revoke, 

or otherwise suspend the delisting in a 

timely manner in the event of 

mismanagement. This language will 

establish a mechanism to review and act 

expeditiously on the delisting when 

additional data become available 

indicating the initial delisting decision 

was inappropriate or wrong. 

C. Changes to Proposed Verification 

Testing Conditions 

In the proposed rulemaking, EPA 

included delisting levels for 23 

constituents which would be protective 

of human health and the environment 

and which could not be exceeded in a 

TCLP extract of the petitioned waste. 

These levels have been lowered in 

today’s rule to allow for an increased 

volume. In addition, the proposed levels 

of 200 mg/l for barium, 10 mg/l for 

chromium, 5 mg/l for selenium and 20 

mg/l for silver have been lowered to the 

levels set in the hazardous waste 
Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 16/Tuesday, January 26, 1999/Rules and Regulations 3871 

toxicity characteristic in § 261.24 to 

ensure that the petitioned waste, even 

though protective of human health and 

the environment, remains below the TC 

levels. 

Levels in the proposed rule were 

based on “Docket Report on HealthBased Levels and Solubilities Used in 

the Evaluation of Delisting Petitions,” 

December 1994. This document was 

revised in May, 1996, and the health 

based level for benzo butyl phthlate was 

changed from .01 mg/l to 7.0 mg/l, the 

health based level for 1,4- 

dichlorobenzene was changed from .075 

mg/l to .004 mg/l, and the health based 

level for cis 1,2-dichloroethene was 

changed from .07 mg/l to .4 mg/l. The 

delisting levels in today’s final rule are 

based on the more recent health based 

numbers. 

The proposed rule incorrectly allowed 

for a level of 10 mg/l chloroform. Under 

the proposed rule, the correct level 

should have been 1 mg/l. Under today’s 

rule, the increased volume lowers the 

level for chloroform to .68 mg/l. 

Paragraph 1 in Table 1 of Appendix 

IX to Part 261 now reads 1. Verification 

Testing: American Steel Cord must 

implement an annual testing program to 

demonstrate, based on the analysis of a 

minimum of four representative 

samples, that the constituent 

concentrations measured in the TCLP 

extract of the waste are within specific 

levels. The constituent concentrations 

must not exceed the following levels 

(mg/l) which are back-calculated from 

the delisting health-based levels and a 

DAF of 68. ArsenicD 3.4 BariumD 100; 

CadmiumD .34; ChromiumD 5; 

CopperD 88.4; LeadD 1.02; MercuryD 

.136; NickelD 6.8; SeleniumD 1; SilverD 

5; ZincD 680; CyanideD 13.6; AcetoneD 

272; Benzo butyl phthlateD 476; 

ChloroformD .68; 1,4- 

DichlorobenzeneD .272; cis 1,2- 

DichloroetheneD 27.2; Methylene 

chlorideD.34; NaphthaleneD 68; 

StyreneD 6.8; TetrachloroetheneD .34; 

TolueneD 68; and XyleneD 680. 

American Steel Cord must measure and 

record the pH of the waste using SW 

846 method 9045 and must record all 

pH measurements performed in 

accordance with the TCLP. 

D. Final Agency Decision 

For the reasons stated in both the 

proposal and this notice, EPA has 

concluded that American Steel Cord’s 

petitioned waste may be excluded from 

hazardous waste control. EPA, therefore, 

is granting a final exclusion for the 

WWTP sludge generated by American 

Steel Cord at its facility in Scottsburg, 

Indiana. This exclusion applies to the 

waste described in the petition only if 

the requirements described in Table 1 of 

part 261 Appendix IX are satisfied. 

Although management of the waste 

covered by this exclusion is removed 

from Subtitle C jurisdiction, this 

exclusion applies only where this waste 

is disposed of in a Subtitle D landfill 

which is permitted, licensed, or 

registered by a state to manage 

municipal and/or industrial solid waste. 

III. Limited Effect of Federal Exclusion 

The final exclusion being granted 

today is issued under the Federal 

(RCRA) delisting program. States, 

however, are allowed to impose (nonRCRA) regulatory requirements that are 

more stringent than EPA’s, pursuant to 

section 3009 of RCRA. These more 

stringent requirements may include a 

provision which prohibits a Federallyissued exclusion from taking effect in 

the State. Because a petitioner’s waste 

may be regulated under a dual system 

(i.e., both Federal (RCRA) and State 

(non-RCRA) programs), petitioners are 

urged to contact the State regulatory 

authority to determine the current status 

of their waste under State law. 

Furthermore, some States are 

authorized to administer a delisting 

program in lieu of the Federal program 

(i.e., to make their own delisting 

decisions). Therefore, this exclusion 

does not apply in those authorized 

States. If the petitioned waste will be 

transported to any State with delisting 

authorization, American Steel Cord 

must obtain delisting authorization from 

that State before the waste may be 

managed as nonhazardous in the State. 

IV. Effective Date 

This rule is effective Janaury 26, 1999. 

The Hazardous and Solid Waste 

Amendments of 1984 amended section 

3010 of RCRA to allow rules to become 

effective in less than six months when 

the regulated community does not need 

the six-month period to come into 

compliance. That is the case here, 

because this rule reduces the existing 

requirements for persons generating 

hazardous wastes. These reasons also 

provide a basis for making this rule 

effective immediately, upon 

publication, under the Administrative 

Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 553(d). 

V. Regulatory Impact 

Under Executive Order 12866, EPA 

must conduct an “assessment of the 

potential costs and benefits” for all 

“significant” regulatory actions. The 

effect of this rule is to reduce the overall 

costs and economic impact of EPA’s 

hazardous waste management 

regulations. This reduction is achieved 

by excluding waste generated at a 

specific facility from EPA’s lists of 

hazardous wastes, thereby enabling this 

facility to treat its waste as nonhazardous. Therefore, this rule does not 

represent a significant regulatory action 

under the Executive Order, and no 

assessment of costs and benefits is 

necessary. The Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) has also exempted 

this rule from the requirement for OMB 

review under section (6) of Executive 

Order 12866. 

VI. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act, 5 U.S.C. 601–612, whenever an 

agency is required to publish a general 

notice of rulemaking for any proposed 

or final rule, it must prepare and make 

available for public comment a 

regulatory flexibility analysis that 

describes the impact of the rule on small 

entities (i.e., small businesses, small 

organizations, and small governmental 

jurisdictions). No regulatory flexibility 

analysis is required, however, if the 

Administrator or delegated 

representative certifies that the rule will 

not have any impact on any small 

entities. 

This rule will not have an adverse 

economic impact on any small entities 

since its effect would be to reduce the 

overall costs of EPA’s hazardous waste 

regulations. Accordingly, I hereby 

certify that this regulation will not have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

This regulation, therefore, does not 

require a regulatory flexibility analysis. 

VII. Paperwork Reduction Act 

Information collection and recordkeeping requirements associated with 

this final rule have been approved by 

OMB under the provisions of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (Pub. 

L. 96–511, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) and 

have been assigned OMB Control 

Number 2050–0053. 

VIII. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

Under section 202 of the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), 

Pub. L. 104–4, which was signed into 

law on March 22, 1995, EPA generally 

must prepare a written statement for 

rules with Federal mandates that may 

result in estimated costs to State, local, 

and tribal governments in the aggregate, 

or to the private sector, of $100 million 

or more in any one year. When such a 

statement is required for EPA rules, 

under section 205 of the UMRA, EPA 

must identify and consider alternatives, 

including the least costly, most costeffective or least burdensome alternative 

that achieves the objectives of the rule. 

EPA must select that alternative, unless 
3872 Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 16/Tuesday, January 26, 1999/Rules and Regulations 

the Administrator explains in the final 

rule why it was not selected or it is 

inconsistent with law. Before EPA 

establishes regulatory requirements that 

may significantly or uniquely affect 

small governments, including tribal 

governments, it must develop under 

section 203 of the UMRA a small 

government agency plan. The plan must 

provide for notifying potentially 

affected small governments, giving them 

meaningful and timely input in the 

development of EPA regulatory 

proposals with significant Federal 

intergovernmental mandates, and 

informing, educating, and advising them 

on compliance with the regulatory 

requirements. The UMRA generally 

defines a Federal mandate for regulatory 

purposes as one that imposes an 

enforceable duty upon State, local or 

tribal governments or the private sector. 

EPA finds that today’s proposed 

delisting decision is deregulatory in 

nature and does not impose any 

enforceable duty upon State, local or 

tribal governments or the private sector. 

In addition, today’s delisting decision 

does not establish any regulatory 

requirements for small governments and 

so does not require a small government 

agency plan under UMRA section 203. 

IX. Submission to Congress and 

General Accounting Office 

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 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this rule and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, the 

Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the final 

rule in the Federal Register . This rule 

is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 

U.S.C. 804(2). This rule will become 

effective on the date of publication in 

the Federal Register . 

X. Executive Order 13045—Protection 

of Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety 

Risks’ (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) 

applies to any rule that: (1) is 

determined to be “economically 

significant” as defined under Executive 

Order 12866, and (2) concerns an 

environmental health or safety risk that 

EPA has reason to believe may have a 

disproportionate effect on children. If 

the regulatory action meets both criteria, 

the Agency must evaluate the 

environmental health or safety effects of 

the planned rule on children, and 

explain why the planned regulation is 

preferable to other potentially effective 

and reasonably feasible alternatives 

considered by the Agency. This final 

rule is not subject to E.O. 13045 because 

this is not an economically significant 

regulatory action as defined by E.O. 

12866 and the environmental health or 

safety risks addressed by this action do 

not have a disproportionate effect on 

children. 

XI. Executive Order 12875 

Under E.O. 12875, EPA may not issue 

a regulation that is not required by 

statute and that creates a mandate upon 

a state, local, or tribal government, 

unless the Federal government provides 

the funds necessary to pay the direct 

compliance costs incurred by those 

governments. If the mandate is 

unfunded, EPA must provide to the 

Office of Management and Budget a 

description of the extent of EPA’s prior 

consultation with representatives of 

affected state, local, and tribal 

governments, the nature of their 

concerns, copies of written 

communications from the governments, 

and a statement supporting the need to 

issue the regulation. In addition, E.O. 

12875 requires EPA to develop an 

effective process permitting elected 

officials and other representatives of 

state, local, and tribal governments “to 

provide meaningful and timely input in 

the development of regulatory proposals 

containing significant unfunded 

mandates.” Today’s rule does not create 

a mandate on state, local or tribal 

governments. The rule does not impose 

any enforceable duties on these entities. 

Accordingly, the requirements of 

section 1(a) of E.O. 12875 do not apply 

to this rule. 

XII. Executive Order 13084 

Under E.O. 13084, EPA may not issue 

a regulation that is not required by 

statute, that significantly affects or 

uniquely affects the communities of 

Indian tribal governments, and that 

imposes substantial direct compliance 

costs on those communities, unless the 

Federal government provides the funds 

necessary to pay the direct compliance 

costs incurred by the tribal 

governments. If the mandate is 

unfunded, EPA must provide to the 

Office of Management and Budget, in a 

separately identified section of the 

preamble to the rule, a description of 

the extent of EPA’s prior consultation 

with representatives of affected tribal 

governments, a summary of the nature 

of their concerns, and a statement 

supporting the need to issue the 

regulation. In addition, E.O. 13084 

requires EPA to develop an effective 

process permitting representatives of 

Indian tribal governments “to provide 

meaningful and timely input in the 

development of regulatory policies on 

matters that significantly or uniquely 

affect their communities.” Today’s rule 

does not significantly or uniquely affect 

the communities of Indian tribal 

governments. Accordingly, the 

requirements of section 3(b) of E.O. 

13084 do not apply to this rule. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 261 

Environmental protection, Hazardous 

waste, Recycling, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Authority: Sec. 3001(f) RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 

6921(f). 

Dated: December 21, 1998. 

Margaret McCue, 

Acting Director, Waste, Pesticides and Toxics 

Division. 

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, 40 CFR Part 261 is amended 

as follows: 

PART 261—IDENTIFICATION AND 

LISTING OF HAZARDOUS WASTE 

1. The authority citation for Part 261 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), 6921, 

6922, and 6938. 

2. Table 1 of Appendix IX of Part 261 

is amended to add the following waste 

stream in alphabetical order by facility 

to read as follows: 

Appendix IX to Part 261—Wastes 

Excluded Under §§ 260.20 and 260.22 

TABLE1.—WASTESEXCLUDEDFROMNON-SPECIFICSOURCES 

Facility Address Waste description 
Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 16/Tuesday, January 26, 1999/Rules and Regulations 3873 

TABLE1.—WASTESEXCLUDEDFROMNON-SPECIFICSOURCES—Continued 

Facility Address Waste description 

* * * * * * * 

American Steel Cord ... Scottsburg, IN Wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) sludge from electroplating operations (EPA Hazardous 

Waste No. F006) generated at a maximum annual rate of 3,000 cubic yards per year, after 

January 26, 1999, and disposed of in a Subtitle D landfill. 

1. Verification Testing: American Steel Cord must implement an annual testing program to 

demonstrate, based on the analysis of a minimum of four representative samples, that the 

constituent concentrations measured in the TCLP extract of the waste are within specific 

levels. The constituent concentrations must not exceed the following levels (mg/l) which 

are back-calculated from the delisting health-based levels and a DAF of 68. Arsenic—3.4; 

Barium—100; Cadmium—.34; Chromium—5; Copper—88.4.; Lead—1.02; Mercury—.136; 

Nickel—6.8.; Selenium—1; Silver—5; Zinc—680; Cyanide—13.6; Acetone—272; Benzo 

butyl phthlate—476; Chloroform—.68; 1,4-Dichlorobenzene—.272; cis-1,2- 

Dichloroethene—27.2; Methylene chloride—.34; Naphthalene—68; Styrene—6.8; 

Tetrachloroethene—.34; Toluene—68; and Xylene—680. American Steel Cord must measure and record the pH of the waste using SW 846 method 9045 and must record all pH 

measurements performed in accordance with the TCLP. 

2. Changes in Operating Conditions: If American Steel Cord significantly changes the manufacturing or treatment process or the chemicals used in the manufacturing or treatment 

process, American Steel Cord may handle the WWTP filter press sludge generated from 

the new process under this exclusion only after the facility has demonstrated that the 

waste meets the levels set forth in paragraph 1 and that no new hazardous constituents 

listed in Appendix VIII of Part 261 have been introduced. 

3. Data Submittals: The data obtained through annual verification testing or compliance with 

paragraph 2 must be submitted to U.S. EPA Region 5, 77 W. Jackson Blvd., Chicago, IL 

60604–3590, within 60 days of sampling. Records of operating conditions and analytical 

data must be compiled, summarized, and maintained on site for a minimum of five years 

and must be made available for inspection. All data must be accompanied by a signed 

copy of the certification statement in 260.22(I)(12). 

4. (a) If, anytime after disposal of the delisted waste, American Steel Cord possesses or is 

otherwise made aware of any environmental data (including but not limited to leachate 

data or groundwater monitoring data) or any other data relevant to the delisted waste indicating that any constituent identified in Condition (1) is at a level in the leachate higher 

than the delisting level established in Condition (1), or is at a level in the ground water or 

soil higher than the health based level, then American Steel Cord must report such data, in 

writing, to the Regional Administrator within 10 days of first possessing or being made 

aware of that data. 

(b) Based on the information described in paragraph (a) and any other information received 

from any source, the Regional Administrator will make a preliminary determination as to 

whether the reported information requires Agency action to protect human health or the environment. Further action may include suspending, or revoking the exclusion, or other appropriate response necessary to protect human health and the environment. 

(c) If the Regional Administrator determines that the reported information does require Agency action, the Regional Administrator will notify the facility in writing of the actions the Regional Administrator believes are necessary to protect human health and the environment. 

The notice shall include a statement of the proposed action and a statement providing the 

facility with an opportunity to present information as to why the proposed Agency action is 

not necessary or to suggest an alternative action. The facility shall have 10 days from the 

date of the Regional Administrator’s notice to present such information. 

(d) Following the receipt of information from the facility described in paragraph (c) or (if no information is presented under paragraph (c) the initial receipt of information described in 

paragraph (a), the Regional Administrator will issue a final written determination describing 

the Agency actions that are necessary to protect human health or the environment. Any required action described in the Regional Administrator’s determination shall become effective immediately, unless the Regional Administrator provides otherwise. 

[FR Doc. 99±1756 Filed 1±25±99; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 73 

[MM Docket No. 97–129; RM–9076] 

Radio Broadcasting Services; New 

Martinsville, WV 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION : Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Commission, at the 

request of Seven Ranges Radio 

Company, Inc., allots Channel 222A at 

New Martinsville, West Virginia, as the 

community’s third local FM 

transmission service. We will also allow 

petitioner to amend its pending 

application (File No. BPH±960223MA) 

to reflect operation on Channel 222A in 

lieu of Channel 258A at New 

Martinsville, West Virginia. See 62 FR 

26466, May 14, 1997. Channel 222A can 

be allotted to New Martinsville in