- F,p UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY w Q WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460



## FEB 1 1 2011

OFFICE OF SOLIDWASTEAND EMERGENCY RESPONSE The Honorable John P. Sarbanes U .S. House of Representatives Washington, D

.C. 20515 Dear Congressman Sarbanes: Thank you for your letter ofJanuary 3, 2011, to U .S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Associate Administrator David McIntosh, regarding EPA's proposed rule, "Identification ofNon-Hazardous Secondary Materials that are Solid Waste." Your constituent, Mr. William Vose, expresses concern that the rule may seriously impact the current used oil management systemand could have unintended negative consequences. I appreciate your interest in these important issues, andwant to assure you that EPAshares your interest in continuing the legitimate recycling of used oil . Used oil is one of many non-hazardous materials discussed in the proposed rule. The preamble to the proposed rule specifically discussed used oil that meets on-specification criteria under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 40 CFRPart 279management standards, as well as the management standards for off-specification used oil that does not meet those standards. Under the proposal, on-specification used oil is considered to be a traditional fuel . Traditional fuels, in the proposal, are considered those fuels that have been historically managed as valuable fuel products rather than being managed as waste materials, and are not considered to be solid wastes under the proposed rule. Thus, on-specification used oil would not be considered a solid waste when burned as a fuel under the proposed rule andwould be subject to the section 112 CleanAir Act (CAA) standards. Off-specification used oil, on the other hand, is considered to be a solid waste under the proposed rule, and combustion units burning off-specification used oil would be subject to the appropriate standards under section 129ofthe CAAfor solid waste incinerators. This proposed approach would provide an additional measure ofcontrol to address the higher level of contaminants that could be present in off-specification used oil . The proposed rule also indicated that off-specification used oil that is processed into on-specification used oil would not be considered a solid waste. The definition of processing includes the blending ofoff-specification used oil with virgin fuel products or on-specification used oil . RCRAand the regulations that have been promulgated in 40 CFRPart 279ensure that used oil that is recycled is done so in a manner that protects human health and the environment. Mr. Vose also expresses concern that the proposed rule would require unnecessary testing of the so STqT

Internet Address (URL) * http://www .epa.gov Recycled/Recyclable 0 Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on 100%Postconsumer, Process Chlorine Free Recycled Paperused oil he collects fromoff-site sources. However, the proposed rule does not require testing

for generators of used oil, nor do the used oil management standards promulgated under 40 CFR Part 279require such testing. Rather, generators of used oil, including those that collect used oil for do-it-yourselfoil changers, can use other information, such as existing data or process knowledge, to determine whether or not the used oil they generate would be considered onspecification or off-specification. Again, thankyoufor your letter. Ifyou have further questions, please contact me or your staffmay call Carolyn Levine, in the Office of Congressional and Intergovernmental Relations, at (202) 564-1859. 

## 1 V\ athy Stams'T'aus ,~ Assistant Administrato