1111 19 t h Street, NW Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036 Phone: (202) 463-2045 Fax: (202) 463-2059

April 3, 2013

BY CERTIFIED MAIL

The Honorable Bob Perciasepe Acting Administrator U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Mail Code 1101 A, Ariel Rios Building 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. Washington, DC 20460

Re: Petition for Determination Identifying Non-Hazardous Secondary Treated Wood Biomass as a Non-Waste under 40 C.F.R. §241.4 (a)

Dear Acting Administrator Perciasepe:

The Treated Wood Council (T WC) submits the following petition under 40 C.F.R. § 241.4 (b) for a determination that non-hazardous secondary treated wood biomass (NHSTWB) is, as a category, not a waste. Further, TWC requests that NHSTWB be added to the materials identified in 40 C.F.R. § 241.4 (a) as a material that is not a solid waste when used as a fuel in a combustion unit. As demonstrated below, depe nding on the type of NHSTWB, it has either not been discarded in the first instance or is pr ocessed and managed pursuant to proven practices comparable to those EPA has previously approved; in both cases it is legitimately used as a fuel in a combustion unit. To the extent any of the legitimacy criteria specified in 40 C.F.R. § 241.3 (d)(1) are not met, NHSTWB is functionally the same as its comparable traditional fuel, and a balancing of all relevant fact ors, as relied upon in previous EPA non-waste determinations, requires that NHSTWB similarly be determined to be a non-waste. Supporting data for each of the types of NHSTWB covered by this petition are provided below.

1. Petitioner’s Name and Address

Treated Wood Council 1111 19th Street, N.W., Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036The Honorable Bob Perciasepe April 3, 2013 Page 2

2. Statement of Petitioner’s Inte rest in the Proposed Action

The TWC is an international trade associati on of the wood treating industry, serving more than 490 companies and associations related to the production of treated wood. TWC’s members have for many years generated, used, sold, or bought NHSTWB as a legitimate fuel for energy recovery. TWC submits this petition for a na tional determination th at this longstanding, beneficial, and environmentally sound practice constitutes combustion of a non-waste fuel and can continue without interruption.

3. Description of the Proposed Action

TWC requests that the following language be added to 40 C.F.R. § 241.4 (a):

(5) Non-hazardous secondary treated wood biomass that is transferred from the generating site or organi zation to the combustion site under contractual agreements throughout its transfer. Such non-hazardous secondary treated wood biomass may also be combined with other traditional fuels or other materials listed in this section. For purposes of this section, “non-hazard ous secondary treated wood biomass” includes wood treated with: waterborne borate -based preservatives, waterborne organic-based preservatives, waterbor ne copper-based wood preservatives (ammoniacal/alkaline copper quat, copper azole, copper HDO, alkaline copper betaine, or copper naphthena te); creosote; oilborne copper naphthenate; pentachlorophenol; or dual -treated with any of the above.

The relevant industry NAICS codes for this petit ion are: 321113 and 321114. The functional use code is U33.

4. Need and Justification for the Proposed Action

The proposed action is needed to redress EP A’s generic conclusion that the use of nonhazardous secondary materials – including NHSTW B – for combustion is categorized as the burning of a solid waste unless ot herwise determined af ter consideration of a petition filed under 40 C.F.R. § 241.4 (b). EPA incorporated this ove rall conclusion into 40 C.F.R. § 241.3 (a) with the adoption of its February 2013 final rule on Non-Hazardous Secondary Materials That Are Solid Waste. 1 To the contrary, as demonstrated below, NHSTWB is a valuable fuel that either is

1 Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incineratio n Units: Reconsideration and Final Amendments; Non-Hazardous Secondary Materials That Are Solid Waste ; Final Rule, 78 Fed. Reg. 9112 (Feb. 7, 2013) (February 2013 Final Rule).The Honorable Bob Perciasepe April 3, 2013 Page 3

not discarded or is properly processed and managed, and is legitimately used as a fuel in a combustion unit.

EPA’s February 2013 final rule requires that petitioners demonstrat e that the secondary material used as a non-waste fuel in a combusti on unit (1) has not previous ly been discarded or, alternatively, has been properly processed and managed, and (2) either meets the legitimacy criteria or, after balancing the legitimacy criteria w ith other relevant factors, is shown not to be a solid waste when used as fuel. 78 Fed. Reg. at 9158-59. The legitimacy cr iteria are: (a) the secondary material is managed as a valuable co mmodity, and storage must not exceed reasonable time frames; (b) where there is an analogous fu el, the secondary material must be managed consistently with the analogous fu el; (c) the secondary material must produce meaningful heating value; and (d) the secondary material must contain contaminants at levels comparable to those in traditional fuels. 2 EPA recognized in its February 2013 final rule that TWC had submitted information in support of a determination that NHSTWB be added as a categorical non-waste, and that, as to one type of treated wood, creoso te railroad ties, sufficient evidence had been provided that EPA expects to propose a categori cal listing for these mate rials. 78 Fed. Reg. at 9174. TWC provides the following additional information in s upport of its petition for the addition of NHSTWB to 40 C.F.R. § 241.4 (a).

NHSTWB Used as Combustion Fuel Has Either Not Been Discarded or Has Been Properly Processed and Managed; Also It is Managed as a Valuable Commodity and Consistently with Traditional Fuels

. Treated wood is green, virgin wood – a materi al EPA recognizes as a traditional fuel – that has been treated with preservative solutions that slow its deteriora tion and extend its useful life in applications such as building products, railroad ties, a nd utility poles. After its primary useful life, NHSTWB products are in demand for their energy recovery value. For example, creosote-treated railroad ties, which are impr egnated with a coal tar derivative (made up of traditional fuels) are sought-after as an alternativ e fuel because of their higher heat (measured as British thermal units or BTU) value, affordabilit y, and availability. Commercial arrangements have for many years channeled NHSTWB material s to cement kilns, power plants, and other facilities, where they are handled as a valuable commodity and substitute for wood, coal, or other fossil fuels. They are managed and stored simila rly to traditional fuels. The Class I railroads recycle nearly 60 percent of their used ties fo r energy recovery (and th e remainder are largely

2 Identification of Non-Hazardous Secondary Materials That Are Solid Waste ; Final Rule, 76 Fed. Reg. 15456, 15551 (March 21, 2011) (March 2011 Final Rule).The Honorable Bob Perciasepe April 3, 2013 Page 4

recycled for other purposes). 3 Approximately 20 percent of util ity poles are similarly reused for energy generation (and another 45 percent for other uses). 4

As EPA’s February 2013 final rule acknowledges, 5 TWC has previously submitted evidence to the record of substantial volumes of NHSTWB used as a valuable combustion source at a co-gen facility in central Pennsylvania that was exclusivel y designed to burn these materials. As the table in Attachment 1 demonstrates, over the course of more than twenty years, this facility has burned 2.3 million tons of NHSTWB as part of its intrinsic process to generate electricity, under contracts with 89 commercial entities that fu rnish used, treated wood for
energy recovery purposes.
A second company, Zwicky Processing & Recy cling, Inc., has provided information describing its facility in eastern Pennsylvania that grinds NHSTWB along with construction and demolition materials, which EPA has preliminarily concluded are not waste. 6 (See Attachment 2.) These materials, once combined, are used for combustion by cement plants, paper mills, and power generation facilities. This facility also was built specifica lly for these materials and, to give a sense of its current s cale of operations, handled 140,000 tons of secondary NHSTWB and C&D wood during the first 10 months of 2012.

A third company has explained that its f acility combusts 75% NHSTWB and 25% other forms of biomass to power its operations. A sa mple purchase contract entered into by this company for railroad ties used as a boiler biomass energy source was attached to TWC’s February 2012 Comments in this proceeding. 7 If EPA fails to categorize these materials as nonwaste, this plant could face a total shut down, without the availability of NHSTWB as a fuel source for this boiler.

TWC has also provided samples in the record of numerous executed contracts showing a variety of types of purchase agreements for NHS TWB used for electricity generation and fuel combustion, and of a “Fuel Supply Agreement coveri ng creosote-treated materials (ties, poles,

3 See Comment submitted by J. Gauntt, Railway Tie Association, Wood Crossties 2008 Benchmark Tie Disposal Survey , Docket EPA-HQ-OPP-2003-0248-0086.

4 Morrell, J. Disposal and Re-use of Utility Poles in the Western United States: A Survey , Proceedings of the American Wood Protection Ass’n., vol. 104, 268-271 (May 2008).

5 78 Fed. Reg. at 9174.

6 78 Fed. Reg. at 9173, citing 76 Fed. Reg. at 15,485.

7 See Attachment 4 to TWC’s Comments of February 20, 2012 in EPA Docket EPA-HQ-RCRA-2008-0329 (TWC February 2012 Comments).The Honorable Bob Perciasepe April 3, 2013 Page 5

posts, piling, and timbers) purchased by Vi king Energy of Michigan as boiler fuel. 8 An additional statement notes the use of copper na phthenate NHSTWB ties as a valuable fuel, for example at the DTE plant in Wisconsin, which is permitted to burn copper naphthenate, borate, and creosote-treated wood secondary material s for energy generation. (See Attachment 3.) Further, TWC’s February 2012 comments cited a st atement submitted to the record by the State of Michigan’s Department of Natural Resour ces and Environment, noting that in 2009, 16,625 tons of NHSTWB, including wood treated with cr eosote and pentachloro phenol, were burned for energy recovery and were eligib le for renewable energy or ad vanced cleaner energy credits under Michigan’s Clean, Renewabl e, and Efficient Energy Act.

Collectively, these submissions provide comp elling evidence that NHSTWB is either not discarded or has been properly processed and mana ged, and that when used as a combustion fuel, it is regarded as a valuable commodity.

NHSTWB has a Meaningful Heating Value a nd is Used as Fuel in a Combustion Unit that Recovers Energy.

TWC has previously placed in the record da ta showing the higher BTU value of treated wood compared to that of virgin wood. 9 In short, NHSTWB has a moisture content of approximately 20 percent, compared to the 50 percent moisture content of untreated wood biomass. Wood preservatives do not reduce, and some add to, the heat value of wood. Treated wood used for fuel is typically drier than milling by-products, such as chips or bark, resulting in a higher heat value at appr oximately 7,000 BTU/pound (300,000 BTU/cf) for waterborne, and up to 8,000 (400,000 BTU/cf) for oilbor ne treated wood products.

Each Type of NHSTWB is Either Not Discarde d in the First Instance or is Processed and Managed Pursuant to Proven Practices; Each Type Contains Contaminants at Levels that are Comparable to or Low er than the Traditional Fuels that the Combustion Unit is Designed to Burn, or is Functionally the Same as Its Comparable Traditional Fuel, and a Balancing of All Relevant Factors Supports Its Categorization as a Non-Waste.

8 See Attachments 2 and 3 to TWC’s February 2012 Comments.

9 See TWC Comments of August 2, 2010 in EPA Docket EPA-HQ-RCRA-2008-0329, Table 1 (TWC August 2010 Comments).The Honorable Bob Perciasepe April 3, 2013 Page 6

The types of NHSTWB covere d by this petition are:

(1) Wood Treated with Waterborne Borate-Based Preservatives

(2) Wood Treated with Waterborne Organic-Based or Copper-Based Preservatives

(3) Wood Treated with Creosote (oilborne)

(4) Wood Treated with Oilborne Copper Naphthenate

(5) Wood Treated with O ilborne Pentachlorophenol

(6) Wood Dual-Treated with a ny of the above preservatives

In the discussion below, the different fo rms of NHSTWB are an alyzed individually.

Wood Treated with Waterborne Borate-Based Preservatives

Waterborne borate-based pr eservatives add no HAPs to traditional wood and contain contaminants at levels that are comparable to t hose of the traditional fu el that a combustion unit is designed to burn (wood). (See Table I on th e following page.) Wood treated with boratebased preservatives is virtually identical to untreated wood in te rms of HAP content.

In fact, EPA has already determined that borate-treated wood “meets the legitimacy criterion on the level of contaminants a nd comparability to traditional fuels.” 10 Waterborne borate-based treated woods are eq uivalent to “clean construc tion and demolition wood,” which EPA considers a traditional fuel. 11 TWC requests that EPA provide a determination for waterborne borate-ba sed preservatives that is consistent with that for clean construction and demolition wood.

10 76 Fed. Reg. at 15,484.

11 78 Fed. Reg. at 9138.The Honorable Bob Perciasepe April 3, 2013 Page 7

TABLE I. HAP and Other Components in Traditional Fuels and Wood Treated wi th Borate Waterborne Preservatives (ppm) HAP Component Wood + Borate s Untreated Wood/Biomass i #2 Fuel Oil i Coal i
Volatile metals (Hg) 1.1 1.1 0.2 3.1 Semi-volatile metals (Cd, Pb, Se) 255 255 57 241

Low-volatile metals (Sb, As, Be, Cr, Co, Mn, Ni) 16,842 16,842 3,551 1,822

Total HAP metals 17,098 17,098 3,608 2,066 Chlorine 5,400 5,400 1,260 9,080 Fluorine 128 128 14 178 Nitrogen 4,600 4,600 3,000 54,000 Sulfur 6,100 6,100 57,000 61,300 Total VOC HAP 27 27 13,745 153 Total SVOC ii HAP NA iii NA 8,900 NA Total POM i v 2 v 2 v 54,700 2,090 Total known HAP vi 17,127 17,127 80,953 4,309

i Maximum values cited in EPA, Materials Characterization Paper In Support of the Final Rulemaking: Identification of Nonhazardous Secondary Materials That Are Solid Waste Traditional Fuels and Key Derivatives (Feb. 7, 2011) (EPA 2011a), EPA, Contaminant Concentrations in Trad itional Fuels: Tables for Comparison (Nov. 29, 2011) (EPA 2011b).
ii Semi-volatile organic compounds; includes phenol, cresols, biphenyl, dibenzofuran, and quinoline.
iii NA = Indicates either data not avai lable, not yet analyzed, or cannot be expressed accurately in table.
iv Polycyclic Organic Matter (POM) is an EPA-defined chemical group that primarily consists of polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) but includes some other aromatic co mpounds that contain hetero atoms such as N and O.

v Data from J. Physics: Conference Series 151, 012004 (2009).
vi HAPs listed include only thos e with available data.

Wood Treated with Waterborne Organic- Based Preservatives and Wood Treated with Waterborne Copper-Based Preservatives

Waterborne organic-based and copper-based preservatives likewise add no HAPS to traditional wood. The HAP metals listed in Tabl e II are naturally occurring in untreated wood and are not introduced during the treating proces s. The only metal introd uced during treatment with waterborne preservatives is copp er, which is not a listed HAP metal.

EPA has also required consideration of chemicals the combustion of which will result in the formation of HAPs. 12 As Table II on the following page indicates, nitrogen content in the waterborne organic-based and c opper-based preservatives is belo w the levels found in wood and other traditional fuels.

12 Id ., at 9139.The Honorable Bob Perciasepe April 3, 2013 Page 8

TWC requests that EPA provide a determin ation for waterborne organic-based and copper-based preservatives that is consistent with that for clean construction and demolition wood.

TABLE II. HAP and Other Components in Traditional Fuels and “End of Life” Wood Treated with Organic & Copper-Based Waterborne Preservatives i (ppm)

HAP Component Copper-Based ii Organic-Based ii Untreated Wood iii #2 Fuel Oil iii Coal iv ACQ CA CuN-W CX-A KDS PTI EL2
Volatile metals (Hg) 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1

Semi-volatile metals (Cd, Pb, Se) 255 255 255 255 255 255 255 255 255 255

Low-volatile metals (Sb, As, Be, Cr, Co, Mn, Ni) 16,842 16,842 16,842 16,842 16,842 16,842 16,842 16,842 16,842 16,842

Total HAP metals 17,098 17,098 17,098 17,098 17,098 17,098 17,098 17,098 3,608 2,066
Chlorine 5,400 5,400 5,400 5,400 5, 400 5,400 5,400 5,400 1,260 9,080 Fluorine 128 128 128 128 128 128 128 128 14 178 Nitrogen 23 i v 235 i v 235 i v 235 i v 235 i v <235 i v <235 i v 4,600 3,000 54,000 Sulfur 6,100 6,100 6,100 6,100 6, 100 6,100 6,100 6,100 57,000 61,300 Total VOC HAP 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 13,745 153

Total SVOC v HAP NA v i NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 8,900 NA

Total POM v ii 2 viii 2 viii 2 viii 2 viii 2 viii 2 viii 2 viii 2 vii 54,700 2,090 Total known HAP ix 17,127 17,127 17,127 17,127 17,127 17,127 17,127 17,127 80,953 4,309

i Assumes same values as in EPA 2011a and EPA 2011b.
ii AWPA Standard U1 abbreviations for wa terborne preservative systems: ACQ = alkaline copper quaternary; CA = copper azole; CuN-W = waterborne copper naphthenate; CX-A = coppe r HDO; KDS = alkaline copper betaine; PTI = propiconazole + tebuconazole + imidacloprid; EL2 = DCOI + imidacloprid.
iii Maximum values cited in EPA 2011a and EPA 2011b.
iv Data from Ruddick 2013; average of all samples tested. Total Nitrogen numbers assayed in we athered ACQ-treated spruce used to estimate N content in wood treate d with all Cu-based preservatives contai ning monoethanolamine (MEA) co-solvents. Wood treated with organic-based preservatives containing no MEA will contain an unknown but lesser amount of Nitrogen. Maximum Nitrogen content in untreated w ood cited by OAQPS databases is 4600 ppm.

v Semi-volatile organic compounds; includes phenol, cresols, biphenyl, dibenzofuran, and quinoline.
vi NA = Indicates either data not available, not yet analyzed, or cannot be expr essed accurately in table.
vii Polycyclic Organic Matter (POM) is an EPA-defined chemical group that primar ily consists of pol ynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) but includes some other aromatic com pounds that contain heteroatom s such as N and O.
viii Data from J. Physics: Conference Series 151 , 012004 (2009).
ix HAPs listed include only thos e with available data.The Honorable Bob Perciasepe April 3, 2013 Page 9

Wood Treated with Creosote (oilborne)

Wood treated with creosote is the subject of a previous petition submitted by other parties, supported by data that EPA has alrea dy considered. Based on these submissions, EPA's February 2013 final rule states that “EPA also expects to propose a categorical listing for this material.” 13 While the previously submitted data ar e focused on creosote and creosote-boron railroad ties, they also apply to creosote-treated posts, pilings, and utility poles, as demonstrated by Table III below. TWC requests that EPA provi de a categorical determination for creosotetreated ties, posts, pilings, a nd poles that they are non-wast es when combusted for energy
recovery.

TABLE III. Estimated Concentration of Selected HA P in “End of Life” Creosote Treated Wood and Traditional Fuels (ppm)

HAP Component Creosote-treated wood i Untreated Wood ii Fuel Oil ii Coal ii

Volatile metals (Hg) 1.1 1.1 0.2 3.1 Semi-volatile metals (Cd, Pb, Se) 255 255 57 241

Low-volatile metals (Sb, As, Be, Cr, Co, Mn, Ni) 16,842 16,842 3,551 1,822

Total HAP metals 17,098 ii 17,098 3,608 2,066 Chlorine (non-HAP) 5,400 ii 5,400 1,260 9,080 Fluorine (non-HAP) 128 ii 128 14 178 Nitrogen (non-HAP) 4,600 ii 4,600 3,000 54,000
Sulfur (non-HAP) 6,100 ii 6,100 57,000 61,300

Total VOC HAP 0.4 27 13,745 153 Total SVOC iii HAP 966 NA iv 8,900 NA Total POM v 20,130 2 vi 54,700 2,090

Total HAP vii 38,194 17,127 80,953 4,309

i Data from URS 2013. Evaluation of Used Railroad Ties Treated with Creosote for Polynuclear Organic Material (POM) which includes Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAH). Report dated January 28, 2013, prepared for Association of American Railroads.
ii Maximum values cited in EPA 2011a and EPA 2011b, except where noted.
iii Semi-volatile organic compounds; includes phenol, cresols, biphenyl, dibenzofuran, and quinoline.
iv Indicates either data not availa ble, not yet analyzed, or cannot be expressed accurately in table.

v Polycyclic Organic Matter (POM) is an EPA-defined chemical group that primarily consists of polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) but includes some other aromatic co mpounds that contain heteroat oms such as N and O.
vi Data from J. Physics: Conference Series 151 , 012004(2009).
vii HAPs listed include only thos e with available data.

13 78 Fed. Reg. at 9174.The Honorable Bob Perciasepe April 3, 2013 Page 10

Wood Treated with Oilborne Copper Naphthenate

Copper naphthenate treating solution is dilu ted with fuel oil to make a solution of approximately 1 percent copper metal by weight. The naphthenic acid, a by-product of crude oil refining, consists primarily of l ong-chain hydrocarbons. It combusts in the same way as fuel oil with the same emissions and fuel value as fuel oil “traditional fuel.”

The fuel oil contained in oilborne copper naphthenate NHSTWB may add 10 to 20 percent more heat value than untreated wood biomass. The fuel oil contained in copper naphthenate treated wood contains contaminants comparable to those in fuel oil, a traditional fuel, and, according to EPA's prescribed analysis , wood treated with oilb orne copper naphthenate should be determined to be a non-waste when com busted in units designed to burn wood and fuel oil. (See Table IV below.)

TABLE IV. Estimated Concentration of Selected HAP in “End of Life ” Copper Naphthenate (CuN) Treated Wood and Traditional Fuels (ppm)

HAP Component CuN-treated wood i Untreated Wood ii Fuel Oil ii Coal ii

Volatile metals (Hg) 1.1 1.1 0.2 3.1 Semi-volatile metals (Cd, Pb, Se) 255 255 57 241
Low-volatile metals (Sb, As, Be, Cr, Co, Mn, Ni) 16,842 16,842 3,551 1,822

Total HAP metals 17,098 ii 17,098 3,608 2,066
Chlorine (non-HAP) 5,400 ii 5,400 1,260 9,080 Fluorine (non-HAP) 128 ii 128 14 178 Nitrogen (non-HAP) 4,600 ii 4,600 3,000 54,000 Sulfur (non-HAP) 6,100 ii 6,100 57,000 61,300 Total VOC HAP 379 27 13,745 153 Total SVOC iii HAP 33 NA iv 8,900 NA Total POM v 414 2 vi 54,700 2,090 Total HAP vii 17,924 17,127 80,953 4,309

i 0.08 pcf Cu & 4 pcf solution retention + 32 pcf wood @ 50% tr eatable volume = 0.94% w/w copp er naphthenate (0.11% Cu) and 4.6% oil in total freshly treated w ood mass. Wood assayed after 12 years expo sure showed 35% average Cu loss (IRG/WP 00-30242); calculations assume 66% organic (diluent oil) loss ba sed on creosote loss during service (URS report to AAR, 2013).
ii Maximum values cited in EPA 2011a and EPA 2011b.
iii Semi-volatile organic compounds; includes phenol, cresols, biphenyl, dibenzofuran, and quinoline.
iv Indicates either data not availabl e, not yet analyzed, or cannot be expressed accurate ly in table.
vi Polycyclic Organic Matter (POM) is an EPA-defined chemical group that primarily consists of polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) but includes some other aromatic com pounds that contain heteroatom s such as N and O.
vi Data from J. Physics: Conference Series 151, 012004 (2009).
vii HAPs listed include only thos e with available data.The Honorable Bob Perciasepe April 3, 2013 Page 11

The total HAP concentration in end-of-life copper naphthena te treated wood is slightly higher (less than 5%) than the total HAP concen tration in untreated w ood, but considerably less than the total HAP concentration in fuel oil. TWC requests that EPA provide a categorical determination for copper naphthenate treated wood NHSTWB that they are non-wastes when combusted for energy recovery in the same t ype boilers approved for creosote treated wood.

Wood Treated with Pentachlorophenol

Pentachlorophenol (penta) is a pesticide ch emical manufactured by reacting phenol with chlorine. Phenol is a by-product of petroleum manufacturing. Penta is sold to wood preserving plants as either a solid block or a concentrated liquid. Solid penta is diss olved in petroleum oil, typically diesel or fuel oil grades. Liquid or di ssolved-solid penta is diluted to approximately 5 to 10 percent in oil for the trea tment solutions. Technical penta contains 86% pentachlorophenol with the balance other chlorinated phenols.

Penta-preserved wood contains a pproximately 4 pcf of fuel oil, used as a carrier for the penta in treatment. The fuel oil contained in penta-treated NHSTWB may add 10 to 20 percent more heat value than untreated wood biomass. Fu el oil is a “traditional fuel.” Penta contains chlorine, but to avoid double-coun ting the chlorine, this has not been listed separately, as penta including the chlorine is al ready listed as a HAP.

The HAPS in penta-treated wood are comparable to those in the tr aditional fuels wood, coal, and fuel oil, except for pe ntachlorophenol itself, which is an EPA-listed HAP (see Table V on the following page). The total HAP concentr ation in end-of-life pe ntachlorophenol treated wood is higher (about 16 %) than the tota l HAP concentration in untreated wood, but considerably less that the total HAP concentration in fuel oil. Pentachlorophenol is deliberately added to the wood for its preservative properties. Its presence in no more meaningful to this type of NHSTWB’s use as a legitimate fuel than th e formaldehyde (also a listed HAP) in resinated wood, similarly added to the wood product for its de sirable properties. In fact, the amount of pentachlorophenol in a treated w ood utility pole at the end of its service life (approximately 1800 ppm) is a small fraction of the amount of form aldehyde-containing resin in a comparable unit of resinated wood used as fuel. As noted prev iously, energy generators have long relied on purchasing this form of biomass as an important fuel, with contracts in the record establishing these established commercial arrangements. Th e State of Michigan has specifically noted the legitimate use of penta NHSTWB as a clean fuel that is eligible for renewable energy or advanced cleaner energy credit under Michig an’s Clean, Renewable, and Energy Efficiency Act. 14

14 Comments of Steven R. Silver, Chief, Solid Wa ste and Land Application Section, Environmental Resource Management Division, Michigan Department of Natural Resources & Environment, at 8 (Aug. 3, 2010), filed in EPA Docket No . EPA-HQ-RCRA-2008-0329.The Honorable Bob Perciasepe April 3, 2013 Page 12

EPA has determined that, despite the highe r level of formaldehyde in resinated wood compared to the traditional fuel wood, the ba lance of factors favors a determination that resinated wood secondary materials are properly viewed as fuel when combusted for energy
recovery. 15 Like resinated wood, penta-treated wood is a sought-after fu el, has a long track record of commercial dealings evidencing its established use for energy recovery, has a high BTU value, is clearly considered and managed as a valuable commodity, is used in plants designed specifically to use this material; and like resinated w ood, disrupting this established commercial relationship would cause advers e economic – and also environmental –
consequences.
Based on a balancing of the relevant factors, using the same type of balancing analysis that EPA has followed in considering resinate d wood, EPA should conclude that penta-treated NHSTWB is a categorical non-waste.

TABLE V. Estimated Concentr ation of Selected HAP in “End of Li fe” Pentachlorophenol Treated Wood and Traditional Fuels (ppm)

HAP Component PentachlorophenolTreated Wood i Untreated Wood ii Fuel Oil ii Coal ii

Volatile metals (Hg) 1.1 1.1 0.2 3.1 Semi-volatile metals (Cd, Pb, Se) 255 255 57 241

Low-volatile metals (Sb, As, Be, Cr, Co, Mn, Ni) 16,842 16,842 3,551 1,822

Total HAP metals 17,098 ii 17,098 3,608 2,066 Chlorine (non-HAP) 6,691 ii 5,400 1,260 9,080 Fluorine (non-HAP) 128 ii 128 14 178 Nitrogen (non-HAP) 4,600 ii 4,600 3,000 54,000 Sulfur (non-HAP) 6,100 ii 6,100 57,000 61,300 Total VOC HAP 379 27 13,745 153 Total SVOC iii HAP 1865 NA iv 8,900 NA Total POM v 414 2 vi 54,700 2,090
Total HAP vii 19,756 17,127 80,953 4,309

i 0.38 pcf pentachlorophenol & 4 pcf solu tion retention + 32 pcf wood @ 50% treata ble volume = 0.55% w/w PCP and 5.0% oil in total treated wood mass. Wood assayed after 8 years e xposure showed 66% penta loss (IRG/WP-00-30242); calculations assume 66% diluent oil loss based on creosote loss during service (URS report to AAR, 2013).
ii Maximum values cited in EPA 2011a and EPA 2011b.
iii Semi-volatile organic compounds; incl udes phenol, cresols, pentachlorophenol, biphenyl, dibenzofuran, and quinoline.
iv Indicates either data not availa ble, not yet analyzed, or cannot be expressed accurately in table.

v Polycyclic Organic Matter (POM) is an EPA-defined chemical group that primarily consists of polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) but includes some other aromatic com pounds that contain heteroatom s such as N and O.
vi Data from J

. Physics: Conference Series 151, 012004 (2009).
vii HAPs listed include only those with available data.

15 78 Fed. Reg. at 9155-58.The Honorable Bob Perciasepe April 3, 2013 Page 13

TWC requests that EPA provide a categori cal determination for pentachlorophenol NHSTWB that they are non-wastes when combusted for energy recovery in the same type boilers approved for creosote treated wood.

Dual-treated Wood

Combinations of preservatives may be us ed for some treated wood products. The analysis does not differ from the foregoing di scussion of each of thes e individual treatment chemicals. Like the underlying NHSTWB formulat ions, combined treatments should also be the subject of a categorical non- waste determination.

TWC requests that EPA provide a categorical determination for dual waterborne treated wood that is consistent with that for clean construction and demolition wood. TWC requests that EPA provide a categorical determination fo r dual treated NHSTWB using an oilborne preservative that they are non-wastes when co mbusted for energy recovery in the same type boilers approved for creosote treated wood.

Conclusion

Unless EPA properly classifies these material s as non-waste, they will be diverted to landfills, resulting in (1 ) the use instead of fossil fuels w ith higher net greenhouse gas emissions (GHG), and (2) the likelihood that landfilled treated w ood will eventually br eak down to produce methane, with twenty times the comparable impact on climate ch ange as carbon dioxide. 16

For all the reasons set forth above, TWC requests that EPA issue a categorical determination that the specified non-hazardous s econdary treated wood biomass materials are not
a waste

. Respectfully submitted,

Jeffrey T. Miller President & Executive Director

Cc: George Faison ( Faison.george@Epa.gov )

16 See, EPA, Greenhouse Gas Emissions

, http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/gases/ch4.html

.