February 28, 2014

Mr. George Faison

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery

Ariel Rios Building

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.

Washington, DC 20460–0002

Re: 40 CFR Part 241.4 Categorical Exemption Petition for Creosote-Treated 

Railroad Ties, Transmittal of Additional Information

Dear George:

On January 29, 2014 All4 Inc. (ALL4) provided a letter to U.S. EPA regarding the 

request for a 40 CFR Part 241.4 categorical exemption petition for creosote-treated 

railroad ties (i.e., crosstie derived fuel – CDF). That letter contained information 

concerning how non-pulp and paper end use combustors and the processors of CDF 

would be impacted by a categorical exemption that is limited in its scope. Since that 

January 29th letter, additional information has been developed that U.S. EPA may find 

helpful as they complete the process of acting on the proposed categorical exemption for 

CDF. The following information from M.A. Energy Resources, LLC (MAER), a 

processor and provider of CDF, is being provided to supplement U.S. EPA’s 

understanding of the scope of CDF as a valuable fuel.

As indicated in the January 29th letter, MAER has firsthand knowledge that there are at 

least fourteen (14) non-pulp and paper entities that are currently using or could 

potentially use CDF. The fourteen (14) entities are in the utility sector and of the 

fourteen (14), nine (9) companies are currently firing or have fired CDF within the past 

two years. MAER’s information on the pulp and paper and utility sources currently 

utilizing CDF indicates that several of these sources use between 5,000 and 70,000 tons 

of CDF per year. In addition to the utility sector, the cement industry may become an

industrial sector that routinely utilizes CDF. Since there are other processors of CDF in 

addition to MAER, it is reasonable to assume that the actual number of non-pulp and 

paper entities currently utilizing CDF as a valuable fuel is definitely greater than nine (9).

The current end use combustors are located primarily in the upper Midwest and Eastern 

portions of the country. In the Western part of the country, there are limited outlets for 

CDF; therefore, railroad ties from the west are transported and processed for Midwest 

end use combustors. 

Also as mentioned in the January 29th letter, sources currently combusting, or considering 

combusting CDF will not use CDF if firing the fuel means that the source will become 

regulated under the Commercial and Institutional Solid Waste Incineration Units 
Page 2 of 2

2/28/2014 Addendum Rev1 02 28 2014 40 CFR Part 241 Final.docx

(CISWI) New Source Performance Standards (NSPS). There are significant economic 

ramifications associated with the elimination of CDF as a non waste fuel. These 

ramifications include the sources combusting CDF paying higher fuel costs as well as the 

CDF processors that would lose the investment in their processing operations (as noted in 

the January 29th letter a processing site can include $2,000,000 of equipment). In order to 

minimize the economic disruption that would result from a limited categorical exemption, 

it is requested that a uniform consideration be given to all of the industrial sectors 

currently combusting or potentially combusting CDF. 

On behalf of all of the industrial parties with an interest in the CDF categorical 

exemption, the efforts that U.S. EPA has devoted to this important petitioning process are 

appreciated immensely. Should U.S. EPA require additional information that would 

assist in the final develop of the proposed CDF categorical exemption, please do not 

hesitate to contact me. I may be reached at (610) 933-5246 ext. 115 or via e-mail at 

dholland@all4inc.com.

Sincerely

All4 Inc.

Dan Holland

Principal Consultant

cc: Mike Sorcher (MAER)

Tim Hunt (AF&PA)