70108 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 227 / Tuesday, November 25, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

DELEGATION STATUS FOR PART 63 STANDARDS—STATE OF TEXAS 1—Continued 

Subpart Source category TCEQ 2

CCCCCC .................................................. Gasoline Dispensing Facilities Area Sources .............................................................. X 

DDDDDD .................................................. Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers Production Area Sources ................................... X 

EEEEEE .................................................... Primary Copper Smelting Area Sources ...................................................................... X 

FFFFFF ..................................................... Secondary Copper Smelting Area Sources ................................................................. X 

GGGGGG ................................................. Primary Nonferrous Metals Area Sources: Zinc, Cadmium, and Beryllium ................ X 

HHHHHH .................................................. Paint Stripping and Miscellaneous Surface Coating Operations at Area Sources ..... X 

IIIIII ............................................................ (Reserved) .................................................................................................................... ........................

JJJJJJ ....................................................... Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers Area Sources .................................. X 

KKKKKK .................................................... (Reserved) .................................................................................................................... ........................

LLLLLL ...................................................... Acrylic and Modacrylic Fibers Production Area Sources ............................................ X 

MMMMMM ................................................ Carbon Black Production Area Sources ...................................................................... X 

NNNNNN .................................................. Chemical Manufacturing Area Sources: Chromium Compounds ................................ X 

OOOOOO ................................................. Flexible Polyurethane Foam Production and Fabrication Area Sources .................... X 

PPPPPP .................................................... Lead Acid Battery Manufacturing Area Sources ......................................................... X 

QQQQQQ ................................................. Wood Preserving Area Sources .................................................................................. X 

RRRRRR .................................................. Clay Ceramics Manufacturing Area Sources ............................................................... X 

SSSSSS .................................................... Glass Manufacturing Area Sources ............................................................................. X 

TTTTTT ..................................................... Secondary Nonferrous Metals Processing Area Sources ........................................... X 

UUUUUU .................................................. (Reserved) .................................................................................................................... ........................

VVVVVV .................................................... Chemical Manufacturing Area Sources ....................................................................... X 

WWWWWW .............................................. Plating and Polishing Operations Area Sources ......................................................... X 

XXXXXX .................................................... Metal Fabrication and Finishing Area Sources ............................................................ X 

YYYYYY .................................................... Ferroalloys Production Facilities Area Sources ........................................................... X 

ZZZZZZ ..................................................... Aluminum, Copper, and Other Nonferrous Foundries Area Sources .......................... X 

AAAAAAA ................................................. Asphalt Processing and Asphalt Roofing Manufacturing Area Sources ..................... X 

BBBBBBB ................................................. Chemical Preparations Industry Area Sources ............................................................ X 

CCCCCCC ................................................ Paints and Allied Products Manufacturing Area Sources ............................................ X 

DDDDDDD ................................................ Prepared Feeds Manufacturing Area Sources ............................................................ X 

EEEEEEE ................................................. Gold Mine Ore Processing and Production Area Sources .......................................... ........................

FFFFFFF–GGGGGGG ............................. (Reserved) .................................................................................................................... ........................

HHHHHHH ................................................ Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers Production Major Sources .................................. X 

1Program delegated to Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ). 

2Authorities which may not be delegated include: § 63.6(g), Approval of Alternative Non-Opacity Emission Standards; § 63.6(h)(9), Approval of 

Alternative Opacity Standards; § 63.7(e)(2)(ii) and (f), Approval of Major Alternatives to Test Methods; § 63.8(f), Approval of Major Alternatives to 

Monitoring; § 63.10(f), Approval of Major Alternatives to Recordkeeping and Reporting; and all authorities identified in the subparts (e.g., under 

‘‘Delegation of Authority’’) that cannot be delegated. 3The TCEQ was previously delegated this subpart on May 17, 2005 (70 FR 13018). The subpart was vacated and remanded to EPA by the 

United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. See, Mossville Environmental Action Network v. EPA, 370 F. 3d 1232 (D.C. 

Cir. 2004). Because of the D.C. Court’s holding, this subpart is not delegated to TCEQ at this time. 4This subpart was issued a partial vacatur on October 29, 2007 (72 FR 61060) by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. 5Final rule. See 78 FR 7138 (January 31, 2013). 

6TCEQ was previously delegated this subpart on May 2, 2006 (71 FR 25753). This subpart was vacated and remanded to EPA by the United 

States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. See, Sierra Club v. EPA, 479 F. 3d 875 (D.C. Cir. 2007). Because of the D.C. 

Court’s holding, this subpart is not delegated to TCEQ at this time. 7 Initial Final Rule. See 77 FR 9304 (February 16, 2012). Final on reconsideration of certain new source issues. See 78 FR 24073 (April 24, 

2013). Portions of this subpart are in proposed reconsideration pending final action. See 78 FR 38001 (June 25, 2013). 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2014–27909 Filed 11–24–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 261 

[EPA–R07–RCRA–2014–0452; FRL–9919– 

72–Region–7] 

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) is granting the petition 

submitted by John Deere Des Moines 

Works (John Deere) of Deere & 

Company, in Ankeny, Iowa to exclude 

or ‘‘delist’’ up to 600 tons per calendar 

year of F006/F019 wastewater treatment 

sludge filter cake generated by John 

Deere’s wastewater treatment system 

from the list of hazardous wastes. This 

final rule responds to a petition 

submitted by John Deere to delist up to 

600 tons per calendar year of F006/F019 

wastewater treatment sludge filter cake 

generated by John Deere’s wastewater 

treatment system from the list of 

hazardous wastes. 

After careful analysis and use of the 

Delisting Risk Assessment Software 

(DRAS), EPA has concluded the 

petitioned waste is not hazardous waste. 

The F006/F019 exclusion is a 

conditional exclusion for 600 cubic 

yards per year of the F006/F019 

wastewater treatment sludge. 

Accordingly, this final rule excludes 

the petitioned waste from the 

requirements of hazardous waste 

regulations under the Resource 

Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

November 25, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–R07–RCRA–2014–0452. All 

documents in the docket are listed on 

the www.regulations.gov Web site. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

e.g., CBI or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the Internet and will be publicly 


wreier-aviles on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 227 / Tuesday, November 25, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 70109 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either electronically through 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy by 

contacting the further information 

contact below. The public may copy 

material from any regulatory docket at 

no cost for the first 100 pages and at a 

cost of $0.15 per page for additional 

copies. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kenneth Herstowski, Waste 

Remediation and Permits Branch, Air 

and Waste Management Division, EPA 

Region 7, 11201 Renner Blvd., Lenexa, 

KS 66219; telephone number (913) 551– 

7631; email address: herstowski.ken@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

information in this section is organized 

as follows: 

I. Overview Information 

A. What action is EPA finalizing? 

B. Why is EPA approving this action? 

C. What are the limits of this exclusion? 

D. How will John Deere manage the waste, 

when delisted? 

E. When is the final delisting exclusion 

effective? 

F. How Does this final rule affect States? 

II. Background 

A. What is a delisting petition? 

B. What regulations allow facilities to 

delist a waste? 

C. What information must the generator 

supply? 

III. EPA’s Evaluation of the Waste 

Information and Data 

A. What waste did John Deere petition EPA 

to delist? 

B. How much waste did John Deere 

propose to delist? 

C. How did John Deere sample and analyze 

the waste data in this petition? 

IV. Public Comments Received on the 

Proposed Exclusions 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Overview Information 

A. What action is EPA finalizing? 

After evaluating the petition for John 

Deere, EPA proposed, on August 20, 

2014 (79 FR 49252), to exclude the 

waste from the lists of hazardous waste 

under section 261.31. EPA is finalizing 

the decision to grant John Deere’s 

delisting petition to have its F006/F019 

wastewater treatment sludge excluded, 

or delisted, from the definition of a 

hazardous waste, once it is disposed in 

a Subtitle D landfill. 

B. Why is EPA approving this action? 

John Deere’s petition requests a 

delisting from the F006/F019 waste 

listing under 40 CFR 260.20 and 260.22. 

John Deere does not believe that the 

petitioned waste meets the criteria for 

which EPA listed it. John Deere also 

believes no additional constituents or 

factors could cause the waste to be 

hazardous. EPA’s review of this petition 

included consideration of the original 

listing criteria, and the additional 

factors required by the Hazardous and 

Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 

(HSWA). See Section 3001(f) of RCRA, 

42 U.S.C. 6921(f), and 40 CFR 

260.22(d)(1)–(4) (hereinafter all 

sectional references are to 40 CFR 

unless otherwise indicated). In making 

the final delisting determination, EPA 

evaluated the petitioned waste against 

the listing criteria and factors cited in 

Sec. 261.11(a)(2) and (a)(3). Based on 

this review, EPA agrees with the 

petitioner that the waste is 

nonhazardous with respect to the 

original listing criteria. (If EPA had 

found, based on this review, that the 

waste remained hazardous based on the 

factors for which the waste was 

originally listed, EPA would have 

proposed to deny the petition.) EPA 

evaluated the waste with respect to 

other factors or criteria to assess 

whether there is a reasonable basis to 

believe that such additional factors 

could cause the wastes to be hazardous. 

EPA considered whether the waste is 

acutely toxic, the concentrations of the 

constituents in the waste, their tendency 

to migrate and to bioaccumulate, their 

persistence in the environment once 

released from the waste, plausible and 

specific types of management of the 

petitioned waste, the quantities of waste 

generated, and waste variability. EPA 

believes that the petitioned waste does 

not meet the listing criteria and thus 

should not be a listed waste. EPA’s final 

decision to delist the waste from John 

Deere’s facility is based on the 

information submitted in support of this 

rule, including a description of the 

waste and analytical data from the John 

Deere Des Moines, Ankeny, Iowa, 

facility. 

C. What are the limits of this exclusion? 

This exclusion applies to the waste 

described in John Deere’s petition only 

if the requirements described in 40 CFR 

part 261, appendix IX, table 1 and the 

conditions contained herein are 

satisfied. 

D. How will John Deere manage the 

waste, when delisted? 

The delisted F006/F019 wastewater 

treatment sludge will be disposed of in 

a Subtitle D landfill which is permitted, 

licensed or otherwise authorized by a 

state to manage industrial waste. 

E. When is the final delisting exclusion 

effective? 

This rule is effective November 25, 

2014. The Hazardous and Solid Waste 

Amendments of 1984 amended Section 

3010 of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6930(b)(1), 

allows rules to become effective in less 

than six months after the rule is 

published when the regulated 

community does not need the six-month 

period to come into compliance. That is 

the case here because this rule reduces, 

rather than increases, the existing 

requirements for persons generating 

hazardous waste. This reduction in 

existing requirements also provides a 

basis for making this rule effective 

immediately, upon publication, under 

the Administrative Procedure Act, 

pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d). 

F. How does this final rule affect States? 

EPA is issuing this exclusion under 

the Federal RCRA delisting program. 

Thus, upon the exclusion being 

finalized, the wastes covered will be 

removed from Subtitle C control under 

the Federal RCRA program. This will 

mean, first, that the wastes will be 

delisted in any State or territory where 

the EPA is directly administering the 

RCRA program (e.g., Iowa, Indian 

Country). However, whether the wastes 

will be delisted in states which have 

been authorized to administer the RCRA 

program will vary depending upon the 

authorization status of the States and 

the particular requirements regarding 

delisted wastes in the various states. 

Some other generally authorized 

states have not received authorization 

for delisting. Thus, the EPA makes 

delisting determinations for such states. 

However, RCRA allows states to impose 

their own regulatory requirements that 

are more stringent than EPA’s, under 

Section 3009 of RCRA. These more 

stringent requirements may include a 

provision that prohibits a Federally 

issued exclusion from taking effect in 

the state, or that requires a state 

concurrence before the Federal 

exclusion takes effect, or that allows the 

state to add conditions to any Federal 

exclusion. We urge the petitioner to 

contact the state regulatory authority in 

each state to or through which it may 

wish to ship its wastes to establish the 

status of its wastes under the state’s 

laws. 

EPA has also authorized some states 

to administer a delisting program in 

place of the Federal program, that is, to 

make state delisting decisions. In such 

states, the state delisting requirements 

operate in lieu of the Federal delisting 

requirements. Therefore, this exclusion 

does not apply in those authorized 

states unless the state makes the rule 

part of its authorized program. If John 

Deere transports the federally excluded 

waste to or manages the waste in any 

state with delisting authorization, John 


wreier-aviles on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES
70110 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 227 / Tuesday, November 25, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

Deere must obtain a delisting 

authorization from that state before it 

can manage the waste as non-hazardous 

in that state. 

II. Background 

A. What is a delisting petition? 

A delisting petition is a request from 

a generator to EPA or to an authorized 

state to exclude or delist, from the 

RCRA list of hazardous wastes, waste 

the generator believes should not be 

considered hazardous under RCRA. 

B. What regulations allow facilities to 

delist a waste? 

Under Sec. 260.20 and 260.22, 

facilities may petition EPA to remove 

their wastes from hazardous waste 

regulation by excluding them from the 

lists of hazardous wastes contained in 

Sec. 261.31 and 261.32. Specifically, 

Sec. 260.20 allows any person to 

petition the Administrator to modify or 

revoke any provision of 40 CFR parts 

260 through 265 and 268. Section 

260.22 provides generators the 

opportunity to petition the 

Administrator to exclude a waste from 

a particular generating facility from the 

hazardous waste lists. 

C. What information must the generator 

supply? 

Petitioners must provide sufficient 

information to EPA 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, the 

Administrator must determine, where 

he/she has a 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 and that 

such factors do not warrant retaining the 

waste as a hazardous waste. 

III. EPA’s Evaluation of the Waste 

Information and Data 

A. What waste did John Deere petition 

EPA to delist? 

On January 28, 2014, John Deere 

(through its consultant) petitioned EPA 

to exclude from the lists of hazardous 

waste contained in Section 261.31 and 

261.32, F006/F019 wastewater treatment 

sludge, generated from its John Deere 

Des Moines facility in Ankeny, Iowa. 

B. How much waste did John Deere 

propose to delist? 

John Deere requested that EPA grant 

an exclusion for 600 cubic yards per 

year of F006/F019 wastewater treatment 

sludge. 

C. How did John Deere sample and 

analyze the waste data in this petition? 

To support its petition, John Deere 

submitted: (1) Facility information on 

production processes and waste 

generation processes; (2) initial Filter 

Cake composite sample analytical 

results to determine constituents of 

concern (COC); and (3) Analytical 

results from six composite samples of 

Filter Cake for the COC. The initial 

sample was analyzed for EPA’s list of 

hazardous constituents in 40 CFR part 

261, Appendix VIII, pesticides, PCBs. 

The COC selected from the initial 

composite sample results are barium, 

chromium, hexavalent chromium, 

copper, lead, mercury, nickel, 

vanadium, zinc, cyanide, acetone and 

methyl ethyl ketone. Both total and 

leachable concentrations of the COC in 

the Filter Cake were determined. 

John Deere generated the sampling 

data used in the Delisting Risk 

Assessment Software (DRAS) under a 

Sampling Plan and Quality Assurance 

Project Plan (June 2012 Revision). EPA 

believes that the sampling procedures 

used by John Deere satisfy EPA’s criteria 

for collecting representative samples of 

the F006/F019 waste. 

IV. Public Comments Received on the 

Proposed Exclusions 

No comments were received during 

the comment period. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under Executive Order 12866, 

‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review’’ (58 

FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this rule is 

not of general applicability and 

therefore is not a regulatory action 

subject to review by the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB). This 

rule does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) because it 

applies to a particular facility only. 

Because this rule is of particular 

applicability relating to a particular 

facility, it is not subject to the regulatory 

flexibility provisions of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), or 

to Sections 202, 204, and 205 of the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

(UMRA) (Pub. L. 104–4). Because this 

rule will affect only a particular facility, 

it will not significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as specified in 

Section 203 of UMRA. Because this rule 

will affect only a particular facility, this 

final rule does not have Federalism 

implications. It 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, ‘‘Federalism,’’ 

(64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). Thus, 

Executive Order 13132 does not apply 

to this rule. Similarly, because this rule 

will affect only a particular facility, this 

final rule does not have tribal 

implications, as specified in Executive 

Order 13175, ‘‘Consultation and 

Coordination with Indian Tribal 

Governments’’ (65 FR 67249, November 

9, 2000). Thus, Executive Order 13175 

does not apply to this rule. This rule 

also is not subject to Executive Order 

13045, ‘‘Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety 

Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), 

because it is not economically 

significant as defined in Executive 

Order 12866, and because the Agency 

does not have reason to believe the 

environmental health or safety risks 

addressed by this action present a 

disproportionate risk to children. The 

basis for this belief is that the Agency 

used the DRAS program, which 

considers health and safety risks to 

children, to calculate the maximum 

allowable concentrations for this rule. 

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 is 

not a significant regulatory action under 

Executive Order 12866. This rule does 

not involve technical standards; thus, 

the requirements of Section 12(d) of the 

National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 

272 note) do not apply. As required by 

Section 3 of Executive Order 12988, 

‘‘Civil Justice Reform,’’ (61 FR 4729, 

February 7, 1996), in issuing this rule, 

EPA has taken the necessary steps to 

eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity, 

minimize potential litigation, and 

provide a clear legal standard for 

affected conduct. 

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. Section 804 

exempts from Section 801 the following 

types of rules (1) Rules of particular 

applicability; (2) rules relating to agency 

management or personnel; and (3) rules 

of agency organization, procedure, or 

practice that do not substantially affect 


wreier-aviles on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 227 / Tuesday, November 25, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 70111 

the rights or obligations of non-agency 

parties (5 U.S.C. 804(3)). EPA is not 

required to submit a rule report 

regarding today’s action under Section 

801 because this is a rule of particular 

applicability. Executive Order (EO) 

12898 (59 FR 7629 (Feb. 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 final 

rule will not have 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 Agency’s risk 

assessment did not identify risks from 

management of this material in a 

Subtitle D landfill. Therefore, EPA 

believes that any populations in 

proximity of the landfills used by this 

facility should not be adversely affected 

by common waste management 

practices for this delisted waste. 

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: November 11, 2014. 

Karl Brooks, 

Regional Administrator, Region 7. 

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, EPA amends 40 CFR part 261 

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. In Table 1 of Appendix IX to part 

261 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 

TABLE 1—WASTES EXCLUDED FROM NON-SPECIFIC SOURCES

Facility Address Waste description 

*******

John Deere Des Moines 

Works of Deere & 

Company.

Ankeny, IA ........ Wastewater Treatment Sludge Filter Cake (WWTS Filter Cake) (Hazardous Waste No. F006/F019) 

generated from combined onsite wastewater treatment at the Ankeny, IA, facility wastewater 

treatment plant at a maximum annual rate of 600 tons per calendar year and disposed of in a 

Subtitle D Landfill which is licensed, permitted, or otherwise authorized by a state to accept the 

delisted WWTS Filter Cake. 

John Deere must implement a testing program that meets the following conditions for the exclusion to be valid: 

1. Delisting Levels: (A) The WWTS Filter Cake shall not exhibit any of the ‘‘Characteristics of Hazardous Waste in 40 CFR 261, Subpart C. (B) All TCLP leachable concentrations (40 CFR 

261.24(a)) for the following constituents must not exceed the following levels (mg/L for TCLP): 

Arsenic—5.0; Barium—100.0; Cadmium—1.0; Chromium—5.0; Lead—5.0; Mercury 0.2; and 

Nickel—32.4. (C) EPA SW—846 Method 1313 Extraction at pH 2.88, 7 and 13 concentration of 

Chromium (hexavalent) must not exceed (mg/l) 0.087. (D) All total concentrations for the following constituents must not exceed the following levels (mg/kg): Antimony—103; Arsenic—52; 

Barium—965; Beryllium—21; Cadmium—10; Chromium (total)—22,500; Cobalt—11; Copper— 

1439; Lead—437; Nickel—1,515; Selenium—52; Silver—26; Thallium—52; Tin—68; Vanadium—380; Zinc—5,085; Mercury—1; Chromium (hexavalent)—20; Cyanide—3, Oil and 

Grease—32,250; Acetone—8; Methyl Ethyl Ketone (MEK)—0.3. 

2. Waste Handling and Holding: (A) John Deere must manage as hazardous all WWTS Filter 

Cake generated until it has completed initial verification testing described in paragraph (3)(A) 

and valid analyses show that paragraph (1) is satisfied and written approval is received from 

EPA. (B) Levels of constituents measured in the samples of the WWTS Filter Cake that do not 

(1) exceed the levels set forth in paragraph (1) for two consecutive quarterly sampling events 

are non-hazardous. After approval is received from EPA, John Deere can manage and dispose 

of the non-hazardous WWTS Filter Cake according to all applicable solid waste regulations. (C) 

Not withstanding having received the initial approval from EPA, if constituent levels in a later 

sample exceed any of the Delisting Levels set in paragraph (1), from that point forward, John 

Deere must treat all the waste covered by this exclusion as hazardous until it is demonstrated 

that the waste again meets the levels in paragraph (1). John Deere must manage and dispose 

of the waste generated under Subtitle C of RCRA from the time that it becomes aware of any 

exceedance. 


wreier-aviles on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES
70112 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 227 / Tuesday, November 25, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

TABLE 1—WASTES EXCLUDED FROM NON-SPECIFIC SOURCES—Continued 

Facility Address Waste description 

3. Verification Testing Requirements: John Deere must perform sample collection and analyses in 

accordance with the Quality Assurance Project Plan submitted with the ‘‘John Deere Des 

Moines, Iowa, Sampling and Analysis Plan for Delisting of F006 and F019 Filter Cake, June 

2012.’’ All samples shall be representative composite samples according to appropriate methods. As applicable to the method-defined parameters of concern, analyses requiring the use of 

SW–846 methods incorporated by reference in 40 CFR 260.11 must be used without substitution. As applicable, the SW–846 methods might include Methods 0010, 0011, 0020, 0023A, 

0030, 0031, 0040, 0050, 0051, 0060, 0061, 1010A, 1020B,1110A, 1310B, 1311, 1312, 1313, 

1320, 1330A, 9010C, 9012B, 9040C, 9045D, 9060A, 9070A (uses EPA Method 1664, Rev. A), 

9071B, and 9095B. Methods must meet Performance Based Measurement System Criteria in 

which the Data Quality Objectives are to demonstrate that samples of the John Deere sludge 

are representative for all constituents listed in paragraph (1). To verify that the waste does not 

exceed the specified delisting concentrations, for one year after the final exclusion is granted, 

John Deere must perform quarterly analytical testing by sampling and analyzing the WWTP 

sludge as follows: (A) Quarterly Testing: (i) Collect two representative composite samples of the 

WWTS Filter Cake at quarterly intervals after EPA grants the final exclusion. The first composite 

samples must be taken within 30 days after EPA grants the final approval. The second set of 

samples must be taken at least 30 days after the first set. (ii) Analyze the samples for all constituents listed in paragraph (1). Any waste regarding which a composite sample is taken that 

exceeds the delisting levels listed in paragraph (1) for the sludge must be disposed as hazardous waste in accordance with the applicable hazardous waste requirements from the time 

that John Deere becomes aware of any exceedance. (iii) Within thirty (30) days after taking 

each quarterly sample, John Deere will report its analytical test data to EPA. If levels of constituents measured in the samples of the sludge do not exceed the levels set forth in paragraph 

(1) of this exclusion for two consecutive quarters, and EPA concurs with those findings, John 

Deere can manage and dispose the non-hazardous sludge according to all applicable solid 

waste regulations. (B) Annual Testing: (i) If John Deere completes the quarterly testing specified 

in paragraph (3) above and no sample contains a constituent at a level which exceeds the limits 

set forth in paragraph (1), John Deere may begin annual testing as follows: John Deere must 

test two representative composite samples of the WWTS Filter Cake (following the same protocols as specified for quarterly sampling, above) for all constituents listed in paragraph (1) at 

least once per calendar year. (ii) The samples for the annual testing taken for the second and 

subsequent annual testing events shall be taken within the same calendar month as the first annual sample taken. (iii) John Deere shall submit an annual testing report to EPA with its annual 

test results, within thirty (30) days after taking each annual sample. The annual testing report 

also shall include the total amount of waste in tons disposed during the calendar year. 

4. Changes in Operating Conditions: If John Deere significantly changes the manufacturing or 

treatment process described in the petition, or the chemicals used in the manufacturing or treatment process, it must notify the EPA in writing and may no longer handle the WWTS Filter 

Cake generated from the new process as non-hazardous unless and until the WWTS Filter 

Cake is shown to meet the delisting levels set in paragraph(1), John Deere demonstrates that 

no new hazardous constituents listed in appendix VIII of part 261 have been introduced, and 

John Deere has received written approval from EPA to manage the wastes from the new process under this exclusion. While the EPA may provide written approval of certain changes, if 

there are changes that the EPA determines are highly significant, the EPA may instead require 

John Deere to file a new delisting petition. 

5. Data Submittals and Recordkeeping: John Deere must submit the information described below. 

If John Deere fails to submit the required data within the specified time or maintain the required 

records on-site for the specified time, EPA, at its discretion, will consider this sufficient basis to 

reopen the exclusion as described in paragraph (6). John Deere must: (A) Submit the data obtained through paragraph (3) to the Chief, Waste Remediation and Permits Branch, U.S. EPA 

Region 7, 11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa KS 66219, within the time specified. All supporting 

data can be submitted on CD–ROM or some comparable electronic media; (B) Compile, summarize, and maintain on site for a minimum of five years and make available for inspection 

records of operating conditions, including monthly and annual volumes of WWTS Filter Cake 

generated, analytical data, including quality control information and, copies of the notification(s) 

required in paragraph (7); (C) Submit with all data a signed copy of the certification statement in 

40 CFR 260.22(i)(12). 


wreier-aviles on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 227 / Tuesday, November 25, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 70113 

TABLE 1—WASTES EXCLUDED FROM NON-SPECIFIC SOURCES—Continued 

Facility Address Waste description 

6. Reopener: (A) If, any time after disposal of the delisted waste, John Deere possesses or is otherwise made aware of any environmental data (including but not limited to leachate data or 

groundwater monitoring data) or any other relevant data to the delisted waste indicating that any 

constituent is at a concentration in the leachate higher than the specified delisting concentration, 

then John Deere must report such data, in writing, to the Chief, Waste Remediation and Permits 

Branch, U.S. EPA Region 7, 11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa KS 66219 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, EPA 

Region 7, 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 John Deere 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 John Deere with an opportunity to present information as to why the proposed Agency 

action is not necessary or to suggest an alternative action. John Deere shall have 30 days from 

the date of the Regional Administrator’s notice to present the information. (D) If after 30 days 

John Deere presents no further information or after a review of any submitted information, 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. 

7. Notification Requirements: John Deere must do the following before transporting the delisted 

waste: (A) Provide a one-time written notification to any state Regulatory Agency to which or 

through which it will transport the delisted waste described above for disposal, 60 days before 

beginning such activities (B) Update the one-time written notification if it ships the delisted waste 

into a different disposal facility. Failure to provide this notification will result in a violation of the 

delisting petition and a possible revocation of the decision. 

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2014–27780 Filed 11–24–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Chapter I 

[WC Docket No. 10–90; DA 14–1569] 

Connect America Fund 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: In this document, the 

Wireline Competition Bureau adopts a 

specific methodology for calculating 

reasonable comparability benchmarks 

for fixed broadband services. The 

methodology the Commission adopts 

today establishes reasonable 

comparability broadband benchmarks 

that vary, depending on the supported 

service’s download and upload 

bandwidths and usage allowance. 

DATES: Effective December 26, 2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Suzanne Yelen, Telecommunications 

Access Policy Division, Wireline 

Competition Bureau at (202) 418–0626 

or TTY (202) 418–0484. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

synopsis of the Wireline Competition 

Bureau’s Report and Order in WC 

Docket No. 10–90; DA 14–1569, released 

October 29, 2014. The complete text of 

this document is available for 

inspection and copying during normal 

business hours in the FCC Reference 

Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th 

Street SW., Room CY–A257, 

Washington, DC 20554. The document 

may also be purchased from the 

Commission’s duplicating contractor, 

Best Copy and Printing, Inc. (BCPI), 445 

12th Street SW., Room CY–B402, 

Washington, DC 20554, telephone (800) 

378–3160 or (202) 863–2893, facsimile 

(202) 863–2898, or via the Internet at 

http://www.bcpiweb.com. It is also 

available on the Commission’s Web site 

at https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/ 

attachmatch/DA-14-1569A1.pdf. 

I. Introduction 

1. In this Report and Order (Order), 

the Wireline Competition Bureau 

(Bureau) adopts a specific methodology 

for calculating reasonable comparability 

benchmarks for fixed broadband 

services. In the USF/ICC Transformation 

Order, 76 FR 73830, November 29, 2011, 

the Commission required that as a 

condition of receiving high-cost 

support, eligible telecommunications 

carriers (ETCs) must offer voice and 

broadband services in supported areas 

at rates that are reasonably comparable 

to rates for similar services in urban 

areas. The methodology we adopt today 

establishes reasonable comparability 

broadband benchmarks that vary, 

depending on the supported service’s 

download and upload bandwidths and 

usage allowance. This approach 

recognizes that ETCs may choose to 

meet their broadband performance 

obligation with a service offering that 

exceeds the minimum requirements in 

one or more respects. The approach also 

is sufficiently flexible to account for any 

changes that the Commission may adopt 

regarding the required minimum 

performance characteristics. 

2. The Bureau notes that because they 

are announcing the methodology late in 

the calendar year, the results for 2014 

are illustrative and to inform parties that 

are potentially interested in bidding on 

Connect America funding for rural 

broadband experiments in the weeks 

ahead. The Bureau also will take into 

account the benchmarks published 

below when adjudicating Connect 

America Phase II challenges. The 

Bureau plans to announce the 2015 

reasonable comparability benchmarks 

for fixed broadband services when the 

Bureau completes our analysis of the 


wreier-aviles on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES