Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 78 /Thursday, April 23, 1998 / Notices 20187

1The Antifreeze Coalition is a group of trade

associations representing antifreeze manufacturers,

suppliers, distributors, recyclers, and businesses

that service motor vehicle cooling systems. Most of

these trade associations predominantly represent

small businesses.

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[FRL–6003–3]

Request for Comment on Proposed

Statement of Policy Regarding Spent

Antifreeze

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Request for Comment on

Proposed Statement of Policy.

SUMMARY: EPA is currently considering

issuing a statement announcing that

data available to the Agency indicates

that spent antifreeze rarely fails the

Toxicity Characteristic Leaching

Procedure (TCLP) test. The TCLP is

used for determining whether or not a

secondary material that is a solid waste

is subject to regulation as a hazardous

waste by virtue of exhibiting a ‘‘toxicity

characteristic’’ (TC). The purpose of

such a statement and any supporting

information would be to assist

generators in determining whether their

spent antifreeze exhibits a hazardous

waste characteristic. In today’s notice,

EPA is providing the data and

qualitative information that we would

use to support such a finding. The

public has 60 days from publication of

this notice to comment on whether it is

appropriate to issue this statement given

the available data.

DATES: Comments are due by June 22,

1998.

ADDRESSES: Commenters must send an

original and two copies of their

comments referencing docket number

F–98–SAFA–FFFFF to: RCRA Docket

Information Center, Office of Solid

Waste (5305G), U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency Headquarters (EPA,

HQ), 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC

20460. Hand deliveries of comments

should be made to the Arlington, VA,

address listed below. Comments may

also be submitted electronically by

sending electronic mail through the

Internet to: rcradocket@epamail.epa.gov. Comments in

electronic format should also be

identified by the docket number F–98–

SAFA–FFFFF. All electronic comments

must be submitted as an ASCII file

avoiding the use of special characters

and any form of encryption.

Commenters should not submit

electronically any confidential business

information (CBI). An original and two

copies of CBI must be submitted under

separate cover to: RCRA CBI Document

Control Officer, Office of Solid Waste

(5305W), U.S. EPA, 401 M Street, SW,

Washington, DC 20460.

Public comments and supporting

materials are available for viewing in

the RCRA Information Center (RIC),

located at Crystal Gateway I, First Floor,

1235 Jefferson Davis Highway,

Arlington, VA. The RIC is open from 9

a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,

excluding federal holidays. To review

docket materials, it is recommended

that the public make an appointment by

calling (703) 603–9230. The public may

copy a maximum of 100 pages from any

regulatory docket at no charge.

Additional copies cost $0.15/page.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For

general information, contact the RCRA

Hotline at (800) 424–9346 or TDD (800)

553–7672 (hearing impaired). In the

Washington, DC, metropolitan area, call

(703) 412–9810 or TDD 703 412–3323.

For information on specific aspects of

the supporting materials in the docket,

contact Stephen A. Bergman, Office of

Solid Waste (5304W), U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, 401

M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460,

(703) 308–7262,

bergman.stephen@epamail.epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This

notice is also available in electronic

format on the Internet. Follow these

instructions to access the notice.

WWW: http://www.epa.gov/osw/

hazwaste.htm#id

FTP: ftp.epa.gov

Login: anonymous

Password: your Internet address

Files are located in /pub/epaoswer

The official record for this action will

be kept in paper form. Accordingly, EPA

will transfer all comments received

electronically into paper form and place

them in the official record, which will

also include all comments submitted

directly in writing. The official record is

the paper record maintained at the

address in ADDRESSES at the beginning

of this document.

EPA responses to comments, whether

the comments are written or electronic,

will be in a notice in the Federal

Register or in a response to comments

document placed in the official record

for this notice. EPA will not

immediately reply to commenters

electronically other than to seek

clarification of electronic comments that

may be garbled in transmission or

during conversion to paper form.

Potential Policy

In 1995, the Antifreeze Coalition 1

requested that EPA, by rule,

categorically exclude used antifreeze

from either the definition of solid waste

or the definition of hazardous waste.

The Coalition argued that such a

determination is justified by the

diminimis potential for spent antifreeze

to pose a hazard to the environment and

that it would significantly encourage

greater recycling of spent antifreeze. As

part of its effort to demonstrate to the

Agency that it is inappropriate to

regulate spent antifreeze as a hazardous

waste under RCRA, the Coalition has

provided the Office of Solid Waste

(OSW) with both quantitative and

qualitative information indicating that

spent antifreeze rarely fails the TC for

lead. The Coalition also has provided

information on various changes in

radiator technology that greatly reduce

the chance that spent antifreeze would

fail the TC for lead. The Coalition

believes that the available data supports

this conclusion.

Spent antifreeze that does not fail the

TC for lead would not be regulated by

EPA as a hazardous waste. This would

be true unless some other constituent of

concern is present that is not normally

found in spent antifreeze or some other

factor causes the spent antifreeze to

meet the definition of hazardous waste.

OSW has reviewed all of the existing

data submitted to EPA in order to make

a determination as to whether spent

antifreeze fails the TCLP for lead and

therefore meets the RCRA definition of

hazardous waste. Of course, states

authorized to implement the RCRA

program may be more stringent than the

federal program and therefore may

regulate spent antifreeze as a hazardous

waste even if it does not fail the TCLP

for lead.

Although the Antifreeze Coalition has

requested that EPA exclude spent

antifreeze from the definition of solid

waste or the definition of hazardous

waste by rule, the Agency is not

convinced that the expenditure of

resources and time on a rulemaking is

appropriate or necessary in this case.

EPA believes that a statement of policy

should be sufficient to address

questions regarding the status of spent

antifreeze. Based upon our review of the

data in the docket, OSW has determined

that it is appropriate to issue a statement

announcing that data available to EPA

indicate that spent antifreeze rarely fails

the TC for lead. The information

provided by the Antifreeze Coalition

also indicates a trend away from the use

of lead in the manufacture of radiators,

thus decreasing the chance in the future

that lead will be present in spent

antifreeze at levels that would render

the antifreeze hazardous.

The effect of an EPA statement on this

issue (unless EPA receives comment on
20188 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 78 /Thursday, April 23, 1998 / Notices

this notice that convinces us that our

present evaluation is incorrect) would

be to assist the industry in making a

determination (as is required under 40

CFR 262.11(c)), on whether the spent

antifreeze it generates exhibits a

hazardous waste characteristic. Under

§ 262.11(c) the generator may either test

the waste or rely upon its knowledge of

the waste in light of the materials or

processes used to make a determination

as to whether it meets the definition of

a hazardous waste. EPA’s statement on

this issue would assist the generators by

directing them to a compilation of data

which they could rely on or give weight

to when making their hazardous waste

determination. Although EPA believes

that generators will find that spent

antifreeze rarely fails the TC for lead

and is therefore not a hazardous waste,

there may be factors (e.g., spent

antifreeze from an old vehicle that has

not had the antifreeze changed for many

years) known to the generator that

increase the likelihood that a particular

sample may be more likely to fail the TC

than the spent antifreeze that is

typically generated. The generator is

responsible for taking such factors into

account. Of course, a statement by EPA

that antifreeze rarely fails the TC would

not absolve generators of spent

antifreeze from their obligation to make

a correct § 262.11(c) determination.

The Agency is seeking comment on

whether the information we are

providing today supports a claim that

spent antifreeze rarely fails the TC for

lead. We are also seeking any additional

data on the composition of spent

antifreeze, particularly as they pertain to

lead content. EPA is also seeking

comment on whether we have properly

limited the scope of our evaluation to

the presence of lead in spent antifreeze,

or whether there are other constituents

of concern commonly present in spent

antifreeze that would render it a

hazardous waste under RCRA. Finally,

the Agency solicits information on

changes in automotive radiator

manufacture that reduce or eliminate

concerns about lead.

The information in the docket for

today’s notice falls into three main

categories. The first of these is the TCLP

data. We have included raw data

submitted to the Agency by both SafetyKleen and the Dames & Moore antifreeze

study (conducted for the New Jersey

Automobile Dealers Association). The

raw data were organized and analyzed

by Science Applications International

Corporation (SAIC), an EPA contractor.

The July 22, 1997 SAIC report in the

docket is an analysis of the data

contained in today’s notice. The two

spreadsheets of data that were prepared

by SAIC and used to draft their report

are also included. One contains raw

data with no calculations. The other is

sorted by constituent and concentration

value. The Antifreeze Coalition also

provided a summary and discussion of

the data evaluated in the SAIC report

and included in the docket for this

notice. In addition to the data from

Safety-Kleen, we have included a

number of letters from Safety-Kleen and

others that endeavor to put the data in

its proper context. The Dames & Moore

report, which concluded based on its

data that ‘‘antifreeze analyses indicate

that antifreeze collected directly from

automobiles lacks the characteristics of

a hazardous waste,’’ (p.7) is also

included in the data portion of the

documents placed in the docket for

today’s notice. The report represents a

cross-section of the antifreeze used in

automobiles. Spent antifreeze was

collected from a variety of dealerships,

including large, multi-brand

dealerships. Based on consultations

with the New Jersey Department of

Environmental Protection and Energy,

nine dealerships were chosen to

participate in the study.

In addition to the TCLP data and

analyses, the docket includes qualitative

information provided to EPA by the

Antifreeze Coalition. These documents

include information on radiator

technology and on the manner in which

spent antifreeze is managed. Included in

this category are the ‘‘Voluntary

Management Standards for Used

Antifreeze Generator Facilities’’

prepared by the Antifreeze Coalition.

Although not legally binding, these are

practices that the Coalition supports to

promote the environmentally sound

recycling of spent antifreeze. Although

this document does address whether

spent antifreeze fails the TC for lead, it

is useful as background material to

anyone desiring a broader

understanding of how this material is

managed and the industry’s efforts to

promote environmentally sound

recycling. EPA strongly supports

environmental sound recycling as the

preferred method for managing spent

antifreeze.

The Antifreeze Coalition documents

also contain considerable information

concerning changes in the manufacture

of radiators. As stated above, EPA

believes the trends in radiator

manufacturing substantially diminish

the likelihood that spent antifreeze will

contain lead in levels that would fail the

TC.

Documents pertaining to ethylene

glycol comprise the third category into

which the documents in the docket for

today’s notice fall. These are assorted

letters and memoranda pertaining to

whether or not there is a risk posed by

ethylene glycol. There is also general

discussion of the regulation of ethylene

glycol-based antifreeze which, although

not relevant to whether spent antifreeze

fails the TC, may be useful as

background information on the

properties of spent antifreeze.

OSW will evaluate and thoroughly

consider all of the comments we receive

on this notice during the 60 day

comment period prior to making a final

decision on this issue.

Dated: April 9, 1998.

Matt Hale,

Acting Director, Office of Solid Waste.

[FR Doc. 98–10865 Filed 4–22–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[FRL–6001–5]

National Environmental Justice

Advisory Council; Notification of

Meeting and Public Comment

Period(s); Open Meetings

Pursuant to the Federal Advisory

Committee Act (FACA), Public Law 92–

463, we now give notice that the

National Environmental Justice

Advisory Council (NEJAC) along with

the subcommittees will meet on the

dates and times described below. All

times noted are Pacific Daylight Time.

All meetings are open to the public. Due

to limited space, seating at the NEJAC

meeting will be on a first-come basis.

Documents that are the subject of

NEJAC reviews are normally available

from the originating EPA office and are

not available from the NEJAC. The

NEJAC and subcommittee meetings will

take place at the Oakland Marriott City

Center, 1001 Broadway, Oakland,

California 94607, phone: 510/451–4000.

The meeting dates are May 31, 1998

through June 3, 1998.

The NEJAC meeeting will begin

Sunday, May 31 with a bus tour of local

environmental justice sites and a

community poster session from 12:00

p.m. to 4:30 p.m. Public comment

periods are scheduled for Sunday, May

31 from 6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. and

Monday, June 1 from 1:30 p.m. to 4:30

p.m., and 6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. The full

NEJAC will convene Monday, June 1

from 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m., and on

Wednesday, June 3 from 9:00 a.m. to

6:00 p.m. to follow-up on pending items

from the previous NEJAC meeting, to

discuss the creation of the new Air and

Water Subcommittee, and to address

several new business interest items. The