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
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 78 /Thursday, April 23, 1998 / Notices 20189

subcommittees of the NEJAC will meet

Tuesday, June 2 from 8:30 a.m. to 6:30

p.m. Any member of the public wishing

additional information on the

subcommittee meetings should contact

the specific Designated Federal Official

at the telephone number listed below.

SubcommitteeFederal official and telephone

No.

Enforcement.Ms. Sherry Milan –202/564–

2619.

Health and

Research.

Mr. Lawrence Martin –202/564–

6497.

Ms. Carol Christensen –202/

260–2301.

International.Ms. Wendy Graham –202/564–

6602.

Indigenous

Peoples.

Mr. Danny Gogal –202/564–

2576.

Public Participation.Ms. Renee Goins –202/564–

2598.

Waste/Facility

Siting.

Mr. Kent Benjamin –202/260–

2822.

Members of the public who wish to

present materials during the community

poster session or participate in one of

the public comment periods should

register to do so by May 1. Individuals

or groups making oral presentations

during the public comment period will

be limited to a total time of five

minutes. If you wish to submit written

comments of any length (at least 50

copies), they should also be received by

May 1. Comments received after that

date will be provided to the Council as

logistics allow. Correspondence

concerning comments, poster sessions,

or registration should be sent to Tama

Clare of Tetra Tech Environmental

Management, Inc. at: 1593 Spring Hill

Road, Suite 300, Vienna, VA 21882,

phone: 703/287–8880 or fax: 703/287–

8843. Hearing impaired individuals or

non-English speaking attendees wishing

to arrange for a sign language or foreign

language interpreter, may make

appropriate arrangements using these

numbers also. In addition, NEJAC offers

a toll-free Registration Hotline at 888/

335–4299. For on-line registration, you

may visit the internet site: http://

www.ttemi.com.nejac.

Dated: April 15, 1998.

Linda K. Smith,

Acting Designated Federal Official, National

Environmental Justice Advisory Council.

[FR Doc. 98–10859 Filed 4–22–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[TRL–6000–7]

Clean Water Act Class II: Proposed

Administrative Penalty Assessment

and Opportunity To Comment

Regarding City of Manhattan, KS

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (‘‘EPA’’).

ACTION: Notice of proposed

sdministrative penalty sssessment and

opportunity to comment regarding City

of Manhattan, Kansas.

SUMMARY: EPA is providing notice of

opportunity to comment on the

proposed assessment.

Under 33 U.S.C. 1319(g), EPA is

authorized to issue orders assessing

civil penalties for various violations of

the Act. EPA may issue such orders after

filing a Complaint commencing either a

Class I or Class II penalty proceeding.

EPA provides public notice of the

proposed assessment pursuant to 33

U.S.C. 1319(g).

Class II proceedings are conducted

under EPA’s Consolidated Rules of

Practice Governing the Administrative

Assessment of Civil Penalties and the

Revocation or Suspension of Permits, 40

CFR Part 22. The procedures by which

the public may submit written comment

on a proposed Class II order or

participate in a Class II proceeding, and

the procedures by which a respondent

may request a hearing, are set forth in

the Consolidated Rules. The deadline

for submitting public comment on a

proposed Class II order is thirty (30)

days after issuance of public notice.

On April 1, 1998, EPA commenced

the following Class II proceeding for the

assessment of penalties by filing with

the Regional Hearing Clerk, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region VII, 726 Minnesota Avenue,

Kansas City, Kansas 66101, (913) 551–

7630, the following complaint:

In the Matter of, the City of

Manhattan, Kansas; CWA Docket No.

VII–98–W–0015.

The Complaint proposes a penalty of

One Hundred Thirty-Seven Thousand

Five Hundred Dollars ($137,500) for

failure to comply with certain

requirements of the sludge program,

including monitoring, recordkeeping,

reporting and application limitations in

violation of Section 405 of the Clean

Water Act.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Persons wishing to receive a copy of

EPA’s Consolidated Rules, review the

Complaint or other documents filed in

this proceeding, comment upon the

proposed penalty assessment, or

otherwise participate in the proceeding

should contact the Regional Hearing

Clerk identified above.

The administrative record for the

proceeding is located in the EPA

Regional Office at the address stated

above, and the file will be open for

public inspection during normal

business hours. All information

submitted by the City of Manhattan,

Kansas is available as part of the

administrative record subject to

provisions of law restricting public

disclosure of confidential information.

In order to provide opportunity for

public comment, EPA will issue no final

order assessing a penalty in this

proceeding prior to thirty (30) days from

the date of this notice.

Dated: April 7, 1998.

William Rice,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region VII.

[FR Doc. 98–10719 Filed 4–22–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–M

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[FRL–6001–6]

Proposed Administrative Penalty

Assessment and Opportunity to

Comment

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Notice of proposed assessment

of Clean Water Act Class I

Administrative Penalty and opportunity

to comment.

SUMMARY: EPA is providing notice of a

proposed administrative penalty for

alleged violations of the Clean Water

Act. EPA is also providing notice of

opportunity to comment on the

proposed penalty.

EPA is authorized under section

309(g) of the Act, 33 U.S.C. 1319(g), to

assess a civil penalty after providing the

person subject to the penalty notice of

the proposed penalty and the

opportunity for a hearing, and after

providing interested persons notice of

the proposed penalty and a reasonable

opportunity to comment on its issuance.

Under section 309(g), any person who

without authorization discharges a

pollutant to a navigable water, as those

terms are defined in section 502 of the

Act, 33 U.S.C. 1362, may be assessed a

penalty in a ‘‘Class I’’ administrative

penalty proceeding. Class I proceedings

under section 309(g) are conducted in

accordance with the proposed

Consolidated Rules of Practice

Governing the Administrative