Document ID: EPA-HQ-RCRA-2010-0851-0027
Agency: epa
Document Type: Rule
Title: Land Disposal Restrictions: Site Specific Treatment Variance for Hazardous Selenium-Bearing Waste Treated by U.S. Ecology Nevada, Beatty, NV
Posted Date: 2012-08-22T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 163 (Wednesday, August 22, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 50622-50626]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-20504]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 268

[EPA-HQ-RCRA-2010-0851; FRL-9715-3]

Land Disposal Restrictions: Site-Specific Treatment Variance for 
Hazardous Selenium-Bearing Waste Treated by U.S. Ecology Nevada in 
Beatty, NV

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: EPA (or the Agency) is granting a site-specific treatment 
variance, under the Land Disposal Restrictions program, to U.S. Ecology 
Nevada in Beatty, Nevada for the treatment of a hazardous selenium-
bearing waste generated by the Owens-Brockway Glass Container Company 
in Vernon, California. The Agency has determined that the chemical 
properties of the waste generated by the Owens-Brockway Glass Container 
Corporation differ significantly from the waste used in developing the 
Land Disposal Restrictions treatment standard for selenium-bearing 
wastes, and as such cannot be treated to the specified treatment level 
of 5.7 mg/L for selenium, as measured by the Toxicity Characteristic 
Leaching Procedure (TCLP). The site-specific treatment variance 
provides an alternative treatment standard of 59 mg/L TCLP for 
selenium, with the condition that the waste-to-reagent ratio not exceed 
1:0.45.

DATES: This final rule will be effective August 22, 2012.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID 
No. EPA-HQ-RCRA-2010-0851. All documents in the docket are listed on 
the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, 
some information may not be publicly available, because for example, it 
may be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information, 
the disclosure of which is restricted by statute. Certain material, 
such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be 
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket 
materials are available either electronically through http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the RCRA Docket, EPA/DC, EPA 
West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC. The 
Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through 
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public 
Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the RCRA 
Docket is (202) 566-0270. A reasonable fee may be charged for copying 
docket materials.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For more information on this 
rulemaking, contact Jesse Miller, Materials Recovery and Waste 
Management Division, Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery (MC 
5304 P), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. 
NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone (703) 308-1180; fax (703) 308-
0522; or miller.jesse@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Does this action apply to me?

    This action applies only to U.S. Ecology Nevada located in 
Beatty, Nevada.

B. Table of Contents

I. Background

[[Page 50623]]

    A. Basis for Land Disposal Restrictions Treatment Variances
    B. Basis of the Current Selenium Treatment Standard
II. Basis for Today's Determination
III. Development of This Variance
    A. U.S. Ecology Nevada Petition
    B. Notices on Granting a Site Specific Treatment Variance to 
USEN
IV. Granting USEN a Site Specific Treatment Variance
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and 
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With 
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From 
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
    J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address 
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income 
Populations
    K. Congressional Review Act

I. Background

A. Basis for Land Disposal Restrictions Treatment Variances

    Under sections 3004(d) through (g) of the Resource Conservation and 
Recovery Act (RCRA), the land disposal of hazardous wastes is 
prohibited unless such wastes are able to meet the Land Disposal 
Restrictions (LDR) treatment standards (or treatment standards) 
established by EPA (or the Agency). Under section 3004(m) of RCRA, EPA 
is required to set ``levels or methods of treatment, if any, which 
substantially diminish the toxicity of the waste or substantially 
reduce the likelihood of migration of hazardous constituents from the 
waste so that short-term and long-term threats to human health and the 
environment are minimized.'' EPA interprets this language to authorize 
treatment standards based on the performance of the best demonstrated 
available technology (BDAT). This interpretation was upheld by the D.C. 
Circuit in Hazardous Waste Treatment Council v. EPA, 886 F. 2d 355 
(D.C. Cir. 1989).
    The Agency recognizes, however, that there may be wastes that 
cannot be treated to the levels specified in the regulations (see 40 
CFR 268.40) because an individual waste matrix or concentration can be 
substantially more difficult to treat than those wastes evaluated in 
establishing the treatment standard (51 FR 40576, November 7, 1986) 
.\1\ For such wastes, EPA has a process by which a generator or treater 
may seek a treatment variance (see 40 CFR 268.44). If granted, the 
terms of the variance establish an alternative treatment standard for 
the particular waste at issue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ According to Sec.  268.44(a)(1), a petitioner may obtain a 
site-specific variance if ``it is not physically possible to treat 
the waste to the level specified in the treatment standard, or by 
the method specified as the treatment standard. To show that this is 
the case, the petitioner must demonstrate that the physical or 
chemical properties of the waste differ significantly from waste 
analyzed in developing the treatment standard, the waste cannot be 
treated to the specified level or by the specified method.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Basis of the Current Selenium Treatment Standard

    Treatment of selenium poses special difficulties. In particular, it 
can be technically challenging to treat wastes containing selenium in 
combination with other metals e.g., cadmium, lead and/or chromium 
because of their different chemical properties and solubility curves 
(62 FR 26041, May 12, 1997).
    The current treatment standard for a waste exhibiting the toxicity 
characteristic for selenium (RCRA Hazardous Waste D010) is based upon 
the performance of stabilization on low concentration selenium wastes. 
When the Agency developed the treatment standard for selenium, EPA 
believed that wastes containing high concentrations of selenium were 
rarely generated and land disposed (59 FR 47980, September 19, 1994). 
The Agency also stated that it believed that, for most wastes 
containing high concentrations of selenium, recovery of the selenium 
would be feasible using recovery technologies currently employed by 
copper smelters and copper refining operations (Id.). The Agency 
further stated in 1994, that it did not have any performance data for 
selenium recovery, but available information indicated that some 
recovery of elemental selenium out of certain types of scrap material 
and other wastes was practiced in the United States.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Because selenium is a non-renewable resource, and because 
the wastes in question contain high selenium concentrations, EPA's 
preference would be to recover the selenium in an environmentally 
sound manner. However, based on information contained in the Mineral 
Commodity Summaries 2010 published by the U.S. Department of the 
Interior, U.S. Geological Survey, the amount of domestic production 
of secondary selenium is estimated to be very small because most of 
the materials eligible for possible secondary smelting (e.g., scrap 
xerographic and electronic materials) were exported for recovery of 
the contained selenium.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In 1994, the Agency used performance data from the stabilization of 
a mineral processing waste, that was characteristically hazardous (RCRA 
Hazardous Waste D010), to set the national treatment standard for 
selenium. At that time, we determined that this characteristically-
hazardous mineral processing waste represented the most difficult-to-
treat selenium waste. This untreated waste contained up to 700 ppm 
total selenium and 3.74 mg/L selenium, as measured by the Toxicity 
Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP). The resulting post-treatment 
levels of selenium in the TCLP leachate were between 0.154 mg/L and 
1.80 mg/L, which (after considering the range of treatment process 
variability) led to EPA establishing a national treatment standard of 
5.7 mg/L TCLP for D010 selenium nonwastewaters.\3\ In the Phase IV LDR 
final rule, the Agency determined that a treatment standard of 5.7 mg/L 
TCLP, continued to be appropriate for D010 nonwastewaters (63 FR 28556, 
May 26, 1998). The Agency also changed the universal treatment standard 
(UTS) for selenium nonwastewaters from 0.16 mg/L to 5.7 mg/L TCLP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The calculation of the LDR treatment standard was based on a 
specific method, sometimes called ``C 99,'' which has been used in 
other LDR rulemakings. This methodology seeks to account for process 
variability (including variability that may be attributed to 
sampling and analytical processes). See 63 FR 28556, May 26, 1998 
and the document, Final--Best Demonstrated Available Technology 
(BDAT) Background Document for Quality Assurance/Quality Control 
Procedures and Methodology, USEPA. October 23, 1991.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Basis for Today's Determination

    Under 40 CFR 268.44, facilities can apply for a site-specific 
treatment variance in cases where a waste that is generated under 
conditions specific to only one site cannot be treated to the specified 
LDR treatment standards. In such cases, the generator(s) or the 
treatment facility may apply to the Administrator, or to EPA's 
designated representative, (in this case the Assistant Administrator 
for Solid Waste and Emergency Response) for a site-specific variance. 
The applicant for a site-specific variance must demonstrate that, 
because the physical or chemical properties of the waste differ 
significantly from the waste analyzed in developing the treatment 
standard, the waste cannot be treated to the specified levels or by the 
specified methods. There are other grounds for obtaining variances, but 
this is the only provision relevant to this action.

[[Page 50624]]

III. Development of This Variance

A. U.S. Ecology Nevada Petition

    On September 16, 2008, U.S. Ecology Nevada (USEN) in Beatty, Nevada 
submitted a petition requesting a site-specific treatment variance from 
the LDR treatment standards for hazardous selenium-bearing waste 
generated by the Owens-Brockway Glass Container Company (Owens-
Brockway) in Vernon, California. Owens-Brockway operates a glass 
manufacturing facility that generates approximately 50 to 100 tons per 
year of electrostatic precipitator (ESP) dust requiring management as a 
hazardous waste. The ESP dust is generated by the glass furnace air 
emissions control system and is hazardous due to its high 
concentrations of leachable arsenic (RCRA Hazardous Waste D004), 
cadmium (RCRA Hazardous Waste D006), lead (RCRA Hazardous Waste D008), 
and selenium (RCRA Hazardous Waste D010). USEN submitted analytical 
data demonstrating that the chemical properties of the waste differed 
significantly from the waste analyzed in developing the LDR treatment 
standard.\4\ They also submitted data demonstrating that the waste 
could not be treated to the specified level of 5.7 mg/L TCLP for 
selenium. USEN requested an alternative treatment standard of 59 mg/L 
TCLP, which was calculated using analytical treatment data from a 
stabilization mixture of ferrous sulfate, quick lime and sodium sulfide 
flakes with a 1:0.45 waste to reagent ratio.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Total selenium concentrations in the electrostatic 
precipitator (ESP) dust generated at the Owens-Brockway facility 
range from 2,400 mg/kg to 5,700 mg/kg. The untreated waste has a 
leachable selenium concentration ranging from 228 mg/L to 440 mg/L 
TCLP. In addition, the untreated waste has a leachable arsenic 
concentration ranging from 3.3 mg/L to 8.6 mg/L TCLP, a leachable 
cadmium concentration ranging from 3.9 mg/L to 11.0 mg/L TCLP, and a 
leachable lead concentration ranging from <0.10 mg/L to 16.3 mg/L 
TCLP.
    \5\ The selenium concentrations used to calculate the 
alternative treatment standard were (in mg/L TCLP) 49.34, 51.39, 
49.39, 43.91, and 54.34. The most effective treatment recipe was 
determined using a 50 gram sample of waste where reagents were 
listed as a percent of waste sample weight. For example, 20% ferrous 
sulfate, 15% quick lime, and 10% sodium sulfide flakes would measure 
out as 10 grams of ferrous sulfate, 7.5 grams of quick lime, and 5 
grams of sodium sulfide flakes for a total of 22.5 grams of total 
reagent. The waste to reagent ratio was then calculated by dividing 
22.5 by 50 to get a waste to reagent ratios of 1:0.45.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Notices on Granting a Site Specific Treatment Variance to USEN

    On April 6, 2011, the Agency issued a Direct Final rule (76 FR 
18921) and a parallel Proposal (76 FR 19003) granting a site-specific 
treatment variance to USEN for the treatment and disposal of hazardous 
selenium-bearing waste generated by Owens-Brockway. The site-specific 
treatment variance provided for an alternative treatment standard of 59 
mg/L TCLP with the condition that the waste to reagent ratio not exceed 
1:0.45. The Agency concluded that USEN had demonstrated that the 
chemical properties of the waste generated by Owens-Brockway differed 
significantly from the waste analyzed in developing the LDR treatment 
standard, and that the waste could not be treated to the specified 
level of 5.7 mg/L TCLP for selenium, necessitating an alternative 
treatment standard.
    The Direct Final rule and the parallel Proposal also included an 
action to withdraw the site-specific treatment variance issued to 
Chemical Waste Management (CWM) in Kettleman Hills, California for this 
same waste.\6\ The Agency issued both a Direct Final and a parallel 
Proposal because EPA considered these actions to be non-controversial. 
However, EPA stated that if adverse comment was received, the Direct 
Final rule would be withdrawn and we would proceed with a subsequent 
final rule. The Agency received no comments on granting a site-specific 
treatment variance to USEN, however, one adverse comment was received 
on withdrawing the CWM variance. As a result, on May 24, 2011, the 
Direct Final rule was withdrawn (76 FR 30027). The comment can be found 
in the docket supporting this rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ EPA considered that technology-based treatment standards, 
whether adopted by generally applicable rule or through a variance 
to the generally applicable rule, serve as the measure of when 
threats posed by land disposal of the hazardous waste are 
``minimized,'' as required by RCRA section 3004(m). See 55 FR 6640 
(February 26, 1990). Thus, EPA has typically limited the standards 
adopted by a variance to a single standard. See 70 FR 44505 (August 
3, 2005). We continued this practice by issuing a Direct Final rule 
and parallel Proposal to withdraw the current variance granted to 
CWM (69 FR 6567, February 11, 2004), determining that the treatment 
standard issued to CWM is less stringent than the standard we would 
be granting, both with respect to potential concentrations of 
selenium released to the environment and also the waste to reagent 
ratios.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA is not taking action on the proposal to withdraw the existing 
site-specific treatment variance granted to CWM. EPA has authorized the 
State of California to grant and administer site-specific treatment 
variances under 40 CFR 268.44. [See 75 FR at 60401 (September 10, 
2010)]. As a result, California now has sole authority to deal with 
issues pertaining to treatment variances for entities within its 
borders, including whether to withdraw the treatment variance to CWM 
for Owens-Brockway selenium-bearing waste, and any other issues related 
to that treatment variance.\7\ Necessarily, therefore, EPA is not 
responding to any of the comments submitted on this issue, since all 
comments pertain to issues within the scope of the authorized 
California program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ It should be noted that EPA is making a conforming change to 
footnote 7 of the table in section 40 CFR 268.44. The footnote 
originally read, ``D010 wastes generated by these two facilities 
must be treated by Chemical Waste Management, Inc. at their 
Kettleman Hills facility in Kettleman City, California.'' The two 
facilities referred to Owens-Brockway and a second facility, St. 
Gobain Containers, El Monte, CA, that also has an existing variance 
for selenium waste. The footnote now reads, ``D010 wastes generated 
by this facility must be treated by Chemical Waste Management, Inc. 
at its Kettleman Hills facility in Kettleman City, California.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Granting USEN a Site-Specific Treatment Variance

    EPA is promulgating, as proposed, a site-specific treatment 
variance, from the LDR treatment standards, for hazardous selenium 
bearing waste generated by Owens-Brockway and managed by USEN of 
Beatty, Nevada. With the information provided to the Agency as part of 
their petition, EPA has concluded that the chemical properties of Owen-
Brockway's selenium-bearing waste differ significantly from the waste 
used in developing the LDR treatment standard and that the generated 
waste cannot be treated to the specified treatment level of 5.7 mg/L 
TCLP. The site-specific treatment variance provides an alternative 
treatment standard of 59 mg/L for selenium with the condition that the 
waste to reagent ratio not exceed 1:0.45 when the waste is treated and 
disposed at USEN's permitted hazardous waste facility. The Agency 
received no comments disagreeing with the Agency's proposal.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive 
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the 
terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and is 
therefore not subject to review under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 
(76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011).

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose any new information collection burden. 
This action grants a site-specific treatment variance to USEN for the 
treatment of hazardous selenium-bearing waste generated by Owens-
Brockway under RCRA's LDR program. The Office of

[[Page 50625]]

Management and Budget (OMB) has previously approved the information 
collection requirements contained in the existing regulations at 40 CFR 
268.42 and .44 under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 
U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and has assigned OMB control number 2050-0085. The 
OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 
CFR part 9.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency 
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to 
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative 
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the Agency certifies that the 
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses, 
small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.
    This site-specific treatment variance does not create any new 
requirements. Rather, it establishes an alternative treatment standard 
for a specific waste that applies to only one facility, USEN located in 
Beatty, Nevada. Therefore, we hereby certify that this rule will not 
add any new regulatory requirements to small entities. This rule, 
therefore, does not require a regulatory flexibility analysis.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    This action contains no Federal mandates under the provisions of 
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C. 
1531-1538 for State, local, or tribal governments or the private 
sector. This action imposes no enforceable duty on any State, local or 
tribal governments or the private sector. This action would not impose 
any new duties on the states hazardous waste program. EPA has 
determined, therefore, that this rule would not contain regulatory 
requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small 
governments in that the authority for this action exists with the 
Federal government. Therefore, this action is not subject to the 
requirements of sections 202 or 205 of the UMRA.
    This rule is also not subject to the requirements of section 203 of 
UMRA because it contains no regulatory requirements that might 
significantly or uniquely affect small governments.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. This rule 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. This action grants a site-
specific treatment variance applicable to one facility. Thus, Executive 
Order 13132 would not apply to this action.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian 
Tribal Governments

    This action would not have tribal implications, as specified in 
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action is a 
site-specific treatment variance that applies to only one facility, 
which is not a tribal facility or located on tribal lands. Thus, 
Executive Order 13175 would not apply to this action.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) 
as applying only to those regulatory actions that are based on health 
or safety risks, such that the analysis required under section 5-501 of 
the Executive Order has the potential to influence the regulation. This 
action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it would not 
establish an environmental standard intended to mitigate health or 
safety risks.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

    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 would 
not be a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law 104-113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) 
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory 
activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or 
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical 
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling 
procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by 
voluntary consensus standards bodies. NTTAA directs EPA to provide 
Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use 
available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
    This action does not involve technical standards. Therefore, EPA 
did not consider the use of any voluntary consensus standards.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental 
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 (February 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 rule will not have a 
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 site-specific treatment variance being finalized 
applies to a selenium bearing waste that will be treated and disposed 
in an existing, permitted RCRA facility, ensuring protection to human 
health and the environment. Therefore, the rule will not result in any 
disproportionately negative impacts on minority or low-income 
communities relative to affluent or non-minority communities.

K. Congressional Review Act

    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. EPA will submit a report containing this rule, when 
finalized, and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. 
House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United 
States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A 
Major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in 
the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 
5 U.S.C. 804(2).

[[Page 50626]]

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 268

    Environmental Protection, Hazardous Waste, and Variances.

    Dated: August 10, 2012.
Mathy Stanislaus,
Assistant Administrator, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
    For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I of the 
Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 268--LAND DISPOSAL RESTRICTIONS

0
1. The authority citation for part 268 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), 6921, and 6924.

0
2. In Sec.  268.44, the table in paragraph (o) is amended as follows:
0
a. By revising the existing entry for ``Owens Brockway Glass Container 
Company, Vernon, CA.''
0
b. By adding in alphabetical order an additional entry for ``Owens 
Brockway Glass Container Company, Vernon, CA.''
0
c. Republishing the entry for ``St. Gobain Containers, El Monte, CA.''
0
d. By revising footnote 7.
0
e. By adding a new footnote 15.
0
f. By adding a new footnote 16.
    The revisions and additions read as follows:

Sec.  268.44  Variance from a treatment standard.

* * * * *
    (o) * * *

                                         Table--Wastes Excluded From the Treatment Standards under Sec.   268.40
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                  Wastewaters                      Nonwastewaters
                                                                        Regulated    -------------------------------------------------------------------
 Facility name\1\ and address   Waste  code         See also            hazardous                                           Concentration (mg/
                                                                       constituent    Concentration (mg/L)      Notes               kg)           Notes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                                      * * * * * * *
Owens Brockway Glass           D010           Standards under Sec.  Selenium........  NA..................  NA...........  51 mg/L TCLP........   (\15\)
 Container Company, Vernon,                      268.40.
 CA \6\.
Owens Brockway Glass           D010           Standards under Sec.  Selenium........  NA..................  NA...........  59 mg/L TCLP........   (\16\)
 Container Company, Vernon,                      268.40.
 CA \6\.
 
                                                                      * * * * * * *
St. Gobain Containers, El      D010           Standards under Sec.  Selenium........  NA..................  NA...........  25 mg/L TCLP........       NA
 Monte, CA5 7.                                   268.40.
 
                                                                      * * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ A facility may certify compliance with these treatment standards according to provisions in 40 CFR 268.7.
 
 * * * * * * *
\5\ Alternative D010 selenium standard only applies to dry scrubber solid from glass manufacturing wastes.
\6\ Alternative D010 selenium standard only applies to electrostatic precipitator dust generated during glass manufacturing operations.
\7\ D010 wastes generated by this facility must be treated by Chemical Waste Management, Inc. at its Kettleman Hills facility in Kettleman City,
  California.
 
 * * * * * * *
\15\ This alternative standard applies only to D010 wastes generated by this facility and treated by Chemical Waste Management, Inc. at its Kettleman
  Hills facility in Kettleman City, California.
\16\ This alternative standard applies only to D010 wastes generated by this facility and treated by U.S. Ecology Nevada at its facility in Beatty,
  Nevada. This alternative treatment standard is conditioned on the waste-to-reagent ratio not exceeding 1 to 0.45.

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2012-20504 Filed 8-21-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P