ILLINOIS
POLLUTION
CONTROL
BOARD
June
30,
1988
IN THE MATTER OF:
PETITION
OF ENVIRITE CORPORATION
)
R87—30
ADOPTED
RULE.
FINAL ORDER
OPINION
AND ORDER OF THE BOARD
(by
B.
Forcade):
This matter comes before the Board
on the August 17,
1987
petition for rulemaking
of Envirite Corporation
(hereinafter
“Envirite”).
That petition sought the addition
of certain
language
to Table A and Table
B of Appendix
I of 35
Ill.
Adm.
Code
721
that would effectively “delist,”
or exclude,
certain
wastes defined
as “hazardous wastes”
under Sections 721.103,
721.131,
and 721.132
of the Board’s
Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act
(hereinafter
“RCRA”)
rules.
See
35 Iii.
Adm.
Code
702.110
& 720.110
(1988).
The federal
rule upon which
it
is
based was adopted
by the United Stated Environmental Protection
Agency
(hereinafter “USEPA”) on November
14,
1986.
51 Fed.
Reg.
41,323
(Nov.
14, 1986).
The Board adopted
the proposed
rule and
published
it
for public comment by
its Opinion and Order of
January
7,
1988.
See
Ill.
Rev.
Stat.
ch.
111—1/2, par.
1022.4
&
ch.
127,
par.
1005.01(a)
(1988).
The
text of
the proposed rule
appeared
in Volume
12,
Issue
6 of the Illinois Register
at page
3211
on February
5,
1988.
The statutory
first notice public comment period ended
on
March
21,
1988,
but the Board delayed
this present action pending
the comments of USEPA
(May
4,
1988)
and the Illinois
Environmental Protection Agency
(June
13,
1988; hereinafter
“Agency”).
The Board
also received public comments from Envirite
(February
2,
1988)
and the negative declaration of the Department
of Commerce and Community Affairs
(March
29,
1988).
See
Ill.
Rev.
Stat.
ch.
127,
par.
1004.03
(1988).
The Board now considers
these public comments and adopts the final
rule with certain non—
substantive revisions from the rule as originally proposed and
published
in the Illinois Register.
I.
Public Comments on the Proposed Rule
The Board
invited comments as
to certain aspects
of
the
proposed rule by its January 7,
1988 Opinion and Order.
Discussion
of
the comments received to each
of the five inquiries
and the general comments
follows.
The first
inquiry related
to Condition No.
4 of Tables A and
B.
It requested comment as
to how the Board should reference the
“priority pollutant
list” published
in the Federal Register
at
4?
90—665
—2—
Fed.
Reg.
52,309
(Nov.
19,
1982).
The first option
is
for
the
Board
to use the current language
of
the proposed
rule,
“the
remaining organics on the priority pollutant
list.
(See
47 FR
52309 November 19,
1982,
for
a list
of
the priority
pollutants.)”
The other option
is
to delete the referential
parenthetical and amend Section 720.111
of the RCRA rules
to
define “priority pollutant
list”
as
“the list
of pollutants
defined
by USEPA as
‘priority pollutants’
at
47
Fed.
Reg.
52.309
(Nov.
19,
1982).
.
The comments received support
the first option as
it appears
in
the proposed
rule.
USEPA believes that either option
is
acceptable.
Envirite pointed out that amendment
of Section
720.111
to
exercise the second option would require additional
time
for second first notice republication of
an amended proposed
rule
in the Illinois Register.
Although the Board agrees that
such delay
is undesirable,
it does not
agree with
Envirite’s
implied conclusion that
the delay would
“create
a potential
for
inconsistent
state and federal requirements”
as such might
present
a problem
for the state’s RCRA program.
The Board agrees
that updating
the reference
to the priority pollutant
list
to
reflect any future federal revisions
is facilitated
if the Board
retains
the federal
language, which currently appears
in the rule
as proposed.
The Agency’s comments support
this conclusion
that
retaining
the proposed language would provide
“an appropriate and
flexible mechanism”
to minimize any future delay
in amending the
state
reference
to reflect federal revisions.
The proposed language
is supported by the public comments
received.
The Board, however, will modify the citation format.
The second,
third, and fourth Board inquiries regarded
certain changes
from the federal language proposed by Envirite
to
Condition No.
5.
The condition relates
to the retention
of
monitoring
data and withdrawal
or modification of
the
exclusion.
These non—substantive
changes attempted
to comport
the language of the federal
rule to the state system and
to
clarify the direction
in which certain actions
are directed.
They included
a provision for prompt notice
to the Board
if USEPA
should decide
to modify or withdraw the exclusion.
The second
inquiry
requested comment whether data submissions should be made
to
(JSEPA,
to the Agency,
or
to both.
The third inquiry invited
comment
as
to whether
the state,
tJSEPA or both had authority
to
modify or withdraw
the exclusion.
The fourth questioned whether
USEPA should notify the Agency,
the Board,
or both
if
it decides
to modify
or withdraw the exclusion.
The comments responding
to the second
inquiry indicate that
the Board does not need
to amend
the proposed
language that would
require Envirite
to maintain monitoring data
at
its facility and
periodically summarize
and submit
it
to USEPA.
USEPA generally
comments
that the proposed
language
is consistent with the
90—666
—3—
federal
language7 but more specifically,
that Envirite should
forward
the data summaries
to both USEPA
and the Agency.
Envirite comments that although
it
is willing
to submit the
summaries
to the Agency,
this
is not necessary, and the rule
should not require
it.
The original delisting action was
federal,
so the Board
lacks authority
to modify or withdraw that
rule.
The Board could only modify or withdraw the state
counterpart,
and
it
is possibly most expedient
to do so
in
response to
a similar
federal action.
The Agency has not
commented
that
the Board should modify the proposed
rule
so that
it would
require submittal
of the monitoring data and summaries
to the Agency,
and the Board believes such a modification
is
unwarranted.
The Board will not modify the proposed rule
in this
regard.
The comments on the
third inquiry also indicate no need for
revision of the proposed
rule
as
it would relate
to
the authority
to withdraw
or modify the exclusion.
USEPA comments
that
the
Board may withdraw or modify
its exclusion
so
long
as the
resulting rule
is equivalent
to
or more stringent than
the
federal
rule.
Envirite reiterates
this position with
the added
comment
that increased stringency might produce inconsistency
with the federal RCRA program.
The Agency makes no direct
comment in this regard.
The Board has already observed that such
“inconsistency” would present
no problem
for the state RCRA
program.
However,
the Board sees
no reason
to revise
the
language of Condition No.
5 regarding USEPA modification or
withdrawal
of
the exclusion to make explicit the Board’s
authority to modify or withdraw
its version.
Minor
change to Condition No.
5
is justified by comments
responding
to
the fourth inquiry relating
to notice
of a
federal
action to modify
or withdraw the federal exclusion.
USEPA
comments that upon federal withdrawal
or modification, the Board
must follow through
to maintain its equivalency with the federal
system.
USEPA felt
it appropriate
that
it notify the Board and
the Agency when
it withdraws or modifies the federal exclusion.
Envirite points out that any federal action would result
in
Federal Register publication of
the revision,
but the Board has
no authority
to compel direct notice from USEPA.
Envirite states
that
it added
language
to Condition No.
5 in
the proposed rule
that would require Envirite notice
to the Board:
“Should USEPA
propose
to modify or withdraw the exclusion, notice thereof shall
be provided promptly
to the Board.”
The Agency would render
this
more explicit by adding the words,
“by Envirite,”
after
the word,
“provided,”
The Board adopts
the Agency proposal
to clarify
Envirite’s
intent,
with only minor, non—substantive grammatical
modification.
The above—quoted portion
of Condition No.
5 shall
appear
in both Table
A and Table B as
follows:
“Should USEPA
propose
to modify or withdraw the exclusion, Envirite shall
promptly provide notice thereof
to the Board.”
90—667
—4—
The comments received
in response
to inquiry
five also
prompt non-substantive modification
of the proposed
rule.
Condition No
3
in Table A reads
in part,
“phenol exceeds 1.566
ppm,” whereas Condition No.
3
in Table B reads
in parallel part,
‘‘phenol
exceeds
1566 ppm.”
The comments are unanimous:
Condition No.
3 should read
in both tables
in significant
part,
“phenol exceeds
1,566 ppm.”
The Board will therefore modify both
tables
to adopt
this corrected language.
No additional comments would modify any other
portion of the
proposed rule.
Envirite and
the Agency are generally supportive
of the rule.
USEPA finds
it acceptable.
The Board
agrees.
However,
the Board will unilaterally
adopt
a small number
of
corrections
to typographic
and stylistic errors
in the proposed
rule.
These unilateral Board changes
are
to the language
as
originally proposed by Envirite,
which
the Board
originally
adopted as
a proposed rule without revision.
Correction
of the typographic and stylistic errors does not
effect a substantive change
in the language
of the proposed
rule.
The words,
“Dewatered waste water
sludges,”
in
the main
body of
the exclusion
in Table
A sould have
read,
“Dewatered
wastewater sludges,”
so
the Board adopts this change
to comport
with the language
of the federal
rule.
The words,
“Spent pickel
liquor,”
in the main body of the exclusion
in Table
B should have
read,
“Spent pickle
liquor,” so
this change
is similarly
adopted.
Similarly,
the portion reading “selenium,
silver,
mercury and nickel”
is corrected
to read
“selenium,
silver,
mercury,
and nickel”;
the portion reading
“chromium,
lead,
arsenic and silver”
is corrected
to read
“chromium,
lead,
arsenic,
and silver”;
and the portion reading “retreated
or
managed”
is corrected
to read “re—treated or
managed”
in
Condition No.
1 and Condition No.
2 of
both Table
A and Table
B.
A similar
correction
is also made
to Condition No.
5 of both
Table A and Table
B, where they
read “evaporative
recovery and
ion exchange.”
The language shall
read
‘‘evaporative recovery,
and
ion exchange.”
The final typographic
change
to comport
with
the language of
the federal rule
is
to Condition No.
3
of Table
A, which
reads
“tetrachloroethylene exceeds 0.186 ppm.”
This i~
corrected
to read “tetrachloroethylene exceeds 0.188 ppm.”
S~e
40 CFR Part 261, App.
IX Table
1
(1988).
Another non—substantive,
technical correction relates
to
the
format
of
the citation
in the incorporation by reference in
Condition No.
4
in Table A and Table
B.
That citation
is
to the
Federal Register adoption of
the “priority pollutant
list,”
which
was
a revision
to Title
40, Part 423
of the Code
of Federal
Regulations.
This citation format appears
to
be more appropriote
and consistent with the Illinois Administrative Procedure Act,
Section 6.02(a),
Ill.
Rev.
Stat.
ch.
127, par.
1006.02(a)
(1987)
90—668
—5—
For
these reasons,
the references
to the priority pollutant
list
in Condition No.
4
of Table A and Table
B are revised
to
read in pertinent part
as follows:
“organics
on
the Priority
Pollutant List
(incorporated by reference,
see 40 CFR 423 App.
A
(1983)
(as adopted at
47
Fed.
Reg.
52,309
(Nov.
19, 1982))
not
including
later amendments).”
The final
non—substantive changes
are
to comport with the
Illinois Administrative Code format.
These
are
to Condition No.
1,
Condition No.
2,
and Condition No.
3 of both Table
A and Table
B.
Where
these currently read
“35
Ill.
Adrn.
Code Parts
...,“
they will
read
“35
Ill.
Adm.
Code
.
....“
See
1
Ill.
Adm.
Code
100.370(b)
(1987).
II.
Adopted Non—Substantive
Revisions
The Board will adopt as
a final
rule the rule
as originally
proposed and published
in the Illinois Register, with only
the
following minor,
non—substantive modifications:
Table
A,
Main Body
of the Exclusion:
The portion reading “Dewatered waste water
sludges” shall
read
“Dewatered wastewater sludges.”
Table
B,
Main
Body
of
Exclusion:
The
portion
reading
“Spent
pickel
liquor”
shall
read
“Spent
pickle
liquor.”
Table
A,
Condition
No.
1
and Table 3, Condition No.
1:
The portion
reading “selenium,
silver, mercury and nickel”
shall
read “selenium,
silver,
mercury, and nickel”;
the portion reading
“retreated
or managed”
shall
read
“re—treated or managed”;
the
portion reading
“35
Ill. Adm.
Code Parts
722
to 725”
shall
read
“35
Ill.
Adm.
Code 722 to
725”;
and the portion reading
“35 Ill.
Adm.
Code Parts 702,
703 and 705”
shall
read “35 Ill. Adm. Code
702,
703, and 705.”
Table A,
Condition No.
2 and Table
B, Condition No.
2:
The portion reading
“retreated
or managed” shall
read “re—treated
or managed.”
The portion reading
“35 Ill.
Adm.
Code Parts 722
to
725”
shall
read
“35
Ill.
Adrn.
Code 722
to 725”;
and the portion
reading
“35 Ill.
Adm.
Code Parts
702,
703 and 705” shall
read
“35
Ill. Adm.
Code
702,
703,
and 705.”
Table
A,
Condition No.
3:
The portion reading “phenol exceeds
1.566
ppm,
tetrachloroethylene
exceeds
0.186 ppm” shall
read
“phenol exceeds
1,566
ppm,
tetrachioroethylene
exceeds
0.188
ppm”;
and
the
portion
reading “35
Ill. Adm.
Code Parts
702,
703 and 705”
shall
read
“35 Ill.
Adm.
Code
702,
703,
and 705.”
90—669
—6—
Table
B,
Condition No.
3:
The portion reading
“phenol exceeds 1566 ppm,”
shall
read “phenol
exceeds
1,566
ppm”;
and
the
portion
reading
“35
Ill.
Mm.
Code
Parts
702,
703 and 705”
shall
read “35
Ill.
Adm.
Code
702,
703,
and
705.”
Table
A, Condition No.
4 and Table
B, Condition No.
4:
The
portion
reading
“organics
on
the
priority
pollutant
list.
(See
47
FR
52309,
November
19,
1982,
for
a
list
of
the
priority
pollutants.)”
shall
read
“organics
on
the
Priority
Pollutant
List
(incorporated
by
reference,
see
40
CFR
423
App.A
(1983)
(as
adopted at 47
Fed. Reg.
52,309
(Nov..
19,
1982)),
not including
later
amendments).”
Table
A,
Condition No.
5 and Table
B, Condition No.
5:
The portion reading “compiled,
summarized and submitted” shall
read “compiled, summarized,
and submitted”;
the portion reading
“notice thereof shall
be provided promptly
to the Board” shall
read “Envirite shall promptly provide notice thereof to the
Board”;
and the portion reading “evaporative recovery and ion
exchange”
shall
read
“evaporative recovery,
and ion exchange.”
ORDER
The following
final amendments
to
35
Ill. Mm.
Code 721.
Appendix
I are adopted as final
rules and submitted
for
publication
in the Illinois Register.
If convenient,
the Clerk
of
the Board may file this rulemaking
with R87—39, RCRA Update,
for purposes of publication.
TITLE
35:
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
SUBTITLE G:
WASTE DISPOSAL
CHAPTER
I:
POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
SUBCHAPTER
C:
HAZARDOUS
WASTE
OPERATING
REQUIREMENTS
PART 721
IDENTIFICATION AND LISTING OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
SUBPART
A:
GENERAL
PROVISIONS
Section
721.101
Purpose
of
Scope
721.102
Definition
of
Solid
Waste
721.103
Definition
of
Hazardous
Waste
721.104
Exclusions
721.105
Special
Requirements
For
Hazardous
Waste
Generated
by Small Quantity Generators
721.106
Requirements
for
Recyclable
Materials
721.107
Residues
of
Hazardous
Waste
In
Empty
Containers
SUPBART
B:
CRITERIA FOR IDENTIFYING THE CHARACTERISTICS
OF HAZARDOUS WASTE AND FOR LISTING
FIAZARDOUS WASTES
90—670
—7—
Section
721.110
721.111
Section
721.120
721.121
721.122
721 .123
721.124
Criteria
for Identifying the Characteristics
of
Hazardous Waste
Criteria for Listing Hazardous Waste
SUBPART C:
CHARACTERISTICS OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
General
Characteristics
of
Ignitability
Characteristics
of Corrosivity
Characteristics
of
Reactivity
Characteristics
of EP Toxicity
Section
721.130
721.131
721.132
721.133
Appendix
A
Appendix
B
Appendix
C
Table A
Table
B
Table C
Appendix
G
Appendix
F!
Appendix
I
Table
A
Table
B
Table C
Appendix
3
Appendix
Z
SUBPART
D:
LISTS OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
General
Hazardous Wastes From Nonspecific Sources
Hazardous Waste
from Specific Sources
Discarded Commercial Chemical Products, Off-
Specification Species, Container Residues and Spill
Residues Thereof
Representative Sampling Methods
EP Toxicity Test Procedures
Chemical Analysis Test Methods
Analytical Characteristics
of Organic Chemicals
(Repealed)
Analytical Characteristics
of Inorganic Species
(Repealed)
Sample Preparation/Sample Introduction Techniques
(Repealed)
Basis
for Listing Hazardous Wastes
Hazardous Constituents
Wastes
Excluded under
Section 720.120 and 720.122
Wastes Excluded from Non—Specific Sources
Wastes Excluded from Specific Sources
Wastes Excluded from Commercial Chemical Products,
Off—Specification Species, Container Residues,
and
Soil Residues Thereof
~4ethod of
Analysis for Chlorinated Dibenzo—p—
Dioxins
and
Dibenzofurans
Table
to
Section
721.102
AUTHORITY:
Implementing Section
22.4 and authorized by Section
27
of
the
Environmental
Protection
Act
(Ill.
Rev.
Stat.
1985,
ch.
111
1/2,
pars.
1022.4
and
1027).
SOURCE:
Adopted
in
R8l—22,
43
PCB
427,
at
5 Ill.
Reg.
9781,
effective
as
noted
in
35
Ill.
Adm.
Code
700.106;
amended
and
codified
in
R8l—22,
45
PCB
317,
at
6
Ill.
Reg.
4828,
effective
as
noted
in
35
Ill.
Mm.
Code
700.106;
amended
in
R82—l8,
51
PCB
31,
at
7
Ill.
Reg.
2518,
effective
February
22,
1983;
amended
in
R82—
90—671
—8—
19,
53
PCB
131,
at
7
Ill.
Reg.
13999,
effective
October
12,
1983;
amended
in R84—34,
61 P08 247,
at
8 Ill. Reg.
24562, effective
December
11,
1984;
amended
in R84—9, at
9
Ill.
Reg.
11834,
effective
July
24,
1985;
amended
in
R85—22
at
10
Ill.
Reg.
998,
effective
January
2,
1986;
amended
in
R85—2
at
10
Ill.
Reg.
8112,
effective
May
2,
1986;
amended
in
R86—l
at
10
Ill.
Reg.
14002,
effective
August
12,
1986;
amended
in R86—19
at 10
Ill.
Req.
20647,
effective
December
2,
1986;
amended
in
R86—28
at
11
Ill.
Reg.
6035,
effective
March
24,
1987;
amended
in
R86—46
at
11
Ill.
Req.
13466,
effective
August
4,
1987;
amended
in
R87—32
at
11
Ill.
Reg.
16698,
effective
September
30,
1987;
amended
in
R87—5
at
11
Ill.
Reg.
19303,
effective
November
12,
1987;
amended
in
R87—26
at
12
Ill.
Reg.
2456,
effective
January
15,
1988;
amended
in
R87—30
at
____
Ill.
Reg.
______________
effective
________________________
Section
72l.Appendix
I
Wastes
Excluded
under
Section
720.120
and
720.122
Table A
Wastes Excluded From Non—Specific Sources
Facility Address
Waste Description
Envirite
Corp.
Dewatered
wastewater
sludges
(EPA
Hazardous
Harvey,
Illinois
Waste NO.
F006) generated from electro-
plating operations;
spent cyanide plating
solutions
(EPA Hazardous Waste No.
F007)
generated from electroplating operations;
plating
bath
residues
from
the
bottom
of
plating
baths
(EPA
Hazardous
Waste
No.
F008)
g~nerated
from
electroplating
operations
where
cyanides
are
used
in
the
process;
spent
stripping
and
cleaning
bath
solutions
(EPA
Hazardous
Waste
No.
F009)
generated
from
electroplatin~
operations
where
qyanides
are
used
in
the
process;
spent
cyanide
solutions
from
salt
bath
pot
cleaning
(EPA
Hazardous
Waste
No.
FOll)
generated
from
metal
heat
treating
opera-
tions; quenching wastewater treatment
sludges
(EPA Hazardous Waste No.
F012) gen-
erated from metal heat treating where
cyanides
are
used
in
the
process;
wastewater
treatment sludges
(EPA Hazardous Waste No.
F0l9)
generated
from
the
chemical
conversion
coating
of
aluminum
after
November
14,
1986.
To
ensure
that
hazardous
constituents
are not present
in the waste at levels
of
90—672
—9—
regulatory concern, the facility must imple-
ment
a contingency testing program for
the
p~titioned
wastes.
This
testing
program
must meet the following conditions
for the
exclusions
to
be
valid:
1)
Each
batch
of
treatment
residue
must
be
representatively sampled
and tested
using
the EP Toxicity test
for arsenic,
barium,
cadmium, chromium,
lead,
selenium,
silver,
mercury,
and
nickel.
If the extract concentrations
for
chromium,
lead,
arsenic,
and
silver
exceed
0.315
ppm;
barium
levels
exceed
6.3
ppm;
cadmium
and
selenium
exceed
0.063
ppm;
mercury
exceeds
0.0126
ppm;
or
nickel
levels
exceed
2.205
ppm,
the
waste
must
be
re—treated
or
managed
and
disposed as
a hazardous waste under
35
Ill. Mm.
Code 722
to 725 and the
permitting standards
of
35
Ill. Mm.
Code
702,
703,
and
705.
2)
Each
batch
of
treatment
residue
must
be
tested
for reactive and leachable
cyanide.
If the reactive cyanide
levels
exceed
250
ppm
or
leachable
cyanide
levels
(using
the
EP
Toxicity~
test without acetic acid adjustment)
exceed 1.26
ppm,
the waste must
be re-
treated
or
managed
and
disposed
as
a
hazardous
waste
under
35
Ill.
Mm.
Code
722
to
725
and
the
permitting
standards
of
35
Ill.
Mm.
Code
702,
703,
and
705.
3)
Each
batch
of
waste
must
be
tested
for
the
total
content
of
specific
organic
toxicants.
If
the total content of
anthracene
exceeds
76.8
ppm,
1,2—
diphenyl
hydrazine
exceeds
0.001
ppm,
methylene
chloride
exceeds
8.18
ppm,
methyl ethyl ketone
exceeds
326
ppm,
n—
nitrosodiphenylamine
exceeds
11.9
pprn,
phenol exceeds 1,566 ppm,
tetrachloro—
ethylene exceeds
0.188 ppm,
or tn—
chioroethylerie exceeds
0.592
ppm,
the
waste
must
be
managed
and
disposed
as
a
hazardous
waste
under
35
Ill.
Adm.
Code
722
to
725
and
the
permitting
standards
of
35
Ill.
Mm.
Code
702,
703,
and
705.
90—673
—10—
4)
A
grab
sample
must
be
collected
from
each
batch
to
form
one
monthly
com-
posite
sample
which
must
be
tested
using
gas
chromatography,
mass
spectrometry
analysis
for
the
compounds
listed
in
No.3
above
as
well
as
the
remaining
org~nics
on
the
Priority
Pollutant
List
(incorporated
by
reference,
see
40
CFR
423
App.
A
(1983)
(as
adopted
at
47
Fed.
Reg.
52,309
(Nov.
19,
1982)),
not
including
later
amendments).
5)
The
data
from
conditions
1—4
must
be
kept
on
file
at
the
facility
for
inspection purposes and must be
compiled,
summarized,
and submitted
to
the Administrator
of USEPA by certified
mail
semi—annually.
The
USEPA
will
review
this
information
and
if
needed
will propose
to modify
or
withdraw
the
exclusion.
Should USEPA propose
to
modify
or withdraw the exclusion,
Envinite shall promptly provide notice
thereof
to
the Board.
The decision to
conditionally exclude
the treatment
residue generated from the wastewater
treatment systems
at Envirite’s Harvey,
Illinois
facility applies only to the
wastewater
and
solids
treatment
systems
as
they
presently
exist
as
described
in
the
delisting
petition
submitted
to
the
USEPA.
The
exclusion
does
not
apply
to
the
proposed
process
additions
described
in
the
petition submitted
to
USEPA as
recovery including crystali—
zation,
electrolytic
metals
recovery,
evaporative
recovery,
and
ion
exchange.
(Source:
Amended
at
Ill.
Reg.
_______,
effective
___________
Table
B
Wastes
Excluded
From
Specific
Sources
Facility
Address
Waste
Description
Amoco
Oil
Company
150 million gallons
of DAF float
from
Wood
River,
Ilinois
petroleum
refining
contained
in
four surge
ponds
after
treatment
with the Chemfix
stabilization
process.
This exclusion
applies
to
the
150
million
gallons
of
waste
90—674
—11—
after
chemical
stabilization
as
long
as the
mixing
ratios
of
the
reagent with the waste
are monitored continuously and do not vary
outside
of
the limits presented
in the
demonstration samples;
one grab sample
is
taken each hour
from each treatment unit,
composited,
and EP toxicity tests performed
on each sample.
If
the levels
of lead
or
total chromium exceed
0.5 ppm
in the EP
extract,
then the waste
that was processed
during the compositing period
is considered
hazardous;
the
treatment
residue
shall
be
pumped
into
bermed
cells
to ensure that the
waste
is
identifiable
in
the
event
that
removal
is
necessary.
Envirite
Corp.
Spent
pickle
liquor
(EPA
Hazardous Waste No.
Harvey,
Illinois
1062)
generated
from
steel
finishing
operations
of
facilities
within
the
iron and
steel industry
(SIC Codes 331
and 332);
wastewater
treatment sludge
(EPA Hazardous
Waste
‘No.
1002)
generated from the pro-
duction of chrome yellow and orange pi2—
ments; wastewater
treatment sludge
(EPA
Hazardous Waste No.
1003)
generated from the
production
of
molybdate
orange
pigments;
wastewater
treatment
sludge
(EPA
Hazardous
Waste
No.
1004)
generated from the pro-
duction of zinc yellow pigments;
wastewater
treatment sludge
(EPA Hazardous Waste No.
1005)
generated
from the production of
chrome green pigments; wastewater treatment
sludge
(EPA Hazardous Waste No.
1006)
gen-
erated from the production
of chrome oxide
green pigments
(anhydrous and hydrated);
wastewater
treatment sludge
(EPA Hazardous
Waste No.
1007)
generated from the pro-
duction of
iron blue pigments;
oven residues
(EPA Hazardous Waste No.
1008)
generated
from the production
of chrome
oxide green
pigments after November
14,
1986.
To ensure
that hazardous constituents are not present
in the waste
at levels of
regulatory con-
cern,
the facility must implement
a con-
tingency testing program for the petitioned
wastes.
This testing program must meet
the
following conditions
for
the exclusions
to
be valid:
1)
Each batch of
treatment residue must
be
representatively sampled and tested
90—67 5
—12—
using
the
EP Toxicity test for arsenic,
barium,
cadmium, chromium,
lead,
selenium,
silver, mercury,
and
nickel.
If the extract concentrations
for chromium,
lead,
arsenic,
and silver
exceed 0.315 ppm; barium levels exceed
6.3
ppm;
cadmium
and
selenium
exceed
0.063 ppm;
mercury exceeds 0.0126 ppm;
or
nickel
levels
exceed
2.205
ppm,
the
waste
must
be
re—treated
or
managed
and
disposed as
a hazardous waste under
35
Ill.
Adm.
Code 722
to 725 and the
permitting standards of
35
Ill. Mm.
Code
702,
703,
and 705.
2)
Each batch
of
treatment residue must be
tested
~or reactive and leachable
cyanide.
If the reactive cyanide
levels exceed 250 ppm;
or leachable
cyanide levels
(using
the B? Toxicity
test without acetic acid adjustment)
exceed 1.26 ppm,
the waste must be re-
treated
or managed and disposed
as
hazardous waste
under
35
Ill. Mm.
Code
722
to
725
and
the
permitting
standards
of
35
Ill.
Mm.
Code
702,
703,
and
705.
3)
Each batch
of waste must
be tested for
the total content of specific organic
toxicants.
If the total content of
anthracene
exceeds
76.8
ppm,
1,2—
diphenyl hydrazine exceeds 0.001
ppm,
methylene chloride exceeds 8.18 ppm,
methyl
ethyl
ketone
exceeds
326
ppm,
n—
nitrosodiphenylamine
exceeds
11.9
ppm,
phenol
exceeds
1,566
ppm,
tetrachloro—
ethylene
exceeds
0.188
ppm,
or
trichlo—
roethylene
exceeds
0.592
ppm,
the
waste
must
be
managed
and
disposed
as
a
hazardous waste under
35
Ill.
Adrn.
Code
722
to
725
and
the
permitting
standards
of
35
Ill.
Mm.
Code
702,
703,
and
705.
4)
A
grab
sample
must
be
collected
from
each batch
to form one monthly com-
posite sample which must be tested
using
gas
chromatography,
mass
spectrometry analysis
for
the compounds
listed
in
No.
3
above
as
well
as
the
remaining organics on the Priority
Pollutant List
(incorporated by
reference,
see
40 CFR 423 App.
A
(1983)
90—676
—13—
(as
adopted
at
47
Fed.
Reg.
52,309
(Nov.
19,
1982)), not including later
amendments).
5)
The
data
from
conditions
1—4
must
be
kept
on
file
at
the
facility
for
inspection
purposes
and
must
be
compiled,
summarized,
and
submitted
to
the USEPA Administrator
by certified
mail semi—annually.
The USEPA will
review this information and
if
needed
will propose
to modify or withdraw
the
exclusion.
Should USEPA propose
to
modify or withdraw the exclusion,
Envirite shall promptly provide notice
thereof
to the Board.
The decision
to
conditionally exclude the treatment
residue generated from the wastewater
treatment systems
at Envirite’s Harvey,
Illinois facility applies only to
the
wastewater and solids treatment systems
as they presently exist
as described
in
the delisting petition submitted to
the
USEPA.
The exclusion does not apply
to
the proposed process additions describ-
ed
in the petition submitted
to USEPA
as recover~’, including crystalization,
electrolytic metals recovery, evapora-
tive recovery,
and ion exchange.
(Source:
Amended at
Ill.
Reg.
,
effective
___________
Table
C
Wastes Excluded From Commercial Chemical
Products,Off—Specification
Species,
Container Residues,
and Soil Residues
Thereof
Facility Address
Waste Description
(Source:
Former Appendix
I, Table C Repealed at 10 Ill.
Reg.
998,
effective January
2,
1986;
new Appendix
I, Table C adopted
10
Ill.
Reg.
8112,
effective May
2,
1986)
IT
IS
SO
ORDERED
9 0—67 7
—14—
I,
Dorothy
M.
Gunn,
Clerk
of
the
Illinois
Pollution
Control
Board, hereby certify that
e above Opinion and Order was adopted
on the Jot~ day of _______________________,
1988,
by
a
vote
of
7—c,
.
Dorothy
M..’j~unn,
Clerk
Illinois
Fôllution
Control
Board
90—678
