RECEIVE

E~

L

INC.

c~

~

(~F!CE

MAY

0

7

1999

(309)676-021

1

STATE OF ILLINOIS

Pollution

Control

Board

Re: DocketR 99-18; USED

OIL REGULATIONS

Dear

Sirs,

To further comment on the proposed changes

regarding

used oil regulation under Parts

807.105,

809.211,

and

809.302, we offer the following, most ofwhich is based on the

testimony

of

Theodore

Dragovich:

Mr.

Dragovich

testified that the requested changes

are

designed to

increase

enviromnental protection and encourage recycling.

Our concern is that

they probably

would, in reality, have the

opposite

effect.

Mr.

Dragovich states

that

many

used oil management facilities

that accept large volumes

ofused oil have historically hadenvironmental

problems.

We

are

not going

to

dispute

the

fact

that

some have, however,

two

things need

to

be realized in conjunction to that

fact.

One

is that prior

to

the used oil

management

regulations going into effect in the

preliminary stages in the late

1980’s,

used

oilrecyclers

were

actually

hazardous

waste

recycleis.

The

used

oil theyhandled

was

vastly more contaminated

through use and

throughmixing with

other wastes than today.

No anti

waste mixing

laws

existed

priorto

that

time.

Due

to the fact

that

mostoil

was being

recycled by

use

as a fuel or refmed

into

base

stock,

and

that

those

procedures

could either utilize or

remove

any mixed in (what is

now) hazardous waste

that

was in the used

oil, there

was absolutely no reason for

recyclers to not

accept

oil withthose wastes in it.

In addition, the

waste that

oilrecyclers

generated (oily water

and

oily sludge) were

nonnally

disposed of on site in simple

evaporation lagoons and selfmade

landfills.

After all, there

were

no

commercial

waste

watertreatment

facilities to take the waterto and

commercial landfills

were

also

largely

unregulated.

Consequently,

used oil recyclers dealt with their problems ofwaste

disposal

as best they could ontheir

own, many

times at their

own

sites.

The

second

reason

that

old

used

oil sites have been

a problem in some cases is the same reason old

dIilling,

refining, and

bulk

tenninal sites

are

often a

problem.

There were

no

facility

regulations.

No

regulations

on the tanks, no regulations or requirements

to

clean up

spills, no

requirements

for

secondary containmen1~,

nothing, also a real lack ofknowledge

ofthe

environmental

impacts

those activities

were causing existed at the time.

As you

can

now surely see, it’s obvious why old used oil and

other

petroleum sites

are

sometimes

a problem today.

However,

one

thing

must still be realized, as

bad

as some were in

managing

“usedoil” prior to any

regulation,

they still

diverted

hundreds of

millions

of

gallons

ofused oil

andhazardous

wastes

from

being

dumped,

into uses as fuel or

into

“new”

oil again by reprocessing

and

re-refming it.

Today these past problems have

already

been addressed

very adequately

by the

SPCC

regulations, the Oil Pollution Act and by the

Federal

Used Oil Regulations.

Due

the

these regulations, todays oil recyclers

are

collecting and accepting used oil that is not

contaminated by other hazardous

toxic

waste, and the oil ismuch cleaner on

its’ own due

PEORIA,

ILL.

61602

—1-

---

to the elimination oflead in gasoline

and

other factors.

In fact, much ofthe used oil

today collected

and

accepted at used oil recycling facilities not only meets the EPA

used

oil on-specificationparameters,

a good portion

will

actually pass EPA’s hazardous

characteristic landfill tests.

Also, used

oil

recycling facilities oftoday, under the federal

regulations, are required to analyze the oil

and

have a

written

analysis

plan.

In

addition,

used oil recycling or processing sites oftoday

are

required

to provide secondary

containment

for their storage

areas,

as do virgin oil and fuel tank

terminals.

However,

the

federal used oil regulations go even

further,

requiringthat the secondary containment at

used oil facilities be

impervious

to used oil.

Virgin

oil

and

fuel facilities do not have

such a requirement.

Mr.

Dragovich

stated that the FederalUsed Oil Regulations do not prescribe methods for

ensuringthat tanks

meet the

standards

of “good condition”.

Part

279.54

in the Federal

Used Oil Regulations

and

also as stated in IL

35

Part

739.154

define

“good condition” as

no

severe

rusting,

apparent

structural

defects or deterioration,

and

novisible leaking.

A

tank

that

isnot severely

rusting

or has severe defects, should ensure

that

it

is and will

stay

in good condition.

And

if a leak would occur, the Federal

and

IL regulations require the

tank be promptly

fixed and

the leak cleanedup.

In addition, the Federal

and IL

Used

Oil

Regulations require a used oil processor to maintain and operate the facility to minimize

the possibility ofa fire, explosion

or

any

unplanned sudden or nonsuddenrelease ofused

oil to the

air,

soil,

or surface water which could threatenhuman health or the

environment.

To obtain the desired

preparedness

and prevention level concerning the

above possible incidents, processors are required to have an alarm system, a

communication system capable of

reaching

emergency

personnel,

fire

extinguishers,

water for

fire fighting,

testing ofthe above equipment,

arrangements

with local

authorities on how to handle an incident

and

what is stored in the facility,

and

where,

a

contingency plan,

and

the

tanks

labeled

as to

their

contents.

As you can see, used oil

processors

and

storage sites have

a much higher level ofprotection concerning possible

human

health

and/or

environmental harm than

even

large gasoline bulk terminals where

the material being stored is more toxic

and

much more volatile

and

hazardous

than

used

oil.

Those facilities

are

regulated

under

the

SPCC

regulations, the Oil Pollution Act

requirements,

and OSHA

requirements.

Oil processors

and

storage facilities

are

also

regulated under allthose regulations, but

have

a further level of

environmental

protection

under

the Used Oil

FacilityManagement Standards.

Mr. Dragovich mentioned that the EPA specification for used oil does not include bottom

sediment or water or other parameters

and

therefore the on-specification parameters alone

could not guarantee a value being applicable to the oil stored

It is imperative

that

low

sediment andwater on-specification oils continue to be

allowed to be stored in

unpermitted

commercial leased

bulk

petroleum facilities.

Seasonal demand patterns

and

other factors require storage of

large amounts

ofused oil at certain times.

Muchmore

than

what storage is available at actualused oil storage and processingfacilities.

In

Addition,

due to economics,

many oil

recyclers in recent years

have

started

using

transfer

-2-

---

facilities, collecting on and offspecification used oil in smaller

trucks

and

bulking

it

up

into

semi truck loads

at transfer facilities.

Again, many

ofthese

transfer

facilities

(although usually quite smaller facilities) are actually commercial petroleum storage

facilities that

the recycler leases

part

or all of.

Typically, these

facilities

are or

have been

used for

gasoline

or fuel oils.

We feel these

facilities

must live up to the used oil facility

requirements as outlined above, but again requiringEPA

permitting

ofthese facilities

would basically take them offthe

market

to used oil recyclers.

We would not object to

requiringused oil haulers to identify

such

on-specification and transfer storage facilities

as a requirement oftheir special waste hauling

permit,

and to

certify that

those

facilities

meet all theused oil

facility standards

where

applicable.

Commercial bulk storage

facilities, whether

large

or small, would not be interested in

“permitting”

their

facilities

as

used oil facilities.

The loss ofthese commercial petroleum storage facilities would

devastate the current used oil recycling operations

and system in

illinois.

Although

we have no real objections to the proposed changes to

Part

809 specifically, we

are

concerned about the

requirement that

special waste be

manifested,

used oil included.

Unlike

almost all other waste streams, there is more used oil generated and it is generated

in small batches.

Therefore, a collector/recycler must stop

many

places to get an

economicallyfeasible load ofoil for the day.

Manifesting

each and

every

small

generator with the

six part

manifest

and following the

mailing

requirements, etc., is

very

burdensome and has always been

a problem in

Illinois.

Most

illinois

recyclers therefore

have been holding a manifestin the truck, but only filling it in when full and

attaching

a

trip log ofsome sort to the manifest showing everywhere the oil came from.

This

is

a

-

procedure IEPA has endorsed in the past.

However, NORA was told last yearby the

agency,

theyagreed

this

is

a problem

and

were working on a way to drop the manifesting

requirements for used oil and instead follow the

Part

279/739

tracking

requirements.

NORA also offered to EPA

that

they felt they could addtess

this

problem in the special

waste hauling

permits

issued to used oil haulers.

Both NORA and ourselves are curious

what the agency now intends to do about

this

issue due to the fact it has not addressed

this issue in these documents clearly.

Also, illinois generators ofused oil have not been

required to obtain an EPA generator number.

Mr.

Dragovich

stated in his proposed

testimony discussing section

809.211(1)

that

“

the exemption from obtaining an Illinois

Special Waste Identification Number in

Part

739.124 conflicts with

Part

809,

since a

manifest is required to

ship

used oil if the generator generatesmore than 220

pounds

of

special waste in a calendarmonth and the EPA identification

numbers

are necessary to

properly complete a manifest”.

This is confusing.

Is Mr.

Dragovich

explaining

that

he

feels

that

generators ofover 220 pounds ofused oil

(

and/or special waste) in a month

should now be requiredto obtain an EPA generator number?

If so, is the EPA prepared

to register the some tens ofthousands ofoil generators in the state and require used oil

collectors to manifest each and every one with the

six part

special waste manifests?

We

hope not.

The burden tothe generators and collector/recyclers would be tremendous due

to the volume and number ofstops serviced by even a single used oil collection driver (up

to 15

a day).

In addition,

the way revised Part 809.211 is written, it seems to preclude an

-3-

---

exempt generator/hauler

who is

transporting used oil to an actual

used oil processing

facility

Stead ofa

aggr6gation

point or collection

facility.

We

qãStibn the value of

restricting

small shipments

(55

or less gallons) ofused oil to other types of

used

oil

facilities.

Many

ofthose facilities

are currently

also accepting such generated oil.

As stated in

our

first comments,

our

general concern is that if

transfer

facilities and

processors

are

permitted under

Part

807, we

will

actually see an entire new set ofused oil

regulations that go

over and above the federal regulations added as permit conditions and

design, operation, and maintenance criteria, as

are

allowed under

Parts

807.206 and

807.213.

In addition,

Part

807,206

may

require used oil facilities to provide fmancial

assurance as prescribed by Part 807.600 which was

primarily

formulated for landfills,

and

which we feel should not apply to used oil facilities.

All

this

would cause the operations

of

Illinois

recyclers to be much more expensive than their neighboring competitors and

would make the costs for oilpick-up and recycling to the generators much

higher than

they currently are, at a

time

when used oil recyclers have already been struggling with

low values for their product

due

to

virgin

oils severely depressed prices over the last year.

We feelthese factors along with what was discussed above would workto discourage

recycling ofused oil in

illinois, especially Do-It-Yourselfoil changers oil due to higher

disposal/recycling costs.

We see no reason to permit marketers.

Marketers have to also either generate transport,

store, or process used oil to be considered a marketer.

Since those other activities are all

regulated to some extent, it seems redundant to permit a marketer.

The proposal does not exempt on-specification used oil

burners

as

written,

from

the

permitting

requirements.

Requiring

permitting

ofon-specification burners in Illinois

would be the end of

illinois

recycling industry and system, with inadequate possible

destination points for all the oil generated in illinois.

The nationwide market is already in

a glutted position due to the depressed pricing mentionedabove.

This action could cause

generators to fmd that no one is willing to pick-up their

oil,,

greatly increasing improper

disposal.

Burners would simply switch to other cheap virgin fuel sources.

Please refer to

ours and NORA’s first set ofcomments dated April 8 for more detail concerning

the

detriments to

Part

807 permitting.

In closing; used oil oftoday is much cleaner and better managed thanjust a

few

short

years ago.

The FederalManagement Standards are extensive but not unnecessarily

restrictive and provide a level of environmental protection

that

is higher than virgin oil

and fuel handlers.

However, at the sametime they keep the costs downto recyclers while

protecting

human

health and the

environment,

and at the sametime encourage recycling

by letting the recyclers do things their way (within the scope ofthe regulations).

This

keeps the costs the absolute lowest they can safely be, to the generators ofused oil.

Rememberingthat 40

ofautomotive oil is generated by Do-It-Yourselfnon regulated

generators who can easily opt ~

ofthe used oil recycling program and system, cost to

the generators is the most critical issue

in encouraging or discouraging participation.

-4-

---

From what we understand this was the number one factor that USEPA kept in mind when

formulating

and

working

on the current used oil regulations.

Also from what we

understand,

USEPA worked

on development ofthose regulations for over 10 years

before

issuing them.

As

written, while they have very adequate

environmental protections, they

allow used oil to be handled more like

a commodity than a waste and allow recyclers to

compete along side virgin fuel and oil producers.

Saddling used oil recyclers and burners

with much more restrictive facility requirements than

virgin oil and fuel

facilities just

makes used oil derived products

that

much more uncompetitive.

As stated, the hazards of

used oil today are no more than virgin

fuels from a spill, fire, or toxic perspective.

Currently,

IEPA holds the proper authority to prescribe a more comprehensive

registration program,

performinspections, and provide full enforcement ofexisting

regulations, regulations

that

we feel

are very

adequate.

We also want to encourage the

board to reviewthe

Part

739

regulations as written.

It’s important we keep state

variations from the federal regulations as minimal as possible,

and do not feel an

actual

permitting program would be a beneficial thing to do for the reasons outlined above

and

in our first set ofcomments.

We would like to see

Illinois make reasonable changes they

feel needed made to try

and

fitinto the federal program, not

invent

their

own program

that varies widely from surrounding states, increases costs

to recyclers and

generators and

over regulates and over

burdens

the indi~tstry.

Sincerely,

Mike Len;

President

-5-