BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
IN THE MATER OF:
)
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE
)
BOARD’S SPECIAL WASTE REGULATIONS
)
R06-20
CONCERNING USED OIL
)
(Rulemaking – Land)
35 ILL. ADM. CODE 808, 809
)
)
NORA’S COMMENTS
)
PRE-FILED TESTIMONY
)
NOTICE OF FILING
Office of the Attorney General
Ms.Deirdre K. Hirner
69 West Washington Street, Suite 1800
Executive Director
Chicago, Illinois 60602
Illinois Pollution Control Board
100 Randolph Street
Mr. Matthew J. Dunn
Suite 11-500
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
Chicago, Illinois 60601
1021 North Grand Avenue East
P. O. Box 19276
Ms. Dorothy Gunn
Springfield, Illinois 62794
Clerk of Illinois Pollution Control
Board
Stephanie Flowers, Esquire
100 Randolph Street Suite 11-500
Brown, Hay and Stephens, L.L.P.
Chicago, Illinois 60601
700 First Mercantile Bank Building
205 South Fifth Street
Tim Fox, Esquire
P. O. Box 2459
Hearing Officer
Springfield, Illinois 62705
Illinois Pollution Control Board
100 Randolph Street
Claire A. Manning, Esquire
Suite 11-500
Illinois Environmental Regulatory Group
Chicago, Illinois 60601
215 East Adams Street
Springfield, Illinois 62701
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that I have today filed with the Office of the Clerk of the Pollution
Control Board NORA’s Motion for Extension of Time to File NORA’s Comments, a copy of
which is herewith served upon you.
Christopher Harris
September 22, 2008
2001 South Tracy
Bozeman, Montana 59715
Telephone: (406) 586-9902
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 22, 2008
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
IN THE MATTER OF:
)
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE
)
BOARD’S SPECIAL WASTE REGULATIONS )
R06-20
CONCERNING USED OIL
)
(Rulemaking – Land)
35 ILL. ADM. CODE 808, 809
)
COMMENTS OF NORA,
AN ASSOCIATION OF RESPONSIBLE RECYCLERS
Background
In response to the Board’s invitation in its May 1, 2008 Opinion and Order for additional
proposals, NORA, An Association of Responsible Recyclers, Inc. (“NORA”) hereby submits the
following comments in support of its proposed amendments to sections 739, 808 and 809. (See
attached proposed amendments). As you may be aware, NORA is a national trade association,
founded in 1984, whose more than two hundred members provide recycling services throughout
the entire United States, including Illinois and the states that border Illinois. NORA’s members
collect and recycle used oil, used oil filters, antifreeze, and wastewater. Since its founding,
NORA (formerly the National Oil Recyclers Association) has been active in all U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (“U.S.E.P.A.”) rulemakings involving used oil and virtually
all significant state rulemakings relating to used oil.
Used oil is generated from millions of engines and items of mechanical hardware. Once
generated, used oil could be handled as a waste and discarded – with adverse environmental
consequences. (In many countries, this is precisely its fate.). However, in the United States, its
value encourages recycling which results in resource conservation, and environmental protection.
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 22, 2008
Once collected from generators, used oil must be transported to processing facilities where it is
transformed into used oil fuel, lubricants, or feedstocks for lubricants. NORA believes that it has
convinced EPA, the Congress and other policy-makers that because used oil is a unique and
valuable commodity it is worthy of very carefully crafted regulations. Such regulations must
simultaneously encourage used oil recycling and protect the environment. These goals are not
odds with each other because collection and recycling of used oil generally precludes its
disposal. This is particularly important because the disposal – if it occurred – would be carried
out by the millions of generators of used oil. The resulting pollution would be widespread, hard
to detect, and extremely harmful to ground and surface water. But instead of widespread
disposal, used oil is collected from all these generators and the used oil is transformed into useful
products. The interesting analogy that NORA’s founding president, John J. Nolan, was fond of
relating to Congressional committees are swarms of honeybees gathering nectar from millions of
flowers. This collection process must be efficient and not waste any precious nectar. After
collecting the nectar, the bees transport it to the nearest honey processing facility and produce a
valuable product. In the used oil context, the collection process must also be efficient.
Efficiency, however, does
not
mean free of regulation; but it does require the crafting of sensible
regulations that encourage legitimate used oil recycling.
These concepts of efficiency, legitimate recycling, and sensible regulation have real
meaning in the world of used oil. Unnecessary regulation burdens the commercial enterprise,
increases costs on generators and transporters, multiplies paperwork and drives out competition.
By definition, this is not efficient and it will inevitably lead to inadequate collection.
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 22, 2008
Does the requirement of a manifest for the collection and transportation of used oil and
materials regulated as used oil impose unnecessary regulation? NORA strongly believes the
answer is yes and offers the following information in support of our conclusion.
U.S.E.P.A.’s Used Oil Program.
The federal used oil management standards,
promulgated by the U.S.E.P.A. in 1985 and 1992, were adopted after extensive study and
comment. After lengthy consideration, EPA rejected a regulatory scheme for used oil that
mirrored the hazardous waste system. EPA concluded that unlike hazardous waste, used oil
destined for recycling constitutes a valuable commodity.
Consequently, according to
U.S.E.P.A., the regulations must encourage rather than interfere with the market forces that
maintain the flow of used oil from generators through the production of fuel and re-refined
lubricants. Manifests, a deeply imbedded component of the hazardous waste system, were
considered unnecessary for properly regulating used oil.
It should be emphasized that the absence of manifests does
not
mean that used oil
becomes invisible to regulators. To the contrary, under the federal used oil management
standards, codified at 40 CFR Part 279, requires tracking, documentation, and reports. The
information required to be gathered and maintained is necessary, useful but not unduly
burdensome. As the Board concluded in its December 19, 1999 Opinion and Order concerning
used oil management (R99-18), “existing federal and State laws and rules governing the used oil
industry are quite extensive…” Opinion and Order, p. 10. The vast majority of states, although
allowed to impose more stringent standards, has adopted Part 279, and has not been hampered in
their efforts to regulate used oil. If this were not the case we would see state after state
promulgating more stringent requirements including manifests.
Illinois Does Not Need Manifests.
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 22, 2008
There can be no doubt that the manifest system for used oil in Illinois has never achieved
anywhere near even partial compliance. It was a low priority for Illinois EPA which made
virtually no effort to inform generators about manifests; it was costly (at $3.00 a manifest); and it
served no useful purpose. Indeed, it placed a burden on Illinois generators and transporters that
was not imposed on generators and transporters in any of the states bordering Illinois.
As you are aware, a copy of the hazardous waste manifest must be sent to the appropriate
regulatory agency. But Illinois EPA (“IEPA”) had zero interest in receiving, reviewing, or
storing thousands of used oil manifests each week, and therefore does not require generators or
the receiving facility to send them into the agency. Consequently, the two “agency copies” are
simply thrown away. But generators and transporters would need to keep copies of hundreds of
thousands of these manifests for years – just in case IEPA may someday want to look at some of
them. This “just in case” scenario does not justify the expense and burden of requiring
manifests. If it did, Illinois EPA would have made the manifests a key priority of its used oil
management program and be able to provide numerous real life examples of the crucial value of
manifests in enforcing this program.
NORA’s Proposal
To a certain extent, the preceding set of arguments has been convincing. In its May 1,
2008 Opinion and Order, the Board proposed amendment to exempt used oil, “defined by and
managed in accordance with Part 739” from the manifesting requirements of Parts 808 and 809
and to exempt shipments of such used oil from the special waste hauling permit requirements of
Parts 808 and 809. The Board found that these exemptions are “economically reasonable” and
“technically feasible.”
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 22, 2008
The only major policy difference between NORA and Illinois EPA in this rulemaking
concerns materials that are regulated as used oil, rather than “defined” as used oil. NORA
proposes that materials regulated as used oil be exempt from the manifesting and special waste
hauling permit requirements; Illinois EPA wants to continue to impose the manifest requirement
on such materials.
What materials are included in this category? NORA has proposed that the following
materials that are regulated as used oil be exempt from the manifest and special waste hauling
permit requirements:
o
Used oil generated by a conditionally exempt small quantity generator
containing the exempt hazardous waste from such generator, provided the
mixture contains more than fifty percent of used oil by volume or weight.
See Part 739.110(b)(3).
o
Used oil containing characteristic hazardous waste, with a BTU per pound
content greater than 5000, where the characteristic (e.g. iginitibility) has
been extinguished, and both the used oil and the characteristic hazardous
waste has been generated and mixed by the same generator.
See Part
739.110(b)(2)(B),(C).
o
Mixtures of used oil and fuels, normal components of fuels, or other fuel
products.
Part 739.110(d)
o
Used oil containing nonhazardous wastewater provided there is a
recoverable (i.e. de minimis) quantity of used oil.
Part 739.110(f).
These are the only materials that NORA proposes to be exempt. They meet certain clear criteria:
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 22, 2008
First, they are recognized in Part 279 as being regulated as used oil. Second, they are and will
continue to be managed in compliance with the used oil management system and other
applicable regulations such as Centralized Waste Treatment and SPCC requirements under the
Clean Water Act. Third, they are and will continue to be properly recycled. In addition, NORA
has proposed additional safeguards for the non-wastewater materials to address concerns by
IEPA that only a tiny quantity of used oil when mixed with the material will place it in the
exempt category.
To avoid any confusion – deliberate or otherwise – let me specify what materials would
not
be covered by NORA’s proposed exemption: mixtures of used oil and hazardous waste
where the mixture exhibits a hazardous waste; mixtures of used oil and any listed waste;
mixtures of used oil any special waste that does not have a minimum BTU per pound content of
more than 5000; used oil containing over 1000 parts per million of halogenated solvents (unless
the presumption has been successfully rebutted); wastewater that does not contain recoverable
quantities of used oil; and post use mixtures of used antifreeze and used oil. Under NORA’s
proposal, these materials would still be subject to the manifest requirements and all other special
waste regulations.
It is perhaps worth re-emphasizing that the categories NORA proposes to be exempt from
the manifest requirement follow existing regulatory structures. A good example is the small
quantity generator conditionally exempt waste. NORA did not create this exemption from
RCRA rules and has never advocated this exemption; it was considered a necessity because U.S.
E.P.A. and the state environmental protection agencies were considered to have inadequate
resources to monitor and regulate millions of such generators. Consequently, this exemption was
adopted and management practices conforming to this exemption are now embedded in the
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 22, 2008
system. If federal and state regulators were to eliminate this exemption and educate generators
about the change, NORA would have no need for the manifest exemption for this category of
materials. NORA’s proposal is intended to line up with established practices resulting, in large
measure, from the way U.S.E.P.A. and subsequently the vast majority of states structured their
hazardous waste and used oil regulations.
This leads to a key question concerning NORA’s proposal: Why is it so important for the
materials
regulated
as used oil to be managed in the same way as “defined” used oil? The
answer is that the bifurcated system advocated by IEPA would be confusing, inefficient, time-
consuming and burdensome. Under IEPA’s proposal, for example, the driver of a typical 3000
gallon tank truck on a collection run would need to segregate “defined” used oil from materials
regulated as used oil. While some trucks have separate compartments; most do not. Those that
do have segregated compartments will not have enough compartments to segregate each of the
“regulated as used oil” categories that would normally be collected in a day’s collection
activities. It might be suggested that this truck pick up “defined” used oil during one day’s
collection travels and make the same run for most of the “regulated as a used oil” materials on a
subsequent trip. Requiring two or more runs for the same territory is highly inefficient and given
the high price of gasoline and diesel fuel (not to mention to additional labor costs), it would be
prohibitively expensive. Such a requirement has about the same usefulness as requiring the busy
honey bee to collect nectar from only red flowers on one trip, lavender flowers on the next trip
and yellow flowers on the third trip.
With respect to used oil/water mixtures, the reality is that virtually all industrial used oil
contains water. Regardless of the ratio of oil to water, these mixtures present no inherent threat
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 22, 2008
to human health and the environment and are not difficult to treat: the water is cleaned and
discharged in accordance with Clean Water Act permits; the used oil is recovered.
NORA suggests that the Board re-read the October 2006 comments of Gregory Ray, Vice
President of Heritage-Crystal Clean in which he carefully explained the (1) entirely unnecessary
burden that would imposed in the case of used oil/water mixtures if a bifurcated system is
implemented; and (2) the typical used oil as well as regulated as used oil materials that would be
generated at single mid-size manufacturing facility. Mr. Ray estimated that there are thousands
of such facilities in Illinois. He also pointed out that the bifurcated system advocated by IEPA
would be unique to Illinois. “Only in Illinois would generators need to distinguish between
‘used oil’ as defined, and other materials that are like used and subject to regulation as used oil.
Obviously this is an expensive and complex new burden to impose on generators and
transporters of used oil…” G. Ray Comments, p. 4-5.
These difficulties are, of course, in addition to the significant task of filling out, handling
and storing a manifest for each and every shipment of material regulated as used oil that is not
“defined” used oil. The Board should also keep in mind that there is, inevitably, a “tipping
point” in this process – it the moment when the burden, expense, and frustration are simply not
worth it. For example, the used oil transporter may well decide that the extra effort to manifest,
segregate, and manage the relatively small amounts of used oil containing CESQG waste (not to
mention the irritation inflicted on his generator customers) is not warranted -- and so he simply
doesn’t collect this material. Consequently, the generator is likely either to “hide” such waste in
a larger quantity of “defined” used oil or find another method of getting rid of it. Neither of
these options achieves compliance, tracking, or any of the other goals that IEPA advocates.
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 22, 2008
What is NORA’s Proposal Concerning Tracking?
While NORA opposes the manifest and special waste hauling permit requirements for
most materials regulated as used oil, we fully acknowledge the need for tracking used oil.
Although we believe the tracking and reporting requirements in Part 279 are adequate for this
purpose, our proposal offers a genuine method to achieve IEPA’s stated objective that goes
beyond federal Part 279 requirement. Under NORA’s proposal, instead of a manifest, a tracking
document (such as a bill of lading) will be filled out and it will include all of the relevant
information to be found on the manifest. On this tracking document, the transporter can comply
with all U.S. Department of Transportation (“DOT”) tracking requirements, all of the customer
(generator) or other business information needed by the transporter, and
all additional relevant
information that would be set forth in a manifest.
Under current rules, the DOT tracking
document (bill of lading) must be kept for three years. Under NORA’s proposal, the Board
would require the use of these tracking documents and their retention by the transporter for not
less than three years. Under NORA’s proposal, these tracking documents would, of course, be
available for IEPA’s inspection. This approach would eliminate duplicative paperwork
(paperwork that, by the way, IEPA does not want cluttering up its offices and warehouses),
promote efficiency, and create a level playing field with generators and transporters in adjacent
states.
Responses to IEPA Concerns
The Board has quoted several of IEPA’s concerns with NORA’s proposal. It is entirely
appropriate that these concerns be directly addressed. One concern is that NORA’s proposal
“would allow waste streams that have chemical and physical properties completely different
from used oil to be transported and managed like used oil even when those practices are not
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 22, 2008
appropriate for that waste stream.” Quoted in Opinion and Order of the Board, R-06-20, May 1,
2008, p. 29. IEPA appears to suggest that NORA’s proposal is somehow written on a blank slate
and divorced from reality. In fact, NORA simply proposes that Illinois’ rule track EPA’s Part
279 requirements that have been adopted by 46 other states. During extensive notice and
comment from 1985 through 1992, U.S.E.P.A. carefully evaluated what materials were normally
mixed with used oil by generators and which did not interfere with legitimate recycling. It is
these materials -- and only these materials -- that are regulated as used oil. Significantly, with
the exception of a plastics pellets/used oil mixture (which would not be acceptable under
NORA’s proposal), IEPA has failed to provide any examples of materials that are regulated as
used oil where is “not appropriate” to manage such material as used oil.
Another concern is the information that would be contained in the tracking document
(IEPA refers to such document as “shipping papers”) would “vary according to company policy
and are not required by the regulations.” Quoted in Opinion and Order of the Board, R-06-20,
May 1, 2008, p.30. NORA’s response is simple: yes, the business information would vary
depending on the information needs of the generator and the transporter; the DOT information
requirements are set forth in DOT regulations; and the balance of the information
would
be
required by regulations – that is precisely the purpose of NORA’s request in this rulemaking.
Moreover, NORA’s proposal encompasses all of the relevant information required by both Part
739 and Part 809.
IEPA further claims that the Agency’s position “involves no additional paperwork”
because the Part 809 manifests will be satisfactory and the information will “not have to be
documented twice.” Id. IEPA deliberately misses the point. The duplicative paper work
involves three different pieces of paper with some overlapping information. NORA’s very
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 22, 2008
straightforward proposal would combine, in a single document: (1) DOT’s required information;
(2) the business-related information useful to the generator and transporter; and (3) all additional
information required by a Part 809 manifest.
An additional concern raised by IEPA is that under NORA’s proposal, a mixture of
“defined” used oil and material regulated as used oil “may be received by used oil facilities that
have less stringent permitting and siting requirements than special waste facilities.” Quoted in
Opinion and Order of the Board, R-06-20, May 1, 2008, p.31. IEPA seems to be hinting that
there would be some dark conspiracy between the generator, the transporter and the facility
operator to violate the facility’s permit standards. NORA has never had any intention of
circumventing any facility’s permit requirements. Either a given mixture is acceptable to a
particular permitted facility – or it is not. For example, in the case of used oil/high water content
mixtures there is no question that only certain facilities are capable of processing these mixtures.
Other facilities have zero interest in such used oil/water mixtures and it would be a complete
waste of everyone’s time and effort to try to push an unacceptable waste into a non-wastewater
facility. If IEPA is making a serious argument on this point, it cannot rest on generalities; it
needs to provide the Board with meaningful examples of materials regulated as used oil being
processed at facilities whose permits do not allow such materials.
Similarly, IEPA claims that it “knows that many facilities also profit by collecting
generator fees and disposing of the mixtures as low grade used oil fuel.” Quoted in Opinion and
Order of the Board, R-06-20, May 1, 2008, p.32. Such practices may occur but it is difficult to
verify because IEPA has failed to provide any examples and, moreover, has failed to define what
“low-grade fuel” is. Even assuming that such practices have indeed occurred they are either
lawful or not lawful. If lawful (e.g. selling “low-grade fuel” to a willing and informer buyer with
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 22, 2008
an appropriate burner), the practice would not in any way support IEPA’s position. If not lawful,
there is nothing in NORA’s proposal on replacing the manifest with a tracking document that
would make it lawful. If this practice is not lawful and IEPA “knows” of “many” such facilities,
it has an obligation to proceed with the appropriate enforcement actions.
IEPA also argues that mixtures of used oil and the constituents in materials regulated as
used oil “could reduce viscosity or BTU content or increase ash content of emissions from
burning the oil.” Quoted in Opinion and Order of the Board, R-06-20, May 1, 2008, p.33. No
examples are provided in this argument. However, any objective observer of the buying and
selling of industrial fuel in the United States will know that the specifications relating to BTU
content, viscosity, and ash content are important to its value. Both the buyer and seller have a
need to know the data on these constituents; the price of the fuel and indeed the transaction itself
depend on it. Moreover, both the buyer and seller will know the data before the transaction
regardless of whether Illinois imposes a manifest requirement on materials regulated as used oil.
Finally, ash emissions from burning is less a function of ash content of the fuel than the proper
operation of air pollution control equipment such as baghouses.
Conclusion
The Board has already discerned the wisdom of eliminating manifests for “defined” used
oil. The question now before the Board is whether to adopt IEPA’s position and establish a
bifurcated system in which defined used oil is not subject to any manifest but materials regulated
as used oil are required to be manifested. NORA has attempted to point out that a bifurcated
system creates needless inefficiency and cost – with no environmental benefit. Under NORA’s
proposal, all of the information that IEPA asserts that it needs will be available to it on a tracking
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 22, 2008
document that will simultaneously serve the information needs of IEPA, U.S. DOT, the
generator and the transporter.
IEPA’s arguments against NORA’s proposal should be carefully scrutinized. Many of
these arguments go to issues that outside the scope of NORA’s proposal. Others have no factual
basis. Other arguments display a lack of knowledge about the used oil recycling system.
The Board has an opportunity in this rulemaking to clearly focus on the realities of
generating, transporting, and processing used oil in Illinois (and across the Nation). The realities
include the true information needs of the regulators and the regulated community as well as the
costs and burdens on the regulated community. NORA is confident that the Board’s clear focus
on these issues will lead to the adoption of NORA’s Rule Proposal Amendment.
Respectfully submitted,
Christopher Harris
General Counsel,
NORA, An Association of Responsible Recyclers
2001 South Tracy
Bozeman, Montana 59715
(406) 586-9902
September 22, 2008
NORA’S PROPOSED AMENDMENT
REGULATORY LANGUAGE
TO BE ADDED TO AND DELETED FROM PART 739
[additional language set forth in bold type]
Part 739.110 Applicability- hazardous wastes
After 739.110,b,3 add the following language:
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 22, 2008
“BOARD NOTE: Used oil and the following post use mixtures are regulated under this
Part, and are exempt from 35 Ill. Adm. Code 808 and 809:
-
Mixtures of used oil and hazardous waste, both mixed and generated by a
conditionally exempt small quantity generator of hazardous, provided that such
mixture contains more than fifty percent of used oil by either volume or weight.
-
Mixtures of used oil containing BTU-valuable characteristic hazardous wastes, both
mixed and generated by the same generator, and which contain more than fifty
percent of used oil by weight or volume, provided such mixture does not exhibit a
characteristic of a hazardous waste. Any such BTU-valuable wastes or materials
shall contain a minimum of 5000 BTUs per pound before mixture with the used oil.
-
Mixtures of used oil and ignitable-only characteristic hazardous wastes, both mixed
and generated by the same generator, and which contain more than fifty percent of
used oil by weight or volume, provided such mixture does not exhibit the
characteristic of ignitability.
All other post use mixtures of used oil and hazardous wastes are regulated by 35 Ill. Adm.
Code 702, 703, and 720 through 728.”
Part 739.110 Applicability- other materials
After 739.110,c,2 add the following language:
“BOARD NOTE: Used oil and the following post use mixtures are regulated under this
Part, and are exempt from 35 Ill. Adm. Code 808 and 809:
-
Mixtures of BTU-valuable nonhazardous wastes and used oil, both generated by the
same generator, and which more than fifty percent of used oil by weight or volume.
Any such BTU-valuable wastes must contain a minimum of 5000 BTU per pound
before mixture with the used oil.
All other post use mixtures of used oil and other special waste materials are regulated by 35
Ill. Adm. Code 808 and 809, in addition to this Part.”
Part 739.110,f Applicability- used oil and wastewater mixtures.
After Part 739.110,f, add the following language:
“BOARD NOTE: Used oil and the following post use-mixtures are regulated under this
part, and are exempt from 35 Ill. Adm. Code 808 and 809:
-
Nonhazardous waste water contaminated by or mixed with used oil, both generated
by the same generator and which contain more than a de minimis (recoverable)
quantity of used oil.
All other post use mixtures of used oil and special waste water are regulated by 35 Ill. Adm.
Code 808 and 809, in addition to this part.”
Part 739.124 Off-Site Shipments - Generators
In the first paragraph remove the last part of the last sentence that reads:
“and an Illinois special waste identification number pursuant to 35 Ill. Adm. Code 809”
and replace it with the following:
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 22, 2008
“If the generator mixes another special or hazardous waste stream into the used oil after
use or presents another special or hazardous waste to the used oil transporter along with
the used oil in the same shipment without the use of a Part 809 special waste manifest as
outlined and allowed under Part 739.110 Applicability, Board Notes, the generator must
provide the quantity, classification and description of the non used oil streams and provide
such information to the transporter at the time of acceptance by the transporter. The
generator is required to keep all such records on file for a minimum of three years.”
Also, add to the end of the Board Note that immediately follows:
“if post use mixture takes place. See Board Notes under Part 739.110, Applicability, for
post use mixtures that are exempt from Part 809 manifesting requirements.”
Part 739.131 Used Oil Collection Centers
Add to the end of the existing Board Note:
“if post use mixture takes place. See Board Notes under Part 739.110, Applicability, for
post use mixtures that are exempt from Part 809 manifesting requirements.”
Part 739.132 Used Oil Aggregate Points Owned by the Generator
Add to the end of the Existing Board Note:
“if post use mixture takes place. See Board Notes under Part 739.110, Applicability, for
post use mixtures that are exempt from Part 809 manifesting requirements.”
Part 739.140,a,4 Applicability for Standards For Used Oil Transporter And Transfer Facilities
Add to the end of the Existing Board Note:
“if post use mixture takes place. See Board Notes under Part 739.110, Applicability, for
post use mixtures that are exempt from Part 809 manifesting requirements.”
Part 739.142,a Notification
Remove the following language from the last sentence:
“identification number”
And replace it with the following:
“hauling permit (if applicable)”
Part 793.142,b,2 Notification
Remove the following language:
“has not received an Illinois special waste identification number”
And replace it with:
“is required to obtain an Illinois special waste hauling permit”
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 22, 2008
Part 739.143,a,1 Used Oil Transportation
Remove the following language from the END of the last sentence:
“identification number”
And replace with:
“hauling permit (if applicable)”
Part 739.146,a,6 Tracking - Acceptance
Add the following as a new section 6:
“If the transporter has accepted any used oil mixed with special or hazardous waste that
was not used oil as generated, or accepts any other non used oil special or hazardous waste
for recycling along with the used oil without the use of a Part 809 special waste manifest as
outlined and allowed under Part 739.110 Applicability, Board Notes, the transporter must
provide to the agency if requested, the quantity, classification and description of the non
used oil streams in the mixture. The transporter must have procedures in place that would
readily convey to any emergency personal in the event of an accident, any non used oil
streams in the load that could alter the handling characteristics of the used oil. This
information must appear on the used oil shipping document.”
Part 739.146,b,2
Add the following language after “and Illinois special waste identification number”:
“(if applicable)”
Part 739.146,b,6 Tracking – Deliveries
Add the following as a new section 6:
“The transporter shall have procedures in place to assure that the receiving facility will be
promptly notified of all relevant information concerning any non-used oil streams in the
load that could adversely affect the management or characteristics of the used oil. The
transporter shall also notify the receiving facility of any other special waste streams in the
used oil would likely cause the used oil to fail the oil EPA used specifications in 40 CFR
Part 279 or the applicable ASTM performance specifications, unless such used oil is sold or
transferred as an EPA off specification or non-ASTM certified used oil.”
Part 739.156,a,3 and b,3 Tracking – Processors
Remove the following language:
“identification number”
And replace with:
“hauling permit number (if applicable)”
Part 739.156,b,4
Add the following language after “special waste identification number”:
“(if applicable)”
Part 739.158 Processor Off-Site Shipments of Used Oil
Remove the following language from the last sentence of the first paragraph:
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 22, 2008
“ identification number”
And replace with:
“hauling permit (if applicable)”
Part 739.165,a,3 Off specification Burners Tracking
Remove the following language in the LAST part of the sentence:
“identification number”
And replace with:
“hauling permit (if applicable)”
Part 739.174,a,3 Marketers - Tracking
Remove the following language in the LAST part of the sentence:
“identification number”
And replace with:
“hauling permit number (if applicable)”
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 22, 2008
19
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, the undersigned, certify that I have served the attached NORA’s Comments (Pre-filed
Testimony), by U. S. mail, upon the following persons:
Office of the Attorney General
Ms.Deirdre K. Hirner
69 West Washington Street, Suite 1800
Executive Director
Chicago, Illinois 60602
Illinois Pollution Control Board
100 Randolph Street
Mr. Matthew J. Dunn
Suite 11-500
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
Chicago, Illinois 60601
1021 North Grand Avenue East
P. O. Box 19276
Ms. Dorothy Gunn
Springfield, Illinois 62794
Clerk of Illinois Pollution Control
Board
Stephanie Flowers, Esquire
100 Randolph Street Suite 11-500
Brown, Hay and Stephens, L.L.P.
Chicago, Illinois 60601
700 First Mercantile Bank Building
205 South Fifth Street
Tim Fox, Esquire
P. O. Box 2459
Hearing Officer
Springfield, Illinois 62705
Illinois Pollution Control Board
100 Randolph Street
Claire A. Manning, Esquire
Suite 11-500
Illinois Environmental Regulatory Group
Chicago, Illinois 60601
215 East Adams Street
Springfield, Illinois 62701
________________________________________
Christopher Harris
September 22, 2008
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 22, 2008