![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Hazardous Waste Management System; Modification of the Hazardous Waste Program; Cathode Ray Tubes and Mercury-Containing Equipment
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
[Federal Register: June 12, 2002 (Volume 67, Number 113)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 40507-40528]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr12jn02-31]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 260, 261, 264, 268, 270, and 273
[FRL-7217-7]
RIN 2050-AE52
Hazardous Waste Management System; Modification of the Hazardous
Waste Program; Cathode Ray Tubes and Mercury-Containing Equipment
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Many used cathode ray tubes (CRTs) and items of mercury-
containing equipment are currently classified as characteristic
hazardous wastes under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA). They are therefore subject to the hazardous waste regulations
of RCRA Subtitle C unless they come from a household or a conditionally
exempt small quantity generator. Today, the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) proposes and seeks comment on an exclusion from the
definition of solid waste which would streamline RCRA management
requirements for used cathode ray tubes (CRTs) and glass removed from
CRTs sent for recycling. In today's notice, the Agency also clarifies
the status of used CRTs sent for reuse. In addition, EPA proposes and
seeks comment on streamlining management requirements for used mercury-
containing equipment by adding it to the federal list of universal
wastes.
DATES: To make sure EPA considers your comments or suggested revisions
to this proposal, they must be postmarked on or before August 12, 2002.
ADDRESSES: Commenters must send an original and two copies of their
comments referencing docket number F-2002-CRTP-FFFFF
to: RCRA Docket Information Center, Office of Solid Waste (5305G), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency Ariel Rios Building, 1200 Pennsylvania
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460. Hand deliveries of comments should
be made to the Arlington, VA address listed in the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section below. Comments may also be submitted
electronically to rcra-docket@epamail.epa.gov. See the beginning
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for instructions on electronic
submissions.
Public comments and supporting materials are available for viewing
in the RCRA Docket and Information Center (RIC) located at Crystal
Gateway 1, First Floor, 1235 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA.
The docket is open from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding federal holidays. To review docket materials, it is
recommended that the public make an appointment by calling (703)
603-9230. The public may copy a maximum of 100 pages from the
regulatory docket at no charge. Additional copies cost $0.15/page. The
index is available electronically. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section for information on accessing it.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information, contact the
RCRA/Superfund/EPCRA/UST Call Center at (800) 424-9346 (toll
free) or TDD (800) 553-7672 (hearing impaired). In the
Washington, DC metropolitan area, call (703) 412-9810 or TDD
(703) 412-3323. For more detailed information on specific aspects
of this rulemaking, contact Ms. Marilyn Goode, Office of Solid Waste
(5304W), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Ariel Rios Building,
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460, (703)
308-8800, electronic mail: goode.marilyn@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Electronic Comment Submission
You may submit comments electronically through the Internet to:
rcra-docket@epa.gov. You should identify comments in electronic
format with the docket number F-2002-CRTP-FFFFF. All
electronic comments must be submitted as an ASCII (text) file avoiding
the use of special characters and any form of encryption. If possible,
EPA's Office of Solid Waste (OSW) would also like to receive an
additional copy of the comments on disk in WordPerfect 6.1 file format.
Commenters should not submit electronically any confidential business
information (CBI). An original and two copies of CBI must be submitted
under separate cover to: RCRA CBI Document Control Officer, Office of
Solid Waste (5305W), U.S. EPA, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington,
DC 20460. If possible, please provide two non-CBI summaries of any CBI
information. Some of the supporting documents in the docket also are
available in electronic format on the Internet at URL: http://
www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/recycle/electron/crt.htm.
EPA will keep the official record for this action in paper form.
Accordingly, we will transfer all comments received electronically into
paper form and place them in the official record, which also will
include all comments submitted directly in writing. The official
administrative file is the paper file maintained at the RCRA Docket,
the address of which is in ADDRESSES at the beginning of this document.
EPA's responses to public comments, whether the comments are
received in written or electronic format, will be published in the
Federal Register or in a response to comments document placed in the
public docket. We will not reply immediately to commenters
electronically other than to seek clarification of electronic comments
that may be garbled in transmission or during conversion to paper form,
as discussed above.
You may view public comments and the supporting materials for the
issues and memoranda discussed below in the RCRA Information Center
(RIC) located at Crystal Gateway 1, First Floor, 1235 Jefferson Davis
Highway, Arlington, VA. The RIC is open from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding federal holidays. To review file materials,
we recommend that you make an appointment by calling (703)
603-9230. You may copy a maximum of 100 pages from any file
maintained at the RCRA Docket at no charge. Additional copies cost
$0.15 per page.
Preamble Outline
I. Legal Authority
II. List of Abbreviations and Acronyms
III. Cathode Ray Tubes
A. What Is the Purpose of EPA's Proposal?
B. What Are Cathode Ray Tubes?
C. Why Are Cathode Ray Tubes An Environmental Concern?
D. How Are Used Cathode Ray Tubes Currently Managed?
E. How Do EPA's Current Regulations Apply to CRTs and Other
Electronic Materials?
F. What Are The Common Sense Initiative (CSI) Recommendations?
G. Proposed Requirements for Used CRTs Undergoing Recycling
H. Solicitation of Comment on EPA's Proposed Management
Requirements for Used CRTs and Processed CRT Glass
IV. Mercury-Containing Equipment
A. What Is "Mercury-Containing Equipment?"
B. Why Is EPA Proposing to Add Mercury-Containing Equipment To
The List of Universal Wastes?
C. What Are EPA's Proposed Management Requirements for Used
Mercury-Containing Equipment?
D. Solicitation of Comment on Universal Waste Notification
Requirements
V. State Authority
A. Applicability of Rules in Authorized States
B. Effect on State Authorization
C. Interstate Transport
VI. Regulatory Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) as amended by the Small
Business
[[Page 40509]]
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
D. Unfunded Mandates
E. Executive Order 13132
F. Executive Order 13175
G. Executive Order 13045
H. Executive Order 13211
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
J. Environmental Justice
I. Legal Authority
These regulations are proposed under the authority of sections
2002(a), 3001, 3002, 3004, and 3006 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act
of 1970, as amended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of
1976 (RCRA), and as amended by the Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984 (HSWA), 42 U.S.C. 6912(a), 6921, 6922, 6924, and
6926.
II. List of Abbreviations and Acronyms
CES Computers and Electronics Subcommittee
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CRT Cathode Ray Tube
CSI Common Sense Initiative
DOT Department of Transportation
FPD Flat Panel Display
HDTV High Definition Television
LCD Liquid Crystal Display
LDR
LQHUW Large Quantity Handler of Universal Waste
OECD Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
SQHUW Small Quantity Handler of Universal Waste
TC Toxicity Characteristic
TCLP Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure
TSDF Treatment, Storage and Disposal Facility
TV Television
USWAG Utility Solid Waste Activities Group
UWR Universal Waste Rule
WTE Waste-to-Energy
III. Cathode Ray Tubes
A. What Is The Purpose of EPA's Proposal?
Technological advances in information management and communication
have improved the quality of people's lives in countless ways. However,
our growing use of electronic products at home and in the workplace has
given us a new environmental challenge: Electronics waste. Today's
proposed rule is an important step towards meeting the challenge of
managing electronics waste in a way that is environmentally sound while
at the same time encouraging the reuse and recycling of these
materials.
EPA estimates that about 57 million televisions and computers are
sold annually to households and businesses in the United States. These
purchasers often do not discard older models when buying newer versions
of the same products. Consumers (both business and household)
frequently store their retired products. Experts agree that the average
household may have between two and three units in storage. The numbers
of units (mainly computers) stored by businesses are of course much
greater. In total, approximately 20 to 24 million computers and
televisions are added to storage each year. Over the next decade,
storage is expected to increase at a faster rate because of advances in
digital technology for televisions. Just as advances in computer speed
and software have made older computers uneconomical to repair, newer
digital broadcast standards are likely to reduce the repair and resale
value of older televisions.
Recycling glass from computers and televisions is still largely a
new industry. However, the number of units available for reuse or
recycling is growing rapidly, and state and industry initiatives to
promote recycling are increasing. EPA is eager to see this industry
grow, in part because reusing and recycling these materials saves
valuable natural resources and avoids their disposal in landfills and
incinerators. The Agency must, of course, assure that materials under
RCRA jurisdiction are managed in a way that protects human health and
the environment.
Today, the Agency seeks comment on streamlining management
requirements for used CRTs and processed CRT glass by proposing a
conditional exclusion from the definition of solid waste for these
materials when they are recycled (see proposed 40 CFR 261.4(a)(23) and
261.4(b)(39)). The purpose of these proposed simplified requirements is
to encourage greater reuse, recycling, and better management of this
growing wastestream, while maintaining necessary environmental
protection. We are also soliciting comment on certain conditions
intended to ensure that the materials are handled as commodities rather
than wastes.
B. What Are Cathode Ray Tubes?
Cathode ray tubes (CRTs) are vacuum tubes, made primarily of glass,
which constitute the video display components of televisions and
computer monitors. CRT sizes are typically measured from one corner;
the diagonal of a CRT display generally ranges from 1 to 38 inches.
Other types of CRTs include medical, automotive, oscilloscope, and
appliance CRTs, which are typically 12 inches diagonal or smaller,
while military and aircraft control tower CRTs may be much larger.
CRTs are built of a specialized glass that often contains lead.
They consist of four major parts: A glass panel (faceplate); a shadow
mask; a glass funnel; and a glass neck which houses the electron gun.
The glass panel is the front of the CRT that the viewer sees when
looking at a TV or computer screen. The shadow mask is a thin metal
sheet with holes that is located immediately behind the glass panel.
Attached to the back of the glass panel is the glass funnel. The panel
and funnel are joined with the shadow mask and sealed together with a
low-temperature glass frit, consisting of solder glass containing
organic binders. The back end of the CRT is the glass neck that holds
the electron gun. This gun produces the electrons that strike the glass
panel, resulting in viewable images on the display surface. A CRT is
assembled into a monitor, a unit that includes several other parts,
including a plastic cabinet, electromagnetic shields, circuit boards,
connectors, and cabling.
C. Why Are Cathode Ray Tubes an Environmental Concern?
Under Subtitle C of RCRA, a solid waste is a hazardous waste if it
exhibits one or more of the characteristics of ignitability,
corrosivity, reactivity, or toxicity in 40 CFR part 261, subpart C, or
if it is a listed hazardous waste in part 261, subpart D. The RCRA
regulations set forth requirements for hazardous waste generators,
transporters, and owners and operators of treatment, storage, and
disposal facilities (TSDFs). EPA regulations also contain exclusions
for certain wastes from the definition of solid waste or hazardous
waste (40 CFR 261.4)(a) and (b)). In addition, EPA has developed
streamlined rules for particular wastes, including recyclable wastes
(40 CFR part 266) and universal wastes such as batteries, pesticides,
thermostats, and lamps that are widely generated by different
industries (40 CFR part 273).
Manufacturers generally use significant quantities of lead to make
color cathode ray tubes. Televisions and color computer monitors
contain an average of four pounds of lead (the exact amount depends on
size and make). Lead is present in the panel glass, funnel, neck, and
glass frit of color CRTs, with the highest concentrations usually found
in the frit and funnel glass. The amount of lead used in some
manufacturing processes of CRTs appears to be decreasing. However,
according to a study of CRTs published by the University of Florida,
the average concentration of lead in leachate from
[[Page 40510]]
colored CRT glass generated through EPA's toxicity characteristic
leaching procedure (TCLP) was 22.2 milligrams per liter (mg/l). This
level is considerably above the toxicity characteristic regulatory
level of 5 milligrams per liter that is used to classify lead-
containing wastes as hazardous (40 CFR 261.24(b)). For monochrome CRTs,
the average lead leachate concentration was 0.03 mg/l. These data
appear to indicate that black and white monitors do not generally fail
the TC. The faceplate also does not usually fail the TC.
Other hazardous constituents sometimes present in CRT glass are
mercury, cadmium, and arsenic. However, these constituents are found in
very low concentrations that are unlikely to exceed the TC
concentration limits (see Characterization of Lead Leachability from
Cathode Ray Tubes Using the Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure,
T.G. Townsend et al., University of Florida, 1999). Flat panel displays
(FPDs) have emerged on the electronics market as a replacement for CRTs
in certain applications, primarily because FPDs are lighter, smaller,
and more portable, and they consume less energy during operation. FPDs
generally contain no lead, but may contain encapsulated mercury in
small amounts.
D. How Are Used Cathode Ray Tubes Currently Managed?
1. Reuse
Many used computers are resold or donated so that they can be used
again, either as is or after minor repairs. Although the Agency has no
legal jurisdiction over reused computers, we encourage this option as a
responsible way to manage these materials, because preventing or
delaying the generation of waste often conserves resources. This option
extends the lives of valuable products and keeps them out of the waste
management system for a longer time. Reuse also allows schools, non-
profit organizations, and individual families to use equipment that
they otherwise could not afford. Many markets for reuse of computers
are located abroad, particularly in countries where few may be able to
purchase state-of-the-art new equipment.
Organizations which handle used computers vary from area to area.
In some cases, nonprofit organizations such as charities and school
districts take donations of used computer equipment. These
organizations may test the equipment, and, if necessary, rewire it and
replace various parts, including the electron gun, before sending them
for reuse. In other cases, the entities that collect the CRTs send them
to another organization with more expertise for evaluation and possible
repair and reuse. CRTs that cannot be used after such minor repairs may
be sent to recycling or disposal. CRTs from televisions are more likely
to be repaired by appliance dealers or small repair shops before reuse.
2. Recycling
a. Collection of used CRTs. If reuse or repair is not a practical
option, CRTs can be sent for recycling, which typically consists of
disassembly for the purpose of recovering valuable materials from the
CRTs, especially glass. A growing number of municipalities are offering
to collect computers and electronics for recycling. In addition, public
and private organizations have emerged that accept CRTs for the same
purpose. Examples of such organizations include county recycling drop-
off centers, television repair shops, charities, electronics recycling
companies, and electronics manufacturers and retailers.
An increasing number of electronics manufacturers are offering to
take back computer CRTs for recycling. In some cases, these services
are provided free. In other cases, a fee is charged, usually for
shipping and handling. Take-back programs have been available for some
time to major corporations and large purchasers of electronic
equipment. Now, electronics manufacturers are beginning to offer
similar services for computer CRTs to small businesses and households.
b. Recycling of unused CRTs and unused CRT glass. Makers of glass
for CRTs recycle some of the glass they produce because it does not
meet product specifications. EPA estimates that about one or two
percent of glass production results in unused, off-specification
products. This glass is generally recycled into new CRT glass. The
glass may be recycled on-site at a CRT glass manufacturing facility, or
it may be sent to a glass processor. Computers and television
manufacturers also find that a small percentage of assembled monitors
are "off-specification". They may send these unused devices
to a glass processor.
c. Glass processing and other materials recovery. CRT glass
processors that accept used CRTs generally receive them from three
sources: the glass manufacturers described above (who supply most of
the glass), manufacturers of monitor units who decide not to sell off-
specification monitors, and businesses who provide used computers or
televisions, which at present are a much smaller source.
The used CRTs are typically stored in a warehouse. When the
processing begins, the CRT display unit is dismantled, and the bare CRT
is separated from all other parts (usually glass, plastic, or metal).
Next, the vacuum is released by drilling through the anode, a small
metal button in the funnel. The different glass portions of the CRT
(faceplate, funnel, and neck) are then separated and classified
according to chemical composition, especially by the amount of lead
contained. The same sorting takes place for broken glass received from
CRT glass manufacturers, which is separated into leaded and non-leaded
glass. All glass is then cleaned and the coatings removed. The sorted
and cleaned cullet (i.e., processed glass) is then typically stored in
enclosed areas before it is shipped off-site to a CRT glass
manufacturer (or sometimes to a smelter or to manufacturers of other
kinds of glass). When a CRT glass manufacturing facility receives a
shipment of processed CRT glass, it removes the anode button and
further crushes the glass, which then enters a furnace to be heated and
made into new CRT glass.
Sometimes the processed glass is sent to a lead smelter where it is
recycled to reclaim the lead and to provide silica, which acts as a
fluxing agent in the smelter. These uses often occur if the glass does
not meet the specifications for CRT glass. The cleaning process
described above also generates glass fines that are collected and sold
to lead smelters to be used as a fluxing agent. In addition, processed
CRT glass may be sent to copper smelters, also for use as a flux.
Sometimes other types of production facilities use processed CRT glass
to make objects such as radiation shielding, acoustical barriers,
optical glass beads, or decorative glass and tile products. The market
for these recycled glass items is currently limited, but may grow in
the future.
3. Disposal
Many consumers do not wish to discard monitors and TVs if they can
be recycled. Many or most CRTs therefore remain in storage. Of the CRTs
that are disposed of by households, most go to municipal landfills, and
others to municipal waste-to-energy (WTE) facilities. Only a small
percentage are recycled (see Life Cycle Assessment of the Disposal of
Household Electronics, D. McKenna et al., August 1996, which indicated
that only one percent of CRTs from households were recycled). Some CRTs
from non-household sources are also placed in municipal landfills. Some
[[Page 40511]]
states (such as Massachusetts and California) have banned CRTs from all
sources from landfills.
E. How Do EPA's Current Regulations Apply to CRTs and Other Electronic
Materials?
As described above, CRT glass often exhibits the toxicity
characteristic (TC) for lead because this constituent is used to make
most CRT glass. Whether a person or facility is currently subject to
the RCRA hazardous waste regulations depends on several factors,
including whether the CRT will be recycled or disposed and the type of
user. Following is a brief description of how different entities are
currently regulated.
1. Who Is Regulated And Who Is Not?
a. Households. Households that dispose of CRTs are exempt from
hazardous waste management requirements under 40 CFR 261.4(b)(1). They
may therefore send their used computer and television monitors to any
facility or collector for recycling or disposal without being subject
to regulation. Other facilities managing household hazardous waste
(such as collectors, recyclers, or disposers) continue to be exempt
from hazardous waste requirements unless the household waste is mixed
with other regulated hazardous waste.
b. Non-residential generators. Non-residential generators of less
than 100 kilograms (about 220 lbs) of hazardous waste (including CRTs)
in a calendar month are known as conditionally exempt small quantity
generators (CESQGs) and are not subject to most RCRA Subtitle C
hazardous waste management standards. The Agency notes that about 7 or
8 CRTs would be sufficient to weigh 220 lbs (assuming that each monitor
weighed 30 lbs). These CESQGs may choose to send their wastes to a
municipal solid waste landfill or other facility approved by the state
for the management of industrial or municipal non-hazardous wastes,
including recycling facilities (40 CFR 261.5). Generators of more than
100 kilograms (about 220 lbs) and less than 1,000 kilograms (about
2,200 lbs) of hazardous waste (including CRTs) in a calendar month are
subject to the RCRA hazardous waste management standards, but are
allowed to comply with certain reduced regulatory requirements (40 CFR
262.34). Generators of more than 1,000 kilograms (about 2,200 lbs) of
hazardous waste in a calendar month are considered large quantity
generators and are subject to all the applicable hazardous waste
regulations for generators (40 CFR 262.34). CRTs that are not
considered wastes should not be counted in determining whether a
generator is a CESQG, SQG, or LQG.
2. When Do CRTs Become Wastes?
To determine whether a non-residential facility with used CRTs must
comply with the RCRA hazardous waste regulations, the user must first
determine if its used CRTs are solid wastes. Following is a brief
description of how solid waste determinations for CRTs are made under
federal law.
a. Reuse and repair of used CRTs. EPA has consistently taken the
view that materials used and taken out of service by one person are not
wastes if a second person puts them to the same type of use without
first "reclaiming" them (see 50 FR 624, January 5, 1985).
Many CRTs are taken out of service by both businesses and households
not because they can no longer be used, but because users are upgrading
their systems to take advantage of the rapid advances that have
resulted in better and faster electronics. Businesses and organizations
upgrading their computers often replace the entire computer system,
including the monitors. A working CRT-containing unit considered
obsolete by one user is therefore likely to be capable of reuse as a
computer monitor or a television monitor by another user.
Many businesses and organizations that take CRTs out of service do
not have the specialized knowledge needed to determine whether the unit
can be reused as a computer or television display unit. Moreover, those
entities often do not decide whether a particular CRT will, in fact, be
reused. Many businesses and other organizations send used computers and
televisions to resellers. Resellers often test CRTs or otherwise decide
if the CRTs can be reused directly, if they can be reused after minor
repairs, or if they must be sent for further processing or disposal.
Because the typical original user usually lacks the specialized
knowledge needed to decide the future of a CRT, EPA is today clarifying
that we do not consider a user sending a CRT to a reseller for
potential reuse to be a RCRA generator.
Furthermore, EPA today clarifies that used CRTs undergoing repairs
before resale or distribution are not being "reclaimed,"
and are considered to be products "in use" rather than
solid wastes. Resellers of used CRTs generally test and identify
equipment that can be resold or is economically repairable. Sometimes
the equipment is collected and redistributed for reuse with no repairs.
If repairs are necessary, they typically consist of rewiring, replacing
defective parts, or replacing the electron gun. Under these
circumstances, the CRT would still be considered a commercial product
rather than a solid waste. EPA believes that these repairs and
replacement activities do not constitute waste management.
b. Unused CRTs sent for recycling. Sometimes manufacturers of
computers and televisions send unused CRTs (usually off-specification
CRTs) directly to glass processors who break the CRTs and separate out
the glass components. Generally, the processor then sends the processed
glass to a glass-to-glass recycler or to another recycling facility,
such as a lead smelter. Although EPA could consider these activities to
constitute reclamation, the Agency does not regulate the reclamation of
either listed or characteristic unused commercial chemical products
(see 50 FR 14219, April 11, 1985). EPA considers unused CRTs to be
unused commercial chemical products. Therefore, these materials are not
solid wastes when sent for reclamation.
c. Used CRTs sent for recycling. Under the current RCRA
regulations, used CRTs sent directly to glass processors or other
recyclers could under some circumstances be considered spent materials
undergoing reclamation, and could therefore be solid wastes. However,
as explained elsewhere in this notice, EPA believes that under some
circumstances used CRTs sent for recycling do not resemble spent
materials. Therefore, users and resellers sending used CRTs to
recyclers should check with their authorized States to see which
Subtitle C requirements, if any, are applicable to their activities.
EPA encourages States to take approaches consistent with today's
proposal. The Agency is today proposing an exclusion from the
definition of solid waste for used CRTs being recycled if they are
managed under certain conditions. This proposal is discussed later in
this notice.
d. Disposal. If a non-household entity decides to send used or
unused CRTs directly to a landfill or an incinerator for disposal, that
entity would be considered the generator of a solid waste. The person
making the decision must determine if the CRTs exhibit a hazardous
waste characteristic under 40 CFR part 261, subpart C. He may either
test the CRTs or use process knowledge to make this determination. As
stated above, many or most CRTs from color computer or television
monitors exhibit the toxicity characteristic for lead. Although EPA's
data indicate that most CRTs from black and white monitors do not fail
the TC, those that do are subject to all applicable hazardous waste
management requirements. When a
[[Page 40512]]
decision is made to dispose of hazardous waste CRTs, the non-
residential user, reseller, or manufacturer must comply with all
applicable hazardous waste generator requirements of 40 CFR part 262,
including packaging and labeling, 90-day accumulation requirements, use
of the hazardous waste manifest, and recordkeeping and reporting
(unless the generator is a CESQG).
Some companies ship their waste CRTs to hazardous waste landfills
for disposal. Used CRTs generated by a non-residential facility that
fail the TC for lead must meet applicable land disposal restrictions
(LDRs) before being placed in a land-based unit, such as a landfill.
These restrictions do not apply to CRTs generated by households or
CESQGs. To meet LDRs, the CRT glass must be treated so that the TCLP
lead concentration does not exceed 0.75 mg per liter. This
concentration level is generally achieved by crushing and stabilizing
the glass through the addition of chemicals which reduce the solubility
of lead when contacted by leachate.
3. When Do Non-CRT Electronic Materials Become Wastes?
In 1992, the Agency issued a memorandum to its EPA Regional Waste
Management Directors stating that used whole circuit boards are
considered to be scrap metal when sent for reclamation, and therefore
exempt from regulation under RCRA. The Agency has also addressed
printed circuit boards in the Land Disposal Restrictions Phase IV
rulemaking (see 62 FR 25998, May 12, 1997). In that rulemaking, the
Agency provided an exclusion from the definition of solid waste at 40
CFR 261.4(a)(14) for shredded circuit boards being reclaimed, provided
they are stored in containers sufficient to prevent a release to the
environment prior to recovery and provided they are free of mercury
switches, mercury relays, nickel-cadmium batteries and lithium
batteries. Subsequently, on May 26, 1998 (63 FR 28556), the Agency
clarified that the scrap metal exemption applies to whole used circuit
boards that contain minor battery or mercury switch components and that
are sent for continued use, reuse, or recovery. In that notice, EPA
stated that it was not the Agency's intent to regulate under RCRA
circuit boards containing minimal quantities of mercury and batteries
that are protectively packaged to minimize dispersion of metal
constituents. Once these materials are removed from the boards, they
become a newly generated waste subject to a hazardous waste
determination. If they meet the criteria to be classified as a
hazardous waste, they must be handled as hazardous waste; otherwise
they must be managed as a solid waste.
The Agency is studying certain non-CRT electronic materials to
determine whether they consistently exhibit a characteristic of
hazardous waste. However, we are not currently aware of any non-CRT
computer components or electronic products that would generally be
hazardous wastes. With respect to these materials, the Agency would use
the same line of reasoning that is outlined above for CRTs to determine
if the materials are solid wastes. That is, if an original user sends
electronic materials to a reseller because he lacks the specialized
knowledge needed to determine whether the units can be reused as
products, the original user is not a RCRA generator. The materials
would not be considered solid wastes until a decision was made to
recycle them in other ways or dispose of them.
F. What Are The Common Sense Initiative (CSI) Recommendations?
From 1994 through 1998, EPA's Common Sense Initiative (CSI)
explored the environmental regulation of six industry sectors and
looked for ways to make environmental regulation "cleaner,
cheaper, and smarter." EPA established CSI as an advisory
committee (the "CSI Council") under the Federal Advisory
Committee Act. The CSI Council included representatives from each
industry sector, from non-governmental environmental and community
organizations, from state governments, and from colleges and
universities. EPA also established subcommittees of the Council for
each industry sector. The subcommittees included representatives of the
various stakeholders represented in the CSI Council. One of the
industry sectors selected for this initiative was the computer and
electronics industry. The CSI Computers and Electronics Subcommittee
(CES) then formed a workgroup to examine regulatory barriers to
pollution prevention and recycling. The workgroup (known as the
"Overcoming Barriers Workgroup") explored the problems of
managing mounting volumes of outdated computer and electronics
equipment.
One of the concerns investigated by the Overcoming Barriers
Workgroup and the CES was the barrier to CRT recycling created by some
existing hazardous waste management regulations. The CES urged that
removing such barriers was essential to fostering CRT recycling,
especially glass-to-glass recycling. The Subcommittee believed that CRT
recycling would provide the following benefits: (1) Less lead sent to
landfills and combustors; (2) added resource value of specialty glass
and lead; (3) lower waste management costs; (4) less regulatory
uncertainty about CRT recovery and recycling; (5) less use of raw lead
in CRT glass manufacturing; (6) better melting characteristics,
improved heat transfer, and lower energy consumption in CRT glass
manufacturing furnaces; (7) improved CRT glass quality; and (8) lower
emissions of lead from CRT glass manufacturing. The CES Subcommittee
indicated that some recycling methods or end products (other than those
associated with glass-to-glass recycling) may pose risks to human
health and the environment and would require further investigation.
As a result of the finding of the CES Subcommittee, the CSI Council
issued a document titled Recommendation on Cathode Ray Tube (CRT)
Glass-to-Glass Recycling. In this document, the Council recommended
streamlined regulatory requirements for CRTs that would encourage
recycling and better management. The recommendations included
streamlined requirements for packaging, labeling, transportation;
general performance standards for glass processors; and export
provisions. The CSI Council also recommended an exclusion from the
definition of solid waste for processed glass that is used to make new
CRT glass. In today's document, EPA proposes an exclusion from the
definition of solid waste which would streamline management
requirements for used CRTs. Although the requirements proposed today
are more streamlined that those recommended by the CSI Council, we
believe that they will be just as effective in fostering the goals of
the Council. The Agency is also soliciting comment on several
alternative management requirements.
G. Proposed Requirements for Used CRTs Undergoing Recycling
1. What Will Not Be Affected by Today's Proposed Rule?
All materials discussed above that are not currently regulated
under RCRA will remain unaffected by today's proposal. Used CRTs from
households and CESQGs will retain their current regulatory exemptions.
Used CRTs from any source that are sent for reuse as is or after minor
repairs are not wastes. Proposed Sec. 261.4(a)(23) will provide
better notice of this interpretation of our current regulations. Unused
CRTs sent for recycling will still be classified as commercial chemical
products which are not solid wastes even if they are
[[Page 40513]]
reclaimed or speculatively accumulated. Finally, both used and unused
CRTs sent for disposal will also remain regulated as before.
2. What Is Covered by Today's Proposed Rule and What Are the Proposed
Management Requirements?
Today's proposal principally addresses used CRTs destined for
recycling and processed glass from CRTs. The regulations we are
proposing distinguish between intact CRTs and CRTs that are broken. An
intact CRT is a CRT remaining within the monitor whose vacuum has not
been released. A broken CRT means glass removed from the monitor after
the vacuum has been released. EPA notes that these proposed definitions
would also cover non-consumer CRTs such as medical, automotive,
oscilloscope, and appliance CRTs.
a. Used, Intact CRTs Destined for Recycling. Today's proposal would
exclude intact CRTs from the definition of solid waste unless they are
disposed. Consequently, these units would not be subject to Subtitle C
regulation, including the speculative accumulation limits of 40 CFR
261.2(c)(4). They could therefore be held indefinitely without becoming
solid wastes.
Intact CRTs are highly unlikely to release lead to the environment
because the lead is contained in the plastic housing and the glass
matrix. Because of this low likelihood of release, EPA is today
proposing reduced requirements for broken CRTs which are based on
findings that these materials merit exclusion from the definition of
solid waste. For the sake of regulatory simplicity, the Agency is
proposing to codify all of the reduced requirements for CRTs in one
section of the Code of Federal Regulations, under the list of
exclusions from the definition of solid waste.
As noted above, unused CRTs are currently considered commercial
chemical products which are excluded from the definition of solid waste
when recycled, even if they are reclaimed or speculatively accumulated.
We believe that it would be very difficult to distinguish between used
and unused intact CRTs destined for recycling. Moreover, there appears
to be no environmental basis for such a distinction. Therefore, EPA is
proposing to grant relief from Subtitle C requirements for all intact
CRTs unless they are disposed, whether used or unused.
b. Used, Broken CRTs Destined for Recycling. Some users and
collectors of CRTs separate the CRT from the monitor and release the
vacuum, after which they send the resulting broken glass to a recycler
(often a glass processor). This practice saves shipping costs and
enables the glass processor to pay more for the broken CRTs received.
At other times, the CRTs are first broken by the processor or other
recycler. CRTs whose glass has been broken by releasing the vacuum are
non-reusable and non-repairable; they are therefore solid wastes at the
time such breakage occurs.
EPA is proposing today to amend 40 CFR part 261 to add a new
Sec. 261.39(a), which will provide that used, broken CRTs are
excluded from the definition of solid waste if they meet specified
conditions. Under today's proposal, used, broken CRTs sent for
recycling would not be solid wastes if they are stored in a building
with a roof, floor, and walls. If they are not stored in a building,
they must be stored in a container (i.e., a package or a vehicle) that
is constructed, filled, and closed to minimize identifiable releases of
CRT glass (including fine solid materials) to the environment. The
packages must also be labeled or marked clearly. When transported, the
broken CRTs must also be in a container meeting the conditions
described above. Used, broken CRTs destined for recycling would also
not be allowed to be speculatively accumulated as defined in 40 CFR
261.1.
The Agency believes that if these materials are properly
containerized and labeled when stored or shipped prior to recycling,
they resemble articles in commerce or commodities more than wastes.
Breakage is a first step toward recycling the leaded glass components
of the CRT. Also, materials held in conditions that safeguard against
loss are more likely to be regarded as valuable commodities destined
for legitimate recycling. In addition, the proposed packaging
requirements would ensure that the possibility of releases to the
environment from the broken CRTs is very low. For these reasons, an
exclusion from the definition of solid waste is appropriate if the
broken CRTs are handled under the conditions proposed today.
Today's proposal would require used, broken CRTs that are imported
for recycling to comply with the packaging and labeling requirements
specified above when they enter the borders of the United States in
order to be eligible for the exclusion. Similarly, they could not be
speculatively accumulated after arriving in the country. However, they
would not be subject to any of the hazardous waste import requirements
of 40 CFR part 262, subparts F and H.
Used, broken CRTs that are exported would not be solid wastes if
they were packaged and labeled as described above, and if they were not
speculatively accumulated. Exports of broken CRTs meeting these
conditions would therefore not be subject to the hazardous waste export
requirements of 40 CFR part 262, subparts E and H, including the
hazardous waste notification requirements.
c. Used, broken CRTs Undergoing Glass Processing. The Agency also
proposes today an exclusion from the definition of solid waste for used
CRTs undergoing glass processing, as long as the processing meets
certain conditions. CRT glass processing is defined in proposed 40 CFR
260.10 as receiving intact or broken used CRTs, intentionally breaking
them, sorting or otherwise managing glass removed from CRT monitors,
and cleaning coatings from the glass. As noted above, CRT users and
collectors sometimes break CRTs before sending them to a processor.
Therefore, breaking used CRTs would not by itself subject a facility to
the CRT glass processing conditions. In order to be classified as a
used CRT glass processor, the facility must perform all of the
activities listed above.
The provisions of today's proposed 40 CFR 261.39(b) state that
used, broken CRTs undergoing glass processing would not be considered
solid wastes if they are stored in a building with a roof, floor, and
walls. If they are not stored inside a building, they must be packaged
and labeled under conditions identical to those proposed above for
used, broken CRTs prior to processing. In addition, all glass
processing activities must take place within a building with a roof,
floor, and walls, and no activities may be performed that use
temperatures high enough to volatilize lead from used, broken CRTs. In
order to be eligible for the exclusion proposed today, the used, broken
CRTs could not be speculatively accumulated as defined in 40 CFR 261.1.
As discussed above, EPA is today proposing an unconditional exclusion
for used, intact CRTs if they are sent for recycling (including glass
processing). Under today's proposal, no other conditions would apply to
intact CRTs.
EPA believes that the packaging and storage conditions proposed
today indicate that the materials in question are more commodity-like
than waste-like. Used, broken CRTs that are not stored or packaged in
accordance with these requirements would not be valuable, product-like
materials. The opportunity for loss or releases of the materials would
indicate that they are wastes. As specifically recommended by the CSI
Council, we are also proposing
[[Page 40514]]
that processors be required to conduct their activities without using
temperatures high enough to volatilize lead from broken CRTs. Besides
increasing the risk of releases to the environment, such practices
could be a sign of waste treatment rather than production.
d. Processed Glass From Used CRTs Sent for Recycling to Glass
Manufacturers and Lead Smelters. In today's document, the Agency is
proposing in 40 CFR 261.39(d) to exclude processed glass from used CRTs
from the definition of solid waste if it is sent for recycling to a CRT
glass manufacturer or to a lead smelter, as long as the processed glass
is not speculatively accumulated, and as long as it is not used in a
manner constituting disposal.
EPA believes that processed glass from used CRTs destined for CRT
glass manufacturing or sent to a lead smelter meets the regulatory
criteria in 40 CFR 260.31(c) for a variance from the definition of
solid waste. This variance applies to materials that have been
reclaimed but must be reclaimed further before recovery is completed,
if, after initial reclamation, the resulting material is commodity-
like. The following paragraphs discuss the characteristics of processed
CRT glass and how they meet the criteria.
i. The degree of processing a material has undergone and the degree
of further processing that is required (40 CFR 260.31(c)(1)). Processed
CRT glass needs minimal further processing by CRT glass manufacturers
or lead smelters. CRT glass cullet is shipped to these facilities
already cleaned and sorted. CRT manufacturers and smelters perform
processing steps consisting only of magnetic separation of anode
buttons and studs and, if necessary, further crushing of the glass.
Following these steps, the partially reclaimed CRT glass enters the
furnace or smelter, similar to other feedstocks used in glass
manufacturing and smelting.
ii. The economic value of the material that has been initially
reclaimed (40 CFR 260.31(c)(2)). The initial processing of CRT glass
satisfies this criterion. CRT glass is usually purchased by CRT glass
manufacturers from processors for at least $170 per ton (approximately
three-fourths of the price of virgin glass). In contrast, lead smelters
are usually paid at least $150 per ton by processors for CRT glass used
as fluxing material and lead feedstock. However, lead smelters only pay
an average of about six dollars per ton for industrial sand used as a
fluxing material. Broken glass from CRTs resembles industrial sand in
composition and can therefore serve as a substitute for this sand in
the fluxing process. The sand, however, is not expensive.
CRT glass manufacturers and lead smelters currently obtain
processed CRT glass from processors and are working with the processors
to increase the supply and quality of processed CRT glass, which may
further increase value. The value of processed CRT glass depends on
whether manufacturers' specifications are met, and some glass
chemistries require exacting specifications that make the processed
glass more valuable if it meets those specifications. CRT glass
manufacturers have stricter quality standards than lead smelters about
the type of material that they can accept (e.g., cleaned, sized, free
of coating and debris).
Further evidence of the economic value of reclaimed CRT glass is
demonstrated by the cost savings realized by CRT glass manufacturers
and lead smelters when using processed CRT glass. The use of processed
CRT glass cullet benefits the manufacturer in several ways, such as
improving heat transfer and melting characteristics in the furnaces,
lowering energy consumption, and maintaining or improving the quality
of the final product.
iii. The degree to which the reclaimed material is like an
analogous raw material (40 CFR 260.31(c)(3)). Under this criterion, the
partially reclaimed material must be similar to an analogous raw
material or feedstock for which the material may be substituted in a
production or reclamation process. Processed CRT glass is similar to
off-specification glass and cullet that manufacturers currently use as
feedstock. Glass-making furnaces require between approximately 30 and
70 percent cullet. With respect to lead smelters, processed CRT glass
is similar to industrial sand that would otherwise be used as feedstock
or flux in the smelter.
iv. An end market for the partially reclaimed material is
guaranteed (40 CFR 260.31(c)(4)). The Agency believes that there is a
strong end market for processed CRT glass. CRT glass manufacturers and
lead smelters have developed relationships with CRT glass processors to
increase the amount and quality of reclaimed CRT glass cullet available
for glass-to-glass recycling and lead reclamation. In addition, CRT
glass manufacturers have developed programs in which off-specification
CRTs may be delivered directly to CRT processors for initial
processing. The processed CRT glass is delivered to CRT glass
manufacturers for use as feedstock in glass-to-glass manufacturing, or
to lead smelters for recycling.
v. The extent to which the partially reclaimed material is handled
to minimize loss (40 CFR 260.31(c)(5)). The Agency believes that
current CRT glass industry practices are effective in minimizing losses
and preventing releases. Processed CRT glass generally is stored
indoors on a cement or asphalt pad. In most cases, the material is
shipped in large capacity trucks that are covered with a tarp to
minimize loss during transport. When the CRT glass manufacturers or
lead smelters receive shipments, the glass is unloaded into a temporary
holding area, inspected, and either loaded onto a conveyor belt for
further processing or stored under cover. Following these steps, the
reclaimed CRT glass enters the furnace feedstock stream or the smelter.
e. Processed glass from Used CRTs Sent For Other Types of
Recycling. Under today's proposal, processed glass from used CRTs sent
for recycling at a facility other than a glass manufacturer or a lead
smelter would be excluded from the definition of solid waste only if
additional conditions were met. The processed glass would have to be
packaged and labeled in accordance with the requirements of proposed 40
CFR 261.39(a). Also, speculative accumulation limits would apply.
As stated previously, processed glass is sometimes sent to copper
smelters for recycling. It also may be sent for recycling into objects
such as radiation shielding, acoustical barriers, optical glass beads,
or decorative glass and tile products. The Agency believes that
processed glass sent for such uses resembles a commodity more than a
waste if it is packaged and labeled under these conditions. In
addition, such packaging ensures that the possibility of releases to
the environment is minimal.
f. Processed Glass From Used CRTs Used in a Manner Constituting
Disposal. If processed glass is sent for any kind of recycling that
involves land placement, it would be subject to the requirements of 40
CFR part 266, subpart C, for recyclable materials used in a manner
constituting disposal. The Agency is currently unaware of processed
glass being recycled in this manner.
g. Imports and Exports. Import requirements were discussed above
for used, broken CRTs prior to recycling. Similar import requirements
would apply to used, broken CRTs sent to the United States and held at
glass processing facilities, as well as already processed glass from
used, broken CRTs sent to the United States. In all cases, the material
would be subject to the
[[Page 40515]]
conditions proposed today, rather than the import requirements of 40
CFR part 262. Similarly, as long as used CRTs (or processed glass from
used CRTs) met the conditions proposed today, the export requirements
of 40 CFR part 262 would not apply.
H. Solicitation of Comment on EPA's Proposed Management Requirements
for Used CRTs and Processed CRT Glass
EPA believes that today's proposed exclusion from the definition of
solid waste is the regulatory scheme which will best promote the CSI
Council goals of improved management and increased recycling of the CRT
wastestream. The requirements proposed in today's notice are more
streamlined than those recommended by the CSI Council. However, we
believe that these requirements, if finalized, will lead to better
management and more recycling while affording full protection to human
health and the environment.
The Agency is also soliciting comment today on several other
recommendations of the CSI Council, on certain other regulatory
alternatives for CRTs that are not proposed today, and on a proposed
change to the universal waste rule. These solicitations are discussed
below.
1. Universal Waste Alternative
The CSI Council envisioned that CRTs would be added to the
universal waste rule, which distinguishes between small quantity
handlers of universal waste (SQHUWs) and large quantity handlers of
universal waste (LQHUWs). The accumulation limit for LQHUWs recommended
by the CSI Council was 36,287 kilograms (for CRTs stored on-site for
longer than seven consecutive days). Other universal waste requirements
applicable to both SQHUWs and LQHUWs that are not proposed today for
regulated entities include employee training requirements. The Agency
also is not proposing to require that regulated entities notify the
appropriate EPA Region of their CRT waste management activities, and
track shipments of CRTs sent and received, which would have been
required of LQHUWs under the CSI recommendations. The Agency solicits
comment on whether these requirements would be appropriate or
burdensome for any entities engaged in breaking or processing CRT
glass, or for collectors who send used CRTs or CRT glass to glass
processors.
2. Definition of "Broken CRT"
EPA is today proposing streamlined requirements for broken CRTs
sent for recycling. "Broken CRT" is defined as "glass
removed from the monitor after the vacuum has been released".
Data available to the Agency indicate that after the vacuum has been
released and the glass removed, the CRT is generally no longer reusable
as a product. However, EPA solicits comment on whether it might be
possible to repair and reuse a CRT after the vacuum has been released
and the glass removed from the monitor, as well as suggested
alternative definitions for "broken CRT'.
3. Alternative Approaches to Speculative Accumulation and Use
Constituting Disposal (Land Placement)
EPA notes that under today's proposal, broken CRTs (but not intact
CRTs) that are sent for recycling in accordance with the packaging and
labeling requirements of proposed 40 CFR 261.39 would be subject to the
speculative accumulation provisions of 40 CFR 261.1(c)(8). The Agency
solicits comment on whether a longer accumulation time period (such as
two or more years) should be provided for CRTs, in order to allow
recycling markets to develop more fully for this relatively new
wastestream and because there appear to be few environmental concerns
with storage as long as these materials are packaged and labeled
properly. EPA also solicits comment on whether intact CRTs sent for
recycling should be subject to the speculative accumulation provisions,
or whether they resemble commercial chemical products being reclaimed.
In addition, the Agency requests comment on whether to add a condition
prohibiting use constituting disposal or land placement of broken CRTs
(as is proposed today for processed CRT glass). The Agency is not aware
of any current uses for broken CRTs or processed CRT glass that involve
use constituting disposal, and we solicit comment on the existence of
any such uses and their implications.
4. Alternative Standards for Processing Used CRTs
EPA also solicits comment on the appropriateness of requiring
additional performance standards for glass processors. The CSI Council
recommended that glass processors install and maintain systems
sufficient to minimize releases of glass and glass particulates via
wind dispersal, runoff, and direct releases to soil. It also
recommended that processing be performed at temperatures low enough to
avoid volatilization of lead from the glass. Today's proposal contains
the requirement for processing temperatures, but took a different
approach than proposing the general performance standard recommended by
the CSI Council. Today's proposed conditions for excluding glass being
processed from the definition of solid waste are very similar to
management standards cited by the CSI Council as examples of
conformance to its recommended performance standards. For example, the
Council stated that storing broken CRTs and CRT glass in buildings or
closed containers were examples of ways to control wind dispersal,
runoff, and direct releases to soil. EPA therefore believes that
today's proposed requirements, in addition to being indications that
the materials in question resemble commodities rather than wastes, are
adequate to fulfill the concerns of the CSI Council. However, the
Agency solicits comment on whether to require the general performance
standards recommended by the Council.
EPA also solicits comment on whether to retain today's proposed
requirement that glass processing be conducted at temperatures that are
not sufficiently high to volatilize lead. We note that worker health
and safety would be covered under the provisions of 29 CFR part 1910 of
the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). The Agency
seeks comment on whether today's proposed temperature requirement is
necessary to prevent volatilization of lead, and also on whether glass
processing conducted at high temperatures is an indication of waste
management.
EPA would also like to solicit comment on the CSI Council
recommendation that glass processors implement a procedure for advising
local communities of the nature of their activities, including the
potential for resident and worker exposure to lead or chemical
coatings. In general, EPA has not required public participation for
hazardous waste recycling facilities, unless they obtain RCRA permits
for storage of hazardous waste prior to recycling. Usually, local
notice and public meetings are governed by preexisting state or local
requirements concerning siting, zoning, or licensing. The Agency
believes that matters of local notice and public participation are
generally best decided at the state, county, or municipal level, but
solicits comment on whether to require additional procedures under
federal regulations in the case of CRT recycling, and the reasons why
these procedures are needed.
[[Page 40516]]
5. Alternative Standards for Processed Glass From Used CRTs Sent for
Recycling
In addition, EPA solicits comment on whether to exclude from the
definition of solid waste under 40 CFR 261.4(b))(39) only processed
glass recycled by being sent to CRT glassmaking, as recommended by the
CSI Council. EPA notes that the recommendations of the CSI Council did
not include an exclusion for processed glass sent to lead smelters, and
that the Council expressed concerns about possible environmental risks
associated with this practice. However, after evaluation of this
question, the Agency has decided, as explained previously in this
preamble, that processed glass sent to lead smelters is more like a
commodity than a waste. EPA believes that such an exclusion would be
desirable because recycling CRTs at lead smelters appears to be just as
legitimate as glass-to-glass recycling. The proposed exclusion may also
turn out to be useful if the increased use of flat screens decreases
the potential for glass-to-glass recycling.
EPA is also soliciting comment today on whether to exclude from the
definition of solid waste CRT glass sent to copper smelters or other
glass uses without packaging and labelling requirements. The Agency is
aware that processed CRT glass has been shipped for recycling to copper
smelters, but we lack much information about this practice. We request
comment on whether this glass is as commodity-like as that sent to
glass-to-glass recycling or lead smelters. We also solicit comment on
whether the exclusion should be allowed for other glass uses. These
glass uses are currently being developed and include optical beads,
decorative objects, radiation shielding materials, and acoustic
barriers for use in the aerospace industry and in equipment
manufacturing where sound control is essential. EPA believes that CRT
glass being recycled into some of these products would likely be a
commodity-like material which would meet the variance criteria
described above. We therefore solicit additional information about
these uses, or other uses of which commenters may be aware, and on
whether CRT glass used for these purposes is commodity-like.
6. Exports of Used CRTs
With respect to exports, the Agency notes that the CSI Council also
developed recommendations for exporting CRT glass. The recommendations
include exporting provisions for CRTs, coated (i.e, unprocessed) CRT
glass, and uncoated (processed) CRT glass. For each category, the CSI
Council recommended administrative requirements, depending on whether
or not the shipment is destined for an Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development (OECD) country.
Under the CSI recommendations, entities exporting CRTs and coated
CRT glass would be subject to the same exporting provisions as
generators of hazardous waste in Subparts E or H of Part 262 (export
notice and consent procedures for non-OECD and OECD countries); such
provisions would be revised to specifically identify the recipient as a
collector or processor. For shipments of uncoated CRT glass to those
OECD countries specified in 40 CFR 262.58(a)(1), the exporter would be
required to provide an annual report to EPA summarizing the number of
shipments and volume sent to each recipient (by country), and
identifying the recipient CRT glass collector and processor. For
shipments of uncoated CRT glass to non-OECD countries, the exporter
would be required to send annual notification to EPA 90 days prior to
the first shipment to each recipient, identifying the country, the
recipient CRT glass collector or processor, and the expected number and
volume of shipments to be sent that year.
EPA notes that today's proposal would exclude from the definition
of solid waste used intact CRTs sent for recycling, along with used,
broken CRTs sent for recycling if they are packaged and labeled in
accordance with the conditions proposed in 40 CFR 261.39. Similarly,
processed glass would be exempt from the definition of solid waste if
sent to CRT glassmaking or a lead smelter. Since these materials would
no longer be considered solid or hazardous wastes, the Agency would not
have the legal authority to require notification under 40 CFR part 262,
subparts E and H, or the authority to require additional notifications.
The Agency notes that if used CRTs were added to the universal waste
program, EPA would have authority to require notification at least for
exported broken CRTs. EPA solicits comment on whether the need for the
export notification requirements recommended by the CSI would warrant
adding used CRTs to the universal waste program, and whether these
requirements would be unduly burdensome.
7. Disposal of CRTs
Finally, the Agency requests comment on whether to allow CRTs sent
for disposal in hazardous waste facilities (i.e., landfills or
incinerators) to comply with streamlined packaging and labeling
requirements similar to those proposed today for broken CRTs sent for
recycling, rather than comply with full Subtitle C requirements. EPA
also seeks comment on whether adding used CRTs to the universal waste
program, which would provide packaging and labeling requirements (as
well as tracking requirements for larger quantities of CRTs) would
provide better management of these wastes through improved compliance,
and whether such requirements would adequately protect human health and
the environment.
IV. Mercury-Containing Equipment
A. What Is "Mercury-Containing Equipment?'
In response to the 1993 universal waste proposal (58 FR 9346,
February 11, 1993), some commenters suggested adding used mercury-
containing equipment (such as switches, relays, and gauges) to the
universal waste rule at 40 CFR part 273. In the 1995 final rule,
however, the Agency did not include these materials in the universal
waste program, stating in the preamble that we lacked sufficient
information to justify such a decision (60 FR 25942, 25508, May 11,
1995). In particular, EPA did not have data about which kinds of wastes
should be included in the suggested category, the amount of mercury in
the wastes, and which management controls would be effective. We stated
that we would welcome a petition which would provide enough information
to add some forms of mercury-containing equipment to the universal
waste program.
On October 11, 1996, the Utility Solid Waste Activities Group
(USWAG), the Edison Electric Institute, the American Public Power
Association, and the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association
submitted a petition to add mercury-containing equipment to the
universal waste program. This petition identified many types of
mercury-containing equipment, including several kinds of instruments
that are used throughout the electric utility and other industries,
municipalities, and households. These devices include manometers,
barometers, hagenmeters, relay switches, mercury wetted switches,
mercury regulators, meters, temperature gauges, pressure relief gauges,
water treatment pressure gauges, sprinkler system contacts, power plant
water treatment gauges, and variable force counterweight wheels used in
coal conveyor systems.
[[Page 40517]]
B. Why Is EPA Proposing To Add Mercury-Containing Equipment To The List
of Universal Wastes?
The USWAG petition contained useful information describing how such
equipment would meet the regulatory criteria for adding wastes to the
universal waste program set forth at 40 CFR 273.81. After examining the
information contained in the petition, we have decided to propose
adding spent mercury-containing equipment to the universal waste rule.
Following is a description of the regulatory criteria for adding wastes
to the universal waste rule, and why the Agency believes that used
mercury-containing equipment meets these criteria. In particular, EPA
believes that adding these wastes to the universal waste rule will
facilitate collection of mercury-containing equipment, thereby reducing
the amount of mercury reaching municipal landfills and incinerators.
USWAG has estimated that approximately 3,000 pounds of such equipment
is generated annually by electric and gas utilities and by other
businesses.
1. The Waste, as Generated by a Wide Variety of Generators, Should Be a
Listed or Characteristic Hazardous Waste (40 CFR 273.81(a))
The category of mercury-containing equipment consists of such
devices as thermometers, manometers, barometers, relay switches,
mercury regulators, meters, pressure relief gauges, water treatment
pressure gauges, and sprinkler system contacts. Most mercury-containing
equipment has a few grams of mercury, although devices such as large
manometers may contain much more. Many of these devices would fail the
TCLP toxicity level for mercury of 0.2 mg per liter, and would be
classified as D009 characteristic hazardous waste. They would therefore
meet the first regulatory criterion.
2. The Waste, or Category of Waste, Should Not Be Exclusive To a
Particular Industry or Group of Industries, but Generated by a Wide
Variety of Establishments (40 CFR 273.81(b))
Used mercury-containing equipment meets this criterion because it
is discarded by many different kinds of generators. Although electric
and gas utilities generate the largest number of such devices, many
other businesses use instruments designed to measure or regulate
pressure or temperature, such as thermometers, barometers and
manometers. In addition, regulators, switches, and relays often contain
mercury for use as an electric conductor. These devices are used widely
in manufacturing industries, retail and commercial establishments
(including the dairy industry), office complexes, hospitals,
municipalities, and (in the case of certain wastes such as thermometers
and mercury switches) domestic households. Sources of this wastestream
are many and varied.
3. The Waste Should Be Generated by a Large Number of Generators and
Generated Frequently, but in Relatively Small Quantities (40 CFR
273.81(c))
Spent mercury-containing equipment would meet this criterion even
if electric utilities alone were counted. Some large electric utilities
have several hundred individual generation points throughout their
distribution network, including generating stations, service centers,
substations, and transformer vaults. In addition, utilities perform
servicing operations on meters, regulators, and other mercury-
containing equipment at many customer locations; a large utility may
have more than 1,000 customer sites. Most facilities, whether utilities
or not, tend to generate mercury-containing wastes sporadically and in
relatively small quantities because equipment failures are relatively
numerous (due to the large number of generation points) and
unpredictable, while not producing large quantities of waste equipment.
The Utility Solid Waste Activities Group estimates that a single mid-
sized electric utility generates from 2,000 to 4,000 pieces of mercury-
containing equipment annually.
4. Systems To Be Used for Collecting the Waste (Including Packaging,
Marking, and Labeling Practices) Should Ensure Close Stewardship of the
Waste (40 CFR 273.81(d))
EPA believes that the universal waste program is a very effective
way to ensure such stewardship. The Agency is today proposing to
require small and large-quantity universal waste handlers of spent
mercury-containing equipment to label or mark such equipment clearly,
similar to the requirements for other handlers of universal wastes in
40 CFR 273.14 and 273.34.
To further encourage responsible stewardship, EPA is also proposing
to require universal waste handlers of mercury-containing equipment to
manage it in accordance with the universal waste management standards
currently in place for used thermostats, because both kinds of devices
contain mercury in ampules which are sometimes removed. Today's
proposal would require handlers who remove ampules from spent mercury-
containing equipment to comply with the provisions of 40 CFR 273.13
(described later in this notice).
5. The Risks Posed by the Waste During Accumulation and Transport
Should Be Relatively low Compared to the Risks Posed by Other Hazardous
Waste, and Specific Management Standards Would Be Protective of Human
Health and the Environment During Accumulation and Transport (40 CFR
273.81(e))
The Agency believes that spent mercury-containing equipment poses
risks that are relatively low compared to other hazardous wastes
because they tend to be generated in relatively small amounts at any
one time by each generator. In addition, the elemental mercury
contained in such devices is generally fully enclosed within the
equipment. The danger of spills and leaks during accumulation and
transport is therefore low when the equipment is packaged correctly. In
addition, USWAG has suggested, and the Agency is today proposing, that
spent mercury-containing equipment be managed in accordance with the
requirements of the universal waste rule at 40 CFR 273. These
requirements will ensure that the devices are handled safely during
accumulation and transport. Besides the provisions discussed above that
are specific to accumulation, packaging, and transport of mercury-
containing universal wastes, the universal waste program requires
handlers to train employees in proper handling and emergency procedures
and to contain all releases of universal wastes immediately. Handlers
may accumulate universal wastes for no longer than one year.
The universal waste rule also contains several provisions which
ensure safe transport. For example, handlers may send universal waste
only to another universal waste handler, a destination facility, or a
foreign destination. If the handler sends a universal waste off-site
which meets the definition of hazardous materials under the Department
of Transportation (DOT) regulations (49 CFR parts 171 through 180), the
handler must package and label the shipment in accordance with those
regulations and prepare the proper DOT shipping papers. If a handler of
universal waste sends a shipment which is rejected, the handler must
either take the waste back or agree with the rejecting facility to send
the waste to a destination facility. If a handler receives a shipment
containing hazardous waste that is not universal waste, the handler
must immediately notify the appropriate EPA regional office. Finally,
large quantity handlers of universal waste must keep records of each
shipment of universal
[[Page 40518]]
waste received or sent off-site. These requirements ensure that spent
mercury-containing devices will be transported safely.
6. Regulation of the Waste Under 40 CFR Part 273 Will Increase the
Likelihood That the Waste Will Be Diverted From Non-Hazardous Waste
Management Systems (e.g., the Municipal Waste Stream, Non-Hazardous
Industrial or Commercial Waste Stream, Municipal Sewer or Stormwater
Systems) to Recycling, Treatment, or Disposal in Compliance With
Subtitle C of RCRA (40 CFR 273.81(f))
If spent mercury-containing equipment was added to the universal
waste program, thousands of sites that generate such devices would be
considered handlers of universal wastes, rather than individual
hazardous waste generators. Because the hazardous waste manifest would
no longer be required, it would be easier to transport these wastes to
central consolidation points. Collecting the wastes at such central
points makes it easier to send them for recycling or for proper
disposal, which makes it less likely that the wastes will be improperly
disposed of in municipal landfills or incinerators. In addition, waste
handlers that wish to consolidate large volumes of waste from
conditionally exempt small quantity generators (CESQGs) must now obtain
a RCRA permit if they accumulate more than 1000 kg of such waste on-
site, pursuant to 40 CFR 261.5(g)(2). This requirement severely
discourages the central collection of large amounts of CESQG waste. If
spent mercury-containing equipment is included in the universal waste
system, collectors of these wastes would be encouraged to gather these
wastes (along with non-CESQG waste and household waste) for recycling
or proper disposal. More of these materials would be kept out of the
municipal wastestream if they were available for removal of elemental
mercury and recycling of scrap metal.
In addition, if spent mercury-containing equipment is included in
the universal waste program, handlers will be less likely to try to
separate the hazardous and non-hazardous portions of this waste.
Because the requirements of the universal waste rule are relatively
streamlined, and because sampling of mercury-containing devices can
sometimes be difficult, handlers will find it easier to manage the
entire wastestream as universal waste. Therefore, waste that would
otherwise go to municipal landfills or combustors would be sent for
recycling or proper disposal. For these reasons, EPA believes that
adding mercury-containing equipment to the universal waste program will
help fulfill the criterion in 40 CFR 273.81(f).
7. Regulation of the Waste Under 40 CFR part 273 Will Improve the
Implementation and Compliance With the Hazardous Waste Regulatory
Program (40 CFR 273.81(g))
EPA believes that the requirements of the universal waste rule are
particularly suited to the circumstances of handlers of spent mercury-
containing equipment, and that their participation in the universal
waste program will improve compliance with hazardous waste regulations.
As stated earlier, spent mercury-containing equipment is generated
sporadically and in small quantities by many geographically dispersed
operations. The existence of so many distribution points, along with
the small quantities of waste, makes compliance with full Subtitle C
requirements very difficult. Compliance with full hazardous waste
generator requirements is particularly difficult for electric or gas
utility operations which are located on customers' properties. The
requirements of the universal waste rule are clear and should be easily
understood by the diverse community affected by this proposal, who will
not need to spend an excessive amount of time and effort interpreting
the regulations. In addition, because the rule does not require
handlers to count universal wastes toward their monthly quantity
determination, many handlers will find it easier to determine their
hazardous waste generation rates. The Agency believes that the
streamlined requirements of this proposal will make compliance more
achievable, and that human health and the environment will benefit as a
result.
C. What Are EPA's Proposed Management Requirements for Used Mercury-
Containing Equipment?
1. Summary of Proposed Requirements
The universal waste rule classifies regulated persons managing
universal waste into four categories: small quantity handlers of
universal waste (SQHUWs), large quantity handlers of universal waste
(LQHUWs), transporters, and destination facilities. The term
"universal waste handler" is defined in 40 CFR 273.9 as a
generator of universal waste; or the owner or operator of a facility
that receives universal waste from other universal waste handlers,
accumulates universal waste and sends it to another universal waste
handler, a processor, a destination facility, or a foreign destination.
The definition of "universal waste handler" does not
include: (1) a person who treats (except under the provision of
Sec. 273.13(a) or (c), or Sec. 273.33(a) or (c)),
disposes of, or recycles universal waste; or (2) a person engaged in
the off-site transportation of universal waste by air, rail, highway,
or water, including a universal waste transfer facility.
Whether a universal waste handler is a SQHUW or LQHUW depends on
the amount of universal waste being accumulated at any time. A SQHUW is
defined under 40 CFR 273.9 as a universal waste handler who accumulates
less than 5,000 kilograms of universal waste, calculated collectively
at any time. The 5,000 kilogram accumulation limit applies to the total
quantity of all universal waste handled on-site, regardless of the
category of universal waste. If at any time a SQHUW accumulates 5,000
kilograms or more of universal waste, then the universal waste handler
becomes a LQHUW for the calendar year in which 5,000 kilograms or more
of universal waste was accumulated. A handler may re-evaluate his
status as a LQHUW in the following calendar year. LQHUWs are subject to
certain additional regulatory requirements.
The management requirements proposed today for mercury-containing
equipment are generally the same as the existing requirements for
mercury-containing thermostats. Under these proposed requirements,
management standards for these universal wastes would not significantly
differ from the current requirements of 40 CFR part 273. Our proposed
definition of mercury-containing equipment was adapted from the
regulatory definitions used by States which have added these materials
to their universal waste programs.
Following is a more detailed description of today's proposed
requirements for mercury-containing equipment.
2. Proposed Requirements for Small and Large Quantity Handlers
Under today's proposal, most of the existing universal waste
requirements currently applicable to SQHUWs and LQHUWs would also apply
to handlers of mercury-containing equipment. For both SQHUWs and
LQHUWs, these requirements include waste management standards, labeling
and marking, accumulation time limits, employee training, response to
releases, requirements related to off-site shipments, and export
requirements. LQHUWs are subject to additional notification and
tracking requirements.
[[Page 40519]]
The Agency is proposing today to require SQHUWs and LQHUWs to
manage mercury-containing equipment in accordance with the universal
waste management standards currently in place for used thermostats,
because both kinds of devices contain mercury in ampules which are
sometimes removed. Today's proposal would require handlers who remove
ampules from spent mercury-containing equipment to remove them in
accordance with the provisions of 40 CFR 273.13. These provisions state
that the ampules must be removed in a manner designed to prevent
breakage, and that they must be removed only over or in a containment
device. A mercury clean-up system would have to be readily available to
immediately transfer any mercury from leaks or spills from broken
ampules to a container. Handlers would be required to ventilate and
monitor the area in which ampules are removed to ensure compliance with
applicable standards of the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA) for exposure to mercury.
Employees of SQHUWs and LQHUWs would need to be thoroughly familiar
with proper waste mercury handling and emergency procedures. They would
be required to store removed ampules in closed, non-leaking containers,
and pack removed ampules in containers with packing materials adequate
to prevent breakage. Handlers who remove mercury-containing ampules
would have to determine whether residues from spills or leaks exhibit a
characteristic of hazardous waste. They would also be required to make
this determination for any other solid waste generated during removal
of the ampules. If the residues or other solid waste exhibits a
characteristic of hazardous waste, it would have to be managed in
accordance with all applicable requirements of 40 CFR parts 260 through
279, rather than as a universal waste.
The notification requirement proposed today for large quantity
handlers of universal waste mercury-containing equipment is consistent
with the existing notification requirement for LQHUWs of all other
universal wastes (40 CFR 273.32). Under today's proposed rule, a large-
quantity handler of mercury-containing equipment would be required to
notify the Regional Administrator and receive an identification number
before meeting or exceeding the accumulation limit. In addition, these
handlers would be required to keep records of universal waste shipments
received or sent off-site. These records may take the form of a log,
invoice, manifest, bill of lading, or other shipping document.
3. Proposed Requirements for Transporters
Under 40 CFR 273.9, the definition of a universal waste transporter
is "a person engaged in the off-site transportation of universal
waste by air, rail, highway, or water." Persons meeting the
definition of universal waste transporter include those persons who
transport universal waste from one universal waste handler to another,
to a processor, to a destination facility, or to a foreign destination.
These persons are subject to the universal waste transporter
requirements of subpart D of part 273. The existing provisions apply to
transporters of all types of universal waste, and, therefore, they
would also apply to transporters of mercury-containing equipment. EPA
notes that today's proposed rule would not affect the applicability of
shipping requirements under the hazardous materials regulations of the
Department of Transportation (DOT). Transporters would continue to be
subject to these requirements if applicable (see 49 CFR 173.164
(Metallic Mercury and Articles Containing Mercury)).
4. Proposed Requirements for Destination Facilities
Today's notice does not propose to change any existing requirements
applicable to destination facilities (subpart E of part 273).
5. Effect of Today's Proposed Rule on Household Wastes and
Conditionally-Exempt Small Quantity Generators
Adding mercury-containing equipment to the definition of universal
wastes would not substantially change the way households and
conditionally-exempt small quantity generators (CESQGs) manage these
devices. Household waste continues to be exempt from RCRA Subtitle C
regulations under 40 CFR 261.4(b)(1). However, under the universal
waste rule, households and CESQGs may voluntarily choose to manage
their mercury-containing equipment in accordance with either the CESQG
regulations under 40 CFR 261.5 or as universal waste under part 273 (40
CFR 273.8(a)(2)). If CESQG waste or household wastes are mixed with
universal waste subject to the requirements of 40 CFR part 273, the
comingled waste must be handled as universal waste in accordance with
part 273. Under today's rule, such comingled waste would be subject to
the 5000 kilogram threshold limit for large quantity handlers.
Hazardous waste mercury-containing equipment that is managed as
universal waste under 40 CFR part 273 would not have to be included in
a facility's determination of hazardous waste generator status (40 CFR
261.5(c)(6)). Therefore, if a generator were to manage such devices
under the universal waste rule and did not generate any other hazardous
waste, that generator would not be subject to other Subtitle C
hazardous waste management regulations, such as the hazardous waste
generator regulations in part 262. A generator that generates more than
100 kilograms of hazardous waste in addition to universal waste
mercury-containing equipment would be regulated as a hazardous waste
generator and would be required to manage all hazardous wastes not
included within the scope of the universal waste rule in accordance
with all applicable Subtitle C hazardous waste management standards.
6. Land Disposal Restriction Requirements (LDRs)
Under existing regulations (40 CFR 268.1(f)), universal waste
handlers and transporters are exempt from the LDR notification
requirements in 40 CFR 268.7 and the storage prohibition in
Sec. 268.50. Today's proposal would not change the regulatory
status of destination facilities; they would remain subject to the full
LDR requirements.
D. Solicitation of Comment on Universal Waste Notification Requirements
EPA is soliciting comment on a proposed change to the notification
requirements of the universal waste rule. The current rule (40 CFR
273.32(b)(5)) requires large quantity handlers of universal waste
(LQHUWs) to include in the notification sent to the Regional
Administrator a statement indicating that the handler is accumulating
more than 5,000 kg of universal waste at one time and the types of
universal waste (i.e., batteries, pesticides, thermostats, lamps, and
mercury-containing equipment) the handler is accumulating above this
quantity. The Agency believes that requiring LQHUWs to specify which
types of universal waste exceed the 5,000 limit is unnecessary because
the regulations already require LQHUWs to provide a list of all the
types of universal waste managed by the handler (see 40 CFR
273.32(b)(4)). In addition, the requirement appears irrelevant because
the 5,000 limit for determining whether a handler is a LQHUW applies to
all universal waste accumulated by the handler, not to any particular
universal waste. The Agency is therefore
[[Page 40520]]
proposing today to delete from 40 CFR 273.32(b)(5) the requirement to
notify the Regional Administrator of which particular universal wastes
exceed the 5,000 kg. accumulation limit. EPA solicits comment on
whether this requirement serves a valid purpose for regulatory
authorities, and on whether it is unduly burdensome for LQHUWs.
V. State Authority
A. Applicability of Rules in Authorized States
Under section 3006 of RCRA, EPA may authorize qualified states to
administer and enforce the RCRA hazardous waste program within the
state. Following authorization, EPA retains enforcement authority under
sections 3008, 3013, and 7003 of RCRA, although authorized states have
primary enforcement responsibility. The standards and requirements for
state authorization are found at 40 CFR part 271.
Prior to enactment of the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of
1984 (HSWA), a State with final RCRA authorization administered its
hazardous waste program entirely in lieu of EPA administering the
federal program in that state. The federal requirements no longer
applied in the authorized state, and EPA could not issue permits for
any facilities in that state, since only the state was authorized to
issue RCRA permits. When new, more stringent federal requirements were
promulgated, the state was obligated to enact equivalent authorities
within specified time frames. However, the new federal requirements did
not take effect in an authorized state until the state adopted the
federal requirements as state law.
In contrast, under RCRA section 3006(g) (42 U.S.C. 6926(g)), which
was added by HSWA, new requirements and prohibitions imposed under HSWA
authority take effect in authorized states at the same time that they
take effect in unauthorized states. EPA is directed by the statute to
implement these requirements and prohibitions in authorized states,
including the issuance of permits, until the state is granted
authorization to do so. While states must still adopt HSWA related
provisions as state law to retain final authorization, EPA implements
the HSWA provisions in authorized states until the states do so.
Authorized states are required to modify their programs only when
EPA enacts federal requirements that are more stringent or broader in
scope than existing federal requirements. RCRA section 3009 allows the
states to impose standards more stringent than those in the federal
program (see also 40 CFR 271.1). Therefore, authorized states may, but
are not required to, adopt federal regulations, both HSWA and non-HSWA,
that are considered less stringent than previous federal regulations.
B. Effect on State Authorization
Today's proposed rule is less stringent than the current federal
program. Because states are not required to adopt less stringent
regulations, they do not have to adopt the streamlined regulations for
CRTs or the universal waste regulations for mercury-containing devices,
although EPA encourages them to do so. Some states may already be in
the process of streamlining their regulations for these materials or
adding them to their list of universal wastes. If a state's standards
for used CRTs or mercury-containing equipment are less stringent than
those in today's rule, the state will need to amend its regulations to
make them equivalent to today's standards and pursue authorization.
C. Interstate Transport
Because some states may choose not to seek authorization for
today's proposed rulemaking, there will probably be cases when used
CRTs, processed CRT glass, or mercury-containing equipment will be
transported through states with different regulations governing these
wastes.
First, a waste which is subject to an exclusion from the definition
of solid waste or to the universal waste regulations may be sent to a
state, or through a state, where it is subject to the full hazardous
waste regulations. In this scenario, for the portion of the trip
through the originating state, and any other states where the waste is
excluded or is a universal waste, neither a hazardous waste transporter
with an EPA identification number per 40 CFR 263.11 nor a manifest
would be required. However, for the portion of the trip through the
receiving state, and any other states that do not consider the waste to
be excluded or a universal waste, the transporter must have a manifest,
and must move the waste in compliance with 40 CFR part 263. In order
for the final transporter and the receiving facility to fulfill the
requirements concerning the manifest (40 CFR 263.20, 263.21, 263.22;
264.71, 264.72, 264.76 or 265.71, 265.72, and 265.76), the initiating
facility should complete a manifest and forward it to the first
transporter to travel in a state where the waste is not excluded or is
not a universal waste. The receiving facility must then sign the
manifest and send a copy to the initiating facility. EPA recommends
that the initiating facility note in block 15 of the manifest (Special
Handling Instructions and Additional Information) that the wastes are
covered by an exclusion or under the universal waste regulations in the
initiating state but not in the receiving facility's state.
Second, a hazardous waste generated in a state which does not
provide an exclusion for the waste or regulate it as a universal waste
may be sent to a state where it is excluded or regulated as a universal
waste. In this scenario, the waste must be moved by a hazardous waste
transporter while the waste is in the generator's state or any other
states where it is not excluded or not a universal waste. The
initiating facility would complete a manifest and give copies to the
transporter as required under 40 CFR 262.23(a). Transportation within
the receiving state and any other states that exclude the waste or
regulate it as a universal waste would not require a manifest and need
not be transported by a hazardous waste transporter. However, it is the
initiating facility's responsibility to ensure that the manifest is
forwarded to the receiving facility by any non-hazardous waste
transporter and sent back to the initiating facility by the receiving
facility (see 40 CFR 262.23 and 262.42). EPA recommends that the
generator note in block 15 of the manifest (Special Handling
Instructions and Additional Information) that the waste is excluded or
covered under the universal waste regulations in the receiving
facility's state but not in the generator's state.
Third, a waste may be transported across a state in which it is
subject to the full hazardous waste regulations although other portions
of the trip may be from, through, and to states in which it is excluded
or covered under universal waste regulations. Transport through the
State must be conducted by a hazardous waste transporter and must be
accompanied by a manifest. In order for the transporter to fulfill its
requirements concerning the manifest (subpart B of Part 263), the
initiating facility must complete a manifest as required under the
manifest procedures and forward it to the first transporter to travel
in a state where the waste is not excluded or is not a universal waste.
The transporter must deliver the manifest to, and obtain the signature
of, either the next transporter or the receiving facility.
As more states streamline their regulatory requirements for these
wastes, the complexity of interstate transport will be reduced.
[[Page 40521]]
VI. Regulatory Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735), the Agency must
determine whether this regulatory action is "significant"
and therefore subject to formal review by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) and to the requirements of the Executive Order, which
include assessing the costs and benefits anticipated as a result of the
proposed regulatory action. The Order defines "significant
regulatory action" as one that is likely to result in a rule that
may: (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more
or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or state, local, or tribal governments or
communities; (2) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere
with an action taken or planned by another agency; (3) materially alter
the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan
programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or (4)
raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the
President's priorities, or the principles set forth in the Executive
Order. Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, the Agency has
determined that today's proposed rule is a significant regulatory
action because this proposed rule contains novel policy issues. As
such, this action was submitted to OMB for review. Changes made in
response to OMB suggestions or recommendations are documented in the
docket to today's proposal.
To estimate the cost savings, incremental costs, economic impacts
and benefits from this rule to affected regulated entities, we
completed an economic analyses for this rule. Copies of these analyses
(entitled "Economic Analysis of Cathode Ray Tube Management,
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking" and "Economic Analysis of
Including Mercury-Containing Devices In the Universal Waste System,
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking") have been placed in the RCRA
docket for public review. The Agency solicits comment on the
methodology and results from the analysis as well as any data that the
public feels would be useful in a revised analysis.
1. Methodology
To estimate the cost savings, incremental costs, economic impacts
and benefits of this rule, the Agency estimated both the affected
volume of cathode ray tubes (CRTs) \1\ and regulated entities.
Because CRTs are often not managed as hazardous wastes but rather along
with municipal refuse, the Agency has evaluated two baseline (pre-
regulatory) scenarios: (1) A Subtitle C scenario which modeled a
distribution of affected monitors as if all affected entities were in
compliance with Subtitle C regulation, and (2) a Subtitle D scenario
which models a high percentage of CRTs being discarded untreated in
municipal solid waste landfills. There is a lower degree of compliance
with Subtitle C regulation in the Subtitle D scenario. However, this
scenario is being analyzed to evaluate the real-world effect of this
rule on affected entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Note: Many CRTs that exhibit the toxicity
characteristic for lead are nonetheless not solid wastes that are
also hazardous wastes for a number of different reasons. Some are
considered household hazardous wastes which are excluded from the
federal definition of hazardous wastes. See 40 CFR 261.4(b)(1).
Other CRTs which are post-manufacturing but not post-consumer are
excluded as commercial chemical products being reclaimed. See 40 CFR
261.2(c)(3). Thus, the fact that a CRT exhibits the toxicity
characteristic for lead is not sufficient in and of itself to know
that the monitor is a hazardous waste and affected by this rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Agency has then modeled two post-regulatory scenarios: (1) The
regulation being proposed today (hereafter referred to as the
"primary alternative"), and (2) the Common Sense Initiative
recommendation (hereafter referred to as the "CSI
alternative"). The chief differences between the primary
alternative and CSI alternative is that the former applies to both
glass-to-glass recycling and lead smelters whereas the latter only
applies to glass-to-glass recycling. The CSI alternative also includes
additional management requirements for CRT handlers. Finally, the CSI
alternative envisions streamlined management requirements for monitors
but keeping them within RCRA Subtitle C jurisdiction as hazardous
waste. By contrast, the primary alternative of today's proposal
excludes previously regulated volumes of CRTs from the federal
definition of solid and hazardous waste.
In our economic analysis, we have calculated administrative,
storage, transportation and disposal/recovery costs for both baseline
and post-regulatory scenarios and estimated the net cost savings and
economic impacts for each combination of baseline/post-regulatory pair
(Subtitle C/primary alternative, Subtitle C/CSI alternative, Subtitle
D/primary alternative, Subtitle D/CSI alternative). The Subtitle C/
primary alternative pair is the scenario that we are using to meet our
administrative requirements following this section. This is so because
it is appropriate to use a baseline scenario that reflects compliance
with existing federal law and a post-regulatory scenario that is the
leading scenario being proposed.
For mercury-containing equipment, we used a similar methodology in
our economic analysis to the one we are using for CRTs. Again, because
mercury-containing equipment is often managed in municipal solid waste,
we have modeled two baselines, one reflecting compliance with Subtitle
C management under existing law and the other reflecting ongoing
management of a portion of discarded mercury-containing equipment in
the municipal solid wastestream.
The benefits from today's proposed rulemaking are presented
qualitatively. EPA solicits comment on the need and means to evaluate
quantitative benefits from today's rule.
2. Results
a. Volume. Estimated volumes of CRTs subject to RCRA regulation are
16,100 tons of monitors under the Subtitle C baseline. We have
estimated the affected volume of CRTs (including both previously
regulated and diverted volumes of monitors) under the primary
alternative at 17,500 tons and 17,700 under the CSI alternative when
paired with the Subtitle C baseline. We believe that between 1500 and
1700 tons of CRTs would be diverted from export or hazardous waste
landfill to CRT glass manufacturing under both the primary alternative
and the CSI alternative. Estimated volumes of mercury-containing
equipment affected by today's rule are 550 tons.
b. Cost/Economic Impact. We estimate that the primary alternative
would save CRT handlers $3.5 million per year relative to the Subtitle
C baseline. This cost savings comes from reduced administrative,
transportation and disposal/management cost. We estimate that CSI
alternative would save CRT handlers $1.15 million relative to the
Subtitle C baseline, again primarily due to reduced administrative and
disposal costs. However, unlike the primary alternative, transportation
costs could actually be higher for the CSI alternative because this
option does not include lead smelters. Thus, longer transportation
distances to glass processors would be required.
To estimate the economic impact of the primary alternative and CSI
alternative on CRT handlers, the Agency evaluated the cost savings or
incremental costs as a percentage of firm sales. In virtually all cases
economic impacts are cost savings at less than one
[[Page 40522]]
percent of firm sales. The average savings for a previously regulated
small quantity generator is $755 per year and $1740 per year for a
previously regulated large quantity generator under the primary
alternative. The average cost savings for previously regulated small
and large quantity generators under the CSI alternative are estimated
at $703 and $7819 respectively.
For mercury-containing equipment, we estimate cost savings
resulting from today's proposal would be approximately $273,000 per
year. Of this, about $200,000 in savings is attributed to generators of
mercury-containing equipment, an average of $106 per generator per
year. The remaining $73,000 is attributable to retorters and waste
brokers. As with CRTs, the economic impact of these savings relative to
firm sales is very small, i.e., less than 0.1 percent of firm sales.
c. Benefits. EPA has evaluated the qualitative benefits and to a
lesser extent, the quantitative benefits of the proposed rule for CRTs
and mercury-containing equipment. Some of the benefits resulting from
today's rule include conservation of landfill capacity, increase in
resource efficiency, growth of a recycling infrastructure for CRTs and
possible reduction of lead emissions to the environment from CRT
recycling. EPA estimates that approximately 2600 tons or 456,000 cubic
feet of CRTs per year would be redirected away from landfills towards
recycling under the Agency's proposal today. In addition, as mentioned
above, the use of processed CRT glass benefits the manufacturer in
several ways, such as improving heat transfer and melting
characteristics in the furnaces, lowering energy consumption, and
maintaining or improving the quality of the final product. This rule
will facilitate the growth and development of the CRT glass processing
industry in the United States by reducing regulatory barriers to new
glass processing firms becoming established. Finally, this rule will
reduce lead emissions to the environment by diverting CRTs from
municipal landfills and waste-to-energy facilities.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as Amended by the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.
The 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.
For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's rule on small
entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business that has
fewer than 1000 or 100 employees per firm depending upon the SIC code
the firm primarily is classified; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction
that is a government of a city, county, town, school district or
special district with a population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small
organization that is any not-for-profit enterprise which is
independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.
The small entity analysis conducted for today's proposal indicates
that streamlining requirements for CRTs and mercury-containing
equipment would generally result in savings to affected entities
compared to baseline requirements. Under the full compliance scenario,
the rule is not expected to result in a net cost to any affected
entity. Thus, adverse impacts are not anticipated. Costs could increase
for entities that are not complying with current requirements, but even
these costs, which are not properly attributable to the current
rulemaking, would not be expected to result in significant impacts on a
substantial number of small entities.
After considering the economic impacts of today's proposed rule on
small entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection requirements in this proposed rule have
been submitted for approval to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
Information Collection Request (ICR) documents have been prepared (ICR
No. 1189.10) for the proposed CRT requirements, and ICR No. 1597.05 for
the proposed requirements for mercury-containing equipment. Copies may
be obtained from Susan Auby by mail at U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Collection Strategies Division (Mail Code 2822), 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001, by email at
auby.susan@epa.gov, or by calling (202) 260-4901. A copy
may also be downloaded off the Internet at http://www.epa.gov/icr.
The information requirements established for this action, and
identified in the Information Collection Request (ICR) supporting
today's proposed rule, are largely self-implementing. This process will
ensure that: (i) Regulated entities managing CRTs or mercury-containing
equipment are held accountable to the applicable requirements; and (ii)
state inspectors can verify compliance when needed. For example, the
universal waste standards require LQHUWs and SQHUWs to demonstrate the
length of time that mercury-containing equipment has been accumulated
from the date they were received or became a waste. The standards also
require LQHUWs and destination sites to keep records of all shipments
received and sent. Further, the standards require waste handlers and
processors to notify EPA under certain circumstances (e.g, when large
amounts are accumulated or when illegal shipments are received).
EPA will use the collected information to ensure that mercury-
containing equipment is being managed in a protective manner. These
data aid the Agency in tracking waste shipments and identifying
improper management practices. In addition, information kept in
facility records helps handlers, processors, and destination sites to
ensure that they and other facilities are managing these wastes
properly. Section 3007(b) of RCRA and 40 CFR part 2, subpart B, which
define EPA's general policy on the public disclosure of information,
contain provisions for confidentiality. However, no questions of a
sensitive nature are included in any of the information collection
requirements associated with today's action.
EPA has carefully considered the burden imposed upon the regulated
community by the regulations. EPA is confident that those activities
required of respondents are necessary and, to the extent possible, has
attempted to minimize the burden imposed. EPA believes strongly that if
the minimum requirements specified under the regulations are not met,
neither the facilities nor EPA can ensure that used CRTs and mercury-
containing equipment are being managed in a manner protective of human
health and the environment.
For the proposed requirements applicable to CRTs, the aggregate
annual burden to respondents over the three-year period covered by this
ICR is estimated at 10,426 hours, with a cost of approximately
$687,000. Average annual burden hours per respondent are estimated to
be 7 hours; there are an estimated 2400 respondents. This represents a
reduction in burden to respondents of approximately 18,616. There are
no capital or start-up costs,
[[Page 40523]]
operation or maintenance costs, and no costs for purchases of services.
Nor is there any burden to the Agency. For the proposed requirements
affecting mercury-containing equipment, the aggregate annual burden to
respondents over the three-year period covered by this ICR is estimated
at 114,770 hours, with a cost of approximately $825,158. Average annual
burden hours per respondent are estimated to be 4.5 hours for small
quantity handlers, 15 hours for large quantity handlers, 10 hours for
treatment, storage, and disposal facilities, and 16 hours for
transporters; there are an estimated 2495 respondents. This represents
a reduction in burden of approximately 18,493 hours. The aggregate
burden to the Agency is estimated at 377 hours, with a cost of
$10,816.00. Total capital costs are estimated to be $1430 annually for
all respondents, and operation and maintenance costs are estimated to
be $113 annually for all respondents.
Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, disclose, or provide
information to or for a federal agency. This includes the time needed
to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements;
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information;
search data sources; complete and review the collection of information;
and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.
Comments are requested on the Agency's need for this information,
the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested
methods for minimizing respondent burden, including the use of
automated collection techniques. Send comments on the ICR to the
Director, Collection Strategies Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (Mail Code 2823), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC
20460-0001; and to the Office of Regulatory Affairs, Office of
Management and Budget, 725 17th St., NW, Washington, DC 20503, marked
"Attention: Desk Officer for EPA". Include the ICR number
in any correspondence. Since OMB is required to make a decision
concerning the ICR between 30 and 60 days after June 12, 2002, a
comment to OMB is best assured of having its full effect if OMB
receives it by July 12, 2002. The final rule will respond to any OMB or
public comments on the information collection requirements contained in
this proposal.
D. Unfunded Mandates
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for federal agencies to
assess the effects of their regulatory actions on state, local, and
tribal governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the
UMRA, EPA generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-
benefit analysis, for the proposed and final rules with "federal
mandates" that may result in expenditures by state, local, and
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100
million or more in any one year.
Before promulgating a rule for which a written statement is needed,
section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify and consider
a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the least
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative that
achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 do
not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover,
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that
alternative was not adopted.
Before EPA establishes any regulatory requirements that may
significantly or uniquely affect small governments, including tribal
governments, it must have developed under section 203 of the UMRA a
small government agency plan. The plan must provide for notifying
potentially affected small governments, enable officials of affected
small governments to have meaningful and timely input in the
development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant federal
intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and advising
small governments on compliance with the regulatory requirements.
The Agency's analysis of compliance with the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act (UMRA) of 1995 found that today's proposed rule imposes no
enforceable duty on any state, local or tribal government or the
private sector. This proposed rule contains no federal mandates (under
the regulatory provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for state, local, or
tribal governments or the private sector. In addition, EPA has
determined that this rule contains no regulatory requirements that
might significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The Act
generally excludes from the definition of "federal
intergovernmental mandate" (in sections 202, 203, and 205) duties
that arise from participation in a voluntary federal program. Today's
proposed rule is voluntary, and because it is less stringent than the
current regulations, state governments are not required to adopt the
proposed changes. The UMRA generally excludes from the definition of
"Federal intergovernmental mandate" duties that arise from
participation in a voluntary federal program. The UMRA also excludes
from the definition of "Federal private sector mandate"
duties that arise from participation in a voluntary federal program.
Therefore we have determined that today's proposal is not subject to
the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of UMRA.
E. Executive Order 13132
Executive Order 13132, entitled "Federalism"
(64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable
process to ensure meaningful and timely input by State and local
officials in the development of regulatory policies that have federalism
implications. "Policies that have federalism implications"
is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations that 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." This proposed rule does not have federalism
implications. It 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.
F. Executive Order 13175
Executive Order 13175, entitled "Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments"
(65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000), requires EPA to develop an accountable
process to ensure "meaningful and timely input by tribal officials
in the development of regulatory policies that have tribal
implications." "Policies that have tribal implications" is defined
in the Executive Order to include regulations that have "substantial
direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between
the federal
[[Page 40524]]
government and the Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the federal government and Indian tribes. This
proposed rule does not have tribal implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the relationship
between the federal government and Indian tribes, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities between the federal
government and Indian tribes, as specified in Executive Order 13175.
G. Executive Order 13045
"Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks and
Safety Risks" (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any rule
that EPA determines (1) "economically significant" as
defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental
health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets
both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health or
safety effects of the planned rule on children and explain why the
planned regulation is preferable to other potential effective and
reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency. This
proposed rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is not
an economically significant rule as defined by Executive Order 12866.
H. Executive Order 13211
This rule is not a "significant energy action" as
defined in Executive Order 13211, "Actions Concerning Regulations
That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use"
(66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not likely to have a
significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of
energy. Today's proposed rule streamlines hazardous waste management
requirements for used cathode ray tubes and mercury-containing
equipment. By encouraging reuse and recycling, the rule may save energy
costs associated with manufacturing new materials. It will not cause
reductions in supply or production of oil, fuel, coal, or electricity.
Nor will it result in increased energy prices, increased cost of energy
distribution, or an increased dependence on foreign supplies of energy.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 ("NTTAA"), Public Law 104-113, section
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. The NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress, though
OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use available and
applicable voluntary consensus standards. This rule does not establish
technical standards. Therefore, EPA did not consider the use of any
voluntary consensus standards.
J. Environmental Justice
Executive Order 12898, "Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations" (February 11, 1994) is designed to address the
environmental and human health conditions of minority and low-income
populations. EPA is committed to addressing environmental justice
concerns and has assumed a leadership role in environmental justice
initiatives to enhance environmental quality for all citizens of the
United States. The Agency's goals are to ensure that no segment of the
population, regardless of race, color, national origin, income, or net
worth bears disproportionately high and adverse human health and
environmental impacts as a result of EPA's policies, programs, and
activities. In response to Executive Order 12898, EPA's Office of Solid
Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER) formed an Environmental Justice
Task Force to analyze the array of environmental justice issues
specific to waste programs and to develop an overall strategy to
identify and address these issues (OSWER Directive No.
9200.3-17). To address this goal, EPA conducted a qualitative
analysis of the environmental justice issues under this proposed rule.
Potential environmental justice impacts are identified consistent with
the EPA's Environmental Justice Strategy and the OSWER Environmental
Justice Action Agenda.
Today's proposed rule would streamline hazardous waste management
requirements for used cathode ray tubes sent for recycling. It would
also streamline such requirements for mercury-containing equipment by
adding this equipment to the federal universal waste rule. Facilities
that would be affected by today's rule include any facility generating
hazardous waste computers and televisions sent for recycling, and any
facility generating hazardous waste mercury-containing equipment sent
for recycling or disposal. Also affected would be facilities which
recycle these materials. Disposal facilities themselves would not be
affected by today's proposed rule.
The wide distribution of affected facilities throughout the United
States does not suggest any distributional pattern around communities
of concern. Any building in any area could be affected by today's
proposal. Specific impacts on low income or minority communities,
therefore, are undetermined. The Agency believes that emissions during
transportation would not be a major contributor to communities of
concern through which used CRTs and mercury-containing equipment may be
transported. Any such material broken during transport would be
contained in the required packaging. Overall, no disproportional
impacts to minority or low income communities are expected.
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 260
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Confidential business information, Hazardous waste, Waste treatment and
disposal.
40 CFR Part 261
Environmental protection, Hazardous waste, Recycling, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
40 CFR Part 264
Environmental protection, Hazardous materials, Packaging and
containers, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security
measures, Surety bonds.
40 CFR Part 265
Environmental protection, Hazardous materials, Packaging and
containers, Security measures, Surety bonds.
40 CFR Part 268
Environmental protection, Hazardous waste, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
40 CFR Part 270
Environmental protection, Hazardous materials transportation,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
40 CFR Part 273
Environmental protection, Hazardous materials transportation,
Hazardous waste.
[[Page 40525]]
Dated: May 17, 2002.
Christine T. Whitman,
Administrator.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I of the
Code of Federal Regulations, parts 260, 261, 264, 265, 268, 270 and
273, are amended as follows:
PART 260 HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM: GENERAL
1. The authority citation for part 260 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), 6921-6927, 6930, 6934,
6935, 6937, 6938, 6939, and 6974.
Subpart B Definitions
2. Section 260.10 is amended by adding in alphabetical order the
definitions of "Cathode ray tube," "CRT glass
manufacturing facility," "CRT glass processor," and
"Mercury-containing equipment" and by republishing the
introductory text of and adding paragraph (5) to the the definition of
"Universal Waste" to read as follows:
Sec. 260.10 Definitions.
* * * * *
Cathode ray tube or CRT means a vacuum tube, composed primarily of
glass, which is the video display component of a television or computer
monitor. An intact CRT means a CRT remaining within the monitor whose
vacuum has not been released. A broken CRT means glass removed from the
monitor after the vacuum has been released.
* * * * *
CRT glass manufacturing facility means a facility or part of a
facility that uses a furnace to manufacture CRT glass.
* * * * *
CRT processing means conducting all of the following activities:
(1) Receiving broken or intact CRTs;
(2) Intentionally breaking intact CRTs or further breaking or
separating broken CRTs;
(3) Sorting or otherwise managing glass removed from CRT monitors;
and
(4) Cleaning coatings off the glass removed from CRTs.
* * * * *
Mercury-containing equipment means a device or part of a device
(excluding batteries, thermostats, and lamps) that contains elemental
mercury necessary for its operation.
* * * * *
Universal Waste means any of the following hazardous wastes that
are managed under the universal waste requirements of part 273 of this
chapter:
* * * * *
(5) Mercury-containing equipment as described in Sec. 273.6
of this chapter.
* * * * *
PART 261 IDENTIFICATION AND LISTING OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
3. The authority citation for part 261 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), 6921, 6922, 6924(y), and
6938.
Subpart A General
4. Section 261.4 is amended by adding a new paragraph (a)(23) to
read as follows:
Sec. 261.4 Exclusions.
(a) * * *
(23) Used cathode ray tubes (CRTs)
(i) Used intact CRTs as defined in Sec. 260.10 are not
solid wastes unless disposed. No restrictions on speculative
accumulation as defined in Sec. 261.1 apply.
(ii) Used, broken CRTs as defined in Sec. 260.10 are not
solid wastes provided that they meet the requirements of
Sec. 261.39.
* * * * *
5. Section 261.9 is amended by adding a new paragraph (e) to read
as follows:
Sec. 261.9 Requirements for universal waste.
* * * * *
(e) Mercury-conteaining equipment as described in
Sec. 273.6 of this chapter.
6. Section 261.38 of subpart D is transferred to Subpart E which is
added to read as follows:
Subpart E Exclusions/Exemptions
Sec.
261.38 Comparable/Syngas Fuel Exclusion.
261.39 Conditional Exclusion for Broken, Used Cathode Ray
Tubes (CRTs) Undergoing Recycling.
Subpart E Exclusions/Exemptions
Sec. 261.38 Comparable/Syngas Fuel Exclusion.
* * * * *
Sec. 261.39 Conditional Exclusion for Broken, Used Cathode Ray
Tubes (CRTs) Undergoing Recycling.
Broken, used CRTs are not solid wastes if they meet the following
conditions:
(a) Prior to processing: These materials are not solid wastes if
they are destined for recycling and if they meet the following
requirements:
(1) Storage. The broken CRTs must be either:
(i) Stored in a building with a roof, floor, and walls, or
(ii) Placed in a container (i.e., a package or a vehicle) that is
constructed, filled, and closed to minimize identifiable releases to
the environment of CRT glass (including fine solid materials).
(2) Labeling. Each container in which the used, broken CRT is
contained must be labeled or marked clearly with one of the following
phrases: "Waste cathode ray tube(s) contains leaded
glass," or "Used cathode ray tube(s) contains leaded
glass." It must also be labeled: "Do not mix with other
glass materials."
(3) Transportation. These CRTs must be transported in a container
meeting the requirements of paragraphs(a)(1)(ii) and (2) of this
section.
(4) Speculative accumulation. These CRTs are subject to the
limitations on speculative accumulation as defined in
Sec. 261.1.
(b) Requirements for used CRT processing: Used, broken CRTs
undergoing CRT processing as defined in Sec. 260.10 are not
solid wastes if they meet the following requirements:
(1) Storage. Broken CRTs undergoing processing are subject to the
requirements of paragraphs (a)(1), (2), and (4) of this section.
(2) Processing.
(i) All CRTs must be processedwithin a building with a roof, floor,
and walls; and
(ii) No activities may be performed that use temperatures high
enough to volatilize lead from CRTs.
(c) Processed CRT glass sent to CRT glass making or lead smelting:
Glass removed from used CRTs that is destined for recycling at a CRT
glass manufacturing facility or a lead smelter after processing is not
a solid waste unless it is speculatively accumulated as defined in
Sec. 261.1. Imported, processed glass from used CRTs is subject
to these requirements as soon as it enters the United States.
(d) Processed CRT glass sent to other types of recycling, except
for use constituting disposal: Glass removed from used CRTs that is
destined for other types of recycling after processing (except use
constituting disposal) is not a solid waste if it meets the
requirements of paragraphs (a)(1)-(4) of this section. Imported,
processed glass removed from used CRTs is subject to these requirements
as soon as it enters the United States.
(e) Use constituting disposal: Processed glass removed from CRT
monitors that is used in a manner constituting disposal must comply
with the requirements of paragraphs (a)(1)-(4) of this section
and the applicable
[[Page 40526]]
requirements of part 266, subpart C of this chapter. Imported,
processed glass from used CRTs is subject to these requirements as soon
as it enters the United States.
PART 264 STANDARDS FOR OWNERS AND OPERATORS OF HAZARDOUS
WASTE TREATMENT STORAGE AND DISPOSAL FACILITIES
7. The authority citation for part 264 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), 6924, and 6925.
Subpart A General
8. Section 264.1 is amended by adding a new paragraph (g)(11)(v) to
read as follows:
Sec. 264.1 Purpose, scope, and applicability.
* * * * *
(g) * * *
(11) * * *
(v) Mercury-containing equipment as described in Sec. 273.6
of this chapter.
* * * * *
PART 265 INTERIM STATUS STANDARDS FOR OWNERS AND OPERATORS OF
HAZARDOUS WASTE TREATMENT, STORAGE AND DISPOSAL FACILITIES
9. The authority citation for part 265 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6906, 6912, 6922, 6923, 6924, 6925,
6935, 6936, and 6937.
Subpart A General
10. Section 265.1 is amended by adding a new paragraph (c)(14)(v)
to read as follows:
Sec. 265.1 Purpose, scope and applicability.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(14) * * *
(v) Mercury-containing equipment as described in Sec. 273.6
of this chapter.
* * * * *
PART 268 LAND DISPOSAL RESTRICTIONS
11. The authority citation for part 268 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), 6921, and 6924.
Subpart A General
12. Section 268.1 is amended by adding a new paragraph (f)(5) to
read as follows:
* * * * *
(5) Mercury-containing equipment as described in Sec. 273.6
of this chapter.
* * * * *
PART 270 EPA ADMINISTERED PERMIT PROGRAMS: THE HAZARDOUS
WASTE PERMIT PROGRAM
13. The authority citation for part 270 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912, 6924, 6925, 6927, 6939, and
6974.
Subpart A General Information
14. Section 270.1 is amended by adding a new paragraph
(c)(2)(viii)(E) to read as follows:
Sec. 270.1 Purpose and scope of these regulations.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(2) * * *
(viii) * * *
(E) Mercury-containing equipment as described in Sec. 273.6
of this chapter.
* * * * *
PART 273 STANDARDS FOR UNIVERSAL WASTE MANAGEMENT
15. The authority citation for part 273 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6922, 6923, 6924, 6925, 6930, and 6937.
Subpart A General
* * * * *
16. Section 273.1 is amended by adding a new paragraph (a)(5) to
read as follows:
Sec. 273.1 Scope.
(a) * * *
(5) Mercury-containing equipment as described in
Sec. 273.6.
* * * * *
17. A new Sec. 273.6 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 273.6 Applicability Mercury-containing equipment.
(a) Mercury-containing equipment covered under this part 273. The
requirements of this part apply to persons managing mercury-containing
equipment as described in Sec. 273.9, except those listed in
paragraph (b) of this section.
(b) Mercury-containing equipment not covered under this part 273.
The requirements of this part do not apply to persons managing the
following mercury-containing equipment:
(1) Mercury-containing equipment that is not yet a waste under part
261 of this chapter. Paragraph (c) of this section describes when
mercury-containing equipment becomes a waste.
(2) Mercury-containing equipment that is not a hazardous waste.
Mercury-containing equipment is a hazardous waste if it exhibits one or
more of the characteristics identified in part 261, subpart C of this
chapter.
(c) Generation of waste mercury-containing equipment. (1) Used
mercury-containing equipment becomes a waste on the day it is
discarded.
(2) Unused mercury-containing equipment becomes a waste on the day
the handler decides to discard it.
18. Section 273.9 is amended by adding in alphabetical order the
definition of "Mercury-containing equipment" and revising
the definitions of "Large quantity handler of universal
waste," "Small quantity handler of universal waste,"
and republishing the introductory text of and adding paragraph (5) to
the definition of "Universal waste" to read as follows:
Sec. 273.9 Definitions.
* * * * *
Large Quantity Handler of Universal Waste means a universal waste
handler (as defined in this section) who accumulates 5,000 kilograms or
more total of universal waste (batteries, pesticides, thermostats,
lamps, or mercury-containing equipment, calculated collectively) at any
time. This designation as a large quantity handler of universal waste
is retained through the end of the calendar year in which the 5,000
kilogram limit is met or exceeded.
* * * * *
Mercury-containing equipment means a device or part of a device
(excluding batteries, thermostats, and lamps) that contains elemental
mercury necessary for its operation.
* * * * *
Small Quantity Handler of Universal Waste means a universal waste
handler (as defined in this section) who does not accumulate 5,000
kilograms or more of universal waste (batteries, pesticides,
thermostats, lamps, or mercury-containing equipment, calculated
collectively) at any time.
* * * * *
Universal Waste means any of the following hazardous wastes that
are subject to the universal waste requirements of this part 273:
* * * * *
(e) Mercury-containing equipment as described in
Sec. 273.6.
* * * * *
Subpart B Standards for Small Quantity Handlers of Universal
Waste
19. Section 273.13 is amended by revising paragraph (c) to read as
follows:
[[Page 40527]]
Sec. 273.13 Waste management.
* * * * *
(c) Universal waste thermostats and mercury-containing equipment. A
small quantity handler of universal waste must manage universal waste
thermostats and mercury-containing equipment in a way that prevents
releases of any universal waste or component of a universal waste to
the environment, as follows:
(1) A small quantity handler of universal waste must place in a
container any universal waste thermostat or mercury-containing
equipment that shows evidence of leakage, spillage, or damage that
could cause leakage under reasonably foreseeable conditions. The
container must be closed, structurally sound, compatible with the
contents of the thermostat or device, and must lack evidence of
leakage, spillage, or damage that could cause leakage under reasonably
foreseeable conditions.
(2) A small quantity handler of universal waste may remove mercury-
containing ampules from universal waste thermostats or mercury-
containing equipment provided the handler:
(i) Removes the ampules in a manner designed to prevent breakage of
the ampules;
(ii) Removes ampules only over or in a containment device (tray or
pan sufficient to collect and contain any mercury released from an
ampule in case of breakage);
(iii) Ensures that a mercury clean-up system is readily available
to immediately transfer any mercury resulting from spills or leaks from
broken ampules, from that containment device to a container that meets
the requirements of 40 CFR 262.34;
(iv) Immediately transfers any mercury resulting from spills or
leaks from broken ampules from the containment device to a container
that meets the requirements of 40 CFR 262.34;
(v) Ensures that the area in which ampules are removed is well
ventilated and monitored to ensure compliance with applicable OSHA
exposure levels for mercury;
(vi) Ensures that employees removing ampules are thoroughly
familiar with proper waste mercury handling and emergency procedures,
including transfer of mercury from containment devices to appropriate
containers;
(vii) Stores removed ampules in closed, non-leaking containers that
are in good condition;
(viii) Packs removed ampules in the container with packing
materials adequate to prevent breakage during storage, handling, and
transportation, and
(3)(i) A small quantity handler of universal waste who removes
mercury-containing ampules from thermostats or mercury-containing
equipment must determine whether the following exhibit a characteristic
of hazardous waste identified in 40 CFR part 261, subpart C:
(A) Mercury or clean-up residues resulting from spills or leaks,
and/or
(B) Other solid waste generated as a result of the removal of
mercury-containing ampules (e.g., remaining thermostat units or
mercury-containing equipment).
(ii) If the mercury, residues, and/or other solid waste exhibit a
characteristic of hazardous waste, it must be managed in compliance
with all applicable requirements of 40 CFR parts 260 through 272. The
handler is considered the generator of the mercury, residues, and/or
other waste and must manage it in compliance with 40 CFR part 262.
(iii) If the mercury, residues, and/or other solid waste is not
hazardous, the handler may manage the waste in any way that is in
compliance with applicable federal, state, or local solid waste
regulations.
20. Section 273.14 is amended by adding a new paragraph (f) to read
as follows:
Sec. 273.14 Labeling/marking.
* * * * *
(f) Mercury-containing equipment, or a container in which the
equipment is contained, must be labeled or marked clearly with any of
the following phrases: "Universal Waste Mercury-Containing
Equipment," or "Waste Mercury-Containing Equipment,"
or "Used Mercury-Containing Equipment."
Subpart C Standards for Large Quantity Handlers of Universal
Waste
21. Section 273.32 is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(4) and
(b)(5) to read as follows:
Sec. 273.32 Notification.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(4) A list of all the types of universal waste managed by the
handler (e.g., batteries, pesticides, thermostats, lamps, and mercury-
containing equipment);
(5) A statement indicating that the handler is accumulating more
than 5,000 kg of universal waste at one time and the types of universal
waste (i.e., batteries, pesticides, thermostats, lamps, and mercury-
containing equipment) the handler is accumulating above this quantity.
22. Section 273.33 is amended by revising paragraph (c) to read as
follows:
Sec. 273.33 Waste management.
* * * * *
(c) Universal waste thermostats and mercury-containing equipment. A
large quantity handler of universal waste must manage universal waste
thermostats and mercury-containing equipment in a way that prevents
releases of any universal waste or component of a universal waste to
the environment, as follows:
(1) A large quantity handler of universal waste must contain any
universal waste thermostat or mercury-containing equipment that shows
evidence of leakage, spillage, or damage that could cause leakage under
reasonably foreseeable conditions in a container. The container must be
closed, structurally sound, compatible with the contents of the
thermostat and/or equipment, and must lack evidence of leakage,
spillage, or damage that could cause leakage under reasonably
foreseeable conditions.
(2) A large quantity handler of universal waste may remove mercury-
containing ampules from universal waste thermostats or mercury-
containing equipment provided the handler:
(i) Removes the ampules in a manner designed to prevent breakage of
the ampules;
(ii) Removes ampules only over or in a containment device (tray or
pan sufficient to collect and contain any mercury released from an
ampule in case of breakage);
(iii) Ensures that a mercury clean-up system is readily available
to immediately transfer any mercury resulting from spills or leaks from
broken ampules, from that containment device to a container that meets
the requirements of 40 CFR 262.34;
(iv) Immediately transfers any mercury resulting from spills or
leaks from broken ampules from the containment device to a container
that meets the requirements of 40 CFR 262.34;
(v) Ensures that the area in which ampules are removed is well
ventilated and monitored to ensure compliance with applicable OSHA
exposure levels for mercury;
(vi) Ensures that employees removing ampules are thoroughly
familiar with proper waste mercury handling and emergency procedures,
including transfer of mercury from containment devices to appropriate
containers;
(vii) Stores removed ampules in closed, non-leaking containers that
are in good condition;
[[Page 40528]]
(viii) Packs removed ampules in the container with packing
materials adequate to prevent breakage during storage, handling, and
transportation, and
(3)(i) A large quantity handler of universal waste who removes
mercury-containing ampules from thermostats or mercury-containing
equipment must determine whether the following exhibit a characteristic
of hazardous waste identified in 40 CFR part 261, subpart C:
(A) Mercury or clean-up residues resulting from spills or leaks,
and/or
(B) Other solid waste generated as a result of the removal of
mercury-containing ampules (e.g., remaining thermostat units or
mercury-containing equipment).
(ii) If the mercury, residues, and/or other solid waste exhibit a
characteristic of hazardous waste, it must be managed in compliance
with all applicable requirements of 40 CFR parts 260 through 272. The
handler is considered the generator of the mercury, residues, and/or
other waste and must manage it in compliance with 40 CFR part 262.
(iii) If the mercury, residues, and/or other solid waste is not
hazardous, the handler may manage the waste in any way that is in
compliance with applicable federal, state, or local solid waste
regulations.
* * * * *
23. Section 273.34 is amended by adding a new paragraph (f) to read
as follows:
Sec. 273.34 Labeling/marking.
* * * * *
(f) Mercury-containing equipment, or a container in which the
equipment is contained, must be labeled or marked clearly with any of
the following phrases: "Universal Waste Mercury-Containing
Equipment," or "Waste Mercury-Containing Equipment,"
or "Used Mercury-Containing Equipment."
[FR Doc. 02-13116 Filed 6-11-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P