LDR Rules and Regulations 2000
Date: November 08, 2000
Citation: 65 FR 67068
Subject:Hazardous Waste Management System; Identification and Listing of Hazardous Waste; Chlorinated Aliphatics Production Wastes; Land Disposal Restrictions for Newly Identified Wastes; and CERCLA Hazardous Substance Designation and Reportable Quantities, Final Rule
Abstract: The Agency is listing as hazardous two of six wastes generated by the chlorinated aliphatics industry. These two wastes are K174 - Wastewater treatment sludges from the production of ethylene dichloride or vinyl chloride monomer (EDC/VCM); and K175 - Wastewater treatment sludges from the production of vinyl chloride monomer using mercuric chloride catalyst in an acetylene-based process. The effect of listing these two wastes is to subject them to stringent management and treatment standards under RCRA and to subject them to emergency notification requirement for releases of hazardous substances to the environment. EPA is also finalizing determinations not to list as hazardous four waste generated by the chlorinated alphatics industry.
Date: September 14, 2000
Citation:65 FR 55684
Subject: Hazardous Waste Management System; Identification and Listing of Hazardous Waste: Inorganic Chemical Manufacturing Wastes; Land Disposal Restrictions for Newly Identified Wastes; and CERCLA Hazardous Substance Designation and Reportable Quantities; Proposed Rule
Abstract: EPA is proposing to add three wastes from inorganic chemical manufacturing processes to the list of hazardous waste. Regulating these chemical wastes will protect human health and the environment by eliminating potential pathways of exposure.
Date: July 26, 2000
Citation:65 FR 45978
Subject: Land Disposal Restrictions: Notice of Intent to Grant a Site-Specific Treatment Variance to Safety-Kleen (Deer Park), Inc.; Notice of Intent to Grant Petition
Abstract: EPA announces the intent to grant a site-specific treatment variance from the Land Disposal Restrictions (LDR) treatment standards for approximately 2850 cubic yards of hazardous waste that Safety-Kleen (Deer Park), Inc. is currently storing at its Deer Park, Texas facility. Safety-Kleen requests this one-time variance because the waste cannot be treated to the interim K088 total arsenic standard of 26.1 mg/kg. Furthermore, a portion of the waste cannot meet the 28 mg/kg total dithiocarbamates treatment standard for the waste codes K161, P196, and P205.
Date: June 19, 2000
Citation:65 FR 37932-37956
Subject: LDR Reinvention Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
Abstract: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is giving advance notice of issues and potential directions we are considering for improving the Land Disposal Restrictions (LDR) program for treating hazardous waste under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act(RCRA).
Date: July 12, 2000
Citation:65 FR 42937
Subject: LDR Treatment Standards for Spent Aluminum Potliners (K088) and Regulatory Classification of Vitrification Units
Abstract: EPA is proposing to revise certain treatment standards for spent potliners from primary aluminum reduction (EPA hazardous waste: K088) under its Land Disposal Restrictions (LDR) program.
Date: April 27, 2000
Citation: 65 FR 24692
Subject: Agency Information Collection Activities: Continuing Collection; Comment Request; Land Disposal Restrictions
Abstract: This notice announces that EPA is planning to submit the following continuing Information Collection Request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB): Land Disposal Restrictions, EPA ICR #1442, OMB Control Number 2050-0085, expires August 31, 2000. Before submitting the ICR to OMB for review and approval, EPA is soliciting comments on specific aspects of the proposed information collection as described in the notice.
Date: March 8, 2000
Citation: 65 FR 12233
Subject: Notice of Proposed Decision on Request by FMC Corporation for an Extension of the Land Disposal Restrictions Effective Date for Five Waste Streams Generated at the Pocatello, Idaho Facility; Proposed Rule
Abstract: EPA is proposing to approve the request submitted by FMC Corporation for a one-year Case-by-Case (CBC) extension of the May 26, 2000, effective date of the RCRA land disposal restrictions (LDRs). FMC requested the CBC extension due to the lack of available treatment capacity for five waste streams and the need for additional time to design, construct, and begin operation of an on-site treatment plant. For this CBC extension to be approved, FMC must make each of the seven demonstrations required in the procedures for CBC extensions to an effective date. These provisions establish that an applicant who satisfies the conditions for a CBC extension will be granted one. If this proposed action is finalized, FMC will be allowed to continue to treat, store, or dispose of these five waste streams, as currently managed in on-site surface impoundments, until May 26, 2001,without being subject to the LDRs applicable to these wastes.
Date: February 22, 2000
Citation: 65 FR 8699
Subject: Agency Information Collection Activities: Continuing Collection; Comment Request; Land Disposal Restrictions No-Migration Variance; Notice
Abstract: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this document announces that EPA is planning to submit the following continuing Information Collection Request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB): Land Disposal Restrictions No-Migration Variances, EPA ICR Number 1353, OMB Control Number 2050-0062, current expiration date May 31, 2000. Before submitting the ICR to OMB for review an approval, EPA is soliciting comments on specific aspects of the proposed information collection.
Date: February 16, 2000
Citation: 65 FR 7809
Subject: Deferral of Phase IV Standards for PCBs as an Underlying Hazardous Constituent in Soil; Proposed Rule
Abstract: EPA is proposing to temporarily defer the requirement that polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) be considered an underlying hazardous constituent when they are present in soils that exhibit the toxicity characteristic for metals. EPA is proposing this action because the existing regulation appears to discourage remediation of certain contaminated soils, contrary to EPA's intent in promulgating alternative treatment standards for contaminated soils.