Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 25
 Regulations Governing Carbon Disposal REGULATORY FRAMEWORk in accordance with the regulations. �azardous wastes AND CONSIDERATIONS are solid wastes that because of “quantity, concentra- tion, or physical, chemical, or infectious characteristics The generation, accumulation, treatment, storage, may (a) cause, or significantly contribute to an increase and disposal of hazardous wastes are regulated under in mortality or an increase in serious irreversible, or the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). incapacitating reversible, illness; or (b) pose a sub- Wastes derived from the management and destruction stantial present or potential hazard to human health of chemical agents and munitions must be assessed or the environment when improperly treated, stored, under this authority and, if determined to be hazardous, transported, or disposed of, or otherwise managed.”2 managed under it. This includes waste activated carbon The statutory definition is implemented for a specific from all air- and gas-filtering units at each chemical waste through a series of regulations that require a agent disposal facility. In this chapter, the committee stepwise process for determining if the solid waste is summarizes the regulations applying at each facility, a hazardous waste. First, if a waste is included on one demonstrates their complexity, and points out some of several lists of substances or constituents provided differences from one state to another to clarify the in the regulations, it is a hazardous waste (each list has legal constraints impacting carbon disposal options. a letter designation (F, K, P, and U)) (40 CFR 261.31- These are the rules by which the facilities must abide, 261.33). Second, a waste is hazardous if it is ignitable, notwithstanding that some public interest groups may corrosive, reactive, or toxic (40 CFR 261.20-261.24). advocate more stringent requirements. A state that has received authorization from the U.S. Regulation under RCRA is triggered once it has Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) may define been determined that a material is a hazardous waste, additional wastes as hazardous. With some exceptions, which is dependent on the material being a solid waste. solid wastes generated during the treatment, storage, or Solid waste is defined as “garbage, refuse, sludge disposal of a listed hazardous waste or their mixture from an . . . air pollution control facility or other dis- with a listed hazardous waste are also hazardous waste. carded material, including solid, liquid, semisolid, or A hazardous waste remains such for the duration of its contained gaseous material resulting from industrial existence except if it is a characteristic waste that no . . . operations.”1 RCRA then requires generators of longer has the characteristic. solid waste to determine if a particular solid waste is RCRA requires operators of facilities that treat, hazardous and, if it is, to manage the hazardous waste store, or dispose of hazardous wastes to obtain a permit. 142 242 U.S.C. 6903(27). U.S.C. 6903(5). 

OCR for page 25
 DISPOSAL OF ACTIVATED CARBON FROM CHEMICAL AGENT DISPOSAL FACILITIES A facility must meet design, operational, performance, storage, and disposal facilities (TSDFs); and restric- insurance, and financial responsibility standards issued tions for the land disposal of some hazardous wastes. by the EPA or an authorized state to obtain a permit. Each state grants permits for the construction and RCRA specifically bans land disposal of uncontained operation of TSDFs. Permits stipulate the general liquid wastes and of specified wastes unless they are requirements governing the design, construction, and first treated to reduce their risk.3 operation of a TSDF and also establish appropriate site- At the Tooele Chemical Agent Disposal Facility specific conditions for all aspects of hazardous waste (TOCDF) and the Umatilla Chemical Agent Disposal management at the facility. Activated carbon waste Facility (UMCDF), operations are known to include from the chemical agent disposal facilities covered in the destruction of certain mustard agent munitions this report is governed by the permits issued by the that are contaminated with mercury. The processing respective states in which these facilities are located. of these munitions will cause some of the used carbon In addition to regulation under RCRA, the Compre- at these facilities to become contaminated with mer- hensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), or Superfund,4 requires a cury. If the mercury concentration levels in a waste are found to exceed 0.2 mg/L by EPA’s toxic chemical responsible party to clean up the release of any hazard- leaching procedure (TCLP), the waste is hazardous ous substance into the environment. A hazardous sub- based on its toxicity characteristic. �azardous wastes stance is defined to include any substance specifically containing mercury are covered by the land disposal designated by EPA, hazardous wastes as defined under restriction regulations, which establish two categories: RCRA, toxic pollutants listed under the federal Clean low mercury (<260 mg/kg total mercury) and high Air Act, and imminently hazardous substances under mercury (≥260 mg/kg total mercury). Low mercury the federal Toxic Substances Control Act.5 Liability wastes require treatment to 0.20 mg/L for residues from under Superfund is strict and joint and several and retorting and 0.025 mg/L for all other wastes (using applies to the generator of the hazardous substance the TCLP) (40 CFR 268.40 and 268.48). EPA states regardless of what treatment or disposal may have occurred.6 Thus, if any hazardous substance remains that stabilization or solidification is generally used to meet these standards. �igh mercury wastes must gen- erally be treated by retorting or roasting in a thermal 442 processing unit capable of volatilizing the mercury and U.S.C. 9601-9675. 542 U.S.C. 9601(14). subsequently condensing the volatilized mercury for 6Environmental regulatory law has its roots in common law tort recovery (40 CFR 268.42). The residual waste from this law, particularly strict liability principles. This is a complex area of treatment is then required to meet the above standards; law. A few of the basic principles concerning liability are outlined if it does not, the same process must be repeated until below to provide context. In tort law, strict liability is the imposition there is compliance. of liability on a party without a finding of fault (such as negligence or tortious intent). The plaintiff needs to prove only that the tort EPA authorizes states to regulate hazardous wastes happened and that the defendant was responsible. For example, in within their borders under RCRA. A state must adopt a the context of a release of chemical agent, a plaintiff needs only program that is no less stringent than the requirements to prove that an injury was caused by the chemical agent and the adopted by the EPA (40 CFR 271). All of the states with defendant’s actions resulted in a level of exposure that caused operating chemical agent disposal facilities—Alabama, that injury. Strict liability is imposed for legal infractions that are Arkansas, Indiana, Oregon, and Utah—have obtained malum prohibitum rather than malum in se; therefore, neither good faith nor the fact that the defendant took all possible precautions such EPA authorization. is a valid defense. Strict liability often applies to those engaged in Each of the states has adopted laws and regulations hazardous or inherently dangerous ventures. In joint liability, par- essentially the same as the EPA hazardous waste man- ties are each liable up to the full amount of the relevant obligation. agement regulations, including regulations for identi- In several liability, the parties are liable for only their respective fication and listing of hazardous wastes; requirements obligations. In joint and several liability, a claimant may pursue an obligation against any one party as if they were jointly liable, applicable to generators and transporters of hazardous and it becomes the responsibility of the defendants to sort out their waste; requirements for hazardous waste treatment, respective proportions of liability and payment. This means that if the claimant pursues one defendant and receives payment, that defendant must then pursue the other obligors for a contribution to 342 U.S.C. 6924(d)-(m). their share of the liability.

OCR for page 25
 REGULATIONS GOVERNING CARBON DISPOSAL after treatment or disposal of wastes generated from The WCL values of 20 ppb for the nerve agents and 200 the chemical agent treatment or destruction processes ppb for mustard agent were derived from Army chemi- and that hazardous substance is released or there is a cal agent regulations for drinking water standards. The substantial threat of a release into the environment, primary analytical methodology for characterizing a then the generator would be liable for remediation of waste at most of the chemical agent disposal facilities the site of the release. is set forth in EPA Publication SW-846. This includes the TCLP, which is required to determine if a waste Finding 3-1. The Army’s Chemical Materials Agency meets the toxicity characteristic definition.8 will retain liability for the release or threatened release Finding 3-2. The existing state permits issued to of residual hazardous wastes or hazardous substances adsorbed on activated carbon if that activated carbon chemical agent disposal facilities allow for on-site is disposed of in a landfill. thermal treatment of all used carbon. Finding 3-3. The existing state permits issued to OVERVIEW OF STATE-SPECIFIC chemical agent disposal facilities allow the off-site REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS transportation of agent-contaminated waste if the agent Each state has adopted its own waste characteriza- concentration is below the waste control limits estab- tion regulations. Alabama and Arkansas have generally lished by each state. adopted the federal regulations for hazardous waste characterization and listing. Oregon and Utah have Alabama issued additional regulations specifically addressing chemical agents or munitions. The Alabama Department of Environmental Man- Each chemical agent disposal facility has been agement (ADEM) has adopted hazardous waste regula- tions that mirror the federal RCRA program.9 ADEM issued a RCRA permit under the applicable state regulations. These permits establish waste character- has not specifically listed chemical agents or muni- ization requirements, pertinent sampling and analysis tions, or the wastes derived from their destruction, as methodologies, waste disposal methods, operating listed hazardous wastes. Therefore, activated carbon parameters, and closure requirements for each facility. wastes from the treatment or management of chemical To deviate from any of the provisions set forth in its agents or munitions at ANCDF must be managed as permit, a chemical agent disposal facility must first RCRA hazardous waste only if they exhibit hazardous obtain approval for the permit modification from the characteristics. state. The individual facility permit requirements for ADEM issued a permit (AL3210020027) to the specific secondary waste streams are discussed below. U.S. Department of the Army, Anniston Army Depot; The state-issued RCRA permits for all of the dis- t he U.S. Department of the Army, ANCDF Field posal facilities specify waste control limits (WCLs) or Office (ANCDF site); and Westinghouse Government permit compliance concentrations (PCCs) in parts per Environmental Services Company LLC to operate a billion (ppb) of chemical agent, below which a waste hazardous waste storage and treatment facility. The may be shipped off-site for additional treatment or permit defines “chemical agent free” as agent concen- disposal. The permits for the Anniston Chemical Agent trations below the lowest achievable method detection Disposal Facility (ANCDF), the Pine Bluff Chemical limits for the specified analytical method used. ADEM Agent Disposal Facility (PBCDF), and TOCDF all set recently approved a permit modification under which WCLs as 20 ppb for nerve agents GB and �X and 200 certain solid wastes not exposed to chemical agent ppb for distilled mustard agent �D, while the UMCDF liquids or to vapors at concentrations greater than the permit sets PCCs, which serve a similar purpose, of 13 ppb for �X, 16 ppb for GB, and 152 ppb for �D.7 840 C.F.R. 261.24(a): A waste is considered hazardous for toxic- ity if the extract from the TCLP contains a listed contaminant above 7Brian O’Donnell, Chief, Secondary Waste, Closure Compli- the concentration specified in Table 1 of Part 261.24(a); mercury ance, and Assessments, CMA, “Transportation risk assessment,” is listed at 0.2 mg/L. 9Alabama Administrative Code Revised 335-14-2. Presentation to the committee, June 4, 2008.

OCR for page 25
 DISPOSAL OF ACTIVATED CARBON FROM CHEMICAL AGENT DISPOSAL FACILITIES short-term limit (STL) are deemed to be nonhazardous • The waste has been decontaminated and/or moni- with respect to chemical agent and may be disposed of tored to a vapor concentration equivalent to less off-site in accordance with the applicable solid waste than the short-term exposure limit (STEL) for regulations.10 According to the ADEM requirements, agent.12 only combustible nonporous solid wastes or objects that do not possess internal cavities can be evaluated for According to the PBCDF WAP, each batch of waste off-site disposal using chemical agent vapor monitor- from areas where chemical agent may be present will ing; thus, activated carbon is excluded (ADEM, 2006). either be sampled and tested for agent or the vapor Under the ANCDF waste analysis plan (WAP), if an space above the waste will be monitored for agent. For EPA analytical methodology exists, that methodology those batches characterized by sampling and analysis, must be used to determine whether a material contains the TCLP extraction method will be used to determine agent or other toxic constituents. Methods developed concentrations of substances of regulatory concern. by the Army are to be used for those materials for which Agent vapor space monitoring is performed by plac- no EPA methods exist. ing the wastes in a container (e.g., drum or bag) and allowing at least 4 hours at 70°F for the agent vapor in the container to reach equilibrium. After equilibrium is Arkansas reached, the concentration of agent in the vapor space The Arkansas Department of Environmental Qual- will be measured using near-real-time monitoring (e.g., ity (ADEQ), like ADEM, has promulgated hazardous automatic continuous air monitoring systems). The waste regulations that essentially are the same as the characterization methodology for each secondary waste federal RCRA program.11 Similarly, ADEQ has not stream destined for off-site shipment is detailed in the listed specific designated chemical agents or muni- WAP (ADEQ, 2006). tions as hazardous wastes. As a result, activated carbon wastes from the treatment or management of chemical Oregon agents or munitions at PBCDF must be managed as RCRA hazardous waste only if they exhibit hazardous The Oregon Department of Environmental Qual- characteristics. ity (ODEQ) has incorporated by reference the federal ADEQ issued a permit (Permit No. 29-�) to Pine RCRA regulations for the identification and listing of Bluff Arsenal to operate a hazardous waste manage- hazardous wastes (Oregon Administrative Rules 340- ment facility at Pine Bluff Circle, Jefferson County, 101-001). In addition to the federally listed acute haz- Arkansas. At PBCDF, process knowledge, quality ardous wastes, ODEQ regulations include the following assurance data, and analytical data are used to make as state-specific listed hazardous wastes: waste characterization decisions. Under the PBCDF RCRA permit, the term “chemical agent-free” refers • Blister agents (such as mustard agent) (�azardous to contaminated or potentially contaminated solid Waste Code P998) and materials that have been tested per the PBCDF WAP • Nerve agents (such as GB and �X) (�azardous and found to be below the WCL or to have been ther- Waste Code P999). mally treated for 15 minutes at 1000°F. Under the WAP, waste may be shipped off-facility for treatment and/or Oregon regulations also include the following as disposal only if additional state-specific listed hazardous wastes from nonspecific sources: • The waste was not agent contaminated, or • The waste meets the criteria for chemical agent free, or 12The STEL is the maximum vapor concentration to which un - 10The STL is a concentration typically expressed in milli- protected workers can be exposed for up to 15 minutes (as often grams of a specific agent per cubic meter of air. For GB, 1 STL as four times in an 8-hour workday) without adverse health effect. is 0.0001 mg/m3; for �X, 0.00001 mg/m3; and for �D, 0.003 These values for chemical agents GB, �X, and �D are the same mg/m3. as the STL values but include as well the aforementioned time 11ADEQ Regulation No. 23. component.

OCR for page 25
 REGULATIONS GOVERNING CARBON DISPOSAL • Residues from demilitarization, treatment, and ces; if a process stream is not listed, the matrix that the testing of blister agents (such as mustard agent) sample most resembles is to be used (ODEQ, 1997). (�azardous Waste Code F998)13 and • Residues from demilitarization, treatment, and Utah testing of nerve agents (such as GB and �X) (�azardous Waste Code F999). The Utah Department of Environmental Qual - ity (UDEQ) regulations generally restate the federal The Oregon Environmental Quality Commission RCRA regulations for the identification and listing of issued a permit (ORQ 000 009 431) to the U.S. Army, hazardous wastes (Utah Administrative Rules R315-2). as represented by the Umatilla Chemical Depot and In addition to the EPA list of acute hazardous wastes, t he Washington Demilitarization Company, LLC, the UDEQ regulations add the following state-specific to operate a hazardous waste treatment and storage listed wastes: nerve, military, and chemical agents (i.e., chemical demilitarization facility located in Umatilla CX, GA, GB, GD, �, �D, �L, �N-1, �N-2, �N-3, �T, County, Oregon. At UMCDF any nerve, military, and lewisite, T, and �X) (�azardous Waste Code P999). chemical agents or any residues from demilitarization, The UDEQ regulations also incorporate by reference treatment, and testing of nerve, military, and chemical the federal list of hazardous waste from nonspecific agents are a state-listed hazardous waste. According to sources and then add the following state-specific listed the UMCDF WAP, wastes must be agent free before wastes: residues from demilitarization, treatment, and they are shipped to an off-site facility. Samples will be testing of nerve, military, and chemical agents CX, GA, considered agent free if they contain less than 13 ppb GB, GD, �, �D, �L, �N-1, �N-2, �N-3, �T, lewisite, �X, 16 ppb GB, and 152 ppb mustard. These PCCs, T, and �X (�azardous Waste Code F999). included in the UMCDF permit, were adopted based on The Utah Solid and �azardous Waste Control Board process knowledge, previous results for similar waste issued a permit (UT 3213820894) to Tooele Army streams at the Johnston Atoll Chemical Agent Disposal Depot to operate a hazardous waste treatment and System (JACADS) or TOCDF, and existing RCRA land storage facility located approximately 3 miles south of disposal restriction notification requirements. These Tooele, on State �ighway 36, in Tooele County, Utah. values are modestly lower than the 20 ppb criterion Under the TOCDF WAP, only secondary wastes hav- for GB and �X at the other chemical agent disposal ing a chemical agent concentration below the WCL of facilities. 20 ppb for GB and �X and 200 ppb for mustard agent Under the UMCDF WAP, compliance of waste may be transported to an off-site RCRA TSDF. These streams with PCCs is determined using EPA SW- wastes are designated as process wastes (Utah F999). 846 unless another characterization methodology Wastes above the WCL are designated as acute wastes is approved. For the detection of chemical agent, (Utah P999). The vapor space above certain other UMCDF standard operating procedure UM-0000-M- wastes is monitored for agent to determine if the waste 559, “Agent Extraction and Analyses,” is used. This is (1) a Utah process waste (Utah F999) that may be procedure tailors the analyses to different sample matri- shipped off-site for treatment and ultimate disposal if it meets the WCL or (2) an acute waste (Utah P999), which must be treated on-site (UDEQ, 2004). 13ODEQ regulations define demilitarization as all processes and COMMONALITIES AND DIFFERENCES activities at the Umatilla Chemical Depot and Umatilla Chemical SPECIFIC TO ACTIVATED CARBON Agent Disposal Facility from February 12, 1997, through ODEQ PRACTICES AND PERMIT REQUIREMENTS approval for closure of all permitted treatment, storage, and disposal units and facility-wide corrective actions. At the four operating Chemical Materials Agency Demilitarization residue is defined as any solid waste gener- (CMA) incineration facilities, exposed carbon is either ated by demilitarization processes and activities, except for waste disposed of on-site by thermal treatment in the metal streams generated from processes or activities prior to the intro - duction of nerve or blister agent into the treatment unit and waste parts furnace or stored on-site for future treatment and streams generated from the maintenance or operation of process disposal. CMA management has identified a need to utility systems not contaminated by agent (Oregon Administrative develop better analytical methods for analyzing porous Rules 340-100-0010).

OCR for page 25
0 DISPOSAL OF ACTIVATED CARBON FROM CHEMICAL AGENT DISPOSAL FACILITIES materials to help facilitate additional off-site carbon Based on that experience, micronization followed by disposal.14 incineration appears to be a highly problematic method The current ANCDF operating permit states that used of disposal, but no on-site alternative to the microniza- carbon will be evaluated for chemical agent contamina- tion technology has so far been permitted by Utah. tion if it has been exposed to agent concentrations of The contamination of the mustard agent stockpiled ≥1 STL. If generator knowledge15 is not sufficient to at TOCDF with significant amounts of mercury could establish the exposure history, extractive analysis can be another problem. TOCDF is implementing a pollu- be used to measure the level of chemical agent if the tion abatement system (PAS) filtration system (PFS) waste is being considered for off-site disposal. Used t hat will trap the mercury on sulfur-impregnated carbon that experiences agent breakthrough of ≥1 STL carbon, but the resulting secondary waste stream will contain carbon with adsorbed mercury.16 This same will not be sampled and is to be treated on-site. Used carbon considered for off-site disposal must also be issue will arise at ANCDF and UMCDF. tested for EPA’s TCLP organics and TCLP metals. Mustard agent accounts for the largest fraction of The means and permit requirements for managing chemical agent yet to be processed at UMCDF. The used activated carbon disposal at PBCDF are currently used carbon from the mustard campaign at UMCDF similar to those at ANCDF. The PBCDF WAP states will be managed in much the same way as at TOCDF, that agent-contaminated carbon will be incinerated on- including following the TOCDF lead for disposal of site in an appropriate manner. Used carbon that has not carbon waste that is potentially mercury contaminated. been exposed to agent is disposed of off-site. The UMCDF WAP requires carbon to be treated on-site Originally, on-site carbon micronization and incin- and simply states that the treatment method for used eration was the only disposal option allowed at TOCDF carbon has not yet been determined (ODEQ, 1997). (UDEQ, 2004). Micronization is a process in which Finding 3-4. Carbon that has not been exposed to carbon is ground to a fine powder prior to incinera- tion. Micronization and incineration were used in the agents, based on generator knowledge, or exposed car- JACADS closure operation to dispose of used activated bon that meets the waste control limit (or, in Oregon, carbon (Jordan and Kaminski, 2001). The systems con- the permit compliance concentrations) may be shipped tractor at JACADS, the Washington Demilitarization off-site for treatment or disposal. �owever, where the Group, experienced many difficulties with the microni- carbon is sent depends on whether it is determined to zation system and wrote various lessons-learned reports. be a hazardous waste. Finding 3-5. Upon a determination that carbon from 14Timothy Garrett, Site Project Manager, ANCDF, “ANCDF a chemical agent disposal facility is not a hazardous secondary waste initiative,” Presentation to a fact-finding team of waste, it may be sent to a solid waste disposal facility the Committee on Review of Chemical Agent Secondary Waste Disposal and Regulatory Requirements, October 16, 2006. or carbon reactivation facility. If there is a determina- 15“Generator knowledge” is a hazardous waste evaluation method tion that the carbon is a hazardous waste but has not commonly accepted and defined by EPA (2005) and individual been exposed to agent or that the concentration of agent states based on some or all of the following information: is below the waste control limit, it must be sent to a 1. Facility process flow diagram or narrative description of the permitted hazardous waste treatment, storage, and dis- process generating the waste (should be used in most cases). posal facility. The TSDF itself may require additional 2. Chemical makeup of all ingredients or materials used in the process that generates the waste (should be used in most cases). testing or certification. This does not apply at the Tooele 3. List of constituents that are known or believed to be by- Chemical Agent Disposal Facility, where the permit products of side reactions to the process that produces the waste. currently requires on-site storage until a treatment 4. Material Safety Data Sheets and/or product labels for sub- system is approved. stances used in the process that generates the waste. 5. Data obtained from approved methods of sampling and labo- ratory analysis of waste generated from the same process using the same ingredients/materials. 16Wastes contaminated with >0.2 mg/L of mercury are hazardous 6. Data obtained from literature on waste produced from a similar process using the same ingredients/materials. wastes (D009). Mercury-contaminated hazardous wastes must meet the land disposal restrictions of <0.025 mg/L (for nonwastewater) 7. Documentation of product specifications or input materials and output products. prior to disposal.

OCR for page 25
 REGULATIONS GOVERNING CARBON DISPOSAL TABLE 3-1 Current Status of Permit Requirements for Shipping Carbon Off-site from Chemical Agent Disposal Facilities Facility Requirement of the Existing Permit Planned Modification Application Carbon exposed to WCL after extractive analysis to off-site.b ANCDF Carbon exposed to >1 STL must undergo extractive analysis prior to shipment. be shipped off-site in accordance with bounding Carbon that tests WCL for GB. UMCDF Off-site shipment of agent-free carbon allowed if agent concentration is less than The UMCDF plans to submit a Permit Modification the PCC: 16 ppb for GB, 13 ppb for �X, and 152 ppb for mustard. Request to incorporate the agent extraction method for spent carbon into the �azardous Waste Permit WAP following the programmatic validation of the method. TOCDF All carbon must be processed by carbon microminiaturization system and Ship all carbon from the pollution abatement system subsequently combusted in the deactivation furnace system.a filtration system and from the heating, ventilation and air conditioning (��AC) Banks 4-6 off-site Considering using autoclave on remaining carbon until �SL <1 then shipping off-site PBCDF The WAP requires on-site incineration of exposed carbon that is shown by None extractive analysis to be greater than 20, 20, and 200 ppb for GB, �X, and �, respectively. The WAP allows off-site shipment to a TSDF of spent carbon that is shown by extractive analysis to be less than 20, 20, and 200 ppb for GB, �X, and �, respectively. Unexposed carbon can also be shipped, and generator knowledge is allowed in the determination of “unexposed.” NECDF Used agent-contaminated carbon is considered a listed hazardous waste (Waste None Code 1001). �owever, extractive analysis was done to satisfy CMA bounding transportation risk assessment requirements. Agent-contaminated carbon has been shipped to a TSDF (a hazardous waste incinerator) for treatment. aAlthough this is the existing requirement, the state and TOCDF have agreed that carbon will be stored until another treatment method is approved. bThe one STL for GB and �X is 20 ppb; for �D, it is 200 ppb. SOURCE: Personal communications between Timothy Garrett, Site Project Manager, ANCDF, and Margaret Novack, NRC study director, February 24, 2009, February 25, 2009, and February 27, 2009. REQUIREMENTS RELATING DOT may waive preemption of state or local require- TO TRANSPORTATION ments if it determines that the nonfederal requirement (1) provides the public with “at least as much protec- General tion” as the federal requirements and (2) is not “an unreasonable burden on commerce.”18 Transportation of hazardous materials is regulated by the Pipeline and �azardous Materials Safety Admin- Existing Requirements for istration within the U.S. Department of Transportation Transporting Carbon Off-site (DOT) under the �azardous Waste Material Transpor- tation Act.17 The administration establishes uniform The existing requirements to transport activated standards for the shipment of all hazardous materials, carbon off-site for disposal are stated in each facility’s including hazardous wastes, and generally preempts RCRA permit. Any changes desired by the facility state and local requirements unless such requirements require applying for a modification to the permit—a (1) may be complied with in addition to the federal process that takes approximately a year. The existing requirements; (2) as applied do not present an obstacle requirement and planned requests for permit modifica- to compliance with the federal requirements; or (3) tions are given in Table 3-1. It is expected that the ship- are substantively the same as the federal requirements. 1749 1849 U.S.C. 5101-5127. U.S.C. 5235.

OCR for page 25
 DISPOSAL OF ACTIVATED CARBON FROM CHEMICAL AGENT DISPOSAL FACILITIES ping of exposed carbon will require extractive analysis EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2005. RCRA �azardous Waste Identification Training Module, 40 CFR 261, September. Wash- to confirm that the agent concentration is below the ington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. permitted levels. Jordan, K., and R. Kaminski. 2001. Status of JACADS: Carbon microniza - tion system (CMS). Technical Bulletin January-March: 15-17. ODEQ (Oregon Department of Environmental Quality). 1997. UMCDF REFERENCES RCRA �azardous Waste Treatment and Storage Permit. Available online at http://www.deq.state.or.us/umatilla/RCRApermit.htm. Last accessed ADEM (Alabama Department of Environmental Management). 2006. March 11, 2009. ANCDF �azardous Waste Facility Permit, Mod 27, July 21. Montgom- UDEQ (Utah Department of Environmental Quality). 2004. TOCDF RCRA ery, Ala.: Alabama Department of Environmental Management. �azardous Waste Permit, May 3. Available online at http://www.haz- ADEQ (Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality). 2006. Permit for ardouswaste.utah.gov/�WBranch/CDSection/CDS_TOCDF_PERM. a �azardous Waste Management Facility, Pine Bluff Arsenal, RCRA htm#intro. Last accessed March 11, 2009. Permit Number 29-�, Revision 16, October 20. Little Rock, Ark.: Ar- kansas Department of Pollution Control and Ecology.