411 - Instituto Nacional de Ecología y Cambio Climático

Transcription

INSTrl'UTO NACIONAL
DE: ECOY.OGIA
CONTENIDO
'Itg)
~
_Q. f
.',''. .i .t~ ~l. . .')B.~ .,~':
PAGINA(S) .,
3 1. Recopilación, análisis, sistematización, evaluación y conclusión de la
información bibliográfica disponible.
3 1.1. Información General
31.1.1 . Introducción.
3 1.1.2. Generalidades
441 .1 .3 . Aceite Usado (definición).
/1.1.4. Constituyentes del petróleo.
31.1.5. Propiedades del aceite.
31.1.6. Aceites lubricantes.
31.1 .7. Aceites solubles.
/1 .1 .8 . Aceites sinteticos.
/1.1 .9. Purificación
31.1 .10. Lubricación.
/1.2. Normatividad
/ 1.2.1. Introducción
31.2.2. Estados Unidos.
v1 .2 .3 . Canadá
i/1 .2 .4. Gran Bretaña
/1.2 .5. Alemania.
3 1.2.6. Japón
.3 1.2.7. China
3 1.2.8. Comunidad Económica Europea
31.2.9. España
j.r 1.2.10. Otros convenios
4.3. Tecnologías.
/1 .4. Aspectos jurídicos
31.5. Conclusiones
Diagnóstico de las fuentes generadoras de aceites lubricantes usados .
f~T 2.1 . Fuentes generadoras
3 2.2. Datos de recolección, transporte, proceso y redistribución de aceites
usados
t/ 2.3. Impacto al Medio Ambiente
2
2
3
5.
8
13 ,
18
27
29
33
35 ;
~.47 .
47
47.
54.
55
55
55
56
.56,•
58
60
61
68
69
' ' 70
70
74
94
/3. Definición de Criterios
96
V 3.1.1. Transporte
, 96
3 3.1.2. Recolección 97.
97
X3.1.3. Requisitos de almacenamiento
3 3.1.4. Quemado • 98
3 3.1.5. Embarque 98
3Policlorados Bifenilos PCB's
100
. .
. ..104
j.T 4. Propuesta para el manejo de aceites lubricantes usados „ .
j 5. Establecimiento de las diferentes tecnologías para el manejo de aceites
107
ubricantes
l
ti
usados .
A:,
7,1 ,, .CIOP-iAL
E(.- .,'
_, :
r ¡j.
.~.
°~~ .' "t:
S
6. Formulación del anteproyecto de Norma Oficial Mexicana
t 7. Determinación del Costo Beneficio en la aplicación de la Norma
.
8 . Propuesta del programa de consulta.
. Bibliografia
3Anexo I
Anexo II
v Apendice A
(
PAGINA(S)
1'0
Itti ~'~ s '
i_ ~y
N :'~ci0`dAL
`LOG
~t~
•
_
._777
y
J.'.`
~ ..J`, ~'
2
1 . RECOPILACION, ANALISIS 9 .
SISTEMATIZACION,
EVALUACION Y CONCLUSION DE LA INFORMACION
BIBLIOGRAFICA DISPONIBLE.
1.1 INFORMACION GENERAL
1.1 .1.
INTRODUCCION
Los aceites crudos derivados de la destilación del petróleo, se encuentran hoy en día
de diferentes tipos, variando tanto de color, como en composición . La principal
función que desempeña un aceite, es la de lubricar, disminuyendo así la fricción y el
desgaste, un aceite lubricante por lo general está compuesto por dos tipos de
elementos, el primero es el aceite base, y el segundo lo constituyen los diferentes
aditivos.
•
La característica más importante en un aceite lubricante, es la de su índice de
viscosidad, la cual es una medida de la fluidez a una temperatura definida, la
viscosidad varía con la temperartura; y una disminución de viscosidad indica que
existen contaminantes en el aceite, debido a la degradación del mismo o a substancias
ajenas a la composición del aceite, las cuales provienen del uso que se le • de a este
(polvo, agua, etcétera), cuando sucede esto se dice que se tiene un aceite usado:
Los aceites lubricantes usados contienen compuestos indeseables que alteran las
propiedades fisicas y químicas, abatiendo así la capacidad de lubricación, tales
compuestos indeseables son producto de la degradación producida por las condiciones
bajo las cuales el aceite lubricante es utilizando.
El aceite lubricante usado que es generado, en ocasiones una parte es utilizado como
combustible alterno en hornos que operan a altas temperaturas, como lo son los
hornos en la industria del cemento, otra parte es utilizada para el control de polvos en
caminos rurales, y una gran parte es desechada en alcantarillados, drenajes y en
callejones generando así un desequilibrio ecológico .
//'
04
~ .~ INS ' TUTO NACIONAL
'
DD ECOLOGIA
---. J
BEBLI ,TECA
3
Con la disminución continua de las reservas de' petróleo, se hace esencial que el aceite
usado sea ahorrado y sea utilizado tanto como sea posible, para `lo cual se han
diseñado diferentes procesos para llevar a cabo la regeneración del aceite lubricante
usado.
1 .1.2. GENERALIDADES
El aceite es principalmente usado para lubricar dos superficies, reduciendo la fricción,
desgaste y la generación de calor.
Un lubricante es un material de alta viscosidad colocado entre dos superficies
adyacentes para reducir las fuerzas friccionantes . Un lubricante puede ser un sólido,
un líquido o un gas, sin embargo los aceites líquidos viscosos son comúnmente usados
como lubricantes, por su durabilidad, accesibilidad y por su costo . El aceite de
lubricación usado, también llamado de desecho, es un aceite que ha sido adulterado en
sus propiedades físicas por el uso subsecuente o que ha sido contaminado como
resultado de su uso.
Existen seis categorías generales de aceite, aunque el aceite es usado principalmente
como un recurso de energía y es el llamado aceite mineral o de petróleo, la mayoría de
este aceite es quemado y así no es confinado, el aceite lubricante usado es alterado y
entonces es suministrado al sistema de disposición.
Las seis categorías de aceite son:
L
Origen mineral (aceité d~ roca), Petróleo:
a) Alifáticos o base cera.
b) Aromáticos o base asfalto.
c) Base mezcla.
A su vez, dentro de los aceites de origen mineral o derivados del petróleo se
dividen en dos grupos según su uso que son:
•
3
Base sintética:
a) Originado por cambios químicos.
b) Originado por petróleo.
Estos aceites tienen cierta capacidad de lubricación y son usados en diferentes
procesos, pero los aceites derivados del petróleo y aceites sintéticos en su mayoría
producen aceite de desecho (aceite usado).
Los aceites de origen animal, esencia y comestibles, son componentes menores en el
mercado de aceites y normalmente son consumidos en su uso, por eso estos aceites no
entran en el sistema de aceites de desecho (no se generan residuos de aceite).
1 .1.3. ACEITE USADO (definición).
4/
Para poder hacer un adecuado tratamiento a la información que se presenta a
continuación, es necesario plantear una definición de aceite usado . Dentro de la
búsqueda de información se hallarón las siguientes:
"Todos los aceites industriales, con base mineral ; o lubricantes, que se hayan vuelto
inadecuados para el uso que se les hubiese asignado inicialmente y, en particular, los
aceites usados de los motores de combustión y de los sistemas de transmisión , así
como los aceites minerales lubricantes, aceites para turbinas y sistemas hidráulicos".
A/
"Se define como aceite usado a todo aceite que ha sido contaminado con impurezas
durante su uso".
"Toda aceite o grasa, tanto mineral como sintético, que ha sido usado, ya sea para
fines de lubricación o para otro fin industrial diferente a éste, y que ha sido.
contaminado con impurezas físicas o químicas durante su uso y que resulta
inadecuado para el uso que se le hubiere asignado inicialmente" .
•
)Y—
6
Los aceites lubricantes en automotores e industriales comprenden la mayoria de los
aceites de desecho que entran en el mercado de desecho-reciclamiento, porque estos
constituyen una gran proporción por volumen de material generado . Los aceites de
aviación y lubricantes marinos comprenden una pequeña parte en el mercado de aceite .
de desecho . Los lubricantes automotores lo contituyen principalmente el aceite de
motor y es el tipo de lubricante usado que más predomina, y consecuentemente el
mercado de aceite usado.
Los lubricantes industriales incluyen lubricantes líquidos para cojinetes, grasas,
polvos lubricantes sólidos en película, para compresor, para refrigeración, para
bombas de vacío, para equipo hidráulico con transmisión de potencia (aceite mineral
base y sintético), grasas lubricantes industriales, lubricantes de turbina, trabajo de
metales ("corte de metales : cold rolling"), aceites de proceso para alimentos,
cosméticos y elaboración de productos medicinales, aceites textiles, etcétera.
Los aceites derivados del petróleo consisten de tres grupos de compuestos orgánicos
que son usados como lubricantes, los cuales son:
•
a)
Alcanos.
b)
Alicíclicos.
c)
Aromáticos.
//-
Los alcanos (parafinas y ceras), son cadenas rectas o hidrocarburos ramificados con 3
buena viscosidad a altas temperaturas .
V
Los compuestos alicíclicos, tienen alta densidad y viscosidad por supeso molecular,
pero tienen un bajo punto de fusión en comparación con los alcanos.
Los aromáticos, tienen altas viscosidades y densidades, además forman excelentes
aditivos, pero son generalmente pobres lubricantes.
Los aceites bases obtenidos del proceso del petróleo son:
•
L
Lubricante:
▪
Aceite de motor.
•
Aceite de máquinas industriales.
▪
Aceite de corte.
U.,
•
Medicinal:
Aceite parafinico refinado.
Origen vegetal:
a) Seco.
b) Semiseco (soya, algodón).
c) No seco (castor, coco).
Origen Animal:
a) Grasas (ácido esteárico).
b) Líquidos (aceite de pescado, ácido oldico, aceite de esperma de ballena).
Esencias:
a) Líquidos volátiles de flores (perfumes y saborizantes
b) Productos resinosos.
Comestibles:
a) Pasta alimenticia (margarina de coco, arroz, soya, algodón, oliva) .
7
a)
Aceites parafinicos.
b)
Aceites nafténicos.
Los aceites parafinicos tienen un contenido relativamente alto de alcanos, tienen
buenas características en su comportamiento de la viscosidad/temperatura y poseen
buena estabilidad . El aceite industrial se refiere a aceites parafinicos como solvente
neutral porque el aceite base es usado como solvente refinado ytiene un pH neutro.
Los aceites naftalénicos son procesados en un rango limitado de aceite crudo en un
número restringido de refinerías, muestran pocas características aceptables en el
comportamiento de la viscosidad con respecto a la temperatura pero tienen un amplio
rango de aplicaciones.
•
Tomando como base los aceites refinados del petróleo, se producen diferentes tipos de
aceites para aplicaciones específicas, los aceites blancos son aceites muy refinados
compuestos de solamente moléculas alifáticas y son usados como productos
medicinales y en la industria de los alimentos, los aceites eléctricos son usados para la
industria de transformadores eléctricos debido al aislamiento eléctrico que
proporciona y como refrigerante.
Un estudio realizado en Estados Unidos, en relación al aceite usado generado, se
encontró que éste se podía clasificar en dos categorías:
a)
Automotiva.
b)
Aceites industriales.
De este estudio se concluyó que aproximadamente la mitad de los 2312 millones de
galones de aceite generado por año, se convierten en aceite de desecho, se concluyó
que la mayoría de aceite de desecho se generó de vehículos personales (239 millones
de galones), aceite industrial hidráulico (200 millones de galones) y vehículos
comerciales (105 millones de galones), estos tres tipos de aceites componen 45% del
aceite de desecho generado en los Estados Unidos .
4Z
8
El mercado extranjero es diferente al mercado de Estados Unidos por el bajo número
de automóviles per cápita, así teniendo un uso menor de lubricantes automotivos. En
Alemania de todo el consumo de petróleo en 1983, el 0 .8% se convirtió en
lubricantes, con aceite de motor consistiendo de solamente el 38% del generado, otro
tipo de aceite lubricante lo compone el 60% de los lubricantes generados . Desde que
se levantó un acta en 1968 en la República Federal Alemana en relación al aceite
usado, la recolección de aceite usado es del, 90% del volumen colectado . Un reporte
hecho por la organización de compañías de aceite de Europa, CONCAWE,
concluyeron que aproximadamente el 53% de las ventas totales de lubricantes fueron
consumidas, donde el 32% fueron reciclados y el 15% no fue estimado por
CONCAWE en 1985.
1 .1.4 . CONSTITUYENTES DEL PETROLEO
El petróleo crudo está constituido por miles de compuestos químicos, incluyendo
gases, líquidos y sólidos en rangos de metanos hasta asfaltos, también existen en
forma significante compuestos que contienen nitrógeno, azufre y oxígeno, la cantidad
o variedad de compuestos dependen del tipo de crudo (de la zona de extracción), a
continuación se mencionarán los constituyentes más comunes en los hidrocarburos.
L
Alifáticos hidrocarburos cadena abierta,
a) Comprende una serie de n-parafinas o alcanos estos son destilados
directamente del crudo, las gasolinas son predominante n-parafinas.
b) Serie de isoparafinas o isoalcanos, estos compuestos son utilizados para
motores de combustión interna, pueden ser formados por reformado catalítico,
alquilación, polimerización o isomerización, ya que en el crudo existen en
pequeñas cantidades.
c) Olefinas o serie de alcanos, estos compuestos están en poca proporción en el
crudo, pero en el proceso de desintegración se producen, son moléculas
inestables con una tendencia a reaccionar, y son usados para la formación de
otros compuestos .
•
9
II .
Compuestos cíclicos (cadena cerrada).
a) Serie de naftenos o cicloalcanos, estos compuestos son los segundos más
abundantes en los crudos, como ejemplo se tienen : metilciclopentano,
ciclohexano, dimetil-ciclopentano y metil-ciclohexano, tienen alto peso
molecular y son predominantes en gasóleo y aceite lubricante.
b) Aromático o serie de bencenos, existen en pequeñas cantidades y son
deseables en gasolinas debido a su alto valor de antidetonancia y estabilidad
de almacenamiento.
ILI Componentes menores,
En este grupo se encuentran sulfuros y compuestos de nitrógeno, estos causan
problemas en el proceso, por lo cual son separados antes del proceso de
refinamiento, además el crudo posee también sales, las cuales causan
problemas de corrosión, por lo cual son separados del crudo antes de su
tratamiento.
•
Existen una gran variedad de crudos, y por lo tanto, los procesos para tratar el crudo
son diferentes, para así obtener los diferentes productos derivados de la destilación del
petróleo, como son : gas, gasolina, aceites y asfaltos . Dependiendo de la calidad de los
diferentes tipos de derivados, los procesos varían desde una destilación hasta una
desintegración catalítica.
Las fracciones comunes de la refinación del crudo son:
a) Natural : gasolina y gas natural y LPG (propano licuado).
b) Destilados, ligeros : gasolinas de motor, naftas solventes, combustibles para jet,
queroseno y aceites ligeros.
c) Destilados intermedios : aceites combustibles pesados, aceites diesel, aceitegas.
d) Destilados pesados: aceites minerales pesados, aceites flotantes pasados,
aceites lubricantes y ceras.
•
l0
e) Residuos : aceites lubricantes, aceite combustible, petrolatum, aceite de
camino, asfaltos y coque.
El cambio constante en el mercado de los productos del petróleo han hecho que se
efectúen alteraciones en los materiales usados parala fabricación de dichos productos,
esto es, se han buscado petroquímicos básicos para que a partir de ellos se generen
otros productos petroquímicos, los principales productos básicos son:
•
Acetileno.
•
Propileno.
•
Benceno.
•
Xileno.
•
Etileno.
•
Butano.
•
Tolueno.
•
Raftaleno.
Algunos de los productos petroquímicos secundarios son:
•
Cloruro de vinilo.
•
Acrilonitilo.
•
Acetaldehído.
•
Alcohol metílico y etílico.
•
Oxido de etileno.
• . Butadieno.
•
•
Acido benzoico.
•
Anhídrido ftálico, etc .
•
11
En el proceso de refinación del petróleo crudo (proceso de destilación) se pueden
denotar tres etapas, las cuales son:
1. Destilados ligeros.
2. Destilados intermedios.
3. Destilados pesados.
Los destilados ligeros son principalmente : gasavión, gasolina para automóviles,
naftas, solventes de petróleo, combustibles para jet y queroseno . La gasolina es el
producto más importante, cuando la razón de compresión en un motor es alta, detona
en el cilindro causando danos y pérdidas de potencia en el motor, los ramales de la
cadena y los hidrocarburos aromáticos reducen la tendencia de la gasolina a que
detone, el número de octanos es una medida para la estabilidad del combustible para
motores de alta compresión . La gasolina de avión es generalmente encontrada en dos
grados, de 100 y de 80 octanos, teniendo mayor demanda la de 100 octanos, la
cantidad de sulfuros en la gasolina debe ser controlada ya que estos compuestos
producen corrosión.
•
El término de nafta es aplicado, a materiales con rangos de ebullición entre la gasolina 1v-y el queroseno, y son utilizados para la elaboración de barnices, de pinturas y para la
elaboración de algunos solventes . El queroseno fue originalmente usado para lámparas
y calentadores, pero últimamente se utiliza como combustible para jet o para aviones.
Los destilados intermedios incluyen : Gasóleo, aceite para hornos domésticos,
combustible diesel y destilado para la desintegración (producción de más gasolina).
Estos destilados son usados principalmente para el transporte de combustible en
camiones pesados, trenes y pequeños barcos comerciales.
Los destilados pesados : Son transformados en aceites lubricantes, en aceites pesados,
para una . variedad de usos en combustibles y en el almacenamiento para ser utilizado
en la desintegración . Los aceites lubricantes de gran calidad pueden ser hechos a base
de parafinas o pueden ser formados a partir de mezclas con un refinamiento de
solvente, esto es empleado para así obtener productos de calidad diferente .
•
12
En los aceites lubricantes es común el uso de aditivos para así mejorar la calidad de
los aceites, los aditivos más comúnmente utilizados son del tipo antioxidante,
detergentes, antiespumas, mejoradores del índice de viscosidad y agentes para presión
extrema (EP).
Los residuos obtenidos de la destilación son hidrocarburos no volátiles y lo
comprenden los asfaltos, aceite combustible residual coque y petrolato.
En el proceso de tratamiento de crudo se han buscado diferentes maneras de obtener
diferentes productos, esto es, obtener el máximo provecho del crudo obteniendo una
gran variedad de productos sin modificar mucho la infraestructura ; esto es, en un
proceso de destilación simple, del cual se obtienen varios productos, en el caso del
petróleo, se pueden obtener solamente gasolina, pero esto implicaría modificación de
equipos, mayor utilización de la energía, mayor costo y el proceso no sería en ese
instante costeable, así de manera tal que el crudo es procesado para obtener una gran
variedad a un bajo costo, cuidando con mayor entereza los cambios de energía ya que
esta es de principal importancia, tanto a nivel técnico como a nivel económico.
Entre las reacciones más importantes que se dan en el proceso de tratamiento del
crudo se tienen:
v
a) Desintegración o pirólisis, este fenómeno se da cuando existe suficiente calor
y/o en presencia de un catalizador, una parafina se rompe en dos o más
moléculas y una de esas moléculas es una olefina, algunas moléculas se
polimerizan y en la reacción se forma carbón, todas las reacciones son
endotérmicas y la energía involucrada es alta.
b) Reformado, es la formación de nuevas moléculas de un tamaño similar l
original.
c) Reformado catalítico, involucra la conversión de otro hidrocarburo en /
compuestos aromáticos en presencia de un catalizador, los catalizadores
usados son comúnmente : platino-alumina o cromo-alumina.
d) Coqueo, aquí se produce ligero a partir de aceite pesado mediante un proceso
de desintegración térmica, obteniéndose como subproducto coque.
•
•
13
/
e) Polimerización, produce hidrocarburos líquidos a partir de hidrocarburos ~/
gaseosos para ser usados como combustible o para ser usados como
petroquímicos.
1) Alquilación, estos procesos son exotérmicos y es fundamentalmente similar a
la polimerización, la diferencia es que la carga debe ser insaturada, el
producto alquilado es una mezcla de hidrocarburos saturados destilados de
isoparafinas estables en el rango de gasolina.
1.1.5 . PROPIEDADES DEL ACEITE
Las propiedades de los lubricantes dependen fundamentalmente de la fuerza del crudo
base y de los aditivos que se hayan agregado al lubricante.
Las propiedades que tienen mayor relevancia para los aceites lubricantes, son:
•
Laviscosidad Es indudablemente la propiedad más importante de un aceite
lubricante, la viscosidad determina la fricción fluida (la resistencia interna al
desplazamiento que ofrece al líquido) en el caso del aceite determina además la
capacidad de soportar una carga.
La viscosidad influye mucho en el grado de fuerza motriz que es absorbida por la
fricción fluida y en la intensidad del calor que se genera en los cojinetes por dicha
fricción.
Indice de viscosidad. Los productos del petróleo al igual que otros líquidos con el
cambio de temperatura alteran su viscosidad, se espesan con el frío y se adelgazan con
el calor. Los aceites deben abarcar una escala muy variada según los diferentes tipos
de usos que tengan . El índice de viscosidad es un número empírico que mide el grado
de variación de un aceite con relación a la temperatura . Un índice de viscosidad bajo,
significa un cambio relativamente grande motivado por la temperatura, mientras que
un índice de viscosidad alto muestra un cambio relativamente pequeño en la
viscosidad . debido a la temperatura . El índice de viscosidad no puede ser usado para
medir ninguna otra cualidad de un aceite .
•
~
•
14
Peso Específico, Es la relación del peso en el aire, de un volumen fijo, de un material
en determinada temperatura y el peso del mismo volumen de agua destilada en la
temperatura fijada . En el caso de aceites lubricantes, esta relación es menor a uno,
,para esto las lecturas se dan en grados API (American Petroleum Isntitute).
En la escala API, corresponde de 18 a 23 y a pesos específicos de 0.8816 a 0.8654 /
corresponden grados API de 29 a 32.
Esta propiedad es importante en la fabricación de aceites, ya que por ser rápida y fácil
de realizarse permite controlar los procesos de elaboración, además de ser una
caracteristica muy definida de cada tipo de lubricante.
Punto de congelación y escurrimiento .Para asegurar una afluencia continua a las
partes a lubricar los aceites deben mantener las caracteristicas de fluido a la
temperatura más baja de servicio . El punto de congelación de un aceite fluye bajo
condiciones especiales, cuando es enfriado en forma progresiva y sin agitación . El
punto de escurrimiento es el punto en el cual un aceite deja de tener la capacidad de
fluir y por definición es 2 0C más alto que el punto de congelación.
Punto de nebulización . El punto de nebulización de un aceite es la temperatura a la - 7
cual la parafina u otro compuesto solidificable presente en el aceite empieza a
cristalizarse o a separarse de la solución cuando el aceite es enfriado bajo condiciones
específicas. Los aceites nafténicós no muestran punto de nebulización.
Punta de flamación . Esta propiedad es la que determina la temperatura en la cual un
lubricante al ser calentado desprende "vapores" suficientes que se flaman
momentáneamente al pasar una flama sobre la superficie . Es importante ya que ayuda
a determinar si el lubricante está contaminado con algún solvente volátil al cual tendrá
un punto de ignición más bajo.
Punto de ignición . Es la temperatura a la cual al aplicar una flama se produce una
chispa, esta propiedad es usada para indicar el desprendimiento de vapores flamables
•
15
y pérdidas por evaporación de los productos del petróleo, en condiciones de altas
temperaturas de operación.
Residuo de carbón . Esta propiedad tiene como finalidad establecer un índice de la
cantidad de residuos de carbón que deja un aceite después de someterlo a un
calentamiento extremo en ausencia de aire . Indica la cantidad de depósitos de carbón
que un aceite de petróleo formará bajo condiciones extremas de calor seco. Mientras
mayor es su viscosidad, mayores son las cantidades de residuos de carbón que dejan
los aceites lubricantes.
Tendencia del aceite a carbonizarse . La propiedad de la tendencia del aceite a /
carbonizarse tiene como fin determinar las tendencias de los aceites a formar
productos de descomposición sólidos, cuando se ponen en contacto con superficies a
temperaturas elevadas.
•
V
Residuos sulfatados . Es aplicable a aceites usados o nuevos e indica la concentración
de metal. Además puede inferirse si el aceite contiene la cantidad apropiada de
aditivos. Los residuos sulfatados de aceite nuevo y los del mismo aceite después de
usarlo pueden indicar el agotamiento del aditivo .
~
Número de neutralización. Muestra los cambios relativos en un aceite, bajo
condiciones de oxidación. Mide el desarrollo de productos perjudiciales en los aceites
lubricantes.
Número de precipitación . Los aceites con el uso Llegan a contener materiales sólidos
ajenos, del mismo sistema de lubricación o por una contaminación extrema, la prueba
del número de precipitación sirve para constatar la presencia o no de materiales
ajenos . Esta propiedad indica la cantidad de materia insoluble en nafta de
precipitación y también incluye productos de oxidación que se encuentran en el aceite
usado.
•
16
Agua y sedimentos . Aqui se cuantifica el agua y sedimento con material oxidación
acumulados por el aceite durante el servicio . Indica de esta forma la condición del
aceite en servicio.
Demulsibilidad dinámica .. Esta propiedad indica la capacidad de un aceite para
separarse del agua bajo condiciones reales de circulación . La velocidad de separación
de agua y aceite es importante en los sistemas de circulación de aceite en donde se
encuentran el agua como contaminante primordial.
Emulsión con agua . Indica la capacidad del aceite para separarse del agua pero bajo
condiciones estáticas, la velocidad de separación del agua y aceite es importante en
los sistemas de almacenamiento de aceite en donde se encuentra el agua como
contaminante principal.
•
Emulsión con vapor . Indica el tiempo que debe transcurrir para que un aceite sin
aditivos se separa después que ha sido emulsificado . La resistencia a la emulsificación
es muy importante en turbinas de vapor.
)
Agua en el aceite . Es la cantidad de agua acumulada por el aceite mientras presta su
servicio. Indicando de esta forma única y exclusiva la cantidad de humedad.
Oxidación de aceites inhibidos . Sirve para medir la resistencia de los aceites con
aditivos a la oxidación, tomando en cuenta el cambio de acidez del aceite por la
absorción del oxígeno . Esta reacción origina ácidos y lodos . También puede medirse
la cantidad de oxígeno que se consumió en la reacción.
Color. El color en los productos del petróleo vistos a través de la luz, varía desde casi
el incolór hasta el negro . Estas variaciones obedecen a los diferentes crudos a las
distintas viscosidades y a los diversos métodos usados durante la refinación .
Z
•
17
Detergencia . Es la propiedad que presentan ciertos aceites de dispensar o mantener en vt/
suspensión partículas de hollín y otros productos de descomposición del combustible
o del aceite lubricante.
Lubricación. Disminución de la fricción, separando las superficies de los cuerpos en,
movimiento por medio de un lubricante.
Dentro de las mismas propiedades de los aceites lubricantes se encuentran las
diferentes presentaciones que estos tienen:
•
Gaseoso.
•
Líquido.
•
Semísólido.
•
Sólido.
La composición más común de un aceite lubricante, es:
Aceite lubricante = aceite básico ± paquete de aditivos.
Donde el aceite básico:
•
Mineral: Subproducto obtenido durante la refinación del petróleo crudo.
•
Sintético : Producto obtenido por reacciones químicas de materiales con
composiciones químicas específicas para obtener un básico con propiedades
planeadas y predecibles .
ACEITE BASICO
ACEITE
BASICO
MINERAL
TIPO
* VIRGEN
DESCRIPCION
BASICO QUE NO HA SIDO USADO.
* REGENERADO BASICO USADO, EL CUAL HA SIDO
SOMETIDO
A UN
PROCESO DE
REGENERACION PARA SU
REUTILIZACION .
•
18
1.1.6. ACEITES LUBRICANTES
Los aceites lubricantes se clasifican según la naturaleza del crudo de que se obtienen:
•
De base parafinica, si en ellos predominan las parafinas,
•
de base naftenos, cuando contienen grandes cantidades de naftenos ; y,
•
de base mezcla cuando existen mezclas de las bases anteriores.
También estan presentes aromáticos en cantidades variables, conteniendo los aceites
nafténicos una proporción mayor que los parafinicos . Los procesos empleados en la
manufactura de aceites lubricantes estan diseñados para obtener un balance adecuado
de los hidrocarburos parafinicos, nafténico y aromáticos: Los acetites lubricantes
pueden estar compuestos de destilados o residuos predominantemente de tipo
nafténicos y parafinicos respectivamente o de mezclas adecuadas de aceites,
destilados y residuales.
El término : "aceite para cilindros o válvulas" (cylinder stock), se aplica
corrientemente a los aceites pesados no destilados, generalmente de naturaleza
parafínica, aunque pueden ser también destilados y de tipo nafténico . Al aceite de este
tipo que ha sido sometido a arrastre con vapor, filtración con arcilla para separar
resinas y substancias carbonizables y desparafinación, se le conoce con el nombre de
"aceite brillante".
El término "neutro" se aplica originalmente a los destilados filtrados, tratados con
tierras; y desparafinados sin refinar con ácido, (en la actualidad, se emplea sin tanta
precisión y se suele aplicar a los destilados refinados con ácido.
r
Los aceites lubricantes minerales están compuestos, casi en su totalidad, de mezclas ~
complejas de hidrocarburos que varían considerablemente en sus pesos moleculares
individuales y estructuras, por ejemplo, hidrocarburos parafinicos, nafténicos,
aromáticos y anillos aromáticos y nafténicos condensados.
Los pesos moleculares promedio determinados por métodos crioscópicos y
ebulloscópicos pueden mostrar discrepancias debidas a la interacción del disolvente
con alguno de los componentes del aceite . Entre todas las técnicas de fraccionamiento
19
disponibles, la destilación molecular y la destilación al vacío con vapor pueden
separar un crudo dado en fracciones esencialmente de diferentes volatilidades . Otras
técnicas de fraccionamiento tales como precipitación, adsorción y extracción, dan
cortes progresivamente menos precisos basados en sus pesos moleculares y tienden a
separar estructuralmente fracciones semejantes.
Una vez realizado el fraccionamiento en cortes de diferentes volatilidades existen
técnicas de laboratorio y de escala industrial por las cuales pueden separarse por
adsorción con tierras activadas, los aromáticos con oxígeno o con azufre . La mezcla
parafinica-nafténica no adsorbida se puede fraccionar en sus componentes por
extracción con disolventes selectivos.
Las fracciones destiladas del corte lubricante contienen, junto con alcanos compuestos
cíclicos que pueden tener hasta cinco o seis anillos por molécula y que siempre
contienen cadenas laterales parafínicas . Estas moléculas cíclicas pueden ser
clasificadas como las que contienen sólo anillos nafténicos y las que poseen anillos
nafténicos y aromátios . Los aceites desparafinados, aunque contienen cierta cantidad
de alcanos, están compuestos principalmente de moleculas nafténicas o mafténicoaromáticas con cadenas laterales. Con objeto de mejorar las propiedades lubricantes
en sus aplicaciones específicas ; por ejemplo, untuosidad, capacidad de arrastre de
carga, etc ., se suele adicionar a los aceites minerales del 5 a 25% de otros aceites
animales, vegetales y/o del 4 al 5% de azufre y una serie extensa de inhibidores y
aditivos. Los aceites grasos más empleados son los de manteca de cerdo para los
aceites de cilindro de máquinas de vapor y los aceites para corte de metales.
El desprendimiento de hidrógeno y la polimerización de aceites que ocurre bajo la
influencia de una descarga eléctrica silenciosa es un fenómeno indeseable en los
aceites eléctricos, pero se aprovecha para la producción de aceites para motores en el
proceso llamado "voltolización" . Los procesos normales de refino dan un número
relativamente pequeño de aceites básicos, que difieren mucho en viscosidad, por lo
cual, y con objeto de cubrir la amplia gama de grados requeridos por el mercado, se
hacen mezclas apropiadas de los componentes básicos . Para que cada una de estas
mezclas esté dentro de las normas específicas y pueda funcionar perfectamente, es
necesario seleccionar cuidadosamente los aceites bases y las proporciones relativas
con que han de mezclarse .
20
La mezcla de aceites grasos, necesita un cuidado extremado con objeto de evitar la
separación, generalmente se mezcla el aceite graso con parte del aceite mineral a una
temperatura de 105°C homogenizando después esta mezcla con el aceite mineral
restante en el tanque de mezcla a una temperatura de unos 95°C . Los aditivos para
aceites lubricantes suelen venir disueltos en forma concentrada en aceites, o bien, se
pueden disolver fácilmente en el mismo hasta obtener la concentración deseada.
Actualmente en el mercado hay una gran variedad de aceites solubles y no solubles,
que el consumidor puede diferenciar según el uso que les da, sin diferenciarlos por su
composición y características físicas y químicas . Existen aceites para vehículos, para
equipos en la industria y herramientas, además de otros tipos.
Los aceites se pueden clasificar en tres grandes grupos, que son:
L
Por
u origen naturaleza:
a)
Animales y Vegetales.
b)
Minerales.
•
2
Por polaridad:
a)
Polares.
b)
No polares.
Pot biodegradabilidad:
a)
Biodegradables.
b)
No biodegradables.
En cuanto a su origen y su naturaleza, se tienen los aceites animales y vegetales y los
aceites minerales.
Los aceites de origen animal y vegetal son compuestos insolubles en el agua y
solubles en productos del petróleo y otros solventes . Estos pertenecen a uno de los tres
•
21
grupos bioquímicos (con las proteínas y carbohidratos), que son esenciales para la
nutrición humana.
Comúnmente, los aceites se consideran como líquidos a la temperatura ambiente . Los
aceites son compuestos de esteres derivados de la reacción de glicerol y un alcohol ~/
trihídrico con ácidos grasos . Los ácidos grasos son generalmente cadenas lineales,
aunque en algunos casos se encuentran ramificados de ácidos alifáticos que contienen
igual número de átomos de carbono.
Los aceites pertenecen a una clasificación más amplia llamada lípidos . Los lípidos son
substancias que pueden disolverse con disolventes que no son polares o que son
ligeramente polares (tales como hidrocarburos de carbono y éter dietilico) . En este
caso, la clasificación está basada en la solubilidad y no en la estructura. Los aceites,
algunas vitaminas y hormonas y ciertos constituyentes de las paredes celulares son
ejemplos de algunas substancias clasificadas como lípidos . Los lípidos son ésteres o
amidas de ácidos grasos, con un amino-alcohol, es decir que el glicerol corresponde a
un lípido.
•
En las aplicaciones industriales, los aceites comercialmente importantes se pueden
dividir en:
a) Aceites vegetales.
b) Aceites de mamíferos terrestres.
c) Aceite de animales marinos.
d) Aceites esenciales (de naturaleza vegetal).
Estos aceites se utilizan en la alimentación como aceites comestibles, o materia prima
para obtener otros productos, como es el caso de los aceites vegetales y aceites de
animales mamíferos, que se usan como aceites secantes para la elaboración de
jabones .
22
Por otro lado, los aceites minerales se derivan del petróleo están formados de mezclas
complejas obtenidas durante las diferentes etapas de la refinación del petróleo crudo.
El aceite refinado contiene de un 80% a 98% de hidrocarburos y de 2% a 20% de
compuestos sulfurados ; tiene, además, pequeñas cantidades de materiales que
contienen nitrógeno y oxígeno.
V-
La porción de hidrocarburos esta formado de compuestos que tienen de 20 a más de
70 átomos de carbono por molécula o está formada por un gran número de
compuestos simples cuya similitud con sus propiedades físicas y químicas las hace
prácticamente imposibles de separar.
Los hidrocarburos que entran en la composición de los aceites pertenecen a tres
familias químicas:
1.
Alcanos.
2.
Ciclanos.
3.
Hidrocarburos aromáticos.
Los alcanos son compuestos gaseosos a la temperatura ambiente, cuando el número de
átomos de la molécula es inferior a cinco ; son 7768 líquidos cuando el número de
átomos de su molécula esta comprendido entre cinco y quince . Los alcanos también se
llaman hidrocarburos parafinicos o parafinas.
Los hidrocarburos cíclicos . Su punto de fusión, es por lo general más bajo que el del !~.
alcano correspondiente ; sin embargo, el punto de ebullición de los ciclanos es más
elevado.
Los hidrocarburos aromáticos también son compuestos cíclicos, pero, a diferencia de
los ciclanos, su molécula no esta saturada, lo cual significa que en ciertas
circunstancias pueden añadirse a ella átomos a grupos de átomos diversos . El hecho
de que los hidrocarburos aromáticos no estén saturados tienen consecuencias
importantes en cuanto a su utilización ya que pueden sufrir transformaciones químicas
notables y dar lugar a importantes precipitaciones de depósitos solubles .
23
Los aceites minerales se utilizan especialmente, como lubricantes, en razón de su
untuosidad que se mide por su índice de viscosidad.
Los aceites minerales utilizados en la industria y que se comercializan son, en general,
mezclas que comprenden por una parte, una proporción importante de hidrocarburos
obtenidos a partir de la refinación del pertróleo y por la otra diferentes productos
destinados a estabilizar las propiedades del aceite en cuestión a fin, especialmente, de
que conserve su untuosidad.
lr
Respecto a su polaridad se tienen los compuestos polares y no polares:
Los compuestos polares tienen enlaces entre átomos de diferentes
electronegatividades y pueden representarse como un dipolo . El concepto de
electronegatividad se usa como una distinción arbitraria entre enlaces fónicos y
covalentes . Es reconocido que una molécula influye bastante en las propiedades
físicas (punto de fusión, solubilidad, etc.), y en las propiedades químicas de los
compuestos.
Los aceites polares son normalmente los de . origen animal y vegetal, además de ser
biodegradables . Los aceites de origen mineral son no polares y por lo tanto más
difíciles de biodegradar.
En cuanto a su biodegradabilidad, se tienen los biodegradables y, los no
biodegradables . Los aceites minerales lubricantes, son de características no
biodegradables.
Los constituyentes del aceite lubricante debido a la complejidad y gran cantidad de v
constituyentes se dividen en cuatro fracciones:
a)
Porción cerosa.
b)
Porción blanca (refinada).
c)
Porción extracto.
d)
Porción asfáltica
24
La porción cerosa está constituida por parafinas normales, aunque conteniendo
hidrocarburos nafténicos con uno, dos o hasta tres anillos con largas cadenas
parafinicas laterales . La porción asfáltica se compone de aromáticos multicíclicos muy
condensados con un contenido de hidrógeno bajo, junto con la mayor parte del
producto no hidrocarbonado de la fracción lubricante original . La porción blanca no
contiene parafinas y se cree que todos los lubricantes desparafinados y extraídos con
disolventes y los lubricantes de base parafinica desparafinados, contienen poco o nada
de isoparafinas y que se componen casi enteramente de derivados alquilados de
naftenos y aromáticos . El tratamiento de refinado con ácido sulfúrico concentrado,
separa la mayor parte de los constituyentes alquil-aromático, de forma tal que los
aceites blancos constan principalmente de alquil-naftenos . El índice de iodo
frecuentemente alto de los aceites lubricantes sugiere la presencia de olefinas, pero es
imposible que estén presentes, excepto en el caso de fracciones de alto punto de
ebullición obtenidos de crudos asfáltenicos que han sido destilados a elevadas
temperaturas.
•
Los elevados índices de viscosidad se asocian con la presencia de largas cadenas
parafinicas laterales unidas a hidrocarburos nafténicos, mientras que los índices de
viscosidad bajos indican la presencia de hidrocarburos aromáticos, generalmente con
cortas cadenas laterales.
Ceras parafinicas, estas están compuestas de parafinas normales, de cadena
carbonadas cuya longitud varía entre quince y treinta átomos de carbono . Con
pequeñas cantidades de crudo de Borneo, las isoparafinas tienen punto de fusión más
bajo que las parafinas normales de longitud de cadena similar.
Asfalto, es el residuo de la destilación del petróleo y está compuesto de fracciones
arbitrarias, las cuales existen muchas, pero las más usuales son:
a) Maltenos, solubles en hidrocarburos parafinicos.
b) Asfaltenos, insoluble en hidrocarburos parafinicos ligeros y soluble en
tetracloruro de carbono.
c) Carbenos, insoluble en tetracloruro de carbono, pero soluble en disulfuro
de carbono.
d) Carboides, insoluble en disulfuro de carbono.
•
•
°=
25
Un aceite lubricante es usado para interactuar entre dos superficies para reducir la
fricción y así . evitar el desgaste entre las piezas, además de proporcionar una
disipación de calor, y evitar calentamientos excesivos entre las superificies y evitar
danos, de acuerdo a los diferentes usos, a los aceites se le han modificado , sus
propiedades para así ser utilizados en diferentes maneras, siendo así se tienen:
Aceites industriales
Estos aceites de baja calidad que se usa en superficies que trabajan a baja velocidad y
a baja temperatura, generalmente tienen un índice de viscosidad bajo y una
determinada estabilidad, una cualidad básica es que deben de poseer puntos de
congelación correctos debido al uso, pueden fabricarse con crudos naftalénicos no
cerosos por destilación al vacío del residuo . Es conveniente eliminar los ácidos
naftalénicos (estos ácidos causan inestabilidad y corrosividad en los aceites) con una
segunda destilación con sosa caústica, extrayéndose de los diferentes puntos de la
columna aceites neutros de diferente viscosidad . Es posible construir unidades para la
eliminación de los ácidos nafténicos por destilación del residuo sin que queden los
naftenos salinos en el asfalto residual, para esto, se circula el álcali líquido en un
sistema cerrado, unos pocos platos de encima de la entrada de carga a la torre de
vacío. La fracción de aceite lubricante neutro sufre entonces en ligero tratamiento
ácido y un acabado con tierras de diatoméas, el grado de intensidad de estos
tratamientos aumenta con la viscosidad del aceite, para fines en que estos aceites de
baja calidad tengan propiedades adhesivos, es necesario que estos aceites sin tratar se
mezclan con asfaltos.
Aceites d~ alta calidad.
Son requeridos para superficies que operan a altas velocidades y altas temperaturas
por ejemplo, máquinas de combustión interna, además mínima tendencia a la
disposición de barros y a la formación de lacas, mínimo cambio de viscosidad con la
temperatura y bajo punto de congelación, este tipo de aceite sólo se puede obtener por
refino con disolventes de cargas seleccionadas, utilizando disolventes selectivos para
extraer los componentes en el grado más conveniente, estos aceites tratados con
disolventes se dividen en dos grupos, el primero que son elaborados con una base
nafténica libre de parafinas, en donde el índice de viscosidad de la carga bruta es
aproximadamente cero, los aceites extraídos procedentes de esta fuente tienen índices
de formación de coque menores que los aceites de base parafinica de alto índice de
•
•
26
viscosidad . El segundo, los que se fabrican como cargas de base parafinicas que
pueden extraerse y después desparafinarse para dar aceites de índice de viscosidad
entre 90 y 110.
Por simple desparafinado de estas cargas parafinicas cerosas, y aplicándole un
acabado con tierras y ácido, se pueden obtener aceites de índice de viscosidad entre 50
a 80, pero son menos estables en la oxidación.
Aceites especiales.
Aceites para corte, estos aceites se emplean para enfriar herramientas de corte y
taladrar metales, en general en todo tipo de maquinaria en la cual se lleva a cabo la
operación de desbastar un metal, el objetivo de este tipo de aceite, es además de
formar una película de aceite, es la de disipar el calor, estos tipos de aceites son
emulsiones estables de agua, cuya cantidad de aceite depende del valor-relativo que se
requiera entre los dos efectos, enfriamiento y lubricación, estos aceites normalmente
poseen viscosidad media y un bajo índice de viscosidad.
•
Aceites pare presiones extremas (EP).
Las cargas extremas y las altas velocidades impuestas a los modernos engranajes
cónicos de dentadura espiral, los tomillos sin fin y los engranajes hipoides, rompen
las películas de lubricantes de los aceites normales, lo que conduce a la soldadura de
las superficies, por las altas temperaturas generadas debido a la fricción, para evitar el
rompimiento de la película, se "fortifica" el aceite con productos químicos, que dan
películas finas y resistentes sobre las superficies metálicas . Estos compuestos
químicos son normalmente derivados con azufre, fósforo o cloro.
Aceites para turbinas y transformadores,
Los aceites para transformadores se obtienen mediante un enérgico tratamiento con
ácido y tierras, a partir de aceites de baja velocidad o índice de viscosidad medio
extraídos con disolventes, deben tener una alta resistencia a la oxidación que permita
una larga vida sin formación de ácidos y pérdidas de poder eléctrico .
•
27
Los aceites para turbina se elaboran con un tratamiento con ácido y tierra activada, a
partir de los aceites de viscosidad media y baja, y de alto índice de viscosidad
previamente sometidos a una intensa extracción, estos aceites deben tener una
considerable resistencia a la oxidación y deben separarse rápidamente del vapor de
agua condensada con una mínima formación de emulsión.
Aceites medicinales y blancos.
Las cargas nafténicas no cerosas preferiblemente las extraídas previamente con
disolventes, se utilizan como materia base para la preparación de aceites
farmacéuticos . Se aplican fuertes tratamientos con ácido sulfúrico, seguido de una
neutralización con sosa y lavado con alcohol para la eliminación de ácidos sulfónicos,
puede ser necesario un último tratamiento con ácido antes del tratamiento final con
arcillas activadas.
1.1 .7. ACEITES SOLUBLES
Debido a la demanda del aceite lubricante y debido también a los diferentes usos de
este en la industria, se han modificado las propiedades físicas de estos para cubrir
dichas demandas, en concreto, la mecanización de metales implica una serie de
operaciones como son : torneado, roscado, escariado, cepillado, fresado, rectificado,
perforado, etc ., en si toda actividad en donde se lleva a cabo un desvaste a un metal,
ha requerido de un tipo de aceite que porporcione determinado tipo de cualidades para
el diferente trabajo realizado ; es decir:
1. Que sea capaz de reducir las temperaturas que se originan en el trabajo de
mecanización o corte.
2. Que reduzca el rozamiento entre la pieza a mecanizar y la herramienta de
corte, de modo que disminuyan desgastes en la pieza ó herramienta de
corte.
3. Que eviten que la punta de la herramienta de corte y la viruta arrancada de
la pieza se suelden entre sí .
~
.
28
4. Que sea capaz, por el gasto del líquido, de arrastrar la viruta, evitando los
entorpecimientos en el trabajo con lo que se gana tanto en el
perfeccionamiento del acabado de la pieza como en la economía del taller.
v-
Estas cualidades las proporciona un aceite soluble, un aceite soluble está normalmente
compuesto de mezcla de aceites minerales y emulsionantes que puedan dispersarse
fácilmente en el agua, una cualidad del aceite soluble es el de proporcionar una
emulsión estable en un periodo de tiempo a diferencia de un aceite no soluble en el
cual no se puede formar emulsión con el agua, el agente emulsionante generalmente
es un jabón, además poseen los aditivos adecuados de oxidación antiespuma y otros.
Para que un aceite soluble sea considerado bueno, como ya se ha dicho, debe guardar
las condiciones ya expuestas y dar una emulsión lechosa consistente, perdurable,
grasosa y no oxidante en una proporción de 2-10% de agua.
Los aceites solubles para cortar comprenden a su vez dos tipos generales:
1.
Opacos.
2.
Claros.
V
El tipo opaco es el más común y forma emulsiones lechosas, mientras que el tipo claro
forma emulsiones traslúcidas claras.
Los aceites de corte solubles se utilizan donde los principales requisitos de la
operación sean la refrigeración del material y la maquinaria, la eliminación de las
partículas metálicas de la superficie a cortar o mecanizar y del polvo acumulado en los
trabajos de fresado.
Los agentes emulsionantes generalmente empleados son naftasulfonatos y ácidos
grasos sulfonados.
En las fórmulas para la preparación de los aceites solubles se añaden a veces aditivos
que se basan en aceites ligeros minerales . En los aceites solubles es importantisimo
•
29
controlar su pH, debiendo procurar que sea neutro o ligeramente alcalina, pues de lo
contrario se puede deteriorar por la formación de jabones . La densidad de la solución
madre debe ser tal que, al ser disuelta en agua, en las proporciones ya indicadas, ha de
tener un peso específico muy próximo al agua.
1.1 .8. ACEITES SINTETICOS
./
Los aceites sintéticos son producidos en base al aceite refinado y otros recursos
químicos (reacciones químicas), los lubricantes sintéticos fueron primeramente ¿/"
desarrollados en 1930, aunque su aplicación comercial como lubricante fue aplicada
recientemente.
Hoy en día los lubricantes sintéticos son encontrados en automóviles, en camiones, en
motores diesel, en motores marinos y en transmisiones, también son usados en
aviación, aeroespacio y en la misma industria de lubricantes.
•
La base principal de los lubricantes sintéticos son polialfaolefinas, aromáticos
alquilados, polibutenos, diésteres alifáticos, poliésteres, polialquilenglicoles y ésteres
fosfatos. Los grupos sintéticos de lubricantes muestran una variedad en cuanto a
propiedades de lubricación, pero son benignos en cuanto a cuestión ambiental . El
grupo de lubricantes sintéticos, ésteres, es muy biodegradable y así el impacto
ambiental es mínimo en comparación con otros tipos de lubricantes, en experimentos
realizados se ha encontrado que los ésteres y aceites vegetales son biodegradables, y
que los aceites blancos y minerales sólo son parcialmente biodegradables.
De todos los lubricantes sintéticos, el polialquilenglicol (PAG) es el más importante,
el PAG es un grupo grande de moléculas poliméricas que exhiben un amplio rango de
propiedades incluyendo solubilidad en agua, son usados en líquidos de frenos,
soluciones anticongelantes, en lubricantes para compresores, en fluido de corte de
metales, como fluido resistente al fuego y como aditivo de aceite para motor . El PAG
puede ser sólido o líquido, soluble o insoluble en agua y puede ser producido para dar
una amplia gama de viscosidad. Las aplicaciones típicas del PAG es como aceite
industrial y la elaboración de grasas, lubricante para compresor, fluido para corte de
metales, fluidos hidráulicos resistentes al fuego, lubricantes textiles y fluido para
t/
30
transferencia de calor, los fluidos más utilizados para la operación de transferencia de
calor en este grupo son los anticongelantes (etileno y propilenglicol).
El PAG es un excelente fluido para compresores porque estos pueden lubricar y
enfrian, sellan y reducen la fricción y el desgaste . Estos compuestos reaccionan muy
poco con oxidantes o líquidos químicos activos o con grasas en la mezcla
comprimida, los aceites de PAG son usados en la industria del corte de metales
porque su solubilidad provee de una película de polímeros en la superficie del metal
trabajado . Estos compuestos tienen baja toxicidad irritan poco la piel y es bioestable.
El PAG soluble en agua es usado extensamente en la elaboración de textiles y puede
ser fácilmente removido después del proceso.
A continuación se mencionan algunos aceites sintéticos elaborados para la sustitución ~
de aceites de hidrocarburos:
Productos polimerización di olefinas.
•
Estos se han elaborado empleando como catalizador cloruro de aluminio para la
desintegración catalítica y térmica de los aceites diesel, y de fracciones cereas, se han
obtenido a partir del etileno . Estos aceites poseen puntos de congelación y números de
neutralización, saponificación y precipitación muy bajos . También se han producido
aceites a través de la polimerización catalizada de alfa olefinas. La polimerización
catalizada por el cloruro de aluminio del isobuteno se emplea comercialmente en los
Estados Unidos para obtener aceites de una zona amplia de viscosidad.
El uso principal de estos productos radica en la preparación de plastificantes,
recubrimientos resistentes a la humedad etc ., se han obtenido también aceites
lubricantes de la despolimerización parcial de poliisobutilenos viscosos por
destilación al vacío.
Aceites alquilados.
Son obtenidos mediante la condensación del benceno con dicloroetano, seguido de la
alquilación del producto por condensación con gasóleo clorado . Se han obtenido
•
//
31
aceites alquilados con bajos índices de viscosidad por condensación del naftaleno con
etileno en presencia de cloruro de aluminio seguido de alquilación del producto con ./'
olefinas superiores, tales como propileno, butileno y amilenos.
La condensación catalizada con cloruro de aluminio del benceno, tolueno oxileno con
ceras parafinicas cloradas o hidrocarburos halogenados (C16 o más), origina también
con altos rendimientos aceites lubricantes de buena calidad para automoviles y
aviones.
Aceites póliester,
•
En los últimos años se han obtenido ésteres del tipo polivialquilenglicol, obtenidos
por condensación del óxido 1,2 propileno o del óxido de etileno con metanol, etanol,
butanol, etc . . Estos productos poseen altos índices de viscosidad, puntos de
congelación muy bajos y se caracterizan por dar bajos residuos carbonosos productos
de oxidación volátiles de bajo peso molecular y carecer de tendencia a formar barros.
Muestran sin embargo, malas caracteristicas frente a la oxidación y poca estabilidad
térmica. Se pueden conseguir, tanto en la forma inmiscible en agua como miscible . Se
ha comprobado también que ciertos ésteres del tipo de los di-1,2-etilbutiratol de los
polixialquilenglicoles, son adecuados para su utilización en los intrumentos
giroscópicos de aviación y en la lubricación de relojes.
Lubricantes sintéticos tipo éster.
Estos son utilizados en ciertos tipos de instrumentos herméticamente cerrados que no
son accesibles para su lubricación durante su funcionamiento, deben poseer alta
estabilidad química, ausencia de corrosividad, puntos de congelación inferiores a
-40°C, baja tendencia a la evaporación, bajas viscosidades a temperaturas inferiores a
cero, altos índices de viscosidad y puntos de inflamación y elevada fluidez.
Los productos que tienen estas características son ciertos diésteres alifáticos de ácidos
dibásicos alifáticos de larga cadena con cortas ramificaciones alifáticas tales como:
•
v
32
1. Glutaratos, adipatos, azeletos y sebacetos de los alcaloles sec-amílico, 3metil-butanol, 2-etil-butanol, 2-etil-hexanol y de los alcoholes secundarios
de cadena ramificada, uno de canal y tetradecanol.
2. Diestéres formados por la reacción de los ácidos anteriores con 2-12- /
etilbutoxil-etanol .
~/
3. Diestéres formados por la reacción del hexametilenglicol o el
decametilenglicol con un ácido de cadena ramificada, tal como el 2etilhexanoíco.
4. Diestéres preparados por la reacción del trietilen o polietilenglicol con el
ácido 2 etilhexanoíco.
Durante la Segunda Guerra Mundial se obtuvo un lubricante sintético del tipo estér de
alta calidad con elevado índice de viscosidad y estabilidad térmica . Los ácidos
empleados fueron principalmente los básicos, (obtenidos por la acción de la sosa
caústica sobre los alcoholes llamados isobutílicos) se utilizaron en la esterificación
alcoholes principalmente del tipo isobutílico y el trimetilolmetano . Los estéres así
preparados se emplearon mucho mezclados con polímeros de etileno, como aceites
para evitar la corrosión en frío.
Siliconas
Las siliconas fluidas se preparan actualmente tanto en los Estados Unidos como en el
Reino Unido . Estas substancias muestran un cambio anormalmente bajo la viscosidad
en una zona amplia de temperaturas, poseen bajos puntos de congelación y volatilidad
y son repelentes al agua, tienen alta resistencia térmica y a la oxidación, elevados
puntos de inflamación y ejercen poca o ninguna corrosión o efecto degradante sobre
metales o gomas . Las siliconas carecen de propiedades lubricantes en condiciones de
alta velocidad o carga. Su aplicación más importante radica como lubricantes de
instrumentos de precisión, como fluidos amortiguadores recubrimiento de superficie y
agentes antiespuma.
•
33
Hidrocarburos clorados 1
Ciertos hidrocarburos aromáticos y ceras parafinicas cloradas se emplean en cierto
grado solos o mezclados con aceites de petróleo como lubricantes especiales . Dichos
productos poseen índices de viscosidad extremadamente bajos . Los productos más
altamente clorados y viscosos resisten el fuego, por lo que, al igual que todos los
productos orgánicos clorados mencionados antes, se utilizan como productos
anticombustibles, lubricantes para moldes, compuestos de impregnación o
impermeabilizantes y como recubrimientos superficiales.
Hidrocarburos fluorados.
•
Los productos totalmente fluorados se conocen como perfluorocarburos, y sus
propiedades oscilan entre las de líquidos de bajo punto de ebullición hasta sólidos
cereos . Estas substancias se caracterizan por su elevada estabilidad térmica e inercia
química. Se han propuesto como lubricantes los polímeros del tetrafluoroetileno con
fórmula empírica : (CF2)n y los productos obtenidos en la descomposición térmica de
los copolímeros del tetrafluoretileno con mono-olefinas de dos a cuatro átomos de
carbono cuya constitución varía entre aceites más o menos viscosos hasta ceras duras.
Al igual que las siliconas, estos lubricantes, llamados fluolubles, tienen aplicación
limitada debido a su elevado costo.
1.1.9. PURIFICACION
Para la purificación del aceite se han ideado muchas maneras de hacerlo, para esto se
debe de conocer el tipo de impureza que se va a retirar y depende además del tipo de
uso que se le va ha dar al aceite.
Extracción 4 J compuestos sit azufre1
Una desventaja de la extracción es que todas las moléculas que contienen azufre, en
lugar de ser este eliminado como sulfuro de hidrógeno, se da a su vez la pérdida de
productos pesados unidos al azufre, pérdida que crece con el peso molécular de la
carga a desulfurizar para un porcentaje en peso de azufre constante, si los distintos
•
34
productos del crudo contienen azufre en tal magnitud que es necesario prácticar una
desulfurización en uno o algunos de sus productos, se puede suponer sin
equivocación, que el resto tendrá azufre y la inclusión en ellos de los extractos
sulfurados pueden dificultar los límites especificados.
Una solución para evitar esto, es la de eliminar el azufre del extracto en forma del
sulfuro de hidrógeno por un proceso de hidrodesulfuración . Se ha encontrado que los
disolventes selectivos de los hidrocarburos aromáticos tienen una influencia semejante
sobre los que contienen azufre, esta influencia es extremadamente marcada para las
cargas desintegradas catalíticamente, en las que la mayor parte del azufre, si lo hay, se
encuentra en combinaciones aromáticas.
Fluoruro di hidrógeno.
•
El Fluoruro de hidrógeno es otro disolvente que muestra un considerable poder
disolvente para algunos compuestos de azufre con este disolvente es posible la
extracción de un 70% o más de azufre dando un rendimiento en extracto de sólo el 10
y 15% de la carga desparafinado, y la presencia de cera parafinica en los aceites es
inconveniente debido a que dificultan la fluidez del aceite a través de los equipos
utilizados a la temperatura normal y a bajas temperaturas . El primer método empleado
para su eliminación fué dejar sedimentar en los tanques de almacenamiento durante el
invierno y extraer luego el aceite claro en enfriandolo y separándolo de la primera
cera. Este método fué luego sustituido por el enfriamiento de los tanques mediante un
serpentín dentro del cual fluía salmuera enfriada previamente por un proceso de
expansión de amoníaco o de dióxido de carbono.
Posteriormente se encontraron mejoras al fraccionar el aceite ceroso destilandolo para
obtener una fracción de baja viscosidad y un residuo de alta viscosidad que se
desparafinaban independientemente, empleando con cada uno las condiciones más
adecuadas para la más eficiente separasión de las parafinas o ceras presentes.
El desparafinado de aceites de elevada viscosidad es bajo, para ayudar a la separación
de la parafina y a la recuperación del aceite se utiliza como diluyente la nafta, siendo
la solubilidad del aceite en nafta fría considerablemente mejor que la de la cera .
•
V
V
35
Otros procesos para el desparafinado del aceite, son:
•
Desparafinado con propano.
•
Desparafinado con benceno-acetona:
•
Desparafinado con tricloroetileno.
1 .1 .10. LUBRICACION
La lubricación de las superificies puede verificarse de dos formas:
18 Lubricación hidrodinámica, y
28 lubricación en capa límite.
Lubricación Hidrodinámica.
•
Se dice que existe lubricación hidrodinámica cuando se mantienen una película del
lubricante entre las superficies del cojinete en las condiciones de operación . En estas
condiciones, la fricción entre el eje y el cojinete dependen de la viscosidad del
lubricante, la velocidad de rotación y la presión ejercida sobre el eje . Dichas presiones
aumentan gradualmente desde la que tienen el aceite a su entrada hasta un valor
máximo . Puesto que la película de aceite a se puede considerar formada por capas, de
las cuales la exterior se adhiere al eje y al cojinete, mientras que las intermedias están
sometidas continuamente a fuerzas de cizalladura, cuanto mayor es la viscosidad del
aceite, mayor es el calor de fricción del fluido desarrollado.
La conductividad térmica del lubricante y no la velocidad de transferencia de calor
desde el cojinete a los alrededores, es lo que, por lo tanto, ha de gobernar la velocidad
de pérdida del calor de la película dentro de la cual se mantiene un gradiente de
temperatura.
Lubricación e1n capa límite
Cuando las condiciones de trabajo son tales que la película de aceite no se puede
mantener entre las superficies del cojinete en condiciones de poca velocidad y carga
•
36
elevada, las rugosidades de las superficies pueden estar en contacto una con otra . Esta
condición se conoce como lubricación en la capa límite y da lugar a una mayor
fricción que la resultante en la lubricación hidrodinámica . La lubricación en la capa
límite es independiente de la viscosidad o la capacidad de las moléculas del lubricante
para permanecer adsorbidas en capas de sólo unas pocas moléculas de grosor, sobre la
superficie del cojinete . Los compuestos polares, por ejemplo, los ácidos grasos son
adsorbidas más fuertemente por la superficie metálica que los hidrocarburos . Esto es,
muestran mayor tensión superficial y resistencia a ser desplazados de entre las
superficies del cojinete.
Condiciones Extremas . En condiciones de extrema presión, el aceite y la película en
la capa límite pueden romperse o perforarse por las rugosidades superficiales;
permitiendo el contacto metal-metal, las temperaturas elevadas producidas en los
puntos de contacto dan lugar a la fusión y soldadura de los metales con los
consiguientes daños a la superficie del cojinete . En los cojinetes lisos o chumaceras se
emplean metales de bajo punto de fusión de manera que si falla la lubricación se
extropea el cojinete y no el eje . En el caso de engranajes donde las superficies de
carga son del mismo metal, se disminuyen al mínimo los danos de las superficies por
soldadura en condiciones de carga elevada y bajas revoluciones, añadiendo aditivos al
aceite. Estos compuestos suelen contener uno o más elementos activos como el azufre,
cloro o fósforo, que se combinan con las superficies metálicas en las zonas calientes
para dar películas de derivado metálico muy adherentes pero fácilmente cizallables,
que evitan el agarrotamiento y el deterioro de las superficies.
La aplicación de los aceites lubricantes a los cojinetes suele ser de tres maneras:
1* Sistemas de recuperación. Aquí el aceite no se recircula.
2a Sistemas circulantes, en este tipo el aceite es bombeado a presión a través
de los cojinetes, siendo recirculado mediante una bomba.
3a Sistemas de baño o barboteo, en este sistema al cojinete está sumergido en
el aceite y al rodar este salpica el aceite llevandolo a las zonas que
requieren lubricación .
•
(
~
37
Uno de los ingredientes principales en los aceites lubricantes es el aditivo, el cual es
una serie de substancias químicas que agregadas a un aceite base, refuerzan sus
propiedades lubricantes y/o implementan nuevas.
TIPOS DE ADITIVOS PARA FORMULAR UN LUBRICANTE
ADITIVO
BENEFICIOS
* MANTENER LIMPIO EL INTERIOR DEL MECANISMO.
LUBRICACION MAS EFICIENTE.
• NEUTRALIZAR LOS ACIDOS QUE SE FORMAN DURANTE
EL FUNCIONAMIENTO, CONTRARRESTANDO EL
DESGASTE QUIMICO Y LA DEGRADACION DEL
LUBRICANTE.
MENOR DESGASTE QUIMICO Y
ABRASIVO.
DISPERSANTE
CONTRARRESTAR LA AGRUPACION DE LOS
CONTAMINANTES, MANTENIENDOLOS EN SUSPENSION
PARA DISMINUIR LA FORMACION DE LODOS.
LUBRICACION MAS EFICIENTE.
SACAR LA CONTAMINACION
DEL MECANISMO AL
MOMENTO DE HACER LOS
CAMBIOS DE ACEITE.
ANTIOXIDANTE
CONTRARRESTAR LA COMBINACION QUIMICA DEL VIDA MAS LARGA DEL ACEITE
ACEITE CON EL OXIGENO DEL AIRE, CONTROLANDO EL Y DEL EQUIPO.
ESPESAMIENTO Y LA FORMACION DE LODOS Y
COMPUESTOS CORROSIVOS.
ANTICORROSIVOS
PROTEGER DE LOS ACIDOS LAS PARTES METALICAS DEL VIDA MAS LARGA DEL EQUIPO.
EQUIPO PARA CONTRARRESTAR LA CORROSION.
DETERGENTE
•
FUNCION
CONTRARRESTAR EL DESGASTE A TRAVES DE LA VIDA MAS LARGA DEL EQUIPO.
ANTIDESGASTE
MENORES
FORMACION DE MICROPELICULAS.
COSTOS
DE
OPERACION.
ANTIESPUMANTES.
COTRARRESTAR LA FORMACION DE ESPUMA EN EL SENO VIDA MAS LARGA DE ACEITE Y
DEL ACEITE .
DEL EQUIPO.
MEJORADORES DEL
INDICE DE VISCOSI-
DISTRIBUIR LA VARIACION DE LA VISCOSIDAD AL LUBRICACION MAS EFICIENTE.
CAMBIAR LA TEMPERATURA.
DAD.
DEPRESORES DEL
PUNTO DE FLUIDEZ
DISMINUIR EL PUNTO DE CONGELAMIENTO DEL ACEITE ARRANQUES MAS FACILES A
BAJAS TEMPERATURAS.
AGENTES EXTREMA FORMAR UNA PELICULA LUBRICANTE CON UNA ALTA VIDA MAS LARGA DEL EQUIPO
.CAPACIDAD DE CARGA .
AL CONTRARRESTAR EL
PRESION
CONTACTO DIRECTO .
PRINCIPALES PROBLEMAS QUE OCASIONA LA
ACEITE .
•
Aumento de la viscosidad:
•
Mala lubricación:
38
OXIDACION DEL
a.
Mayor desgaste.
b.
Mayor temperatura de funcionamiento del equipo.
•
Aumento en la presión del aceite.
•
Generación de ácidos:
•
Degradación del aceite.
•
Aumento del desgaste químico.
•
Aumento del desgaste abrasivo.
•
Formación de lodos, lacas y barnices:
•
Problemas de lubricación.
•
Disminución de la vida útil del equipo.
PRINCIPALES PROBLEMAS QUE OCASIONA LA ESPUMA EN EL SENO
DEL ACEITE.
•
Película lubricante irregular:
•
Mayor desgaste mecánico y abrasivo.
•
Mayor degradación del aceite (oxidación).
•
Más probabilidades de corrosión por la humedad contenida en las burbújas
de aire.
•
•
Posibilidad de que los sellos fallen.
•
Posibilidad de cavitación en el sistema.
•
Funcionamiento irregular de la bomba de aceite.
•
39
PRUEBAS EN ACEITES LUBRICANTES.
PRUEBA DE : NORMA
SUMARIO
APLICACIONES
Color ASTM D-1500 Usando una fuente de luz, se coloca
una muestra líquida en el contenedor
de prueba, se observa y se compara
con discos de vidrio con colores
estándar, cuyos va-lores van de 0 .5 a
8 .0
Determinación del color.
Para control de manufactura.
Características de calidad importante
para el aceite.
No es una gula confiable de calidad.
Densidad ASTM D-1285 Se coloca la muestra en un cilindro y
se introduce el hidrómetro dentro de
la muestra, ya equilibrado, se lee la
escala del hidrómetro y se anota la
temperatura.
Rige la calidad del petróleo crudo.
Para control de contenido neto en
envases.
Dato importante de relación pesovolumen.
No es un parámetro de calidad en aceites
lubricantes.
La copa con aceite es colocada en una
Temperatura de ASTM D-92
inflamación . parrilla para elevar su temperatura.
Se pasa una flama sobre la copa hasta
que se produce una flama (chispa)
sobre toda la copa . Se toma la lectura
del termómetro.
Tenencia del aceite para formar mezclas
inflamables. Mide la peligrosidad de
inflamación de un aceite.
Ofrece la característica de una mues-tra
para soportar la combustion.
Temperatura de ASTM D-92 Igual que la temperatura de
inflamación, pero en ésta prueba se
ingnición .
sigue pasando la flama hasta que la
copa con aceite se quede
completamente encendida. Se toma la
lectura del termómetro .
Tenencia del aceite para formar mezclas
inflamables . Mide la peligrosidad de
inflamación de un aceite.
Ofrece la característica de una muestra
para soportar la combustión.
Viscosidad
a ASTM D-445
40°C y a 100°C
Se regula la temperatura del baño de
aceite. La muestra se coloca en un
tubo canon y se mide el tiempo que
tarda en bajar por gravedad a través
del capilar calibrado. Este tiempo se
multiplica por el factor de calibración
y nos dá la viscosidad.
Es esencial para obtener la clasifica-ción
de viscosidad S.A.E. o I .S.O.
Determinar el cambio de viscosidad de un
aceite antes y después de usarlo.
Indice de visco- Para
detersidad . minar el índice de viscosidad a 40°C y
a
100°C
ASTM-2270
Para determinar el indice de Mide la variación de la viscosidad debida
viscosidad a 40°C y a 100°C y después a los cambios de temperatura (40°C y a
aplicar la siguiente formúla:
100°C).
Mientras mayor sea el indice de
IV=j(L-U)/L-H)jx100
viscosidad, menor será el efecto de la
tempe-ratura en la viscosidad.
Los valores L y H se obtienen de la
tabla del método ASTM-2270
Cenizas ASTMD-874 Se pesa la muestra y se quema hasta
que quedan sólo cenizas y carbón.
sulfatadas
Después de enfriarse, el residuo se
trata con ácido sulf-úrico y se calienta
a 775°C. Se deja enfriar y se pesa
para obtener la diferencia en % del
peso total .
Indica la concentración de aditivos que
contengan metales conocidos en aceites
nuevos. Es importante para determinar la
relación de cenizas y T.B .N. Considera la
cantidad de cenizas que puede producir
un aceite al quemarse en el interior del
motor.
40
PRUEBAS EN ACEITES LUBR1CANTES
(continuación)
PRUEBA DE : NORMA
SUMARIO
APLICACIONES
Número Total ASTM D-2896 Se disuelve la muestra en un solvente.
El equipo a través de da-tos generados
Base : T .B.N.
dá una curva de la cual se toma un
punto (inflexión) que indica la
cantidad de mgOH/gr. que tiene la
muestra . Mide la capacidad de un
lubricante para contrarrestar la
formación de ácidos en el motor. Es
usado para medir la degradación de el
lubricante durante el servicio . Se debe
comparar contra estándares del
fabricante.
No aplica.
ASTM D-4742 El aceite se mezcla en un envase de
vidrio con otros tres materiales que
son usados para simular las
condiciones del motor. Esta mez-la es
colocada en un bailo a altas
temperaturas y se le inyecta oxigeno.
Se toma el periodo de tiempo que
tarda el aceite en absorber el oxigeno
presente en el envase (oxidación).
No aplica.
Se coloca el aceite en una ventana de
cristal para que pase a través de el luz
infrarroja, al pasar ésta luz detecta el
contenido que tiene y lo expresa por
medio de picos de absorción que son
únicos en cada tipo de elemento.
No aplica.
El equipo absorbe una cantidad de
aceite diluido en un solvente.
Este aceite es quemado junto con
gases . Se emite una luz particular del
metal que se desea conocer, al pasar
por la flama, el equipo detecta la
cantidad de éste metal en p .p.m .
Excelente para determinar la cantidad de
metales de desgaste que el motor ha
depositado en el aceite lubricante.
Cuantifica la cantidad de algunos
componentes de tipo metálico que
contienen los aditivos.
T.F .O .U.T.
•
Espectrofotóme- xxxxxxxxxxx
tro de luz infrarroja.
Espectrofotóme- xxxxxxxxxxx
tro de absorción
atómica .
ESPECIFICACIONES DE ACEITE LUBRICANTE REQUERIDAS POR LOS
FABRICANTES DE MOTORES A GASOLINA.
Las especificaciones requeridas por los fabricantes para el adecuado funcionamiento
de los motores de combustión interna que utilizan como combustible gasolina, son:
• Viscosidad SAE (Society Automotive Engineers) :
41
•
Monogrado (30, 40).
• Multigrado (15W-40, 20W-40).
•
Clasificación del Instituto Americano del Petróleo (American Petroleum
Institute : API) o nivel de desempeño (protección al motor) : SA, SB, SC,
SE, SF y SG . En donde SA, SB, SC, y SD, son especificaciones
absoletas (su venta en la República Mexicana esta prohibida).
La relación entre la clasificación del API y los años de construcción de los motores a
gasolina, es:
CLASIFICACION
API
SA
SB
SC
SD
SE
SF
SG
AÑO DE FABRICACION DEL
MOTOR
1950 y anterior.
1963 y anterior.
1964 y 1967 y anteriores.
1980 a 1988 y anteriores.
1989 anteriores y posteriores.
Las consecuencias de poner en un motor moderno de combustión interna a gasolina,
un aceite de clasificación API baja, son:
•
Mayor consumo de aceite . Generación de mayores niveles de
contaminación y mayor número de malestares, para el operador.
•
Mayor consumo de gasolina. Generación de mayores niveles de
contaminación y mayor número de malestares, para el operador.
•
Motores más sucios por la mayor degradación del aceite (mayor
formación de lacas, barnices, lodos).
•
•
Gastos más elevados en refacciones, mano de obra y tiempos muertos.
•
Mayor depreciación y vida del motor más corta.
•
Costos totales de operación más elevados.
42
BENEFICIOS DE LOS ACEITES MULTIGRADOS .
V
Los beneficios de los aceites multigrados, son:
•
Mejor arranque y puesta en marcha a cualquier temperatura ambiente.
•
Mejor economía de combustible.
•
Menor consumo de aceite.
•
Menor inventario de aceites.
•
Rendimiento superior.
•
Vida más larga del motor.
•
Costos de mantenimiento más bajos.
•
El aceite es más delgado entre más baja sea la temperatura ambiente.
•
Menor potencia requerida por el motor de arranque.
•
Mejor bombeabilidad del aceite.
•
lubricación más eficiente del motor.
•
Pérdidas de potencia por fricción más bajas.
•
Mayor viscosidad a altas temperaturas de operación.
•
Menor consumo de aceite durante el calentamiento del motor.
•
Un sólo aceite para todas las épocas del año.
•
Vida más larga del aceite sin perder sus propiedades.
•
Protección más larga y eficiente al motor prolongando su vida útil.
•
Menor cantidad de tiempos muertos.
ACEITES LUBRICANTES PARA MOTORES DE COMBUSTION INTERNA
QUE UTILIZAN DIESEL.
Las especificaciones requeridas para los motores de combustión interna a diesel, son:
•
Viscosidad SAE .
•
43
• Monogrado (30, 40).
•
Multigrado (15W-40).
~
Clasificación API o nivel de desempeño : CA. CB . CC . CD . CD-II . CE CF-4
Número básico total (T .B .N.).
•
CLASIFICACION
API
AÑO DE
INTRODUCCION
APLICACION
CA
1940
No deberán usarse, salvo recomendación del fabricante
del motor.
CB
1949
No deberán usarse, salvo recomendación del fabricante
del motor.
CC
1961
Motores a Diesel de aspiración natural operando bajo
servicio ligero.
CD
1950
Motores a diesel de aspiración natural o turbo
cargados.
CD-II
1981
Motores a diesel de dos tiempos.
CE
1983
Motores a diesel de aspiración natural y turbo
cargados operando bajo servicio severo.
•
CF-4 1990 Lubricante de bajas emisiones recomendado para motores a diesel de aspiración natural o turbo cargados
construidos a partir de 1990, anteriores y posteriores.
De esta clasificación, se encuentran absoletas las : CA, CB, y la CC.
El Número Básico Total (TBN) neutraliza los ácidos que se forman durante el
funcionamiento del motor a diesel, principalmente el ácido sulfúrico.
Los problemas que pueden surguir con el contenido de ceniza en este tipo de
lubricantes, son:
•
Desgaste de válvulas.
•
Ensuciamiento de inyectores.
•
Depósitos en la cámara de combustión
•
Depósitos en la meseta del pistón .
V-
44
NIVEL DE CENIZA (%)
1 .0
1 .3 a 1 .5
1 .8 a 2 .0
VIDA DEL MOTOR
100%
85%
50%
Las consecuencias de poner un aceite de baja clasificación API en un motor moderno
a diesel, son:
•
Mayor consumo de aceite.
•
Mayor consumo de combustible.
•
Motores más sucios por una mayor degradación del aceite (mayor
)
formación de lodos, lacas y barnices).
•
Tiempos muertos más frecuentes.
•
Gastos más elevados en refacciones y mano de obra .
•
Mayor depreciación del equipo.
•
Vida más corta del motor.
•
Costos totales de posesión y operación más elevados.
ACEITES LUBRICANTES PARA ENGRANAJES AUTOMOTRICES.
Los tipos de engranajes que requieren de lubricantes son :
•
•
Cilindro interno.
•
Cónico espiral.
•
Cónico simple.
•
Dientes rectos.
•
Espina de pescado.
•
Helicoidales.
•
Hipoidales.
•
Tornillo sin fin .
YY
45
Ahora bien, las propiedades que debe ofrecer un lubricante para estos tipos de
engranajes, son:
•
capacidad para soportar carga/extrema presión.
•
Alta resistencia a la oxidación.
•
Conservar su viscosidad.
•
Contrarrestar la formación de ácidos originados por la oxidación.
•
Contrarrestar la formación de lodos, lacas y barnices.
•
Eficiente control de la corrosión.
•
Efectiva capacidad antiespumante, contrarrestando:
•
Película lubricante irregular.
•
Degradación del aceite (oxidación).
•
Falla de Sellos.
•
Cavitación.
•
Funcionamiento irregular de la bomba de aceite, etc.
•
Buena demulsibilidad.
•
Estabilidad térmica.
•
Viscosidad adecuada a temperaturas de trabajo.
La clasificación API para este tipo de lubricantes es la siguiente:
CLASIFICACION API
GL-1
GL-2
G L-3
G L-4
GL-5
GL-6
APLICACION
Transmisiones
manuales
operando
bajo
condiciones ligeras
para lubricación de engranajes tornillo sin fin.
Transmisiones manuales y engranajes cónicoespirales operando bajo condiciones moderadas.
Transmisiones manuales, engranajes cónicoespirales y diferenciales operando bajo cargas y
velocidades moderadas.
Diferenciales y otros engranajes operando bajo
condiciones moderadas a severas.
Obsoleto
COMENTARIOS
Aceite mineral puro.
Contiene aditivos antidesgaste y/o una
minima cantidad de aditivos extrema
presión.
Contiene aditivos extrema presión media, no
adecuado para diferenciales.
Usualmente su desempeño es 50% de un
aceite GL-5.
Recomendado por la mayoría de los
fabricantes de vehículos para la lubricación
de diferenciales.
46
En el caso de los lubricantes para transmisión automática (Automatic Transmission
Fluid : ATF), Estos deben de cumplir lo siguiente:
Funciones:
•
•
•
•
Transmitir potencia.
Transferir calor.
Actuar como fluido hidráulico.
Lubricar.
Propiedades:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Antioxidante.
Características friccionantes adecuadas : Debe permitir cambios suaves y
uniformes; eliminar la vibración ; un desempeño friccionante pobre
puede causar alto calentamiento y desgaste excesivo de los elementos
friccionantes.
Antiespuma . Los principales problemas que ocasiona la espuma, son:
reducción de la presión hidráulica y flujo irregular.
Anticorrosivas. Contrarrestar la formación de ácidos, neutralizando el
ataque de éstos a los metales amarillos.
Compatibilidad con sellos . Contrarrestar su endurecimiento y
agrietamiento . Y, contrarrestar fugas.
Habilidad para fluir a bajas temperaturas . El flujo pobre a baja
temperatura ocasiona fluctuaciones en la presión ocasionando cambios
tardíos .
J
•
47
1 .2 NORMATIVIDAD.
1 .2.1
Introducción.
Como uno de Ios primeros antecedentes se tiene que Alemania emitió una ley sobre
aceites usados en 1968 siendo la primera nación en desarroliar la regulación sobre el
uso de aceites usados (es de hacerse notar que en aquel entonces se denominaba
Alemania Federal) . Desde entonces, varios países desarrollados se han visto en la
necesidad de regular estos aceites . Uno de los primeros en dar propuestas sobre el
tema lo fueron los Estados Unidos, quienes dieron las primeras propuestas y
regulaciones en 1978 para el manejo de residuos peligrosos y aceites usados . La
mayoría de los países desarrollados aparentemente no regulaban los aceites usados
industriales, pero cuentan con regulaciones especiales para prevenirlos ; sin embargo,
más países han realizado regulaciones que dan el establecimiento de disposiciones a
estas actividades.
En relación con la normatividad existente para el manejo de lubricantes usados, se
tienen diferentes reglamentaciones y legislaciones sobre el tema . Dentro de estas se
encuentran las siguientes:
1.2.2
Estados Unidos.
No hace mucho, los Estados Unidos realizaron la mayor parte de leyes
gubernamentales sobre aceites usados, estas regulaciones fueron hechas a la Ley
Federal (20 de mayo de 1992 : 40 CFR 261) . En este punto, regulan el control de los
aceites usados no "definidos", principalmente porque los aceites usados han existido
por muchos anos y la recuperación y reciclaje de los aceites fué considerada hasta
1974 (Weinstein, 1974).
En diciembre 18 de 1978, la Agencia de Protecciónal Medio Ambiente (Enviromental
Protection Agency: EPA), inicialmente propuso guías y regulaciones para la
administración de desechos peligrosos. Estas regulaciones especificaron la's reglas
para la identificación y listó los desechos peligros bajo una sección "3001", del Acta
de Recuperación y Conservación de Recursos ( Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act: 43 FR 58946) . Las reglas indican que los aceites usados son peligrosos en base a
su toxicidad . La EPA propuso regulaciones para el reciclado, la incineración y/o
quemado a partir del uso de lubricantes hidráulicos y de corte como peligrosos .
48
En mayo 19 de 1980 la EPA decidió promulgar las regulaciones sobre reciclado de
aceites usados (45 FR 33084), por considerarlos completamente desechos con un uso
específico, instituyendo estándares que pudieran ser instituidos para su recuperación y
reciclado . Así mismo, tiempo después, se generó una lista de aceites usados para ser
dispuestos paulatinamente . Estas regulaciones hicieron que los aceites usados fueran
un desecho peligroso sujeto a un apartado especial (subtítulo C de la legislación antes
mencionada), en donde se indican las características de los desechos peligrosos:
inactividad, corrosividad, reactividad y toxicidad.
El 8 de noviembre de 1985 la EPA propuso una lista de todos los aceites como
residuos peligrosos (50 FR 49258), incluyendo derivados del petróleo y aceites
sintéticos, basada en la presencia de constituyentes tóxicos ; por ejemplo: metales,
compuestos orgánicos volátiles . La EPA propuso estándares administrativos para el
reciclado de aceites usados (29 de noviembre de 1985 : 50 FR 49212) y emitió las
regulaciones finales para la prohibición de quemado fuera de especificación usando
aceites usados como combustibles.
El Registro Federal público el 20 de mayo de 1992, la 57 FR 21524, como una regla
final que listaba los tratamientos de los aceites usados para su disposición . La EPA
promulgó una decisión final y no una lista de aceites usados para su disposición en el
apartado de regulaciones subtítulo C, sobre las caracteristicas de peligro.
Los estándares generales para la promulgación de las regulaciones sobre los aceites //
usados fueron los siguientes:
•
Estándares del Generador.
•
Estándares para la facilidad de transferencia de transportador.
•
Estándares para el procesador de aceites usados y re-refinadores.
•
Estándares para el quemado fuera de especificación de aceites usados.
•
Estándares para la comercialización de aceites usados .
49
ESTANDARES GENERALES PARA LA REGULACION DE ACEITES
USADOS EN LOS ESTADOS UNIDOS
REQUERIMIENTOS
Suposiciones de reciclado.
Mezclas de aceite usado con desechos peligrosos.
Suposiciones de refutación para aceites usados.
•
•
REGULACION
CORRESPONDIENTE
279 .10(a)
279 .10(b)
279 .10(b)(1)(ii)
261 .3(a)(2)(v)
Excepciones para la presupuesta CFC's y aceites de 261 .3(a)(2)(v)(A)y(B)
trabajo en metal.
Mezclas de aceite usado con desechos no peligrosos .
279 .10(c)
279 .10(d)
Mezclas de aceites usados con productos .
Materiales derivados por el uso de aceites usados .
279 .10(e)
Excepción condicional : agua de desechos . 279 .10(t)
Introducción de aceites usados dentro de aceites crudo o 279 .10(g)
gas natural en líneas de tuberías.
Aceites usados en recipientes .
279 .10(e)(e), 279.10(h)
y 279 .20(a)(2)
Aceites usados contaminados con PCB's .
279 .10(i)
Prohibición de aceites usados .
279 .11
Prohibición de pilas depósito/desecho excepto para 279 .12(a)
unidades bajo el apartado 264/265.
Prohibición sobre su uso como supresor de polvos .
279 .12(b)
Prohibición en el quemado dentro de otras unidades fijas . 279.12(c)
Y
Y
50
ESTANDARES PARA LA REGULACION DEL GENERADOR DE
ACEITES USADOS EN LOS ESTADOS UNIDOS
REQUERIMIENTOS
•
REGULACION
CORRESPONDIENTE
Aceites usados en recipientes
279 .20(a)(2)
Mezclas de aceites usados y diesel
219 .20(a)(3)
279 .20(a)(4)
Agricultores
Generadores quienes realizan otras actividades de manejo .
279 .20(b)
Mezclado de residuos peligrosos.
279 .21
.
279 .22(a)
Tipo de unidades de almacenamiento
Buenas condiciones sobre la superficie de tanques y
279 .22(b)
contenedores.
Rotulado o etiquetado de tanques y contenedores .
279 .22(c)
Réspuesta al descargo deaceites usados sobre la superficie
279.22(d)
de las unidades de almacenamiento.
Quemado fuera del sitio de los espacios de calentamiento .
279.23
Embarque fuera de sitio
279 .24
Requerimientos SPCC, incluyendo prevención y control de 40 CFR parte 112
derramientos.
Requerimientos UST, incluyendo acciones correctivas y
40 CFR parte 280
responsabilidad financiera.
Límite de acumulación .
No hay regulación.
Requerimientos de inspección .
No hay regulación.
Cierre.
No hay regulación.
Centros de recolección:
Centros de recolección de auto servicio .
279 .30
Centros de recolección de aceites usados .
279 .31
Puntos de agregación de aceite usado .
279.31
51
ESTANDARES PARA LA REGULACION DEL TRANSPORTADO
Y TRANSFERENCIA DE ACEITES USADOS EN LOS ESTADOS
UNIDOS
REGULACION
CORRESPONDIENTE
279.40(a) hasta (c)
Requerimientos generales
Transportadores que realizan otras actividades de manejo . 279.40(d)
Restricciones sobre el procesode aceite usado .
279.41
Notificación y Número de identificación de EPA .
279.42
279.43(a)
Producción de aceite usado .
279 .43(b)
Requerimientos DOT
279 .43(c)
Descargas de aceite usado.
279 .44(a), (b) y (c)
Conjetura y contrarrélica para aceite usado .
Excepciones por conjetura y contrarréplica para aceites 279 .44(c), (1) y (2)
CFC y de metales de trabajo.
Retención récord para conjetura y contrarréplica .
279 .44(d)
.
279 .44(d)
Guardado de registros
279.45(a)
Límite de almacenamiento.
279.45(b)
Tipo de unidades de almacenamiento.
Buenas condiciones alrededor de las superficies de tanques 279 .45(c)
y contenedores.
Contenedores para contaminantes secundario ya existentes 279 .45(d),(e) y(f)
y nuevas superficies de tanques.
279 .45(g)
Respuesta de salida .
Localización aceptable, deliberar, exportar y guarda 279 .46(a),(b) y (c)
registro.
279 .46(d)
Localización-exportación .
Manejo de residuos .
279.47
Requerimientos SPCC, incluyendo prevención y control de 40 CFR parte 112
derrames.
Requerimientos UST, incluyendo acciones correctivas y 40 CFR parte 280
responsabiliad financiera.
No hay regulación
Inspecciones.
No hay regulación
Cierre .
REQUERIMIENTOS
52
ESTANDARES PARA LA REGULACION DE PROCESADORES Y
REREFINADORES DE ACEITES USADOS EN LOS ESTADOS
UNIDOS.
REQUERIMIENTOS
Procesadores quienes ejecutan otras actividades de manejo .
Número de identificacion de la EPA y notificación .
Prevención y preparación .
Plan de contingencia y procedimientos de emergencia .
Conjetura y contrarréplica para aceite usado.
Expediciones para conjeturas y contrarréplica para CFC y
trabajo de metales.
Tipo de unidadesde manejo.
Superficie alrededor de los tanques y contenedores en buenas
condiciones.
Contenedores para contaminante secundario y existencia de
tanques con nuevas superficies.
Rotulado o etiquetado de tanques y contenedores .
Respuesta para liberación .
Para superficies alrededor de contenedores y tanques .
Plan de análisis.
Parámetros de indicadores .
Localización aceptable, deliberar, exportar y guarda-registro .
Record de operación .
Reporte bianual.
Embarque de salida.
Requerimientos SPCC, incluyendo prevención y control de
derrames.
Inspecciones.
•
REGULACION
CORRESPONDIENTE
279 .50(a)
279 .51
279 .52(a)
279.52(b)
279.53(a),(b) y (c)
279.53(c), (1) y (2)
279.54(a)
279.54(b)
279.54 (c),(d) y (e)
279.54(1)
279.54(g)
279.54(h)
279 .55
No hay regulación
279 .56
279 .57(a)
279 .57(b)
279 .58
279 .59
40 CFR parte 112
40 CFR parte 280
No hay regulación
53
ESTANDARES PARA LA REGULACION DE ESPECIFICACIONES DE 6
SALIDA DE ACEITE USADO EN QUEMADORES EN LOS ESTADOS
UNIDOS.
REQUERIMIENTOS
REGULACION
CORRESPONDIENTE
Quemadores quienes realizan otras actividades de manejo . 279 .60(a)
Restricciones de quemado.
279 .61
Número de identificación y notificación a la EPA .
679 .62
Conjetura y contrarréplica para aceite usado .
279 .63(a),(b) y (c)
Expediciones para conjeturas y contrarréplicas para aceites 279 .63(c),(1) y (2)
CFC y trabajo de metales.
Conjetura y contrarréplica para el record de retención
279 .63(d)
Tipo de unidades de almacenamiento
279 .64(a)
Condiciones de tanques y contenedores .
279 .64(b)
Contenedores y existencia de nuevas superficies de tanques 279 .64(c) y (e)
para contaminante secundario.
Rótulado o etiquetado de tanques y contenedores .
279 .64(1)
Respuesta para liberación .
279 .64(g)
Localización aceptable, deliberar, exportar y guarda
279 .65
registro.
Certificación .
279 .66
279 .67
Requerimientos SPCC, incluyendo prevención y control de 40 CFR parte112
derrames.
40 CFR parte 280
Inspecciones .
No hay regulación
Cierre.
No hay regulación
•
•
54
ESTANDARES PARA LA REGULACION DE ESPECIFICACIONES DE
LA COMERCIALIZACION DE ACEITES USADOS EN LOS ESTADOS
UNIDOS
REQUERIMIENTOS
Prohibiciones
Especificaciones de entrada de aceite usado y análisis.
Número de identificación y notificación a la EPA .
Localización del aceite fuera de especificación .
Localización del aceite dentro de especificación .
Record e mantenimiento.
Certificación.
REGULACION
CORRESPONDIENTE
279 .71
279 .72
279.73
279 .74(a)
279 .74(b)
279.74(c)
279.75
1.2.3. Canadá.
•
Canadá cuenta al igual que Estados Unidos con una Agencia encargada de la
protección del Medio Ambiente : La Agencia de Protección del Medio Ambiente
Canadiense (Canadian Enviromental Protección) . Esta agencia, llevó a cabo la
revisión (28 de junio de 1988) a la ley de 1985, dado que no contemplaba aceites de
desecho como una situación específica. Las regulaciones efectuadas contemplaron la
incineración de aceites de desecho, siendo estos : "un elemento, componente, o
aditivo en una concentración o cantidad que excediera las concentraciones o las
cantidades prescritas" (capítulos C-15 .3 parte II, No.46). De este modo el aceite puede
ser regulado cuando se usa para incineración, siendo la clasificación del estado legal
de los desechos de aceite contemplada en el programa I y II (secciones 13, 33 y 37;
del capítulo C-15 .3, de la ley) . En estas clasificaciones se tiene, por ejemplo en la
parte II, que los aceites usados que exhiban las caracteristicas que este programa
indica no podrán ser usados como combustible. De igual forma como se indica en la
parte I del programa, los combustibles que contengan substancias tóxicas que sean
peligrosas serán prohibidas para importación y exportación.
Actualmente, Canadá no ha presentado la elaboración sobre el reciclado de aceites
usados como producidos con excepción de los contenidos en la lista del programa II,
sin embargo estos no se consideran peligrosos.
55
1.2.4. Gran Bretaña.
En el caso de Gran Bretaña, este país aprobo la amplicación de la Ley de Protección al
Medio Ambiente en 1990 y derogó leyes anteriores que intentaban atender el control
de la contaminación (por 'ejemplo, la ley de Salud Pública de 1936, la ley de
Depósitos y Desechos Tóxicos de 1972 y la ley de Control de la Contaminación de
1974) . Esta ley reemplazo y contemplo el aspecto del reuso de los aceites usados que
las anteriores no lo tenían.
La ley de Protección Ambiental de 1990, indica que " . . . los poderes conferidos sobre
desechos se encuentran depositados en una autoridad .. . como aspectos de reciclado y
desechos y el uso de desechos para producir calor o electricidad podrán ser tratados
como acciones las cuales la autoridad puede ejercer . . ." De esta manera el reciclado de
material esta dentro del alcance de los municipios locales y estos gobernados por el
Departamento del Medio Ambiente a través de la Inspectoria de la Contaminación de
sus Majestades.
Es en este país donde surgen las facilidades para que las comunidades locales tengan
la opción de reglamentar en materia de reciclaje.
•
1.2 .5 . Alemania.
Dentro del alcance de la ley de aceites usados de Alemania, los aditivos no son
considerados comomateria externa . A su vez, las grasas lubricantes usadas no son
consideradas como aceites usados, puesto que estos elementos no son bombeados o
usados en sistemas externos . De acuerdo con la ley de aceites de desechos, los aceites
usados deben ser deliberadamente dispuestos en empresas especializadas las cuales
son sujeto de aceptar los aceites . Los costos de disposición son convertidos a una
fracción de los impuestos cargados a todos los lubricantes minerales. Las emulsiones
refrigerante/lubricante estan usualmente libres de cargos como aceites usados.
Alemania a intentado salvar los efectos adversos de los aceites usados sobre el medio
ambiente por lo que alienta el reuso.
1 .2.6 . Japón.
La ley de Disposición de Desechos y Limpieza Pública promulgada en 1970 y
enmendada en1971 (No .71), 1974 (No.47), 1976 (No. 68) y 1993(No . 43); indica
responsabilidad de la función, pública o privada, para disminuir la cantidad de
V
•
56
desechos por regeneración o reuso . Consecuentemente, esta sociedad activamente
alienta el reciclado yes disposición de aceites de desecho es probablemente mínima.
Las leyes que gobiernan el reuso o reciclado aparentemente no existen en esta país,
como lo ha demostrado una búsqueda exahustiva enla Universidad de Pittsburgh, así
como los bancos computarizados tales como Pittcat e Internet . Por otro lado el
Consulado Japones de Washington, D .C. indica que la ley 137 de 1979 es la mas
pertinente en la regulación de aceites de desecho en ese país.
1 .2.7. China.
En el caso de China, las investigaciones realizadas hasta el momento no indican la
existencia de alguna legislación . Sin embargo, en la obra de L . Ross, intitulada : Ley y
Política Ambiental enla República de China en el Interior de su Población, indica que
dichas las leyes no han sido promulgadas para el control y manejo de desechos
tóxicos . Consecuentemente, se puede asumir que no existen leyes que gobiernan el
uso o disposición de acietes usados.
1 .2 .8 . Comunidad Económica Europea : C.E.E.
En lo relacionado con, aceites usados, la Comunidad Económica Europea a creado
una serie de cuerpos para tal fin . A continuación se hace una descripción de las
siguientes Directivas de la Comunidad Económica Europea relativas a la gestión de
aceites usados.
* DIRECTIVA DEL CONSEJO del 15 de julio de 1975 relativa a la gestión l
de aceites usados (75/439/CEE).
*
DIRECTIVA DEL CONSEJO del 15 de julio de 1975 relativa a los
residuos (75/442/CEE).
* DIRECTIVA DEL CONSEJO del 15 de julio de 1875 relativo a los
residuos (75/442/CEE).
* DIRECTIVA DEL CONSEJO del 22 de diciembre de 1989 por lo que se
modifica la Directiva 75/442/CEE relativa a la gestión de aceites usados
(87/101/CEE).
•
57
* DIRECTIVA DEL CONSEJO del 20 de marzo de 1978 relativa a los
residuos tóxicos y peligrosos (78/319/CEE).
* DIRECTIVA DEL CONSEJO del 6 de abril de 1976 relativa a la gestión de
policrorobifenilos y policloroterfenilos (76/406/CEE).
* DIRECTIVA DEL CONSEJO del 12 de diciembre de 1991 relativa a los /
residuos peligrosos.
*
DIRECTIVA DEL CONSEJO del 23 de diciembre de 1991 sobre la
normalización y racionalización de los informes relativos a la aplicación de
determinadas directivas referentes al medio ambiente.
Las Directivas comunitarias en materia de gestión (manejo) de aceites usados tienen
como finalidad obligar a los Estados miembros de la CEE a tomar las medidas
necesarias para la que se prohiba:
•
a) todo vertido de aceites usados en las aguas superficiales interiores, en
agua subterráneas, en las aguas marítimas jurisdiccionales y en los
sistemas de evacuación,
fr'
b) todo depósito y/o vertido de aceites usados con efectos nocivos sobre el /
suelo, así como todo el vertido incontrolado de residuos derivados de
tratamiento de aceites usados.
c) todo tratamiento de aceites usados, que provoque una contaminación
atmósférica superior al nivel establecido por las disposiciones vigentes.
Por lo anterior, las Directivas de la CEE en materia de gestión (manejo) de aceites
usados están encaminadas a establece medidas para garantizar la recogida (colección)
eficiente y la gestión seguras de los aceites usados y para asegurar que, en la medida
de lo posible, su gestión se realice por medio de reciclaje (regeneración y/o
combustión con fines distintos a la destrucción .
58
1 .2.9 España.
La regulación de aceites usados en España se encuentra contenida en los siguientes
instrumentos juridicos:
* Orden de 28 de febrero de 1989 por la que se regula la gestión de aceite
usado.
*
Orden de 13 de junio de 1990 por la que se modifica el aparato
décimosexto, 2, y el Anexo II de la Orden de 28 de febrero de 1989 por lo
que se regula la gestión de aceites usados.
* Ley 20/1986, 14 de mayo, Básica de Residuos Tóxicos y Peligrosos.
* Reglamento para la ejecución de la Ley 20/1986, de 14 de mayo, Básica
de Residuos Tóxicos y Peligrosos.
La legislación española en materia de gestión de aceites usados tiene por objeto la
regulación de las situaciones específicas exigidas por las actividades de producción y
gestión de estos aceites . De conformidad con la Orden del 28 de febrero de 1989 por
la que regula la gestión de aceites usados, tendrá la consideración de residuos tóxicos
y peligrosos, de conformidad con lo dispuesto en el artículo de la Ley 20/1986, de 14
de mayo, Básica de Residuos Tóxicos y Peligrosos, los aceites usados cuyo poseedor
destine al abandono, siéndoles de aplicación lo dispuesto en la citada Ley en el
Reglamento para su ejecución.
Esta Ley (20/1986), define a los residuos tóxicos y peligrosos como los "materiales
sólidos, pastosos, líquidos, así como los gaseosos contenidos en recipientes, que
siendo el resultado de un proceso de producción, transformación, utilización o
consumo, su productor destine al abandono y contenga en su composición alguna de
las sustancias y materiales que figuran en la relación (ver tabla siguiente), posterior en
cantidad o concentraciones tales que representen un riesgo para la salud humana,
recursos naturales y medio ambiente.
La Ley 20/1986 incluye en su ámbito de aplicación a "los aceites usados, minerales o
sintéticos, incluida las mezclas agua-aceite y las emulsiones" . La existencia de dos
directivas comunitarias, 75/439/CEE de 16 de junio de 1975, modificada por la
directiva 87/101/CEE de 22 de diciembre de 1986, y las especialidades que
r
59
caracterizan tanto la producción (generación) como la gestión (manejo) de este tipo de
residuos exige la elaboración de una norma que regule las citadas actividades, dentro
del marco legal y reglamentario establecido.
La legislación española así como la de la comunidad europea clasifican a los aceites y
grasas lubricantes usados como residuos especiales que requieren de una normatividad
específica. Tanto la CEE como España pretenden controlar el vertido de los aceites y
grasas lubricantes usadas que generalmente se realizan a través de alcantarillas por
establecimientos dedicados a vehículos, así por instalaciones industriales y que
constituyen un problema grave para las plantas de tratamiento de aguas y residuales
urbanas, transmitiéndose a otros casos los aceites persistentemente a las aguas
superficiales y subterráneas.
Ñ
Relación de substancias o materias tóxicas y peligrosas que constituye el Anexo de la
Ley 20/1986, del 14 de mayo, Básica y Residuos Tóxicos y Peligrosos.
De acuerdo a la normatividad española queda prohibido:
a) todo vertido de aceites usados en las aguas superficiales interiores, en
aguas subterráneas, en cualquier zona de mar territorial y en los sistemas
de alcantarillado o evacuación de aguas residuales.
V
b) todo deposito o vertido de aceite usado con efectos nocivos sobre el suelo,
así como todo vertido incontrolado de residuas derivados del tratamiento
de aceite usado.
c) todo tratamiento de aceites usados, que provoque una contaminación 4
atmosférica superior al nivel establecido en la legislación sobre protección
del ambiente atmosférico.
Por lo anterior, la normátividad española en materia de gestión (manejo) de aceites
usados estáencaminada a establecer medidas para garantizar que toda persona física o
jurídica que posea aceite usado está obligado a destinar el mismo a una gestión
(manejo) correcta, evitando trasladar la contaminación a los diferentes medios
receptores.
7
60
1.2.10. OTROS CONVENIOS.
En relación con convenios internacionales multilaterales (de aplicación general),
como en los regionales o bilaterales suscritos por México, referentes a aceites usados,
no se encontró en la búsqueda desarrollada información que permitiese determinar
algún tratado, el único documento a que se hace referencia es a la Convención
Internacional Relacionada a la Intervención en Mares en casos de Contaminación
Casual de Aceite, firmado por México el siete de julio de 1976 . Sin embargo, en éste
no se hace referencia a aceites usados, sino al petróleo crudo que se transporta por
estas vías .
61
1.3. TECNOLOGIAS.
Un aceite lubricante, después de haber sido sometido a determinados procesos, puede
lograrse que sea tan útil y de tal calidad, que pueda compararse con un aceite
lubricante "virgen", esto debe desterrar la idea de que un aceite lubricante regenerado
o reciclado sea de una claridad inferior a un aceite no-regenerado o nuevo . Sobre todo,
no hay que perder de vista que se degrada el aditivo, más el lubricante base queda casi
intacto por lo que al recuperarse éste, y agregándosele posteriormente algún aditivo,
puede llegar a tener las mismas características que el aceite inicial.
En la actualidad existen varios procedimientos para lograr la purificación de los
aceites lubricantes usados, pero no todos ellos reúnen los requisitos indispensables
para producir un lubricante regenerado adecuado.
Dentro de todos estos procesos, cualquier operación que haga decrecer la cantidad de
contaminantes en el aceite es buena . Pero no hay que perder de vista que entre mayor
cantidad de operaciones e insumos se necesiten en el proceso, harán que se refleje en
el costo, y en el caso contrario, un proceso excesivamente simple y barato se reflejará
en la dudosa calidad del producto.
Los criterios para el manejo de aceites lubricantes usados (ver punto 1 .1 .3., definición
de aceite usado), varían dependiendo de cual es la fuente generadora de los parámetros
físicos de los aceites. A continuación se describen en forma breve algunos procesos
generales para el tratamiento de aceites residuales.
Procesos de regeneración.
Un aceite lubricante después de haberlo sometido a determinados procesos, puede
lograrse que sea tan útil y de calidad tal que pueda compararse con un aceite
lubricante virgen.
En un aceite lubricante lo que se degrada es el aditivo y el lubricante base queda casi
intacto por lo que al recuperarse este y agregándosele el aditivo, puede llegar a tener
las mismas características que el aceite inicial .
62
Para el reciclamiento de aceites se han ideado procesos los cuales purifican el aceite
lubricante : Algunos de estos procesos son tratados a continuación.
Proceso sedimentación.
Este proceso consiste en bombear el aceite a un tanque sedimentador, el cual tiene un
serpentín que conduce vapor, en este tanque se calientan el aceite para así acelerar el
proceso de sedimentación . Este tanque cuenta con dos purgas que se encuentran a
diferentes niveles, la primera se encuentra al fondo del tanque para la eliminación de
las impurezas sólidas sedimentadas, y la segunda está ubicada en la parte inferior del
tanque para desalojar el agua que acompaña al aceite sucio . Depués de un tiempo el
aceite es llevado a un calentador eléctrico donde se calienta a 70 0C y se pasa
inmediatamente a una centrifuga.
•
De las principales ventajas que se obtiene de este proceso se puede mencionar que el
costo incial es bajo, así mismo, lo es el costo de operaciones y por último el
mantenimiento es fácil.
Las principales desventajas en este proceso es que sólo se eliminan algunos sólidos
suspendidos y agua, además no se desechan completamente los diluyentes.
Proceso del filtración.
El aceite almacenado es succionado por medio de una bomba hacia los filtros prensa
para pasar al tanque de almacenamiento final, este proceso es simple filtración del
aceite y la calidad del producto es dudoso ya que el aceite usado posee lacas, gomas,
barnices y sólidos solubles como impurezas.
En este tipo de proceso, se puede decir que de las principales ventajas se puede
mencionar que el costo inicial es sumamente bajo, el costo de operación es nulo, el
mantenimiento es fácil y rápido.
•
63
De. sus principales desventajas se tiene que para asegurar una filtración efectiva se
tiene que repetir el proceso, otra es de que no elimina los aditivos y compuestos
nocivos, y es recomendable para aceites de corte y transformador.
Proceso Milwaukee.
Este proceso consiste en bombear el aceite a regenerar desde el lugar de
almacenamiento a un mezclador, se le agrega tierra activada o "fuller" en proporción
del 7% al 10% en peso del aceite usado, y sé agita para mezclar bien los materiales
anteriores.
•
En el proceso de mezclado se comienza a crear un vacio y a calentar la mezcla
mediante resistencias eléctricas, al crearse un vacio de 10 pulgadas de mercurio y
llegada a una temperatura de 1200C se inyecta agua en el fondo del tanque, en estas
condiciones el agua se convierte en vapor y origina que el punto de ebullición de
combustibles y ácidos contenidos en el aceite tratado disminuya y . se separen
facilmente terminada la destilación el aceite es pasado a través de un filtro para la
eliminación de la tierra activada obteniendo un aceite purificado.
Las principales ventajas de este proceso es que el costo inicial es moderado, debido a
la sencillez del proceso y debido al poco equipo utilizado, los costos de operación y
mantenimiento son mínimos.
Las desventajas de este proceso son:
a) No desdobla por completo las impurezas químicas existentes en el aceite.
b) No neutralizada el aceite final.
c) Es apto sólo par aceites de corte, transformador o de laminación.
•
64
Proceso Boungstone Miller,
El aceite usado se pasa a un tanque provisto de un serpentín en donde se calienta a
600 C, al aceite caliente es pasado a través de una centrifuga para separar la mayor
parte de los contaminantes insolubles, posteriormente el aceite se pasa al tanque de
acidulación, el cual está provisto de un agitador y en el cual se adiciona ácido
sulfúrico, se agita y se depositan impurezas solubles, después el aceite es llevado a un
recipiente que cuenta con un agitador, un ventilador en la parte superior y un banco de
resistencias eléctricas, el aceite entra por la parte superior y se mezcla con arcillas, la
temperatura se eleva a 400 0 C y se agita para la buena mezcla de reactivos en esta
parte los diluyentes ligeros se evaporan siendo lanzados a la atmósfera . Al término de
la operación la mezcla se bombea a filtros prensa donde se obtiene la arcilla con las
impurezas que absorbió y como producto se tiene aceite reciclado.
Sus ventajas de este proceso se puede decir que son : el costo inicial es moderado, y el
costo de operación y mantenimiento lo son también.
•
Las desventajas de este proceso son : descompone el aceite base debido al manejo de
altas temperaturas y no neutraliza el aceite regenerado.
7
Proceso Refinol.
Se llena un tanque mezclador con el aceite a tratar, cuando esto sucede se pone en
marcha el agitador y se comienza a elevar la temperatura del recipiente hasta 120 0C.
Se agrega un compuesto comercial : Retrol, y se agita, hecha la mezcla se lleva a un
alambique en donde se crea un vacío de 25 pulgadas de mercurio, llenado el recipiente
se aumenta el vacío y se calienta la mezcla hasta 218 0C, en este punto se realiza la
destilación de los diluyentes que se encuentran impurificando el aceite . Los diluyentes
salen en forma de vapor para ir a un cambiador de calor en donde se condensan,
mientras que el aceite pasa a un filtro para la remoción de los sólidos suspendidos y
tener como producto final el aceite regenerado.
Las ventajas de este proceso son :
•
.-
65
a)
b)
Costo inicial moderado.
Costo de operación y de mantenimiento moderados.
No se realiza previamente alguna sedimentación ocasionando que la filtración
a)
es ineficiente.
No se neutraliza el producto final.
b)
Proceso Texaco.
El aceite sucio pasa a una etapa de desmetalización, este aceite es tratado con una
solución de fosfato de diamonio y se le hace pasar por una serie de reactores, donde
la mezcla se agita y calienta gradualmente, las partículas metálicas en suspensión
forman fosfatos metálicos los diluyentes como agua gasolina y diesel así como
algunos solventes son evaporados y los aditivos de la formulación son destruidas por
las altas temperaturas, la corriente de aceite con sólidos en suspensión se envía a un
filtro donde se utilizan tierras diatomaceas como filtro ayuda se separan los sólidos /
para reducir el contenido de cenizas sulfatadas a una cantidad mínima . En la etapa de
hidrogenación el producto libre de metales entra en contacto con hidrógeno y se envia
a una cama de arcillas con el fin de remover gomas e impurezas que no fueron
filtradas anteriormente . Después el producto pasa a través de dos camas de catalizador
niquel-molibdeno, en donde el cloro, oxígeno, nitrógeno y azufre son separados en
forma de gases y se mejora el calor del producto, al final en una fraccionadora los
combustibles y el aceite se separan obteniéndose aceite ligero, pesado y combustible.
De las principales ventajas, la más importante es la de eliminación de todos los
contaminantes sólidos y líquidos, debido a que es un proceso altamente sofisticado
debido al gran número de etapas que se tienen en él y por lo consiguiente a los
equipos que se emplean, se tiene que el costo inicial es elevado, así mismo lo es el
costo de operación y el de mantenimiento, es además un proceso de alto riesgo debido
al manejo de hidrógeno y otros reactivos.
Purificación
aceites de laminación.
Los aceites generados en procesos industriales, generalmente están en contacto con
materiales ajenos al aceite, tales como agua y partículas sólidas como son escorias
metálicas y óxidos, al continuar gradualmente hasta un ' punto que el aceite está
fb
•
66
contaminado con esos materiales extraños y ya no puede ser utilizado y debe ser
desechado o, en su caso, regenerado.
El aceite lubricante utilizado en un proceso básicamente metalúrgico, es contaminado
con metales y con agua, en este proceso de purificación, el aceite contaminado es
inicialmente calentado a una temperatura de 60°C, esta temperatura es variable, ya que
depende del tipo de aceite, el objetivo es sólo de calentar para así lograr una
disminución de sodio, la cantidad es de 10% v/v de aceite sucio, la mezcla se agita
bien con el objeto de asegurar la dispersión de la mezcla alcalina y de que el aceite
sucio reaccione con la misma solución, después del mezclado, el aceite mezclado pasa
a un sedimentador en donde se sedimenta una fase pesada (acuosa) y una fase ligera
(aceite), el aceite es separado por la parte superior y pasa a través de una serie de
filtros, obteniéndose así aceite limpio listo para ser reutilizado, la fase acuosa es
pasada a través de filtros obteniéndose asi un . líquido parcialmente alcalino, el cual es
reutilizado en el proceso.
En la etapa de mezclado, en la reacción que lleva a cabo el metasilicato de sodio con
el aceite sucio, se desprende hidrógeno, el cual es mandado a la atmósfera mediante
un ventilador . En este proceso, también pueden ser utilizados otros reactivos alcalinos
como son: hidróxido de sodio, hidróxido de potasio, e hidróxido de calcio . Su uso
tiene la desventaja de que la producción de hidrógeno es mayor y la fase acuosa es
más difícil de filtrar.
Proceso Meinkan.
En este proceso las etapas para procesar el aceite usado a sido desarrollado para una
mejor utilización de energía y un buen producto . Se tiene también una reducción en el
consumo de ácido sulfúrico y en la cantidad de ácido de alquitrán acumulada por
medio de un mezclador . El aceite en la destilación al vacío es calentado
indirectamente para protegerlo de un sobrecalentamiento y que sucedan reacciones de
craqueo . Se adicionó un 2% de arcilla blanqueadora al refinado y al mismo tiempo se
destila, la arcilla es separada del alambique continuamente junto con el residuo del
destilado y separada por filtración.
•
67
Proceso IFP.
Este proceso desarrollado por el Instituto Francés del Petróleo (IFP), consiste en la
remoción de los contaminantes antes del refinamiento extrayendolos con propano
líquido . El resultado es una reducción significativa del ácido sulfúrico y de la arcilla
blanqueadora utilizada y decrementa la acumulación de alquitrán en el refinado. El
aceite es destilado para eliminar combustibles y agua, después el aceite pasa a una
columna donde se pone en contacto con propano líquido de 75°C a 95 0C, la suciedad
y substancias insolubles son separadas de la mezcla de propano aceite, el propano es
separado del aceite y el aceite está listo para ser refinado.
Proceso Shampregetti.
Este proceso es similar al IFP pero incluye una extracción con propano antes y
después de la destilación al vacío y adicionando una etapa de hidroterminado, así
transformando el proceso en un proceso de cuatro etapas . La producción es alta
comparandola con los procesos donde se usa ácido sulfúrico . Primeramente el agua y
los hidrocarburos ligeros son separados por destilación atmosférica, después se lleva a
cabo la primera extracción de propano en orden para precipitar suciedad, productos de
oxidación y una parte de los aditivos . El aceite despropanizado es destilado bajo vacío
en tres fracciones : aceite, combustible, aceite base y aceite combustible, después el
remanente se extrae con propano para remover los aditivos remanentes . Todas las
fracciones de aceite lubricante son sujetas a hidroterminado.
Proceso KTI,
Este proceso es desarrollado por Kinetics Techonolgy International . En este proceso
no se lleva a cabo tratamiento con ácido, así los aditivos y otras materias ajenas
pueden ser removidas por destilación o puede ser convertida a productos convenientes
por hidrogenación.
•
68
Proceso J3erc.
En este proceso se utiliza una mezcla consistente en 50% de 1-butanol, 25% propano
y 25% metiletilcetona . El aceite, después de ser destilado para eliminar agua e
hidrocarburos ligeros se diluye con tres voluménes de la mezcla y se centrifuga, el
solvente se separa por destilación y el aceite se sujeta a fraccionamiento en una
columna de destilación al vacío, el aceite se pasa a un hidroterminado o es tratado con
arcilla.
Proceso Recyclone.
En este nuevo proceso los productos de oxidación y aditivos son separados tratando
con sodio finamente disperso . Esto conduce a. la eliminación de sus productos o a la
conversión en sales de sodio pudiendo ser destilado el aceite ya que las impurezas
aumentan su punto de ebullición.
'Primeramente el aceite es alimentado libre de agua e hidrocarburos de bajo punto de
ebullición por destilación, después el aceite es tratado en un reactor con sodio
metálico ; después se añaden pequeñas cantidades de agua, y por último se destila para
obtener aceite. El residuo consiste de aceite lubricante y productos de reacción y
entonces es destilado en condiciones térmicas . en una columna donde el aceite forma
una película fina sobre unas hojas rotatorias arregladas en serie . Los destilados son
usados como aceite base sin otro tratamiento.
Estos son los procesos que se contemplan con mayor actividad dentro del ábmito
industrial de los aceites lubricantes. En el apendice A, se muestran los procesos y
diagramas que los identifica.
1 .4. ASPECTOS JURIDICOS.
El anteproyecto de norma oficial mexicana para el manejo de los aceites lubricantes
usados, en su parte juridica, se deriva de:
a) Ley General del Equilibrio Ecológico y la Protección al Ambiente 4---_
Capítulo V sobre materiales y residuos peligrosos . Particularmente é1
artículo 152 se refiere a las normas y procedimientos para el manejo d
residuos peligrosos que deberá establecer la S etaria (SEDUE ,ante
SEMactuai4ente) .
5 .00K
00'
•
69
b) Reglamento de la Ley General del Equilibricy=kcológico y la Protección al Y j–
Ambiente en materia de residuos pe b osos4 Capítulo I R sobre
disposiciones generales . Especificamente en el ártículo 4° inciso II se
establece que corresponde a lalls cretaria con la participación de otras a-itecretarias expedir las normas y procedimientos para el manejo de los
c) Norma Oficial Mexicana CRP-052-ECOL/1993, que establece las
características de los residuos peligrosos, el listado de los mismos y los
límites que hacen a un residuo peligroso por su toxicidad al ambiente . En
el Anexo 3, tabla 2 de clasificación de residuos por fuente no específica, se
incluyen a los aceites lubricantes usados gastados con el número
RPNE1 .1/03 del Instituto Nacional de Ecología.
d) Otros elementos normativos relacionados con el manejo de aceites
lubricantes usados son:
Itt
* Reglamento para el tran porte terrestre cl.g materiales y residuos
peligrosos . Secretaria de(omunicaciones y(ransportes.
•
* Norma oficial mexicana NOM-CRP-053-ECOL/93 que establece el
procedimiento para llevar a cabo la prueba de extracción para
determinar los constituyentes que hacen a un residuo peligroso por
su toxicidad.
* Norma oficial mexicana NOM-CRP-054-ECOL/93 que establece el
procedimiento para determinar la incompatibilidad entre dos o más
residuos considerados como peligrosos por la norma oficial
mexicana NOM-052-ECOL/93.
1.5. CONCLUSIONES.
Se puede concluir, que del análisis efectuado a las diferentes normatividades aquí
presentadas, se evita la disposición final . La tendencia que se sigue es la de dar a estos
compuestos un reuso o reciclado y un aprovechamiento de su poder calorifico como
última alternativa en caso de no poder efectuarse el reuso o reciclado . Esto da como
resultado, que estas legislaciones no hacen mención a valores relacionados con
cuerpos receptores, ya que la política a seguir es la de recuperación o reuso .
•
•
70
2. DIAGNOSTICO DE LAS FUENTES GENERADORAS DE
ACEITES LUBRICANTES USADOS.
2.1 . FUENTES GENERADORAS.
Algunas de las principales fuentes de aceites lubricantes usados, son:
•
•
La industria automotriz, talleres de servicio y mantenimiento de vehículos,
comercios de cambio de aceite a vehículos y de lavado y engrasado.
Las refinerias . Estas desechan fuertes cantidades dé aceites, Las cantidades
descargadas de productos contaminantes estan en función de la producción de
barriles.
Las aplicaciones principales de los aceites lubricantes y las dificultades que se
encuentran en sus servicios se reseñan a continuación.
•
Maquinas de vapor.
En este tipo de maquinaria es necesario efectuar la lubricación de los cilindros y
cojinetes con diferentes tipos de aceites . En general se emplean aceites minerales de
destilación directa, aunque con vapor es necesario utilizar aceites preparados con
mezcla de aceites grasos, a fin de mejorar el reparto del mismo sobre las susperficies
metálicas humedas, aumentar el emulsionamiento del agua condensada, minimizar el
escape de aceite de las paredes del cilindro etc ., para vapor humedo y presiones de
14Kg f/cm2 son adecuados los aceites de cilindros de viscosidad baja o media,
mezclados con un 5 a 10% de aceite de manteca de cerdo, para temperaturas elevadas
cercanas a los 3000C se utilizan lubricantes residuales de base parafinica con altos
valores de viscosidad . Se seleccionan con vistas a que sufran un mínimo de
desintegración térmica. y formación de carbón y posean una adecuada viscosidad y
capacidad de atomización a las condiciones de trabajo.
Turbinas de vapor.
En las turbinas de vapor el aceite normalmente se circula a presión, tiene que lubricar
los cojinetes del rotor, el mecanismo regulador de revoluciones y los engranajes de
•
í
•
71
reducción, al mismo tiempo que actúa sobre dicho mecanismo regulador. El aceite
debe también transmitir el calor de las partes en movimiento, propiedades que, con el
empleo de mayores temperaturas del vapor y velocidades del rotor crecientes, va
asumiendo mayor importancia. Los aceites para turbinas de vapor deben permanecer
en servicio durante varios años sin substitución, salvo ocasionales reposiciones y tener
una gran desemulsionabilidad frente al agua, con vistas a la posible contaminación
con la pérdida de vapor. Es por tanto necesaria la utilización de aceites especiales,
tratados con inhibidores de oxidación, minimizar la formación de barros y con
inhibidores de errumbre . Con objeto de asegurar el mayor rendimiento posible, el
aceite debe limpiarse por separación del agua y barros de los depósitos y filtración y
tratamiento sentrífugo . El aumento de barros conduce al incremento en el
emulsionamiento de agua.
El envejecimiento y la posible descomposición del aceite en la máquina se controla
por la determinación regular del número de neutralización y la viscosidad, debiéndose
cambiar el aceite cuando se aproximan ciertos límites recomendados.
Compresores y refrigeradores.
En la lubricación de compresores se emplea mucho aceite que en los motores de
combustión interna. Si existiese exceso de lubricante se fomarían depósitos sobre las
válvulas, en los enfriadores y en los receptores de aire para temperaturas de hasta
600C es recomendable aceite de buena calidad, si la temperatura es mucho mayor, se
emplea aceite pesado.
Los aceites pesados son convenientes donde existe la posibilidad de contaminación
con agua .
//
r
Los compresores destinados para hidrocarburos exigen el empleo de aceites viscosos
para que la variación de la viscosidad por efecto de disolución de gases sea mínima.
Motores de combustión interna.
Los motores de combustión interna comprenden tres tipos principales :
•
72
1° Motores a gasolina de encendio por chispa . Utilizados en instalaciones
estacionarias, automoviles y aviones y se refrigeran con aire o con líquido.
2° Motores diesel . Se emplean en la industria de transportes pesados de carga.
3° Turbopropulsados . Utilizados en aviación.
Lubricación ¢e engranajes
La transmisión por engranajes comprende una gran variedad de formas . Normalmente
la lubricación de los engranajes se hace por salpicadura o borboteo, aunque, en ciertos
casos donde la velocidad es elevada se dirige un chorro de aceite sobre los dientes o
bien se sumergen esos en un baño de aceite.
Corte de metales.
•
La mecanización de metales implica una serie de operaciones tales como torneado,
roscado exterior e interior, escariado, cepillado, rectificado, etc ., en este tipo de
actividad son empleados aceites solubles y no solubles.
Aceites para laminado,
En las operaciones de reducción de metales a láminas a tiras por acción de rodillos, es
necesario la lubricación al objeto de minimizar la fricción . De esta manera se
disminuye la carga necesaria para el laminado, se reduce el desprendimiento de calor
y se evita en gran parte el peligro de deterioro del metal y los rodillos.
Los aceites para laminado pueden estar constituidos por emulsiones de aceites
solubles que lubrican y refrigeran, o por aceites de destilación directa, de los-que hay
que separar normalmente, el agua de refrigeración. En ambos casos los aceites para
laminado deben dejar el mínimo de depósitos cuando las láminas se someten a
subsiguiente recocido a la temperatura del blanco .
•
r
73
Los aceites para laminado de destilación directa suelen ser aceites minerales de baja
viscosidad que, a veces se mezclan con aceites grasos . Si se desea obtener los mejores
resultados en el recocido de las hojas, el aceite mineral empleado debe ser del tipo
muy refinado y baja tendencia a la carbonización.
Lubricante para hileras.
La transformación de metales en alambres y tubos por estirado exigen él uso de
lubricante para reducir el desgaste . Estos lubricantes cubren una amplia gama, tales
como : emulsiones acuosas, jabones, aceites minerales ligeros, pesados, compuestos,
grasos y de presión extrema.
Aceite para tratamiento térmico.
Los aceites minerales encuentran frecuentemente aplicación en el endurecimiento por
temple del acero y sus aleaciones son calientes hasta 750 a 950 0C y se sumergen
rápidamente en un medio enfriador, donde el material se templa y se reviene.
Normalmente es utilizado aceites de baja viscosidad como medio enfriador.
Aceite para transmisión, térmicas
Los aceites lubricantes comprendidos entre los destilados de viscosidad media y los
aceites para cilindros, encuentran aplicación como medio de transferencia térmica por
circulación en sistemas calientes . Los principales requisitos a cumplir por estos
aceites, son :
•
•
Una elevada estabilidad térmica,
baja volatilidad.
Es también conveniente que el aceite posea una viscosidad tan baja como sea posible,
a fin de disminuir al mínimo las dificultades de bombeo al poner en marcha en frío.
•
74
Aceites textiles,
En las maquinarias de la industria textil se utilizan aceites minerales muy refinados de
baja viscosidad y alta estabilidad a la oxidación, esto en el uso de la maquinaria, el
resto de la maquinaria se utilizan grasas y aceites viscosos, los aceites inoxidables
libres de grasa son utilizados en las partes donde la maquinaria tiene contacto con el
hilo o tejido . Los aceites de engrase típicos autoemulsionables están compuestos de un
aceite mineral y de emulsionante. El aceite mineral varía en grado de refiamiento
desde el tipo normal con ligero tratamiento ácido y con tierras hasta el producto de
superior estabilidad a la luz obtenido por percolación o a través de tierras, intenso
tratamiento ácido o refino con disolventes.
Aceites blancos,
Estos productos se dividen en dos grupos : aceites blancos y aceites medicinales . La
primera clase se emplea mucho en la lubricación de maquinaria textil, en cosméticos y
en insecticidas, la segunda clase se emplea con fines farmaceúticos.
Los aceites empleados como base en los insecticidas varían mucho en grado de refino,
y generalmente se utilizan aceites muy refinados de los que se han eliminado los
constituyentes indeseables capaces de dañar los tejidos de las plantas en ciertas
condiciones . También pueden aparacer productos perjudiciales del empleo de aceites
de menor estabilidad frente a la oxidación.
Los aceites medicinales son incoloros y se exige que sean casi inodoros e insipidos.
Tales productos se han empleado en farmacia durante mucho tiempo.
2.2 DATOS DE RECOLECCION, TRANSPORTE, PROCESO Y
REDISTRIBUCION DE ACEITES USADOS.
Es un hecho, que la industria automotriz es la que define el rumbo de la economía
mundial . Más que ninguna otra, esta industria ya íntimamente ligada a la riqueza o
pobreza de un país, al desarrollo de la tecnología y a la eficiencia de las
•
75
.
Actualmente
no
es
posible
concebir
una
economía
que
comunicaciones domésticas
no base su desarrollo en buena parte en el uso de vehículos automotores.
La demanda de lubricantes automotrices es consecuencia directa del uso y adquisición
de medios de transporte, por lo que es importante delinear un panorama general de
esta industria.
México.
Ciertamente, el sector automotriz nacional ha sido sujeto de variados y muy diversos
estudios, que nos permiten conocer tanto sus inicios como su desarrollo y crecimiento.
La importancia de este sector es evidente al constatar que de las 20 empresas más
grandes del mundo, seis se dedican a la fabricación de automóviles . A nivel nacional,
cuatro de las 10 empresas más importantes son del sector automotriz.
La producción de la industria terminal de México es la número 12 del mundo . En
1991 se registró la cifra de venta más alta en la historia de esta industria, al
comercializarse 642,981 unidades (incluyendo importados), obteniéndose un
incremento del 16 .8% contra el total de 1990 ; esta venta se vio motivada en buena
parte por los planes de financiamiento que se ofrecen actualmente, los cuales
resultaron muy atractivos por las tasas de interés bajas.
Se hizo un breve análisis de la industria automotriz para entender . la relación que
existe entre ésta yla de los lubricantes automotrices, pues ésta depende de aquella al
ser un producto de consumo para el usuario final de los vehículos automotores, sea
persona física o moral . Cualquier variación en la industria automotriz afecta a la de
lubricantes y aceites automotrices . Sin embargo, esta dependencia es indirecta, pues
la demanda de lubricantes siempre existe aún cuando no se vendan modelos nuevos,
ya que el parque automotriz preexistente necesita lubricación.
Cuando la industria automotriz obtiene ventas altas, el efecto sobre los lubricantes es
la demanda de producción de aceites de calidad que satisfagan las necesidades de los
autos nuevos ; y cuando se reducen las ventas de aquella, de todas maneras la industria
de los lubricantes .tiene que atender la demanda de los autos existentes, que por ser
modelos en operación consumen más aceite . Por lo tanto, la industria de los
lubricantes más bien depende directamente del número total de automóviles en
circulación, y de la composición de este total .
•
76
La fuerza básica de este sector y punto de partida para cualquier estrategia es la
comercialización. Consiste principalmente en pequeños talleres y comercios donde se
llevan a cabo cambios de aceite . Es muy importante para las empresas de esta
industria tomar en cuenta que su cliente principal es el encargado o dueño del taller,
pues un particular que llega a efectuarle tal servicio a su coche elige la marca
disponible en el taller ( en el caso de que esta sea distribuidor exclusivo), o bien,
muchas veces sigue el consejo del encargado (en el caso de un taller que vende de
todas las marcas) . Aquel que se dedique a la comercialización de algún lubricante
automotriz tiene que poner toda su atención en estar presente en el mayor número de
locales posibles . De tal forma que en el caso de un aceite usado, la recuperación de
este tendrá por principio la misma dedicación que la del comercializador de aceite
nuevo.
En cuanto a la división del consumo de lubricantes en general, por función, se tendrá:
Consumo de lubricantes marino :
Consumo de lubricantes industriales :
Consumo de lubricantes de4 venta al detalle :
2.00%
26.00%
72 .00%
Esto implica que de este 100% al menos el 96% es lubricante usado . Ahora bien, el
consumo de estos por compañía, son :
MARCA
PEMEX
MOBIL
QUAKER STATE
TEXACO
ESSO
ELF
VALVOLINE
VEEDOL
ROSH FRANS
SHELLO
OTROS
IMPORTADOS
PORCIENTO
42
12
10
7
6
5
2
1 .5
8
8 .7
8 .7
d
•
Consumo de Lubricantes
en General
PORCENTAJE
80
60
40
20
0
MARINO
INDUSTRIAL
Consumo
DE VENTA AL DETALLE
•
Consumo de Lubricantes
por Compañia
PORCENTAJE
50
40
30
20
10
Op~
~~ ~
p~.
,e
,z.
J
MARCA
~
~~Q`
~t~
‘t-
~
co
O
•
Generación de Aceites
Volumen (MM litros/año)
250
200
150,
100
50
o
•
Generación de Aceites Usados
por el Parque Vehicular Mexicano
Tipo
1, 000
2,000
3,000
AUTOMOVILES
CAMIONES
MOTOCICLETAS
LANCHAS
TRACTORES
CONSTRUCCION
unidades (miles)
4,000
5,000
6,000 .
•
Generación de Aceites Usados
por el Parque Vehicular Mexicano
Tipo
50,000
100,000
AUTOMOVILES
CAMIONES
MOTOCICLETAS
LANCHAS
TRACTORES
CONSTRUCCION
Aceites usados
Miles de Litros
150,000
200,000
Usos más Comunes de lubricantes Industriales
porcentaje
0
10
20
40
35 .3
Hidráulicos
22 .5
;8 .57
Lub . general
Para engranes
Para compresores
Grasas
Para rieles y vías
Para transformadores
Para chumaceras
Otros
30
3
porcentaje
50
•
•
Usos más Comunes
de lubricantes Industriales
por Compañía
MARCA
o
10
20
PEMEX
MOBIL
QUAKER STATE
TEXACO
ESSO
VEEDOL
OTROS
porcentaje
30
40
50
60
GENERACION DE ACEITES USADOS
por Industria
ACTIVIDAD
0
5
10
Fabricación de metal
Equipo de transporte
Manufactura de metal
Manuf. de Maquinaria
Vidrio y Cerámica
Maquinaria eléctrica
Otras
porcentaje
15
20
25
30
87
En cuanto a la generación de aceites usados por tipo de industria especializada, se
tiene:
ACTIVIDAD
PARA ALTAS TEMPERATURAS
PREVENCION DE LA CORROSION
RODAMIENTOS
ACEITES DE CORTE
PORCIENTO
2
8
15
75
Asi mismo se presentan tablas caracteristicas de la composición de los aceites usados
en México, asi como su propia variación . Además se contempla la integración de los
probables usos que este tipo de aceite tiene en nuestro país.
Tambien se da una infomación pertinente en base a la consulta en los bancos de
información de la Cámara Nacional de la Industria de la Transforación:
CANACINTRA, en relación con las industrias que se encuentran autorizadas para el
manejo de este tipo de residuos.
Estados Unidos.
En el caso de los Estados Unidos la generación de aceites usados se encuentra al igual
que en el estudio de México, dividida en dos categorias : aceites Automotrices e
industriales, en donde se ha concluido que la producción de estos desechos es del
orden de los 2,312 millones de galones por ano . Este estudio fue costeado por la
EPA, teniendo como conclusión que la mayoría de los aceites usados son generados
por vehículos personales 239'000,000 millones de galones ; aceites hidráulicos
200'000,000. millones de galones y vehículos comerciales 105'000,000 millones de
galones .
N
COMPOSICION DE LOS ACEITES USADOS
CARACTERISTICA
VALOR
Peso específico, API, 15 .6°C
24
Viscosidad, Centistokes a 37 .8°C
99
Punto de fusión, (°C)
-37
Punto de inflamación, (°C)
146
Poder calorífico, Kj/Kg (BTU/Ib)
38,230 (16,436)
Sedimentos yagua, % en peso
11
Azufre, % en peso
43
Cenizas, % en peso
2
Plomo, ppm .
3400
Zinc, ppm .
1650
Fósforo, ppm .
1250
Fierro, ppm .
1025
Bario, ppm .
1025
Calcio, ppm .
1005
Magnesio, ppm .
559
Cobre, ppm .
177
Estaño, ppm .
58
Cromo, ppm .
29
Plata, ppm .
1
VARIACION EN LA COMPOSICION DE LOS ACEITES USADOS
~ti
CARACTERISTICA
Viscosidad, Centistokes a 40°C
36-135
Combustible % (vaporizable por debajo de 315
2-15
Agua % en peso
0-15
Nitrógeno, % en peso
0 .03-0 .54
Azufre, % en peso
0 .13-1 .00
Cloro % en peso
0 .03-0.25
PCB's, ppm .
<5-50
Plomo,ppm .
1-11
Calcio . ppm .
600-3720
Zinc, ppm .
200-1500
Bario, ppm .
2-1630
Magnesio ppm
3-500
Hierro, ppm .
10-600
Fósforo, ppm .
600-1410
Cobre, ppm .
•
VALOR
1-120
Ahora bien, la generación de aceites usados al detalle es:
TIPO DE GENERADOR
MOTORES A GASOLINA
MOTORES A DIESEL
MOTORES FUERA DE BORDA
TRACTORES
MOTOCICLETAS
VOLUMEN EN
MILLONES DE
LITROS AL AÑO
215
101
3 .6
2 .7
2 .1
En cuanto al parque automotor mexicano, la existencia de vehículos actualizada a
diciembre en 1990, y la correspondiente generación de aceites usados, son las
siguientes:
TIPO
AUTOMOVILES
DE PASAJEROS
CAMIONES
MOTOCICLETAS
LANCHAS
TRACTORES
CONSTRUCCION
UNIDADES
(MILES)
GENERACION DE
ACEITES USADOS
(MILES DE LITROS)
5,000
160,000
1,300
233
48
60
100
82,280
2,100
3,570
2,700
18,600
Si se cuenta que la gente le hace el cambio de aceite a su automovil aproximadamente
ocho veces al año, se tendrá una generación estimada en 160'000,000 de litros . Ahora
en cuanto a la generación de los camiones, se sabe que su capacidad de aceite es de
ocho litros, por lo tanto actualmente hay diariamente en circulación 10'400,000 litros.
A los camiones se les cambia el aceite en promedio ocho veces también, por lo que la
generación anual de aceite usado será para este tipo de vehículo de 82'280,000 litros.
La situación que se vive en el país es de conversión hacia la modernización, causa por
la cual la industria nacional se encuentra inmersa en el proceso de mejorar sus
procedimientos y su productividad, así como de reconvertir la infraestructura existente
para poder ser más competitivos . Con la integración al mercado norteamericano y
canadiense, las empresas trabajan rápidamente para poder alcanzar los niveles de
calidad internacionales . También la confianza en el futuro industrial del país se hace
patente en el flujo de capitales, tanto nacionales como extranjeros, hacia proyectos de
inversión (nuevas plantas y parques industriales y joint ventures. Las facilidades
existentes en materia de comercio exterior hacen más fácil la importación de
tecnología y la exportación de productos con calidad .
•
/
USOS DEL ACEITE USADO EN MEXICO
•
TIPO DE INDUSTRIA
•
APLICACION
Ladrillera
Combustible
Cementeras
Combustible
Baños públicos
Combustible
Panaderías
Combustible
Minas
Compactación de terrenos
Fundidoras
Templado
Construcción
Cimbras, moldes
Industria química
Impermeabilizantes, mastiques y
grasas
Porcicultura
Insecticida
83
Esta dinámica genera como punto principal la lubricación industrial para mantener la
competitividad . Dentro de ello, los usos más comunes de lubricantes industriales se
cuenta con la siguiente clasificación por función:
Hidráulicos
Lubricación general
Para engranes
Para compresores
Grasas
Para rieles y vfas
Para transformadores
Para chumaceras
Otros
35 .80%
22 .50%
18 .57%
10 .23%
6 .14%
4 .09%
3 .03%
2 .05%
0.30%
Ahora bien en cuanto a la participación en el mercado por compañía, se tiene:
MARCA
PEMEX
MOBIL
QUAKER STATE
TEXACO
ESSO
VEEDOL
OTROS
PORCIENTO
50
16
10
9
4
1
11
La generación de aceites usados por la industria es como se presenta:
ACTIVIDAD
FABRICACION DE METALES
EQUIPO DE TRANSPORTE
MANUFACTURA DE METALES
MANUFACTURA DE MAQUINARIA
VIDRIO Y CERAMICA
MAQUINARIA ELECTRICA
OTRAS
•
PORCIENTO
26
25
24
10
5
4
6
EMPRESAS AUTORIZADAS PARA MANEJAR RESIDUOS PELIGROSOS
CONFORME AL REGLAMENTO DE LA LEY GENERAL DEL EQUILIBRIO
ECOLOGICO Y LA PROTECCIÓN AL AMBIENTE EN MATERIA DE
RESIDUOS PELIGROSOS.
A .- PARA RECICLAJE DE SOLVENTES SUCIOS:
No . DE AUTORIZACION Y ACTIVIDAD
EMPRESA
Chemical Waste Management
Lic . No. 4453 . Oficio No . 411-4132 del 21 de junio de 89,
Reciclado de solventes.
Química Fortek
Reciclaje de solventes orgánicos y organoclorados.
Química Omega, S .A. de C.V .
No . 9-11-PS-11 . Instalación de tanques para
almacenamiento de solventes.
Lic . No. 4561, reciclaje de solventes No . 15-90-PS-V-0693 . Transporte y tratamiento de residuos para elaborar
combustible alterno.
Química Wimer
No . 15-25-PS-V-08-93 . Reciclado de residuos industriales
y solventes.
Reciclados California
Lic . .7620, Recolección, transporte y reciclado de
solventes.
Recuperación industrial de desechos
Lic . No. 4601 Reciclaje de solventes usados.
Reid Química, S .A . de C.V.
Lic . No. 4775, Reciclado de solventes.
Solventes San Martin
No . 21-15-PS-11-02-93 . Reciclaje de solventes usados .
B.- ACEITES LUBRICANTES USADOS:
EMPRESA
No. DE AUTORIZACION Y ACTIVIDAD
Juan R . Santos Nieto
No. 15-60-PS-01-93, Recolección y reuso aceites
lubricantes usados.
Novaceites, S .A. de C .V .
Oficio No . A00 DGNA 33393 del 16/04/93 . Manejo de
aceites lubricantes usados.
Ecología y Lubricantes, S .A. de C .V .
Reciclado de aceite lubricante usado . No . 15-13-PS-V-0393 . Incluye recolección, transporte y almacenamiento.
C.- ALMACENAMIENTO . TEMPORAL:
•
EMPRESA
Chemical Waste Managment
Lic . No . 4531 de TEESA. Transferencia de residuos y
compactación de tambores vacíos.
Olimpia Industrial
No . 0001 DGPCCA . Recclección y almacenamiento temporal de
Química Omega, S .A . de C.V .
No. 14-120-PS-II-01-93 . Recolección, transporte y
almacenamiento temporal .
D.- CONFINAMIENTOS CONTROLADOS:
EMPRESA
Ciba-Geigy Mexicana
No . 14-30-PS-02-93 . Confinamiento controlado
de cenizas de su incinerador.
Confinamiento fraccionamiento, las Viboras
Confinamiento Controlado.
Confinamiento técnico de residuos industriales,
S.A. de C.V.
No . 24-17-PS-VII-01-9 . Confinamiento
controlado.
Finsa Matamoros .
Rellenos Industriales de Residuos no Peligrosos.
Residuos Industriales Multiquim . S.A. de C.V.
Lic. No. 3119 Of. 411-2964 . Recolección,
transporte, reciclo, elaboración de combustibles
alternos y confinamiento controlado.
E.- INCINERACION:
EMPRESA
Bayer de México
Lic . No . 2678 Of. 410-999, Incineración de
Residuos Peligrosos.
Ciba-Geigy de México, S .A. de C.V.
Bo. 14-30-PG-VII-02-93 . Recolección,
transporte, almacenamiento temporal e
incineración.
. F.- RECICLAJE DE METALES:
ACTIVIDAD
EMPRESA
Aluminio y Zinc industrial
Reciclaje de chatarra de aluminio
Maquiladora Russment
Reciclaje de chatarra de aluminio
Zinc Nacional, S .A .
Reciclaje de polvillos de zinc
G .- EQUIPOS MOVILES PARA TRATAMIENTO DE RESIDUOS PELIGROSOS EN
EL LUGAR DE ORIGEN:
EMPRESA
Grupo Ecológico MUSA, S .A. de
C.V.
\_T-15),
G
E
KU,lo 1
va
-1-
tA%~CCt
w
%')\ .T
f'CD14-t
I
C, A
s6k.4uAfi,lo, ~ ~ wl
•
Lic . 4773 . Recuperación, procesamiento y limpieza de
residuos y subproductos del petróleo .
~
k .0-rT: ~ p.,-a .
'ü
k
ó PPP\
4;
T
N
94
IMPACTO AL MEDIO AMBIENTE.
La incorporación de los aceites a los cuerpos receptores se presentan en diferentes
formas, como son : películas en grandes . partículas, micropartículas absorbidas sobre
materia orgánica, Disuelto en el agua y emulsionado . Cada una de estas formas
ocasiona diferentes tipos de efectos entre los que se pueden mencionar los siguientes:
A Efectos fisicos y químicos. Los principales efectos fisicos y químicos que
provocan los aceites son los de interferir con la transferencia de oxígeno
entre las fases agua y aire, al formarse películas de estos materiales sobre
la superficie del agua, se impide la transferencia de oxígeno provocando
desoxigenación del agua, causando efectos de calentamiento en el agua
cuando existen capas gruesas de aceite que son expuestas a la radiación
solar, provocando mortalidad de los organismos acuáticos existentes.
Los aceites absorben compuestos tóxicos como ; plaguicidas, metales
pesados presentes en las descargas, causando incrementos en la
concentración de dichos contaminantes, en la zona donde están presentes
estos materiales y en consecuencia efectos sobre los microorganismos del
agua y usos del agua.
B. Efectos sobre la forma de vida acuática . Hay dos tipos de efectos que se
presentan sobre la vida acuática que son letales y subletales . Los efectos
letales ocurren cuando los aceites interfieren con los procesos celulares y
subcelulares de los organismos, causando la muerte . Estos materiales
pueden provocar sofocación o interferencia en su movimiento para obtener
comida o escapar de sus depredadores, reduciendo el número de especies.
Los efectos subletales ocasionan disturbios psicológicos o cambio en su
comportamiento, sin causarle inmediatamente la muerte, los aceites
interfieren con las actividades reproductivas de crecimiento, de
alimentación de las especies . Estos efectos no solamente conducen a
cambios en la población de especies, sino también en su composición y
diversidad .
95
C. Efectos sobre la salud humana . Algunos aceites puede ser
carcinogénicos para los humanos especialmente los de carácter vulnerable.
Los aceites son bioacumulativos, dicha acumulación se presenta por dos
vías principales : la primera al ingerir agua con estos compuestos y la
segunda al ingerir alimentos contaminados con estos.
D. Efectos en los usos del agua . El contenido de aceites en el agua, reduce
su utilización, principalmente como fuente de abastecimiento de agua
potable.
En la industria ocasionan problemas a los procesos productivos y en la
agricultura al desarrollo de las plantas y la producción de los cultivos.
E. Efectos en los sistemas de tratamiento . Muchos problemas son causados
por los aceites en los sistemas de tratamiento de agua, además de que muy
pocas plantas disponen de equipo para su remoción .
96
3.
DEFINICION DE CRITERIOS.
Los criterios para el manejo de aceites usados varían dependiendo de cual es la fuente
generadora y de los parámetros fisicos de los aceites. Dentro de estos criterios se
encuentran:
3.1,1 . Transporte.
El transporte de los aceites usados generados es regulado una vez que han sido
depositados en los centros de recolección, o en los puntos de acopio, o en sitios de
refinación, procesamiento o quemado, sin embargo, no aplica para generadores que
transportan sus aceites usados en los vehículos de su propiedad en cantidades menores
a 200 litros.
Las instalaciones de transferencia incluyen actividades de carga, áreas de
estacionamiento, áreas de almacenamiento y otras zonas relacionadas con el embarque
de los aceites usados que permanecen por más de 24 horas y no más de 35 días.
En el caso de los transportistas, estos deberán contar con un número de identificación
proporcionado por la EPA. Asimismo, los transportistas deberán tener un registro de
al menos tres anos de sus embarques para el transporte o entrega a otro transportista,
instalación de tratamiento o envió a confinamiento u otro país . El transportista deberá
tener los registros resguardados junto con el método y los resultados de la refutación
por al menos tres años.
Los transportistas de los aceites usados podrán acumular 'o consolidar cargas de
aceites usados con propósitos de transportación, pero no los podrán a menos que
cumplan con los requisitos establecidos por los procesadores . Los incidentes en las
operaciones que puedan ocurrir durante la transportación no constituyen una
violación.
Si se produjera un derrame de aceites usados durante su transportación, el transportista
deberá tomar acciones inmediatas, con el objeto de proteger la salud y el medio
ambiente, tales como notificar a las autoridades locales y contener el derrame en el
área afectada. Si el gobierno federal, estatal o municipal o la Secretaría respectiva,
determina que el derrame de aceite usado deberá ser removido de inmediato, las
97
autoridades deben autorizar la remoción de aceites usados por transportistas que no
cuenten con el número de identificación otorgado . Si ocurre la fuga de aceites usados
durante su transportación por aire, vías férreas, carreteras o agua ésta deberá ser
reportada de inmediato a las autoridades correspondientes y deberá proceder a limpiar
la zona afectada.
7
3.1.2.Recolección.
Un centro de recolección de aceites usados es cualquier sitio que acepta, acumula o
almacena aceites usados que son recolectados de los generadores o de los DIY . Los
centros de recolección deben de contar con licencia de la autoridad . competente, para
el manejo de los aceites usados . Si se habla de centros o puntos de acopio para aceites
usados, estos tienen esencialmente la misma función, exepto que sólo pueden aceptar
aceites usados de los propios generadoes o de los DIY y no requieren licencia o
permiso.
3.1.3. Requisitos de almacenamiento,
Los aceites usados deben ser almacenados en tanques, contenedores, colectores, o
cualquier otro dispositivo de recolección equipados con vertederos . Los dispositivos
de almacenamiento deben ser estacionarios y deben ser construidos con materiales
tales como : madera, concreto, acero o plástico . Deben estar en buenas condiciones y
no tener fugas . La Agencia de Protección del Medió Ambiente (Enviroment
Protection Agency : EPA), de los Estados Unidos, concluye que estos materiales son
adecuados basándose en el tamaño de unidades típicas y las características del sitio.
En base a situaciones de' danos al ambiente por almacenamiento de los aceites usados
en otro tipo de unidades, prohibe su almacenamiento en lagunas, fozas o embalses
superficiales . Estas unidades o sitios de disposición no proporcionan una adecuada
protección a la salud y el medio ambiente debido a los danos y derrames potenciales
de este tipo de materiales.
Las unidades de almacenamiento y las tuberías utilizadas para transferir el aceite
usado a los tanques de almacenamiento enterrados deberán ser etiquetados con el
rubro de "aceites usados" (los tanques de almacenamiento cuentan por lo regular una
•
//
•
98
10% de superficie adicional) . Los derrames de los contenedores deberán ser limpiados
reparar la fuga o cambiar las unidades de almacenamiento que se encuentren dañadas.
Las instalaciones de transferencia deberán almacenar los aceites usados únicamente en
tanques, contenedores o unidades que cumplan con las especificaciones y deberán
tener un sistema secundario de contención . Este sistema de contención deberá
consistir de diques, trincheras, o muros de retención y suelo impermeabilizado u otro
sistema que asegure su retención al 100% . La Agencia de Protección al Medio
Ambiente, recomienda un suelo asfáltico de tres pulgadas de espesor con una
aplicación periódica anual de impermeabilizante pare prevenir cualquier tipo de
infiltración . este sistema de contención es requerido para contenedores, tanques de
almacenamiento superficies existentes y de nueva instalación . Si la estación de
transferencia cuenta con tanques de doble pared o tuberías de contención no requiere
de la instalación de un sistema secundario de contención.
Si la estación de transferencia almacena los aceites usados por más de 35 días se
encuentran también sujetos a los requisitos de almacenamiento para procesadores y/o
refinadores . La EPA establece que el almacenamiento de aceites usados de su
tratamiento deberá ser menor a los 35 días.
3.1.4. Quemado
En el caso de quemado de los aceites usados se podrá realizar en un calentador
siempre y cuando el calentador queme únicamente aceites usados provenientes de sus
instalaciones o bien de otras instalaciones que generen aceites usados con
características similares.
El calentador debe estar diseñado para tener una máxima capacidad no mayor a 0 .5
millones de BTU/h (52,750KJ/h) y los gases de combustión deben ser remetidos al
ambiente.
3.1.5. Embarque.
En la mayoría de los datos recabados para este rublo, se ha visto que no necesitan
transportar los aceites usados en un transporte identificado con el número de
~//
99
identificación asignado por la EPA, previendo que éstos transportan sus aceites
usados en su coche y a un centro de recolección autorizado y no llevan más de
2081itros por viaje (55 galones) . Asi mismo, los generadores que tengan un acuerdo de
cuota pueden transportar sus aceites usados en cualquier vehículo . Todos los demás
transportistas deben tener un número de identificación de la EPA.
La EPA asume que es necesario permitir que los generadores de aceites usados
transporten pequeñas cantidades a los centros de recolección o puntos de acopio para
su reciclaje, con el fin de alentar a los pequeños y medianos generadores que tienen
varios puntos de generación, pero que generan pequeñas cantidades de aceites usados
en uno o varios sitios a reciclar sus aceites usados . Bajo este sistema, los generadores
de aceites usados que generan pequeñas cantidades de éstos en cualquier mes
calendario serán desalentados a almacenarlos por largos periodos de tiempo o
disponerlos inadecuadamente . La EPA asume que los riesgos de derrames en el
transporte de pequeñas cantidades de aceites usados es insignificante.
•
Los transportistas podrán entregar únicamente su carga a otro transportista, a un
reprocesador o refinador, o a una instalación para la quema de aceites que se
encuentra fuera o dentro de especificaciones siempre y cuando éstos cuenten con el
número de identificación proporcionado por la EPA.
Los aceites usados que cumplan con las características de líquidos combustibles (con
un punto de ignición por debajo de los 93 .3°C pero igual o mayor a 38°C o líquidos
inflamables con un punto de ignición menor a 38°C) se encuentran sujetos al
Reglamento de Transporte de Materiales Peligrosos.
Los camiones utilizados para el transporte de materiales peligrosos deberán ser
completamente descargados, de conformidad con las regulaciones de los residuos
peligrosos antes de transportar aceites usados con el fin de prevenir que éstos se
mezclen con los residuos peligrosos .
100
POLICLORADOS BIFENILOS (POLYCHLORINATED BIPHENYLS PCB'S) ~
O ASKARELES ,
En 1966 se encontró por todo el mundo que los policlorados bifenilos son un
contaminante ambiental . Se encontraron muestras de agua, sedimentos, tejidos de
aves y tejidos de peces . La síntesis de PCB's involucra la clorinación del bifenilo.
f4CctC,Gcu``~
Con esta síntesis se han podido obtener 210 compuestos . Hasta que su manufactura
fue descontinuada, en 1977 (E.U .A .), los PCB's se usaron como agente de
refrigeración o fluido aislante en transformadores y capacitores, como plastificantes,
para la impregnación de algodón y asbestos, y en algunas pinturas epóxicas . Su baja
presión de vapor, su alta constante dieléctrica, actividad química, y estrema
estabilidad térmica son las propiedades que hicieron que los PCB's fueran útiles en
muchas aplicaciones . Desafortunadamente, estas mismas propiedades contribuyeron a
su extrema estabilidad en el ambiente.
Los depósitos de PCB's que se generan por su uso en el equipo eléctrico y otras
fuentes de desechos contaminados con PCB's son un problema ambiental
especialmente si el método o procedimiento aplicado para su eliminación no es el
adecuado, ya que una mala aplicación de éstos, hace que los PCB's sobrevivan (en
caso de incineración) pudiendo escapar completamente como . vapores y/o gases de
chimenea; o bien, en caso de almacenamiento de equipo contaminado se encuentre en
contenedores dañados o con fugas, provocando problemas ambientales.
Los policlorados bifenilos o PCB's son fluidos usados para actuar como material
refrigerante en el equipo eléctrico (debido a suestabilidad a altas temperaturas),
conocidos en el medio como : Askareles, aunque este término corresponde a una marca
comercial . Dentro de las características fisicas más relevantes se encuentran las
siguientes:
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
•
Son líquidos más o menos viscosos, de características casi recinosas debido a
las elevadas cantidades de cloro en su composición.
Son incoloros o amarillentos.
De olor a cloro fétido (provocado por el alto contenido de cloro).
Su densidad es mayor a la del agua.
De textura Gelatinosa.
Características particulares.
Buenos aisladores.
Deficilmente inflamables.
Estabilidad térmica grande cuanto mayor cantidad de cloro contengan.
'
101
Los Bifenilos policlorados denominados PCB's en los Estados Unidos de
Norteamérica y otros países, son líquidos fabricados por el hombre, altamente
estables, buenos aisladores, no corrosivos y relativamente no inflamables, sus
características de estabilidad térmica, determinaron que se extendiera su uso en la
industria eléctrica, como aislantes en los transformadores y los condensadores.
Las investigaciones realizadas respecto a este producto, mostraron que su
biodegradabilidad es difícil y por tal razón, es posible que se acumule en los
alimentos.
Además de los usos eléctricos que tienen los PCB's se usan como:
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Aceites para cortes.
Adhesivos
Cuerdas para barcos.
Fluidos portadores de calor.
Mastiques.
Papel carbón.
Pegamentos.
Pesticidas.
Pinturas.
Plásticos.
Plastificantes.
Tinta.
Es decir, se aplican en una serie de productos muy diversos y se usan en diferentes
actividades.
Descomposición de los PCB's.
La eliminación de los PCB's completa ocurre a temperaturas mayores de los 1200 C,
por lo cual se requieren hornos especiales con características similares a los diseñados
para el uso de la industria cementera.
Este tipo de producto comienza a sufrir alteraciones en su composición química bajo
las condiciones siguientes:
* Temperatura (500 a 700 C)
102
* Presión (una atmósfera)
* Tiempo de exposición (aproximadamente diez minutos).
* Presencia de oxígeno (mezclas de aire ricas en este elemento)
Las mezclas a base de PCB's, pueden a partir de los vapores de ácido clorhídrico que
producen, dar lugar a la formación de derivados con toxicidad aguda como los
Furanos y en menor cantidad las Dioxinas.
Los PCB's sometidos en el aire libre al efecto del calor, pueden dar origen a la
formación de Furanos y en cantidades menos notables a Dioxinas (Dioxina "severo",
producto de mayor toxicidad).
Los PCB's pueden dar lugar a productos de descomposición como ácido clorhídrico,
que puede provocar una irritación de la piel y de las mucosas, y en caso de gran
concentración puede provocar un edema pulmonar. En relación a los Furanos y
Dioxinas, son compuestos de propiedades químicas complejas y numerosas, por lo
tanto se puede decir que su toxicidad depende del arreglo molécular y número de
átomos de cloro contenidos en la molécula (C 6H5-C6H5O Fenil-Benceno).
•
La pirólisis o desintegración térmica (proceso que ocurre en los productos químicos
calentados a temperaturas relativamente altas, provocan su ruptura o desintegración en
dos o más compuestos químicos) de los PCB's, se puede dar lugar a la formación de
compuestos considerados como tóxicos esencialmente los Policlorodibenso-Furanos
(PCDF's), más raramente los Policlorodibenso-Dioxinas (PCDD's) y en algunos
casos los Policlorobifenilos (BPCBP's) . Conviene resaltar el hecho de que solamente
en teoría se conocen aproximadamente 75 isómeros de los PCDD's y de los PCB's,
así como 135 isómeros de PCI?F's
's.
El Furano se encuentra junto con el Pirol, la Piridina y al Tiofeno, así como en el
Alquitrán de Carbón, por lo que su manejo requiere de mucho cuidado (C4OH4).
En el caso de la Dioxina, ésta se obtiene a partir de un sobrecalentamiento en el
proceso (este sobrecalentamiento puede ser del equipo o bien, por causas del medio
que lo rodea) para la síntesis de 2,4,5-Triclorofenol (un compuesto de la familia de los
fenoles) a partir de 1,2,4,5-Tetraclorobenceno (Cl2C6H2O2H2C6 12) . (los números
que aparecen antes del nombre indican la posición de los tom s de cloror en los
compuestos de carbono).
•
103
Toxicidad de los PCB's.
Durante el uso normal de los policlorados bigenilos y en condiciones bien aisladas no
se tiene mayor problema con elmanejo de esta substancia.
Los danos más comunes que producen los PCB's son:
* Contaminación por vía cutánea, debida a la manipulación del producto sin
la debida protección.
* Contaminación vía pulmonar, por la inhalación de los vapores que son
emitidos por los PCB's, debido a la exposición a altas temperaturas o a la /
utilización de solventes inapropiados.
* Contaminación por ingestión accidéntalo regular, debido al consumo de
alimentos contaminados, produciéndose dos clases de intoxicaciones:
1.
La intoxicación aguda ocasionada por la toma de una dosis,
generalmente considerada como débil o moderada (entendiéndose
que esta toma ser en relación a la cantidad de alimentos
contaminados por este producto, y a su vez por el grado de /
contaminación de los mismos).
2. La intoxicación crónica, es aquella que da lugar a una incorporación
regular de PCB's por sus efectos acumulativos . (el daño dependerá
de cuanto tenga el cuerpo humano acumulado).
Estas intoxicaciones se materializan bajo la forma de cloroacnés (inflamación de las
glándulas sebáceas), afecciones hepáticas, trastornos intestinales, afección renal,
danos a la visión y bronquitis crónicas.
La principal medida para cuando se tiene como contaminante PCB's, es la de colocar
este producto, en contenedores hermeticamente serrados y posteriormente ser
enviados a zonas de confinamiento . Otro lo es el proceso de incineración en hornos
especiales los cuales permitan la destrucción de los furanos y Dioxinas que se generan
por la descomposición del PCB. Por último, un tratamiento químico para esta
substancia química lo es el proceso de descloración, sin embargo, esta tecnología, no
se encuentra aun disponible .
•
104
4.- PROPUESTAS PARA EL MANEJO DE ACEITES
LUBRICANTES USADOS.
En relación al manejo de los aceites lubricantes usados, se debe de tomar en cuenta
que este es un compuesto químico que presenta características propias, por lo que el
manejo de esta substancia debe de tomar en cuenta principalmente la salud humana, la
conservación del Medio y la preservación de los recursos naturales.
Ahora bien, para llevar a cabo lo antes señalado es necesario conocer las áreas que
involucra :
* Almacenamiento.
* Recolección.
* Transporte.
* Tratamiento.
* Incineración.
* Disposición final.
•
Almacenamiento:
Los aceites lubricantes usados, deberán ser almacenados en envases cerrados, los
cuales cuenten con un recubrimiento químico adecuado para el tipo de contaminantes
que se encuentren contenidos en el aceite usado (este recubrimiento no debe de
reaccionar con el aceite usado a ser almacenado), con la finalidad de que se evite el
ataque químico al envase.
Tanto el envase y sus cierres deben ser sólidos y resistentes para responder con
seguridad a las manipulaciones necesarias y se mantendrán en buenas condiciones, sin
defectos estructurales y sin fugas.
Una vez envasado el aceite usado, el recipiente deberá ser correctamente etiquetado de
forma clara, legible e indeleble en idioma español . Las etiquetas deberán a su vez
contener la fecha en que se inicie el periodo de almacenamiento, asi como el tipo de
lubricante almacenado y la fecha en que se llenó.
El almacenamiento deberá realizarse en un área que cuente con piso de material
impermeable y resistente a los lubricantes.
•
i(7
•
105
El almacenamiento deberá realizarse en condiciones que eviten derrames durante su
almacenamiento y posteriormente durante su transporte a un centro de acopio , u otra
empresa de manejo.
Las áreas de almacenamiento deberán estar separadas de las áreas de producción,
servicios oficinas y de almacenamiento de materias primas o productos terminados.
Por lo que estas áreas deberán estar ubicadas en zonas donde no se presenten riesgos
por posibles emisiones, fugas, incendios, explosiones e inundaciones.
Las áreas de almacenamiento deberán contar con sistemas especiales de control contra
conatos de incendio, derrames o fugas y emisiones.
Las áreas de almacenamiento deberán de contar con una correcta iluminación tanto
diurna como nocturna, para garantizar una manipulación segura de los lubricantes
usados, asi mismo, deberá contar con letreros y señalamientos alusivos a la
peligrosidad de los residuos almacenados, en lugares y formas visibles.
Las paredes de las áreas de almacenamiento deberán estar construidas con materiales
no inflamables.
El área de almacenamiento debe de permitir una adecuada movilización dentro de su
entorno, esto es, contar con pasillos y espacios adecuados para el manejo de equipo
auxiliar.
Los movimientos de entrada y salida de lubricantes usados de las áreas de
almacenamiento deberán quedar registrados en una bitácora o libro de control.
Recolección y Transporte.
En lo referente a la recolección y transporte de los aceites usados se tienen las
siguientes propuestas.
Una vez, envasado el aceite usado, este se podrá transportar personalmente por el
propio generador a un centro de acopio o de tratamiento, siempre y cuando realice el
transporte en recipientes cerrados y autorizados.
Es recomendable que los vehiculos de transporte se encuentren en condiciones
mecanicas satisfactorias, que cuente con señalamientos en los costados y frente y parte
posterior que indiquen el tipo de substancia química que transporta .
•
•
106
En caso de que se produjera un derrame del aceite lubricante usado durante su
transporte, el transportista deberá contar con elementos primarios que permitan
contener el derrame en e área afectada, con objeto de proteger la salud y el ambiente y
tomar acciones inmediatas, tales como notificar a las autoridades competentes.
Reciclaje, Tratamiento y Incineración.
Las empresas dedicadas al manejo de reciclado, tratamiento o incineración de aceites
lubricantes usados deberan mantener y operar sus equipos e instalaciones de manera
que se minimicen los riesgos de incendio, explosión y derrames o descargas al Medio
Ambientede éstos o de productos o residuos generados por los procesos de reciclado,
tratamiento o incineración.
Deberá tenerse especial cuidado en la clasificación del aceite usado, ya que en el caso
de los que contengan PCB's, estos deberán de manejarse con las restriccciones del
caso.
•
Los lubricantes usados pueden ser empleados como combustibles únicamente en
instalaciones que cuenten con controles de contaminación atmosférica adecuados y
con la debida tecnología.
Disposición final.
En el caso de la disposición final, lo deseable dentro de una política de Desarrollo
sustentable, es que la substancia química (aceite usado), sea reusada evitando al
máximo posible convertirlo en un desecho ya no aprovechable y que por lo tanto deba
ser confinado.
En la etapa final de los aceites lubricantes usados, se deberá manejar de la eliminación
de éste cuando no pueda ser reusado o reciclado, para aprovechar su contenido
calorífico y lograr su eliminación mediante incineración.
En conclusión lo deseable es el aprovechamiento máximo del aceite lubricante usado,
evitando su disposición er/confinamientos . Más sin embargo, el llevar a cabo la
realización de la incineración como etapa última del manejo del aceite lubricante
usado, conlleva a contar con dispositivos de control de la contaminación atmosférica;
que en el tiempo inmediato no se cuenta. Por lo que se requerira de una etapa de
transición como lo es la disposición final .
•
107
5.- ESTABLECIMIENTO DE LAS DIFERENTES TECNOLOGIAS
PARA EL MANEJO DE ACEITES LUBRICANTES USADOS.
En lo relacionado con este rublo, podemos indicar que las empresas aunque estas
utilicen constantemente las tecnologías, no están interesadas en ellas por sí mismas.
Son sólo medios para conseguir sus objetivos : vender y obtener beneficios . Por eso,
no es de extrañar que las estrategias para el establecimiento de tecnologías se
encuentran inspiradas en una lógica financiera y de mercadotecnia, más que de su
utilidad o valor técnico.
Para hablar de un establecimiento de tipo tecnológico, es necesario centrarse en el
contenido de un análisis del proceso de elaboración del mismo y la descripción de las
herramientas que pueden facilitar dicho proceso.
Esta elección debe exponer con claridad:
•
* La distribución del presupuesto destinado a la tecnología entre los diversos
programas, clasificados por líneas de productos o de negocios . Los
programas deben de especificar qué tecnologías se usarán.
* Las modalidades de acceso a las tecnologías (investigación y desarrollo
interna, compra de tecnología externa...) con sus correspondientes
presupuestos.
* La elección de la posición competitiva en las diversas tecnologías.
* El grado de intensidad en el esfuerzo tecnológico, que puede variar desde
una investigación exploratoria hasta la plena aplicación industrial.
* El grado de dificultad y de riesgo, que varía desde la aplicación o mejora
de tecnologías existentes hasta el desarrollo de tecnologías completamente
nuevas.
Además, para el establecimiento de la tecnología debe de tomarse en cuenta la
prioridad elegida de innovaciones de proceso, tomando en cuenta la paradoja
innovación de proceso-productividad, en términos de como crear inestabilidad en el
seno de la estabilidad de la actividad en estudio .
108
Otro aspecto a tenerse en cuenta es la información técnica . La información técnica se
define como el conjunto de datos, experiencias y conocimientos que una empresa
reune para ser sintetizados, analizados y evaluados en función de darle una aplicación
específica.
Por último, los criterios de selección tecnológica difieren de los aplicados por países
industrializados, principalmente por la carencia de recursos para el desarrollo de
tecnologías propias . Así, se pone énfasis en la selección de la tecnología más
adecuada (variando desde la primitiva hasta la muy avanzada), y su transferencia al
país mediante los mejores medios posibles . Para tal efecto, se concidero para la
evaluación de las tecnologías más apropiadas sobre aceites usados las siguientes
categorias:
I
La evaluación tecnológica por sí misma.
II
La gestión social de la tecnología.
III
La tecnología apropiada.
•
A continuación se presenta una tabla comparativa de tecnologías . Esta tabla se genero
a partir del estudio y análisis tecnológco de la revisión de 250 tecnologías que se
encuentran en el Anexo II, del presente trabajo.
Para la descriminación de estas tecnologías se aplicaron los pasos I, II y III antes
indicados.
Es de señalarse, que las tecnologías o procesos indicados en la tabla siguiente, son el
resultado de la aplicación de los puntos anteriores y además son las que se encuentran
legalmente registradas en el Instituto Mexicano de la Propiedad Industrial : IMPI,
dependiente de la Secretaria de Comercio y Fomento Industrial : SECOFI.
•
•
TABLA COMPARATIVA DE TECNOLOGIAS
PROCESO
TIPO DE
TRATAMIENTO
Lilao
UTILIZACION DEL
PROCESO
VENTAJAS
CATALIZADOR
DESVENTAJAS
Debe de cama con técnicas y
procedimtmos de pruebas de control de
calidad pan vismsidado mldbdora
Acido sulfúrico
sedimmadón.
Drenado de agm.
Centrifvgacldat .
Cunas.
Aceites usados y diverws tipos
de canambmntes.
90X
Fihradbn.
Destiladlo
Aceite mudos pmcedadeo de
motores auloodcq
hidrailims mmpresama
IEtem de solvma clorados,
Prod . galaicos.
95X
(PROP)
Redore d .marido de otetal cs.
Renmeve oslgmo, nim5ge o.
dom.
Evapora el agua y mrr~taos
volitile ligeros .
Udliación de diferade tipos de
mlvmes
Roces de horno rotatorio
B .V. Tdmologa dnéica
i tlanadonal (KTI)
DestilacWn
Filuacidn.
Smlimmadóo.
Aceites de todos tipos
82X
Utiliacidn de honro toaleiio,
doodc mhdmia el ensodamiado
dei agolpo
Al milico la h(mogaadóo se
ctakpda tipo de iogmcas
Pocero de evtramión del
preparo
Destiladdn
`
Eebaoddn por olvome
FIftredón
Traamtmo con leido
Sepaadón de salvenes
Ululación de propano pata
earaaión de aceite
lthriames (aguas resida] .)
8085X
Se puede oblata an producto de
da atildad
Proceso de eareaión por
solvente (timila al KTI)
Dmilxran.
Sedimentación
Filtración
Evapdación
Aceites de todos tipos
80-
Ad'. n de diferentes tIos de
ohms
Proceso de la egnaw
Resoluta Tecadogy
(Rii)
Destilación
Fiaadóo
Aceite asidos
80
Produce sclativamme aceite
hdai®te de atea calidad
Ge nación de hidtoasbmos y
cosrdostbles semivo151iles.
Proceso de dmtiadúa
Rltradón y baamiento de
Destilación
Esaporadón
FObadón
Traamteyto de arcillas
Mdee amonotrice
80-
8514
Se sabe d origen y godo de
mmaml acido del a elle
Se toma en afama ro
pretramiado
Se Ilevan acabo para al trstatrriento
diferentes pasos de los mala algunos
se pudieran seducir
Proceso Recydon
Destilación
Evapaneión
Aceites asados de varios tipos
1014
La utilización on la ...No
dudados
Generación de mmamloaote a a
atmósfea y egms residual.
Hidsowados Bgaos
Sodio
Rocoso Supmcriiim
(KRUPP)
Desliladón
Aceites osados
Su teliación se ha hecho mdcansente
a nivel laboratorio
Etano
Re-seMadóo Ac. arcilloso
Reydinacdn Phillips
=W as
Toni. en atenta las diferentes
TIPO DE
SOLVENTE
espcdfiodones de
tipos de room .
a
-
85X
los diferentes
moifidmo (su
objetivo es remm•a
azufre, nitrógeno,
oxigeno, ciao).
Niguel
Fosfato de amooio
PRESION
(A(en)
TEMPERA
1
150
20 (psig)
G300°F
Aosmda total de metales
Reducddn dd convenido de
meale.
Pegadlos trama de aeJre.
Ácidos
Alto grado de mnaminacidn.
Componentes altamente tódcon
Gmeadón de aguas reoNrrales
Himocarbmos ligaos.
Ropa..
Lodos acidificados y asdlas
gastadas
Al tdiltar la óidrogaacióo, hay mayor
invasión inicial en d potencial de
Bmanol, imgapmol,
metilctilceona (MEX)
Gateacióo m tumor porción de
anillas y se obtienen [asiduos de
hidroarboms y coowaestos
pomos
introduce
fuentes de dago debido a las altas
tmgeratmas y presiones
(hidmgaacióo, explosivo)
la de
TIPO DE GENERADORES
Tes CC)
Hidsoarbteos ligaos
1
425F
No gama emisiones a la
atmbsfas
Geneacido de metales
Oldtaas saturadas y coetgnsestos
halogen:dos
1(por
destilación)
1500 psig
110°F
Auutxia de metales
•
6 . FORMULACION ..DEL ANTEPROYECTO
DE NORMA OFICIAL MEXICANA .
•
rt . .! .i
A
'
.1
ANTEPROYECTO DE NORMA OFICIAL MEXICANA PARA EL
MANEJO DE LOS ACEITES LUBRICANTES USADOS.
CONSIDERANDO
QUE LOS ACEITES LUBRICANTES USADOS
SON RESIDUOS PELIGROSOS, POR SUS
CARACTERISTICAS TOXICAS Y
REPRESENTAN UN PELIGRO PARA EL
EQUILIBRIO ECOLOGICO, POR LO QUE ES
NECESARIO DEFINIR CUALES SON LOS
REQUISITOS NECESARIOS QUE SE DEBEN
CONTEMPLAR EN SU MANEJO .
•
1. OBJETO.
Esta norma oficial Mexicana establece los requisitos para
el manejo de los aceites lubricantes usados.
2. CAMPO DE APLICACION.
Esta norma oficial mexicana es de observancia obligatoria
para 'lbsgeneradorj,de lubricantes usados, así como para
las empresas que presten servicios relacionados con el
manejo de los mismos
3 . REFERENCIAS .
Ley General del Equilibrio Ecológico y la Protección al~
Ambiente.
Ley General sobre Metrología y Normalización.
Reglamento de la Ley General del Equilibrio Ecológico y
la Protección al Ambiente en Materia de Residuos
Peligrosos.
Reglamento para el Transporte Terrestre de Materiales
Residuos Peligrosos.
Norma oficial mexicana NOM-CRP-052-ECOL/93 que establece
las características de los residuos peligrosos, el
listado de los mismos y los limites que hacen a un
residuo peligrosos por su toxicidad al ambiente.
Norma oficial mexicana NOM-CRP-053-ECOL/93 que establece ~r
el procedimiento para llevar a cabo la prueba de y
extracción para determinar los constituyentes que hacen a
un residuo peligroso por su toxicidad.
Norma oficial mexicana NOM-CRP-054-ECOL/93 que estable el
procedimiento para determinar la incompatibilidad entre
dos o más residuos considerados como peligrosos por la
norma oficial mexicana NOM-CRP-052-ECOL/93.
4 . DEFINICIONES.
•
4 .1 . ACEITES LUBRICANTES . Son hidrocarburos de alto peso
molécular y estructuras complejas que se obtienen de la
refinación del petróleo .ku
?,
1
v\
•
4 .2 .
VISCOSIDAD .
Es
la
resistencia
desplazamiento que ofrece al liquido.
interna
al
4 .3 . PUNTO DE NEBULIZACION . El punto de nebulización de
un aceite es la temperatura a la cual la parafina u otro
compuesto solidificable presente en el aceite empieza a
cristalizarse o a separarse de la solución cuando el
aceite es enfriado bajo condiciones especificas.
4 .4 . PUNTO DE FLAMACION .
Esta propiedad es la que
determina la temperatura en la cual un lubricante al ser
calentado desprende vapores suficientes que se flaman
momentáneamente al pasar una flama sobre la superficie.
•
4 .5 . PUNTO DE IGNICION . Es la temperatura a la cual al
aplicar una flama se produce una chispa, esta propiedad
es usada para iniciar al desprendimiento de vapores
flamables y pérdidas por evaporación de los productos del
petrólero, en condiciones de altas temperaturas de
operación.
4 .6 . INDICE DE VISCOSIDAD . Es un número empírico que mide
el grado de variación de un aceite con relación a la
temperatura.
4 .7 . PESO ESPECIFICO . Es la relación del peso en el aire,
de un volumen fijo, de un material en determinada
temperatura y el peso del mismo volumen, de agua
destilada en la temperatura fijada . En el caso de aceites
lubricantes, esta relación es menor a uno, para esto las
lecturas
dan en grados API.
se
4 .8 . RESIDUOS DE CARBON . Indice que indica la cantidad
de depósitos de carbón que un aceite de petróleo formaré
bajo condiciones extremas de calor seco.
•
4 .9 . PRUEBA DEL NUMERO DE PRECIPITACION . Prueba para
constatar la 'presencia o no de materiales ajenos . Esta
propiedad indica la cantidad de materia insoluble en
nafta de precipitación y también incluye productos de
oxidación que se encuentran en el aceite usado.
2
•
4 .10 . DESMULSIBILIDAD DINAMICA . Propiedad que indica la
capacidad de un aceite para separarse del agua bajo
condiciones reales de circulación.
4 .11 . EMULSION CON AGUA .
Capacidad del aceite para
separarse del agua bajo condiciones estáticas.
4 .12 EMULSION CON VAPOR .
Indica el tiempo que debe
transcurrir para que un aceite sin aditivos sea separado
después que ha sido emulsificado.
4 .13 . AGUA EN EL ACEITE . Es la cantidad
de agua
acumulada por el aceite mientras presta su servicio.
Sirve para medir la resistencia de los aceites con
aditivos a la oxidación, tomando en cuenta el cambio de
acidez del aceite por la absorción del oxígeno . Esta
reacción origina ácidos y lodos . También puede medirse la
cantidad de oxigeno que se consumió en la reacción.
•
El color en los productos del petróleo vistos a través de
la luz, varía desde casi el incolor hasta el negro . Estas
variaciones obedecen a los diferentes crudos a las
distintas viscosidades y a los diversos métodos usados
durante la refinación.
4 .14 . DETERGENCIA . Es la propiedad que presentan ciertos
aceites de dispensar o mantener en suspensión partículas
de hollín y otros productos de descomposión del
combustible o del aceite lubricante.
4 .15 LUBRICACION . Disminución de la fricción, separando
las superficies de los cuerpos en movimiento por medio de
un lubricante . .
4 .16 . ACEITE LUBRICANTE MINERAL . Subproducto obtenido
durante la refinación del petróleo crudo.
4 .17 . ACEITE LUBRICANTE SINTETICO . Producto obtenido por
reacciones químicas de materiales con composiciones
químicas específicas para obtener un básico con
propiedades planeadas y predecibles.
3
•
4 .18 .
ALMACENAMIENTO .
Resguardo temporal de
los
lubricantes usados.
4 .19 . ADITIVO . Substancias químicas que agregadas a un
aceite base, le refuerzan sus propiedades lubricantes y/o
implementan nuevas.
4 .20 . CENTRO DE ACOPIO.
Sitio con infraestructura para colectar, consolidar y
almacenar temporalmente los aceites lubricantes usados.
4 .21 . ACEITE LUBRICANTE NUEVO.
Hidrocarburos derivados del petróleo que no ha sido
usado.
4 .22 . ACEITE LUBRICANTE USADO.
Aceite mineral o sintético que ha sido usado para
lubricación o para otro fin diferente a éste, habiendo
sido contaminado con impurezas físicas o químicas durante
su uso.
4 .23 . LEY.
La Ley General del Equilibrio Ecológico y la Protección
al Ambiente.
4 .24 . EMPRESA PARA MANEJO.
Persona física o moral autorizada por la Secretaria para
realizar servicios de manejo de aceites lubricantes
usados.
4 .25 . SECRETARIA.
Secretaria de Medio Ambiente, Recursos Naturales y Pesca.
4
•
4 .26 . GENERADOR.
Persona física o moral que produce o genera aceites
lubricantes usados.
4 .27 . PEQUEÑO GENERADOR.
Persona física o moral que produce o genera aceites
lubricantes usados en un volumen menor o igual a 1,000
(mil) litros por mes calendario.
4 .28 . DISPOSICION FINAL.
Acción de depositar permanentemente los aceites
lubricantes usados de manera segura y confiable para
evitar contaminar el ambiente.
4 .29 . CONFINAMIENTO.
•
Confinamiento referido en los artículos 32 y 33 del
la Protección al Ambiente en materia de residuos
peligrosos.
4 .30 . INCINERACION .
*\,,6
Acción de destruir los aceites lubricantes usados a
temperaturas controladas, tiempo de residencia y
turbulencia.
4 .31 . MANEJO.
Término que comprende las actividades de almacenamiento,
recolección, transporte, alojamiento, reuso, tratamiento,
reciclaje,
incineración y disposición
final
de ~~"
lubricantes usados.
4 .32 . REGLAMENTO.
la Protección al Ambiente en materia de Residuos
Peligrosos.
•
5
•
4 .33 . RECOLECCION.
Acción de transferir los lubricantes usados del generador
a los centros de acopio o a empresas de manejo.
4 .34 . RECICLAJE.
Tratamiento para transformar a los aceites lubricantes
usados con fines productivos.
4 .35 . RECUPERACION DE ENERGIA.
Aprovechamiento del contenido calorífico de los aceites
lubricantes usados con fines productivos.
4 .36 . RE -REFINACION.
Tratamiento de los aceites lubricantes usados para
reutilizarlos como productos derivados del petróleo.
•
4 .37 . TRATAMIENTO.
Proceso físico, químico o biológico para modificar las
características de los lubricantes usados con el fin de
disminuir su volumen, transformarlos, reducir o eliminar
su toxicidad.
4 .38 . TRANSPORTISTA.
Persona física o moral autorizada para el transporte de
5. CARACTERIZACION.
El generador deberá obtener la composición físicoquimica
de los aceites lubricantes usados, aplicando la NOM-CRP052-ECOL/93.
6. MANEJO.
6 .1 . Queda prohibido descargar aceites lubricantes
usados, sus residuos y subproductos derivados de su
tratamiento en cuerpos de agua superficial, subterránea,
~,2
•
zonas del mar territoria l y sistemas para colectar y
conducir aguas residuales . ~Queda prohibido su disposición
superficial o subterránea, así como cualquier manejo que
genere contaminación atmosférica que exceda los límites
máximos permisibles establecidos en la normatividad
correspondiente.
6/2 .
El generador podrá contratar a empresas autorizadas
para el manejo de aceites lubricantes usados,
asegurandose que la empresa contratada c vente con la
autorización correspondiente . Asi mismo, ). las empresas
para manejo de 'aceites lubricantes usados serán
responsables por los servicios que presten, debiendo
tener la autorización de la Secretaria para realizar
actividades en materia de manejo de aceites lubricantes
usados.
Queda prohibido mezclar aceites lubricantes usados
con agua u otros productos diferentes a los aceites
lubricantes usados y con cualquier otro residuo
peligroso.
•
7 . GENERADOR.
7 .1 . El generador deberá llevar una bitácora para control
de adquisición de lubricantes nuevos y para control de
producción de lubricantes usados . En la bitácora deberá
registrarse :
1 1'
2
7 .~ .1 .
Información sobre adquisición de lubricantes
nuevos, incluyendo:
7 .4 .1 .1 . Tipo
9.7
7 .
2
de Lubricante.
.1 .2 .
Proveedor (nombre, domicilio, teléfono).
.1 .3 .
Uso(s) de (los) aceites lubricantes.
.1 .4 . Volumen adquirido (fecha de adquisición).
.
.1 .5 . Tipo de almacenamiento.
7 . .2 .
Información
sobre
generación
lubricantes usados, incluyendo:
7 .! .2 .1 . Tipo de Lubricante.
•
7
de
aceites
•
2
7 4 .2 .2 . Volumen generado.
7 4 .2 .3 . Tipo de almacenamiento.
.2 .4 . Nombre de la(s) empresas(s) para el manejo de
7. . El generador deberá presentar, durante el mes de
Enero de cada año, ante la Secretaria un resumen mensual
por cada mes del año que se reporta de las bitácoras de
control de adquisición de aceites lubricantes nuevos y
producción de aceites lubricantes usados .\ El generador
deberá conservar las bitácoras de control de adquisición
de aceites lubricantes nuevos y generación de lubricantes
usados por un período de 5 (cinco) años\)La Secretaria
podrá solicitar en cualquier tiempo las bitácoras de
adquisición de aceites lubricantes nuevos y las bitácoras
de aceites lubricantes usados.
El generador deberá almacenar los aceites
lulricantes usados de acuerdo con los requisitos
establecidos en el punto 10 de esta norma.
8. PEQUEÑO GENERADOR.
8 .1 . El pequeño generador deberá llevar una bitácora para
control de adquisición de aceites lubricantes nuevos . En
la bitácora deberá registrarse:
2
8 .,X .1 . Información sobre adquisición . de lubricantes
nuevos incluyendo:
8,1 .1 . Tipo de lubricante.
2
8/ .1 .2 . Proveedor (nombre, domicilio, teléfono).
8 .7 .1 .3 .
Uso(s) de lo(s) aceites lubricantes.
2
8 4 .1 .4 . Volumen adquirido (fecha de adquisición).
2
84 .1 .5 . Tipo de Almacenamiento.
~
8 . . El pequeño generador deberá presentar durante el mes
de Enero inmediato al año anterior de cada año, ante la
Secretaría un resumen mensual por cada mes del año que se
reporta de las bitácoras de control de adquisición de
aceites lubricantes nuevos . El pequeño generador deberá
8
•
conservar las bitácoras de control de adquisición de
aceit s lubricantes nuevos por un periodo de 5 (cinco
año
a Secretaria podrá solicitar en cualquier tiempo,
las bitácoras de aceites lubricantes nuevos.
8 . . El pequeño generador deberá almacenar los aceites
lu ricantes usados de acuerdo con los requisitos
establecidos en el punto 10 (diez) de esta norma.
8. . El pequeño generador podrá transportar sus aceites
lu ricantes usados a un centro de acopio . El transporte
de los aceites lubricantes usados lo deberá realizar en ¡,ta
recipientes cerrados y no transportar más de 1000 (mil)
litros en cada viaje, o entregarlos a un centro de acopio k¡U-I
y/o a una empresa autorizada para el manejo de aceites
lubricantes usados .
J
9. ENVASADO Y ETIQUETADO.
•
9 .1 .
Los generadores y s empresas a manejo de
aceites lubricantes usados, deberán cum -lir con los
requisitos de envasado y etiquetado siguientes:
9 .1 .1 . Los recipientes o envases con aceites lubricantes
usados deberán etiquetarse de manera clara visible,
legible e indeleble en idioma español.
Los envases, tapas y el cerrado de estos que
contengan aceites lubricantes usados deberán ser sólidos
y resistentes y mantenerse en buenas condiciones.
9 .1 .2 .
9 .1 .3 . Las etiquetas deberán incluir la fecha de inicio
del período del almacenamiento así como el tipo de aceite
lubricante usado,, yla fecha de llenado del recipiente.
9 .1 .4 . Los envases, tapas y el cerrado de estos deben
estar fabricados de manera tal que sean herméticos y
fabr ados con materiales no suceptibles de ser atacados
por su contenido, ni formar con este combinaciones
peligrosas.
10. ALMACENAMIENTO.
10 .1 . El generador` de aceites lubricantes usados debe
cumplir con los requisitos siguientes:
•
9
k , `t'
•°s
10 .1 .1 . El almacenamiento se debe realizar de manera que
no se producan derrames.
10 .1 .2 . El almacenamiento se debe efectuar en sitios con
piso de material impermeable y resistente a los aceites
lubricantes usados.
10 .1.3 . El generador, con 'excepción del pequeño
generador, debe realizar un estudio de análisis de riesgo
para definir en particular para su almacenamiento y de
manera adicional a los requerimientos que así se
establecen, las condiciones que se deben asumir para el
almacenamiento de los aceites lubricantes usados.
10 .1 .4 . Los
sitios para almacenamiento deben estar
separados de los sitios para producción, servicios,
oficinas y para almacenamiento de materias primas o
productos terminados.
10 .1 .5 . Los
sitios para almacenamiento deben estar
suficientemente iluminados, diurna y nocturnamente.
10 .1 .6 . Los sitios para almacenamiento deben contar con
•
sistemas específicos contra incendios.
10 .1 .7 . Los sitios para almacenamiento deben tener
sistemas de contención, diques, trincheras, canaletas,
fosas de retención o las estructuras y dispositivos de
material no inflamable e inpermeable para contener
derrames.
10 .1 .8 . Los sitios para almacenamiento no deben estar por
abajo del agua alcanzado en la mayor tormenta registrada
en la zona.
10 .1 .9 . Los
sitios para almacenamiento deben tener
letreros en lugares visibles que adviertan del peligro
existente por almacenamiento de residuos.
pasillos suficientemente amplios para la operación de
equipos de carga y descarga de lubricantes y maniobras
del personal de seguridad . Oivm &,ki
10 .1 .11•_ Cuando se haga el almacenamiento en envases
(como tambos) la capacidad de la estructura para contener
derrames o fugas deber ser mayor o igual a una cuarta
parte de la capacidad máxima de almacenamiento.
•
10
•
10 .1 .12 . Cuando se~h g el almacenamiento a granel ) -4T,
t - u' ) la estructura para contener derrames debe se
mayor b igual a una cuarta parte de la capacidad total
de los tanques que se encuentren dentro de la estructura
referida.
10 .1 .13 . Los sitios para almacenamiento deben construirse
con materiales impermeables y no inflamables.
10 .1 .14 . Los sitios para almacenamiento deben tener
pararrayos.
ventilación (natural o forzáda).
un programa de mantenimiento.
10 .2 . En los sitios para almacenamiento se deberán
registrar los volumenes de entrada y salida de aceites
lubricantes usados mediante bitácora.
•
10 .3 .
El
generador previo a su construcción deberá
someter para revisión y autorización de la Secretaria su
Proyecto de Almacenamiento de Aceites Lubricantes Usados.
10 .4 . Se prohibe . almacenár aceites lubricantes usados
cuando los volumenes de residuos rebasen la capacidad de
almacenamiento cuando exista incompatibilidad entre
residuos peligrosos y cuando los sitios e instalaciones
no reunan las condiciones indicadas anteriormente.
11 . RECOLECCION Y TRANSPORTE.
11 .1 . El transportista deberá cumplir con lo establecido
en el reglamento para el transporte terrestre de
materiales y residuos peligrosos.
1 .2 . El transportista de aceites lubricantes usados podrá
consolidar cargas de lubricantes usados (del mismo tipo)
únicamente para transportarlos.
•
11 .3 . Un generador o pequeño generador podra transportar
por el mismo sus aceites lubricantes usados a un centro
de acopio siempre y cuando realice el transporte en
recipientes cerrados, autorizados y no transporte más de
11
1000 (mil) litros en cada viaje . En el caso de que un
generador desee transportar más de 1000 (mil) litros de
aceites lubricantes usados en un solo viaje, deberá
contratar los servicios de una empresa transportista
debidamente autorizada.
11 .4 . El transportista deberá entregar los aceites
lubricantes usados a una empresa de manejo para su
reciclaje o tratamiento en un plazo no mayor de 7 (siete)
días naturales contados a partir de la fecha de
recolección
11 .5 . El transportista y destinatario de los aceites
lubricantes usados deberán entregar a la Secretaria un
informe con periodicidad anual de los volumenes y tipo de
aceites lubricantes usados que recibieran para su
transporte, reciclaje o tratamiento.
11 .6 . Las instalaciones que use el transportista para las
operaciones de consolidación de carga de aceites
lubricantes usados deben cumplir con el punto 8 (ocho) de
esta norma.
12 . CENTRO DE ACOPIO.
12 .1 . La recepción de aceites lubricantes usados en los
centros de acopio se deberá registrar en la bitácora de
recepción de aceites lubricantes usados, que llevará el
responsable del centro de acopio.
12 .2 . No se deberán almacenar aceites lubricantes usados
en los centros de acopio, por un periodo mayor a 60
(sesenta) días aturales contados a partir de la fecha en
que se reciban ~'uando los centros de acopio formen parte k —
de una instalación de tratamiento de aceites lubricantes
usados quedarán exentos de este requisito.
12 .3 . Los requisitos que deberán cumplir los centros de
acopio, además de los requisitos específicos que la
Secretaria establezca en cada caso, son:
12 .3 .1 .,Los sitios para almacenamiento en los centros de
acopio deben cumplir con lo indicado en el punto 10
(diez) de esta norma .
•
12
•
12 .3 .2 .
Los centros de acopio deberán contar con equipo
para detectar bifenilos policlorados (BPCs) en los
12 .3 .3 . Los centros de acopio deberán aplicar programas
autorizados por. la Secretaria en materia de:
12 .3 .3 .1 . Capacitación del personal para el manejo de los
12 .3 .3 .2 . Mantenimiento de instalaciones y equipo.
12 .3 .3 .3 . Atención a contingencias.
12 .3 .4 . Contar con las instalaciones siguientes:
12 .3 .4 .1 .
Sitios
para maniobras de las unidades de
transporte.
12 .3 .4 .2 . Areas para estacionamiento, en caso de contar
con equipo de transporte propio.
12 .3 .4 .3 . Areas para carga y descarga.
•
12 .3 .4 .4 . Areas para . almacenamiento de envases y áreas
para almacenamiento a granel.
12 .3 .4 .5 .
Area para aseo del personal del centro de
acopio.
13 . RECICLAJE, TRATaENTO E I C NERACION.
13 .1 . Los residuos producidos en el tratamiento o
reciclaje de los aceites lubricantes usados deben
caracterizarse de acuerdo con la Norma Oficial Mexicana
053-ECOL/93 y
reportar el resultado a la
NOM-C
Secre arfa ..
13 .2 . Los aceites base producidos en la re-refinación no
deben formar residuos peligrosos y su contenido en
bifenilos policlorados (BPCs) no debe exceder la
concentración de 2 ppm (dos partes por millón).
•
13 .3 . Los aceites lubricantes usados podrán usarse
combustible únicamente en instalaciones que cumplan con
la normatividad en materia de contaminación atmosférica y
cuenten con la autorización de la Secretaria.
13
•
14. DISPOSICION FINAL.
14 .1 . La disposición final, en el caso de que esta se
lleve a cabo en confinamientos controlados, se realizara
aplicando las normas:
14 .1 .1 . NOM-CRP-004-ECOL/93, que establece los requisitos
que deben reunir los sitios destinados al confinamiento
controlados de residuos peligrosos.
14 .1 .2 . NOM-CRP-005-ECOL/93, que establece los requisitos
para el diseño y construcción de las obras
complementarias de un confinamiento controlado de
14 .1 .3 . NOM-CRP-006 .-ECOL/93, que establece los requisitos
que deben observarse en el diseño construcción y
operación de celdas de un confinamiento controlado para
14 .1 .4 . NOM-CRP-007-ECOL/1993, que establece los
requisitos para la operación de un confinamiento
controlado de residuos peligrosos
15. VIGILANCIA.
15 .1 . La Secretaria de Medio Ambiente, Recursos Naturales
y ¡Pesca por conducto de la Procuraduría Federal de
Protección al I)imbiente vigilará el cumplimiento de la
presente norma oficial mexicana.
16. SANCIONES ..
16 .1 . El incumplimiento de las disposiciones contenidas
en esta norma oficial mexicana será sancionado conforme
a lo establecido en la Ley General del Equilibrio
Ecológico y la Protección al Ambiente y demás
ordenamientos jurídicos aplicables.
17. BIBLIOGRAFIA.
[4-4 . Directivas de la Comunidad Económica Europea.
- Directiva del Consejo de 16 de junio de 1975 relativa a
la gestión de aceites usados (75/439/CEE).
•
14
•
- Directiva del Consejo de 22 de diciembre de 1986 por
la que se modifica la Directiva 75/439/CEE relativa a la
gestion de aceites usados (87/101/CEE).
R2 .
Legislación Española:
- Orden de 28 de febrero de 1989 por las que se regula la
gestión de aceites usados.
- Orden del 13 de junio de 1990 por la que se modifica el
apartado decimosexto, 2, y el Anexo II de la Orden del 28
de Febrero de 1989 por la que se regula la gestión de
aceites usados.
v1
3 . Legislación de los Estados Unidos de América:
- Underground Storage Tank Regulations.
Clean Water Act Spill Prevention control and
Countermeasures.
- Clean Water Act.
•
International Convention for the Prevention
Pollution from Ships 1978 Protocol.
- Hazardous Materials Transportation Act.
- Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, 40 CFR Partes
260 a 266, 268, 270, 279 y 124.
- Toxic Substances Control Act.
- Comprehensive Environmental Reponse , Compensation, and
Liability Act.
n .'
1
4.
"La Industria de los Lubricantes en México".
Secretaria de Energía, Minas e Industria Paraestatal,
enero 1994.
1 ,5 . "Estudio sobre la regeneración de aceites usados en
México" . Organización de las Naciones Unidas para el
Desarrollo Industrial . 1992.
11,6
. XIIÍ Censo Industrial . Resultados definitivos . Resumen
general . Censos Económicos, 1989.
•
15
v
•
18. CONCORDANCIA CON NORMAS INTERNACIONALES.
Esta norma oficial mexicana coincide parcialmente con las
siguientes normas internacionales:
(0-
Directiva del Consejo de la Comunidad Económica Europea
de 16 de junio de 1975 relativa a la gestión de aceites
usados (75/439/CEE.
4-
Directiva del Consejo de la Comunidad Económica Europea
de 22 de diciembre de 1986 por la que se modifica la
directiva 75/439/CEE relativa a la gestion de aceites
usados (87/101/CEE).
`%3- Orden del Ministerio de Obras Públicas de España de 28
t de febrero de 1989 por la que se regula la gestión de
aceites usados.
b-
r
•
Orden del Ministerio de Obras Públicas de España del 13
de Junio de 1990 por la que se modifica el apartado
decimosexto, 2 y el Anexo II de la Orden del 28 de
febrero de 1989 por la que se regula la gestión de
aceites usados.
N-
Code of Federal Regulations,, Vol . 40, Parts 124, 260 268, 270, 279 . 1992, United States of América (Código de
Regulaciones Federales, Volumen 40, Partes 124, 260 a
268, 270 y 279 . 1992 . Estados Unidos de América).
19. VIGENCIA.
La presente norma oficial mexicana entrará en vigor al
días siguiente de su publicación en el Diario Oficial de
la Federación .
•
16
•
8 . PROPUESTA DEL PROGRAMA DE CONSULTA.
En esta sección se presenta un programa de consulta para
recabar la opinión de los sectores público y privado
sobre el anteproyecto de norma de aceites lubricantes
usados.
Inicialmente
se
proporciona
una
relación
de
instituciones, asociaciones y empresas para ser
consultadas . Posteriormente se presentan las actividades
y tiempos de ejecución estimados que conforman el
programa referido.
8 .1 .Sectores interesados.
8 .1 .1 . Sector Público.
8 .1 .1 .1 . Secretaría de Comercio y Fomento Industrial.
8 .1 .1 .2 . Secretaria de Industria y Comercio.
•
8 .1 .1 .3 . Secretaria de Energía .
-
8 .1 .1 .4 . Petróleos Mexicanos.
8 .1 .1 .5 . Comisión Federal de Electricidad.
8 .1 .1 .6 . Instituciones de Educación Superior.
8 .1 .2 . Sector Privado.
8 .1 .2 .1 . Asociaciones Civiles (p . ejm . Asociación
Mexicana para el Control de Residuos Sólidos y Peligrosos
A . C . y Asociación Nacional de la Industria Química A.
C .).
8 .1 .2 .2 . CANACINTRA.
8 .1 .2 .3 . CONCAMIN.
8 .1 .2 .4 . CEMEX .(Cementos Mexicanos).
8 .1 .2 .5., TEXACO
8 .1 .2 .6 . MOBIL
8 .1 .2 .7 . ESSO
•
17
8 .1 .2 .8 . QUAKER STATE.
8 .1 .2 .9 . VEEDOL.
8 .1 .2 .10 . Empresas Autorizadas por la SEMARNAP/INE para:
- Reciclaje de solventes sucios.
- Aceites lubricantes usados.
- Almacenamiento temporal.
- Confinamientos controlados.
- Incineración.
- Reciclaje de metales.
- Equipos moviles para tratamiento de residuos peligrosos
en el lugar de origen .
•
18
•
8 .2 . PROPUESTA DE PROGRAMA DE CONSULTA DEL ANTEPROYECTO DE NORMA
OFICIAL MEXICANA PARA EL MANEJO DE ACEITES LUBRICANTES USADOS.
DURACION : 45 DIAS NATURALES.
MES 1
MES
2
2
3
MES 3
ACTIVIDADES
1
1 . DISTRIBUCION DEL ANTEPROYECTO
A SECTORES INTERESADOS.
2
3
4
1
4
up
2 . REVISION DEL ANTEPROYECTO POR
SECTORES INTERESADOS.
3 . RECEPCION DE COMENTARIOS POR
ESCRITO DE SECTORES INTERESADOS
4 . EVALUACION DE LOS COMENTARIOS
RECIBIDOS (INE) .
--~
5 . REUNIONES CON SECTORES
CONSULTADOS.
6 . SINTESIS DE Ca4ENTARIOS
RECIBIDOS .
~~
7 . ADECUACIONES AL ANTEPROYECTO
DE NORMA.
19
1
2
3
4
109
BIBLIOGRAFIA.
Environmental Chemistry, Stanley E . Manahan, Third Edition, 1979, pp . 175 .y 176.
Instructivo para el manejo preventivo de los PBC's (Bifenilos Policlorados PBC's o
Askareles) . Depto. de Seguridad e higiene en el trabajo . Oficinas Nacionales C .F.E.
1988.
* Aplicability if Land Disposal Restrictions to RCRA and CERCLA Ground Water
Treatment Reinjections . Marchs 28, 1990.
*Belton, C .I . (1992), Lubricantes and their enviromental impact ., In, Mortier, R.M.
and S .T. Orszulik, de. pp. 282-298 . Chemistry and Technology of Lubricants . VCH
Publishers, Inc. New York.
•
* Carter, B .H . (1992), Marine lubricants, In Mortier, R .M. and S .T. Orszulik, de ., pp
237-254, Chemistry and Technology of Lubricants ., VCH Publishers, Inc . New York.
* CONCAWE (1985) . The Colletion, disposal and regeneration of waste oils and
related materials . materials . CONCAWE, Report No . 85/53.
* Enviromental Technology iniciative fy 1994 Program Plan. U.S .EPA.
* Franklin Associates Ltd (1985) . Composition and Management of Used Oil
Generated in the United States, U .S. EPA. Washington, D .C., Report No . Pó85180297.
* Genderson, R .C . and A.W.H. (1982), Synthetic Lubricants, Reinnold PublishingCo.
London.
* Hazardous Waste Management System, U .S. EPA, Nov . 7; 1991.
* Identification and Listing of Hazardous Waster ; Used Oil. Final . U.S. EPA. Oct.
22, 1992.
•
110
* InternationalConvention on Civil Liability For Oil Pollutions Damage, U .S . EPA.
* Kajdas, C. (1992), Industrial lubricants, In, Mortier, R .M. and S .T. Orszulik, de .,
pp. 196-222, Chemistry and Technology of Lubricants, VCH Publishers, Inc ., New
York.
* Klamann, D . (1984) Lubricants and Related Products : Synthesis, Properties,
Applications, International Standards, Verlag Chemie GmbH Weinheim, FRG, 489
pp.
* Lansdown, A .R. (1992) . Aviation lubricants, In, Mortier, R .M. and S .T. Orszulik,
de. pp. 223-236, Chemistry and Technology of Lubricants . VCH Publishers, Inc . New
York.
* Mueller Associates Inc. (1989), Waste Oil ; Reclaiming Technology, Utilization and
Disposal, Noyes Data Corporation Park Ridge, New Jersey, 193 pp.
* National Enviromental Policy Act Implementing Procedure . Departament of
Energy, April, 1992.
•
* National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) for Storn Water
Discharges . National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Application, August,
27; 1992.
* Prevention of Oil Spills and Chemical Accidents . U.S. EPA.
* Prince, R .J. (1992), Base Oils from petroleum, In Mortie, R .M. and S .T. Orszulik,
de pp. 1-31, Chemistry and Technology of Lubricants, VCH Publishers, Inc . New
York.
* Randles S .J., A.J. Robertson and R .B. Cain (1989), Enviromental friendly
lubricants for the automotive and engineering industries, In, Royal Society of
Chemistry, de . pp Royal Society of London, York England.
* Randles, S.J. P.M. Stroud, R.M. Mortier,S.T. Orzulik, T .J. hoyes and M . Brown,
(1992), Synthetic base fluids, In, Mortier, R .M. and S .T. Orszulik, de, pp 32-61,
Chemistry and Technology of Lubricants, VCH Publishers ; Inc. New York.
* Sax, N .I. and R.J. Lewis Sr . (1987), Hawley's Condensed Chemical Dictionary Van
Nostrand Reinhold Company New York, 1288 pp .
•
111
* The Relationship Between Demographic Trends Economic Growth, Unsustainnable
Consumption Patterns and Enviromental Degradation . Preparatory for the United
Nations Conference on Enviroment and Development, Third Session, Geneva, 12
August to 4 September 1991.
* Used Oil Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking . Office of Enviromental
Guidance, October 3, 1991.
* Winstein, N.J.
052,327 pp.
•
(1974)
Waste Oil Recycling and Disposal, U .S. EPA, Epa 670/2-74-
•
SECRETARIA DE MEDIO AMBIENTE
RECURSOS NATURALES Y PESCA
INSTITUTO NACIONAL DE ECOLOGIA
ESTUDIO PARA EL
ANTEPROYECTO DE NORMA OFICIAL
MEXICANA PARA EL MANEJO DE LOS
ACEITES LUBRICANTES USADOS.
(SEGUNDO INFORME)
- ANEXOS -
ECOPROTECCION AMBIENTAL, S .A . DE C .V.
(CONTRATO No . DGRA/44-CE-006/95) 16 DE OCTUBRE DE 1995.
DIRECCION GENERAL DE PLANEACION ECOLOGICA
•
112
ANEXO I
•
INFORMACION BIBLIOGRAFIA OBTENIDA PARA EL PRESENTE
ESTUDIO
Environmental Technology Initiative
FY 1994 Program Plan
.eword
The Clinton-Gore Administration recognizes that
environmental protection and economic development must go hand in
hand if we are to ensure a secure future . U .S . environmental
firms are vital to achieving that goal . The United States is
poised to supply the world market with a wide variety of
environmental technologies and services . To date, however, we
have not done enough to encourage innovation in environmental
technology . In fact, regulations and programs developed at the
federal, state and local levels have often unintentionally
discouraged innovation.
To boost innovation in environmental technology, the
President has called upon the Environmental Protection Agency to
lead his multi-year Environmental Technology Initiative.
The Fiscal Year 1994 Program Plan presented here identifies
EPA's initial priority areas . The plan is based on discussions
held with the other Federal Agencies and EPA's program offices,
Regions and laboratories . By disseminating this plan, we hope
both to generate interest in the projects that are already
underway and also to stimulate dialogue on additional programs
for future years.
I encourage all interested parties to approach our Agency
rAgarding any aspect of innovative technologies - their
Selopment, their marketing, or their use . By forging new
} ._rtnerships, we can advance the next generation of environmental
technologies - and enhance both our environment and our economy.
Carol M . Browner
Administrator
U . S . Environmental Protection Agency
January 1994
TABLE OF CONTENTS
FOREWORD
.i
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . .
CHAPTER I : ENVIRONMENTAL AND RESTORATION TECHNOLOGIES .
.
.1
CHAPTER II : CLEAN TECHNOLOGY USE BY SMALL BUSINESS . .
iiiPTER III : U .S . TECHNOLOGY FOR INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL
SOLUTIONS (U .S . TIES)
. .
. 15
CHAPTER IV : GAPS, BARRIERS, AND INCENTIVES
21
ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY INITIATIVE
FY 1994 PROGRAM PLAN
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Background
In his State of the Union speech on February 17, 1993,
President Clinton outlined a new technology initiative to
accelerate environmental protection while strengthening America's
industrial base.
The focus of this activity will be long-term research and
pollution prevention by EPA, other Federal agencies, and
the private sector . The goal is to develop more advanced
environmental systems and treatment techniques that can
yield environmental benefits and increase exports of "green"
technologies . This investment will aid in the transition
away from a defense-oriented economy, by stimulating the
increased use of private sector R&D resources for
environmental quality-related purposes.
410
The program is funded at $36 million in FY 1994,
approximately half of which will be invested in partnership with
other Federal agencies . A long term and expanding effort is
envisioned . Subsequent presentations by the President on
February 22 and April 21 focused particular attention on
increasing the export potential of U .S . environmental technology.
Within days of the State of the Union address, EPA began to
consider appropriate responses to the President's Environmental
Technology Initiative (ETI) . The EPA Innovative Technology
Council (ITC) was tasked to develop the Agency's ETI plan.
Formed in July, 1992, the ITC is an internal EPA committee of
senior program managers whose mission is to promote cross-Agency
approaches to stimulate and accelerate the development of
innovative environmental technologies . In developing options,
the ITC recognized the importance of technological innovation to
the Agency's environmental protection mission . The continuing
expansion of world population and economic activity highlights
the need for more cost-effective environmental technologies if we
are to protect public health and sustain viable ecosystems at an
affordable cost . The ITC also recognized that the Agency has
numerous opportunities to stimulate the development and
commercialization of new environmental technologies through its
policies and programs.
FY 94 Program Plan
•
The purpose of this document is to present the U .S . EPA
h,lvironmental Technology Initiative : FY 1994 Program Plan . The
FY 1994 ETI Program Plan was shaped substantially by the
President's speeches and the ITC's ongoing dialogue to develop an
EPA Technology Innovation Strategy . The President articulated
two ETI goals . These goals are to advance environmental
protection through the use of innovative technologies and to
enhance the marketplace for U .S . environmental technologies, both
at home and abroad . The U .S . EPA Technology Innovation Strategy
(EPA/542/K-93/002) outlines four strategic approaches
through which EPA intends to accomplish the President's goals:
1.
Adapt EPA's policy, regulatory and compliance framework
to promote innovation ; .
2.
Strengthen the capacity of technology developers and
users to succeed in environmental technology
innovation;
3.
Strategically invest EPA funds in the development and
commercialization of promising new technologies ; and
4.
Accelerate diffusion of innovative technologies at home
and abroad.
The four FY 1994 program theme areas selected by the ITC
address all of the functional objectives outlined above . The
r themes for FY 1994 are : Environmental and Restoration
',._zhnologies ; Clean Technologies for Small Business ; Improving
Competitiveness of U .S . Environmental Technologies ; and, Gaps,
Barriers, and Incentives . The four chapters that follow the
executive summary list 73 specific project areas under the four
themes.
ENVIRONMENTAL AND RESTORATION TECHNOLOGIES
Accelerated development and use of innovative environmental
technologies (including pollution prevention technologies) are
critical to both the protection of the nation's environment and
to the competitiveness of U .S . industry at home and abroad . It
is generally believed by those in the environmental technology
community, that the overall rate of development and deployment of
environmental technologies today is too slow for both our
environmental and economic health . The goal of this theme area
is to accelerate the development and deployment of specific
critical technologies by direct funding of evaluation,
development, and commercialization activities.
Projects that have been chosen under this theme meet a
number of criteria . The projects
•
either : focus heavily on the need for a specific technology to
fill either an implementation or regulatory gap ; focus on an
opportunity to optimize a technology, lowering its cost, and thus
ing it more accessible ; or focus on technologies that are at a
ical point in their development when infusions of federal
to ds can make a substantial difference in scale-up and
commercialization . An over-arching selection criterion for this
area is that the projects funded have a substantial likelihood of
success within a reasonable period of time (see Chapter I).
This theme area addresses technology development in four
areas : pollution control, environmental remediation, pollution
prevention, and monitoring . Three projects are funded to further
the ability of environmental monitoring devices to characterize
pollutant releases and assure compliance with emissions
standards . Eight pollution prevention projects are funded in the
plastics, metal plating, solvent replacement, and clean car
areas . Five projects are aimed at direct control of pollution
releases from various industrial processes and eight
projects are funded for remediation technology development.
CLEAN TECHNOLOGY FOR SMALL BUSINESS
A major EPA objective is to prevent pollution before it is
created . The Agency wants to expand the development and use of
pollution prevention solutions to environmental problems, an
approach that is particularly important to environmental progress
and the competitiveness of small businesses . Small businesses
often lack the technical and financial resources to develop,
understand, identify, and/or utilize pollution prevention
o ortunities .Pollution prevention technologies are the
ferred solutions to environmental problems, especially when
t__ y improve competitiveness, efficiency, and environmental
compliance . This portion of the ETI strengthens EPA's ability to
address the pollution prevention needs and opportunities of
industries dominated by small business.
Pollution prevention, the reduction or elimination of the
generation of pollutants, offers the potential to achieve
environmental progress while increasing productivity and
decreasing the use of energy and materials . Many manufacturing
companies have already reaped substantial benefits from pollution
prevention . For example, 3M's Pollution Prevention Pays (3P)
program has saved hundreds of millions of dollars for the
corporation over the last 15 years.
In the Clean Technology focus area (Chapter II), EPA will
attempt to bring the benefits of pollution prevention to small
businesses by acting as a convener and partner, a collaborator in
technology diffusion, and an educator . Building on its
successful Design for the Environment and Clean Technology R&D
programs, EPA will partner with other federal agencies, such as
the National Institute for Science and Technology, the Small
Business Administration, state and local agencies, and the
private sector in implementing this program . Projects will focus
on three areas:
1.
Technical assistance . The Agency seeks partnered,
*raged, and tailored support for diffusion of pollution
ntion technologies for specific industries dominated by
b.daller businesses . Projects in this area are designed to
disseminate sound technical information in formats that are
understandable to potential users . In these projects, the Agency
will take advantage of the expertise and diffusion networks of
existing organizations.
2.
Joint research with targeted industry segments . The
Agency will emphasize joint research and commercialization
projects that involve a mix of organizations from the public,
private, and non-profit sectors . In this way, research targets,
designs, and evaluations can be performed by a joint project team
using a combination of technical, commercial, and environmental
decision factors that can be tailored to the needs of businesses
in targeted industries.
3.
Catalyze the design of safer chemicals and processes . The
Agency will seek to catalyze clean technology development that is
funded by other government agencies and outside institutions.
EPA will try to increase the capacity of these outside
organizations to succeed . The types of capacity most often
needed include : scientific and engineering expertise ; performance
and cost evaluation designs ; market assessments ; business
planning ; and sites for testing and evaluation . Direct funding
for research or commercialization of specific technologies is not
provided in this area.
ROVING
COMPETITIVENESS OF U .S . ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGIES
The U . S . Technology for International Environmental
Solutions (U .S . TIES) is an inter-agency technology diffusion
program designed to enlist greater participation of the U .S.
private sector in achieving U .S . environmental objectives
overseas . Led by EPA, and focussing on both the demand for and
supply of environmental technologies, this public-private
partnership supports environmental projects in a number of areas,
including : international technical assistance and training,
information dissemination, financial assistance, technology
demonstrations, and the international adoption of regulations and
standards . The U .S . TIES theme serves as the international
component of the ETI.
While U .S . TIES was f4rst proposed shortly after the Earth
Summit in Rio de Janeiro, the concept of a public-private
partnership on behalf of the global environment was further
emphasized in a number of recent Presidential and Congressional
mandates . One of the primary objectives of the ETI, as outlined
in the President's State of the Union address . , is to "develop
more advanced environmental systems and increase exports of
'green' technologies ." Congress, in appropriating FY 1994 funds
for the ETI, specified that the primary objective should be the
•
"development and employment of environmental technologies to
enhance the environmental security and the economic standing of
the U .S . in the world marketplace ." Moreover, in November 1993,
t Clinton administration proposed a comprehensive strategy for
ncing U .S . environmental exports in the inter-agency report
~.. itled Environmental Technology Exports : Strategic Framework
for U .S . Leadership . Funding for projects under U .S . TIES
enables EPA to respond to these Presidential and Congressional
mandates in a strategic and integrated manner.
U .S . TIES is aimed at assuring that American innovators,
manufacturers, service suppliers, and workers play a major role
in the improvement of the world's environment through the
provision of their goods and services . Unlike many other
governmental programs, which rely heavily on public sector
resources to perform specific functions, this initiative enlists
the expertise, creativity, and resources of the U .S . private
sector in addressing environmental problems . While many other
Federal agencies will be involved in this effort in a promotional
way, EPA's role will be unique (see Chapter III).
First, the Agency will continue its traditional function of
assisting other nations in defining their environmental problems
and in identifying potential solutions through training,
technical assistance, capacity building, feasibility evaluation, and
demonstration projects . These activities will help other nations
solve their environmental problems and allow the Agency to better
define the potential international marketplace for American
innovators . Assessments of international markets and technology
needs will be conducted on a targeted basis . This function links
directly with other Federal agencies' mandates and expertise in
prt promotion and business development.
Alp
Second, EPA will assist other countries in evaluating the
performance of pollution control and remediation technologies.
Because of its central function in evaluating the adequacy and
applicability of technologies in the American environment, EPA
serves the vital function of the "honest third party" in
evaluating technological and procedural alternatives to
environmental problems . The Agency's reputation worldwide for
objective evaluation is pivotal in assuring that useful U .S.
technologies be considered by other countries as those nations
seek to address environmental challenges . The development,
evaluation, and barrier reduction activities found in the other
ETI focus areas will be of enormous importance in carrying out
the activities and goals of this part of the program.
GAPS, BARRIERS, AND INCENTIVES
To be effective in achieving the President's goals for
environmental technology innovation, EPA needs to demonstrate
leadership in redirecting and stimulating public and private
investment in technologies in two ways . First, EPA must attempt
to create among all stakeholders a consensus that articulates the
•
nation's environmental and economic goals . Through this
stakeholder process, EPA can best identify strategies for
achieving technological breakthroughs that support the nation's
a is . Second, EPA must change the national "climate" for
ronmental technology innovation to make it more supportive
t.. oughout the continuum of technology financing, development,
testing, evaluation, marketing, and diffusion . The national
agenda for innovative technology can serve to stimulate private
sector investment in the environmental marketplace and help to
set priorities for federal investment, both of which are needed
to achieve the optimal results . EPA's ETI program for FY 1994
aggressively moves to address both of these objectives.
First, the ETI will identify and characterize the important
technological gaps . EPA will support a nationwide process with
key stakeholders in environmental technology innovation and
marketing, that will build upon existing EPA expertise and data,
to develop and issue the first National Agenda for Environmental
Technology Innovation . This process will initiate an ongoing
dialogue with all stakeholders to help stimulate and shape future
investments . The approach to identifying gaps in environmental
technology will be performance-oriented to avoid blind alleys
created by prematurely locking in to specific technological
solutions.
Second, the ETI will be used to achieve short- and long-term
changes in the climate for innovation through changes to EPA
environmental programs and policies . The program will seek
visible early improvements and consensus around an agenda for
additional improvements . EPA will focus its attention and
resources on creating environmental policies and programs that
•
ort environmental technology innovation .' The Agency will
itor selected technological innovations as they move through
the regulatory approval process to better understand and reduce
the regulatory barriers to acceptance . EPA will also begin work
in designing pilot projects at the federal, state, and local
levels that can serve to assess and demonstrate new approaches to
technology development, evaluation and acceptance.
Finally, ETI will fund the development and dissemination of
improved information on the environmental technology industry.
This information will better characterize the technical,
financial and business assistance needs of the environmental
technology and service industry.
Management Plan
In FY 1994, EPA has selected 73 ETI projects . The Agency
has already been working in a number of the project areas
identified in the four chapters that follow . EPA has also been
actively reaching out to other federal agencies to identify
potential partners for each project . The Agency is interested in
coalescing public and private interests around these project
areas to further the development, commercialization, and use of
technologies . To that end, EPA invites other Federal agencies,
and other public and private institutions to contact the
appropriate project managers identified in the following chapters
to discuss possible partnership arrangements . EPA is seeking
e partnerships in which all parties involved provide
allectual and financial support to a mutually agreed upon
yvdl . EPA is not seeking, nor will it entertain, purely
contractual relationships under this initiative.
In the chapters that follow, specific project areas are
identified and numbered sequentially . The names and phone
numbers of the EPA project managers are identified . To get
further information on specific projects, please contact the
appropriate project manager directly.
Copies of the U .S . EPA Environmental Technology Initiative:
FY 1994 Program Plan (EPA/542/K-93/003) and the U .S . EPA
Technology Innovation Strategy (EPA/542/K-93/002) may be obtained
by contacting the U .S . General Printing Office . Orders may be
placed by calling (202) 783-3238 . The documents may also be
ordered by faxing a request to (202) 512-2250 . Finally, mail
requests should be directed to : Superintendent of Documents,
P .O . Box 371954, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15250-7954 . Please
identify the titles when requesting documents.
•
•
ENVIRONMENTAL AND RESTORATION TECHNOLOGIES
*POSE
The Environmental and Restoration Technologies theme
supports the development and commercialization of technologies
that fill critical environmental needs . Resources for projects
under this theme are directed toward developing, testing,
evaluating, and bringing to the marketplace, technologies that
address technical problems that inhibit the Agency's ability to
implement its programs.
CRITERIA FOR SELECTION
The following criteria guided the selection of projects
under this theme:
o
proposals must address the most critical needs of individual
EPA programs and cross-cutting programs ; and
o
funding will be allocated among the projects that have the
greatest prospect for important technological breakthroughs.
PROGRAM PLAN
The EPA will implement projects in three principal areas:
monitoring, pollution prevention, and technology development for
control and remediation . While the primary purpose of the
sp ected projects is to advance technical solutions to specific
'ronmental problems, they also represent an opportunity for
L._
to assess and enhance the technical merits of the proposed
innovation and to evaluate institutional obstacles and market
opportunities . Barriers to rapid evolution and commercial
proliferation of needed technologies, both prior to EPA's
assistance (e .g ., inability of a private inventor to get
development financing) and in the future (e .g ., inability to get
a permit or permit variance) can prevent market access to
critical technologies . Similarly, the lack of information about
market opportunities inhibits technologies from moving forward.
The development and analysis of specific technical, financial,
procedural and regulatory examples will be extremely valuable in
identifying obstacles to successful innovation.
Thus, for each project outlined in this section, a Barrier
and Implementation Evaluation Report will be developed . These
reports will include analyses of : private sector efforts to
develop the technology (with the objectives of understanding
barriers that have precluded or slowed development and
identifying private sector partners for joint research);
implementation barriers likely to be faced in the process of full
scale commercialization ; potential markets for the technology;
environmental and economic benefits of broad commercialization.
A central analytical function within the EPA's Office of Research
and Development will be established to conduct these studies .
A.
Monitoring
The EPA believes that there is a critical need to develop
quality and site remediation monitoring technologies . The
IlPected projects represent an initial step toward addressing
this concern . Monitoring is to be a major theme of the ETI in FY
1995 .
1.
Monitoring Technologies Test-Off proposes to use a federal
facility to host an open competition to identify the most
promising defense-related technologies for environmental
monitoring . Eric Koglin (702) 798-2432.
2.
Use of the National Laboratories as Satellite Testing and
Evaluation Centers in Support of the Consortium for Site
Characterization Technology creates a partnership with,
and uses the facilities, staff, and equipment of, the U .S ..
Department of Energy (DOE) National Laboratories to support
testing and evaluation of innovative and emerging
monitoring, measurement, and site characterization
technologies . DOE will be a representative on the Board of
Advisors for the Consortium for Site Characterization
Technology . Eric Koglin (702) 798-2432.
3.
•
Demonstration/Evaluation of Innovative Monitoring Techniques
accelerates current efforts to demonstrate and evaluate
open-path and stack emission (extractive) sampling
technologies, significantly aiding their commercialization.
These technologies will aid implementation of Title I and
Title III of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAAA) by
improving the capability to monitor hazardous air pollutants
and volatile organic compounds . Tom Logan (919) 541-2580.
B.
Pollution Prevention
The selected pollution prevention projects emphasize actual
technology development . They complement work that will be
accomplished under the Clean Technology for Small Business
portion of the program plan . The small business portion of the
program plan addresses needed pollution prevention outreach and
technical assistance . The selected projects in this section
address four problem areas : plastics, metal plating, solvent
replacement, and emissions reduction.
Plastics
4.
•
Plastics Recycling by Depolymerization/Repolymerization focuses on finding thermal and catalytic methods for
breaking individual condensation and free radical polymers.
Plans call for this project to be followed with attempts to
find ways to break down and separate mixtures of polymers.
The project's ultimate goal is to develop an improved method
for recycling plastics, which constitute about 8% by weight
and 20% by volume of municipal solid wastes . Teressa Harten
(513) 569-7565.
Metal Plating
Cleaner Processes in Plating and Metal Finishing includes
developmental research funding for at least two problem
areas and from four to six demonstrations of cleaner
technologies for electroplating and metal finishing
operations . Teressa Harten (513) 569-7565.
6.
Metal Plating and Coating provides manufacturers and
suppliers using metal plating processes with information on
cleaner alternatives to current practices . Although the
project focuses on the Midwest region, the results from the
project are expected to be similar to, and applicable to
other regions . Brian Sweeney (202) 260-0720.
7.
Advanced Adsorption Technologies develops and pilots
through the commercialization stage, several advanced
adsorption technologies that are radical improvements to
existing technologies . These advanced technologies include:
an improved polymeric ion exchange membrane developed by the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) for
metals adsorption ; improved metal-adsorbent materials
- developed by the U .S . Bureau of Mines ; and a low-cost,
extremely high capacity adsorbent for low contaminant
concentrations in mixed waste streams . Teressa Harten (513)
569-7565.
Solvent Replacement
•
Pollution Prevention-Based Materials Cleaning/
Decontamination develops and demonstrates new alternative
surface cleaning technologies for use in advanced
manufacturing operations and service industries, such as
commercial cleaning and building decontamination, to replace
cleaning systems based on hazardous chemicals and/or
volatile solvents . John Burckle (513) 569-7506.
9.
Supercritical CO2 as a Replacement Solvent produces a
solvent-free alternative technology for metal degreasing
operations and compares the environmental risk of the new
process with established degreasing processes . Paul Anastas
(202) 260-2257.
10.
Enhancing Market Penetration of Water-Borne and Other LowSolvent Consumer/Commercial Adhesives involves the
identification of the key technical and institutional
barriers to the use of new adhesive technologies by EPA's
Air and Energy Engineering Research Laboratory (AEERL) . The
project includes pinpointing research and development needs;
directing key product and applications R&D, in cooperation
with industry and academia ; and demonstrating successfully
developed processes and products . Michael Kosusko (919)
541-2734 .
Clean Car Program
Clean Car Technology Demonstration - demonstrates, in
cooperation with the domestic automobile manufacturers,
dramatically improved passenger car and light truck fuel
economy available through an integrated systems approach to
engine and vehicle design . This approach will use
technologies that are now available and some anticipated in
the near future, to lower CO2 emissions . The most farreaching concept is a unique hybrid approach that has the
potential to triple fuel economy while maintaining vehicle
performance and safety . This project will complement
ongoing work at other federal laboratories . This work will
also support the President's goals for the automobile
industry, i .e ., to produce cars that : restore the industry's
technological leadership ; are as safe and perform as well as
today's cars ; cost no more to drive ; produce little or no
pollution ; and stabilize greenhouse emissions at 1990
levels . Charles Gray (313) 668-4404.
C.
Hardware/Technology
Projects in this category fall into two groups : controlrelated technologies and remediation-related technologies.
Control-Related Technologies
12 .
Develop/Evaluate Innovative Sub-Systems for Thermal
Treatment involves research and non-biased, competent
testing/evaluation of innovative thermal treatment
technologies through EPA's permitted and operational
research facility . Robert Thurnau (513) 569-7692.
13.
Removal of Multi-Contaminants from Drinking Water Treatment
Systems involves the EPA Risk Reduction Engineering
Laboratory's (RREL) evaluation of the combination of
microfiltration (MF), nanofiltration (NF), and reverse
osmosis (RO) membranes for treating waters containing a
mixture of microorganisms, particulates, pesticides and
organics, and inorganic chemicals . Jeffrey Adams (513) 5697835.
14.
Destruction of Organic Pollutants in Water and Air by
Titanium Dioxide Photocatalysis supports continuation
of RREL's investigation of an advanced oxidation process for
the destruction decomposition) of organic pollutants in water and air
streams . The primary objective of the project is to
optimize a titanium dioxide (TiO2) based photocatalytic
technology which, in combination with ultraviolet
(W) radiation, produces a highly reactive oxygen species
known as the hydroxyl radical . Once formed in-situ, the _
hydroxyl radical causes the rapid destruction of a wide
array of chemical compounds known to be present in both
groundwater and surface water.
John Ireland (513) 569-7413.
15.
•
NOx Control by Hybrid Technologies develops and evaluates
cost-effective hybrid NOx control technologies for
application on major combustion sources . Two areas of
research are proposed : advanced fuel reburning
(AFR)/selective non-catalytic reduction (SNCR) and
SNCR/selective catalytic reduction (SCR) . Brian Gullet
(919) 541-1534.
16.
Demonstration of Regional Manure Composting Facility
develops and demonstrates an area-wide animal waste and
composting facility that can handle the animal waste from a
large number of operations, process the waste, and market
the product . Methane recovery also is to be demonstrated if
feasible . Steve Dressing (202) 260-7024.
Remediation-Related Technologies
17.
Remediation Technologies Development Forum involves the
collaboration of EPA, DOE, the U .S . Department of Defense
(DOD), and several private companies to design, develop, and
demonstrate innovative remediation technologies . This
project uses federal facility sites for full scale
demonstrations . Subhas Sikdar (513) 569-7528.
18.
Reductive Techniques To Manage Metals in Solid and Hazardous
Wastes involves a critical review of the state-of-the-art
techniques for reducing various types of metallic ores to
base metals for use in commerce . The objective is to
determine if these techniques have been or could be employed
economically in the management of metals-containing solid
and hazardous wastes . Jonathan Herrmann (513) 569-7839.
•
19.
Supercritical CO2 Extraction Technology for Pollution
Prevention and Waste Treatment
expands support, through RREL, for a university-based
study to develop a supercritical CO2 system for metals
extraction and similar projects . The objective is to insure
a thorough investigation of the technology with possible
scale-up for commercial use . The project includes
development and demonstration of new supercritical CO2
extraction manufacturing applications . The goal is to
increase pollution prevention opportunities by eliminating
the use of a more hazardous extracting solvent or by
substituting for a process that produces a waste stream.
Teressa Harten (513) 569-7565.
20.
Promotion of Soil Washing as an Alternative Remedial
Technology assembles and repackages the quantitative
bench-scale and pilot-scale treatability test results from
EPA, DOD, DOE, and . others . The project also involves
conducting additional experiments selected by modern
statistical methods . The objective is to provide
comprehensive, quantitative data that officials can compare
411
with risk-based target residual concentrations . The project
is expected to help position U .S . companies to compete
effectively in the new market and to assist Federal agencies
that are potentially major users of soil washing to evaluate
the technology and to use it properly . - Richard Griffiths
(908) 321-6625.
21.
Develop/Evaluate Innovative Thermal Treatment Systems
involves the Office of Research and Development (ORD)
working with industry and other Federal agencies to develop
and test innovative technologies and to develop a method to
evaluate the performance of these technologies through ORD
research facilities . Robert Thurnau (513) 569-7692.
22.
Joule Heating for Remediation of a DNAPL Source in
Stratified Unconsolidated Sediments To Prevent Pollution in
Currently Uncontaminated Water and Subsurface Environments
consists of laboratory and field studies to evaluate the
feasibility of using joule (resistive) heating to
selectively heat parts of an aquifer that have low hydraulic
conductivity to force volatile dense non-aqueous phase
liquids (DNAPLs) to regions of high hydraulic conductivity.
The project will also evaluate the feasibility of combining
joule heating with other technologies, such as soil vacuum
extraction, to remove volatilized DNAPLs . The objective is
to provide a cost-effective technology for remediation of
ground-water contamination in fine textured soils in
inaccessible subsurface environments and capitalize on the
more expensive European experience with the application of
electrochemical technology to geotechnical problems . Carl
Enfield (405) 436-8530.
Engineering Scale-up and Demonstration of Chemical
Dechlorination by the Base-Catalyzed Decomposition (BCD)
Process designs and constructs a flexible, continuous
pilot-scale technology capable of handling all commonly
encountered chlorinated soil contaminants . The pilot system
would be operated on a number of soils contaminated with
PCBs, pentachlorophenol, and chlorinated insecticides and
herbicides . The project includes documenting performance of
the BCD process to satisfy potential users of its
effectiveness . Carl Brunner (513) 569-7655.
24 .
Remediation of Sediments develops, through the Office of
Water (OW), innovative technologies to clean up contaminated .
sediments that pose ecological and human health risks . The
developmental work would be designed to incorporate
technical assistance to foster the use and potential export
of U .S . technology . The project includes : use of OW's
public-private partnership to develop remedial techniques,
scale up and field testing of promising bench-scale
techniques, and networking with the Netherlands, Japan, and
other foreign countries to use the techniques developed to
remediate contaminated sediments . Dennis Timberlake (513)
569-7547 .
CHAPTER II
CLEAN TECHNOLOGY USE BY SMALL BUSINESS
APPOSE
The Clean Technology Use by Small Business theme increases
coordination in the EPA-led national pollution prevention program
by assisting small U .S . businesses to achieve their regulatory
compliance and competitiveness objectives through the use of
pollution prevention . Resources in this portion of the
Environmental Technology Initiative are directed toward : (1)
identifying high priority industry segments for targeted
assistance ; (2) assisting small- and mid-sized businesses
understand, identify, and use short-term pollution prevention
opportunities ; and, (3) catalyzing public/private partnerships to
develop a new generation of cleaner industrial technologies.
Primary benefits of this initiative include improvement in the
competitiveness, efficiency, and environmental progress of these
businesses.
Two principles guided the selection of projects for this
theme area:
o
EPA should lead by "steering" more than "rowing" in the
planning, development, commercialization, and diffusion of
technology ; and
EPA should, in addressing the barriers to small business
achievement of cleaner technology, emphasize approaches that
increase partnering, collaboration, and leveraging.
PROGRAM PLAN
The selected projects under this theme fall into three major
categories : technical assistance ; joint research with industry;
and catalyzing industrial design of safer chemicals, products,
materials, processes, and systems.
A.
Technical Assistance
Three types of technical assistance efforts are supported
that increase EPA's overall ability to contribute to the
diffusion of pollution prevention technologies to small business.
These are : (1) capacity building (i .e ., expanding the capacity of
existing organizations that can effectively deliver pollution
prevention technical information), (2) development of technical
assistance tools, and (3) geographically focused technical
assistance.
Capacity Building
•
Projects in this sub-category will enable EPA to enhance the
capacity of existing or newly created Federal, state and local,
and private sector diffusion agents to serve the potential users
of pollution prevention technologies . These projects are
igned to make EPA a better partner in the diffusion process
pollution prevention and, along with projects in the third
sub-category, to help identify the best ways to deliver pollution
prevention technical information to small businesses.
Al
25.
Small Business Pollution Prevention Support explores and
tests the capabilities of the SBA Small Business Development
Center (SBDC) network and other SBA resources in several
states to serve as delivery vehicles for pollution
prevention information to small businesses, and to provide
technical and financial planning assistance services.
Paul Shapiro (202) 260-4969.
26.
Leadership Grants to CAAA State Small Business Centers
establishes a "Leadership State Grant Program," which
provides incentive grants to 7-10 state small business
assistance programs created under the Clean Air Act
Amendments of 1990 (CAAA) . The objective is to assist in
the development of model programs that could demonstrate to
other states effective ways of providing small businesses
technical assistance that incorporates both pollution
prevention and a multi-media focus . Deborah Elmore (919)
541-5437.
27.
Control Technology Center Pollution Prevention Program
provides additional funding to EPA's Control Technology
Center (CTC) to improve its capability to provide pollution
prevention technical assistance to state small business
assistance centers created under the CAAA . Charles Darvin
(919) 541-7633.
•
28.
Grant to the National Roundtable of State Pollution
Prevention Programs provides a grant to the National
Roundtable, an association of state and local pollution
prevention technical assistance programs, to build the
capabilities of state small business assistance centers to
provide pollution prevention assistance to their small
business clients . Lena Hann (202) 260-2237.
Development of Technical Assistance Tools
Programs in this sub-category build on existing EPA research
to develop, field test, and integrate the use of decision-making
and analytic tools, e .g ., the Facility Pollution Prevention
Guide ; the Life Cycle Analysis Inventory Guidelines, the Chemical
Use Cluster Scoring System, and the Cleaner Technology Substitute
Assessment - and developing methods for disseminating information
to interested small businesses.
29.
Tool Development and Integration expands the development
of engineering diagnostic pollution prevention tools that
•
30.
will allow small businesses to identify, analyze, and
implement source reduction options . A series of clean
production guides for several industries (e .g ., printing,
plastics, chemicals) will be undertaken . Computer software
and videos will also be investigated as supplemental
material for training seminars . James Bridges (513) 5697837.
Workshops, Manuals, Training, Etc . focuses on developing
and distributing through other agencies' delivery mechanisms
to small business, targeted technical assistance information
such as manufacturing assessment protocols, financial
assistance handbooks, and other support materials that
promote the concept of pollution prevention and provide
guidance on its implementation . Harold Williams (513) 5697361.
Geographically Focused Technical Assistance
Projects in this sub-category will demonstrate the
effectiveness of geographically focused technical assistance
programs for expanding the use of pollution prevention
technologies . These projects will help EPA identify the best
ways to deliver pollution prevention technical information to
small businesses.
31.
•
Colorado Partnership replicates in other states the
Colorado Pollution Prevention Partnership, which is
comprised of government, business, and public interest groups . This partnership was designed to develop and
promote pollution prevention and waste minimization in
Colorado industries, but is applicable to other states . The
project focuses on gathering the pollution prevention
expertise of large businesses in a state and applying it to
small businesses in that state . Jonathan Herrmann (513)
569-7839.
32.
MERIT (Metal Finishing in'So . Cal .) facilitates the
transfer of existing and proven pollution prevention
technology from larger metal finishing firms to smaller
businesses . The project involves the sharing of pollution
prevention technologies, developed for a large aerospace
firm and validated through years of testing, through the
Mutual Effort to Reduce Industrial Toxics (MERIT)
Partnership for southwest Los Angeles County (California).
EPA will be working in partnership with the National
Association of Small Business Development Centers and the
Metal Finishers Association of Southern California . The
project provides funds to small businesses to support their
use of these pollution prevention technologies . Payback
agreements will create a revolving fund for additional
projects . Roger Wilmoth (513) 569-7509.
B.
Joint Research with Industry
Projects in this category enable EPA to convene and provide
financial and technical support to public-private partnerships
that identify and develop pollution prevention technology
on ortunities for industries dominated by small businesses.
t industry-specific Design for the Environment (DfE) projects
a supported in FY 1994 . A goal of 1 :1 leveraging is
established for the total of joint research supported in this
area.
Dry Cleaning
33.
OPPT/DfE Dry Cleaning Project involves working
cooperatively with industry and public stakeholders {e .g .,
International Fabricare Institute, Neighborhood Cleaners
Association, Greenpeace, Occupational Health Foundation) to
reduce environmental and human health risk from exposure to
perchloroethylene (PCE) . It evaluates the comparative risk
and technological feasibility of alternative exposure
controls for solvent-based dry cleaning and alternative
cleaning methods that do not use PCE . The project also
develops outreach mechanisms to small businesses to
communicate the results of technical work . The project
includes development of incentives to implement
environmentally improved options . Ohad Jehassi (202) 2606911.
34.
Testing and Development Program for Emerging Options to Dry
Cleaning involves AAERL working with OPPTS to identify
emerging technologies upon which proof of concept testing
can be performed . Plans call for technologies that pass
this "proof of concept" testing to be further developed, and
hopefully brought to commercialization, in cooperation with
equipment manufacturers and trade organizations.
Janet Ondricek (919) 541-4765.
411
Printing
35.
OPPT/DfE Printing Project involves working cooperatively
with industry and public stakeholders (e .g ., Flexible
Packaging Association, Flexographic Technical Association,
National Association of Printers and Lithographers, Graphic
Arts Technical Foundation, Screen Printing Association
International, NIST/MTC's, Pollution Prevention Centers,
EDF/Council of Great Lakes Governors Great Printing Project)
to reduce environmental and human health risk from exposure
to chemicals used in printing . The project includes
completion of a Cleaner Technology Substitute Assessment
(CTSA) of flexographic inks, a flexographic case study, and
development of outreach mechanisms to communicate the
results of technical work to the lithography, screen
printing, and flexography sectors of printing industry.
Stephanie Bergman (202) 260-1821.
Printed Wiring Boards
36.
•
OPPT/DfE Printed Wiring Boards Project involves working
cooperatively with U .S . Department of Energy (DOE) National
Laboratories, industry and public stakeholders (e .g ., Sandia
National Laboratory, Dupont, IBM) to reduce environmental
and human health risk from exposure to chemicals used in the
manufacture of printed wiring boards . The project develops
tools (software or spread sheets) that allow industry to
evaluate current and alternative practices ; develops
outreach products including case studies, magazine articles,
and interim project information ; develops outreach
mechanisms to communicate the results of technical work to
small businesses in the industry ; and develops incentives
for implementing environmentally improved options . Jean
(Libby) Parker (202) 260-1678.
Metal Plating and Coating
37.
OPPT/DfE Metal Plating and Coating Project involves
working cooperatively with the DOE National Laboratories,
the U .S . Department of Commerce (DOC)/National Institute of
Standards and Technology (NIST), industry and public
stakeholders (e .g ., Northeast Midwest Institute, , Precision
Metal Forming Association, National Association of Metal
Finishers) to reduce environmental and human health risk
from exposure to chemicals used in the metal plating and
coating processes . The project includes completion of a Use
Cluster Profile and a CTSA, development of a
manufacturing/energy/environmental audit tool for use by
industry, and development of outreach mechanisms to
communicate the results of technical work to small
businesses in the industry . The project also includes
evaluating and validating the utility of existing multimedia pollution prevention assessment and energy assessment
protocols and identifying and demonstrating advanced
environmental technologies with applications to small
businesses . This project is expected to provide a model for
other Manufacturing Technology Centers . Brian Sweeney (202)
260-0720.
38.
Metalforming Project involves cooperative research and
development efforts with other government agencies and
industry partners to develop and demonstrate technological
improvements including better process control to improve
efficiency of chemical use while reducing waste and
substitution of bath chemistries based on toxics such as
chlorinate solvents, cyanides and cadmium with "cleaner"
alternatives and technologies that are functionally
equivalent substitutes for the Cr+6-based conversion
process . John Burckle (513) 569-7506.
Metal Degreasing
39.
OPPT/DfE Metal Degreasing Project involves working
cooperatively with the DOE National Laboratories, government
agencies, industry and public stakeholders (e .g ., IBM,
•
Hughes Aircraft, Honeywell, Boeing, Autoclav Engineers,
National Forge) to reduce environmental and human health
risk from exposure to chemicals used in degreasing
operations in small business . Partnership with the U .S . Air
Force and the aerospace industry to ensure environmental
considerations are built into the "Clean Aircraft
Initiative ." Additionally, EPA will partner with Los Alamos
and the NSF to evaluate substitutes for solvents, especially
supercritical CO2 . Finally, the project will include a
partnership with the Department of Commerce Manufacturing
Technology Centers to develop outreach products and a
communications network for disseminating to small businesses
the results of the technical work . Jean (Libby) Parker
(202) 260-1678.
Solvents
40.
SAGE Version 3, System Facility Design and Cost Upgrade
updates the ORD Solvents Alternative Guide (SAGE) software
system, proven a major success in identifying viable
alternative solvent substitution options for industrial
users, to include a capability ,o produce process flow
diagrams and projected costs for the options selected by the
user . Plans call for soliciting technology vendors to
develop cost algorithms for cleaning and associated
equipment . Other possible collaborators include the
National Center for Manufacturing Sciences and OAQPS and
OPPTS . Charles Darvin (919) 541-7633.
41.
Application Engineering and Process Modification Program
involves working with industry technical organizations to
identify, demonstrate, and evaluate innovative non-polluting
manufacturing processes and concepts for reduction of VOC
and toxic emissions in industries, such as painting, that
have many small businesses . Plans call for soliciting
organizations to provide technical support, host sites, and
assistance in selecting and evaluating candidate
technologies and for developing process manuals for each of
the processes evaluated . Charles Darvin (919) 541-7633.
•
Coatings
42.
Zero-VOC/Zero-HAP 2-Component Epoxy Coating System
Development and Subsequent Demonstration on a Fast,
Low/Medium Price Point Wood Furniture Finishing Line
provides a substitute for the nitrocellulose resin-based
coating system . (averalinn 6 lb VOC/gal and 3 lb HAP/gal)
used to finish most wood furniture and the water-based
coating systems currently in development, many of which use
ethylene glycol ethers that are more toxic than most of the
solvents used with nitrocellulose resins . The 2-component
epoxy top coat developed under joint EPA/SCAQMD sponsorship
contains no VOC and no HAP . Plans call for funding the
project through the Center for Emissions Research and
Analysis and involving a small coatings manufacturer, The
410
Adhesives Company, and a small furniture manufacturer.
Preliminary testing before pre-production, if required,
would be done at Southern California Edison's Customer
Technology Application Center coating evaluation laboratory.
Robert McCrillis (919) 541-2733.
43.
Accelerated Development and Market Penetration of Very Low
VOC Wood Furniture Coatings builds on a SCAQMD/Southern
California Edison (SCE) project that solicited coating
samples from across the country and applied them to wood
coupons in SCE's Customer Technology Application Center
paint spray laboratory . SCE evaluated more than 75
coatings . This project follows up with the coating
suppliers and determines the development and use status of
the coatings . Plans call for selecting the most promising
10 coatings, developing a strategy--including application at
small wood furniture manufacturers--to bring each one to
marketability, and following selected products for several
years to determine customer satisfaction . Robert McCrillis
(919) 541-2733.
44.
Transfer and Use of DoD Powder Coating Expertise in Civilian
Applications promotes civilian applications of powder
coating technology in segments of the industry, such as
patio furniture and garden tools, that are dominated by
small businesses . Powder coating produces a durable/hard
surface without VOC and toxic air emissions and has been
used increasingly by the U .S . Navy . Plans call for
reviewing, in conjunction with the Powder Coating Institute,
the Navy experience and for establishing cooperative
efforts, with DoD and private sector organizations, to carry
out several applications using thermoset and thermoplastic
materials . Janet Ondricek (919) 541-4765.
•
45.
Applied Innovative Coatings Research Center seeks
industry, university, and Federal agency participation to
complete field trials of coatings that contain reactive
diluents, such as vernonia oil, and to investigate ways to
reduce the toxicity of water-borne formulations through
reformulation . Coatings are the source of 18% of total
stationary area source VOC and a significant percentage of
air toxic emissions . The results of this project are
expected to be applicable to the surface coating MACT
standard and residual risk determinations . Michael Kosusko
(919) 541-2734.
C.
Catalyze the Design of Safer Chemicals, Processes, Etc.
In addition to providing direct financial support for
technology development and commercialization, EPA can provide
information, skills, tools, facilities, and incentives that
increase the chances for success by technology developers, or
that accelerate their work . Two types of projects are supported
that increase EPA's ability to catalyze technology development
and commercialization funded by others . These are : (a) capacity
building and (b) economic incentives.
Capacity Building
Projects in this sub-category will enable EPA to enhance the
c acity of technology developers to succeed in their technology
development, commercialization, and use efforts through such
means as the provision of technical and other types of support to
developers and the development of standardized protocols and
methods for technology performance testing.
46.
National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST)
focuses on building the government-supported capacity (at
one or more NIST centers) to speed the development and
commercialization of pollution prevention technologies for
small business-dominated industries and on enhancing the
adoption of the technologies through more effective
diffusion programs . Plans call for NIST to provide
scientific and engineering expertise, performance and cost
evaluation design, market assessment, business plan
development, and testing and evaluation locations . The
overall objective of this project is to demonstrate
appropriate techniques for bringing technology and technical
assistance to small- and mid-sized companies through the
existing and proposed NIST Manufacturing Extension Centers.
No direct funding of technology development or
commercialization is provided in this project . Roger
Wilmoth (513) 569-7509.
47.
Pollution Prevention Data Comparability assures, . through
an EPA-led multi-agency effort, mutually acceptable data
quality, data comparability, and data transferability on
pollution prevention technologies and techniques for small
businesses . Credibility and comparability of data
describing technology performance is essential for
regulatory acceptance . The project is expected to produce
sets of general and specific procedures for conducting,
analyzing, and reporting elements of Federally sponsored,
environment-related technology R&D and commercialization
programs . Bruce Hollett (513) 569-7654.
•
48.
Prototype Eco-Industrial Park involves a multi-agency
effort to design and develop an environmentally sound
industrial park, with the cooperation and participation of
private industry in the U .S ./Mexico border area . This
project is expected to demonstrate sustainable development
in practical, economically-grounded terms and to result in
industrial parks designed to coexist healthfully with local
ecosystems, regional economies, and the global biosphere.
(Additional funding is provided under the U .S . TIES program
plan . See Chapter III, Project 52 .) Lea Swanson (202) 2605276.
Economic Incentives
49 .
•
Encouraging Innovative Environmental Technologies Through
the Use of Regulatory Flexibility improves the climate for
technological innovation by demonstrating the feasibility
and benefits of innovative approaches such as economic
incentives . The project seeks a specific application to
identify and facilitate the adoption and use of innovative
environmental technology by introducing regulatory
flexibility . Peter Nagelhout (202) 260-7015.
CHAPTER III
U .S . TECHNOLOGY FOR INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS (U .S . TIES)
PURPOSE
The U .S . Technology for International Environmental
Solutions (U .S . TIES) initiative promotes the application of U .S.
technologies and expertise in solving international environmental
problems and in enhancing U .S . competitiveness in the global
marketplace . Recognizing the important role of environmental
regulations and institutions in creating the demand for
environmental technologies, the initiative focuses on
international technical assistance, training, and other capacitybuilding programs . On the supply side, it is expected to result,
in an improved understanding and application of U .S . technologies
for environmental needs overseas . Primary benefits of the U .S.
TIES program include reduction of trans-boundary and global
environmental issues affecting the United States . The initiative
is expected to result in the development of lower cost and more
effective technologies for use in the United States as U .S.
technology developers gain valuable experience in applying their
'~hnologies overseas . This portion of the ETI is related also
t the inter-agency export promotion initiative documented in
Environmental Technology Exports : Strategic Framework for U .S.
Leadership.
The following seven general principles guided the selection
of projects for this program:
o
EPA's mission is to protect the environment;
o
EPA must safeguard its international credibility and
reputation for objectivity;
o
EPA's technology promotion activities must not exceed EPA's
statutory authority;
o
the program should be more than the sum total of projects;
o
a successful and sustainable program will require both longterm vision and short-term results;
o
EPA and other Federal government action should not displace
private sector initiative or resources ; and
o
the term "environmental technologies" should be broadly
defined.
PROGRAM PLAN
Focusing on "technology push" and "market pull," the FY 1994
program plan for the U .S . TIES theme includes a mix of projects
that combines concrete results in the short term with a longer
term perspective . Undertaken in strict accordance with EPA's
statutory mandates and mission, specific projects are designed
to :
o
assess international markets and needs;
o
evaluate the ability of U .S . technologies to meet these
needs;
o
generate and disseminate credible information on the
performance and costs of relevant U .S . environmental
technologies and expertise;
o
provide technical assistance and training on both longerterm and project-specific bases;
o
overcome financial and other barriers to the international
adoption and use of renewable energy, energy efficient, and
other reduced emission technologies;
demonstrate the performance of U .S . technologies abroad ; and
o
promote greater participation of the U .S . public and private
sectors in the international development of both regulatory
and voluntary standards, thereby helping to "level the
playing field" for the U .S . environmental industry.
The program plan also includes funding to establish the
feasibility of a U .S .-based technical assistance center or other
public-private arrangement to promote integration among these
diverse activities . It also enlists the direct participation of
the U .S . private sector in implementing the initiative.
A.
Technical Assistance Center
50 .
Feasibility Study for Technical Assistance Center -develops a conceptual framework for enlisting the direct
participation of the U .S . private sector in implementing the
U .S . TIES initiative . Specifically, the study would
determine the feasibility of a technical assistance center
or other public-private arrangement for facilitating the
inter-action between U .S . governmental and private sector
parties in conducting technical assistance and training,
ìnformation dissemination, technology demonstrations, and
•
other U .S . TIES activities . Based on a preliminary factfinding and assessment phase, the study would develop
specific options related to : (a) mandate and scope of
activities, (b) legal framework, (c)
governance/organization, (d) interaction with other public
and private organizations, and (e) interface with foreign
governments, industries, and other potential clients . The
feasibility study will set the stage for the actual
establishment or piloting of one or more centers in later
years . Jamison Koehler (202) 260-4894.
B.
Technical Assistance and Training
51.
U .S . Environmental Training Institute focuses on expanding
the proven and highly effective U .S . Environmental Training
Institute, a joint effort between the U .S . environmental
industry and the U .S . government . It provides, to qualified
public and private sector officials from developing
countries, specific training courses that focus on priority
environmental issues that use U .S . technology for solutions.
The training would be designed to incorporate technical
assistance and follow-up activities to foster the exposure
and potential export of U .S . environmental goods and
services . Mark Kasman (202) 260-0424.
52.
Prototype Eco-Industrial Park involves a multi-agency
effort to design and develop an environmentally sound
industrial park, with the cooperation and participation of
private industry, in the U .S ./Mexico border area . The
project offers a unique opportunity to demonstrate the
practical application of the concepts of sustainable
development . (Additional funding is provided under the Clean
Technology Use by Small Business program plan . See Chapter
II, Project 48) . Lea Swanson (202) 260-5276.
•
C.
In-Country Demonstrations
53 .
In-Country Demonstrations of U .S . Environmental Technologies
demonstrates U .S . industrial pollution control and
prevention technology in target countries . Emphasis is on
countries identified in the interagency export strategy
document and countries where the U .S . has existing
assistance efforts, such as Asia, Central and Eastern
Europe, and Mexico . EPA will work with other countries and
non-profit groups to identify opportunities and technologies
for demonstration ; and develop cooperative programs with
other agencies. such es the Agency for International
Development (AID.) and the U .S . Trade and Development Agency
(TDA) to assist in conducting the demonstrations.
Demonstrations will be coordinated with the Export-Import
Bank and the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC)
to provide potential export financing for the technologies,
as well as investment insurance and investor services.
Richard Stern (919) 541-2973.
•
D.
Pre-Feasibility and Feasibility Studies
54.
Environmental Feasibility Study provides support to the
International Fund for Renewable Energy and Energy
Efficiency (IFREE) for projects that reduce greenhouse gas
emissions and air pollutants . IFREE is a two-year-old group
operated with support from EPA, AID, and DOE . With a
pipeline of about 80 projects, IFREE could begin developing
potential projects for U .S . TIES funding immediately.
Michael Adler (202) 260-9013.
E.
Information Generation and Dissemination
55.
Packaging and Dissemination of Information on U .S.
Technologies focuses on producing international workshops,
technology monographs, and handbooks for worldwide
distribution/dissemination to highlight U .S . technologies
and services that have inherent advantages over conventional
approaches to solve major environmental problems . EPA will
work with major international organizations (e .g ., the
International Solid Waste and Public Cleansing Association,
the World Bank, the United Nations Environment Program, and
the World Health Organization) to identify areas of need and
agreeable host countries . This activity will be coordinated
with in-country demonstrations where possible and priority
given to countries targeted in Environmental Technologies
Exports : Strategic Framework for U .S . Leadership . Michael
Moore (202) 260-7671.
F.
Market . .and Needs Assessments
International Market and Needs Assessment surveys the
universe of international environmental problems identified
over the last few years, on a country by country basis,
using studies conducted by a wide variety of sources . The
project then assesses the validity of the data and seeks to
fill information gaps as necessary . The survey of existing
information will also attempt to determine international
priority setting decisions that already have been made, as
well as country by country funding capabilities and needs.
Mark Kasman (202) 260-0424.
57 .
•
National/International Technology Characterization - will
determine, to the extent found in existing literature, the
technical capabilities and costs of the existing universe of
technologies capable of addressing environmental problems in
the following areas : (a) air pollution control (including
monitoring) ; (b) drinking water and wastewater treatment
systems ; and (c) pollution prevention technologies . This
assessment will survey technologies across all countries and
at all levels of effectiveness . It will identify data gaps
for those technologies known to exist, but not fully
characterized, and identify areas that are ripe for
innovation . Stephen James (513) 569-7877.
58.
•
Characterization of U .S . Envirotech Industry -- carried out
in conjunction with project #65, this project will collect
and analyze data on the U .S . envirotech industry and
identify segments of the industry that possess the greatest
potential for export development and economic growth . This
will enable EPA to generate a composite baseline statistical
sketch of the existing industry in the United States and to
assess trends in the industry fundamental to effective
government and private sector policy setting and planning
Better understanding the universe of the U .S . industry will
also help to ensure their involvement in development of a
national agenda for change, and will allow a better
understanding of the barriers affecting innovation and what
is needed to overcome them . Scott Bidner (202) 260-2087.
G.
Technology Evaluation and Testing
59.
Technology Evaluation and Testing : Plans, Priorities, and
Protocols plans and scopes an evaluation and testing
program and develops initial testing protocols . The project
includes evaluating alternative approaches and scopes--from a
protocols-only effort to a broader program in which EPA
establishes a testing program in cooperation with
professional societies, universities, or non-profit
organizations . The project is designed to establish initial
testing protocols that would be applicable under a program
of any scope . Attention will be directed to distinctions
between performance documentation needs for foreign versus
U .S . markets . Stephen James (513) 569-7877.
H
International Standards Development
b.,011.
--
involves
International Standards Development Project
keeping U .S . industry informed about international
environmental regulations and non-regulatory international
environmental standards . The latter focuses particularly on
documents developed through the International Standards
Organization (ISO) as they are to be adopted preferentially
under international trade agreements such as GATT and NAFTA.
The project will seek to clarify differences and, where
possible, minimize inconsistencies between U .S.
environmental regulatory and non-regulatory standards and
those of European, Asian, South American and other trading
partners . The project will identify and evaluate
environmental regulations from five key U .S . international
trading partners so that U .S . industry knows where
competitive environmental opportunities exist . The project
includes participation in the national and international
non-regulatory standards systems to advance EPA goals and
principles that promote sustainable development and
pollution prevention . Mary McKiel (202) 260-3584.
CHAPTER IV
GAPS, BARRIERS, AND INCENTIVES
PURPOSE
.
The Gaps, Barriers, and Incentives theme is designed to
provide the public and private sectors with an analysis of the
environmental technology development gaps in order to stimulate
technology innovation where it is most needed and to create a
national climate supportive to innovation . Resources for the
Gaps Analysis portion of this program will be used to identify
existing gaps analyses and to promote their use to stimulate
development of technology needed to address important
environmental problems . Resources will be used also to provide a
framework for future conduct and use of gaps analyses . Resources
in the Barriers and Incentives portion of this program will be
used to create a national climate for innovation by aggressively
seeking to remove barriers to, and create incentives for,
innovation while ensuring protection of public health and the
environment.
The following principles guided the Subcommittee's selection
of projects for the Gaps portion of this initiative:
o
•
EPA's efforts to establish a technology agenda for the
nation must begin from the perspective of the environmental
problems it is charged to address--for example, ecosystem
protection (such as wetlands and estuaries)--and the
identification and reduction of unacceptable risks to public
health and environment (such as those stemming from
exceedances of ambient air quality standards).
o
The needs of those who use environmental technologies to
identify and address environmental problems is a very
distinct perspective which must be addressed in any
technology agenda, such as gaps in technologies for waste
treatment, reduction, or disposal or in the measurement and
detection of certain substances in the full range of
environmental conditions.
o
To best capture needs for innovation and direct the
challenge toward those who can make a difference in the
future in a manner which prevents pollution, any gap or
needs analysis should challenge industry from a multi-media,
holistic perspective . Further, pollution prevention
opportunities are best addressed through a performance
challenge to an entire operation.
The following principles guided the selection of projects
for the Barriers and Incentives portion of this initiative:
o
•
The program plan must address the full range of
barriers--regulatory, non-regulatory, institutional, and
financial.
o
•
EPA should concentrate funding on reducing or eliminating
barriers related to EPA/state environmental program
activities.
o
EPA should seek early and perceptible change in the climate
for innovation.
o
The program plan must address the full range of
stakeholders--providers of environmental technology (products
and services), regulators, the regulated community, the
financial community, and the public.
PROGRAM PLAN
61 .
Identify National Gaps and Needs Priorities for Innovation
in Environmental Technology - involves a national effort to
gather current information about environmental technology
gaps from various stakeholders' perspectives ; convenes a
major national Conference on Gaps and Needs in Environmental
Technology ; issues the first report articulating an agenda
for innovation in environmental technology based on
information gathered, and discussions at the Conference.
The report will aim to stimulate investment and set
priorities for public and private sector investment to meet
environmental technology needs . This effort will also
create criteria and useful models for performing future gap
and needs analysis . Donn Viviani (202) 260-2767 or Brendan
Doyle (202) 260-2693.
6
Interagency Agenda for Ensuring a National Climate for
Environmental Technology Innovation, Diffusion and
Commercialization - supports EPA's work with the Office of
Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) and other agencies to
coordinate Federal efforts to identify barriers to
innovative environmental technology and to develop a
national agenda for overcoming those barriers and creating a
climate that fosters innovation in environmental
technologies . Al McGartland (202) 260-3354.
63.
EPA Agenda for Creating A Regulatory Climate Conducive to
Environmental Technology Innovation and Commercialization works with relevant stakeholders, both inside and outside
EPA, to identify regulatory barriers and incentives to
innovative technology and to develop an EPA agenda for
enhancing the ability of environmental policies and programs
to foster innovation in all aspects of environmental
technology including : pollution prevention, pollution
control, remediation, monitoring, measurement, and the
provision of environmental services . Barry Elman (202) 2602727.
64.
NPDES Project on Regulatory Barriers and Incentives to
Innovation - identifies barriers to technology innovation
within the NPDES program, evaluates initiatives to remove
those barriers and recommends additional incentives for
innovation while ensuring protection of public health and
the environment . Jackie Romney (202) 260-9528.
411
Characterization of U .S . Environmental Technology Industry in conjunction with project #58, involves the collection and
analysis of data and information about the U .S.
environmental technology industry for a number of purposes.
First, this effort will allow EPA to generate a composite
baseline statistical sketch of the existing environmental
technology industry in the United States using Census and
other information, and to assess recent trends in the
industry . Second, this information will help,identify
segments of the industry that possess the greatest potential
for export development and economic growth . Better
understanding the universe of the U .S . industry will allow a
more complete understanding of the barriers affecting
innovation and what is needed to overcome them . Jenny
Weinberger (202) 260-4396 or Diane DeWitt (202) 260-9645.
66.
Inclusion of Innovative Technology in EPA Enforcement
Settlements - encourages the use of innovative technologies
in EPA settlements in order to "leverage" the overall
environmental impact of individual enforcement actions.
Funds will be used to support evaluation of the
environmental benefits and feasibility of projects proposed
as means of returning to compliance or supplemental
environmental projects for consideration in penalty
mitigation . Peter Rosenberg (202) 260-8869.
67.
Regional Project on Permitting Innovative Technologies supports EPA and/or state permit reviews for facilitating
consideration of proposed use of innovative technologies in
permits required under existing media statutes and
regulations . Funds will be used in selected cases,
identified by the Regions and states, to support analysis of
feasibility and environmental impacts of the alternative
proposals received from the regulated community as Regions
and States actively consider such permit applications . The
visibility of this effort also will enhance our
understanding of the barriers and incentives to innovative
environmental technologies in our permitting processes . Ray
Vogel (919) 541-3153.
S
68.
Evaluation of Multi-Media Inspection Approaches - evaluates
different approaches to multi-media environmental
inspections used, by States and/or EPA to determine which, if
any, are most supportive of innovative technology . Becky
Barclay (202) 260-7166.
69.
Removing Barriers to Approval of New Monitoring Methods assesses how EPA can expedite review and approval of new
monitoring methods and measurement techniques, and
demonstrate the application of the approval process reforms
to methods development activities in EPA . Carol Finch (202)
260-9463.
70.
•
Permit Process -- Communication and Assessment of
Opportunities - documents and analyzes the permitting
processes across all agency programs to support the use of
innovative technologies . First, this project will document
and communicate the steps involved in permitting processes
to better inform the regulated community of the necessary
steps . Second, the project will analyze and describe ways
EPA is proposing to make the permitting processes more
friendly to innovation (building on project #64).
Diane DeWitt (202) 260-9645 and Jenny Weinberger (202) 2604396.
71.
Implementation of Specific Barriers and Incentives Agenda
Items by EPA Headquarters, Regions or States - provides for
early action on initiatives to improve the climate for
technology innovation . Barry Korb (202) 260-2689.
72.
Diffusion Strategies For Environmental Technology - assesses
current approaches to diffuse information on environmental
technologies and their performance, including
clearinghouses, report dissemination, conferences, training,
symposia, and demonstrations ; explores what information
about new technologies and approaches is needed by permit
writers, enforcement personnel, the users of environmental
technology, and the public ; and determines how diffusion
efforts may be improved . Richard Kashmanian (202) 260-5363.
73.
Training on Accounting and Financial Principles for Business
Decisions on Cleaner Technologies and Innovative
Environmental Technologies (for Manufacturing Technology
Centers and Small Business Development Centers) - involves
EPA jointly funding, with partners in other federal and
state agencies and accounting professional societies, the
development and test piloting of a training module on
accounting and financial analysis geared towards medium and
small businesses . The module will help businesses overcome
barriers in their accounting and investment decision-making
that bias decisions away from innovative environmental
technologies, particularly cleaner technologies . The module
will be developed by, and integrated into the outreach
infrastructure of existing and newly created technical
assistance programs, such as Manufacturing Technology
Centers, Small Business Development Centers, and Pollution
Prevention Technical Assistance Programs . Marty Spitzer
(202) 260-4342.
•
B4 .6 Additions/modifications to transmission facilities within
previously developed area
• B4 .7 Adding/burying fiber optic cable
84 .8 New electricity transmission agreements for transfer of power
B4 .9 Multiple use of DOE transmission line rights-of-way
84 .10 Dismantling and removal of transmission lines
B4 .11 Construction or modification of substations
B4 .12 Construction of tap lines (less than 10 miles in length), not
integrating major new sources
84 .13 Minor relocations of existing transmission lines (less than 10
miles in length)
B5 Categorical exclusions applicable to conservation, fossil, and
renewable energy activities
B5 .1 Actions to conserve energy
B5 .2 Modifications to oil/gas/geothermal pumps and piping
B5 .3 Modification (not expansion)/abandonment of oil storage
access/brine injection/geothermal wells, not part of site
closure
• 85 .4 Repair/replacement of sections of pipeline within maintenance
provisions
B5 .5 Construction/operation of short crude oil/geothermal pipeline
segments
B5 .6 Oil spill cleanup operations
B5 .7 Import/export natural gas, no new construction
B5 .8 Import/export natural gas, new cogeneration powerplant
B5 .9 Temporary exemption for electric powerplant, fuel-burning
installation
B5 .10 Certain permanent exemptions for electric powerplant,
fuel-burning installation
B5 .11 Permanent exemption for mixed natural gas and petroleum
B5 .12 Permanent exemption for new peak-load powerplant
B5 .13 Permanent exemption for emergency operations
B5 .14 Permanent exemption for meeting scheduled equipment outages
B5 .15 Permanent exemption due to lack of alternative fuel supply
B5 .16 Permanent exemption for new cogeneration powerplant
'lp6 Categorical exclusions applicable to environmental restoration and
waste management activities
B6 .1 CERCLA removals/similar actions under RCRA or other authorities,
meeting CERCLA cost/time limits or exemptions
B6 .2 Siting/construction/operation of pilot-scale waste collection/
treatment/stabilization/containment facilities
B6 .3 Improvements to environmental control systems
B6 .4 Siting/construction/operation/decommissioning of facility for
storing packaged hazardous waste for 90 days or less
B6 .5 Siting/construction/operation/decommissioning of facility for
characterizing/sorting packaged waste, overpacking waste (not
high-level, spent nuclear fuel)
B6 .6 Modification of facility for storing, packaging, repacking waste
(not high-level, spent nuclear fuel)
B6 .7 Granting/denying petitions for allocation of commercial disposal
capacity
B6 .8 Modifications for waste minimization/reuse of materials
07
Categorical exclusions applicable to international activities
B7 .1 Emergency measures under the International Energy Program
B7 .2 Import/export of special nuclear or isotopic materials
B . Conditions that are Integral Elements of the Classes of Actions in
Appendix B
B . The classes of actions listed below include the following
conditions as integral elements of the classes of actions . To fit
within the classes of actions listed below, a proposal must be one
that would not:
(1) Threaten a violation of applicable statutory, regulatory, or
permit requirements for environment, safety, and health, including
requirements of DOE orders;
(2) Require siting and construction or major expansion of waste
storage, disposal, recovery, or treatment facilities (including
incinerators and facilities for treating wastewater, surface
water, and groundwater);
(3) Disturb hazardous substances, pollutants, contaminants, or
•
CERCLA-excluded petroleum and natural gas products that preexist
in the environment such that there would be uncontrolled or
unpermitted releases ; or
410(4)
Adversely affect environmentally sensitive resources . An action
may be categorically excluded if, although sensitive resources are
present on a site, the action would not adversely affect those
resources (e .g ., construction of a building with its foundation
well above a sole-source aquifer or upland surface soil removal on
a site that has wetlands) . Environmentally sensitive resources
include, but are not limited to:
(i) Property (e .g ., sites, buildings, structures, objects) of
historic, archeological, or architectural significance designated
by Federal, state, or local governments or property eligible for
listing on the National Register of Historic Places;
(ii) Federally-listed threatened or endangered species or their
habitat (including critical habitat), Federally proposed or
candidate species or their habitat, or state-listed endangered or
threatened species or their habitat;
(iii) Floodplains and wetlands;
(iv) Areas having a special designation such as Federally- and
state-designated wilderness areas, national parks, national
natural landmarks, wild and scenic rivers, state and Federal
wildlife refuges, and marine sanctuaries;
(v) Prime agricultural lands;
• (vi) Special sources of water (such as sole-source aquifers, wellhead
protection areas, and other water sources that are vital in a
region) ; and
(vii) Tundra, coral reefs, or rain forests.
Bi . Categorical Exclusions Applicable to Facility Operation
B1 .1 Rate increases for products or services marketed by parts of DOE
other than Power Marketing Administrations and approval of rate
increases for non-DOE entities that do not exceed the change in
the overall price level in , the economy (inflation), as measured
by the Gross National Product (GNP) fixed weight price index
published by the Department of Commerce, during the period since
the last rate increase . (Also see B4 .3 .)
B1 .2 Training exercises and simulations (including, but not limited
to, firing-range training, emergency response training, fire
fighter and rescue training, and spill cleanup training).
B1 .3 Routine maintenance activities and custodial services for
buildings, structures, infrastructures (e .g ., roads), and
equipment, during which operations may be suspended and resumed.
Custodial services are activities to preserve facility
•
appearance, working conditions, and sanitation, such as
cleaning, window washing, lawn mowing, trash collection,
painting, and snow removal . Routine maintenance activities,
corrective (that is, repair), preventive, and predictive (as
defined in DOE Order 4330 .4, "Maintenance Management"), are
required to maintain and preserve buildings, structures,
infrastructures, and equipment in a condition suitable for a
facility to be used for its designated purpose . Routine
maintenance may result in replacement to the extent that the
replacement is in kind and is not a substantial upgrade or
improvement . Routine maintenance does not include replacement of
a major component that significantly extends the originally
intended useful life of a facility (for example, it does not
include the replacement of a reactor vessel near the end of its
useful life) . Routine maintenance activities include, but are
not limited to:
(a) Repair of facility equipment, such as lathes, mills, pumps, . and
presses;
(b) Door and window repair or replacement;
(c) Wall, ceiling, or floor repair;
(d) Reroofing;
(e) Plumbing, electrical utility, and telephone service repair;
(f) Routine replacement of high-efficiency particulate air filters;
(g) Inspection and/or treatment of currently installed utility poles;
410 (h) Repair of road embankments;
(i) Repair or replacement of fire protection sprinkler systems;
(j) Road and parking area resurfacing, including construction of
temporary access to facilitate resurfacing;
(k) Erosion control and soil stabilization measures (such as reseeding
and revegetation);
(1) Surveillance and maintenance of surplus facilities in accordance
with DOE Order 5820 .2, "Radioactive Waste Management";
(m) Repair and maintenance of transmission facilities, including
replacement of . conduc :tors of the same nominal voltage, poles,
circuit breakers, transformers, capacitors, crossarms, insulators,
and downed transmission lines, in accordance, where appropriate,
with 40 CFR Part 761 (Polychlorinated Biphenyls Manufacturing,
Processing, Distribution in Commerce, and Use Prohibitions);
(n) Routine testing and calibration of facility components,
subsystems, or portable equipment (including but not limited to,
control valves, in-core monitoring devices, transformers,
•
capacitors) ; and
•
(o) Routine decontamination of spot or minor contamination on the
surfaces of equipment, rooms, hot cells, or other interior
surfaces of buildings (by such activities as wiping with rags,
using strippable latex, and minor vacuuming) and removal of
contaminated intact equipment (labware) and other materials (e .g .,
gloves and other clothing).
B1 .4 Installation or modification of air conditioning systems
required for temperature control for operation of existing
equipment.
B1 .5 Minor improvements to cooling water systems within an existing
building or structure if the improvements would not : (1) Create
new sources of water or involve new receiving waters ; (2)
adversely affect water withdrawals or the temperature of
discharged water ; or (3) increase introductions of or involve
new introductions of hazardous substances, pollutants,
contaminants, or CERCLA-excluded petroleum and natural gas
products.
B1 .6 Installation or modification of retention tanks or small
(normally under one acre) basins and associated piping and pumps
for existing operations to control runoff or spills (such as
under 40 CFR part 112) . Modifications include, but are not
limited to, installing liners or covers.
B1 .7 Acquisition, installation, operation, and removal of
communication systems, data processing equipment, and similar
electronic equipment.
• B1 .8 Modifications to screened water intake structures that result in
intake velocities and volumes that are within existing permit
limits.
B1 .9
Placement of airway safety markings and painting (but excluding
lighting) of existing electrical transmission lines and antenna
structures in accordance with Federal Aviation Administration
standards.
B1 .10 Routine, onsite storage at an existing facility of activated
equipment and material (including lead) used at that facility,
to allow reuse after decay of radioisotopes with short
half-lives.
B1 .11
Installation of fencing, including that for border marking,
that will not adversely affect wildlife movements or surface
water flow.
B1 .12 Detonation or burning of explosives or propellants that failed
in outdoor tests (i .e ., duds) or were damaged in outdoor tests
(e .g . ,, by fracturing) in outdoor areas designated and routinely
used for explosive detonation or burning under an existing
permit issued by state or local authorities.
•
B1 .13 Acquisition or minor relocation of existing access roads
serving existing facilities if the traffic they are to carry
will not change substantially.
B1 .14 Refueling of an operating nuclear reactor, during which
operations may be suspended and then resumed.
B1 .15 Siting, construction, and operation of small-scale support
buildings and support structures (including prefabricated
buildings and trailers) and/or small-scale modifications of
existing buildings or structures, within or contiguous to an
already developed area (where site utilities and roads are
available) . Covered support buildings and structures (and/or
modifications) include those for office purposes ; parking;
cafeteria services ; education and training ; visitor reception;
computer and data processing services ; employee health services
or recreation activities ; routine maintenance activities;
storage of supplies and equipment for administrative services
and routine maintenance activities ; security (including
security posts) ; fire protection ; and similar support purposes,
but excluding facilities for waste storage activities, except
as provided in other parts of this appendix.
B1 .16 Removal of asbestos-containing materials from buildings in
accordance with 40 CFR part 61 (National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants), subpart M (National Emission
Standard for Asbestos) ; 40 CFR part 763 (Asbestos), subpart G
(Asbestos Abatement Projects) ; 29 CFR part 1910, subpart I
(Personal Protective Equipment), Sec . 1910 .134 (Respiratory
Protection) ; subpart Z (Toxic and Hazardous Substances), Sec.
1910 .1001 (Asbestos, tremolite, anthophyllite and actinolite);
and 29 CFR part 1926 (Safety and Health Regulations for
Construction), subpart D (Occupational Health and Environmental
Controls), Sec . 1926 .58 (Asbestos, tremolite, anthophyllite,
and actinolite), other . appropriate Occupational Safety and
Health Administration standards in title 29, chapter XVII of
the CFR, and appropriate state and local requirements,
including certification of removal contractors and technicians.
B1 .17 Removal of polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB)-containing items,
such as transformers or capacitors, PCB-containing oils flushed
from transformers, PCB-flushing solutions, and PCB-containing
spill materials from buildings or other aboveground locations
in accordance with 40 CFR part 761 (Polychlorinated Biphenyls
Manufacturing, Processing, Distribution in Commerce, and Use
Prohibitions).
B1 .18 Siting, construction, and operation of additional water supply
wells (or replacement wells), within an existing well field, if
there would be no drawdown other than in the immediate. vicinity
of the pumping well, no resulting long-term decline of ' the
water table, and no degradation of the aquifer from the new or
replacement wells .
B1 .19 Siting, construction, and operation of microwave and radio
communication towers and associated facilities, if the towers
•
and associated facilities would not be in an area of great
visual value.
B1 .20 Small-scale activities undertaken to protect, restore, or
improve fish and wildlife habitat, fish passage facilities
(such as fish ladders or minor diversion channels), or
fisheries.
B1 .21 Minor noise abatement measures, such as construction of noise
barriers and installation of noise control materials.
B1 .22 Relocation of buildings (including, but not limited to,
trailers and prefabricated buildings) to an already developed
area where site utilities and roads are available and
demolition and subsequent disposal of buildings and support
structures (including, but not limited to, smoke stacks and
parking lot surfaces).
B2 . Categorical Exclusions Applicable to Safety and Health
B2 .1 Modifications of an existing structure to enhance workplace
habitability (including, but not limited to : improvements to
lighting, radiation shielding, or heating/ventilating/air
conditioning and its instrumentation ; and noise reduction).
B2 .2 Installation of, or improvements to, building and equipment
instrumentation (including, but not limited to, remote control
•
panels, remote monitoring capability, alarm and surveillance
systems, control systems to provide automatic shutdown, fire
detection and protection systems, announcement and emergency
warning systems, criticality and radiation monitors and alarms,
and safeguards and security equipment).
B2 .3 Installation of, or improvements to, equipment for personnel
safety and health, including, but not limited to, eye washes,
safety showers, radiation monitoring devices, and fumehoods and
associated collection and exhaust systems, provided that
emissions would not increase.
B2 .4 Development and implementation of Equipment Qualification
Programs (under DOE Order 5480 .6, "Safety of DOE-owned Nuclear
Reactors") to augment information on safety-related system
components or to improve systems reliability.
B2 .5 Safety and environmental improvements of a facility, includingreplacement and upgrade of facility components, that do not
result in a significant change in the expected useful life,
design capacity, or function of the facility and during which
operations may be suspended and then resumed . Improvements may
include, but are not limited to : Replacement/upgrade of control
valves, in-core monitoring devices, facility air filtration
systems, or substation transformers or capacitors ; addition of
•
structural bracing to meet earthquake standards and/or sustain
high wind loading ; and replacement of aboveground or belowground
•
tanks and related piping if there is no evidence of leakage,
based on testing that meets performance requirements in 40 CFR
part 280, subpart D (40 CFR part 280 .40) . This includes
activities taken under RCRA, subtitle I ; 40 CFR part 265,
subpart J ; 40 CFR part 280, subparts B, C, and D ; and
other applicable state, Federal and local requirements for
underground storage tanks . These actions do not include
rebuilding or modifying substantial portions of a facility, such
as replacing a reactor vessel.
B3 . Categorical Exclusions Applicable to Site Characterization,
Monitoring, and General Research
B3 .1 Site characterization and environmental monitoring, including
siting, construction, operation, and dismantlement or closing
(abandonment) of characterization and monitoring devices and
siting, construction, and operation of a small-scale laboratory
building or renovation of a room in an existing building for
sample analysis . Activities covered include, but are not
limited to, site characterization and environmental monitoring
under CERCLA and RCRA.
Specific activities include, but are not limited to:
(a) Geological, geophysical (such as gravity, magnetic, electrical,
seismic, and radar), geochemical, and engineering surveys and
mapping, including the establishment of survey marks;
• (b) Installation and operation of field instruments, such as
stream-gauging stations or flow-measuring devices, telemetry
systems, geochemical monitoring tools, and geophysical exploration.
tools;
(c) Drilling of wells for sampling or monitoring of groundwater or the
vadose (unsaturated) zone, well logging, and installation of
water-level recording devices in wells;
(d) Aquifer response testing;
(e) Installation and operation of ambient air monitoring equipment;
(f) Sampling and characterization of water, soil, rock, or
contaminants;
(g) Sampling and characterization of water effluents, air emissions,
or solid waste streams;
(h) Installation and operation of meteorological towers and associated
activities, including assessment of potential wind energy
resources;
(i) Sampling of flora or fauna ; and
(j) Archeological, historic, and cultural resource identification in
compliance with 36 CFR part 800 and 43 CFR part 7.
183 .2 Aviation activities for survey, monitoring, or security purposes
that comply with Federal Aviation Administration regulations.
B3 .3 Research, inventory, and information collection activities that
are directly related to the conservation of fish and wildlife
resources and that involve only negligible animal mortality,
habitat destruction, or population reduction.
B3 .4 Drop, puncture, water-immersion, thermal, and fire tests of
transport packaging for radioactive or hazardous materials to
certify that designs me et the requirements of 49 CFR Secs.
173 .411 and 173 .412 and requirements of severe accident
conditions as specified in 10 CFR Sec . 71 .73.
83 .5 Tank car tests under 49 CFR part 179 (including, but not limited
to, tests of safety relief devices, pressure regulators, and
thermal protection systems).
83 .6 Indoor bench-scale research projects and conventional laboratory
operations (for example, preparation of chemical standards and
sample analysis) within existing laboratory facilities.
83 .7 Siting, construction, and operation of new infill exploratory
and experimental (test) oil, gas, and geothermal wells, which
are to be drilled in a geological formation that has existing
operating wells.
B3 .8 Outdoor ecological and other environmental research (including
siting, construction, and operation of a small-scale laboratory
sample analysis) in a small area (generally less than five
acres) that would not result in any permanent change to the
ecosystem.
B3 .9 Demonstration actions proposed under the Clean Coal Technology
Demonstration Program, if the actions would not increase the
quantity or rate of air emissions . These demonstration actions
(a) Test treatment of 20 percent or less of the throughput product
' (solide liquid, or gas) venerated at an existing and fully
operational coal combustion or coal utilization facility;
(b) Addition or replacement of equipment for reduction or control of
sulfur dioxide, oxides of nitrogen, or other regulated substances
that requires only minor modification to the existing structures
at an existing coal combustion or coal utilization facility for
which the existing use remains unchanged ; and
(c) Addition or replacement of equipment for reduction or control of
sulfur dioxide, oxides of nitrogen, or other regulated substances
•
that involves no permanent change in the quantity or quality of
coal being burned or used and involves no permanent change in the
capacity factor of the coal combustion or coal utilization
facility, other than for demonstration purposes of two years or
less in duration.
B3 .10 Small-scale research and development projects and small-scale
pilot projects conducted (for generally less than two years) to
verify a concept before demonstration actions, performed in an
existing structure not requiring major modification.
B3 .11 Outdoor tests and experiments for the development, quality
assurance, or reliability of materials and equipment
(including, but not limited to, weapon system components),
under controlled conditions that would not involve source,
special nuclear, or byproduct materials . Covered activities may
include, but are not limited to, burn tests (such as tests of
electric cable fire resistance or the combustion
characteristics of fuels), impact tests (such as pneumatic
ejector tests using earthen embankments or concrete slabs
designated and routinely used for that purpose), or
drop, puncture, water-immersion, or thermal tests.
B4 . Categorical Exclusions Applicable to Power Marketing Administrations
and to all of DOE with Regard to Power Resources
411
B4 .1 Establishment and implementation of short-term contracts,
marketing plans, policies, annual operating plans, allocation
plans, or acquisition of excess power, the terms of any of which
do not exceed five years and would not cause changes in the
normal operating limits of generating projects, and if
transmission would occur over existing transmission systems.
B4 .2 Export of electricity over existing transmission lines as
provided by section 202(e) of the Federal Power Act.
B4 .3 Changes in rates for electric power, power transmission, and
other products or services provided by a Power Marketing
Administration that are based on a change in revenue
requirements that does not exceed the change in the overall
price level in the economy (inflation), as measured by the GNP
fixed weight price index published by the Department of
Commerce, during the period since the last rate adjustment for
that product or service or, if the rate change does exceed the
change in the GNP fixed weight price index, the rate change
would have no potential for affecting the operation of power
generation resources.
B4 .4 Power marketing services, including storage, load shaping,
seasonal exchanges, or other similar activities if the
operations of generating projects would remain within normal
operating limits.
B4 .5 Temporary adjustments to river operations to accommodate
day-to-day river fluctuations, power demand changes, fish and
wildlife conservation program requirements, and other external
events if the adjustments would occur within the existing
operating constraints of the particular hydrosystem operation.
• B4 .6 Additions or modifications to transmission facilities that would
not affect the environment beyond the previously developed
facility area, including tower modifications, changing
insulators, and replacement of poles, circuit breakers,
transformers, and crossarms.
B4 .7 Adding fiber optic cable to transmission structures or burying
fiber optic cable in existing transmission line rights-of-way.
B4 .8 New electricity transmission agreements, and modifications to
existing transmission arrangements, to use a transmission
facility of one system to transfer power of and for another
system, if no new generation projects would be involved and no
physical changes in the transmission system would be made beyond
the previously developed facility area.
B4 .9 Grant or denial of requests for multiple use of a transmission
facility rights-of-way, such as grazing permits and crossing
agreements, including electric lines, water lines, and drainage
culverts.
B4 .10 Dismantling and removal of transmission lines and right-of-way
abandonment.
•
B4 .11 Construction or modification of substations (including
switching stations) with power delivery at 230 kV or below
and/or support facilities, that would not involve the
construction or relocation of more than 10 miles of
transmission lines or the integration of a major new resource.
B4 .12 Construction of tap lines (less than 10 miles in length) that
are not for the integration of major new sources of generation
into a main transmissión system.
B4 .13 Minor relocations of existing transmission lines (less than 10
m miles in length) made to enhance existing environmental and
land use conditions . Such actions include relocations to avoid
right-of-way encroachments, resolve conflict with property
development, accommodate road/highway construction, allow for
the construction of facilities such as canals and pipelines, or
reduce existing impacts to environmentally sensitive areas.
B5 . Categorical Exclusions Applicable to Conservation, Fossil, and
Renewable Energy Activities
B5 .1 Actions to conserve energy, demonstrate potential energy
conservation, and promote energy-efficiency that do not „ increase
the indoor concentrations of potentially harmful substances.
These actions may involve financial and technical assistance to
individuals (such as builders, owners, consultants, designers),
411
organizations (such as utilities), and state and local
governments . Covered actions include, but are not limited to:
programmed lowering of thermostat settings, placement of timers
on hot water heaters, installation of solar hot water systems,
installation of efficient lighting, improvements in generator
efficiency and appliance efficiency ratings, development of
energy-efficient manufacturing or industrial practices, and
small-scale conservation and renewable energy research and
development and pilot projects . The actions could involve
building renovations or new structures in commercial,
residential, agricultural, or industrial sectors . These actions
do not include rulemakings, standard-settings, or proposed DOE
legislation.
B5 .2 Modifications to oil, gas, and geothermal facility pump and
piping configurations, manifolds, metering systems, and other
instrumentation that, would not change design process flow rates
or affect permitted air emissions.
B5 .3 Modification (but not expansion) or abandonment (including
plugging), which is not part of site closure, of crude oil
storage access wells, brine injection wells, or geothermal
wells.
B5 .4 Repair or replacement of sections of a crude
water, brine, or geothermal pipeline, if the
determined by the Army Corps of Engineers to
maintenance provisions of a DOE permit under
Clean Water Act.
oil, produced
actions are
be within the
section 404 of the
• B5 .5 Construction and subsequent operation of short offsite crude oil
or geothermal pipeline segments between DOE facilities and
existing commercial crude oil transportation, storage, or
refining facilities, or geothermal transportation or storage
facilities, within a single industrial complex, if the pipeline
segments are within existing rights-of-way.
B5 .6 Removal of oil and contaminated materials recovered in oil spill
cleanup operations in accordance with the National Oil and
Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) and .
disposed of in accordance with local contingency plans in
accordance with the NCP.
B5 .7 Approval of new authorization or amendment of existing
authorization to import/export natural gas under section 3 of
the Natural Gas Act that does not involve new construction and
only requires operational changes, such as an increase in
natural gas throughput, change in transportation, or change in
storage operations.
B5 .8 Approval of new authorization or amendment of existing
authorization to import/export natural gas under section 3 of
the Natural Gas Act involving a new cogeneration powerplant (as
defined in the Powerplant and . Industrial Fuel Use Act) within or
•
adjacent to an existing industrial complex and requiring less
than 10 miles of new gas pipeline.
• B5 .9 The grant or denial of any temporary exemption under the
Powerplant and Industrial Fuel Use Act of 1978 for any electric
powerplant or major fuel-burning installation.
B5 .10 The grant or denial of any permanent exemption under the
Powerplant and Industrial Fuel Use Act of 1978 of any existing
electric powerplant or major fuel-burning installation, other
than an exemption under (1) section 312(c) relating to
cogeneration, (2) section 312(1) relating to scheduled
equipment outages, (3) section 312(b) relating to certain state
or local requirements, and (4) section 312(g) relating to
certain intermediate load powerplants.
B5 .11 The grant or denial of a permanent exemption from the
prohibitions of Title II of the Powerplant and Industrial Fuel
Use Act of 1978 for any new electric powerplant or major
fuel-burning installation to permit the use of certain fuel
mixtures containing natural gas or petroleum ..
Use Act of 1978 for any new peak-load powerplant.
41,
prohibitions . of Title II of the Powerplant and Industrial Fuel
Use Act of 1978 for any new electric powerplant or major
fuel-burning installation to permit operation for emergency
purposes only.
prohibitions of Titles II and III of the Powerplant and
Industrial Fuel Use Act of 1978 for any new or existing major
fuel-burning installation for purposes of meeting scheduled
equipment outages not to exceed an average of 28 days per year
over a three-year period.
Use Act of 1978 for any new major fuel-burning installation
which, in petitioning for an exemption due to lack of alternate
fuel supply at a cost which does not substantially exceed the
cost of using imported petroleum, certifies that it will be
operated less than 600 hours per year.
Use Act of 1978 for any new cogeneration powerplant.
B6 . Categorical Exclusions Applicable to Environmental Restoration and
Waste Management Activities
B6 .1 Removal actions under CERCLA (including those taken as final
response actions and those taken before remedial action) and
removal-type actions similar in scope under RCRA and other
authorities (including those taken as partial closure actions
and those taken before corrective action), including treatment
(e .g ., incineration), recovery, storage, or disposal of wastes
at existing facilities currently handling the type of waste
involved in the removal action . These actions will meet the
CERCLA regulatory cost and time limits or satisfy either of the
two regulatory exemptions from those cost and time limits
(National Contingency Plan, 40 CFR Part 300) . These actions
(a) Excavation or consolidation of contaminated soils or materials
from drainage channels, retention basins, ponds, and spill areas
that are not receiving contaminated surface water or wastewater,
if surface water or groundwater would not collect and if such
actions would reduce the spread of, or direct contact with, the
contamination;
(b) Removal of bulk containers (for example, drums, barrels) that
contain or may contain hazardous substances, pollutants,
contaminants, CERCLA-excluded petroleum or natural gas products,
or hazardous wastes (designated in 40 CFR part 261), if such
actions would reduce the likelihood of spillage, leakage, fire,
explosion, or exposure to humans, animals, or the food chain;
(c) Removal of an underground storage tank including its associated
piping and underlying containment systems in compliance with RCRA,
subtitle I ; 40 CFR part 265, subpart J ; and 40 CFR part 280,
subparts F and G if such action would reduce the likelihood of
spillage, leakage, or the spread of, or direct contact with,
contamination;
(d) Repair or replacement of leaking containers;
(e) Capping or other containment of contaminated soils or sludges if
the capping or containment would not affect future groundwater
remediation and if needed to reduce migration of hazardous
substances, pollutants, contaminants, or CERCLA-excluded petroleum
and natural gas products into soil, groundwater, surface water, or
air;
(f) Drainage or closing of man-made surface impoundments if needed to
maintain the integrity of the structures;
(g) Confinement or perimeter protection using dikes, trenches,
ditches, or diversions if needed to reduce the spread of, or
direct contact with, the contamination;
(h) Stabilization, but not expansion, of berms, dikes, impoundments,
or caps if needed to maintain integrity of the structures;
(i) Drainage controls (for example, run-off or run-on diversion) if
•
needed to reduce offsite migration of hazardous substances,
pollutants, contaminants, or CERCLA-excluded petroleum or natural
gas products or to prevent precipitation or run-off from other
sources from entering the release area from other areas;
(j) Segregation of wastes that react with one another to result in
adverse environmental impacts;
(k) Use of chemicals and other materials to neutralize the pH of
wastes;
(1) Use of chemicals and other materials to retard the spread of the
release or to mitigate its effects if the use of such chemicals
would reduce the spread of, or direct contact with, the
contamination;
(m) Installation and operation of gas ventilation systems in soil to
remove methane or petroleum vapors without any toxic or
radioactive co-contaminants if appropriate filtration or gas
treatment is in place;
(n) Installation of fences, warning signs, or other security or site
control precautions if humans or animals have access to the
release ; and
(o) Provision of an alternative water supply that would not create new
water sources if necessary immediately to reduce exposure to
contaminated household or industrial use water and continuing
until such time as local authorities can satisfy the need for a
permanent remedy.
• B6 .2 The siting, construction, and operation of temporary (generally
less than 2 years) pilot-scale waste collection and treatment
facilities, and pilot-scale (generally less than one acre) waste
stabilization and containment facilities (including siting,
construction, and operation of a small-scale laboratory
sample analysis) if the action : (1) Supports remedial
investigations/feasibility studies under CERCLA, or similar
studies under RCRA, such as RCRA facility investigations/
corrective measure studies, or other authorities, and
(2) would not unduly limit the choice of reasonable remedial
alternatives (by permanently altering substantial site area or
by committing large amounts of funds relative to the scope of
the remedial alternatives).
B6 .3 Improvements to environmental monitoring and control systems of
an existing building or structure (for example, changes to
scrubbers in air quality control systems or ion-exchange devices
and other filtration processes in water treatment systems) if
during subsequent operations (1) any substance collected by the
environmental control systems would be recycled, released, or
disposed of within existing permitted facilities and (2) there
are applicable statutory or regulatory requirements or permit
•
conditions for disposal, release, or recycling of any hazardous
substance or CERCLA-excluded petroleum natural gas products that
are collected or released in increased quantity or that were not
previously collected or released.
B6 .4 Siting, construction (or modification or expansion), operation,
and decommissioning of an onsite facility for storing packaged
hazardous waste (as designated in 40 CFR part 261) for 90 days
or less or for longer periods as provided in 40 CFR part 262 .34
(d), (e), or (f) (e .g ., accumulation or satellite areas).
B6 .5 Siting, construction (or modification or expansion), operation,
and decommissioning of an onsite facility for characterizing and
sorting previously packaged waste or for overpacking waste,
other than high-level radioactive waste or spent nuclear fuel,
if operations do not involve unpacking waste . These actions do
not include waste storage (covered under C16).
B6 .6 Modification (excluding increases in capacity) of an existing
structure used for storing, packaging, or repacking waste other
than high-level radioactive waste or spent nuclear fuel, to
handle the same class of waste as currently handled at that
structure.
B6 .7 Under the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of
1985 (5(c)(5)), granting of a petition qualified under 10 CFR
part 730 .6 for allocation of commercial disposal capacity for an
unusual or unexpected volume of commercial low-level radioactive
waste or denying such a petition when adequate storage capacity
exists at the petitioner's facility.
• B6 .8 Minor operational changes at an existing facility to minimize
waste generation and for reuse of materials . These changes
include, but are not limited to, adding filtration and recycle
piping to allow reuse of machining oil, setting up a sorting
area to improve process efficiency, and segregating two waste
streams previously mingled and assigning new identification
codes to the two resulting wastes.
B7 . Categorical Exclusions Applicable to International Activities
B7 .1 Planning and implementation of emergency measures pursuant to
the International Energy Program.
B7 .2 Approval of import or export of small quantities of special
nuclear materials
NEPA Regulation Implementing Procedures - 10 CFR part 1021
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
NEPA REGULATION IMPLEMENTING PROCEDURES - 10 CFR PART 1021
40' For reasons set out in the preamble, 10 CFR part 1021 is revised to
read as set forth below:
PART 1021--NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT IMPLEMENTING PROCEDURES
Subpart A--General
1021 .100
1021 .101
1021 .102
1021 .103
1021 .104
1021 .105
Purpose.
Policy.
Applicability.
Adoption of CEQ NEPA regulations.
Definitions.
Oversight of Agency NEPA activities.
Subpart B--DOE Decisionmaking
1021 .200
1021 .210
1021 .211
process.
1021 .212
1021 .213
1021 .214
1021 .215
1021 .216
DOE planning.
DOE decisionmaking.
Interim actions : Limitations on actions during the NEPA
Research, development, demonstration, and testing.
Rulemaking.
Adjudicatory proceedings.
Applicant process.
Procurement, financial assistance, and joint ventures.
•ubPart C--Implementing Procedures
1021 .300
1021 .301
1021 .310
1021 .311
1021 .312
1021 .313
1021 .314
1021 .315
1021 .320
1021 .321
1021 .322
1021 .330
1021 .331
1021 .340
1021 .341
1021 .342
1021 .343
General requirements.
Agency review and public participation.
Environmental impact statements.
Notice of intent and scoping.
EIS implementation plan.
Public review of environmental impact statements.
Supplemental environmental impact statements.
Records of decision.
Environmental assessments.
Requirements for environmental assessments.
Findings of no significant impact.
Programmatic (including site-wide) NEPA documents.
Mitigation action plans.
Classified, confidential, and otherwise exempt information.
Coordination with other environmental review requirements.
Interagency cooperation.
Variances.
Subpart D--Typical Classes of Actions
1021 .400 Level of NEPA review.
1021 .410 Application of categorical exclusions (classes of actions that
normally do not require EAs or EISs).
Appendix A to Subpart D--Categorical Exclusions Applicable to General
•ncy
Actions
Appendix B to Subpart D--Categorical Exclusions Applicable to Specific
Agency Actions
Appendix C to Subpart D--Classes of Actions that Normally Require EAs
but not Necessarily EISs
Appendix D to Subpart D--Classes of Actions that Normally Require EISs
Authority : 42 U .S .C . 7254 ; 42 U .S .C . 4321 et seq.
Subpart A--General
Sec . 1021 .100
Purpose.
The purpose of this part is to establish procedures that the
Department of Energy (DOE) shall use to comply with section 102(2) of the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 (42 U .S .C . 4332(2)) and
the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations for implementing
the procedural provisions of NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500-1508) . This part
supplements, and is to be used in conjunction with, the CEQ Regulations.
Sec . 1021 .101
Policy.
It is DOE's policy to follow the letter and spirit of NEPA ; comply
;~ly with the CEQ Regulations ; and apply the NEPA review process early in
t.. planning stages for DOE proposals.
Sec . 1021 .102 Applicability.
(a) This part applies to all organizational elements of DOE except the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
(b) This part applies to any DOE action affecting the quality of the
environment of the United States, its territories or possessions . DOE
actions having environmental effects outside the United States, its
territories or possessions are subject to the provisions of Executive
Order 12114, "Environmental Effects Abroad of Major Federal Actions" (3
CFR, 1979 Comp ., p . 356 ; 44 FR 1957, January 4, 1979), DOE guidelines .
implementing that Executive Order (46 FR 1007, January 5, 1981), and the
Department of State's "Unified Procedures Applicable to Major Federal
Actions Relating to Nuclear Activities Subject to Executive Order 12114"
(44 FR 65560, November 13, 1979).
Sec . 1021 .103 Adoption of CEQ NEPA Regulations.
DOE adopts the regulations for implementing NEPA published by CEQ at
40 CFR parts 1500 through 1508 .
Sec . 1021 .104
Definitions.
(a) The definitions set forth in 40 CFR part 1508 are referenced and
in this part.
(b) In addition to the terms defined in 40 CFR part 1508, the
ilpd
tullowing definitions apply to this part:
Action means a project, program, plan, or policy, as discussed at 40
CFR 1508 .18, that is subject to DOE's control and responsibility . Not
included within this definition are purely ministerial actions with regard
to which DOE has no discretion . For example, ministerial actions to
implement congressionally mandated funding for actions not proposed by DOE
and as to which DOE has no discretion (i .e ., statutorily mandated,
congressionally initiated "passthroughs").
Advance NOI means a formal public notice of DOE's intent to prepare an
EIS, which is published in advance of an NOI in order to facilitate public
involvement in the NEPA process.
American Indian tribe means any Indian tribe, band, nation, pueblo, or
other organized group or community, including any Alaska native entity,
which is recognized as eligible for the special programs or services
provided by the United States because of their status as Indians.
Categorical exclusion means a category of actions, as defined at 40
CFR 1508 .4 and listed in appendix A or B to subpart D of this part, for
which neither an EA nor an EIS is normally required.
CEQ means the Council on Environmental Quality as defined at 40 CFR
1508 .6.
• CEQ Regulations means the regulations issued by CEQ (40 CFR parts
i-J0-1508) to implement the procedural provisions of NEPA.
CERCLA-excluded petroleum and natural gas products means petroleum,
including crude oil or any fraction thereof, that is not otherwise
specifically listed or designated as a hazardous substance under section
101(14) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act (CERCLA) (42 U .S .C . 9601 .101(14)) and natural gas, natural
gas . liquids, liquefied natural gas, or synthetic gas usable for fuel or of
pipeline quality (or mixtures of natural gas and such synthetic gas).
Contaminant means a substance identified within the definition of
contaminant in section 101(33) of CERCLA (42 U .S .C . 9601 .101(33)).
Day means a calendar day.
DOE means the U .S . Department of Energy.
DOE proposal (or proposal) means a proposal, as discussed at 40 CFR
1508 .23 (whether initiated by DOE, another Federal agency, or an
applicant), for an action, if the proposal requires a DOE decision.
EA means an environmental assessment as defined at 40 CFR 1508 .9 .
EIS means an environmental impact statement as defined at 40 CFR
1508 .11, or, unless this part specifically provides otherwise, a
Supplemental EIS.
• EIS Implementation Plan means a document that explains and supports
t,ie scope, target schedule, and approach DOE will use to prepare an EIS.
EPA means the U .S . Environmental Protection Agency.
FONSI means a Finding of No Significant Impact as defined at 40 CFR
1508 .13.
Hazardous substance means a substance identified within the definition
of hazardous substances in section 101(14) of CERCLA (42 U .S .C.
9601 .101(14)) . Radionuclides are hazardous substances through their
listing under section 112 of the Clean Air Act (42 U .S .C . 7412) (40 CFR
part 61, subpart H).
Host state means a state within whose boundaries DOE proposes an
action at an existing facility or construction or operation of a new
facility.
Host tribe means an American Indian tribe within whose tribal lands
DOE proposes an action at an existing facility or construction or
operation of a new facility . For purposes of this definition, "tribal
lands" means the area of "Indian country," as defined in 18 U .S .C . 1151,
that is under the tribe's jurisdiction . That section defines Indian
country as:
(i) All land within the limits of any Indian reservation under the
y isdiction of the United States government, notwithstanding the issuance
any patent, and including rights-of-way running through the
i_,ervation;
(ii) All dependent Indian communities within the borders of the United
States whether within the original or subsequently acquired territory
thereof, and whether within or without the limits of a state ; and
(iii) All Indian allotments, the Indian titles to which have not been
extinguished, including rights-of-way running through the same.
Interim action means an action concerning a proposal that is the
subject of an ongoing EIS and that DOE proposes to take before the ROD is
issued, and that is permissible under 40 CFR 1506 .1 : Limitations on
actions during the NEPA process.
Mitigation Action Plan means a document that describes the plan for
implementing commitments made in a DOE EIS and its associe.ted ROD, or,
when appropriate, an EA or FONSI, to mitigate adverse environmental
impacts associated with an action.
NEPA means the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U .S .C.
4321 et seq .).
NEPA document means a DOE NOI, EIS, ROD, EA, FONSI, or any other
document prepared pursuant to a requirement of NEPA or the CEQ Regulations .
NEPA review means the process used to comply with section 102(2) of
NEPA .
NOI means a Notice of Intent to prepare an EIS as defined at 40 CFR
08 .22.
Notice of Availability means a formal notice, published in the Federal
Register, that announces the issuance and public availability of a draft
or final EIS . The EPA Notice of Availability is the official public
notification of an EIS ; a DOE Notice of Availability is an optional notice
used to provide information to the public.
Pollutant means a substance identified within the definition of
pollutant in section 101(33) of CERCLA (42 U .S .C . 9601 .101(33)).
Program means a sequence of connected or related DOE actions or
projects as discussed at 40 CFR 1508 .18(b)(3) and 1508 .25(a).
Programmatic NEPA document means a broad-scope EIS or EA that
identifies and assesses the environmental impacts of a DOE program ; it may
also refer to an associated NEPA document, such as an NOI, ROD, or FONSI.
Project means a specific DOE undertaking including actions approved by
permit or other regulatory decision as well as Federal and federally
assisted activities, which may include design, construction, and operation
of an individual facility ; research, development, demonstration, and
testing for a process or product ; funding for a facility, process, or
product ; or similar activities, as discussed at 40 CFR 1508 .18(b)(4).
• ROD means a Record of Decision as described at 40 CFR 1505 .2.
Scoping means the process described at 40 CFR 1501 .7 ; "public scoping
process" refers to that portion of the scoping process where the public is
invited to participate, as described at 40 CFR 1501 .7 (a)(1) and (b)(4).
Site-wide NEPA document means a broad-scope EIS or EA that is
programmatic in nature and identifies and assesses the individual and
cumulative impacts of ongoing and reasonably foreseeable future actions at
a DOE site ; it may also refer to an associated NEPA document, such as an
NOI, ROD, or FONSI.
Supplement Analysis means a DOE document used to determine whether a
supplemental EIS should be prepared pursuant to 40 CFR 1502 .9(c), or to
support a decision to prepare a new EIS.
Supplemental EIS means an EIS prepared to supplement a prior EIS as
provided at 40 CFR 1502 .9(c).
The Secretary means the Secretary of Energy.
Sec . 1021 .105 Oversight of Agency NEPA activities.
The Assistant Secretary for Environment, Safety and Health, or his/her
designee, is responsible for overall review of DOE NEPA compliance .
Further information on DOE's NEPA process and the status of individual
NEPA reviews may be obtained upon request from the Office of NEPA
Oversight, EH-25, U .S . Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue,
S ., Washington, DC 20585.
ubpart B--DOE Decisionmaking
Sec . 1021 .200
DOE planning.
(a) DOE shall provide for adequate and timely NEPA review of DOE
proposals, including those for programs { policies, projects, regulations,
orders, or legislation, in accordance with 40 CFR 1501 .2 and this section.
In its planning for each proposal, DOE shall include adequate time and
funding for proper NEPA review and for preparation of anticipated NEPA
documents.
(b) DOE shall begin its NEPA review as soon as possible after the time
that DOE proposes an action or is presented with a proposal.
(c) DOE shall determine the level of NEPA review required for a
proposal in accordance with Sec . 1021 .300 and subpart D of this part.
(d) During the development and consideration of a DOE proposal, DOE
shall review any relevant planning and decisionmaking documents, whether
prepared by DOE or another agency, to determine if the proposal or any of
its alternatives are considered in a prior NEPA document . If so, DOE shall
consider adopting the existing document, or any pertinent part thereof, in
accordance with 40 CFR 1506 .3.
Sec . 1021 .210 DOE decisionmaking.
411
(a) For each DOE proposal, DOE shall coordinate its NEPA review with
its decisionmaking Sections 1021 .211 through 1021 .214 of this part
specify how DOE will coordinate its NEPA review with decision points for
certain types of proposals (40 CFR 1505 .1(b)).
(b) DOE shall complete its NEPA review for each DOE proposal before
making a decision on the proposal (e .g ., normally in advance of, and for
use in reaching, a decision to proceed with detailed design), except as
provided in 40 CFR 1506 .1 and Secs . 1021 .211 and 1021 .216 of this part.
(c) During the decisionmaking process for each DOE proposal, DOE shall
consider the relevant NEPA documents, public and agency comments (if any)
on those documents, and DOE responses to those comments, as part of its
consideration of the proposal (40 CFR 1505 .1(d)) and shall include such
documents, comments, and responses as part of the administrative record
(40 CFR 1505 .1(c)).
(d) If an EIS or EA is prepared for a DOE proposal, DOE shall consider
the alternatives analyzed in that EIS or EA before rendering a decision on
that proposal ; the decision on the proposal shall be within the range of
alternatives analyzed in the EA or EIS (40 CFR 1505 .1(e)).
(e) When DOE uses a broad decision (such as one on a policy or
•
program) as a basis for a subsequent narrower decision (such as one on a
project or other site-specific proposal), DOE may use tiering (40 CFR
1502 .20) and incorporation of material by reference (40 CFR 1502 .21) in
NEPA review for the subsequent narrower proposal.
Sec . 1021 .211 Interim actions : Limitations on actions during the NEPA
process.
While DOE is preparing an EIS that is required under Sec . 1021 .300(a)
of this part, DOE shall take no action concerning the proposal that is the
subject of the EIS before issuing an ROD, except as provided at 40 CFR
1506 .1 . Actions that are covered by, or are a part of, a DOE proposal for
which an EIS is being prepared shall not be categorically excluded under
subpart D of these regulations unless they qualify as interim actions
under 40 CFR 1506 .1.
Sec . 1021 .212 Research, development, demonstration, and testing.
(a) This section applies to the adoption and application of programs
that involve research, development, demonstration, and testing for new
technologies (40 CFR 1502 .4(c)(3)) . Adoption of such programs might also
lead to commercialization or other broad-scale implementation by DOE or
another entity.
(b) For any proposed program described in paragraph (a) of this
section, DOE shall begin its NEPA review (if otherwise required by this
part) as soon as environmental effects can be meaningfully evaluated, and
before DOE has reached the level of investment or commitment likely to
determine subsequent development or restrict later alternatives, as
discussed at 40 CFR 1502 .4(c)(3).
(c) For subsequent phases of development and application, DOE shall
l_ pare one or more additional NEPA documents (if otherwise required by
this part).
Sec . 1021 .213
Rulemaking.
(a) This section applies to regulations promulgated by DOE.
(b) DOE shall begin its NEPA review of a proposed rule (if otherwise
required by this part) while drafting the proposed regulation, and as soon
as environmental effects can be meaningfully evaluated.
(c) DOE shall include any relevant NEPA documents, public and agency
comments (if any) on those documents, and DOE responses to those comments,
as part of the administrative record (40 CFR 1505 .1(c)).
(d) If an EIS is required, DOE will normally publish the draft EIS at
the time it publishes the proposed rule (40 CFR 1502 .5(d)) . DOE will
normally combine any public hearings required for a proposed rule with the
public hearings required on the draft EIS under Sec . 1021 .313 of this
part . The draft EIS need not accompany notices of inquiry or advance
notices of proposed rulemaking that DOE may use to gather information
during early stages of regulation development . When engaged in rulemaking
for the purpose of protecting the public health and safety, DOE may issue
•
the final rule simultaneously with publication of the EPA Notice of
Availability of the final EIS in accordance with 40 CFR 1506 .10(b).
(e) If an EA is required, DOE will normally complete the EA and issue
related FONSI prior to or simultaneously with issuance of the proposed
r le ; however, if the EA leads to preparation of an EIS, the provisions of
paragraph (d) of this section shall apply.
Sec . 1021 .214 Adjudicatory proceedings.
(a) This section applies to DOE proposed actions that involve DOE
adjudicatory proceedings, excluding judicial or administrative civil or
criminal enforcement actions.
(b) DOE shall complete its NEPA review (if otherwise required by this
part) before rendering any final adjudicatory decision . If an EIS is
required, the final EIS will normally be completed at the time of or
before final staff recommendation, in accordance with 40 CFR 1502 .5(c).
(c) DOE shall include any relevant NEPA documents, public and agency
comments (if any) on those documents, and DOE responses to those comments,
as part of the administrative record (40 CFR 1505 .1(c)).
Sec . 1021 .215 Applicant process.
(a) This section applies to actions that involve application to DOE
for a permit, license, exemption or allocation, or other similar actions,
unless the action is categorically excluded from preparation of an EA or
EIS under subpart D of this part.
411(b) The applicant shall:
(1) Consult with DOE as early as possible in the planning process to
obtain guidance with respect to the appropriate level and scope of any
studies or environmental information that DOE may require to be submitted
as part of, or in support of, the application;
(2) Conduct studies that DOE deems necessary and appropriate to
determine the environmental impacts of the proposed action;
(3) Consult with appropriate Federal, state, regional and local
agencies, American Indian tribes and other potentially interested parties
during the preliminary planning stages of the proposed action to identify
environmental factors and permitting requirements;
(4) Notify DOE as early a:3 possible of other Federal, state, regional,
local or American Indian tribal actions required for project completion to
allow DOE to coordinate the Federal environmental review, and fulfill the
requirements of 40 CFR 1506 .2 regarding elimination of duplication with
state and . local procedures, as appropriate;
(5) Notify DOE of private entities and organizations interested in the
proposed undertaking, in order that DOE can consult, as appropriate, with
these parties in accordance with 40 CFR 1501 .2(d)(2) ; and
•
(6) Notify DOE if, before DOE completes the environmental review, the
applicant plans to take an action that is within DOE's jurisdiction that
have an adverse environmental impact or limit the choice of
ernatives . If DOE determines that the action would have an adverse
ironmental impact or would limit the choice of reasonable alternatives
under 40 CFR 1506 .1(a), DOE will promptly notify the applicant that DOE
will take appropriate action to ensure that the objectives and procedures
of NEPA are achieved in accordance with 40 CFR 1506 .1(b).
(c) For major categories of DOE actions involving a large number of
applicants, DOE may prepare and make available generic guidance describing
the recommended level and scope of environmental information that
applicants should provide.
(d) DOE shall begin its NEPA review (if otherwise required by this
part) as soon as possible after receiving an application described in
paragraph (a) of this section, and shall independently evaluate and verify
the accuracy of information received from an applicant in accordance with
40 CFR 1506 .5(a) . At DOE's option, an applicant may prepare an EA in
accordance with 40 CFR 1506 .5(b) . If an EIS is prepared, the EIS shall be
prepared by DOE or by a contractor that is selected by DOE and that may be
funded by the applicant, in accordance with 40 CFR 1506 .5(c) . The
contractor shall provide a disclosure statement in accordance with 40 CFR
1506 .5(c), as discussed in Sec . 1021 .312(b)(4) of this part . DOE shall
complete any NEPA documents (or evaluation of any EA prepared by the
applicant) before rendering a final decision on the application and shall
consider the NEPA document in reaching its decision, as provided in Sec.
1021 .210 of this. part.
•ec . 1021 .216 Procurement, Financial Assistance, and Joint Ventures.
(a) This section applies to DOE competitive and limited-source
procurements, to awards of financial assistance by a competitive process,
and to joint ventures entered into as a result of competitive
solicitations, unless the action is categorically excluded from
preparation of an EA or EIS under Subpart D of this part . Paragraphs (b),
(c), and (i) of this section apply as well to DOE sole-source procurements
of sites, systems, or processes, to noncompetitive awards of financial
assistance, and to sole-source joint ventures, unless the action is
categorically excluded from preparation of an EA or EIS under Subpart D of
this part.
(b) When relevant in DOE's judgment, DOE shall require that offeror's
submit environmental data and analyses as a discrete part of the offeror's
proposal . DOE. shall specify in its solicitation document the type of
information and level of detail for environmental data and analyses so
required . The data will be limited to those reasonably available to
offerors .
(c) DOE shall independently evaluate and verify the accuracy of
environmental data and analyses submitted -by offerors.
(d) For offers in the competitive range, DOE shall prepare and
•
consider an environmental critique before the selection.
(e) The environmental critique will be subject to the confidentiality
.iirements of the procurement process.
(f) The environmental critique will evaluate the environmental data
and analyses submitted by offerors ; it may also evaluate supplemental
information developed by DOE as necessary for a reasoned decision.
(g) The environmental critique will focus on environmental issues that
are pertinent to a decision on proposals and will include:
(1) A brief discussion of the purpose of the procurement and each
offer, including any site, system, or process variations among the offers
having environmental implications;
(2) A discussion of the salient characteristics of each offeror's
proposed site, system, or process as well as alternative sites, systems,
or processes;
(3) A brief comparative evaluation of the potential environmental
impacts of the offers, which will address direct and indirect effects,
short-term and long-term effects, proposed mitigation measures, adverse
effects that cannot be avoided, areas where important environmental
information is incomplete and unavailable, unresolved environmental issues
and practicable mitigating measures not included in the offeror's
proposal ; and
(4) To the extent known for each offer, a list of Federal, Tribal,
s* te, and local government permits, licenses, and approvals that must be
lined.
(h) DOE shall prepare a publicly available environmental synopsis,
based on the environmental critique, to document the consideration given
to environmental factors and to record that the relevant environmental
consequences of reasonable alternatives have been evaluated in the
selection process . The synopsis will not contain business, confidential,
trade secret or other information that DOE otherwise would not disclose
pursuant to 18 U .S .C . 1905, the confidentiality requirements of the
competitive procurement process, 5 U .S .C . 552(b) and 41 U .S .C . 423 . To
assure compliance with this requirement, the synopsis will not contain
data or other information that may in any way reveal the identity of
offerors . After a selection has been made, the environmental synopsis
shall be filed with EPA, shall be made publicly available, and shall be
incorporated in any NEPA document prepared under paragraph (i) of this
section.
(i) If an EA or EIS is required, DOE shall prepare, consider and
publish the EA or EIS in conformance with the CEQ Regulations and other
provisions of this part before taking any action pursuant to the contract
or award of financial assistance (except as provided at 40 CFR 1506 .1 and
Sec . 1021 .211 of this part) . If the NEPA process is not completed before
the award of the contract, financial assistance, or joint venture, then
the contract, financial assistance, or joint venture shall be contingent
on completion of the NEPA process (except as provided at 40 CFR 1506 .1 and
Sec . 1021 .211 of this part) . DOE shall phase subsequent contract work to
allow the NEPA review process to be completed in advance of a go/no-go
decision.
.ubpart C--Implementing Procedures
Sec . 1021 .300 General requirements.
(a) DOE shall determine, under the procedures in the CEQ Regulations
and this part, whether any DOE proposal:
(1) Requires preparation of an EIS;
(2) Requires preparation of an EA ; or
(3) Is categorically excluded from preparation of either an EIS or an
EA . DOE shall prepare any pertinent documents as required by NEPA, the
CEQ Regulations, or this part.
(b) Notwithstanding any other provision of these regulations, DOE may
prepare a NEPA document for any DOE action at any time in order to further
the purposes of NEPA . This may be done to analyze the consequences of
ongoing activities, support DOE planning, assess the need for mitigation,
fully disclose the potential environmental consequences of DOE actions, or
for any other reason . Documents prepared under this paragraph shall be
prepared in the same manner as DOE documents prepared under paragraph (a)
of this section.
•ec . 1021 .301 Agency review and public participation.
(a) DOE shall make its NEPA documents available to other Federal
agencies, states, local governments, American Indian tribes, interested
groups, and the general public, in accordance with 40 CFR 1506 .6, except
as provided in Sec . 1021 .340 of this part.
(b) Wherever feasible, DOE NEPA documents shall explain technical,
scientific, or military terms or measurements using terms familiar to the
general public, in accordance with 40 CFR 1502 .8.
(c) DOE shall notify the host state and host tribe of a DOE
determination to prepare an EA or EIS for a DOE proposal, and may notify
any other state or American Indian tribe that, in DOE's judgment, may be
affected by the proposal.
(d) DOE shall provide the host state and host tribe with an
opportunity to review and comment on any DOE EA prior to DOE's approval of
the EA . DOE may also provide any other state or American Indian tribe with
the same opportunity if, in DOE's judgment, the state or tribe may be
affected by the proposed action . At DOE's discretion, this review period
shall be from 14 to 30 days . DOE shall consider all comments received from
a state or tribe during the review period before approving or modifying
the EA, as appropriate . If all states and tribes afforded this opportunity
for preapproval review waive such opportunity, or provide a response
before the end of the comment period, DOE may proceed to approve or take
other appropriate action on the EA before the end of the review period.
(e) Paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section shall not apply to power
m keting actions, such as rate-setting, in which a state or American
Indian tribe is a customer, or to any other circumstances where DOE
determines that such advance information could create a conflict of
interest.
Sec . 1021 .310 Environmental impact statements.
DOE shall prepare and circulate EISs and related RODS in accordance
with the requirements of the CEQ Regulations, as supplemented by this
subpart.
Sec . 1021 .311 Notice of intent and scoping.
(a) DOE shall publish an 1QOI in the Federal Register in accordance
with 40 CFR 1501 .7 and containing the elements specified in 40 CFR 1508 .22
as soon as practicable after a decision is made to prepare an EIS.
However, if there will be a lengthy period of time between its decision to
prepare an EIS and the time of actual preparation, DOE may defer
publication of the NOI until a reasonable time before preparing the EIS,
provided that DOE allows a reasonable opportunity for interested parties
to participate in the EIS process . Through the NOI, DOE shall invite
comments and suggestions on the scope of the EIS . DOE shall disseminate
the NOI in accordance with 40 CFR 1506 .6.
(b) If there will be a lengthy delay between the time DOE has decided
repare an EIS and the beginning of the public scoping process, DOE may
AiTish an Advance NOI , in the Federal Register to provide an early
opportunity to inform interested parties of the pending EIS or to solicit
early public comments . This Advance NOI does not serve as a substitute for
the NOI provided for in paragraph (a) of this section.
(c) Publication of the NOI in the Federal Register shall begin the
public scoping process . The public scoping process for a DOE EIS shall
allow a minimum of 30 days for the receipt of public comments.
(d) Except as provided in paragraph (g) of this section, DOE shall
hold at least one public scoping meeting as part of the public scoping
process for a DOE EIS . DOE shall announce the location, date, and time of
public scoping meetings in the NOI or by other appropriate means, such as
additional notices in the Federal Register, news releases to the local
media, or letters to affected parties . Public scoping meetings shall not
be held until at least 15 days after public notification . Should DOE
change the location, date, or time of a public scoping meeting, or
schedule additional public scoping meetings, DOE shall publicize these
changes in the Federal Register or in other ways as appropriate.
(e) In determining the scope of the EIS, DOE shall consider all
comments received during the announced comment period held as part of the
public scoping process . DOE may also consider comments received after the
•
close of the announced comment period.
(f) The results of the scoping process shall be documented in the EIS
I lementation Plan as provided in Sec . 1021 .312 of this part.
(g) A public scoping process is optional for DOE supplemental EISs (40
CFR 1502 .9(c)(4)) . If DOE initiates a public scoping process for a
supplemental EIS, the provisions of paragraphs (a) through (f) of this
section shall apply.
Sec . 1021 .312
EIS implementation plan.
(a) DOE shall prepare an EIS Implementation Plan to provide guidance
for the preparation of an EIS and record the results of the scoping
process . DOE shall complete the EIS Implementation Plan as soon as
possible after the close of the public scoping process, but in any event
before issuing the draft EIS . DOE may amend the EIS Implementation Plan
to incorporate changes in schedules, alternatives, or other content.
(b) The EIS Implementation Plan shall include:
(1) A statement of the planned scope and content of the EIS;
(2) The purpose and need for the proposed action;
(3) A description of the scoping process and the results (as needed to
document DOE compliance with 40 CFR 1501 .7), including a summary of
comments received and their disposition;
• (4) Target schedules;
(5) Anticipated consultation with other agencies ; and
(6) A disclosure statement executed by any contractor (or
subcontractor) under contract with DOE to prepare the EIS document in
accordance with 40 CFR 1506 .5(c).
(c) At
limits for
with other
to be used
DOE's option, the Implementation Plan may include target page
the EIS, planned work assignments, anticipated consultation
organizations, or any other information to support the approach
in preparing the ETS.
(d) DOE shall make the EIS Implementation Plan and any formal
revisions available to the public for information . DOE shall make copies
available for inspection in the appropriate DOE public reading room(s) or
other appropriate location(s) for a reasonable time . Copies of these
documents shall also be provided upon written request.
Sec . 1021 .313 Public review of environmental impact statements.
(a) The public review and comment period on a DOE draft EIS shall be
no less than 45 days (40 CFR 1506 .10(c)) . The public comment period begins
when EPA publishes a Notice of Availability of the document in the Federal
Register .
(b) DOE shall hold at least one public hearing on DOE draft EISs . Such
lic hearings shall be announced at least 15 days in advance . The
ouncement shall identify the subject of the draft EIS and include the
1 ation, date, and time of the public hearings.
(c) DOE shall prepare a final EIS following the public comment period
and hearings on the draft EIS . The final EIS shall respond to oral and
written comments received during public review of the draft EIS, as
provided at 40 CFR 1503 .4 . In . addition to the requirements at 40 CFR
1502 .9(b), a DOE final EIS shall include any Statement of Findings
required by 10 CFR part 1022, "Compliance with Floodplain/Wetlands
Environmental Review Requirements ."
(d) DOE shall use appropriate means to publicize the availability of
draft and final EISs and the time and place for public hearings on a draft
EIS . The methods chosen should focus on reaching persons who may be
interested in or affected by the proposal and may include the methods
listed in 40 CFR 1506 .6(b)(3).
Sec . 1021 .314 Supplemental environmental impact statements.
(a) DOE shall prepare a supplemental EIS if there are substantial
changes to the proposal or significant new circumstances or information
relevant to environmental concerns, as discussed in 40 CFR 1502 .9(c)(1).
(b) DOE may supplement a draft EIS or final EIS at any time, to
further the purposes of NEPA, in accordance with 40 CFR 1502 .9(c)(2) .
All
(c) When it is unclear whether or not an EIS supplement is required,
shall prepare a Supplement Analysis.
(1) The Supplement, Analysis shall discuss the circumstances that are
pertinent to deciding whether to prepare a supplemental EIS, pursuant to
40 CFR 1502 .9(c).
(2) The Supplement Analysis shall contain sufficient information for
DOE to determine whether:
(i) An existing EIS should be supplemented;
(ii) A new EIS should be prepared ; or
(iii) No further NEPA documentation is required.
(3) DOE shall make the determination and the related Supplement
Analysis available to the public for information . Copies of the
determination and Supplement Analysis shall be provided upon written
request . DOE shall make copies w!ailable for inspection in the appropriate
DOE public reading room(s) or other appropriate location(s) for a
reasonable time.
(d) DOE shall prepare, circulate, and file a supplement to a draft or
final EIS in the same manner as any other draft and final EISs, except
that scoping is optional for a supplement . If DOE decides to take action
on a proposal covered by a supplemental EIS, DOE shall prepare a ROD in
accordance with the provisions of Sec . 1021 .315 of this part.
(e) When applicable, DOE will incorporate an EIS supplement, or the
determination and supporting Supplement Analysis made under paragraph (c)
this section, into any related formal administrative record on the
ion that is the subject of the EIS supplement or determination (40 CFR
1-Ú2 .9(c)(3)).
Sec . 1021 .315 Records of decision.
(a) No decision may be made on a proposal covered by an EIS during a
30-day "waiting period" following completion of the final EIS, except as
provided at 40 CFR 1506 .1 and 1506 .10(b) and Sec . 1021 .211 of this part.
The 30-day period starts when the EPA Notice of Availability for the final
EIS is published in the Federal Register.
(b) If DOE decides to take action on a proposal covered by an EIS, a
ROD shall be prepared as provided at 40 CFR 1505 .2 (except as provided at
40 CFR 1506 .1 and Sec . 1021 .211 of ,this part) . No action shall be taken
until the decision has been made public.
(c) DOE RODS shall be published in the Federal Register and made
available to the public as specified in 40 CFR 1506 .6, except as provided
in 40 CFR 1507 .3(c) and Sec . 1021 .340 of this part.
(d) DOE may revise a ROD at any time, so long as the revised decision
is adequately supported by an existing EIS . A revised ROD is subject to
the provisions of paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section.
Sec . 1021 .320 Environmental assessments.
DOE shall prepare and circulate EAs and related fONSIs in accordance
Ilk
h the requirements of the CEQ Regulations, as supplemented by this
subpart.
Sec . 1021 .321 Requirements for environmental assessments.
(a) When to prepare an EA . As required by 40 CFR 1501 .4(b), DOE shall
prepare an EA for a proposed DOE action that is described in the classes
of actions listed in appendix C to subpart D of this part, and for a
proposed DOE action that is not described in any of the classes of actions
listed in appendices A, B, or D to subpart D, except that an EA is not
required if DOE has decided to prepare an EIS . DOE may prepare an EA on
any action at any time in order to assist agency planning and
decisionmaking.
(b) Purposes . A DOE EA shall serve the purposes identified in 40 CFR
1508 .9(a), which include providing sufficient evidence and analysis for
determining whether to prepare an EIS or to issue a FONSI . If appropriate,
a DOE EA shall also include any floodplain/wetlands assessment prepared
under 10 CFR part 1022 and may include analyses needed for other
environmental determinations.
(c) Content . A DOE EA shall comply with the requirements found at 40
CFR 1508 .9 . In addition to any other alternatives, DOE shall assess the no
action alternative in an EA, even when the proposed action is specifically
required by legislation or a court order.
d
ec . 1021 .322 Findings of no significant impact.
(a) DOE shall prepare a FONSI only if the related EA supports the
finding that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the
human environment . If a required DOE EA does not support a FONSI, DOE
shall prepare an EIS and issue a ROD before taking action on the proposal
addressed by the EA, except as permitted under 40 CFR 1506 .1 and Sec.
1021 .211 of this part.
(b) In addition to the requirements found at 40 CFR 1508 .13, a DOE
FONSI shall include the following:
(1) A summary of the supporting EA, including a brief description of
the proposed action and alternatives . considered in the EA, environmental
factors considered, and projected impacts;
(2) Any commitments to mitigations that are essential to render the
impacts of the proposed action not significant, beyond those mitigations
that are integral elements of the proposed action, and a reference to the
Mitigation Action Plan prepared under Sec . 1021 .331 of this part;
(3) Any "Statement of Findings" required by 10 CFR Part 1022,
"Compliance with Floodplain/Wetlands Environmental Review Requirements";
(4) The date of issuance ; and
(5) The signature of the DOE approving official.
10,
(c) DOE shall make FONSIs available to the public as provided at 40
1501 .4(e)(1) and 1506 .6 ; DOE shall make copies available for
inspection in the appropriate DOE public reading room(s) or other
appropriate location(s) for a reasonable time.
(d) DOE shall issue a proposed FONSI for public review and comment
before making a final determination on the FONSI if required by 40 CFR
1501 .4(e)(2) ; DOE may issue a proposed FONSI for public review and comment
in other situations as well.
(e) Upon issuance of the FONSI, DOE may proceed with the proposed
action subject to any mitigation commitments expressed in the FONSI that
are essential to render the impacts of the proposed action not
significant.
(f) DOE may revise a FONSI at any time, so long as the revision is
supported by an existing EA . A revised FONSI is subject to all provisions
of paragraph (d) of this section.
Sec . 1021 .330 Programmatic (including Site-wide) NEPA documents:
(a) When required to support a DOE programmatic decision (40 CFR
1508 .18(b)(3)), DOE shall prepare a programmatic EIS or EA (40 CFR
1502 .4) . DOE may also prepare a programmatic EIS or EA at any time to
further the purposes of NEPA.
S
(b) A DOE programmatic NEPA document shall be prepared, issued, and
culated in accordance with the requirements for any other NEPA
ument, as established by the CEQ Regulations and this part.
(c) As a matter of policy when not otherwise required, DOE shall
prepare site-wide EISs for certain large, multiple-facility DOE sites ; DOE
may prepare EISs or EAs for other sites to assess the impacts of all or
selected functions at those sites.
(d) DOE shall evaluate site wide NEPA documents prepared under Sec.
1021 .330(c) at least every five years . DOE shall evaluate site-wide EISs
by means of a Supplement Analysis, as provided in Sec . 1021 .314 . Based on
the Supplement Analysis, DOE shall determine whether the existing EIS
remains adequate or whether to prepare a new site-wide EIS or supplement
the existing EIS, as appropriate . The determination and supporting
analysis shall be made available in the appropriate DOE public reading
room(s) or in other appropriate location(s) for a reasonable time.
(e) DOE shall evaluate site-wide EAs by means of an analysis similar
to the Supplement Analysis to determine whether the existing site-wide EA
remains adequate, whether to prepare a new site-wide EA, revise the FONSI,
or prepare a site wide EIS, as appropriate . The determination and
supporting analysis shall be made available in the appropriate DOE public
reading room(s) or in other appropriate location(s) for a reasonable time.
Sec . 1021 .331 Mitigation action plans.
(a) Following completion of each EIS and its associated ROD, DOE shall
*pare a Mitigation Action Plan that addresses mitigation commitments
ressed in the ROD . The Mitigation Action Plan shall explain how the
corresponding mitigation measures, designed to mitigate adverse
environmental impacts associated with the course of action directed by the
ROD, will be planned and implemented . The Mitigation Action Plan shall be
prepared before DOE takes any action directed by the ROD that is the
subject of a mitigation commitment.
(b) In certain circumstances, as specified in Sec . 1021 .322(b)(2),, DqE
shall also prepare a Mitigation Action Plan for commitments to mitigations
that are essential to render the impacts of the proposed action not
significant . The Mitigation Action Plan shall address all commitments to
such necessary mitigations and explain how mitigation will be planned and
implemented . The Mitigation Action Plan shall be prepared before the FONSI
is issued and shall be referenced therein.
(c) Each Mitigation Action Plan shall be as complete as possible,
commensurate with the information available regarding the course of action
either directed by the ROD or the action to be covered by the FONSI, as
appropriate . DOE may revise the Plan as more specific and detailed
information becomes available.
(d) DOE shall make copies of the Mitigation Action Plans available for
inspection in the appropriate DOE public reading room(s) or other
appropriate location(s) for a reasonable time . Copies of the Mitigation
Action Plans shall also be available upon written request.
ec . 1021 .340 Classified, confidential, and otherwise exempt
fllormation.
(a) Notwithstanding other sections of this part, DOE shall not
disclose classified, confidential, or other information that DOE otherwise
would not disclose pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5
U .S .C . 552) and 10 CFR 1004 .10(b) of DOE's regulations implementing the
FOIA, except as provided by 40 CFR 1506 .6(f).
(b) To the fullest extent possible, DOE shall segregate any
information that is exempt from disclosure requirements into an appendix
to allow public review of the remainder of a NEPA document.
(c) If exempt information cannot be segregated, or if segregation
would leave essentially meaningless material, DOE shall withhold the
entire NEPA document from the public ; however, DOE shall prepare the NEPA
document, in accordance with the CEQ Regulations and this part, and use it
in DOE decisionmaking.
Sec . 1021 .341 Coordination with other environmental review
requirements.
(a) In accordance with 40 CFR 1500 .4(k) and (o), 1502 .25, and 1506 .4,
DOE shall integrate the NEPA process and coordinate NEPA compliance with
other environmental review requirements to the fullest extent possible.
(b) To the extent possible, DOE shall determine the applicability of
.er environmental requirements early in the planning process, in
sultation with other agencies when necessary or appropriate, to ensure
compliance and to avoid delays, and shall incorporate any relevant
requirements as early in the NEPA review process as possible.
Sec . 1021 .342 Interagency cooperation.
For DOE programs that involve another Federal agency or agencies in
related decisions subject to NEPA, DOE will comply with the requirements
of 40 CFR 1501 .5 and 1501 .6 . As part of this process, DOE shall cooperate
with the other agencies in developing environmental information and in
determining whether a proposal requires preparation of an EIS or EA, or
can be categorically excluded from preparation of either . Further, where
appropriate and acceptable to the other agencies, DOE shall develop or .
cooperate in the development of interagency agreements to facilitate
coordination and to reduce delay and duplication.
Sec . 1021 .343
Variances.
(a) Emergency Actions . DOE may take an action without observing all
provisions of this part or the CEQ Regulations, in accordance with 40 CFR
1506 .11, in emergency situations that demand immediate action . DOE shall
consult with CEQ as soon as possible regarding alternative arrangements
for emergency actions having significant environmental impacts . DOE shall
document, including publishing a notice in the Federal Register, emergency
actions covered by this paragraph within 30 days after such action occurs;
this documentation shall identify any adverse impacts from the actions
taken, further mitigation necessary, and any NEPA documents that may be
41)4ired .
(b) Reduction of Time Periods . On a case-by-case basis, DOE may reduce
time periods established in this part that are not required by the CEQ
Regulations . If DOE determines that such reduction is necessary, DOE shall
publish a notice in the Federal Register specifying the revised time
periods and the rationale for the reduction.
(c) Other . Any variance from the requirements of this part, other than
as provided by paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section, must be soundly
based on the interests of national security or the public health, safety,
or welfare and must have the advance written approval of the Secretary;
however, the Secretary is not authorized to waive or grant a variance from
any requirement of the CEQ Regulations (except as provided for in those
regulations) . If the Secretary determines that a variance from the
requirements of this part is within his/her authority to grant and is
necessary, DOE shall publish a notice in the Federal Register specifying
the variance granted and the reasons.
Subpart D--Typical Classes of Actions
Sec . 1021 .400 Level of NEPA review.
(a) This subpart identifies DOE actions that normally:
(1) Do not require preparation of either an EIS or an EA (are
categorically excluded from preparation of either document) (appendices A
B to this subpart D);
(2) Require preparation of an EA, but not necessarily an EIS (appendix
C to this subpart D) ; or
(3) Require preparation of an EIS (appendix D to this subpart D).
(b) Any completed, valid NEPA review does not have to be repeated, and
no completed NEPA documents need to be redone by reasons of these
regulations, except as provided in Sec . 1021 .314.
(c) If a DOE proposal is encompassed within a class of actions listed
in the appendices to this subpart D, DOE shall proceed with the level of
NEPA review indicated for that class of actions, unless there are
extraordinary circumstances related to the specific proposal that may
affect the significance of the environmental effects of the proposal.
(d) If a DOE proposal is not encompassed within the classes of actions
listed in the appendices to this subpart D, or if there are extraordinary
circumstances related to the proposal that . may affect the significance of
the environmental effects of the proposal, DOE shall either:
(1) Prepare an EA and, on the basis of that EA, determine whether to
•
prepare an EIS or a FONSI ; or
(2) Prepare an EIS and ROD.
c . 1021 .410 Application of categorical exclusions (classes of
!tons that normally do not require EAs or EISs).
(a) The actions listed in appendices A and B to this subpart D are
classes of actions that DOE has determined do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment
(categorical exclusions).
(b) To find that a proposal is categorically excluded, DOE shall
determine the following:
(1) The proposal fits within a class of actions that is listed in
appendix A or B to this subpart D;
(2) There are no extraordinary circumstances related to the proposal
that may affect the significance of the environmental effects of the
proposal . Extraordinary circumstances are unique situations presented by
specific proposals, such as scientific controversy about the environmental
effects of the proposal ; uncertain effects or effects involving unique or
unknown risks ; or unresolved conflicts concerning alternate uses of
available resources within the meaning of section 102(2)(E) of NEPA ; and
(3) The proposal is not "connected" (40 CFR 1508 .25(a)(1)) to other
actions with potentially significant impacts, is not related to other
proposed actions with cumulatively significant impacts (40 CFR
1508 .25(a)(2) . ), and is not precluded by 40 CFR 1506 .1 or Sec . 1021 .211 of
this part.
• (c) All categorical exclusions may be applied by any organizational
element 'of DOE . The sectional divisions in appendix B to this subpart D
are solely for purposes of organization of that appendix and are not
intended to be limiting.
(d) A class of actions includes activities foreseeably necessary to
proposals encompassed within the class of actions (such as associated
transportation activities and award of implementing grants and contracts).
Appendix A to Subpart D--Categorical Exclusions Applicable to General
Agency Actions
Table of Contents
Al . Routine administrative/financial/personnel actions
A2.
Contract interpretations/amendments/modifications, clarifying or
administrative
A3.
Certain actions by Office of Hearings and Appeals
A4.
Interpretations/rulings for existing regulations
A5 . Rulemaking (interpreting/amending), no change in environmental
effect
6.
Rulemakings, procedural
7.
Transfer of property, use unchanged
A8.
Award of contracts for technical support/management and
operation/personal services
A9.
Information gathering/data analysis/document
preparation/dissemination
A10.
Reports or recommendations on non-DOE legislation
All . Technical advice and assistance to organizations
Al2 . Emergency preparedness planning
A13.
Procedural Orders, Notices, and guidelines
A14.
Approval of technical exchange arrangements
A15.
Umbrella agreements for cooperation in energy research and
development
Al Routine actions necessary to support the normal conduct of agency
business, such as administrative, financial, and personnel
actions.
• A2 Contract interpretations, amendments, and modifications that are
clarifying or administrative in nature.
A3 Adjustments, exceptions, exemptions, appeals, and stays,
modifications, or rescissions of orders issued by the Office of
Hearings and Appeals.
A4 Interpretations and rulings with respect to existing regulations,
or modifications or rescissions of such interpretations and
rulings.
A5 Rulemaking interpreting or amending an existing rule or regulation
that does not change the environmental effect of the rule or
regulation being amended.
A6 Rulemakings that are strictly procedural, such as rulemaking
(under 48 CFR part 9) establishing procedures for technical and
pricing proposals and establishing contract clauses and
contracting practices for the purchase of goods and services, and
rulemaking (under 10 CFR part 600) establishing application and
review procedures for, and administration, audit, and closeout
of, grants and cooperative agreements.
A7 Transfer, lease, disposition, or acquisition of interests in
property, if property use is to remain unchanged.
A8 Award of 'contracts for technical support services, management and
operation of a government-owned facility, and personal services.
A9 Information gathering (including, but not limited to, literature
surveys, inventories, audits), data analysis (including computer
modelling), document preparation (such as conceptual design or
feasibility studies, analytical energy supply and demand studies),
and dissemination (including, but not limited to, document
mailings, publication, and distribution ; and classroom training
and informational programs), but not including site
characterization or environmental monitoring . (Also see B3 .1 .)
A10 Reports or recommendations on legislation or rulemaking that is
not proposed by DOE.
All Technical advice and planning assistance to international,
national, state, and'local organizations.
Al2 Emergency preparedness planning activities, including the
designation of onsite evacuation routes.
A13 Administrative, organizational, or procedural Orders, Notices,
and guidelines.
A14 Approval of technical exchange arrangements for information,
data, or personnel with other countries or international
organizations, including, but not limited to, assistance in
identifying and analyzing another country's energy resources,
needs and options.
• A15 Approval of DOE participation in international "umbrella"
agreements for cooperation in energy research and development
activities that would not commit the U .S . to any specific
projects or activities.
Appendix B to Subpart D--Categorical Exclusions Applicable to Specific
Agency Actions
Table of Contents
B Conditions that are integral elements of the classes of actions in
appendix B
B1 Categorical exclusions applicable to facility operation
B1 .1 Rate increases less than inflation (not power marketing, but see
B4 .3)
B1 .2 Training exercises and simulation
B1 .3 Routine maintenance/custodial services for buildings,
structures, infrastructures, equipment
•
B1 .4
• B1 .5
Improvements to cooling water systems within existing building,
structure
B1 .6
Installation/modification of retention tanks, small basins to
control runoff, spills
B1 .7
Acquisition/installation/operation/removal of communication
systems, data processing equipment
B1 .8
Modifications to screened water intake structures
B1 .9
Placement of airway safety markings/painting (not lighting) of
existing lines, antennas
B1 .10
Routine onsite storage of activated material at existing
facility
B1 .11
Fencing, no adverse effect on wildlife movement/surface water
flow
B1 .12
Detonation/burning of failed/damaged high explosives or
propellants
B1 .13
Acquisition or minor relocation of access roads
B1 .14
Refueling of a nuclear reactor
• B1 .15
B2
Installation/modification of air conditioning systems for
existing equipment
Siting/construction/operation of support buildings/support
structures
B1 .16
Removal of asbestos from buildings
B1 .17
Removal of polychlorinated biphenyl-containing items from
buildings, other aboveground locations
B1 .18
Siting/construction/operation of additional/replacement water
supply wells
B1 .19
Siting/construction/operation of microwave/radio communication
towers
B1 .20
Protect/restore/improve fish and wildlife habitat
B1 .21
Noise abatement
B1 .22
Relocation/demolition/disposal of buildings
Categorical exclusions applicable to safety and health
B2 .1
Modifications to enhance workplace habitability
B3
B2 .2
Installation of/improvements to building/equipment
instrumentation (remote controls, emergency warning systems,
monitors)
B2 .3
Installation of equipment for personnel safety and health
B2 .4
Equipment Qualification Programs
B2 .5
Safety and environmental improvements of a facility,
replacement/upgrade of facility components
Categorical exclusions applicable to site characterization,
monitoring, and general research
B3 .1
Site characterization/environmental monitoring
B3 .2
Aviation activities for survey/monitoring/security
B3 .3
Research related to conservation of fish and wildlife
B3 .4
Transport packaging tests for radioactive/hazardous material
B3 .5
Tank car tests
B3 .6
Indoor bench-scale research projects/conventional laboratory
operation
B3 .7
Siting/construction/operation of new infill exploratory,
experimental oil/gas/geothermal wells
B3 .8
Outdoor ecological/environmental research in small area
• B3 .9
B4
•
Certain Clean Coal Technology Demonstration Program activities
B3 .10
Small-scale research and development/small-scale pilot
projects, at existing facility, preceding demonstration
B3 .11
Outdoor tests, experiments on materials and equipment
components,, no source, special nuclear, or byproduct materials
involved
Categorical exclusions applicable to Power Marketing Administrations
and to all of DOE with regard to power resources.
B4 .1
Contracts/marketing plans/policies for the short term
B4 .2
Export of electricity over existing transmission lines
B4 .3
Power marketing rate changes less than inflation
B4 .4
Power marketing services within normal operating limits
B4 .5
Temporary adjustments to river operations within existing
operating constraints
National Environmental Policy Act Implementing Procedures
57 FR 15122
April 24, 1992
•
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Part 1021
National Environmental Policy Act Implementing Procedures
AGENCY : Department of Energy.
ACTION : Final rule.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------SUMMARY : The Department of Energy (DOE) is revising the existing rule at
10 CFR part 1021, titled "Compliance with the National Environmental
Policy Act," to incorporate revised provisions of DOE's Guidelines for
Implementing the Procedural Provisions of the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) . DOE is also revoking its existing NEPA guidelines.
This rule incorporates changes required by certain policy initiatives
instituted by the Secretary of Energy to facilitate participation of the
public and affected states in the NEPA process for proposed DOE actions.
The rule also includes a revised and expanded list of typical classes of
actions, including categorical exclusions . Categorical exclusions are
classes of actions that normally do not require the preparation of either
an environmental impact statement or an environmental assessment.
AFFECTIVE
DATE : This rule will become effective May 26, 1992.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT : Carol Borgstrom, Director, Office of
NEPA Oversight, EH-25, U .S . Department of Energy, 1000 Independence
Avenue, SW ., Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586-4600 or (800) 472-2756.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I . Background
November
published
proposed r
at
would revise 10 CFR part 1021, 4 revokeOthe DOESNEPA a
(52 FR
47662, December 15 1987, as amended), and adopt the Council on
Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations implementing NEPA (40 CFR parts
1500-1508).
Publication of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking began a 45-day public
comment period, ending December 17, 1990 . As part of the notice and
comment process, DOE held a public hearing on the proposed rule on
December 5, 1990.
Comments were received from 19 sources, including private individuals,
state and Federal agencies, public interest groups, and other
organizations . Copies of all written comments and the transcript of the
public hearing have been provided to CEQ and are available for public
inspection at the DOE Freedom of Information Reading Room, room 1E-190,
estal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW ., Washington, DC 20585,
( 2) 586-6020.
Today's notice adopts the revisions proposed at that time, with certain
changes discussed below, and codifies them at 10 CFR Part 1021 . A separate
notice published today revokes the existing Guidelines on the date that
these regulations become effective.
Copies of the final rule are available upon request to the information
contact listed above.
In accordance with 40 CFR 1507 .3, DOE has consulted with CEQ regarding
this rule . CEQ has found that this regulation conforms with NEPA and the
CEQ regulations and has no objection to its promulgation.
II. Statement of Purpose
The purpose of the rule is to revise the provisions of DOE's NEPA
Guidelines, based on DOE's experience in the implementation of NEPA and on
the directives of Secretary of Energy Notice 15-90 (SEN-15-90), to provide
more specificity and detail than the Guidelines and to enhance public
review opportunities . (For further information on SEN-15-90, issued
February 5, 1990, see the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (55 FR 46445,
November 2, 1990) ; copies are available from the information contact
listed above .) The rule is to be codified at 10 CFR part 1021 . By issuing
its NEPA Guidelines as regulations published in the Code of Federal
Re ulations, DOE will ensure that its NEPA procedures are more accessible
he public.
III. Comments Received and DOE's Responses
DOE has considered and evaluated the comments received during the
public comment period . Many revisions suggested in these comments have
been incorporated into the final rule . The following discussion describes
the comments received, provides DOE's position on the comments, and
describes any resulting changes to the rule . Section references, unless
otherwise indicated, are to those in the proposed rule rather than the
final rule ; changed section designations are noted below, in response to
corresponding comments.
Many of the commenters expressed overall support for DOE's efforts to
improve its NEPA procedures, especially in the areas of increased public
participation and requirements for programmatic and site-wide NEPA
documentation and mitigation action plans . Because these comments are
general in nature and do not require consideration of any changes to the
proposed rule, they will not be discussed individually.
In addition to revisions made in response to comments and other
revisions already discussed DOE has made a number of editorial,
stylistic, and format revisions . DOE also has made certain technical
changes for clarity and consistency, which are described below under
corresponding subject headings.
A. Procedural Comments
everal commenters addressed the procedural aspects of this rulemaking.
S
commenter requested that DOE hold public hearings on the proposed rule
in the vicinity of its nuclear weapons facilities . DOE provided an
opportunity for both oral and written comment on this rule . Written
comments were given the same consideration as oral comments . For this
reason, DOE determined that additional public hearings in the vicinity of
its nuclear weapons facilities were not necessary.
One commenter disagreed with DOE's position--stated in the November 2,
1990, Preamble, regarding NEPA review requirements for the proposed rule-that the promulgation of this rule does not require an environmental
assessment (EA) or environmental impact statement (EIS) . The commenter
asserted that, in light of the absence of documentary support for the many
decisions made in the rule, especially the identification of classes of
categorically excluded actions, not only is NEPA review required, but an
EA or EIS would help to provide ,a basis for these decisions.
Issuance of this rule complies fully with NEPA's review requirements.
DOE's NEPA Guidelines (52 FR 47662, December 15, 1987) list a categorical
exclusion for "promulgation of rules and regulations which are clarifying
in nature, or which do not substantially change the effect of the
regulations being amended ." The regulations adopted today will revise 10
CFR part 1021, which simply adopts the CEQ regulations . The amendment
clarifies the previous rule by adding specificity, and contains only
procedural requirements . Therefore, this action is categorically excluded
from further NEPA review . (Also see section V, below .)
number of commenters addressed the effective date of the final rule.
supported DOE's intention to have the rule become effective
immediately upon publication . Another asserted that the rule should not
become effective immediately upon publication because "good cause" does
not exist within the meaning of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U .S .C.
535(d), to waive the standard 30-day period between publication and
effective dates . Two commenters asserted that because their comments
suggested such substantial revisions to the proposed rule, the rule should
be reissued as a proposed rule.
ilk
As indicated earlier in this Notice of Final Rulemaking, the effective '
date of the rule will be 30 days from the date of publication . DOE does
not agree that the rule should be reproposed for further public comment.
The revisions are a logical outgrowth of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
published on November 2, 1990, reflecting responses to public comments and
limited technical changes in the proposed rule.
B. General Comments on Subparts A Through C
Two commenters were concerned about the length of time needed to
complete NEPA documentation . One commenter suggested that DOE establish
time periods for internal DOE review and decisions . The other commenter
suggested establishing limits on the total time allowed for the completion
of each NEPA document process, as many states have done in connection with
state processes under NEPA-equivalent laws . Although DOE is aware of the
advantages of being able to predict the time the NEPA process will take
for proposed actions, the variety of the type and complexity of DOE
ons precludes establishing a single time period that would be
tical for all actions . Therefore, DOE does not believe that
li0
establishing time limits for NEPA review is feasible.
One commenter was concerned in particular about the duplication of
effort that might arise from the need to meet both Federal and state NEPA
requirements and asserted that guidance on this issue should be provided
in DOE's NEPA procedures . One of the goals of these regulations is to
implement the CEQ regulation encouraging Federal agencies to cooperate
with state agencies to the fullest extent possible to reduce duplication
between NEPA and state requirements (see 40 CFR 1506 .2) . In the past, DOE
has been successful in attaining that goal, and, in nearly all cases, a
single document has sufficed for both NEPA and state requirements . Under
this rule, DOE will continue to work to minimize duplication and to
maximize coordination and cooperation . Should the unusual situation arise
where there is a conflict between NEPA and state requirements, however,
DOE is bound by the requirements of NEPA . Accordingly, DOE believes that
no revisions to the proposed rule are necessary as a result of this
comment.
There were three comments regarding DOE internal procedures related to
the proposed rule . One commenter requested a discussion of the future role
of the Action Description Memorandum (ADM) . An ADM is an internal DOE
document used to assist DOE in determining the appropriate level of NEPA
review--EA or EIS--for a proposed action that is not listed in the classes
of actions in the appendices to Subpart D of the rule or for which the
a ropriate initial level of review is unclear . The role of the ADM will
change with the promulgation of this rule.
One commenter requested clarification of how the final rule would be
applied to NEPA documents that had been initiated before its effective
date . DOE intends to apply the rule to ongoing activities and to
environmental documents begun before the effective date of the rule to the
fullest extent practicable . The rule will not apply to an EIS if the draft
EIS was filed before the rule's effective date, and completed
environmental documents will not be required to be redone as a result of
this rule.
Two commenters stated that the proposed rule contains an overabundance
of imprecise, subjective, and discretionary language, sometimes in
provisions where discretionary language is inconsistent with NEPA and the
CEQ regulations . The commenters urged DOE to eliminate such language from
the proposed rule . DOE generally agrees with these comments and has
removed the phrase "in DOE's judgment" from the following sections of the
proposed rule : 1021 .200(b), 212(b), 213(b), 301(d), 311(a), 332(a) and
(c), 340(b), and 341(a) and (b) . Similarly, the phrase "at its [or DOE's]
discretion" has been removed from the following sections : 1021 .300(b),
301(c) and (d), 311(b) and (e), 312(d), 313(d), 314(d)(3), 322(d), and
330(a) . The phrase "at its option" has been removed from 1021 .312(a).
C . Comments on Subpart A--General
Section 1021 .102 Applicability
ne commenter suggested that the phrase "any DOE action affecting the
' ronment" be chanced to the language in NEPA : "major Federal actions
s nificantly affecting the quality of the human environment ." Because DOE
is required to examine all actions that affect the environment to
determine whether they are major Federal actions that may significantly
affect the human environment, the commenter's suggested change was not
adopted . Another commenter suggested that DOE follow the lead of other
agencies with overseas activities (e .g ., the U .S . Agency for International
Development and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) and
analyze all the environmental impacts of proposed activities, not just
impacts within U .S . territory . Executive Order 12114, "Environmental
Effects Abroad of Major Federal Actions," states in section 1-1 that the
Order "represents the United States government's exclusive and complete
determination of the procedural and other actions to be taken by Federal
agencies to further the purpose of [NEPA], with respect to the environment
outside the United States, its territories and possessions ." As explained
in the proposed rule, DOE has adopted procedures (46 FR 1007, January 5,
1981) implémenting E .O . 12114, pursuant to section 2-1 of that Order . As
long as the Order is in effect, DOE will use these procedures in
addressing the extraterritorial environmental effects of DOE actions, and
no change is needed in this final rule.
Section 1021 .104 Definitions
Section 1021 .104(b) . In addition to the comments discussed below, other
comments that nominally relate to definitions are addressed elsewhere, in
the discussion of sections of the rule where the comment has more
*stantive relevance.
Definition : Action and DOE decision . One commenter stated that the
failure of officials to act was reviewable and thus should be included in
DOE's definition of action . The commenter suggested that DOE should simply
reference the CEQ definition at 40 CFR 1508 .18 . The proposed rule did
reference Sec . 1508 .18 of the CEQ Regulations, and DOE's paraphrasing of
that section in the proposed rule was not intended to exclude any activity
covered by 40 CFR 1508 .18, including the failure to act . In response to
the comment, however, the final rule has been modified to more closely
parallel 40 CFR 1508 .18 . (As a result of this change and a related comment
on the definition of "DOE decision," DOE has deleted the definition of
"DOE decision" from the final . rule .) The definition of "action" has also
been chanced to make clear that these regulations do not apply to
"ministerial actions," such as congressionally mandated funding
passthroughs, which DOE does .not . , propose and over which it has no
discretion . (Also see the discussion of appendix Al .5, below .)
Definition : Adjacent state . One commenter stated that the requirement
that a state must have a common boundary with a host state in order to be
an adjacent state was too limiting . Specifically, they asserted that
states may be downwind or downstream from the location of a proposed
action or have vital social or economic interests in a proposed action
without sharing a„common boundary . In response to the comment, the
•
definition of "adjacent state" has been deleted, and in corresponding
provisions of the rule, DOE has replaced "adjacent state" with the concept
of a state or American Indian tribe that may be affected by a proposed
¡Ilion.
efinition : American Indian tribe . This definition has been added to
accommodate changes made in Secs . 1021 .301(c) and (d) in response to
comments and the addition of Sec . 1021 .301(e).
Definition : Contaminant and hazardous substance . One commenter objected
to defining these words by reference to their definitions under the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA) because this would potentially exclude actions involving
petroleum and natural gas products from NEPA review . DOE has addressed the
commenter's concern by adding a definition for "CERCLA-excluded petroleum
and natural gas products" and incorporating this phrase in appropriate
parts of the final rule.
Definition : Documentation . One commenter stated that the proposed
definition would supplant the environmental assessment that CEQ requires
as the basis for determining the significance of the environmental effects
of a proposed action . DOE agrees with the commenter's basic assertion that
the purpose of "documentation" should be to have a record of a decision
that categorical exclusion from environmental analysis is appropriate.
This was DOE's intention, but comments on the definition of
"documentation" and related parts of the proposed rule suggest that the
intended purpose was not well understood . The CEQ regulations do not
require documentation of the application of a categorical exclusion, and
DOE is withdrawing the proposed regulatory requirement for such
documentation . DOE believes that internal procedural and recordkeeping
r quirements for overseeing the application of categorical exclusions are
appropriate, and therefore has deleted the proposed definition and
i
ated provisions of the proposed rule.
.
Definition : EIS Implementation Plan . One commenter suggested that the
definition be altered by adding "schedule" so as to read "that explains
and supports the scope, schedule, and approach * * *" DOE accepts the
comment, but has also added the qualifying word "target" because schedules
are subject to change.
Definition : Host tribe . This definition has been added to accommodate
changes made in 1021 .301(c) and (d).
Definition : Interim action . One commenter thought that this definition
would be more instructive if it cited the CEQ definition rather than
referring to it . The commenter's suggested change, however, would include
only one of the limitations from 40 CFR 1506 .1 . The proposed language that
was the source of confusion has been rewritten.
Definition : NEPA document . One commenter would expand this definition by
adding "Supplement Analysis," "Environmental Critique," and "Environmental
Synopsis ." DOE disagrees because these documents are not required by NEPA
or the CEQ regulations . DOE has deleted "documentation of a categorical
exclusion" from this definition because listing it was inappropriate at
the outset, and the final rule does not require such documentation .
Definition : Pollutant . This definition has been affected indirectly by
the addition of a new definition--"CERCLA-excluded petroleum and natural
a products"--in response to comments ..
Definition : Project . DOE has modified this definition to more explicitly
comport with CEQ's corresponding language, as a'commenter suggested.
Definition : Site-wide NEPA document . The definition in the final rule
acknowledges the programmatic nature of a site-wide NEPA document, in
response to a commenter's request for clarification.
Section 1021 .105 Oversight of Agency NEPA Activities
One commenter interpreted DOE's proposed offer to provide information on
procedures and the status of NEPA reviews as an offer to provide written
guidance and reports, and suggested that the rule make further provisions
regarding such materials . DOE does not prepare written reports on
individual NEPA reviews . The rule has been changed to clarify the original
intent that DOE will make every effort to respond to public inquiries and
to provide timely information regarding the status of NEPA review of
specific projects.
D . Comments on Subpart B--DOE Decisionmaking
Section 1021 .200 DOE Planning
Section 1021 .200(a) . A commenter stated that many DOE orders issued
under the Department's Atomic Energy Act authority govern critical
environmental, health, and safety matters with the potential for
ificant impacts on the human environment, and suggested that
AlMulgation of DOE orders be included as an activity that may require
NEPA review . DOE accepts the suggestion and Sec . 1021 .200(a) has been
modified accordingly . Another commenter requested that the rule clearly
state the criteria DOE will use in deciding when to initiate a NEPA review
in order to ensure a consistent approach to the NEPA process . The
commenter was concerned that DOE tight begin NEPA review after committing
to a course of action . Section 1021 .210(b) has been modified to
emphasize DOE's intention to complete NEPA review before committing to a
course of action . However, DOE believes that specific criteria for
individual types of actions can be more effectively administered through
internal procedures.
Section 1021 .200(b) . One commenter suggested the addition of, or a
reference to, the CEQ requirement (40 CFR 1501 .2) to integrate the NEPA
process with other planning as early as possible . In Sec . 1021 .200(a), DOE
commits to performing an adequate and timely NEPA review in accordance
with 40 CFR 1501 .2 . Section 1021 .200(b) only amplifies the general
directive for a proposed action and is not intended to eliminate that
commitment.
Section 1021 .211 Interim Actions
One commenter supported the intent of the section but was concerned that
DOE commitment of resources to an action before completing NEPA review
might bias the consideration of alternatives . This commenter also
requested that criteria for determining whether future actions fall within
t bounds of permissible interim actions under the CEQ regulations (40
1506 .1) be proposed for public review and comment . The commenter
e ressed concern that DOE will interpret this section too loosely . The
commenter did not offer additional criteria . DOE believes that the
criteria in the CEQ regulations are adequate, and, therefore, no
additional criteria are included in the final rule . The title and language
of this section have been modified editorially, however, to more closely
parallel the CEQ regulations.
Another commenter was concerned that ongoing and planned environmental
restoration actions would be delayed until records of decision for larger
"umbrella" EISs or supplemental EISs are issued . DOE believes that many
such actions would satisfy the criteria of 40 CFR 1506 .1 and, therefore,
could proceed while "umbrella" NEPA reviews are being prepared.
Section 1021 .212 Research, Ddvelopment, Demonstration, and Testing
Section 1021 .212(b) . One commenter requested that criteria be added for
DOE to use in determining when to begin a NEPA review, but did not suggest
additional criteria . DOE believes that the criteria in this section, in 40
CFR 1501 .2, and elsewhere in this rule are sufficient for that purpose.
In the final rule DOE has moved the last part of proposed Sec.
1021 .212(b), which concerned completion of NEPA review before a decision
to proceed with detailed design, to Sec . 1021 .210(b) in the final rule.
This was done to emphasize that this aspect of timing has general
applicability.
ction 1021 .212(c) . One commenter was concerned that this section might
read to allow improper segmentation of the NEPA review of a project.
DOE's rule, at Sec . 1021 .212(b), provides for subsequent NEPA reviews to
evaluate those environmental impacts that could not be meaningfully
evaluated at the time the initial review was prepared . Accordingly, the
rule does not sanction improper segmentation . In the event that there are
legitimate phases to an action, each successive EA or EIS considers
cumulative impacts as required under 40 CFR 1508 .25.
i
Section 1021 .213 Rulemaking
Section 1021 .213(b) . One commenter objected to the "internal,
subjective" decisionmaking process for determining when to begin NEPA
review, but did not offer specific suggestions for more objective
criteria . DOE believes that the criteria contained in Sec . 1021 .213(b) are
adequate and consistent with 40 CFR 1501 .2, in that they emphasize
conducting NEPA review early in the process.
Section 1021 .214 Adjudicatory Proceedings
Sections 1021 .214(a) and 1021 .214(c) . One commenter questioned the
meaning of "adjudicatory proceeding" and how it is distinguished from
"administrative action ." The comma inadvertently placed after
"administrative" has been deleted to clarify the provision and to be
•
consistent with 40 CFR 1508 .18(a) . Also, the phrase "for formal
adjudicatory proceedings" has been deleted from Sec . 1021 .214(c) to
eliminate confusion.
*ion 1021 .215 Applicant Process
Section 1021 .215(b)(6) . In response to a comment, and to clarify DOE's
original intent, language has been added indicating that DOE would take
appropriate action if an applicant were about to take an action that would
not satisfy the criteria in 40 CFR 1506 .1(a) before DOE completes the NEPA
process.
Section 1021 .215(c) . One commenter believed that the generic guidelines
mentioned in this section should be proposed under the Administrative
Procedure Act with adequate public notice and opportunity for comment . DOE
has modified the section to clarify that any guidance issued to assist
preparation of applications would be nonbinding on the applicants . Such
guidance need not be subjected to public notice and comment.
Section 1021 .216 Procurement and Financial Assistance
This section has been modified to clarify that it applies to DOE joint
ventures entered into as a result of a competitive solicitation . Such
joint ventures are authorized pursuant to the Renewable Energy and Energy
Efficiency Technology Competitiveness Act of 1989 (Pub . L . 101-218).
E . Comments on Subpart C--Implementing Procedures
Section 1021 .300 General Requirements
Section 1021 .300(b) . One commenter requested that this section be
ified to reflect the mandatory nature of NEPA review for ongoing
Alpr
a
ivities . DOE agrees that NEPA applies to ongoing activities in
appropriate circumstances ; however, this section addresses preparation of ..
NEPA documents that are not required by law or regulations . DOE has made
clarifying changes.
Section 1021 .301 Agency Review and Public Participation
Section 1021 .301(a) . The term "interested groups" has been added to the
list of entities to which DOE will make its NEPA documents available, in
response to a comment . In response to another commenter's general concern
about the public's information and involvement opportunities regarding
DOE's activities, DOE notes that the rule enhances such opportunities and
exceeds CEQ's minimum requirements.
Section 1021 .301(c) . (Section 1021 .301(d) of the final rule) . Commenters
addressed several aspects of this section, including to whom the proposed
opportunity for pre-approval review of EAs should be offered, the length
of the review period, and the fact that states may vary in making DOE's
documents available to the public.
DOE accepts several commenters' suggestions that American Indian tribes
be accorded the same pre-approval review opportunities as similarly
situated states . The opportunity will not be extended to the public
generally or to citizen groups, however, as several commenters also
suggested . The pre-approval review opportunity implements the Secretary of
Energy's policy to closely coordinate DOE's NEPA actions with host and
paentially affected states and American Indian tribes . The courtesy
iblished by this policy is consistent with the special relationship
between the Federal Government and the sovereign states and American
Indian tribes . The rule exceeds and does not detract from CEQ's public
review requirements.
In regard to the length of the review period, two commenters stated that
the proposed 14- to 30-day period was inadequate, and one commenter
thought the proposed period was adequate . DOE believes that the proposed
period is adequate, and notes that this period is a minimum that may be
extended as appropriate . DOE believes that the phrase "[a]t DOE's
discretion" regarding the review period is necessary to provide
flexibility in tailoring the review process to the circumstances of an
individual action.
One commenter questioned the meaning of the proposed language explaining
how DOE will proceed after giving the opportunity for pre-approval review.
DOE has, clarified that it may take any appropriate action on the EA before
the end of the review period if the states and American Indian tribes have
already waived the opportunity or have responded.
Finally, as previously noted regarding the definition of "adjacent
state," this definition has been replaced with the concept of a state or
American Indian tribe that may be "affected" by a proposed action . DOE
believes that it is necessary to maintain the phrase "in DOE's judgment,"
however, when determining which states or American Indian tribes may be
a ected by a proposed action, contrary to several commenters . In many
s, this determination will depend on subjective evaluations of
mM
iple factors . Therefore, DOE believes that the rule should state that
DOE retains the discretion to exercise judgment in these matters.
Section 1021 .301(d) . (Section 1021 .301(c) of the final rule) . Two
commenters recommended that, in addition to adjacent (now "affected")
states, Indian tribes should also be notified of DOE's determination to
prepare an EA or EIS for a DOE action . DOE agrees . One of the commenters
further suggested that interested agencies, citizen groups, and the
general public should be notified . This comment was not accepted for the
same reasons described in the response to comments on proposed Sec.
1021 .301(c).
Section 1021 .301(e) . In considering the comments opposing the early
notification and review and comment provisions of Secs . 1021 .301 (c) and
(d), DOE concluded that there . are circumstances when this process would be
inappropriate . Therefore, DOE added this section to the final rule so that
these provisions would not apply where providing such advance information
to a state or American Indian tribe could create a conflict of interest.
The rule specifically cites power marketing actions, such as rate-setting,
in which a state or Indian tribe is a customer.
Section 1021 .311 Notice of Intent and Scoping
Section 1021 .311(a) . One commenter suggested that a Notice of Intent
(NOI) should include at least a brief discussion of potential
alternatives . DOE agrees, and a reference to 40 CFR 1508 .22, which
ludes potential alternatives within the NOI contents, has been added to
section.
4i
One commenter objected to the lack of criteria on which DOE will base
its decisions on publishing an NOI or an Advance NOI, and also suggested
that the rule should allow for maximum public notice of any opportunity
for public comment . DOE notes that the wording of the first portion of
this subsection is almost a direct quotation of the CEQ regulations, and
it is not intended to limit public notice and comment.
The same commenter also stated that the section could be interpreted to
mean that DOE has a choice whether or not to provide a reasonable
opportunity for public participation regarding a proposed action . DOE
believes that this would not be a reasonable interpretation of the
section . The provision allowing an NOI to be deferred is intended to
ensure that scoping comments are timely, not to limit public
'participation.
Section 1021 .311(b) . Two commenters recommended that criteria be
established for requiring the publication of an Advance NOI ; one suggested
that an Advance NOI should be required if the delay between the time DOE
has decided to prepare an EIS and the beginning of the public scoping
process will be longer than three months . DOE disagrees . The purpose of an
Advance NOI is to enhance public involvement, not to restrict it . It is
neither necessary nor practical to establish fixed criteria for providing
this opportunit;'.. Issuance of an Advance NOI exceeds the requirements of
the CEQ regulations, and, therefore, no change is necessary to this
Stion.
Section 1021 .311(c) . Three commenters suggested that the minimum scoping
period should be at least 45 days ; another commenter objected to extending
the minimum scoping period from the current 20 days to 30 days . DOE has
retained the proposed 30-day period as a minimum that can be extended when
appropriate, commensurate with the importance, size, and complexity of an
individual project and other factors (see 40 CFR 1501 .8(b)(1)) . Late
comments may also be considered when practicable (see Sec . 1021 .311(e)).
DOE believes that the rule provides an adequate opportunity for informed
participation without risking significant project delay as a result of the
NEPA process.
Section 1021 .311(d) . Three commenters suggested that there should be at
least 30 days between the announcement of the scoping meeting and the
meeting itself and that DOE should provide notice of meetings-and schedule
changes in the Federal Register and in other ways . DOE has retained the
15-day notice period as a minimum. DOE believes that a 15-day notice will
generally provide adequate opportunity for informed public participation
without risking significant project delay . The notice period may be
extended when appropriate, commensurate with the importance, size,
complexity of an individual project and other factors.
Regarding the request that DOE provide notice of meetings and schedule
changes by publication in the Federal Register and through other means,
DOE believes that the proposed rule reflects the Department's commitment
to aggressively promote use of the most effective means of publicizing the
details of public meetings, including schedule changes . As noted in Sec.
1
.311(d), DOE intends to use various means of announcements, including
'Federal Register, news releases, or letters to affected parties, to
ensure that the public has adequate notification.
Section 1021 .311(g) . A commenter noted that the rule did not establish
any criteria for determining the need for a scoping period for a
supplemental EIS or any reason why such a scoping period should be
optional . DOE believes that there is no need to repeat the public scoping
process if the scope of the proposed action has not changed . This
provision is consistent with 40 CFR 1502 .9, which does not require public
scoping for a supplemental EIS . When the scope has changed, however, or
when the importance, size, or complexity of the proposal warrants, DOE may
elect to have a scoping process.
Section 1021 .312 EIS Implementation Plan
Section 1021 .312(c) . A commenter objected to the proposed rule's
categorization of target schedules and anticipated consultations with
other agencies in an EIS Implementation Plan as discretionary . DOE has
modified the rule to include . target schedules and anticipated
consultations with other agencies in the list of required items (Sec.
1021 .312(b)).
Section 1021 .312(d) . Several commenters objected to the provision in the
proposed rule for making copies of the EIS Implementation Plan available
in DOE public reading rooms . To enhance public access to EIS
Implementation Plans, DOE has modified the rule to remove the
d' cretionary language and to require that all EIS Implementation Plans be
available in the appropriate DOE public reading rooms or other
ae ropriate locations.
Section 1021 .313 Public Review of Environmental Impact Statements
Section 1021 .313(a) . Several commenters suggested that the minimum
public review and comment period for a draft EIS should be 60 to 90 days
or more, except under documented extraordinary circumstances . One
commenter objected to the establishment of a minimum period and said that
if a minimum is established, it should be no more than 30 days . DOE will
retain the minimum comment period of 45 days, consistent with CEQ's
minimum requirement (40 CFR 1506 .10(c)) . DOE may specify a longer comment
period for an individual proposal, and often does.
Section 1021 .313(b) . Two commenters suggested that the minimum notice
for a public hearing on a draft EIS should be 30 rather than 15 days . DOE
does not agree . As noted in responses to comments at Sec . 1021 .311 (c) and
(d), DOE believes that a 15-day notice will generally provide adequate
opportunity for informed public participation without risking significant
project delay due to .the NEPA process . DOE may provide a longer period of
notice before a hearing when the circumstances warrant, and often , .does.
Section 1021 .313(d) . Two commenters stated that DOE should be required
to publicize the availability of draft and final EISs and the time and
place for public hearings, and to announce the availability of these
documents through additional methods beyond a Federal Register notice . DOE
agrees and has modified the section by removing discretionary language and
fying that DOE shall use other appropriate means to publicize the
likability of such events.
Section 1021 .314 Supplemental Environmental Impact Statements
Section 1021 .314Ca) . A commenter questioned why the phrase "new
circumstances," which appears in the CEQ regulations (40 CFR
1502 .9(c)(1)), was omitted from DOE's proposed rule . The omission in the
proposed rule was inadvertent, and "new circumstances" has been added to
the final rule.
Section 1021 .314(c)(1) . (Not included in the final rule) . A commenter
suggested that a supplemental EIS might be required even though the
impacts may not change, such as when the need for the proposed action, the
range of reasonable alternatives, or available mitigation measures may
have changed . The commenter suggested that the proposed provision at Sec.
1021 .314(c)(1) was inconsistent with CEQ provisions at 40 CFR 1502 .9(c)
regarding when a supplemental EIS is required . DOE has deleted the
proposed subsection from the final rule, and other provisions of the
section have been redesignated as appropriate.
Section 1021 .314(c)(2) . (Not included in the final rule) . No comments
were received on this section, which provided that DOE could revise an
existing Record of Decision (ROD) if a decision were subsequently made to
proceed with an alternative that was evaluated in the EIS but was not part
of the initial decision . The proposed provision has been deleted, however,
because the circumstances under which it would apply are adequately
411ressed by Sec . 1021 .315(d) of the final rule (which was Sec.
1 1 .315(f) of the proposed rule).
Section 1021 .314(d) . (Section 1021 .314(c) of the final rule) . Two
commenters stated that DOE should provide a public notice and comment
opportunity concerning its intent to prepare an EIS Supplement Analysis
(SA) and publish a Notice of Availability of the SA and the resulting
determination . One commenter further suggested treating an SA like an EA
(i .e ., providing the same review and comment opportunities as for an EA).
An EA, in contrast to an SA, is a NEPA document required by the CEQ
regulations . DOE does not believe parallel procedures for the two
documents are appropriate, and does not believe it is necessary to seek
public input prior to a determination whether a supplemental EIS is
required . DOE will follow the criteria at 40 CFR 1502 .9(c)(1) when
determining whether to supplement an EIS . If a supplement is required,
the public will be fully involved in the NEPA process per the requirements
at 40 CFR 1502 .9(c)(4) and Sec . 1021 .314(d) of these rules . In response to
the comments, however, DOE has modified Sec . 1021 .314(d)(3) to provide
that SAs shall be placed in the appropriate DOE public reading rooms or
other appropriate locations.
Section 1021 .314(d)(1) . (Section 1021 .314(c)(1) of the final rule) . DOE
modified this section in accordance with a commenter's suggestion that the
content of an SA be described more specifically.
•
Section 1021 .314(d)(2) . (Section 1021 .314(c)(2) of the final rule).
Language in the proposed rule regarding revision of an existing ROD has
n deleted from this subsection of the final rule to eliminate potential
fusion regarding the basis for revising an ROD . As provided for in Sec.
1 1 .315(d) of the final rule, DOE may revise an ROD only when it is
adequately supported by an existing EIS.
4
Section 1021 .314(d)(3) . (Section 1021 .314(c)(3) of the final rule) . A
commenter thought that it should be required, not discretionary, for the
SA and the determination resulting from it to be provided to the public in
relevant DOE reading rooms . Another commenter suggested that DOE should
establish an affirmative system for providing access to SAs . (See response
under Sec . 1021 .314(d)).
Section 1021 .314(e) . (Section 1021 .314(d) of the final rule) . Language
of the proposed rule regarding revision of an ROD has been deleted to be
consistent with changes made at Sec . 1021 .314(d)(2) . Additionally, a
reference to Sec . 1021 .315 of the final rule has been added to this
section to clarify and emphasize provisions associated with issuing RODS.
Section 1021 .315 Records of Decision
Section 1021 .315(b) . (Section 1021 .313(c) of the final rule) . DOE has
moved the requirements in this proposed subsection to Sec . 1021 .313(c) of
the final rule in order to be consistent with the requirements of 10 CFR
part 1022 . Part 1022 requires that a Statement of Findings for floodplain
actions shall be noted in a final EIS.
Section 1021 .315(d) . (Not included in the final rule) . A commenter
ob ' ected to having the date of issuance of an ROD be the date of signature
her than the date it is published in the Federal Register because that
ld mean that the action might proceed before the public becomes aware
of the decision . DOE has modified Sec . 1021 .315(b) of the final rule (Sec ..
1021 .315(a) of the proposed rule) to clarify that no action may be taken
until the decision has been "made public" ; proposed Sec . 1021 .315(d) has
been deleted . Section 1021 .315(c) of the proposed and final rule provide a
requirement that RODS be published in the Federal Register, which exceeds
CEQ's requirement . DOE may also provide initial public notification by a
press release, for example, announcing the availability of the ROD in
appropriate DOE public reading rooms.
Section 1021 .315(e) . (Section 1021 .315(a) of the final rule) . DOE agrees
with the commenters that the CEQ regulations allow for situations when
comments on a final EIS may be appropriate . The phrase leading to
confusion regarding this subject has been deleted.
Section 1021 .315(f) . (Section 1021 .315(d) of the final rule) . One
commenter stated that revision of the preferred alternative would only be
appropriate if all of the alternatives had received the same level of
analysis and discussion of mitigation . DOE acknowledges the general
correctness of this comment, but believes strict equality of treatment
among alternatives may not be necessary in all cases . Rather, each
alternative must be analyzed to a degree commensurate with its potential
for environmental impact, and sufficient information must be provided for
all alternatives to allow a proper basis for comparison among them . Rather
than making the rule more specific, as the commenter further suggested,
DOE has added language to the final rule to assure that revisions of the
P will only take place if the EIS "adequately" supports the revised
sion.
Section 1021 .321 . Requirements for Environmental Assessments.
Section 1021 .321(a) . One commenter expressed concern about the breadth
of DOE's proposal to prepare an EA for all proposed actions not listed in
appendices A, B, or D to subpart D . No change has been made to the final
rule . DOE will prepare an EA for such actions unless it has already
decided to prepare an EIS . This is consistent with 40 CFR 1501 .4(b) . DOE
may add classes of actions to the lists in appendices A, B, or D in
accordance with the CEQ regulations (40 CFR 1507 .3).
Section 1021 .321(b) . One commenter thought the proposed focus of an EA
was too limited, in comparison with the CEQ requirements . The discussion
in the proposed rule focused on the major purpose of an EA but was not
intended to be limiting . DOE has added clarifying language to indicate
that an EA shall serve all the purposes identified in 40 CFR 1508 .9(a).
Section 1021 .321(c) . One commenter suggested that DOE withdraw the
requirement to analyze the no action alternative in an EA when a proposed
action is required by law or court order . DOE believes that it is
appropriate to retain this provision . Presentation of the impacts of the
no action alternative establishes a "baseline" for judging the impacts of
the proposed action . The purpose served by this requirement (i .e .,
informing Congress and the public, as well as the decisionmaker, of the
implications of not taking the action) is consistent with the reasoning
behind the judicial interpretations and the CEQ regulation requiring
*ideration of the no action alternative in EISs.
Section 1021 .322 Findings of no Significant Impact
Section 1021 .322(a) . DOE accepts a commenter's suggestions regarding
clarification of when it is appropriate to issue a Finding of No
Significant Impact (FONSI) . DOE has modified this section editorially to
clarify that a FONSI will be issued only if the related EA supports the
finding that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the
human environment.
Section 1021 .322(b)(2) . A commenter requested that DOE clarify this
section to distinguish the types of environmental impacts that may be
mitigated consistent with issuance of a FONSI from those warranting
preparation of an EIS . Because of the varied nature of DOE's projects, it
is not practical to define with precision the types of mitigation that
would support the issuance of a FONSI . However, DOE does not view
activities that are routine parts of proposed actions, such as routine
erosion control, as "mitigation commitments" in the context of Sec.
1021 .322(b)(2) . Rather, Sec . 1021 .322(b)(2) refers to mitigation actions
over and above the proposed action that are necessary to render the
impacts of the action insignificant . DOE agrees with the commenter's
suggestion that actions requiring relocation of endangered species habitat
or reconstruction of major wetlands are EIS candidates . DOE believes such
•
determinations should be made case by case, however, taking account of all
the pertinent circumstances . DOE has revised the appropriate parts of
Sec . 1021 .322 to make these distinctions clearer.
ction 1021 .322(c) . One commenter suggested that DOE should add a
co itment to the final rule to provide a notice of availability of FONSIs
to interested state and Federal agencies, tribal governments, citizen
groups, and members of the general public . The procedure proposed by DOE
and retained in the final rule is in accordance with CEQ regulations for
distribution of a FONSI . It includes options such as those proposed by the
commenter . DOE believes this is adequate, but will accommodate the
commenter's further suggestion to make FONSIs available in the appropriate
DOE public reading rooms or other appropriate locations . The section is
modified accordingly.
Section 1021 .330 Programmatic NEPA Documents
A commenter requested clarification of the distinction between
programmatic NEPA documents and site-wide NEPA documents as discussed in
proposed Sec . 1021 .331, especially in view of DOE having proposed periodic
review only for the latter . DOE considers site-wide NEPA documents to be
programmatic in nature and, accordingly, has merged proposed Sec . 1021 .331
into Sec . 1021 .330 of the final rule . Many DOE sites contain facilities
that support diverse and unrelated missions and activities . Site-wide
NEPA documents are programmatic in the sense that they review the
collective potential environmental effects of such facilities on a single
geographic location, and in the sense that these facilities are operated
under a single management . However, DOE has retained the requirement for
periodic review of site-wide NEPA documents without extending it to
programmatic NEPA documents in general . A site-wide NEPA review evaluates
potential individual and cumulative environmental impacts of ongoing
Ilk reasonably foreseeable activities at a DOE site (including potential
mitigations of any environmental problems) ; periodic review of those
evaluations is appropriate . Periodic review of programmatic NEPA
documents (other than site-wide NEPA documents) would not be useful if the
proposed program has been implemented, as often is the case.
Section 1021 .330(a) . A commenter observed that a programmatic EIS is
required not only for "connected actions," but also for "cumulative
actions" and "similar actions ." DOE did not intend to limit the
circumstances that require a programmatic EIS . The section has been
revised to delete the reference to connected actions and to refer instead
to the CEQ Regulations (40 CFR 1508 .18(b)(3)), which define a program to
include a group of concerted actions and systematic and connected agency
decisions.
Section 1021 .331 Site-wide NEPA Documents (Included in Section 1021 .330
of the Final Rule)
Section 1021 .331(a) . A commenter maintained that DOE's requirement in
the proposed rule to prepare site-wide EISs for certain large,
multiple-facility sites is inconsistent with the definition of an EIS,
would not significantly further the purposes of NEPA, and would mainly
provide information that is already available from other sources . DOE
believes, however, that site-wide NEPA review will serve to improve and
coordinate agency plans, functions, programs, and resource utilization . A
site-wide EIS provides an overall NEPA baseline for a site that is
p ticularly useful for tiering or as .a reference when preparing
ect-specific NEPA documents for new proposals . The requirement is
r ained.
Another commenter stated that inclusion of the phrase "as a matter of
policy" was inappropriate because site-wide EISs may be required under
NEPA in certain circumstances . DOE will prepare site-wide EISs when
required, but may also, "as a matter of policy," prepare site-wide EISs
for a number of reasons including, for example, to improve site planning
efforts, to consolidate activities, and to maximize cost-saving
efficiencies.
As discussed at Sec . 1021 .330, DOE considers site-wide NEPA documents to
be programmatic in nature and, accordingly, has merged proposed Sec.
1021 .331 into Sec . 1021 .330 of the final rule.
Section 1021 .331(b) . Several commenters suggested public participation
opportunities for the proposed periodic evaluation of site-wide NEPA
documents . DOE does not believe it necessary to require public notice of
its intent to conduct such evaluations and will evaluate case by case
whether such notice is appropriate . DOE has modified the rule, however, so
that analyses and determinations resulting from such reviews will be made
available in the appropriate DOE public reading rooms or other appropriate
locations.
One commenter requested that DOE define the starting time of the cycle
for the five-year reviews . DOE does not agree that specifying procedural
•ting times in this regulation is necessary or appropriate.
Finally, DOE has modified this section of the final rule to delete an
unintended reference in the proposed rule to supplementing an EA.
Section 1021 .332 Mitigation Action Plans (Section 1021 .331 of the Final
Rule)
One commenter stated that DOE must narrow the scope of this section,
which allows for mitigation in support of a FONSI, citing the answer to
Question 40 of CEQ's "Forty Most Asked Questions" (46 FR 18038, March 23,
1981), which addresses the circumstances under which a FONSI based on
mitigation is appropriate . DOE has not modified the rule in this regard
because it believes that the rule, as proposed, is consistent with CEQ's
guidance . The answer to Question 40 focuses on the principle that a FONSI
cannot be based only on the possibility of mitigation . However, DOE action
under a FONSI supported by mitigation would be based on a commitment to
perform the mitigation not the possibility . This section has been
modified to clarify this point ; in doing so, DOE separated the discussion
of EISs and EAs into different subsections . The discussion regarding
Mitigation Action Plans (MAPs) for EISs and EAs/FONSIs can now be found at
Sec . 1021 .331(a) and (b), respectively.
Two commenters suggested that MAPs be made available for public review
and comment . DOE believes that public review of the MAP is not necessary
because commitments to perform the subject actions would be included in
the FONSI or EIS and associated ROD . The MAP is an internal DOE document
at describes the plan for implementing and monitoring mitigation
fitments made in these documents . DOE, however, will make copies of
s available in the appropriate DOE public reading rooms or other
appropriate locations (see Sec . 1021 .331(d) of the final rule).
iit
r
Section 1021 .332(a) (Section 1021 .331(b) of the Final Rule)
One commenter suggested that the phrase "in significant part" was
inappropriate and should be deleted because, no matter how small the
mitigation, its accomplishment would be critical to avoid the need for an
EIS .
The phrase "in significant part" has been deleted from the final
rule, and the section has been changed to clarify that DOE commits to
performing all mitigations "essential to render the impacts of the
proposed action not significant ." However, as discussed under and
clarified in Sec . 1021 .322(b)(2), DOE does not intend the term
"commitments to mitigations" to apply to actions that are routinely taken
as part of or are integral elements of a proposed action.
Section 1021 .340 Classified, Confidential, and Otherwise Exempt
Information
A commenter suggested that DOE exercise greater restraint in deciding
which information to withhold from the public . DOE believes that this rule
in many ways enhances public access to information . With respect to
confidential or classified documents, however, DOE must comply with
applicable laws and regulations . Procedures for classifying information
are beyond the scope of this rule.
•lthough no comments were received to this effect, DOE has deleted the
reference to disclosure of interagency memoranda transmitting comments on
EISs . This modification was made to avoid the possible misconception that
DOE intended to disclose classified comments . For unclassified comments,
the provisions of the CEQ Regulations at 40 CFR 1506 .6(f) would apply.
Additionally, DOE has deleted from the final rule the inadvertent and
unnecessary reference to "restricted" information made in the proposed
rule.
Section 1021 .340(a) . A commenter expressed a concern that unless this
section is limited, inappropriate material will be made available to the
public, especially draft comments and attorney work product . The provision
at issue addresses interagency memoranda transmitting comments . By their
nature, such documents are final and become public comments (40 CFR
1506 .6(f)) . No exception in the requirement is made for the case where the
agency's responding unit is its legal counsel . DOE legal counsel's
comments (intraagency), like other internal deliberative documents, are
exempt from release . The section is not changed.
Section 1021 .340(b) . One commenter suggested that the phrase "wherever
possible" should be deleted because it might lead to a determination that
the release of information was not "possible" because of costs or
inconvenience .
This section addresses the preparation of a document in the context of
Sec . 1021 .340(c), in which cost and inconvenience are not issues . The
ią 1 rule has been modified, however, to indicate that DOE will, to the
ii lest extent possible, segregate any information that is exempt from
u,sclosure into an appendix to facilitate public review of the remainder
of the document.
Another commenter suggested that the rule acknowledge that classified
portions of documents will undergo an independent review by other Federal
agencies whenever appropriate . This comment refers to the responsibilities
of the Environmental Protection Agency under section 309 of the Clean Air
Act . This rule need not restate review responsibilities that are
otherwise provided for by law.
Section 1021 .341 Coordination With Other Environmental Review
Requirements
Section 1021 .341(a) . One commenter suggested that the rule provide for
integrating NEPA with CERCLA requirements in order to preclude delays and
unnecessary duplication of effort . Another expressed a concern that this
rule should not prejudice an ongoing, broader discussion of the
applicability of NEPA to the environmental restoration activities
conducted by Federal agencies other than EPA . It is DOE's policy to
integrate NEPA values into activities undertaken pursuant to CERCLA
wherever practical . DOE's implementation of this policy is not intended to
represent a statement on the legal applicability of NEPA to environmental
restoration activities conducted under CERCLA or other legal authority,
and DOE believes that this policy will not prejudice any subsequent
resolution of the applicability issue.
S
ection 1021 .341(b) . DOE agrees with a comment noting that the
determination of applicability of other environmental requirements (e .g .,
those of the Endangered Species Act, section 106 of the Historic
Preservation Act, and section 404 of the Clean Water Act) is not always
left to the agency proposing an action, but sometimes to other agencies
with given program responsibilities . DOE did not intend to imply in the
proposed rule that it could unilaterally determine the applicability of
such requirements . The final rule has been modified from the proposed rule
to state that DOE will determine the applicability of other environmental
requirements in consultation with other agencies when necessary or
appropriate.
Section 1021 .342 Interagency Cooperation
One commenter requested clarification of DOE's procedures for the
designation of a lead office within DOE and the designation of cooperating
offices and agencies within and without DOE, including entities other than
Federal agencies.
Another commenter thought that the provisions for involvement of
cooperating agencies should be expanded and improved to reference or
acknowledge the CEQ regulations . DOE has reinforced its general
obligation, acknowledged in Sec . 1021 .103, to comply with all CEQ
requirements, including those for lead and cooperating agencies, by
establishing in Sec . 1021 .342 an affirmative policy to cooperate with
other agencies, including the development of interagency agreements . The
f = al rule cites specific CEQ requirements (i .e ., 40 CFR 1501 .5 and
:~1 .6) for greater clarity . DOE's internal procedures for carrying out
its responsibilities are beyond the scope of this rulemaking, however . .
Section 1021 .343 Variances
Section 1021 .343(a) . DOE has modified the rule in response to a
commenter's request to make the rule more clearly consistent with the CEQ
regulation regarding consultation with CEQ about "alternative
arrangements ." The final rule also requires DOE to publish a notice in
the Federal Register after taking an emergency action, which exceeds CEQ
requirements.
Section 1021 .343(b) . A commenter suggested that DOE limit its reduction
of time periods established in the rule to extraordinary situations that
demand immediate attention . The only time periods that DOE has discretion
to change are those established by DOE that exceed CEQ's requirements . DOE
does not believe it is appropriate to establish criteria for reducing
these time periods, because it is not possible to foresee all possible
circumstances under which reductions may be needed . However, in no case
would the time periods resulting from application of this subsection be
less than the minimums established by CEQ.
Section 1021 .343(c) . One commenter suggested that the variance provision
should be deleted, describing it as a "catch-all ." Another suggested that
a Federal Register notice be required for such variances . DOE believes the
variance provision is reasonable and appropriate, and consistent with 40
CFR 1506 .11 . The rule has been modified, however, to require that a notice
o~ variance be published in the Federal Register, as the commenter
suggested . Editorial modifications were also made to clarify
responsibilities of the Secretary of Energy.
F . General Comments on Subpart D--Typical Classes of Actions
DOE received extensive comments on the approach to NEPA compliance
reflected in the proposed regulations and appendices of Subpart D, with
the mayor focus of these comments on the classes of actions proposed in
appendices A and B to be categorically excluded from the preparation of an
EA or EIS.
Commenters pointed out that DOE failed in the proposed rule to make the
finding required by the CEQ regulations (at 40 CFR 1508 .4) that the
classes of actions categoricE :lly ,. excluded from the requirement to prepare
an EA or EIS do not indiviaually or cumulatively have a significant effect
on the human environment . Two commenters further asserted that DOE must,
for each class of action included in appendices A and B, make an explicit
finding with an articulated basis, supported by documentation, . that the
actions encompassed by the class never, except in extraordinary
circumstances, have a significant effect on the human environment.
DOE agrees that the CEQ regulations do require DOE to find that the
•
classes of actions in appendices A and B will not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment and that
this finding be made in procedures adopted in implementing the CEQ
rP lations . Accordingly, DOE has included such a finding at Sec.
.410(a) of the final rule . However, DOE does not believe that it is
r uired to set forth in the preamble a detailed, individualized
explanation for such finding for each of the classes of actions in
appendices A and B . In finding that the classes of actions categorically
excluded in the final rule will not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment, DOE has considered, among
other things, its own experiences with these classes of actions, other
agencies' experiences as reflected in their NEPA procedures, and the
comments received on the proposed rule.
One commenter also questioned DOE's exclusive reliance on experience to
support its identification of categorical exclusions and the use of
memoranda-to-file as a part of this experience record because, the
commenter asserted, DOE has determined that memoranda-to-file do not
constitute acceptable NEPA documentation . Although DOE stopped using the
memorandum-to-file as part of its NEPA process on September 30, 1990, DOE
believes that memoranda-to-file prepared before that date are valid
documents that should be considered as part of DOE's experience with
particular actions . The purpose of memoranda-to-file was to determine
whether proposed actions, not included in the list of categorical
exclusions, would have clearly insignificant impacts, and therefore not
require either an EA or an EIS . This is precisely the type of document
that is relevant for the finding required by 40 CFR 1508 .4.
Some commenters stated that DOE's extensive list of categorical
exclusions suggested a DOE position that classes of actions can be
categorically excluded if, some of the time, they would not have
glipificant impacts . The commenters compared this to the CEQ regulations,
clearly limit categorical exclusions to those classes of actions
that have significant impacts only in extraordinary circumstances . DOE
believes its categorical exclusions comply with the CEQ regulations and
agrees that to be eligible for categorical exclusion, a class of actions
must not individually or cumulatively have significant effects on the
human environment except in extraordinary circumstances . DOE has
determined that the classes of actions included in appendices A and B of
the final rule meet this standard.
One commenter noted that if the individual actions encompassed by a
categorical exclusion have the potential for significant impact on a
cumulative basis, then the categorical exclusion is invalid . DOE agrees
that it must find that classes of actions categorically excluded do not
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment . The commenter further noted that if a proposal encompasses
actions within multiple categorical exclusions and cumulatively the
actions have the potential for significant impacts, then the categorical
exclusions encompassed are invalid . DOE agrees that such a proposal could
not be categorically excluded but believes that the individual categorical
exclusions would still be valid . DOE has added Sec . 1021 .410(b)(3) to
address this concern and to preclude the segmentation of a proposal into
component parts, which as discrete proposals are categorically excluded,
to avoid preparation of an EA or EIS.
Commenters, expressing the view that DOE's proposed categorical
eY lusions are too broad, asserted that DOE should prepare more EAs and
DOE's extensive list of categorical exclusions results from a
uctance on DOE's part to prepare EAs because its internal EA
requirements are so burdensome . Commenters asserted that the approach
represented by the expanded list of categorical exclusions is not
consistent with the requirements of NEPA and the CEQ regulations . One
commenter noted that an increased reliance on EAs would not necessarily
require vast new commitments of time and resources if DOE would take heed
Of CEQ regulations and guidance that intend the EA to be a concise and
expeditious analysis . Other commenters criticized DOE for presenting a
confusing and illogical mix of activities, ranging from the payment of
salaries to the restart of nuclear facilities, and for not having
a de minimis level for actions to be subject to a NEPA review.
The extensive list of categorical exclusions results primarily from the
fact that DOE is engaged in many different types of activities . DOE's
extensive list of categorical exclusions also reflects DOE's policy that
some NEPA review is required for all DOE actions potentially affecting the
environment, even if there is no apparent potential for any significant
effect . DOE believes the extensive list of categorically excluded actions
in the final rule is consistent with NEPA and the CEQ regulations . The CEQ
regulations require agencies to reduce excessive paper work and avoid
delays by using categorical exclusions (40 CFR 1500 .4(p) and 1500 .5(k)).
DOE will prepare EAs when necessary--that is, when the class of actions
has not been excluded and/or when DOE is uncertain whether the proposed
action would have significant environmental impacts . DOE believes it will
serve environmental concerns best if it focuses its efforts on analyzing
those actions that may or do have potential for significant impact.
411
ñe commenter stated that the categorical exclusions in proposed
Appendix B were inappropriate because they were vaguely drafted and were
entirely without reference to size, volume, or significance in a way that
would encompass major Federal actions that were likely to have significant
environmental impacts . Others expressed concern about the broad scope of
the classes of actions categorically excluded . DOE has reevaluated all
categorical exclusions in the proposed rule to determine the
appropriateness of more precise language, adding limiting factors or
otherwise narrowing the scope of the categorical exclusions, and has
modified several accordingly . DOE has decided not to categorically
exclude some classes of actions that were included on the list in the
proposed rule . These deletions and changes are described in more detail in
the discussion under section III G below.
One commenter suggested that DOE delete proposed appendix B in its
entirety, and instead add explicit limits on the size of each class of
actions proposed in that appendix and move the classes of actions to
proposed appendix A . The commenter further suggested that DOE prepare EAs
or EISs for all proposed activities beyond the expressed size limit . of the
classes of action in the resulting appendix A.
DOE believes it is reasonable to retain two appendices for categorical
exclusions but has revised the distinction between the types of classes of
actions included in appendices A and B . Appendix A in the final rule lists
categorical exclusions applicable to general agency actions and includes
ose classes of actions with impacts so remote or conjectural as to
clude meaningful consideration . Appendix A includes some classes of
a
to which NEPA probably does not apply but that DOE has listed to
clarify that neither an EA nor EIS is needed and to avoid any potential
misunderstanding associated with the absence of such listing . Appendix B
in the final rule lists categorical exclusions that are applicable to
specific agency actions and have conditions specified as integral elements
of the classes of actions.
The conditions that are integral elements of the classes of actions in
appendix B of the final rule were the eligibility criteria in Sec.
1021 .410(b) of the proposed rule . Even though originally proposed to apply
to all categorical exclusions as eligibility criteria, DOE believes that
inclusion of the conditions specified in appendix B would be meaningless
for the categorical exclusions DOE retained in appendix A in the final
rule . This is because appendix A is limited to classes of actions with
impacts that cannot be meaningfully evaluated . DOE moved the classes of
actions with impacts that are not so remote or conjectural as to preclude
meaningful analysis that were included in appendix A of the proposed rule
to appendix B in the final rule so that the conditions specified in
appendix B would be integral elements of these classes of actions.
Categorical exclusions in appendices A and B have been found by DOE not to
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment.
Two commenters were concerned that, while DOE's proposed rule purports
to abolish the memorandum-to-file, DOE has merely substituted a new
system, "documentation," which also would not be made available to the
Alhlic . One commenter considered the documented categorical exclusions as
mpfantom" EAs that would reinsert into DOE's NEPA process the very
subjectivity, discretion, and secrecy that SEN 15-90 was intended to
eliminate . Another commenter viewed DOE's creation of the proposed
Appendix B as indicating a lower level of certainty about those
categorical exclusions and noted that, when an analysis is required to
decide whether an action meets the criteria for a categorical exclusion,
then the proper format for that analysis is an EA subject to public
review, not documentation behind closed doors.
DOE has eliminated the requirements for documentation of categorical
exclusions from its regulations . It was not DOE's intent that any
categorical exclusion in appendix B be supported by an analysis of.
environmental effects ("phantom" EAs) or that the documented categorical
exclusion be equivalent to the memorandum-to-file, which DOE has
eliminated from its NEPA procedures . The documentation that DOE referred
to for these categorical exclusions in the proposed rule was to be a
record of the determination that the action was appropriately
categorically excluded and was to be used for internal oversight purposes.
Although the CEQ regulations require public review of categorical
exclusions proposed for listing, the regulations do not require
documentation, public review, or notification when categorical exclusions
are applied ..
•
One commenter was concerned that proper documentation is needed to
ensure that an established process has been followed, and suggested that
use a checklist to demonstrate why an action has been excluded from
her NEPA review . DOE is evaluating the need for internal recordkeeping
p cedures and, if such procedures are established, will consider the use
of a checklist.
In contrast to the commenters who believed that the classes of actions
proposed to be categorically excluded were too broad, some commenters
believed the classes of actions to be categorically excluded should be
broader than those proposed . One commenter thought that rather than
listing specific classes of actions, DOE should establish "guiding
criteria ." Some commenters suggested that certain classes of actions, in
addition to those in the proposed rule, should be categorically excluded
in the final rule . DOE believes that the classes of actions categorically
excluded in the final rule are appropriate and does not believe that it
could make the necessary findings at this time for any broader classes of
actions . As to the comments suggesting the categorical exclusion of
classes of actions not proposed by DOE, DOE cannot categorically exclude
in the final rulemaking any classes of actions not included in the
proposed categorical exclusions . The CEQ regulations require that
categorical exclusions be established only after public notice and the
opportunity for public comment . DOE will consider the suggestions of the
commenters in determining whether to propose new or broader classes of
actions for categorical exclusion in a future rulemaking.
The comment was made that because many of the classes of actions
proposed to be categorically excluded in appendices A and B entail
activities that could affect the character or use of historic properties,
DOE should make absolutely clear in its final rule that the categorical
usion of an action does not exempt it from the requirements of other
llllronmental regulations . DOE's NEPA rule addresses NEPA compliance only,
not other environmental requirements . Coordination with other
environmental review requirements is addressed in Sec . 1021 .341 ; in
addition, condition B .(4)(i) in appendix B of the final rule precludes a
proposed action from categorical exclusion if the action would have an
adverse effect on historic properties.
Four commenters expressed concern about the lack of public participation
in, and public scrutiny of, the process of determining whether particular
proposed actions are appropriately categorically excluded . One commenter
suggested that records of determinations that proposed actions are
categorically excluded be placed in public reading rooms . Another
commenter felt that in view of the breadth of the classes of actions on
the list of categorical exclusions and the discretion to be exercised in
applying eligibility criteria to proposed actions, there should be public
participation in the process.
The CEQ regulations do not provide for public participation in
determinations that particular proposed actions are categorically
excluded, nor do they require that records of such determinations be kept
or made public . DOE believes that requiring public participation in
categorical exclusion determinations or that documentation of categorical
exclusion determinations be made available in public reading rooms would
be contrary to the purposes of categorical exclusions, as stated in the
CEQ regulations--reducing paperwork and avoiding delays.
G Comments on Specific Sections of Subpart D--Typical Classes of Actions
SeZtion 1021 .400 Level of NEPA Review
A commenter suggested that Sec . 1021 .400 as proposed should address
proposed actions covered by "memoranda-to-file ." DOE does not believe a
reference in the rule to memoranda-to-file is needed or appropriate
because such documents are no longer part of DOE's NEPA procedures . To
clarify the effect of this rulemaking on completed NEPA reviews and
documents, DOE has changed Sec . 1021 .400(b) in the final rule to state
that "any completed, valid NEPA review does not have to be repeated, and
no completed NEPA documents need to be redone by reasons of these
regulations, except as provided in Sec . 1021 .314" (which concerns
supplemental EISs) . Because a memorandum-to-file issued before September
30, 1990, is a valid NEPA document, Sec . 1021 .400(b) would apply . (See
additional discussion under section III B above .)
A commenter suggested that clarification be provided in Sec.
1021 .40.0(b), as proposed, on the use of existing site-wide EAs or EISs
during the evaluation of those documents or the preparation of new
site-wide documents for continuing or new actions . DOE believes that this
issue is generally addressed by Sec . 1021 .400(b) and that any further
clarification is better addressed in internal guidance than in this
rulemaking because of site-specific issues and circumstances . Accordingly,
DOE did not provide the requested clarification in the final rule.
Another commenter was concerned that the language in Sec . 1021 .400(c),
as proposed, did not make it sufficiently clear that the application of a
gorical exclusion to a particular DOE proposal depends on the proposal
N- tang the eligibility criteria of proposed Sec . 1021 .410(b) . DOE agrees
with respect to those classes of actions listed in appendix B of the final
rule . However, rather than modifying Sec . 1021 .400(c) in the final rule,
DOE has included the eligibility criteria in Sec . 1021 .410(b) of the
proposed rule in appendix B of the final rule as conditions that are
integral elements of the classes of actions listed in appendix B . DOE has
not included the proposed eligibility criteria in Sec . 1021 .410 of the
final rule . DOE believes that this provides the clarification requested by
the commenter.
A commenter expressed concern that the proposed rule did not provide for
instances where actions falling within a category . of categorically
excluded actions might have significant environmental effects because of.
extraordinary circumstances . .DOE .. intended to provide for such instances in
Sec . 1021 .400(c) as proposed . In light of the commenter's concern, DOE has
modified Sec . 1021 .400(c) in the final rule and added Sec . 1021 .410(b) (2)
to clarify that DOE will not proceed with the level of review indicated in
the appendices if there are extraordinary circumstances related to the
proposal that may affect the significance of ..its environmental effects.
DOE has included a circumstance cited by the commenter (i .e ., the
unresolved conflicts concerning alternative uses of available resources
within the meaning of Sec . 102(2)(E) of NEPA) as an example of an
•
extraordinary circumstance in Sec . 1021 .410(b) (2) of the final rule . DOE
also modified Sec . 1021 .400(d) in the final rule to be consistent with the
revisions to Sec . 1021 .400(c).
ion 1021 .410 Application of Categorical Exclusions (Classes of
Aons That Normally Do Not Require EAs or EISs)
Section 1021 .410(a) General . In the final rule, DOE has expanded this
section to clarify the application of categorical exclusions and has
divided the proposed section into four parts . DOE has incorporated Sec.
1021 .410(b) of the proposed rule into appendix B in the final rule.
Therefore, Sec . 1021 .410(a) of the proposed rule as modified is Sec.
1021 .410 in the final rule, as explained below.
Section 1021 .410(a) states DOE's required finding that the classes of
actions listed in appendices A and B of subpart D are classes of actions
that DOE has determined do not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment . Section 1021 .410(b)(1)
clarifies that to be eligible for categorical exclusion, the proposal must
be determined by DOE to fit within a class of actions listed in appendix A
or B . For a proposal to fit within a class of actions in appendix B, it
must meet the conditions specified in B .(1)-(4) in appendix B . ,
Section 1021 .410(b)(2) clarifies that to find that a proposal is
categorically excluded, DOE must determine that there are no extraordinary
circumstances related to the proposal that may affect the significance of
the environmental effects of the proposal . This section identifies three
examples of extraordinary circumstances that could exclude actions within
a class of actions in appendix A or B from eligibility for categorical
exclusions . These examples are unresolved conflicts concerning alternative
u es of available resources, scientific controversy about the
ronmental effects of the proposal, and uncertain effects or effects
~ . . olving unique or unknown risks.
Section 1021 .410(b)(3) clarifies that DOE, in determining that a
proposal is categorically excluded, shall find that the proposal is not
connected to other actions with potentially significant impacts, is not
related to other proposed actions with cumulatively significant impacts
(following 40 CFR 1508 .25(a) (1) and (2)), and is not precluded by 40 CFR
1506 .1 or Sec . 1021 .211 of these regulations . Section 1021 .410(b)(3) was
included in response to comments concerning cumulative impacts, as
discussed above.
Section 1021 .410(c) includes the statements contained in proposed Sec.
1021 .410(a) concerning the application of the classes of action by any
element of DOE and the division of appendices A and B only for
organizational purposes . In the final rule the word "organizational" was
added before "element of DOE" to be consistent with Sec . 1021 .102(a).
Section 1021 .410(d) modifies Sec . 1021 .410(a) as proposed to clarify
that, to avoid segmentation, the classes of actions are intended to
include all activities necessary to implement a proposal, such as
transportation activities and award of implementing grants and contracts.
A commenter recommended that Sec . 1021 .410(a) as proposed be revised to
provide for a case-by-case determination that a proposed action, not
included within classes of actions listed in appendices A and B, be
categorically excluded if the action meets the eligibility criteria set
f th in Sec . 1021 .410(b) . DOE has not made the requested revision
use, as discussed above, the CEQ regulations require that
ca egorically excluded classes of actions be identified in an agency's
published procedures . The proposed eligibility criteria and the appendix B
conditions in the final rule are not classes of actions.
Section 1021 .410(b) Eligibility criteria for categorical exclusions
(Appendix B of the final rule) . One commenter expressed concern that DOE
used as eligibility criteria for categorical exclusions some of the
factors in 40 CFR 1508 .27 intended for evaluating the intensity or
severity of impacts and for determining the significance of the
environmental impacts of proposed actions . The commenter pointed out that
the analysis of such factors is more appropriately accomplished in an EA.
The commenter acknowledged, however, that the use of these factors as
eligibility criteria is better than no requirement for screening and
suggested that, if such a screening mechanism is developed, it include
several additional critical factors found in 40 CFR 1508 .27 . Another
commenter also recommended that other factors in 40 CFR 1508 .27 be
added to DOE's list of eligibility criteria.
DOE agrees that subjective evaluation of the intensity or severity of an
impact as prescribed in 40 CFR 1508 .27 is not appropriate in a
determination that an action fits within a categorically excluded class of
actions . The conditions specified as integral elements of the classes of
actions in appendix B in the final rule, which were the eligibility
criteria in proposed
ec . 1021 .410(b)(1), require a factual determination . That is, the
ence, not the severity, of the factor would make a proposed action
~.. ligible for categorical exclusion . For example, 40 CFR 1508 .27(b)(8)
requires an evaluation of "(t)he degree to which the action may adversely
affect districts, sites, highways, structures, or objects listed in or
eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places ." On the
other hand, condition B .(4)(i) of DOE's final rule screens from
categorical exclusion status proposed actions that "adversely affect
environmentally sensitive resources," which include property listed on the
National Register.
The final rule retains the eligibility criteria proposed for classes of
actions in appendix B as conditions that are integral elements of the
classes of actions in appendix B in the final rule . DOE did not include,
however, additional conditions based on the CEQ factors in 40 CFR 1508 .27.
DOE believes that controversial environmental effects (40 CFR
1508 .27(b)(4)) and uncertain effects or effects that involve unique or
unknown risks (40 CFR 1508 .27(b)(5)) would not, except in extraordinary
circumstances, be associated with any of the categorically excluded
classes of actions included in the final rule . As explained earlier, DOE
has identified these factors as possible extraordinary circumstances in
Sec . 1021 .410(b)(2) of the final rule . The other CEQ criteria of
establishing a precedent for future actions with significant effects (40
CFR 1507 .28(b)(6)) or relation to other actions with individually
insignificant but cumulatively significant impacts (40 CFR
1507 .28(b)(7)) are included in Sec . 1021 .400(b)(3) of the final rule,
discussed above.
• In the final rule, DOE has added a condition that is an integral
ft .Lement of the classes of actions listed in Appendix B : a proposal must be
one that would not disturb hazardous substances, pollutants, contaminants,
or CERCLA-excluded petroleum and natural gas products that preexist in the
environment such that there would be uncontrolled or unpermitted releases
(B .(3)) . This condition is similar to an element of several categorical
exclusions in the proposed rule (proposed A1 .34, A3 .1, A3 .5, B3 .3, B6 .2,
and B6 .7) that concerned inadvertent or uncontrolled movement of hazardous
substances, pollutants, contaminants, or non-native organisms.
In response to comments that many of the proposed categorical exclusions
were too broad, DOE believes that condition B .(3) in the final rule, along
with other changes described herein, will appropriately narrow the scope
of categorical exclusions in appendix B . Proposed disturbance with
subsequent unpermitted or uncontrolled releases of hazardous substances,
pollutants, contaminants, or CERCLA-excluded petroleum and natural gas
products warrants analysis to determine if there is potential for
significant impact . DOE is concerned that such an action, otherwise
without potential for significant impact, may have the side-effect of
spreading preexisting contamination in the environment.
As a consequence of adding condition B .(3) to the final rule, the
corresponding restricting phrase proposed as part of several categorical
exclusions is not included in those categorical exclusions in the final
rule . With regard to proposed A1 .34 (final B1 .3) that concerns component
testing (generally an indoor activity), condition B .(1) of the final rule
(' e ., proposals cannot threaten applicable environment, safety, and
' 1th requirements) would provide the assurance that emissions are
trolled . With regard to the condition in proposed A3 .1 (site
characterization/environmental monitoring) and proposed A3 .5 (research
related to conservation of fish and wildlife) that the proposals not
result in the uncontrolled movement of non-native organisms, DOE now
believes that these actions (final B3 .1 and B3 .3, respectively) will not
foreseeably involve non-native organisms.
In response to a suggestion by a commenter that Sec . 1021 .410(b)(1)(i)
should have a disjunctive effect, the word "and" in the phrase "applicable
statutory, regulatory, and permit requirements" has been changed to "or"
in condition B .(1) in appendix B in the final rule . DOE also added the
phrase "for environment, safety, and health" to the condition in appendix
B .(1) in the final rule to clarify its intent that the term "requirements"
applies to safety and health as well as environment in response to a
comment in this regard.
DOE has revised the proposed eligibility criterion in Sec.
IO21 .410(b)(l)(ii) of the proposed rule as condition B .(2) in appendix B
in the final rule, and that condition includes waste storage facilities
because DOE believes the siting, construction, or major expansion of waste
storage facilities cannot be categorically excluded.
•
proposed action from the proposed . action for purposes of determining the
level of NEPA review would constitute inappropriate segmentation.
C version Table
S Part D--Typical Classes of Actions
Designation of Classes of Action in Subpart D
Proposed
Final
A1 .2
A1 .3
A1 .4
A1 .5
A1 .6
A1 .7
A1 .8
A1 .9
A1 .10
A1 .11
A1 .12
A1 .13
A1 .14
A1 .15
A1 .16
A1 .17
A1 .18
A1 .19
A1 .20
A1 .21
A1 .22
A1 .23
A1 .24
A1 .25
Al.
Al.
Not included ./l/
A2.
Not included ./2/
B1 .1.
Not included ./2/
A3.
A4.
A5.
A6.
A6.
Not included.
A6.
A7.
Al, A8.
A9.
A9.
A10.
All.
A9.
Al2.
B1 .2.
A13.
Al.
A1 .26
A1 .27
A1 .28
A1 .29
A1 .30
A1 .31
A1 .32
A1 .33
A1 .34
A1 .35
A1 .36
B1 .3, B2 .5.
B1 .15, B4 .11.
B1 .3, B2 .5.
B1 .4.
B1 .5.
B1 .6.
B1 .7.
B1 .8.
B1 .3.
B1 .3.
B1 .9.
A1 .37
A1 .38
A1 .39
A1 .40
A1 .41
B1 .10.
B1 .11:
B5 .1.
B1 .12 ..
B1 .13 .
Al .l
•
A1 .42
A1 .43
A1 .44
A1 .45
A1 .46
A2 .1
A2 .2
A2 .3
A2 .4
A2 .5
A3 .1
A3 .2
A3 .3
A3 .4
A3 .5
A3 .6
A3 .7
A3 .8
A4 .1
A4 .2
A4 .3
A4 .4
A4 .5
A4 .6
A4 .7
A4 .8
A4 .9
A4 .10
A5 .1
A5 .2
A5 .3
A5 .4
A6 .1
A6 .2
A6 .3
B1 .1
B1 .2
B1 .3
B1 .4
B1 .5
B1 .6
B1 .7
B1 .8
B1 .9
B2 .1
B3 .1
B3 .2
B3 .3
B3 .4
B3 .5
Not included ./1/
Not included ./1/
Not included ./1/
B1 .14.
Not included ./1/
B2 .1.
B2 .2.
Al2, B1 .3, B2 .2, B2 .5.
B2 .3.
B2 .4.
83 .1.
B3 .1.
B3 .1.
B3 .2.
B3 .3.
B3 .4.
B3 .5.
B3 .6.
B4 .1.
A7.
B4 .2.
B4 .3.
B4 .4.
Not included.
B4 .11.
B4 .5.
B4 .6.
B4 .7.
B5 .2.
B5 .3.
B5 .4.
Not included.
A14.
A15.
B7 .1.
B1 .15.
B1 .3.
B1 .16.
B1 .17.
B1 .18.
B1 .19.
B5 .1.
B1 .20.
Not included ./1/
B2 .5.
B3 .1, B3 .8, B6.
B3 .7.
B3 .8, B6 .2.
B3 .9.
B3 .10.
B3 .6
B3 .11.
B4 .1
B4 .8 .
B4 .2
B4 .3
B4 .4
B4 .5
B4 .6
B4 .7
B4 .9.
B4 .10.
B4 .11.
B4 .12.
B4 .13.
B1 .21.
B5 .1
B5 .2
B5 .3
B5 .4
B5 .5
B5 .6
B5 .7.
B5 .8
B5 .9
B5 .10
B5 .11
B5 .12
B5 .5.
B5 .6.
B5 .7.
B5 .8.
B5 .9.
B5 .10.
B5 .11.
B5 .12.
B5 .13.
B5 .14.
B5 .15.
B5 .16.
B6 .1
B6 .2
B6 .3
B6 .4
B6 .5
B6 .6
B6 .7
B6 .8
B6 .1.
B6 .2.
B6 .3.
C16, B6 .4, B6 .5, B6 .6.
B6 .6.
B6 .7.
B1 .22.
B6 .8.
B7 .1
B7 .2
B7 .2.
Cl
Cl.
Not included.
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
C9
C10
C11
C12
C13
C14
C15
C16
C8.
C2.
C3.
C10, C11.
C12.
C4.
C5.
C6.
C7.
C13.
C14.
C15.
C16.
Not included.
C9.
D1
D2
D3
D4
D1.
D2.
D3.
D4.
D5
D5 .
D6
D7
D8
D9
DIO
D11
D12
D6.
D8.
D9.
D10.
D11.
Not included.
D12.
/1/ In scope of broader proposals.
/2/ CEQ definition of action excludes
this classification.
Proposed A1 .5 Pass-throughs (Not Included in the Final Rule)
DOE has not included this proposed categorical exclusion in the final
rule because congressionally mandated funding pass-throughs are
"ministerial actions," which DOE does not propose and over which it has no
discretion . Therefore, these are not DOE actions as discussed above under
"action" in III C.
Proposed A1 .7 Administrative Enforcement Actions (Not Included in the
Final Rule)
rule because the CEQ definition of a "major Federal action" at 40 CFR
1508 .18(a) . specifically excludes administrative enforcement actions.
Proposed A1 .11 Rulemaking for Technical and Pricing Proposals (Final A6)
P oposed A1 .12 Rulemaking for Grants and Cooperative Agreements (Final
Proposed A1 .14 Procedural Rulemakings (Final A6)
DOE has consolidated these proposed categorical exclusions into one
categorical exclusion in the final rule because rulemakings that are
strictly procedural include those described in proposed A1 .11 and A1 .12.
Proposed A1 .13 Rulemaking for Categorically-excluded Actions (Not
Included in the Final Rule)
DOE has not included this categorical exclusion in the final rule.
Specific classes of rulemakings that are categorically excluded are
specified in appendix A of the final rule ; other types of rulemaking will
require an EA or EIS.
Proposed A1 .15 Transfer of Property, Use Unchanged or Categorically
Excluded (Final A3)
DOE has modified the wording of this categorical exclusion in the final
rule . The phrase referring to proposed uses that are "categorically
excluded in this subpart" has been deleted because DOE believes that
transfers, leases, dispositions, or acquisitions of property that are part
of a broader proposed action must be reviewed for NEPA purposes in the
context of the broader proposed action . Separating these property
transfers from the proposed new use would constitute inappropriate
s entation . DOE also deleted the phrase referring to disposition through
General Services Administration because the phrase was unnecessary.
Proposed A1 .16 Personnel Actions/Personal Service Contracts (Final Al and
A8)
One commenter was concerned that technical support contracts and
management and operating (M&O) contracts should not be categorically
excluded because hiring certain contractors or using ineffective
contracting practices and procedures might have environmental impacts that
could require an EA or EIS.
DOE does not believe that contracts for technical services, management and
operation of DOE facilities, or personal services, or even contracting
procedures in general, have potential for significant environmental
effects because they are merely arrangements to perform future actions,
yet to be assigned . Subsequent actions carried out under such contracts,
however, may have environmental consequences and will be the subject of
NEPA review . Furthermore, Federal procurement policy requires that
contracts be awarded only to responsible contractors (48 CFR part 9), and
based on this standard, DOE will not knowingly contract with an
environmentally irresponsible party . DOE believes that discussion of the
purported environmental merits of potential contractors in a NEPA document
would be extremely speculative and not amenable to meaningful analysis.
The commenter also mentioned that DOE's proposed "Alternate Contracting
System" would benefit from NEPA analysis . DOE believes that this reference
is to the alternate business strategy for environmental restoration
ice of Intent to develop an environmental restoration alternate
L iness strategy, 55 FR 48544, October 31, 1990) . This strategy would
establish environmental restoration management contractors at certain DOE
field offices, separate from the M&O contractors that otherwise manage DOE
facilities . DOE believes that establishing the framework for these
contracts does not have the potential for significant environmental
impact . Specific restoration activities carried out under the contracts
will be subject to separate NEPA review.
DOE has revised the categorical exclusion in the final rule to refer
only to the award of contracts (final A8) and has rephrased it to clarify
that contracts for technical support services and for management and
operation of a government-owned facility are not subsets of contracts for
personal services . In the final rule, personnel actions are included in
the categorical exclusion for actions necessary to support . the normal
conduct of business (Final Al) . (See also discussion of proposed All,
,A1 .2, A1 .16, and A1 .25, above .)
Proposed A1 .17 Document Preparation (Final A9)
Proposed A1 .18 Information Gathering/Analysis/Dissemination (Final A9)
Proposed A1 .21 Classroom Training and Informational Programs (Final A9)
DOE has consolidated these categorical exclusions into one covering
information gathering, analysis, documentation preparation, and
d' semination of information . DOE believes that these proposed categorical
lusions are interrelated, and combining them into one categorical
e lusion avoids segmentation . One commenter suggested that the list of
documents given as examples should be expanded to include monitoring
reports, permit applications, project scope, and cost estimating . DOE does
not believe that additional examples are necessary to ensure that the
scope of the consolidated categorical exclusion is clearly understood to
be paperwork activities.
Proposed A1 .19
A10)
Reports or Recommendations on non-DOE Legislation (Final
One commenter suggested that the proposed categorical exclusion be
expanded to include reports or recommendations on legislation or
rulemaking proposed by DOE . This change was not made because DOE-proposed
legislation and rulemaking that is not categorically excluded in the final
rule may require preparation of an EA or an EIS.
Proposed A1 .26 Routine Maintenance/Custodial Services for Building
Structures and Equipment (Final B1 .3 and B2 .5)
Proposed A1 .34
B1 .3)
Routine Testing/Calibration of Facility Components (Final
Proposed A1 .35
(Final B1 .3)
Routine Decontamination, not part of Decommissioning
Proposed B1 .2
(Val B1 .3)
Removal of Contamination, not Decommissioning Project
DOE has revised the definition and scope of proposed A1 .26 to clarify
that the scope includes work on infrastructures (such as roads),
maintenance work of a predictive nature (i .e ., continuous or periodic
monitoring or diagnosis to forecast component degradation), and suspension
of operations to perform maintenance and subsequent resumption of
operations . In addition, DOE has included custodial services in the
general description and scope paragraph in the final rule (rather than as
an example of routine maintenance, as proposed).
DOE has added two examples of routine maintenance . One example (example
B1 .3(n) in the final rule) concerns predictive maintenance and
incorporates proposed A1 .34 (discussed below under that heading) . The
other example (example B1 .3(o) in the final rule) concerns routine
decontamination of the interior surfaces of buildings and removal of
contaminated equipment and other material . This last example incorporates
activities in proposed A1 .35 and proposed B1 .2, as discussed below under
those headings.
One commenter objected to categorically excluding the repair and
maintenance of transmission facilities (example (m) of proposed A1 .26 and
final B1 .3) because of the potential for polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB)
contamination, noting that maintenance of transformers at many DOE
facilities has resulted in environmental contamination . The routine
maintenance procedure referred to by the commenter (i .e ., draining a small
amount, about one quart, of transformer oil into the ground to flush out
J unities before sampling) was common practice before regulations
co trolling PCBs were established in 1979 (40 CFR part 761) . This practice
has now been discontinued . DOE believes that maintenance activities
involving PCBs carried out in compliance with applicable regulations are
appropriate for a categorical exclusion . For purposes of clarity, DOE has
added a stipulation to the example that the activities be conducted in
accordance with 40 CFR part 761.
The commenter was concerned that cumulative maintenance activities
involving PCBs would have significant impact and stated that an EA or EIS
might be a valuable means of demonstrating long-term benefits of a
systematic phaseout of PCB-containing equipment . In establishing this
categorical exclusion, DOE has determined, based on its experience, that
the class individually and cumulatively has no potential for significant
environmental effect.
In response to two commenters' requests that applicable statutory and
regulatory requirements be added to the example concerning removal and
replacement of tanks and piping (example (n) of proposed A1 .26), DOE has
included citations of applicable statutory and regulatory requirements . As
one commenter also requested, DOE has added a requirement that there be no
evidence of leakage based on regulatory performance requirements . On
further analysis, DOE determined that removal and replacement of tanks and
piping form an example of an upgrade rather than routine maintenance.
Accordingly, DOE has deleted it as an example of routine maintenance and
included it as an example in B2 .5 in the final rule (82 .1 in the proposed
rile), which addresses safety and environmental improvements and facility
ades.
Proposed A1 .27 Siting/Construction/Operation of Storage Area for
Maintenance/Administrative Supplies/Equipment (Final B1 .15 and 84 .11)
To avoid inappropriate segmentation, DOE has not included this
categorical exclusion as a separate class of actions in the final rule but
incorporated this categorical exclusion into proposed B1 .1 (B1 .15 of the
final rule) as one of several categorically excluded support facilities
and into proposed B4 .4 (84 .11 of the final rule) . (See the discussion
under proposed B1 .1, below .)
Proposed A1 .28 Replacement/Extension of Existing Utility Systems for
Categorically-Excluded Actions (Final B1 .3 and B2 .5)
Commenters requested that the concepts of repair, modification, and
upgrade be added to this categorical exclusion . DOE has not included this
categorical exclusion in the final rule because it duplicates activities
(e .g ., replacement of existing utility systems) in both proposed A1 .26
(B1 .3 of the final rule) and B2 .1 (B2 .5 of the final rule) . DOE also now
recognizes that extension of utility systems required as a result of
categorically excluded actions is part of the larger action and the
exclusion would have resulted in inappropriate segmentation.
•
Proposed A1 .31 Installation of/Improvements to Liquid Retention Tanks,
Small Basins (Final B1 .6)
E has narrowed the scope of this categorical exclusion by limiting the
of basins installed or modified to generally less than one acre . One
c enter felt that the term "liquid retention" implied the exclusion of
holding tanks for gas and other materials and suggested that the term be
deleted . DOE intended the categorical exclusion to apply to a facility's
improved handling of materials (such as sludges ., wastewater, or
stormwater) to control spills and runoff . DOE deleted the . term "liquid"
and otherwise modified the categorical exclusion to clarify this intent.
Proposed A1 .32 Acquisition/Installation/Operation of Communication
Systems, Data Processing Equipment (Final B1 .7)
In response to a comment on this categorical exclusion, DOE has added
"removal" to the stated activities.
Proposed A1 .34 Routine Testing/Calibration of Facility Components (Final
B1 .3)
In response to a comment, DOE has added portable equipment in the list
of proposed items . Because testing and calibration of equipment is
predictive maintenance, DOE has incorporated this proposed categorical
exclusion as an example (example (n)) in the categorical exclusion for
routine maintenance (proposed A1 .26 and final B1 .3).
Proposed A1 .35 Routine Decontamination, not Part of Decommissioning
(Final B1 .3)
ne commenter objected to categorically excluding decontamination
ivities, even if they are not part of a decommissioning project . At
many DOE facilities, decontamination of equipment, rooms, hot cells, and .
the interior of buildings is a daily or weekly activity, which includes
wiping with rags, using strippable latex, and minor vacuuming . These
activities are part of routine maintenance . The commenter interpreted a
much broader scope to this proposed categorical exclusion than DOE
intended . Therefore, DOE incorporated the categorical exclusion as an
example (along with proposed B1 .2) into the categorical exclusion for
routine maintenance (proposed A1 .26, final B1 .3, example (o)).
Another commenter suggested that exterior decontamination activities
should be categorically excluded as well . Exterior decontamination is
addressed in categorical exclusion B6 .1, CERCLA removals/similar actions
under RCRA or other authorities.
Proposed A1 .37 On-site Storage of Activated Material at Existing Facility
(Final B1 .10)
One commenter suggested that this categorical exclusion be deleted
because it allowed too broad a range of actions, given the risks of
storing any radionuclides . DOE has revised this categorical exclusion in
the final rule to emphasize that its scope is the routine storage of
activated equipment and construction materials to allow radionuclides with
short halflives(days or weeks) to decay sufficiently before reuse . The
activation-produced radioisotopes are in the matrix of the material and
are not likely to leak out.
1Dosed A1 .40 Detonation of High Explosives in Reserved Areas (Final
B .12)
One commenter objected to this categorical exclusion because, based on
its vague wording, it could be interpreted to apply broadly to all high
explosive detonations . DOE has revised the categorical exclusion to
clarify that it applies only to the detonation or burning of failed or
damaged explosives or propellants under an existing permit issued by state
or local authorities.
Proposed A1 .42 Routine Transportation of Nonhazardous Materials and
Nonradioactive, Nonwaste Hazardous Materials (Not included in the final
rule)
Proposed A1 .43 Routine Transportation of Waste (Not Transuranic, not High
Level) (Not Included in the final rule)
One commenter objected to the broad scope of proposed A1 .42, based on
concern about the transport of hazardous substances (including CERCLAexcluded petroleum and natural gas products), uncertainty regarding DOE's
adoption of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Below Regulatory Concern
level, and the lack of eligibility criteria to screen for potential
impacts on public health and safety and for cumulative impacts . DOE
believes that reviewing transportation for proposals separately from the
proposals themselves would be inappropriate segmentation . DOE will
consider the transportation impacts of proposed actions in EAs and EISs,
ppropriate . As indicated in Sec . 1021 .410(d) of the final rule, DOE
s classes of actions as including all activities necessary to
implement a proposal within the class of actions, such as associated
transportation activities . DOE has not adopted the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission's Below Regulatory Concern level . DOE has revised the proposed
eligibility criterion concerning statutory, regulatory, and permit
requirements and, as explained above, included it as condition B .(1) in
appendix B of the final rule to clearly indicate that public health and
safety issues are covered . DOE also has added Sec . 1021 .410(b)(3) to
address cumulative impacts.
a
Proposed A1 .44 Temporary Shutdown/Restart of a Facility for Inventory,
Routine Maintenance (Not Included in the Final Rule)
Proposed A1 .46 Shutdown of an Operating Facility (Not Included in the
Final Rule)
DOE now recognizes that in proposing these two categorical exclusions,
it inappropriately identified suspension and resumption of operations as
separate and distinct actions . These exclusions identified activities that
are part of ongoing routine operations of an- .existing facility and thus by
themselves are not subject to NEPA . The final rule has been revised to
focus on the activities to be performed while operations are suspended.
(See, e .g ., proposed A1 .26 (final B1 .3), proposed A1 .45 (final B1 .14), and
•
proposed B1 .9 (final B2 .5) . See also the discussion below for proposed
A1 .45 (final B1 .14) and proposed B1 .9 (final B2 .5) .) Therefore, DOE has
not included proposed A1 .44 and A1 .46 in the final rule.
One commenter, in reference to proposed A1 .44, was concerned about the
vagueness of the terms related to maintenance and about the potential for
DOE to carry out substantial work to correct safety or environmental
concerns through repeated shutdowns . The categorical exclusion for routine
maintenance (proposed A1 .26, final B1 .3) provides many examples that
describe and limit the nature and scope of these activities.
Another commenter, in reference to proposed A1 .44 and A1 .46, stated that
it was unreasonable for DOE to predetermine that a shutdown for up to two
years would not require an EA or EIS and expressed concern, in reference
to proposed A1 .44, that the magnitude of problems at DOE facilities can
easily be underestimated . DOE agrees that it cannot predetermine the
length of time that activities appropriately categorically excluded might
take, and has not included a time period in those categorical exclusions
that may involve a suspension and resumption of operations . DOE must
determine the appropriate level of NEPA review and complete it before
taking the proposed action . If a proposed action changes as a result of
initial activities, DOE will complete a new NEPA review before taking
further action.
One commenter, in reference to proposed A1 .46, was concerned that this
categorical exclusion would exempt shutdown of facilities intended
primarily for environmental mitigation or improvement (e .g ., a wastewater
treatment plant or a renewable energy facility), and that such a shutdown
could have potential for significant adverse impacts . DOE believes that
temporary suspension of operation and subsequent resumption (e .g ., for
r utine maintenance) would not have potential for significant impacts
pt in extraordinary circumstances . This commenter also requested
V_ rification that permanent shutdown may require additional NEPA review
if decontamination and decommissioning activities are proposed . DOE agrees
and notes the lack of a categorical exclusion for facility
decommissioning, as well as the inclusion of decommissioning in several of
the classes of actions found in appendix D to Subpart D of the rule, which
normally require an EIS.
Proposed A1 .45 Temporary Shutdown/Restart of a Nuclear Reactor for
Refueling
(Final B81 .14)
DOE has retained this categorical exclusion, but it is revised to focus
on the refueling activity, while acknowledging that operations may be
suspended and resumed for such activity.
Proposed A2 .3 Establishment of/Improvements to Warning Systems Monitors,
Evacuation Routes (Final Al2, B1 .3, B2 .2, and B2 .5)
rule because DOE believes the actions are encompassed by proposed A2 .2
(final B2 .2), which addresses building instrumentation, and proposed
A1 .22, A1 .26, and B2 .1 (final Al2, B1 .3, and B2 .5, respectively), which
cover emergency evacuation road designation, repair, and improvement . DOE
clarified the scope of B2 .2 and Al2 in the final rule .
Proposed A2 .4 Promotion/Maintenance of Employee Health (Final B2 .3)
e commenter requested that radiation monitoring devices and fumehoods
associated collection and exhaust systems be added to the list of
ex mples in this categorical exclusion and that a reference be made to
applicable regulations . DOE has added the additional example to the
categorical exclusion in the final rule (B2 .3), but has not provided the
requested reference to applicable regulations because there are no
regulations specifically applicable to this categorical exclusion.
Proposed A3 .1 Site Characterization/Environmental Monitoring (Final B3 .1)
Proposed B3 .1 Siting/Construction/Operation of Small-Scale Laboratory
Building or Renovation of Room for Sample Analysis for Site
Characterization/Environmental Monitoring (Final B3 .1, B3 .8, and B6 .2)
In response to a comment, DOE has modified proposed A3 .1 to clarify that
site characterization and environmental monitoring activities for remedial
investigation and feasibility studies are within the scope of the
categorical exclusion.
Another commenter stated that proposed A3 .1 should be limited to
existing .waste site cleanups and should not apply to site characterization
for the construction of new facilities . DOE has not limited the
categorical exclusion in this wax because it believes that the
environmental impacts of activities covered by this categorical exclusion
are insignificant whether performed for possible restoration or
construction . Site characterization may be necessary before formulating a
proposal involving new construction and for which preparation of an EA or
E is necessary, as the data may be needed for conceptual design and to
uate impacts of construction, operation, and, as appropriate, eventual
u- ommissioning . DOE believes that Sec . 1021 .410(b)(3), which clarifies
that DOE's categorically excluded actions will not be connected to other
actions with potentially significant impacts or otherwise be related to
actions with cumulatively significant impacts, addresses the commenter's
concern that the site characterization activities not establish a
precedent for future actions with significant impacts or represent a
decision in principle about a future consideration.
DOE has included the scope of activities of proposed B3 .1 into proposed
A3 .1 (final B3 .1), proposed B3 .3 (final B3 .8 and B6 .2) and proposed B6 .2
(final B6 .2) to avoid inappropriate segmentation.
Proposed A3 .2 Geochemical Surveys/Geological Mapping/Geophysical
Investigation (Final B3 .1)
DOE has not included this categorical exclusion in the final rule
because DOE believes the categorical exclusion is encompassed by proposed
A3 .1, which is B3 .1 in the final rule . In the final rule, example (a) in
B3 .1 was modified accordingly to clarify the scope of that categorical
exclusion.
Proposed A3 .3 Archeological/Cultural Resource Identification (Final B3 .1)
DOE has included this proposed categorical exclusion as an example of
site characterization activity in the final rule (B3 .1(j)).
a
P osed A3 .5 Research Related to Conservation of Fish and Wildlife
-ervation (Final B3 .3)
In response to a comment that categorically excluded research should not
significantly reduce the study populations of non-nuisance species, DOE
has narrowed this proposed categorical exclusion . In the final rule, the
categorical exclusion is limited to research activities that would involve
only negligible population reduction.
Another commenter asserted that this categorical exclusion was
inconsistent with 40 CFR 1506 .1, proposed Sec . 1021 .410, and proposed
appendix C2 to subpart D . In the final rule under Sec . . 1021 .410(b)(3), all
categorically excluded actions must meet the criteria in 40 CFR 1506 .1
(limitations on actions during NEPA process) . Because the categorically
excluded research activities in this class of actions might directly
involve fish and wildlife resources that are not environmentally sensitive
(section 1021 .410(b)(2)(ii) in the proposed rule, condition B .(4) in
Appendix B in the final rules the categorical exclusion emphasizes
minimization of animal mortality, population reduction, or habitat
destruction regardless of whether these resources are protected by other
statutes . The class of actions in proposed C2 (Protection of fish and
wildlife habitat), which is final C8, and in proposed B1 .8
(Protect/restore/improve fish and wildlife habitat), which is
final B1 .20, concern habitat modification, rather than research as in this
categorical exclusion.
P
osed A3 .8 Indoor Bench-Scale Research Projects/Conventional Operation
al B3 .6)
One commenter asserted that this proposed categorical exclusion might be
used to exempt laboratory operations that are conducted with radioactive
and hazardous materials as part of a larger development project . The
commenter had specific concerns that categorically excluded research could
lead to violations of National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
permits and larger programs with significant environmental impacts . DOE
had proposed an eligibility criterion for categorical exclusions (section
1021 .410(b)(1)(i) in the proposed rule) that the proposed actions would
not threaten a violation of applicable permit requirements . In the final
rule, DOE has revised this criterion to be condition B .(1), which is an
integral'element of all the classes of actions in appendix B . DOE has also
added Sec . 1021 .410(b)(3) to this final rule to clarify that DOE's
categorically excluded proposals will not involve segmentation . DOE
believes that this type of laboratory work, even involving radioactive and
hazardous materials, does not have potential for significant impact.
Another commenter suggested expanding the list of examples of
conventional laboratory operations and adding the restriction that
operations be in accordance with applicable requirements, permits, and DOE
orders . This restriction was covered in DOE's proposed eligibility
criteria at proposed Sec . 1021 .410(b)(1) and is in condition B .(1) in
appendix B in the final rule . DOE does not believe it is necessary to
augment the list of examples but has revised the categorical exclusion to
explicitly state that the activities will be conducted within existing
laboratory facilities . Establishing a laboratory facility is a separate
elf* ion, for which DOE will prepare an EA or EIS to address, among other
es, overall wastewater treatment and pollution prevention and the
im acts from discharges related to research performed therein.
Proposed A4 .1 Contracts/Marketing Plans/Policies for the Short Term
(Final B4 .1)
Proposed A4 .5 Power Marketing Services Within Normal Operating Limits
(Final B4 .4).
Proposed A4 .8 Temporary Adjustments to River Operations (Final B4 .5)
One commenter strongly objected to these categorical exclusions because
of concern for cumulative impacts as well as immediate, direct effects
from changes in the timing and flow of rivers . The commenter stated that
marketing plans and contracts have the potential for significant
environmental effects and pointed out the ambiguity in timeframes in
proposed A4 .1 . The same commenter thought that the use of hydropower
resources to meet peak demands may tend to displace oil- and gas-fired
thermal generation . Another commenter stated that proposed A4 .1 should not
apply when there is increased emissions from fossil-fueled powerplants or
major changes in reservoir levels or streamflows.
After consideration of the comments, DOE has determined that the three
proposed categorical exclusions do not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment . Repeatedly and consistently,
DOE has found no significant impacts associated with actions by the power
eting agencies that are within the existing constraints of a
ticular hydrosystem operation, including past decisions concerning
actions that would be beyond the parameters of the proposed categorical
exclusions.
DOE considers a five-year limit for categorical exclusion (proposed
A4 .1, final B4 .1) of disposition, allocation, or acquisition of excess
power appropriate because it is consistent with (1) the delineation of a
"major" resource in the Northwest Power Act (that is, sections 3(12) and
6(c) of the act define resources of more than 50 average megawatts
acquired for more than 5 years as "major" and impose special procedures
for such acquisitions) and (2) the Bonneville Power Administration's
normal multiyear planning process (promulgated, in accordance with the
Pacific Northwest Coordination Agreement, to effect short-term marketing
actions to optimize the system economically or short-term power
acquisitions to avoid power shortages) . Excess power refers to nonfirm
power or surplus firm power derived from existing resources . Proposed A4 .1
(final B4 .1) would not apply to transactions enabling the construction of
new resources . (See the discussion of proposed C10, below .)
In response to the commenter's concern regarding the subjectivity of
proposed A4 .5 (final B4 .4) and proposed A4 .8 (final B4 .5), including the
use of such terms as "temporary" and "minor," DOE believes that the
limitations within the final categorical exclusions, while not
eliminating, will minimize the need for subjective judgment.
DOE agrees that the establishment of basic hydrosystem operating
p ameters is appropriately addressed through means other than categorical
usions . (See discussion below under proposed CIO .) The Bonneville
P er Administration, for example, is preparing the Columbia River System
Operation Review EIS to consider the balance of uses on the Columbia
River.
One commenter indicated that the categorical exclusion for temporary
river adjustments (proposed A4 .8, final B4 .5) should not be applied if the
changes would reduce instream flows below minimum requirements . This
categorical exclusion would not apply in this situation because such
changes would exceed the existing constraints of a particular hydrosystem
operation and would not be regarded as a minor change to reservoir levels
or streamflows.
Proposed A4 .2 Leasing of Existing Transmission Facilities (Final A7)
DOE has not included this categorical exclusion in the final rule . This
categorical exclusion is unnecessary because the leasing of existing
transmission facilities is encompassed by proposed A1 .15, which is A7 in
the final rule.
Proposed A4' .6 Buffer Rights-of-Way at Existing Transmission Facilities
(Not included in the final rule)
DOE has not included this categorical exclusion in the final rule . DOE
recognizes that there is potential for significant impact from acquisition
of rights-of-way because of possible changes in land use related to
establishing buffer zones ; therefore, a categorical exclusion is
propriate . If land use in the buffer . zone will not change, proposed
ti 5 (A7 in the final rule) may apply to the action.
Proposed A4 .7 Minor Substation Modifications/Expansions (Final B4 .11)
In the final rule, DOE included the scope of this proposed categorical
exclusion into the scope of proposed B4 .4 (final B4 .11), which concerns
construction and modification of substations, to avoid segmentation.
Proposed A5 .4 Removal of Oil Field Waste to Permitted Disposal Facility
(Not Included in the Final Rule)
One commenter strongly objected to this categorical exclusion, stating
that research conducted by EPA had indicated that there are significant
environmental impacts from disposal practices used for oil field wastes.
DOE reconsidered its proposal . of this categorical exclusion and, because
of uncertainty as to the potential for significant impacts, has not
included it in the final rule.
Proposed A6 .2 Umbrella Agreements for Cooperation in Energy Research and
Development (Final A15)
DOE has not included phrase (b) in proposed A6 .2 (that referred to
categorically excluded projects and activities) in the categorical
•
exclusion in the final rule (A15) . The phrase was unnecessary because
specific energy research and development projects that are categorically
excluded are specified in Appendix B of the final rule.
sed B1 .1
Siting/Construction/Operation of Support Structures (Final
b .15)
Proposed A1 .27 Siting/Construction/Operation of Storage Area for
Maintenance/Administrative Supplies, Equipment (Final B1 .15 and B4 .11)
One commenter stated that the scope of proposed B1 .1 was too broad ; it
would essentially exempt all construction and operation of service and
support buildings regardless of size, soil contamination, resuspended dust
from construction, environmental and energy impacts of operation, and
alternative designs and locations that could minimize impacts.
In response to the comment, DOE has narrowed the scope of proposed B1 .1
in the final rule (B1 .15) . The siting and construction of structures
covered by the categorical exclusion are limited to small-scale support
buildings and structures within or contiguous to an already developed area
where site utilities and roads are available . DOE has added a condition in
the final rule, B .(3), that is an integral element of the classes of
actions in appendix B : Construction activities that would disturb
hazardous substances, pollutants, contaminants, CERCLA-excluded petroleum
and natural gas products that preexist in the environment such that there
would be uncontrolled or unpermitted releases would not be categorically
excluded . (See additional discussion under section III F, above .)
In addition, .DOE incorporated proposed A1 .27 into this categorical
exclusion for support buildings and structures as an example (as noted
e in the discussion of proposed A1 .27) because small-scale storage
Aras for maintenance and administrative supplies are support facilities.
In the final rule, DOE has added the phrase "and similar support
purposes" to the list of support functions for which buildings and
structures may be constructed because DOE believes that siting,
construction, and operation of any small-scale support structure will not
individually or cumulatively have a significant impact on the human
environment and that it is appropriate to categorically exclude these
activities . DOE had not intended this categorical exclusion to be limited
to only those support buildings and structures for the purposes listed in
the proposed rule . DOE has also added the phrase "but excluding facilities
for waste storage activities" to clarify that it does not consider these
to be support activities for which construction may necessarily
be categorically excluded except as provided in the final rule . (See the
discussion of proposed B6 .4 for categorically excluded waste storage
facilities .)
Proposed B1 .2
(Final B1 .3)
Removal of Contamination, Not Decommissioning Project
Two commenters suggested that this categórical exclusion be deleted
because they did not believe that the only test for 'deciding whether to
prepare an EA or EIS is whether the action is part of a decommissioning
project . One of the commenters was concerned that certain activities at
the Rocky Flats Plant and at the Portsmouth and Paducah Uranium Enrichment
Plants might, inappropriately come under this exclusion.
.E intended the proposed categorical exclusion to cover routine actions
w“ere intact equipment (e .g ., labware) and other materials (such as
gloves) that are radioactive or otherwise contaminated are removed from a
facility for disposal . The comment implied a much broader scope to the
categorical exclusion than DOE intended . Therefore, DOE combined the
categorical exclusion with proposed A1 .35 as an example under routine
maintenance (B1 .3(o) in the final rule).
DOE is conducting a program to remove plutonium from contaminated ducts
at the Rocky Flats Plant . The current activities include routine
decontamination techniques commonly used to maintain facility operations
'(e .g ., wiping with rags, vacuuming, and stripping with latex) . These
limited activities are encompassed within the existing routine maintenance
categorical exclusion under. DOE's NEPA guidelines (52 FR 47662, December
15, 1987) and would be encompassed by the categorical exclusion for
routine maintenance in this final rule (B1 .3) . Removal of plutonium from
ducts at the Rocky Flats Plant that are more difficult to access or are
impossible'to clean using routine maintenance techniques may require
dismantling and replacement . DOE is currently preparing an EA to evaluate
these types of proposed activities for the Rocky Flats Plant . Similarly,
if DOE were to propose large equipment replacement actions, such as the
Cascade Improvement and Cascade Upgrading Programs at the Paducah and
Portsmouth Uranium Enrichment Plants in the 1970s to which the commenter
referred, those large programs would not be categorically excluded.
P posed B1 .5 Construction/Operation of Additional/Replacement Water
ly Wells (Final B1 .18)
One commenter stated that the proposed categorical exclusion should be
limited to those circumstances where DOE can demonstrate that a
steady-state drawdown occurs (i .e ., the withdrawal from the supply wells
is compensated by the recharge from the surrounding area) . Another
commenter was concerned that although the construction and operation of a
few additional water supply wells might not be a major Federal action,
construction and operation of a substantial well field could be . In
response to these comments, DOE has added to the categorical exclusion in
the final rule the additional stipulation that new wells must be within an
existing well field and that there can be no resulting long-term decline
of the water table . DOE . has also added "siting" to the list of activities
for completeness.
Proposed B1 .6 Construction/Operation of Microwave/Radio Communication
Towers (Final B1 .19)
In response to a comment that construction of microwave or'radio
communications towers in areas considered to be of great visual value
could have potential for significant impacts, the categorical exclusion in
the final rule has been limited to areas that are not of great visual
value . In the final rule, DOE did not include the restrictive phrase
concerning prejudice of future site selection decisions for substations
and other facilities that was in this categorical exclusion in the
proposed rule because the final rule sets forth the restriction in Sec.
1021 .410(b)(3) that categorical exclusions may not involve inappropriate
s=,uentation.
P •posed B1 .9 Restart of Facility After Categorically Excluded Safety/
Environmental Improvements (Not Included in the Final Rule)
Several commenters strongly objected to this categorical exclusion . One
commenter viewed it as an attempt to allow DOE to "jump-start"
problem-plagued facilities and stated that facilities that have been
closed for modifications (particularly safety modifications) should be
subject to an EA or EIS before restart . Another commenter noted that DOE
has already had one court require an EIS for restart of a nuclear reactor
at the Savannah River Site, and believed that the magnitude of DOE's work
at the Rocky Flats Plant is also a major Federal action with significant
impacts . A third commenter stated that the categorical exclusion was
overly broad.
A fourth commenter said that this categorical exclusion was one of the
most troubling of all the proposed categorical exclusions, stating that it
conflicts directly with DOE decisions to prepare EISs on such facilities
as the Savannah River reactors, the N Reactor, and the PUREX plant at
Hanford and with various court decisions . The commenter stated that the
effects of both accidental and routine releases from nuclear reactors or
chemical processing plants are both highly controversial and involve
uncertain risks (factors highlighted by the CEQ regulations as bearing on
significance) . The commenter asserted that the limitation in the proposed
categorical exclusion (that restart would only be categorically excluded
after categorically excluded improvements) was meaningless because
tually any improvement to a facility could fit into one of the other
posed categorical exclusions . This commenter noted the elaborate and
complex standards and practices for the restart of reactors and chemical
processing plants and that these warrant at least an EA . The commenter
stated that DOE must eliminate this categorical exclusion and adopt a
regulation requiring NEPA analysis of a reactor or chemical processing
plant that has been shut down for safety/environmental modifications.
I
DOE has not included this categorical exclusion in the final rule . DOE
recognizes that it inappropriately focused on the resumption of operations
rather than the proposed action in proposing this categorical exclusion.
DOE has not established a categorical exclusion for resumption of
operations after shutdown for safety or environmental improvements,
because DOE believes such shutdown is part of routine, ongoing operations.
Proposed B2 .1 Improvement of a Facility, Replacement/Upgrade of Facility
Components (Final B2 .5)
One commenter stated that this categorical exclusion was much too broad;
many DOE facilities require significant improvements to even approach
current design and operating parameters . Another commenter, referring to
this categorical exclusion as "frightfully wide open," asserted that it
could cover major initiatives aimed at rebuilding a nuclear reactor . This
commenter referred to the CEQ regulations, which state that a significant
effect may exist even if the Federal agency believes that on balance the
effect will be beneficial . The commenter stated that DOE must
substantially narrow this categorical exclusion or eliminate it
ogether . Another commenter asserted that given the age and condition of
e DOE facilities, these actions have potential for significant impact.
e commenter further stated that DOE cannot predetermine the degree of
impacts because of the absence of current, adequate NEPA documentation.
DOE has narrowed the scope of this categorical exclusion in the final
rule to emphasize that the activities cannot result in a substantial
change in function of a facility and that the categorical exclusion does
not apply to rebuilding or modifying substantial portions of a facility.
These modifications, along with Sec . 1021 .410(b)(3) in the final rule,
which addresses segmentation, should ensure that improvements with
significant impacts (beneficial or adverse) are not categorically
excluded . The categorical exclusion was also modified to acknowledge that
operations may be suspended while the action takes place and then be
resumed . In accordance with the CEQ regulations, DOE has procedures
(section 1021 .410(b)(2) in the final rule) for review of individual
proposals to determine whether there are extraordinary circumstances that
would indicate that a categorical exclusion is not appropriate.
DOE has added an example to this categorical exclusion for an
environmental improvement (removal and replacement of underground storage
tanks) ; DOE proposed the example as part of A1 .26 (example (n)) but
believes it is more appropriately considered as an
' upgrade . (See the
discussion under proposed A1 .26 .)
Proposed B3 .1 Siting/Construction/Operation of Small-Scale Laboratory
Building or Renovation of Room for Sample Analysis for Site
•racterization/Environmental Monitoring (Final B3 .1, B3 .8, and B6 .2)
Proposed B3 .3 Outdoor Ecological/Environmental Research Activities (Final
B3 .8 and B6 .2)
In the final rule, DOE has incorporated the scope of activities in
proposed B3 .1 (construction and renovation activities related to sample
analysis) into the scope of proposed A3 .1 (final B3 .1) (discussed above
under proposed A3 .1), proposed B3 .3 (final B3 .8), and proposed B6 .2 (final
B6 .2) to avoid inappropriate segmentation.
DOE has narrowed the scope of proposed B3 .3 in the final rule (final
B3 .8) to outdoor ecological and other environmental research activities, '
none of which could result in any permanent change to the ecosystem . Some
environmental restoration experiments concerned with waste, originally in
the scope of this categorical exclusion, are now included in the scope of
proposed B6 .2 (final B6 .2) where they are limited by size (further
discussion below under proposed B6 .2) . The restriction concerning release
or movement of hazardous and other substances proposed as part of proposed
B3 .3 was not included in these categorical exclusions in the final rule
because the condition that proposals not disturb hazardous substances,
pollutants, contaminants, or CERCLA-excluded petroleum and natural gas
products such that there would be uncontrolled or unpermitted releases is
now an integral element of the classes of actions in appendix B under
condition B .(3) . (See additional discussion under section III F, above .)
Proposed B3 .5 Research and Development Activities/Small Scale Testing at
'sting Facility, Preceding Demonstration (Final B3 .10)
ne commenter asserted that this categorical exclusion, because of the
inadequacy of proposed eligibility criteria, would exempt activities that
have the potential to establish a precedent for future actions with
significant effects or that represent a decision in principle about a
future consideration . In response to this comment (and similar comments
on other categorical exclusions), DOE has added section 1021 .410(b)(3) to
the final rule that clarifies that the Department will not categorically
exclude a proposal if it involves segmentation.
The commenter noted that DOE has prepared EAs for research and
development projects involving nonradioactive and nonhazardous materials,
and was concerned that this categorical exclusion represented a step
backward for DOE.
DOE has modified this categorical exclusion in the final rule (B3 .10) to
clarify its intent (i .e ., to include small-scale research and development
projects and small-scale pilot projects) and has also narrowed the scope
of the categorical exclusion to projects generally less than two years in
duration.
The commenter misinterpreted the example for research to improve the
capability or efficiency of existing accelerators as applying to
accelerator upgrades, for which DOE would prepare an EA or EIS . The
commenter also requested a change in the example concerning accelerator
b ams with insufficient energy to produce reactions . DOE believes the
ad examples were misleading and has deleted them.
Proposed B4 .1 New Electricity Transmission Agreements, System Operation
Within Normal Operation Limits (Final B4 .8)
DOE has modified this categorical exclusion in the final rule to clarify
that the use of a transmission facility of one system to transfer power of
and for another system is the only scope for categorically excluded new or
modified transmission agreements . DOE deleted the phrase referring to
normal operating limits because it was not necessary, and comments on
other categorical exclusions (proposed A4 .5 and A4 .8) indicated its
subjectivity.
Proposed B6 .1 CERCLA Removals/Similar Actions Under RCRA or Other
Authorities (Final B6 .1)
A commenter requested that this categorical exclusion be explicitly
restricted to situations involving small-scale removal operations or Where
there is a threat of a release . The categorical exclusion in the final
rule states that DOE's categorically excluded removal actions will meet
CERCLA regulatory cost and time limits (cuirently $2 million or 1 year
from the time activities begin on site) or will satisfy one of two
regulatory exemptions . Neither CERCLA nor EPA has set cost or time limits
for exempted actions.
•
The same commenter also recommended that DOE include a period of time
(e .g ., one year) within which some exposure is expected to occur to
lift' for the categorical exclusion . DOE does not believe that the
ing of potential exposure from a release is a measure of the
significance of impacts expected from cleaning up the release . EPA's
National Contingency Plan and written guidance for removal actions do not
present a limitation based on the period of ' time within which some
exposure is likely.
Two other commenters requested that DOE address in Subpart D the level
of NEPA review required for final corrective or remedial actions and other
typical restoration activities, such as waste packaging and repackaging,
onsite waste stabilization/ treatment, and bioremediation techniques . As
DOE gains experience in remediation, DOE may propose additions to the
listings in subpart D.
A commenter stated that the removal of underground storage tanks
(example (c) in the proposed and final . rule) should not be categorically
excluded, except in the case of the threat of a release, because tank
removals are typically large actions and tanks are often used to store
petroleum and its byproducts, which are exempted from RCRA review . DOE
believes that tank removal that meets the criteria for this categorical
exclusion can be appropriately excluded . DOE believes that its phrase
concerning reduction of "the likelihood of spillage, leakage, or the
spread of, or direct contact with, contamination" is essentially the same
as removing "the threat of a release ." DOE will review individual
activities to determine whether they present extraordinary circumstances'
such that there is potential for significant impacts on the human
environment . (The commenter noted that DOE had removed "tanks" from the
41kt of excluded containers in proposed example (b) (removal of bulk
c... tainers) ; DOE removed "tanks" to avoid overlap and confusion with
proposed example (c), not to limit the scope of the categorical
exclusion . DOE has not changed this terminology in the final rule .) In
the final rule, however, DOE has included citations of applicable
statutory and regulatory requirements in this example in response to a
comment.
DOE has moved proposed example (p) (transportation, treatment, recovery,
storage, or disposal of wastes at existing facilities) to the lead
statement of the categorical exclusion to emphasize that these activities
(part of any removal action) must occur at existing facilities . DOE did
not include transportation in the lead statement of the categorical
exclusion because the Department considers it an activity necessary to and
included in the categorical exclusion (as discussed under Sec.
1021 .410(d)) . A commenter was confused by a phrase in this example that
concerned reducing the likelihood of human, animal, or food chain
exposure, thinking that there would either be only rare opportunities for
applying this categorical exclusion, or DOE would have to perform more
extensive investigation of the potential exposures from its activities to
qualify for the exemption . DOE did not include this confusing and
unnecessary phrase in the lead statement of the categorical
exclusion in the final rule .
Proposed B6 .2 Siting/Construction/Operation of Temporary Pilot-Scale
Waste Collection/Treatment Facilities (Final B6 .2)
OE has modified this categorical exclusion in the final rule to include
r temporary pilot-scale waste management systems (i .e ., stabilization
a, containment) that were proposed in B3 .3 of the proposed rule . This
categorical exclusion in the final rule has a one acre size restriction,
rather than five acres, as in proposed B3 .3 . DOE has also modified this
categorical exclusion in the final rule to include the scope of activities
in proposed B3 .1 (construction or renovation of facilities for sample
analysis) to avoid inappropriate segmentation . (Also see the discussion
under proposed B3 .3 .)
Proposed B6 .3
Improvements to Environmental Control Systems (Final B6 .3)
In response to a comment requesting clarification on whether work on
outdoor systems was within the scope of the categorical exclusion, DOE has
rewritten this categorical exclusion in the final rule for clarity and in
so doing included a reference to systems "of" an existing building or
structure rather than "within" a building or structure . Categorically
excluded activities could include work on piping or duct work leading to a
building or structure, but could not include new construction.
Proposed B6 .4 Siting/Construction/Operation of Waste Storage Facility
(not Transuranic, High Level) (Final C16, B6 .4, B6 .5 and B6 .6)
Proposed B6 .5 Modification (not expansion) of Existing Transuranic Waste
Storage Facility (Final B6 .6)
A commenter was concerned about the potential for long-term storage of
e under proposed B6 .4 . Two other commenters believed that there was no
Atonable basis for DOE's distinction between waste storage facilities
for transuranic (TRU) and non-TRU waste (other than high-level waste or
spent nuclear fuel) . One commenter noted that there are very likely
certain hazardous or non-TRU mixed wastes that pose equal or greater
dangers than TRU or TRU-mixed wastes . The commenter urged DOE to eliminate
this unprincipled distinction and to prepare an EA for storage facilities
for all the wastes listed in proposed B6 .4 as well as for TRU wastes.
In response to these comments and the general comments that appendix B
categorical exclusions are too broad, DOE has included in the final rule
two categorical exclusions for waste storage and staging activities that
are smaller in scope and that represent subsets of the originally proposed
categorical exclusion (i .e ., 90-day hazardous waste storage (final B6 .4)
and characterizing and sorting previously packaged waste or overpacking
waste (final B6 .5)).
DOE believes that it is appropriate to analyze the environmental impacts
from waste handling (mainly worker exposure), the deterioration of
containers during extended storage (which could result in environmental
releases), and the establishment of and increases in storage capacity
(because of, for example, general radiation from a given volume of waste
or the potential for release of hazardous fumes, including explosive
fumes, especially if there are accidental releases) . Therefore, DOE has
categorically excluded only those activities that do not involve direct
handling of waste (packaging waste or opening waste containers) or
tablishing or increasing storage capacity, unless the storage time is
to limited (e .g ., 90 days) or the volume of waste generated is very
small (e .g ., less than 1,000 kilograms in a calendar month).
DOE has modified proposed B6 .5 (final B6 .6) to address modification of
existing structures for storage of wastes proposed to be categorically
excluded in proposed B6 .4 . DOE also has modified proposed C10 (final C7)
to address new structures for storage of wastes that had been proposed to
be categorically excluded in proposed B6 .4.
DOE did not follow another commenter's suggestion that the definition of
hazardous waste also refer to applicable state and local regulations
because DOE's citation is to a definition or designation of hazardous
waste, not to regulations applicable to handling the waste.
Proposed B6 .7 Relocation/Demolition/Disposal of Buildings (Final B1 .22)
In the final rule, DOE has moved this categorical exclusion to section
B1 .22 (categorical exclusions applicable to facility operation) . This was
in response to a request to clarify whether the scope of the categorical
exclusion was limited to environmental restoration and waste management,
although DOE's division of appendix B is only for purposes of organization
and is not limiting . DOE narrowed the scope of the categorical exclusion
in the final rule by restricting the relocation of buildings to an already
developed area where site utilities and roads are available.
Proposed B7 .2 Retransfers of source, special nuclear, and byproduct
materials (Not Included in the Final Rule)
0
0E has not included proposed B7 .2 in the final rule . As proposed the
categorical exclusion did not involve transport within the United States
or its territorial seas, and therefore these NEPA regulations would not
apply to the retransfer actions . DOE actions having environmental effects
. outside the United States, its territories or possessions are subject to,
as set forth in Sec . 1021 .102 of the final rule, Executive Order 12114,
DOE's guidelines implementing that Order, and Department of State
procedures.
Appendix C to Subpart D--Classes of Actions That Normally Require EAs but
Not Necessarily EISs
Appendix . D to Subpart D--Classes of Actions That Normally Require EISs
A commenter suggested that an item be added relating to research on the
conservation of endangered, threatened, or proposed to be listed species.
Another commenter requested that DOE consider including chemical, thermal,
and other types of process pilot plants in appendix C.
DOE had listed only those classes of actions that are typical classes of
actions for DOE (i .e ., DOE proposes the type of action frequently) and for
which DOE has enough experience to be reasonably confident that an EA will
normally be the required level of NEPA review . Therefore, DOE has not
added typical classes of actions to appendix C for research on endangered
species or for additional process pilot plants.
bstantial changes to proposed Appendix C involved three classes of
a~ ions, two of which were modified in response to comments (ClO and C14)
and one of which was not included in the final rule (C15) (discussed above
under proposed 86 .4 and below under proposed CIO and C15) . Other minor
. changes were made in response to comments (discussed below under proposed
C8 and C9) or for clarity.
Substantial changes to proposed appendix D involved two classes of
action, one of ' which was not included in the final rule (discussed below
under proposed D11) and one of which is new (in response to comments, as
discussed below under proposed CIO).
C8 Implementation of System-wide vegetation management program (Power
Marketing Administrations) (Final C5).
C9 Implementation of System-wide Erosion control program (Power
Marketing Administrations) (Final C6) . '
In response to a commenter's request, DOE clarified that the term
"system-wide" in these classes of actions in the final rule refers to a
program of general application regarding all the facilities of a power
marketing administration.
CIO Long-term allocation of power (Final C7 and D7).
One commenter believes that long-term (five years or loner) power
marketing contracts, policies, marketing plans, or allocation plans should
orally be subject to review in an EIS . The commenter noted that two
its that have addressed this issue have determined that EISs were
indeed necessary before implementing long-term marketing plans for major
river basins . The commenter noted wide-ranging effects, from direct
riverine effects (resulting from peak power generation to meet capacity
commitments) to indirect effects on air quality and greenhouse gas
emissions (that may result from Federal hydropower displacement of
different forms of thermal power generation) . This commenter added that,
because Federal hydropower is generally inexpensive, its availability can
reduce incentives for energy conservation . The commenter noted that
Federal hydropower dams are some of the largest sources of hydropower
generation in the country, contributing substantially to the overall mix
of power generation in some regions, and that the long-term marketing .
plans for these facilities are usually developed on a comprehensive basis
for many facilities in an entire river basin.
In response to this comment and comments on proposed A4 .1, DOE has added
conditions to the various power marketing agreements (i .e ., contracts,
policies, marketing plans, or allocation plans) to distinguish those that
would normally require EAs but not necessarily EISs (final C7) from those
that would normally require EISs, and has added a class of actions that
normally requires an EIS (final D7) . DOE normally will prepare an EIS for
long-term (five years or longer) contracts, policies, marketing plans, or
allocation plans when the DOE proposal involves adding a major new
generation resource or service to a major new load or causes major changes
in the operating parameters of power generation resources ; otherwise, DOE
mally will prepare an EA.
OE does not consider power marketing actions with durations of five .
years or longer appropriate for a categorical exclusion because such
actions have a duration exceeding the Bonneville Power Administration's
normal multiyear planning process (promulgated in accordance with the
Pacific Northwest Coordination Agreement), and, in the case of resource
acquisitions, they would be inconsistent with the delineation of a "major"
resource in the Northwest Power Act (that is, sections 3(12) and 6(c) of
the act define resources of more than 50 megawatts acquired for more than
5 years as "major" and impose special procedures for such acquisitions).
The Northwest Power Act also contains a size limit {50 average megawatts)
above which a resource acquisition would be considered "major" if acquired
for more than five years . This size limit is what DOE determined should
differentiate between an EA and EIS relative to resource acquisitions.
C15 Siting/construction/operation of waste disposal facility in
contaminated area (not AU or high-level waste) (Not included in the final
rule).
D11 Siting/construction/expansion of waste disposal facility in
uncontaminated area (not transuranic or high-level waste) (Not included in
the final rule).
Four commenters did not understand how DOE distinguished between EA and
EIS levels of review on the basis of the presence or absence of previous
contamination . One commenter pointed out that a disposal facility located
i a contaminated area may not only add to existing contamination but
ld actually exacerbate its spread through physical means or its
L., icity through synergistic chemical reactions . This commenter noted that
impacts from the actual construction of a disposal site in a contaminated
area are far more likely to be significant than at an uncontaminated site.
This commenter urged DOE to include all siting, construction, and
operation of waste disposal sites in appendix D.
Another commenter stated that to proceed as suggested by DOE's proposed
rule provides an unwarranted "credit" for prior DOE environmental
degradation and does not permit a true evaluation of significant
environmental impacts and alternatives of the proposed action . Another
commenter believed that nonhazardous solid waste disposal should be a
class of action normally requiring an EA but not necessarily an EIS.
DOE has withdrawn the prcrgcsed listings and will determine the level of
NEPA review required (EA or EIS level) on a case-by-case basis . DOE
recognizes that there are many action- and site-specific circumstances
that raise questions about the reasonableness of general listings at this
time.
IV . Revocation of Existing Guidelines and Replacement of Regulations
On the effective date of this rule, May 26 ; 1992, DOE revokes the
existing DOE NEPA Guidelines and revises the existing regulations at 10
CFR part 1021 by striking the current text and replacing it with this
rule.
'environmental Review
Section D of the DOE NEPA Guidelines categorically excludes
"promulgation of rules and regulations which are clarifying in nature, or
which do not substantially change the effect of the regulations being
amended ." This rule establishes and clarifies procedures for considering
the environmental effects of DOE actions within its decisionmaking
process, thereby enhancing compliance with the letter and spirit of NEPA,
and therefore fits within this categorical exclusion . DOE has determined
that promulgation of this rule is not a major Federal action significantly
affecting the quality of the human environment within the meaning of NEPA.
Consequently, neither an EIS nor an EA is required for this rule . DOE will
continue to examine individual actions to determine the appropriate level
of NEPA review.
VI. Review Under Executive Order 12291
This rule has been reviewed in accordance with Executive Order 12291,
which directs that all regulations achieve their intended goals without
imposing unnecessary burdens on the economy, individuals, public or
private organizations, or state and local governments . The Executive Order
also requires that a regulatory impact analysis be prepared for a "major
rule ." The Executive Order defines "major rule" as any regulation that is
likely to result in : (1) An annual effect on the economy of $100 million
or more ; (2) a. major increase in costs or prices for consumers, individual
industries, Federal, state, and local government agencies, or geographic
re ions ; or (3) significant adverse effects on competition, employment,
stment, productivity, or innovation or on the ability of U .S .-based
e. . erprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises in domestic or
export markets.
This rule amends and codifies already existing policies and procedures
for compliance with NEPA . The rule contains no substantive changes in the
requirements imposed on applicants for a DOE license, financial
assistance, permit, or other similar actions, which are the areas where
one might anticipate an economic effect . Therefore, DOE has determined
that the incremental effect of today's rule will not have the magnitude of
effects on the economy to bring this rule within the definition of a
"major rule ."
Pursuant to the Executive Order, this rule was submitted . to the Office
of Management and Budget for regulatory review.
VII. Review Under Executive Order 12612
Executive Order 12612 requires that rules be reviewed for Federalism
effects on the institutional interest of states and local governments . If
the effects are sufficiently substantial, preparation of a Federalism
assessment is required to assist senior policymakers . The rulemaking to
revoke DOE's NEPA Guidelines and revise 10 CFR part 1021 will not have any
substantial direct effects on state and local governments within the
meaning of the Executive Order . It will, however, allow states the
opportunity to play a more significant role in DOE's NEPA process . This
f ' a1 rule will affect Federal NEPA compliance procedures, which are not
ject to state regulation.
VIII. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act, Pub .L . 96-345 (5 U .S .C . 601-612),
requires that an agency prepare an initial regulatory flexibility analysis
to be published at the time the proposed rule is published . The
requirement (which appears in section 603 of the act) does not apply if
the agency "certifies that the rule will not, if promulgated, have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities ."
This rule modifies existing policies and procedural requirements for DOE
compliance with NEPA . It makes no substantive changes to requirements
imposed on applicants for DOE licenses, permits, financial assistance, and
similar actions as related to NEPA compliance . Therefore, DOE certifies
that this rule will not have a "significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities ."
IX. List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 1021
Environmental assessment, environmental impact assessment, National
Environmental Policy Act.
Issued in Washington, DC, April 16, 1992.
Paul L . Ziemer,
Assistant Secretary, Environment, Safety and Health.
************************************************************************
PROTECTING THE ENVIRONMENT:
USAID'S STRATEGY
'• Challenge
Environmental problems increasingly threaten the economic and
political interests of the United States and the world at large.
Both industrialized and developing nations contribute to the
threat.
Human activities are disrupting the Earth's global life
support systems -- the atmosphere and the planet's wealth of
biological resources . Atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse
gases continue to rise, with potentially catastrophic consequences
for the global climate . The loss of untold numbers of plant and
animal species and their habitats impoverishes the natural world
for future generations and eliminates raw materials for advances in
medicine, agriculture, and other fields.
At the local level, environmental degradation poses a growing
threat to the physical health and economic and social well-being of
people throughout the world . Explosive and poorly managed
urbanization has contributed significantly to air, water, and soil
pollution worldwide . The erosion and degradation of soils, loss of
fertility, deforestation, and desertification beset rural
communities and undermine food production, cause malnutrition, and
impel migration . Water shortages cause conflicts among industrial,
agricultural, and household users within countries and among
nations.
The impact on developing nations can be measured in graphic
t an and economic terms . Widespread soil degradation is reducing
the capacity of many countries, particularly in the tropics, to
achieve food security . In Eastern Europe and the former Soviet
Union, air-borne pollutants are the likely cause of high levels of
morbidity and respiratory illnesses . Water pollution alone
accounts for some 2 million preventable deaths and millions of
illnesses each year . Environmental degradation can reduce national
incomes by 5 percent or more.
America's own well-being is directly threatened by
environmental degradation around the world . We cannot escape the
effects of global climate change, bíodiversity loss, and
unsustainable resource depletion . The consequences of local
environmental mismanagement -- increasing poverty, social
instability, wars over resources -- endanger our political and
economic interests . The quality of life for future generations of
Americans will in no small measure be determined by the success or
failure of our common stewardship of the planet's resources.
The scope of the problem is clear:
Environmental problems are caused by the way people use
resources . Workable solutions must focus on how humans and their
•
economic interests interact with the natural environment and its
resources . They must address how people perceive the environment
and'how they utilize it ; how they judge the costs of using
rP ources ; and how political, industrial, and agricultural
~;esses either damage or protect the environment.
Environmental damage often is driven by poverty and food
insecurity . These two factors deprive people of the possibility of
making rational choices about how to use resources . They force.
individuals and communities to choose short-term exploitation over
long-term management.
Environmental problems reflect the imperfections of private
markets . Adam Smith's "invisible hand" is not always a "green"
hand . Government policies often distort markets and encourage
excessive exploitation of natural resources . Public interventions
to correct market failures and eliminate market distortions often
are necessary to protect the environment . Effective public
institutions that create and monitor an environment favorable to
sustainable resource use are critical . This, in turn, requires
active public participation in the setting of standards,
monitoring, and enforcement . Market-based approaches should be
pursued wherever possible and appropriate ; since solutions
ultimately must make economic sense, regulatory institutions, the
policy environment, and incentives must help define what is
economically rational and what is not.
Environmental problems have systemic effects . The impact of
most environmental problems is ultimately regional or global, so
the solutions must transcend borders . Interventions produce the
best results when they simultaneously address the problem locally,
-tonally, regionally, and globally.
Environmental damage often is irreversible . Thus, the need
for action is urgent . Early intervention is critical to preventing
the extinction of a species or limiting the impact of pollution on
public health . Debates over ways to save biodiversity after the
tropical forest is gone or how to clean up a river after children
have been hurt are moot . Worse, the failure to act makes it more
difficult to respond effectively to future environmental problems.
At the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and
Development (UNCED), both rich and poor nations agreed that
economic growth and environmental stewardship must both be pursued
to avoid a catastrophic overload of the Earth's carrying capacity
in the next century . Economic growth cannot be sustained if the
natural resources that fuel that growth are irresponsibly depleted.
Conversely, protection of the environment and careful stewardship
of natural resources will not be possible where poverty is
pervasive . This is the conundrum and the opportunity of
sustainable development.
Strategic Goals and Areas of Concentration
USAID will pursue two strategic goals:
• Reducing long-term threats to the global environment,
p icularly loss of biodiversity and climate change.
• Promoting sustainable economic growth locally, nationally,
and regionally by addressing environmental, economic, and
developmental practices that impede development and are
unsustainable.
USAID will concentrate on the following kinds of problems:
Globally, it will focus on the growing sources end diminishing
sinks of greenhouse gas emissions and on impoverishment of the
planet's biological diversity at the genetic, species, and
ecosystem levels.
Locally, it will focus on the abiding impairment of human
health due to air, water, and soil contamination from industrial,
agricultural, and household activity ; unsustainable exploitation of
forests, wetlands ; coastal zones, coral reefs, and other ecosystems
that provide vital ecological services ; degradation and depletion
of water resources ; unsustainable agricultural practices;
inefficient and environmentally unsound energy production and use;
inadequate management of household and municipal wastes in growing
urban areas ; regulatory, statutory, enforcement, and policy issues;
and'social and economic patterns, including the lack of local
participation and empowerment, that contribute to the
aforementioned problems or impede solutions ..
'rational Approaches
USAID will pursue an integrated approach to environmental
issues as outlined in Agenda 21 of the UNCED (Earth Summit)
guidelines for ecologically sustainable development . The causes of
environmental degradation often are the result of underlying
pressures of poverty and rapid population growth . Programs in
every sphere of development -- environment, economic growth,
population and health, democracy -- must be designed with conscious
regard for their impact on the natural environment and their
potential for improving environmental stewardship locally,
nationally, regionally, and globally.
USAID will strengthen its institutional capacity to ensure
that all Agency- supported efforts, whether projects or
program-related investments, Ire environmentally sound . Where
necessary, it will require mitigating measures or project redesign.
Solutions begin at the local level, even for environmental
problems with global implications . Lack of education, antiquated
and inappropriate technologies, the local regulatory environment,
economic policy distortions, and the absence of economic and social
incentives to protect the environment all contribute to the
continuation of damaging practices . USAID's environmental
assistance programs thus must empower individuals and communities
to act ; they also must facilitate collaboration among government
agencies, the private sector, and local groups . Such empowerment
of orts must specifically reach out to include women and members of
rity groups . Experience has shown, for example, that improving
e cation for girls may be one of the most effective, long-term
environmental policies in Africa and other parts of the developing
world.
USAID will promote the involvement of citizens in identifying
problem areas, suggesting and designing solutions, overseeing
implementation, and evaluating results . USAID will actively
support environmental initiatives by local governments,
communities, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to help
articulate local concerns and involve individuals and communities
in decisions that affect the local and global environments.
Close coordination and communication with the host government
are essential to all development work ; they are especially critical
here . Environmental projects invariably involve diverse political
actors, economic forces, and social groups . USAID will work to
create and strengthen consultative, management, review, regulatory,
and monitoring capacities• at the regional, national, and local
levels, in order to avoid misunderstandings and build consensus
about plans and action ..
To sustain the environmental impact of its work, USAID will
encourage the development of an institutional and policy capacity
within recipient countries . This improved capacity will help
facilitate the flow of information, encourage consultations
in-country, support economically efficient and environmentally
d policies, and promote the development, transfer, and adoption
J_ echnologies that enhance environmentally sound growth . Since
many environmental problems (and solutions) are regional in nature,
USAID will encourage regional approaches, including ongoing
coordination, establishment of priorities, allocation of
responsibilities, exchange of techniques, and sharing of technical
resources.
USAID will coordinate its efforts with other members of the
donor community . It will pursue partnerships with the U .S . and
international environmental community of universities, private
voluntary organizations (PVOs), professional and academic groups,
scientific organizations, and the private sector to identify
priority areas and appropriate methods, share responsibilities and
technical resources, reinforce the efforts of other donors_, and
avoid duplication . Agency field missions will work to strengthenlocal markets for U .S . environmental technology services and
equipment through capacity building, local environmental
management, training, and dissemination of information.
Programs and Methods
USAID will focus on programs that address these issues and use
these methods:
Global Issues : In the area of climate change, USAID will
ntify key developing and former Soviet bloc countries that are,
become, significant contributors to global greenhouse gas
emissions . USAID will work with these countries on a case-by-case
basis to develop appropriate action plans to reduce sources and
enhance sinks of greenhouse gas emissions, through activities
consistent with local environmental and economic goals . As
appropriate, efforts in this area will include energy efficiency
improvements ; expanded use of renewable energy technologies;
limiting deforestation, the burning of forests and agricultural
lands, and other carbon- emitting land-use changes ; and
introduction of new agricultural practices to reduce methane
emissions.
twill
i
USAID's approach to biodiversity will focus on promoting
innovative approaches to the. conservation and sustainable use of
the planet's biological diversity at the genetic, species, and
ecosystem levels . "Biodiversity" refers to the variability among
living organisms from all sources, including terrestrial, marine,
and other aquatic ecosystems, and among the ecological complexes of
which they are part . This includes diversity within species,
between species, and among ecosystems . We are only beginning to
fully understand the economic value and biological underpinnings of
biodiverse areas.
Protecting biodiversity is a . complex and multifaceted
challenge . It involves promoting sustainable economic uses of
biological resources, strengthening systems of parks and protected
a as, and supporting ex-situ efforts such as herbaria, gene banks,
zoos . Geographically, USAID will maintain a special focus on
t types of areas : those richest in biodiversity and facing the
greatest threat ; and those that are least disturbed and present the
greatest opportunity for long-term conservation . USAID also will
support conservation and sustainable use of biological resources
where this is judged to be a priority for sustainable development
at the country level.
Substantively, USAID will focus on developing sustainable
economic uses of biological resources ; building local capacity for
the management of biodiverse areas, including management of parks
and protected areas ; supporting innovative, non- governmental
conservation and research programs ; encouraging the involvement of
indigenous peoples and local communities at every stage of
decision-making ; and facilitating the setting of conservation
priorities that respect the rights of indigenous peoples at the
local, national, and regional levels.
Country Issues : USAID's approach to national environmental
problems will differ on a country-by-country basis, depending on a
particular country's environmental priorities -- as determined by ,
the host government and local communities and citizens -- and
USAID's overall country program . All country strategies will
include assessments of these elements :
Improving agricultural, industrial, and natural resource
management practices that play a central role in environmental
d radation . As appropriate, USAID-supported programs will target
actives such as:
• Conservation of soil and water through improved tilling
practices, erosion planning and control, integrated pest
management, reductions in the use of pesticides and in fertilizer
and pesticide runoff, efficient design and management of irrigation
systems, and protection of aquifers and integrated water resource .
planning and management.
• Reduction of industrial- and energy-related environmental
degradation through the adoption of pollution prevention strategies
and pollution control systems in industry, and through energy
efficiency programs, renewable energy applications, fuel switching,
and installation of environmental controls in the energy sector.
• Amelioration of rural and urban natural resource management
problems and land-use problems through efforts to limit
deforestation and promote reforestation ; support for conservation
and environmentally sustainable uses of forests, coastal zones, and
other important ecosystems ; and in urban areas, improved water
resources management, land-use, sewage and waste disposal, and
transportation planning.
Strengthening public policies and institutions to protect the
environment . As appropriate, USAID will support such activities
as :
• Reform of national economic policies, development
0ategies, and market mechanisms to end unintended or misguided
environmental damage, promote conservation, and encourage
sustainable resource management.
• Development of a comprehensive environmental policy
framework, including laws, regulations, and standards at the
national and local levels, as appropriate.
• Promotion of procedures for measuring, assessing,
monitoring, and mitigating the environmental impact of economic
growth .
• Improved enforcement of environmental laws and regulations
through increased funding and technical training for regulatory
agencies, enhanced public participation, and development of
non-governmental advocacy groups.
• Creation or strengthening of competent environmental
institutions within government, the private sector, the NGO
community, and academia.
• Creation of environmental data bases and natural resource
inventories.
•
Bilateral and multilateral interventions . USAID also will
work bilaterally and multilaterally, pursuing dialogues with
arwernments on environmental issues, such as environmental
ulations, natural resource usage, and energy pricing policies;
logues with international agencies, especially agencies of the
United Nations and internationál financial institutions, on the
environmental impact of lending practices in developing nations;
and the design and implementation of innovative mechanisms to
support environmental work, including the establishment of trust
funds and endowments and the design and completion of debt swaps
and debt forgiveness.
Ill
Environmental research and education . As resources permit,
USAID will continue its support for applied research on key
environmental issues ; non-capital intensive elements of technology
transfer, such as institutional cooperation, scientific exchanges,
development of human resources, and policy development ; and support
for public education on issues affecting the environment.
Measuring Results
USAID will insist on measurable results from its programs . It
is not enough to measure project inputs, funds spent, etc . The
sole standard of success is the impact that programs have on host
nations, their societies, and the lives of citizens . Detailed
performance criteria for environmental activities will be developed
in consultation with expert and interested outside parties . As
appropriate, the following types of questions will be asked of
environmental programs supported by USAID:
• In the area of climate change : Are greenhouse gas emissions
being reduced in countries that contribute most to the problem?
Have these countries identified sources and sinks of emissions and
implemented national action plans that address key sectors, e .g .,
energy, forestry, agriculture?
In the area of biodiversity : Have levels of biodiversity in
key geographical areas been conserved? Have conservation plans and
strategies been implemented for these areas, including provision
for protection of parks and sensitive areas and support for
sustainable economic activities for inhabitants of these areas and
their buffer zones? Do these plans enjoy the support of local
people, such that they can be maintained over time? Have national
and regional biodiversity strategies that address underlying social
and economic forces been implemented, including both in-situ and
ex-situ approaches? Have economic policy distortions that
encourage excessive exploitation of critical habitats been
reformed?
In countries where the concern is environmentally harmful
agricultural practices : Have agricultural activities in fragile
lands been reduced? Has soil management improved, as demonstrated
by better soil tilth and nutrient content and reduced soil erosion?
Has the use of inappropriate pesticides been ended? Has pollution
from chemical runoff been reduced? Have integrated pest management
techniques been disseminated and adopted? Have government
s sidies or other policies encouraging environmentally harmful
cultural practices been reformed? Has an indigenous research
cacity committed to the development of environmentally
sustainable agricultural technology been developed? Do local
farmers, both male and female, benefit from this research and from
permanent lines of communication with international agricultural
experts and institútions?
urbanization practices : Have urban land-use plans been developed
in consultation with affected businesses and communities and
implemented? Have local governments adopted, implemented, and
. enforced integrated solid and liquid waste management programs?
Are the levels of primary, secondary, and tertiary sewage treatment
before discharge increasing?
industrial and energy practices : Have ambient levels of air and
water pollution been reduced in target airsheds and water bodies?
Have pollution-related public health conditions, including the
incidence of lead- and heavy metal-poisoning, improved? Have
industries implemented pollution prevention and control strategies?
Have government subsidies or other policies that encourage
inefficient and environmentally harmful industrial practices or
activities been reformed? Have policies for energy efficiency,
renewable energy, and fuel switching been implemented? Have energy
production facilities adopted appropriate environmental controls?
r►lltral resources management and land-use practices : Have rates of
deforestation been reduced? Have subsidies or other policies that
encourage deforestation been reformed? Have conservation
strategies been implemented for watersheds, critical ecosystems,
and habitats for rare, threatened, or endangered species? Have
national forestry policies been reformed to discourage
unsustainable forestry practices? Have rates of destruction for
other critical ecosystems, e .g ., wetlands, coral reefs, and coastal
zones, been reduced?
In poorer countries where the concern is strengthening
environmental policies and institutions : Have culturally
appropriate incentives to encourage the conservation of resources
been established? Has a comprehensive environmental policy
framework been adopted? Rave regulatory agencies been established
and are they functioning effectively? Have local NGOs been created
or strengthened and do they participate at all levels of
environmental planning and monitoring? Has the environmental
research capacity of indigenous institutions been enhanced?
In advanced developing countries and economies in transition
where the concern is strengthening environmental policies and
institutions : Are national economic development strategies
•
consistent with environmental goals? Has a comprehensive
environmental policy framework been established that is appropriate
to changing economic and social circumstances? Are regulatory
titutions well funded, staffed, and trained? Do NGOs, including
, academic research institutions, and community groups
p ticipate in all levels of environmental planning and monitoring?
•
Applicability of Land Disposal Restrictions to RCRA and CERCLA
DATE : MAR 28 1990
P F LY TO
.
OF : EH-231
SUBJECT : Applicability of Land Disposal Restrictions to RCRA and CERCLA Ground
Water Treatment Reinjections
TO : Distribution
BACKGROUND
The purpose of this memorandum is to provide Field Organizations with
information and guidance on the applicability of Land Disposal Restrictions
(LDR) to the reinjection of treated ground water into aquifers during "pump and
treat" operations at Department of Energy (DOE) environmental restoration
sites.
On December 15, 1989, the Environmental Guidance Division (EH-231) issued a
memorandum to all Program and Operations Offices entitled "Fact Sheets : Natural
Resource Trusteeship Under CERCLA and Management of Contaminated Ground Water
as Hazardous Waste" . The fact sheet on ground water as hazardous waste
described pertinent definitions and facts about the U .S . Environmental
Protection Agency's (EPA) approach to managing contaminated ground water under
the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) . It also alerted readers
that EPA's Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER) planned to
issue an interpretive memorandum which would describe whether LDR applies to
ground water that is reinjected during environmental restoration "pump and
treat" operations . RCRA LDR may be applicable or relevant and appropriate
requirements (ARARs) for certain response actions taken under the Comprehensive
'eronmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA)1.
The LDR Interpretation for reinjected ground water has been announced by EPA
provided for your information as attachment 1 (OSWER Directive
and
9234 .1-06) . Briefly stated, the EPA has determined that under certain
circumstances, the LDR do not apply to reinjections of ground water during pump
and treat operations . The driving force behind this action was a Department of
Justice letter to the EPA asking for clarification of the applicability of the
LDR to the injection of treated ground water back into the aquifer from which.
it was withdrawn at a Federal facility . The EPA's LDR Interpretation for
reinjected ground water
also consistent with a specific recommendation of a
major EPA report, "A Management Review of the Superfund Program" (EH-231
distributed a synopsis for management on this report in a September 20, 1989,
memorandum entitled "Fact Sheet : A Management Review of the Superfund Program:
The 90-Day Report").
is
is
1 The National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP)
requires that CERCLA lead agencies comply with all applicable or relevant and
appropriate requirements pertinent to the remedial action during this course of
the action as well as upon its completion (55 FR 8666, March 8, 1990 ; to be
codified at 40 CFR 300 .435(b)(2) .
NEED FOR INTERPRETATION
7^ its management review of the Superfund Program, EPA identified the
application of RCRA LDR (which are proscriptive regulations designed to
p event contamination before it happens), as contributing to the inefficient
implementation of-CERCLA (a response program for responding to uncontrolled
releases which have already resulted in contamination) . There is recognition
on the part of EPA that the problem of cleaning up large-scale contamination
(under CERCLA) is quite different from the problem of how hazardous wastes
should be properly managed by an ongoing operation (the focus of RCRA) . EPA
has recognized that in some cases, using RCRA standards as ARARs for CERCLA
response actions confuses prevention for cure.
In general, RCRA LDR prohibit the land disposal of restricted wastes (after the
effective date of the restriction), unless such waste meets promulgated
treatment standards based on best demonstrated available technology (BDAT)
identified by EPA for that particular type of waste . Requiring compliance with
these fundamentally "preventative" provisions of RCRA, could place unnecessary
constraints on CERCLA response actions . The BDAT regimes can be difficult to
apply at CERCLA sites because the wastes that are encountered are usually a
mixture of different types of restricted wastes, non-restricted hazardous
substances and debris, which may be dispersed throughout different
environmental media . Each of the restricted wastes in a CERCLA mixture may
require a different BDAT treatment . Since restricted wastes subject to LDR may
be mixed together with other restricted wastes, it can be difficult to
determine the appropriate BDAT(s) for all of the restricted wastes in a CERCLA
mixture2 . These difficulties can be expected to be magnified at DOE's
environmental restoration sites, because there can be additional technical
problems associated with DOE's soil and debris mixed wastes, containing
restricted hazardous wastes and radioactive wastes.
&use injection of ground water containing restricted wastes constitutes
"land disposal" under RCRA section 3004(k), the question of whether the LDR are
applicable to reinjected ground water during CERCLA "pump and treat" operations
has been raised . If LDR are applicable, ground water containing restricted
wastes would require treatment to attain standards based on BDAT prior to each
reinjection . Since "pump and treat" remedies may have to operate for many
years, the clean up action could become overly burdensome, technically
impractical and/or prohibitively expensive.
The Applicability of LDR To Ground Water Treatment Reinjection Interpretation
at attachment 1 is one way EPA is attempting to correct the misapplication of
the LDR to RCRA corrective and CERCLA response actions .
BASIS FOR THE LDR INTERPRETATION
RCRA Section 3020(b) prohibits the injection of hazardous waste into or above
an underground source of drinking water, with the following exception : the
prohibition does not apply to "the injection of contaminated ground water into
the aquifer from which it was withdrawn," . if the injection is a CERCLA response
action (or a RCRA corrective action), the ground water has been treated to
"substantially reduce hazardous constituents," and the action will protect
human health and the environment . The EPA Interpretation that LDR are not
applicable to reinjection of 2 In a September 25, 1989, memorandum to Program
and Operations Offices entitled "RCRA Land Disposal Restriction Guides for
CERCLA Cleanup Actions", EH-231 provided a synopsis and copies of six EPA
publications on the application of the RCRA LDR to CERCLA response actions.
treated ground water during RCRA corrective and CERCLA response actions is
.ed on the "traditional principle" that the more specific of two overlapping
tutory provisions should control . In this case, the language of the LDR,
which refers generally to the land disposal of wastes, was found to be less
specific than another RCRA provision [Section 3020(b)] that directly focuses on
the injection of treated contaminated ground water into Class IV injection
wells (40 CFR 146 .5(d)).
In determining whether RCRA LDR may be "relevant and appropriate" (for CERCLA
response actions), EPA indicates that the requirement must address problems or
situations similar to the circumstances of the response action contemplated,
and be well-suited to , the (CERCLA) site . Comparing the CERCLA response
objectives with the purpose and objective of the LDR requirement is the key to
EPA's interpretation of the potential relevance and appropriateness of the LDR
to pump and treat operations conducted under a CERCLA response action.
Treating and reinjecting ground water into Class IV injection wells is
ultimately performed to restore the ground water (aquifer) to drinking water
quality . EPA believes that standards that have been specifically developed to
establish drinking water quality levels, such as Maximum Contaminant Levels
(MCLs), are well-suited to the accomplishment of the CERCLA response action
(i .e ., pump and treat) objective . Thus, the EPA Interpretation provides that
where drinking water standards are available (e .g ., MCLs), those standards, and
not the standards set by the LDR, will generally be the relevant and
appropriate requirements to use in setting treatment standards for CERCLA
response actions involving the clean up of drinking water aquifers.
NECESSARY CONDITIONS
to reinject treated ground water during pump and treat operations at
's environmental restoration sites without triggering the RCRA LDR, three
.order
conditions must be met:
1. the reinjection must be part of a CERCLA section 104 or 106 response
action, or be a RCRA corrective action,
2. the contaminated ground water must be treated to substantially reduce
hazardous constituents prior to such injection, and
3. the response action or corrective action must be sufficient to protect
human health and the environment upon completion.
While the language of RCRA section 3020(b) is straightforward in its
application to RCRA corrective actions, it is not explicit with respect to
CERCLA response actions conducted at Federal facilities . The Federal
directed by Section 120 of the Superfund Amendments and
government
Reauthorization Act (SARA) to comply with CERCLA to the same extent as private
parties, so that a question arises as to which statutory authority Federal
facilities employ for CERCLA response actions . DOE does employ CERCLA section
104 authority consistent with the mandate of SARA section 120, consequently,
DOE's CERCLA response actions satisfy the first condition .3
3 The basis for DOE's use of CERCLA section 104 is found in Executive Order
12580, "Superfund Implementation", Jan . 23, 1987, Sec . 2(d), by which the
is
President delegated the President's removal and remedial response authority
under CERCLA 104(a) and remedy selection authority under 104(c)(4) to the
Secretaries of Defense and Energy with respect to releases or threats of
r eases from any vessel or facility under their control, provided that this
iority is exercised " . . .consistent with the requirements of Section 120 of
tr Act" (i .e ., SARA section 120) . The second requirement of RCRA section
3020(b) is that the reinjection must be treated to "substantially reduce
hazardous constituents prior to such injection ." There is no quantitative
guidance available at this time which will provide environmental restoration
managers with the certain knowledge that they have met this requirement . EPA
suggests that the steps necessary to "substantially reduce" hazardous
constituents during a RCRA corrective action or CERCLA response action should
be decided on a case-by-case basis until specific guidance is prepared on the
issue . EH-231 will disseminate the EPA guidance to all Field Organizations
once it becomes available.
As a final condition, the corrective action or response action must be
sufficient to protect human health and the environment upon completion . EPA's
guidance on meeting this requirement is to consult RCRA and CERCLA statutes,
regulations and policies . Pursuant to DOE Orders, RCRA corrective actions and
CERCLA response actions undertaken by the Department are required to be
protective of human health and the environment . When these actions are
performed in compliance with the appropriate governing statute, regulation or
pertinent guidance document, they may be presumed to be protective of human
health and the environment upon completion because of the stringent
protectiveness requirements and the regulatory oversight imposed by these
procedures . The pertinent governing regulations which, if properly
implemented, will confer the appropriate decree of protectiveness for human
health and the environment such that this final condition will .be satisfied,
include : 1) the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency
Plan (for CERCLA actions) ; 2) Standards for Owners and Operators of Hazardous
e Treatment, Storage and Disposal Facilities (40 CFR 264, Subpart F) ; and
AjltCRA Corrective Action requirements, 40 CFR 264, Subpart S (when
promulgated).
Field Organizations are encouraged to consult with their Regional EPA Office on
the proper application of the LDR interpretation for the reinjection of treated
ground water into or above underground sources of drinking water (i .e ., into
Class IV injection wells) at their facilities . If you have any questions about
the attached Interpretation, please contact John Bascietto of my staff at FTS
896-7917 .
Thomas T . Traceski
Chief, RCRA/CERCLA Unit
Environmental Guidance Division
Attachment : EPA's LDR Interpretation for Reinjected Ground Water, 12/27/89
DOE Comments on the Proposed Revision to the National Contingenc
DATE : MAY 08 1989
ION
LY OF :
EH-231
SUBJECT : DOE Comments on the Proposed Revision to the National Contingency
Plan
TO : Distribution
On December 21, 1988 (53 FR 51394), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
requested comment on a proposed rulemaking regarding revisions to the National
(Oil and Hazardous Substances) Contingency Plan (NCP) . In this notice, EPA
proposed revisions intended to implement regulatory changes necessitated by
The Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA), as well as to
clarify existing NCP language and to reorganize the NCP to coincide more
accurately with the sequence of response actions . A DOE internal report
summarizing the proposed revisions to the NCP is provided for your information
as attachment 1.
With a December 28, 1988 memorandum, the Environmental Guidance Division
(EH-231) distributed copies of the NCP proposed rule for DOE-wide review and
comment . During the comment period, EH-231 conducted an internal evaluation
of the implications of the proposed NCP revisions on DOE environmental
restoration activities and programs . Comments received from the DOE Program
Offices and Field Organizations were reviewed, and a consolidated reply to
EPA's request 'for comment on this proposed rulemaking was developed . In those
few cases where dissimilar comments were received, EH-231 proposed a comment
consistent with current DOE policy and guidance . A copy of the consolidated
Ali response that was submitted to EPA . is provided for your information as
nMtachment 2.
The Environmental Guidance Division extends its appreciation to those Field
Organizations and Program Offices that provided comments pertaining to the
proposed NCP revision ; with your assistance we were able to identify and
address a number of pertinent issues for EPA to consider in preparing the
final rulemaking . Questions related to the proposed NCP revision .or the
attached consolidated DOE response may be addressed to Jane Powers of my
staff, on FTS 896-5027 .
Thomas T . Traceski
Chief, RCRA/CERCLA . Unit
Attachments :
1)
2)
Summary of the Proposed National Contingency
Plan, March 1989
DOE Consolidated Response to EPA
Guidance for Natural Resource Trusteeship and Ecological
DATE : June 4, 1991
P
LY TO
OF : EH-231
SUBJECT : Guidance for Natural Resource Trusteeship and Ecological Evaluation
for Environmental Restoration at Department of Energy Facilities
TO : Distribution
The Office of Environmental Guidance, RCRA/CERCLA Division (EH-231) has
prepared a guidance document entitled : "Natural Resource Trusteeship and
Ecological Evaluation for Environmental Restoration at Department of Energy
Facilities ." A copy is attached for your consideration and use . The guidance
document provides information on several responsibilities and requirements
which the Department of Energy (DOE) has as a lead response agency and a
Natural Resource Trustee (DOE may be only one of several co-Trustees at
Environmental Restoration sites).
The guidance document emphasizes notification and coordination requirements
which DOE must address in order to be in compliance with the Natural Resource
Trustee provisions of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation
and Liability Act (CERCLA), and to be consistent with the National Oil and
Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) . The guidance stresses
the benefits of early coordination with co-Trustees on technical issues such
as Remedial Investigation/ Feasibility Study (RI/FS) work plans, sampling and
analysis schemes and risk assessments . Early coordination on these and other
technical issues can facilitate the formulation of remedial action objectives
which reduce ecological risks and address natural resource injuries.
particular guidance document does not provide information on how to
form a Natural Resource Damage Assessment (NRDA) . The guidance does,
however, suggest that a properly planned and implemented ecological assessment
not only fulfills certain regulatory requirements (e .g ., the "baseline risk
assessment" of a CERCLA RI/FS), but can also be a valuable tool in making the
necessary preliminary determinations which precede the performance of a NRDA.
Furthermore, the information provided by an ecological assessment is vital to
formulating remedial action objectives which address natural resource injuries
(unaddressed or "residual" injuries form the basis of a natural resource
damage claim) . Therefore, an ecological assessment should be viewed as a
short-term requirement of the CERCLA remedial and RCRA corrective action
processes . NRDAs, on the other hand, are longer-term activities, which only
become necessary when and if environmental restoration actions do not satisfy
the concerns of Natural Resource Trustees (however, since residual damages
continue to accumulate throughout the release and recovery periods, it can be
disadvantageous to postpone addressing natural resource injuries).
r,
Since the issuance in March, 1989, of the U .S . Environmental Protection
Agency's (EPA) guidance for performing ecological risk assessments at CERCLA
sites, several regulatory developments have occurred which indicate that
ecological risks may increasingly drive environmental protection decisions.
These developments include : 1) the promulgation of the revised NCP (March,
1990), which explicitly calls for ecological evaluations at CERCLA sites ; 2)
the issuance of a court order (July, 1989) to revise the Interior Department's
NRDA regulation and broaden the scope of damages that Trustees may recover the regulation defines "actionable" injuries and provides procedures for
assessing damages ; 3) the proposal of RCRA Corrective Action requirements
1y,
410
action
1990) { which call for consideration of ecological risks in corrective
decision-making ; and 4) the development by EPA, of Guidelines for
ecological risk assessment (announced April, 1991), which are scheduled for
publication in the Federal Register (promulgation will likely result in a more
systematic approach to the performance and oversight of ecological risk
assessments at hazardous sites).
The attached guidance anticipates that the court-ordered revisions to the NRDA
regulation may result in increased oversight of DOE by Natural Resource
Trustees (i .e ., States, Indian tribes and other Federal agencies) who are
co-Trustees for resources located on DOE facilities, or who are Trustees for
resources which are affected by off-site releases . EH-231 has recently
solicited Departmental review and comment on the proposed revisions to the
NRDA rule (EH-231 memorandum, dated May 15, 1991, Subject : Proposed Revisions
to CERCLA Natural Resource Damage Assessment Regulation) . Likewise, in the
past, EH-231 has solicited Departmental review and comment on the CERCLA NCP
revisions and the proposed RCRA Corrective Action rule . EH-231 is currently
participating with EPA in the aforementioned guidelines development project.
It is anticipated that continuing regulatory developments will require updated
and/or supplemental guidance.
EH-231 continues to track regulations effecting ecological assessment at
Environmental Restoration sites . DOE Field Organizations will be kept
appraised of the most recent developments as new information becomes
available . If you have questions about the Natural Resource Trusteeship
guidance, or about the guidance for planning ecological evaluations, please
contact John Bascietto or Thomas Traceski of my RCRA/CERCLA Division at FTS
.-7917 or 6374, respectively .
Raymond F . Pelletier
Director
Office of Environmental Guidance
Attachment : EH-231's guidance document entitled "Natural Resource Trusteeship
and Ecological Evaluation for Environmental Restoration at Department of
Energy Facilities"
Guidance for Natural Resource Trusteeship and Ecological
DATE : June 4, 1991
RY TO
OF : EH-231
SUBJECT : Guidance for Natural Resource Trusteeship and Ecological Evaluation
for Environmental Restoration . at Department of Energy Facilities
TO : Distribution
The Office of Environmental Guidance, RCRA/CERCLA Division (EH-231) has
prepared a guidance document entitled : "Natural Resource Trusteeship and
Ecological Evaluation for Environmental Restoration at Department of Energy
Facilities ." A copy is attached for your consideration and use . The guidance
document provides information on several responsibilities and requirements
which the Department of Energy (DOE) has as•a ' lead response agency and a
Natural Resource Trustee (DOE may be only one of several co-Trustees at
Environmental Restoration sites).
The guidance document emphasizes notification and coordination requirements
which DOE must address in order to be in compliance with the Natural Resource'
Trustee provisions of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation
and Liability Act (CERCLA), and to be consistent with the National Oil and
Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) . The guidance stresses
the benefits of early coordination with co-Trustees on technical issues such
as Remedial Investigation/ Feasibility Study (RI/FS) work plans, sampling and
analysis schemes and risk assessments . Early coordination on these and other
technical issues can facilitate the formulation of remedial action objectives
which reduce ecological risks and address natural resource injuries.
'
particular guidance document does not provide information on how to
p form a Natural Resource Damage Assessment (NRDA) . The guidance does,
however, suggest that a properly planned and implemented ecological assessment
not only fulfills certain regulatory requirements (e .g ., the "baseline risk
assessment" of a CERCLA RI/FS), but can also be a valuable tool in making the
necessary preliminary determinations which precede the performance of a NRDA.
Furthermore, the information provided by an ecological assessment is vital to
formulating remedial action objectives which address natural resource injuries
(unaddressed or "residual" injuries form the basis of a natural resource
damage claim) . Therefore, an ecological assessment should be viewed as a
short-term requirement of the CERCLA remedial and RCRA corrective action.
processes . NRDAs, on the other hand, are longer-term activities, which only
become necessary when and if environmental restoration actions do not satisfy
the concerns of Natural Resource Trustees (however, since residual damages
continue to accumulate throughout the release and recovery periods, it can be
disadvantageous to postpone addressing natural resource injuries).
Since the issuance in March, 1989, of the U .S . Environmental Protection
Agency's (EPA) guidance for performing ecological risk assessments at CERCLA
sites, several regulatory developments have occurred which indicate that
ecological risks may increasingly drive environmental protection decisions.
These developments include : 1) the promulgation of the revised NCP (March,
1990), which explicitly calls for ecological evaluations at CERCLA sites ; 2)
the issuance of a court order (July, 1989) to revise the Interior Department's
NRDA regulation and broaden the scope of damages that Trustees may recover the regulation defines "actionable" injuries and provides procedures for
assessing damages ; 3) the proposal of RCRA Corrective Action requirements
ly, 1990), which call for consideration of ecological risks in corrective
Ilion decision-making ; and 4) the development by EPA, of Guidelines for
ecological risk assessment (announced April, 1991), which are scheduled for
publication in the Federal Register (promulgation will likely result in a more
systematic approach to the performance and oversight of ecological risk
assessments at hazardous sites).
The attached guidance anticipates that the court-ordered revisions to the NRDA
regulation may result in increased oversight of DOE by Natural Resource
Trustees (i .e ., States, Indian tribes and other Federal agencies) who are
co-Trustees for resources located on DOE facilities, or who are Trustees for
resources which are affected by off-site releases . EH-231 has recently
solicited Departmental review and comment on the proposed revisions to the
NRDA rule (EH-231 memorandum, dated May 15, 1991, Subject : Proposed Revisions
to CERCLA Natural Resource Damage Assessment Regulation) . Likewise, in the
past, EH-231 has solicited Departmental review and comment on the CERCLA NCP
revisions and the proposed RCRA Corrective Action rule . EH-231 is currently
participating with EPA in the aforementioned guidelines development project.
It is anticipated that continuing regulatory developments will require updated
and/or supplemental guidance .,
EH-231 continues to track regulations effecting ecological assessment at
Environmental Restoration sites . DOE. Field Organizations will be kept
appraised of the most recent developments as new information becomes
available . If you have questions about the Natural Resource Trusteeship
guidance, or about the guidance for planning ecological evaluations, please
contact John Bascietto or Thomas Traceski of my RCRA/CERCLA Division at FTS
41077917 or 6374, respectively .
Director
Attachment : EH-231's guidance document entitled "Natural Resource Trusteeship
and Ecological Evaluation for Environmental Restoration at Department of
Energy Facilities"
Proposed Revisions to CERCLA Natural Resource Damage Assessments
DATE : May 15, 1991
TO
RGLY
N OF : EH-231
SUBJECT : Proposed Revisions to CERCLA Natural Resource Damage Assessments
Regulation
TO : Distribution
This memorandum solicits comments on a Department of the Interior (DOI) Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) for Natural Resource Damage Assessments (56 FR
19752-19773, April 29, 1991) . The natural resource damage assessment (NRDA)
rule was first promulgated in 1986 pursuant to the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), and is codified at 43 CFR
11 . The rule provides for the assessment of "residual" damages by Natural
Resource Trustees . Residual damages may exist when environmental restoration
actions do not, or cannot fully address injuries to natural resources
resulting from a release of CERCLA hazardous substances . DOI is proposing
revisions to the NRDA rule in order to comply with a partial court remand of
43 CFR 11.
On December 15, 1989, the Office of Environmental Guidance (EH-23) distributed
a memorandum, "Fact Sheets : `Natural Resource Trusteeship Under CERCLA' and
`Management of Contaminated Groundwater as Hazardous Waste' ." The former fact
sheet provided a synopsis for the Department of Energy's (DOE) management role
as a Natural Resource Trustee under CERCLA . On October 10, 1990, the
RCRA/CERCLA Division (EH-231) conducted a limited DOE Field Organization
review of a draft guidance document entitled : "Natural Resource Trusteeship
Responsibilities and Ecological Evaluation Requirements", which described the
stee notification and coordination requirements for DOE during
t ironmental restoration actions . The draft guidance also discussed the
conduct and application of a CERCLA ecological risk assessment, particularly
as it relates to the identification of natural resource injuries . The draft
guidance proposed that if residual injuries can be identified or estimated
during the investigatory phase of an environmental restoration project, DOE can
use the information to plan appropriate mitigation measures for the remedial
phase . Even if the mitigation measures cannot eliminate all residual damages,
they may be sufficiently reduced to satisfy the Natural Resource Trustee
concerns . DOE Field Organization comments are currently being incorporated
into the guidance document, which will be distributed at the earliest
opportunity.
Attachment 1 is a summary of DOI's proposed rulemaking . The full text of the
NPRM is included as attachment 2 . EH-231 will coordinate .DOE comments on the
NPRM ; the comment period expires on June 28, 1991 . Please provide your
comments to EH-231 no later than June 14, 1991 . Comments received by this
date will be considered in Headquarter's preparation of a consolidated DOE
response to DOI.
Comments received after this date will be forwarded to DOI after the close of
the comment period, for possible consideration if new and significant issues
are identified . Please reference specific sections you are commenting on, so
we can more readily consolidate similar comments . If you have any questions,
please contact John Bascietto of my RCRA/CERCLA Division at FTS 896-7917 or
(202) 586-7917.
•
Director
Attachments : 1) Summary of the Proposed Revisions to the Natural Resource
Damage Assessment Rule 2) DOI's Proposed Rule for Natural Resource Damage
Assessments (4-29-91, 56 FR 19752)
Reportable Quantity Adjustments
December 13, 1993
erfund Docket Clerk
Environmental Protection Agency
Superfund Docket Room M2427
401 M Street, S .W.
Washington, D .C . 20460
Ilk .
Re : Reportable Quantity Adjustments Proposed Rule, Docket Number 102 RQ-CAA
Dear Docket Clerk:
The Department of Energy (DOE) would like to submit the enclosed comments
from the Richland Field Office in response to the Environmental Protection
Agency's (EPA's) Proposed Rulemaking "Reportable Quantity Adjustments" issued
on October 22, 1993 (58 FR 54836).
DOE appreciates the opportunity to review the Reportable Quantity Adjustments
Proposed Rulemaking .
Sincerely,
Director
Slosure :
U .S . DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY RICHLAND OPERATIONS OFFICE
COMMENTS ON REPORTABLE QUANTITY ADJUSTMENTS
PROPOSED RULE (58 FR 54836)
1 . The U .S . Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office (RL) fully
supports the proposal to revise the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability [Act] (CERCLA) statutory
reportable quantity (RQ) for ethylene glycol from one pound to 5,000
pounds . Increasing the RQ to 5,000 pounds will not result in an
unacceptable threat to human health or the environment . The U .S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has an extensive process for
adjusting RQs based upon the intrinsic properties of a given hazardous
substance . The results of this evaluation for ethylene glycol indicate
that the RQ should be adjusted to 5,000 pounds (i .e ., the highest RQ for
chemical hazardous substances) based upon chronic toxicity and
application of the adjustment criterion of biodegradation . Adjusting.
the RQ to 5,000 pounds will also reduce the burden to the regulated
community associated with reporting releases of ethylene glycol in
excess of the statutory RQ of one pound.
•
2 . RL specifically requests EPA to provide guidance on release reporting of
listed hazardous substances that are inherent in petroleum . RL is of
the opinion that the petroleum exclusion should take precedence for all
411 listed hazardous substances inherent in petroleum . Clarification on
this matter is required for the reasons discussed in the following
paragraphs.
EPA is proposing to establish RQs for hazardous air pollutants
identified pursuant to the Clean Air Act (CAA) Amendments of 1990.
Footnote "a" to Table 302 .4 states that benzene was already a CERCLA
hazardous substance prior to the CAA Amendments of 1990 and received an
adjusted 10 pound RQ based on potential carcinogenicity . The CAA
Amendments specify that benzene (including benzene in gasoline) is a
hazardous air pollutant and, thus, a CERCLA hazardous substance.
Therefore, the footnote to Table 302 .4 appears to require release
reporting for benzene because the CAA specifically identified benzene,
including benzene in gasoline, as a hazardous substance . This footnote
could be construed to imply that releases of gasoline, containing
benzene as an inherent component, would require release reporting if
released into the environment in excess of the 10 pound RQ for benzene.
This interpretation, however, would question the applicability and
validity of the petroleum exclusion.
RL requests clarification on the above footnote with respect to the
petroleum exclusion identified at Section 101(14) of CERCLA . This
section of CERCLA provides the definition .of a hazardous substance and
specifically excludes petroleum, including crude oil or any fraction
thereof which is not specifically listed or designated as a hazardous
substance . The April 4, 1985, Federal Register, page 13460, discusses
• the petroleum exclusion and states : "The petroleum exclusion applies to
materials such as crude oil, petroleum feedstocks, and refined petroleum
products, even if a specifically listed or designated hazardous
substance is present in such products ." Additional EPA guidance is
provided in "Scope of the CERCLA Petroleum Exclusion Under Section .
101(14) and 104(a)(2) ." This document indicates that the petroleum
exclusion includes those hazardous substances that are inherent in
petroleum but not those added to or mixed with petroleum products.
Therefore, the exclusion of diesel oil as "petroleum" includes its
hazardous substance constituents, such as benzene and toluene .
Consolidated DOE Comments on Proposed Revisions to CERCLA
September 22, 1993
ice of Environmental Affairs
A N : NRDA Rule, Room 2340
Department of the Interior
1849 C Street, N .W.
Dear Sir or Madam:
The Department of Energy (DOE) has reviewed the Department of the Interior
(DOI) responses to public comments received on the proposed revisions of the
CERCLA "Type B" Natural Resource Damage Assessment regulation (43 CFR 11).
The DOI's responses were published in the Federal Register on Thursday, July
22, 1993 (58 FR 39328-39357).
The Department of Energy appreciates the responses DOI provided to DOE's
previous comments on this proposed rulemaking (i .e ., DOE letter dated June
27, 1991) . At the request of DOI, DOE would like to take this opportunity to
provide further comments on the proposed rule and the response to comments
already received . Three copies of DOE's comments are enclosed with this
letter .
Sincerely,
Director
•
Attachment 1):
U .S . DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY COMMENTS ON FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE (58 FR 39328)
CONCERNING REOPENING OF THE COMMENT PERIOD ON THE PROPOSED REVISIONS TO THE
CERCLA "TYPE B" NATURAL RESOURCE DAMAGE ASSESSMENT RULE (43 CFR 11)
BACKGROUND
Federal agencies are responsible for responding to releases of substances
listed as hazardous substances under the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) . When such releases
injure natural resources:. . and, response actions activities incompletely address
such injuries, Natural Resource Trustees may file a claim for compensatory
"residual" damages . Section 107(a)(4)(C) of CERCLA, as amended, imposes
liability on responsible parties for damages for injury to, destruction of, or
loss of natural resources . "Natural resources" include land, fish, wildlife,
biota, air, water, groundwater, drinking water supplies, and other resources
belonging to, managed by, or held in trust by the United States or any State
or local government or Indian tribe . Federal agencies that administer lands
containing natural resources, such as the Department of Energy (DOE), have
•
several roles to play in this process : they may be both a Natural Resource
Trustee, responsible for assessing injuries to natural resources located on,
over, or under their land, as well as potentially responsible parties (PRPs)
lead response agencies in CERCLA response actions . Trusteeship for
I
ural resources is often shared with states, other Federal agencies, and
Indian tribes.
Section 301(c) of CERCLA requires the promulgation of regulations for the
assessment of damages for injury to, destruction of, or loss of natural
resources resulting from a discharge of oil or a release of a hazardous
substance . The statute requires that these regulations specify (1) standard
procedures for simplified assessments requiring minimal field observation,
and (21 alternative protocols for conducting assessments in individual cases
to determine the type and extent of short- and long-term injury, destruction,
or loss . In Executive Order 12580, the President delegated authority to
promulgate these regulations to the Department of the Interior (DOI) . DOI's
rule has been codified at 43 CFR 11 . The regulation describes two types of
NRDA : Type A which is a generalized simulation model applicable only to
coastal and marine environments ; and Type B, which allows for individual site
assessments.
Section 113 of CERCLA provides that any member of the public may petition the
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia to review any regulation under
CERCLA . Two separate but parallel cases have challenged DOI's NRDA rule.
Colorado v . United States Department of the Interior challenged two issues
pertaining to the Type A NRDA procedures established in DOI's rule ; and State
of Ohio v . United States Department of the Interior challenged twelve issues
pertaining to the Type B procedures . The United States Court of Appeals for
the District of Columbia circuit invalidated the NRDA regulation in part . In
its ruling in Ohio v . Interior, the Court held that (1) restoration costs are
preferred measure of natural resource damages under CERCLA and (2) that
reliably calculated lost use values of injured natural resources should
be recoverable, with no hierarchy of methodologies required of Natural
Resource Trustees in conducting these valuations.
On April 29, 1991, DOI proposed revisions to, and sought comments on, its
NRDA Type B rule to conform with the Court [Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(NPRM), 43 CFR 11, (56 FR 19752)] . On July 22, 1993, the U .S . Department of
the Interior (DOI) reopened the comment period on its April 29, 1991,
proposed rule for natural resource damage assessments (NRDA), requesting
additional comments on the April 1991 NPRM and new comments on the July 22,
1993, NPRM.
This document is divided into two main sections : 1) DOE comments relating to
the April 21, 1991, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (56 FR 19752) and the DOI
response to DOE's comments on that Notice ; and 2) DOE comments relating to
the July 22, 1993, Federal Register Notice (58 FR 39328).
Attachments : 2) "Comments Relating to the April 21, 1991 Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (56 FR 19752)" 3) "Comments Relating the [sic] to the July 22,
1993 Federal Register Notice (58 FR 39328)"
Hazardous Waste Managment System
November 7, 1991
RCRA Docket (OS-305)
411
L .a . Environmental Protection
Agency
401 M Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460
Docket Number F-91-UOLP-FFFFF
Re : 56 FR 48000, Hazardous Waste Management System ; General ; Identification
and Listing of Hazardous Waste ; Used Oil
Dear Sir or Madame:
The Department of Energy (DOE) would like to take this opportunity to comment
on the Environmental Protection Agency's Supplemental Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking on Identification and Listing of Hazardous Waste ; Used Oil,
pubshed in the Federal Register on September 23, 1991 (56 FR 48000).
We have reviewed the notice and would like to provide EPA with specific
comments relative to the impact of this proposal on DOE operations and
facities .. Our comments are enclosed with this letter.
DOE appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on the draft notice.
Please contact me if you have any questions on our comments.
•
Sincerely,
Director
Attachment : DOE comments on Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking -Hazardous Waste Management System ; General ; Identification and Listing of
Hazardous Waste ; Used Oil
Shell Oil Company vs . EPA
March 13, 1992
e Honorable William K . Reilly
inistrator
.,vironmental Protection Agency
Dear Mr . Reilly:
The recent federal appeals court remand (Shell Oil Co . v . EPA) of the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) "mixture" and "derived-from"
rules is a topic of great interest to the Department of Energy (DOE) . The
Department is aware that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has
recently reissued these rules on an interim basis and solicited comments on
the rules and alternative approaches for regulating waste mixtures and
residues . The alternative approaches to be considered in this rulemaking
are important to DOE from not only the perspective of DOE facilities and
operations but also from the perspective of the industrial sector, including
the energy industry . DOE looks forward to participating in that rulemaking
process and will be providing comments in response to EPA's recent Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking.
DOE recognizes that the intent of the mixture and derived-from rules was to
respond to legitimate enforcement concerns, such as the commingling of listed
wastes with nonhazardous solid waste to avoid regulation under RCRA Subtitle
C . While in agreement with the original purpose of these rules, DOE believes
that the regulation of hazardous wastes should also take into account the
hazardous constituent concentration levels and the resultant risk to human
health and the environment posed by such wastes . Some waste streams managed
by the Department and other affected parties, containing minute
centrations of listed hazardous constituents, pose no appreciable or
i ntifiable risk to human health or the environment but, nonetheless, are
presently subject to costly regulation under Subtitle C.
Additionally, some of the Department's radioactive mixed waste streams
contain extremely small quantities of listed hazardous waste yet fall under
RCRA Subtitle C jurisdiction due to the mixture and derived-from rules.
While the hazardous components of these particular wastes are subject to the
-requirements of RCRA, there are also radioactive components that must be
strictly managed in accordance with the requirements of the Atomic Energy
Act (AEA) . The redundant management under both RCRA and AEA authorities of
radioactive mixed waste containing minute concentrations of listed hazardous
constituents neither furthers EPA's legitimate enforcement concerns nor
appreciably reduces risk to human health and the environment.
DOE, therefore, urges EPA to consider establishing threshold levels that
identify constituent concentrations above which wastes are judged hazardous
by the significant health risk . Specifically, we recommend that the mixture
and derived-from rules be modified to reflect health-based risks posed by
listed hazardous constituents as a means of defining wastes that are subject
to RCRA Subtitle C . Implementing such a regulatory approach through a
refinement of the mixture and derived-from rules would remove wastes
unnecessarily included in the hazardous waste management system . We believe
that similar risk-based considerations could also usefully be brought to bear
•
in establishing appropriate management requirements for wastes that are
determined to be hazardous.
W are available to provide further information in support of the EPA's
its to establish health-based standards for both the identification and
t, management of hazardous wastes . I have asked Leo P . Duffy, Assistant
Secretary for Environmental Restoration and Waste Management (DOE), to
arrange a meeting with Don R . Clay, Assistant Administrator for Solid Waste
and Emergency Response (EPA), within the next two weeks to discuss how DOE
can be of assistance in your efforts.
Sincerely,
James D . Watkins
Admiral, U .S . Navy (Retired)
National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan
December 20, 1993
gency Response Division, Attn:
A
et Clerk
Docket Number NCP-R2/A
U .S . Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street S .W.
'RE : Docket Reference Number NCP-R2/A
Dear Sir:
On October 22, 1993, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published a
proposed rule and request for comments regarding changes to "40 CFR Part 300;
National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency . Plan" 158 FR
54702-54810) . As indicated in the proposed rule, comments were to be
submitted to EPA on or before December 20, 1993.
The Department of Energy (DOE) appreciates the opportunity to provide
comments on the October 22, 1993, proposed rule . The enclosed package
presents several comments for your consideration in finalizing changes to the
National Oil and Hazardous Substance Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) . These
comments incorporate the combined viewpoints and concerns identified by DOE
Operations Offices and Program Offices.
The Department commends EPA on its effort to revise the NCP, to incorporate
changes required by the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA) amendments to the
Clean Water Act (CWA), particularly in light of the fact that multiple
~tutory programs are involved in this revision . One of the Department's
ik n concerns in the proposed regulation is the expanded authority granted to
the Federal government in responding to discharges of oil and releases of
hazardous substances ` into the "inland zone" and "coastal zone ."
Specifically, the Department is concerned that the additional planning
requirements developed in the proposed rule will have a profound impact on
the Department and other federal agencies concerning the commitment of time
and personnel to participate in the planning process . Second, a critical
Departmental concern is the consistency and precision of the proposed rule to
clearly distinguish between responses to Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) hazardous substances and
CWA hazardous substances and to identify DOE's roles as either lead agency or
support agency for these responses.
These comments have been divided into two sections : general and specific.
The general comments address broad concerns . The specific comments relate
directly to potential regulatory issues raised in particular sections of the
proposed rule .
°
Sincerely,
Director
Olosure :
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY (DOE)
COMMENTS ON 40 CFR PART 300
THE NATIONAL OIL AND HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES POLLUTION CONTINGENCY PLAN;
PROPOSED RULE (58 FR 54702)
GENERAL COMMENTS
1.
Overall, the Department of Energy (DOE) would like to commend the U .S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on its effort to revise the
National Oil and Hazardous Substance Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) to
incorporate changes required by the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA)
amendments to the Clean Water Act (CWA), particularly in light of the
fact that there are three statutory programs involved in this revision.
DOE would like to suggest that EPA supplement the text of the revised NCP
with a table which shows how and where the provisions of the OPA, the CWA,
and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act
(CERCLA) impact the NCP . We believe that this would help to alleviate any
confusion that could arise from reading the proposed rule . Also, to help
clarify the NCP, we suggest that EPA consider adding two figures which would
separately depict . the response requirements for 1) discharges of oil and CWA
hazardous substances, and 2) releases of CERCLA hazardous substances.
•
2.
The proposed rule Section 300 .120 draws new and important distinctions
between the general requirements for EPA and the USCG to provide
On-Scene Coordinators (OSCs) for discharges of oil and releases of
hazardous substances, and the responsibilities of other Federal
agencies, such as DOE when the release is from a vessel or facility
under that agency's control.
Paragraph 300 .120(c) discusses DOE's, DOD's, or other Federal agency's
responsibilities to provide OSCs and Remedial Project Managers (RPMs) for
CERCLA hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants when the release is
on, or the sole source of the release is from, any facility or vessel,
including vessels bareboat chartered or operated under the jurisdiction,
custody, or control of DOE, DOD, or other Federal agency . . Under provision
(c)(1), " . . .in the case of DOD or DOE, DOD or DOE shall provide OSCs/RPMs
responsible for taking all response actions ." DOE views these as key
provisions regarding its responsibilities to provide OSCs/RPMs for responses
to releases of CERCLA hazardous substances and to support EPA or USCG
OSCs/RPMs for CWA hazardous substances ., DOE elements, such as the Office of
Environment Restoration and Waste Management, have previously developed an
institutional capability to respond to CERCLA hazardous substance releases
following promulgation of the existing (NCP) final rule in March 1990 (55 FR
8666) . This orientation toward CERCLA hazardous substance response, however,
has not necessarily prepared DOE facilities to address responses to CWA
hazardous substances, to the extent that these response actions will differ
from those under CERCLA . A critical concern during the Department's review
a
development of comments on the NPRM is the consistency and precision of
proposed rule to clearly distinguish between responses to CERCLA
h ardous substances and CWA hazardous substances and to identify DOE's roles
as either lead agency or support for these responses . To address our
concerns over the potential for confusion between DOE's two roles, we have,
therefore, added suggestions (listed under Item 1 above) that EPA develop two
figures which would separately depict response requirements for
(1) discharges of oil and CWA hazardous substances and (2) releases of CERCLA
hazardous substances.
3 . The proposed rule significantly expands the emergency planning process
by creating an area-level planning and coordination structure to
supplement national, regional, state and local contingency planning
efforts . As part of this process, Area Planning Committees (APCs) are
to develop Fish and Wildlife Sensitive Environments Plans (FWSEPs) as
annexes to each Area Contingency Plan (ACP) . These additional planning
efforts will require a significant allocation of resources on the part
of DOE and other Federal agencies involved in the planning process.
Under the proposed revisions to the NCP, DOE . participation will be required
on both the Regional Response Teams (RRTs) and the APCs . Necessary planning
and response information will need to be provided by DOE for incorporation
into the ACPs . The RRTs are also responsible for reviewing the Local
Emergency Planning Committee plans to ensure that they are consistent with
the requirements of the NCP . In addition, it is likely that DOE facilities
and personnel will be involved in the development of FWSEPs.
recognizes the need for adequate preplanning for response to discharges
and releases of hazardous substances . However, the development of
Regional Response Plans, Area Contingency Plans, and the FWSEPs, which are to
be annexed to the ACPs, will all require a substantial commitment of time and
resources on the part of the agencies involved . Collection of information
for the FWSEPs could require an extensive level of effort to document the
existing fish and wildlife resources at DOE facilities . The extent that a
given DOE facility has information on fish and wildlife and sensitive
environments consolidated and on hand varies considerably throughout the DOE.
complex . The variability of environmental information depends on the extent
of environmental activities at a facility and the presence of state programs
possessing a capability to routinely monitor and document such resources . In
addition, the FWSEPs are to be designed to ensure preapproval for appropriate
removal actions in specific areas, and compatibility between various response
activities and measures to protect fish and wildlife resources . This
requires that the FWSEPs contain information on the potential impacts of oil
discharges and hazardous substance releases, as well as data on the potential
adverse impacts of potential remedial actions.
Alpoil
is
It
unclear from the proposed rule what timeframe EPA envisions for
completion of these plans . EPA should specify a timeframe for the ,drafting
of the ACPs that considers the level of effort needed to collect and analyze
the information required in the FWSEPs . Given that DOE and other Federal
agency personnel will be involved in several levels of planning (e .g ., RRT,
ACP, etc .), EPA should also provide some information on the level of effort
anticipated to be necessary for participation in planning and response
activities.
gil
The, proposed rule expands the role of the Federal OSC . The OSC is
required to determine impacts to fish, wildlife and other natural
resources, beaches and shorelines . In addition, OSCs are , required to
determine whether a spill would present a substantial threat to public
health or welfare.
The identification of a substantial threat to public health or welfare
requires . the OSC to consider many specific spill characteristics and
characteristics of the affected natural resources . A significant
consideration is the availability and capability of local response resources.
Because these response resources will be reorganizing pursuant to the
planning provisions of the OPA and the revised NCP, EPA should address the
timing of finalization of this rule and the ongoing reorganization and ,
upgrade of response resources:
The proposed rule also redefines the scope of Federal OSC responsibilities to
allow the OSC to direct the actions of the responsible party . The OSC is
also to consult with natural resource trustees on selection and termination
of a removal action . For many potential activities occurring at DOE
facilities, DOE personnel may be required to serve as the Federal OSC while
also serving as the natural resource trustee representative and, possibly,
the responsible party . A situation of multiple roles may also arise when DOE
is the designated lead Federal agency and additionally provides radiological
advice with respect to releases of by-product, special nuclear material,
radioactive mixed waste, or other ionizing radiation sources . In addition to
the potential confusion that may arise in a situation where DOE is acting in
se several roles, the commitment of resources, in time and personnel,
uired to responsibly take on these roles is likely to be significant . EPA
should give some consideration to the level ofreffort anticipated to be
necessary for a medium or minor discharge or release where a Federal agency
will be tasked with several responsibilities under the proposed rule.
I
DOE envisions that the additional requirements placed on the OSC to determine
the potential impacts of a release or discharge will also require extensive
training for DOE personnel acting as OSCs at DOE facilities . EPA should
factor the time and resource requirements associated with training of. Fe4eral
OSCs into the timeframes for development of the various response plans, and
provide this information in the final rule.
5 . 'Section 1004 of the Oil Pollution Act provides limitations to liability
for discharges of oil . Although Section 300 .335 of the proposed NCP
addresses funding of removal actions, it does not reference the
OPA
.
The
Department
recommends
liability limitations described in the
that a reference to these liability limitations be included in the
revised NCP .
.
Section 300 .335 of the proposed revisions to the NCP states that "the
responsible party is liable for costs of Federal removal and damages in
accordance with Section 311(f) of the CWA and Section 1002 of the OPA, and
other Federal laws ." Section 311(f)(2) of the CWA establishes the limit of
liability for an onshore facility from which oil or a hazardous substance is
dischar4ed in violation of subsection (b)(3) at $50,000,000 except where
discharge was the result of willful negligence or willful misconduct.
tjon 1004(a)(4) of the OPA establishes a liability limit of $350,000,000
onshore facilities or deepwater ports . Because these sections appear to
establish differing limits for liability, it would be valuable for EPA to
identify which of the liability limits apply to removal of oil as discussed
in the proposed revisions to the NCP, including Section 300 .335.
S
6 . The ACPs and FWSEPs will contain useful information that facilities
could incorporate into their facility-specific Spill Prevention, Control
and Counter-Measure Plans, and use in preparing Natural Resource Damage
Assessments.
EPA should develop a mechanism to inform potentially interested parties when
the FWSEPs are completed and how copies could be obtained . ACPs should be
more readily available to industry and the public especially in view of the
statutory requirements in the CWA Section 300(j)(5)(c) that tank vessel and
facility response plans shall be consistent with ACPs . For the coastal zone
areas, this section could be revised to reflect the availability of ACPs at
the USCG Captain of the Port offices (predesignated Federal OSC) . For the
inland zone ACPs, the EPA could consider more widespread distribution,
possible through the State Emergency Response Commission.
Attachment : DOE's specific comments on EPA's "40 CFR Part 300 ; National Oil
and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan" (10-22-93, 58 FR 54702)
•
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Application
DATE : August 27, 1992
IRNLY OFTO:
EH-23
SUBJECT : National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Application
Deadlines, General Permit Requirements, and Reporting Requirements
for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Industrial Activity
TO :, Distribution
The purpose of this memorandum is to provide a summary of recent regulatory
initiatives regarding the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) for storm water discharges associated with industrial activity . A
copy of the summary is attached . On April 2, 1992, the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) issued a final rule on the NPDES Application
Deadlines, General Permit Requirements, and Reporting Requirements for Storm
Water Discharges Associated with Industrial Activity (57 FR 11394).
Previously, in November 1990, EPA promulgated a final rule to establish
permit application requirements for storm water discharges (55 FR 47990).
These two rulemakings set the NPDES storm water permit application deadlines
and establish minimum application and monitoring requirements for storm water
discharges from affected facilities.
If you have questions about the applicability of the storm water discharge
application requirements to your facility, please contact Lois Thompson of my
staff at (202) 586-9581 .
•
Director
' Attachment :
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES)
FOR
STORM WATER DISCHARGES
BACKGROUND
The Clean Water Act amendments (the Water Quality Act of 1987), require EPA
to issue requirements for storm water discharges associated with industrial
activity under the NPDES system . Section 402(p) of the Clean Water Act, as
amended, authorizes EPA and authorized states to require storm water
discharge permits prior to October 1, 1992, primarily for storm water
discharges associated with industrial activity and discharges from municipal
separate storm sewer systems . The requirement for NPDES permits for other
categories of storm water discharge cannot be promulgated until after October :
•
industrial activity must submit a Notice of Intent (NOI) to the state or
regional EPA . At a minimum, the following information will be required in a
NOI submittal:
• (1) legal name and address of owner or operator;
(2) facility name and address;
(3) type of facility or discharges ; and
(4) the name of the receiving stream(s).
EPA has not yet issued its final general permit requirements, proposed in the
Federal Register on August 16, 1991 (56 FR 40948) . The final rule does,
however, address general permit NOI requirements of dischargers, discussing
NOI provisions for storm water discharge general permits associated with
industrial activity from:
o
o
o
inactive mining;
inactive oil and gas operations that qualify for the application
requirement ; or
inactive landfills
on Federal lands where an operator cannot be identified . EPA expects its
general permit program to be finalized later this summer.
EPA'S LONG-TERM PERMITTING PROGRAM
The final rule sets forth EPA's tiered permitting framework . This approach
will aid in the establishment of permitting priorities over the long-term.
EPA's long-term strategy will require more stringent permitting conditions of
permittees whosdischarge poses greater environmental risk relative to other
discharges or otherwise requires additional controls . Similarly, storm water
~harges that do not warrant individualized controls may be consolidated
4~fer general permits . The four permitting tiers (and permit options)
proposed on August 16, 1991, are as follows:
(1) Baseline (general) permitting;
(2) Watershed (individual and specific general) permitting;
(3) Industry-specific (individual or industry-specific general)
permitting ; and
(4) Facility-specific (individual) permitting.
As facility and discharge information is collected from EPA's initial storm
water permitting efforts, regulated facilities may be required to modify
their permits (e .g ., change from a general to an individual permit).
Deadlines and conditions for these modified permits will be determined by the
storm water authority on a case-by-case basis.
STATE STORM WATER PERMITTING PLANS
The final rule identifies State Storm Water Permitting Plans (required under
Section 402(p)(6) of the Clean Water Act) as one means of supporting EPA's
long-term permitting strategy . The State Plans will set a framework for
evaluating, describing, and listing the status of permitting activities and
discharges related to municipal separate storm sewer systems, storm water
1, 1992.
IIIERAL STATUS AND APPLICABILITY OF STORM WATER PERMITTING AT DOE FACILITIES
In a proposed rule addressing storm water permits for storm water discharges
associated with industrial activity, the EPA provided three permit options
(56 FR 40947, Aug . 16, 1991) . Most DOE facilities managing storm water
discharges associated with industrial activity have opted for the individual
permit application ; however, general or group permit applications have been
submitted by a few DOE facilities with the understanding that an individual
application may ultimately be required . Facilities rejected from a group
permit application have 12 months after notice of rejection or until October
1, 1992 (whichever comes first), to submit an individual application or
obtain coverage by a general permit.
Facilities that have not yet submitted an application currently have two
remaining options . Facilities that qualify may wait until their NPDES
regulatory agency finalizes a general permit and submit a Notice of Intent
(NOI) and other appropriate information . Alternatively, facilities may apply.
for an individual permit by October 1, 1992 . EPA expects to finalize its
general permit this summer and encourages all NPDES-authorized states to do
the same . [1] EPA's general permit will serve as the general permit for
twelve states (AL, AZ, FL, ID, LA, ME, MA, NH, NM, OK, SD, and TX), and six
Territories (District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam,
American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and the
Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands) without authorized NPDES State
programs ; on Indian lands in AL, CA, GA, KY, MI, MN, MS, MT, NC, ND, NY, NV,
SC, TN, UT, WI, and WY ; located within Federal facilities and Indian lands in
CO and WA ; and located within Federal facilities in Delaware . All DOE
f cilities with storm water discharges associated with industrial activity
t be covered by a permit by October 1, 1992 . Facilities in states without
e er general permit authority or immediate plans to gain such authority
before October 1, 1992, do not qualify for a general permit and must submit
an individual application.
CURRENT APPLICATION DEADLINES
Part I, Group Applications
September 30, 1991
Part II, Group Applications
October 1, 1992
Individual Applications
October 1, 1992
General Permit
180 days after EPA or state finalizes
program or October 1, 1992 (whichever is
first)
EXPECTED EPA AND STATE GENERAL PERMIT REQUIREMENTS
General permit application requirements vary on a program-by-program and
case-by-case basis . The final rule (57 FR 11394) is clear, however, that all
general permit applicants for storm water discharges associated with
DOE facilities waiting for general permit programs to be finalized should
obtain acknowledgment from the state or EPA regarding the acceptability of
general permit conditions for their site . If there is the possibility of
r 'ection from either a general permit or Part 1 of a group application, the
ility should prepare to submit an individual application by October 1,
1 2.
DOE COMMENTS ON EPA'S PROPOSED RULE
Most of the comments that DOE submitted regarding the August 1991, proposed
rule to EPA pertained to EPA's draft general permit . These comments raised
questions about the identification of industry-specific categories and
priority industries for general permit development and permitting priorities;
limits of coverage on general permits ; and EPA's use of the term pollution
prevention . EPA expects to finalize the general permit provisions later this
summer, at which time these questions will be addressed.
DOE also submitted substantial comment on EPA's monitoring and reporting
options . DOE requested greater flexibility, particularly with respect to
monitoring under general permit conditions . Another comment challenged EPA's
selection of parameters and only moderate use of Professional Engineer
certifications . The minimum reporting and monitoring requirements described
in this memorandum incorporate DOE's concerns by retaining a flexible
structure for permit conditions . Permit conditions more stringent than the
minimum requirements must be negotiated on an individual basis . NPDES
program managers may utilize DOE's comments to EPA (November 13, 1991)
regarding minimum reporting and monitoring requirements as a reference for
negotiations at their facilities.
•
o
discharges associated with industrial activity, impacted waters, and
case-by-case designations of water quality standard violations . The
development of State Plans may also affect DOE operations in that states will
h^ tracking storm water discharge activities . It is recommended that DOE
ES program managers and staff engage in dialogue with authorities
arding the development of state plans . Such participation would be
particularly beneficial as states develop procedures to identify storm water
discharges that contribute to violations of water quality standards.
MINIMUM MONITORING AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
EPA combined several of the proposed monitoring and reporting options in the
April 1992, final rule . The minimum requirement for facilities discharging
storm water associated with industrial activity is annual inspection of the
facility site . Furthermore, facilities must keep records of such
inspections, certification of compliance with the storm water discharge
permit, and any incidents of non-compliance for a period of three years.
Although this annual inspection requirement is more frequent than that
proposed in the NPRM, it allows for greater flexibility of inspection and
monitoring requirements (e .g ., the inspector does not have to be a
Professional Engineer in most cases).
Monitoring requirements will be required for certain storm water discharges
with effluent limits with a minimum of annual monitoring . Other dischargers
will not be subject to monitoring, but will be required to implement
pollution prevention measures or best management practices . Conditions for
individual and group permits beyond minimum requirements are to be determined
on a case-by-case basis, depending on the nature and effect of the discharge.
410ECTED TRENDS IN DOE MONITORING AND REPORTING
Some DOE facilities {e .g ., certain National Laboratories) are subject to
effluent limitations for their storm water discharges . These facilities can
expect numeric or toxicity limitations as additional conditions of their
storm water permit . The purpose of individual permits is to provide
information about the site and materials contaminating storm water.
Therefore, individual permit holders can expect conditions for sampling to
correspond with factors such as the exposure of industrial areas to storm
water and the extent of on-site hazardous materials management . Others may
only be required to comply with the minimum annual inspection requirement and
best management practice conditions . It should be noted that monitoring
requirements will be established on a case-by-case basis in part by state
needs to collect information about priority facilities and watershed-level
pollutant loading.
The August 1991, proposed rule required a minimum frequency of once every
three years for Registered Professional Engineer inspections of oil and gas
production operations and some inactive mining sites . The final rule upholds
this proposal for inactive mining sites only where annual inspections are
impracticable . Oil and gas production operations with storm water discharges
associated with industrial activity, however, must abide by the standard
minimum requirement of annual site inspections .
November 9, 1993
Fp A-SAB- EC -LTR- 94 -002
Alllorable
Carol M . Browner
Administrator
401 M Street, S .W.
SubJect : Overview of SAB Comments and Recommendations on the Proposed
RIA for the RCRA Corrective Action Rule.
Dear Ms . Browner:
This report is one of a series of six reports (listed in Appendix A)
generated by the SAB in response to the subject request from the USEPA's
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER) . It contains a brief
summary and overview of the salient conclusions of the other five reports as
well as some observations, comments and recommendations of the RCRA/RIA
Steering Committee (RRSC) . A roster of RRSC is in Appendix B.
At the October, 1992 meeting of the Executive Committee (EC), the Science
Advisory Board (SAB) was asked by OSWER to review its then-nearly-complete RIA
methodology which was being applied to the cost/benefit analysis required
prior to promulgation of the Agency's final RCRA Corrective Action Rule . The
EC, recognizing the importance, complexity, creativity, and novelty of OSWER's
work and its multi-disciplinary character, established the RRSC to assure that
certain significant aspects of the RIA--both methodology and
application--received appropriate attention from the relevant SAB standing
410mittees.
At a public meeting on January 29, 1993, the RRSC concluded, on the basis
of presentations by and discussions with OSWER personnel, that four individual
SAB standing committees should undertake reviews of the major segments of the
RCRA-RIA with appropriate inter-committee liaison . The Environmental
Economics Advisory Committee (EEAC) reviewed the contingent valuation (CV)
methodology (hereafter called CV-1) and the ' application of CV in the
specific case of the RCRA-RIA (hereafter called CV-2) . The Environmental
Engineering Committee (EEC) reviewed the principal fate and transport model,
MMSOILS, used in the RCRA-RIA . The Ecological Process and Effects Committee
(EPEC) reviewed the ecological risk assessment portion of the RCRA-RIA and the
Environmental Health Committee (EHC) reviewed the human health risk assessment
portion of the RCRA-RIA . The RRSC provided coordination and its own insights
with respect to the RCRA-RIA methodology and its application.
Interpretation of the Charge
The charge for these reviews is contained in two separate requests for
reviews of RCRA-RIA components : the Groundwater Contingent Valuation (CV)
Study (October 21, 1992) and the MMSOILS model for fate and transport (March
26, 1993) . The latter request also asked the SAB to comment on "the
implications that the model has on the human and ecological risk assessment"
and to "consider during their review several practical factors including the
baseline risk assessment and the fact that the RIA is a predictive analysis".
Thus the RRSC concluded that how these risks were determined needed to be
reviewed as well . Each of the standing committees of the SAB has addressed
portion of the charge in their separate reports . The RRSC has taken as
charge the task assigned it by the EC of ensuring that the significant
ects of the RIA -- both methodology and application -- received appropriate
attention from the relevant SAB standing committees, of ensuring that
coordination exists where needed and, ultimately, providing its own comments
And overview . As noted by the EHC, this draft methodology is actually a
screening analysis which provides preliminary estimates rather than definitive
analysis reflecting site specific details.
The SAB was not asked to review the costs of corrective action or the
procedures for estimating them, nor was it supplied with the detailed
background information needed to do so . The SAB has thus reviewed only the
estimation of the benefits of the corrective action and the methodologies used
in deriving the expressions of the benefits . A review of the costs and their
estimation methods might produce comments . Thus, the absence of comments in
this area does not constitute any SAB position as to the costs of remediation
or their methods of estimation.
General Comments
This RIA is one of the most complete and complex that OSWER has
undertaken and is the first to undergo detailed review by the SAB . In spite
of the scientific criticisms which follows we commend the Agency for this
major effort, for its openness of discussion with the SAB, and for its
innovative attempts to apply a wide variety of types of information and
procedures to assess the risks associated with solid waste management units
and the benefits of abating those risks.
The OSW/ORD working group is also to be commended for a well-coordinated
focused effort to develop an RIA that will help the Agency and the Nation
better understand the risks associated with RCRA sites and the costs and
benefits of remediation -- and the size, complexity and difficulty of the
analysis . The intra-agency coordination represented by this RIA is itself a
model approach that the Agency should apply to other programs to promote
effective and efficient interactions of Program Office and ORD to ensure that
Program Office activities represent state-of-the-art science and technology.
Finally, despite the large amount of good work that has gone into this
RIA, it only accounts for part of the benefits that may accrue from reducing
health and ecological risks from RCRA sites . The comments which follow
include recommendations for both short term changes to improve this RIA and
long-term investments in research and analysis to improve RIAs within the
Agency.
Overview of the Major Comments and Recommendations of the SAB Standing
Committees
To place into context the specific comments and recommendations of the
RRSC, some of the major findings of the SAB's standing committees are
summarized here . The reader is referred to the individual reports for full
and'detailed descriptions of these and other findings . In each case, the
standing committees offer recommendations for both short term and long term
improvements.
The Agency's CV-1 document represents a substantive contribution,
e ending understanding of the issues associated with contingent valuation as
thod of estimation of non-market values . Even so, concerns were raised
a ut the method which need answering : whether the pretesting and design are
such as to truly assure that a well-defined groundwater commodity was
understood properly by the respondents ; whether use of the Box-Cox econometric
estimates alone is acceptable and defensible ; whether embedding was adequately
treated ; whether the "per household" non-use values from CV-1 can be regarded
as either upper or lower bound values ; and others . Among the concerns raised
about CV-2, given also the concerns about CV-1, itself, are : whether the
application of values obtained in CV-1 to the different set of circumstances
of CV-2 is possible ; that EEAC could not endorse the McClelland et al study as
a basis for EPA to determine the non-use values of groundwater ; and that the
hedonic analysis was not actually used in the RIA.
CV methods in general are still controversial and the EEAC concluded that
more information was needed to apply CV in this RIA . Nonetheless, the EEAC.
showed sufficient confidence in the approach to recommend that further
research be undertaken, particularly to resolve whether the CV approach can
produce information useful in RIAs.
Fate and transport information is fundamental in assessing exposures and,
therefore, human health and ecological risks . While noting that the methods
and formulations used in the MMSOILS model are well known, documented and
accepted and that underlying assumptions are clearly stated in the RIA, the
EEC concluded that here, too, there are difficulties (though if MMSOILS is
applied to simplified case studies it might be a valid screening tool for
assessing the relative risks and costs associated with alternative regulatory
o tions) . The primary difficulties are : sparse or inaccurate information,
parameter estimation especially relative to source terms, suspected
r-reliance upon default parameters, and that the Model is applied to cases
outside the range of its validity . Given these shortcomings, many of which'
were already realized by the Agency, the most basic and pressing concern is
whether the use of a generic model such as MMSOILS is appropriate as a basis
for the assessment of regulatory costs and benefits at the national level
since the fate and transport estimates that comprise the model output may be
wrong by orders of magnitude for many complex sites . In its report the EEC
recommends ways in which the Agency can augment exposure and cost/benefit
estimates using alternative approaches.
The human health risk assessment methods used in the RIA are well known
and often used in the regulatory arena . There is a question as to how well
they can be used to estimate risks -- or exposure levels of concern for risk
-- in this case of multiple exposures, for analytical rather than regulatory
purposes . Also there are fundamental differences between the usual methods
used for carcinogens and noncarcinogens and the results that can be obtained
in each case . Much of the criticism of the human health risk analysis in CV-2
has to do with a confusing use of risk and exposure terminology and is easily
rectified . We urge that it be rectified . The EHC also urges that quantities
be calculated to describe the population exposed at levels of concern for
cancer and non-cancer adverse effects, and the attendant risks so they are
comparable and offers suggestions for presenting non-monetized benefits . Some
of the proposed calculations can be carried out in the short term (calculating
the number of people exposed to carcinogens at levels of concern for cancer
risk, as is already done for noncarcinogens for non-cancer adverse effects
risk) whereas the method proposed for calculating population risks for noner adverse effects will take more time and development . Of all of the
s tions of RIA, this section is the most easily improved through the
application of existing scientific knowledge.
The EPEC recognizes the formidable task undertaken by the Agency in the
ecological risk assessment but raises several questions about it . . Among the
concerns raised are these : the major pathway considered is not necessarily the
most likely to . cause adverse ecological effects, the range of ecological
endpoints considered is limited, there is no consideration of the ecological
risks and benefits of site remediation, there is insufficient discussion of
data sources and assumptions, and there are a number of application and
interpretive errors . The EPEC also suggests that the ecological risk
assessment be recast in a form consistent with the Agency's "Framework for
Ecological Risk Assessment" (EPA/630/R-92/001, February, 1992).
Specific Comments and Recommendations of the RRSC on RCRA-RIAs
1.
The RRSC noted with pleasure that each major chapter in the RIA
contained a final section on limitations which served to enhance the
understanding of the reader/user of what meaning can be ascribed to the
contents of the chapters . It is recommended that the sections be enlarged
where necessary to address the criticisms from the SAB relevant to the final
text of the RIA.
2.
It is important to improve the assessment of fate and transport, and
therefore of estimated exposures, as much as possible since the large error
band seen by the . EEC can only seriously compound and make more uncertain the
ssment of both human health and ecological risks and the benefits to be
Lived by their abatement . Greater reliance should be placed on measurements
of exposure to supplement and validate model predictions, as called for in the
Exposure Assessment Guidelines.
The risks created by the remediation process should be addressed . EPEC
3.
identified additional ecological risks ih their report, such as impacts on
terrestrial wildlife, habitat, and biodiversity which were not adequately
addressed . Additional risks include : loss of contaminants to other media
during pumping, treatment, excavation, and hauling, e .g ., transferring
groundwater eventually to surface water, stripping of volatile compounds, air
entrainment of soil particles ; accidents to workers during remediation and
transportation ; and puncturing a confining structure and contaminating a
deeper aquifer during installation of wells . These risks are relevant because
several Superfund Records of Decisions have been amended/overturned due in
part to risks to workers and off-site communities during remediation.
While the cost estimates in the RIA for corrective action were not
4.
evaluated in a consensus manner by the SAB, several issues of possible concern
were identified• by the EEC : Should additional sites be included . e .g .,
pre-HSWA,land treatment units, very large DoD sites, more spill sites? Was the
cost of a given cleanup underestimated, e .g . f quantity of soil to be
remediated, labor'costs under hazardous conditions, insurance, inflation? What
is the comparison of the cost in the draft RIA report with costs developed in
•
1992 by the University of Tennessee's Waste Management Research and Education
institute? Should other cost categories be included, e .g ., transaction costs
and government administrative costs?
We recommend that these questions be addressed by EPA during the public
period.
jlkment
5 . The RRSC has considered sampling strategy since, as in all assessments,
results and interpretations depend on the samples used in the RCRA-RIA . The
current RIA gives much consideration to this subject and the sample used is
large relative to that used in other cases . RIAs operate on a national scale
and have multiple components (economics, engineering, human health, and
ecological effects) . The choice of sample sites has to be representative of
the population of sites in the country and it also has to consider the
attributes of these multiple components . The RCRA RIA sampling design was
based primarily on the size and type of waste sites but did not consider the
nature of the ecological risks,(based on exposure or effects) or, necessarily,
the different nature of health risks (and exposures), in choosing the sites.
Thus it is not evident that either type of risk assessment is representative
because ecological and health criteria were not part of the stratification
process.
We therefore recommend that in future RIAs the sample designs
incorporate criteria appropriate for all aspects of the RIA . The categories
of samples should include estimates of central tendency and dispersion and a
discussion of the sources of variability within each category . Estimates of
uncertainty should be included in the National Assessment . In some cases, it
may be necessary to use different designs to address particular types of
risks . For the long-term the Agency should consider whether calculation of a
National Assessment is a useful decision-making tool for rulemaking,
particularly where site-specific conditions are highly variable.
The RRSC supports the recommendations for further research into and
development of the methodologies needed to perform RIAs as set forth in the
other five reports . Some further questions which research may be able to
answer are : (a) Can the CV methods be sensitive enough to distinguish between
the values of clean, cleaner and cleanest ground water? This question is of
importance in examining different corrective action options which may yield
significantly different costs and different levels of clean-up . If this
distinction cannot be made, the distribution of CV values would stand as an
invariant and might have little to say about which option to choose, if any.
And (b) what are the CV values of sound ecosystems or of good health? These
questions, if they can be answered without overlap with other CV values, could
greatly assist in valuing benefits.
7 . Chapter 13 of the RIA should be renamed to indicate that costs and
benefits are characterized, since the non-monetized and the monetized benefits
cannot be compared to costs in the same manner . Monetization is not always
possible so other types of characterizations should be presented in ways that
make comparisons possible and that facilitate judgments about costs versus
benefits ; also terms should be clearly defined and used consistently . Indeed,
even if complete monetization is achieved, presenting additional characterizations of costs and benefits is highly desirable . All characterizations
should include a description of their uncertainties . Specific suggestions for
improvements are provided in Appendix C to this report . Similar
clarifications of meaning and definition should be made consistently
throughout the entire report.
In closing, we commend the Office of Solid Waste for its pioneering
Alorts in the development of this RCRA RIA . Regulatory impact assessments by
their very nature are not site specific and operate at the national scale or
even international and/or global scale . Based on our review of this RIA, we
recommend that the Agency build on the experience gained here to develop a
technical support document (TSD) providing guidance on the development of an
RIA . The TSD should include a variety of approaches for assessing the
economic, human health, and ecological benefits and costs associated with
proposed regulation . We suggest that the TSD incorporate as building blocks
the Human Health Risk Assessment Guidelines and the Framework for Ecological
Risk Assessment.
Finally, we make one additional recommendation . In the first stages of
approaching and defining a major project such as the RIA, the Agency might
consider availing itself of the consultation role of the SAB . In this role
the individual members and consultants of SAB committees offer advice and
comments as individuals in public meetings on points of interest raised by the
staff members about their nascent project . Although the occurrence of such a
consultation is recorded and reported to the Administrator, the details of the
advice are not . Such advice at an early stage, can serve to raise questions
that are better addressed early rather than close to the end of a(project.
The SAB may later conduct a peer review of the final agency document.
The SAB is pleased to have had the opportunity to review this important
project, and we look forward to your response to these comments, as well as
reviewing other .RlAs in the future.
•
Dr . Raymond Loehr, Chair
Executive Committee
Science Advisory Board
Sincerely yours,
Dr . Paul Deisler, Chair
RCRA-RIA Steering Committee
APPENDIX A . LIST OF SAB REPORTS REVIEWING DIFFERENT ASPECTS OF OSWER'S
RCRA/RIA CORRECTIVE ACTION COST/BENEFIT ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY AND ITS
•LICATION.
Zia reports are, in brief:
1.
EPA-SAB-EEAC-94-001 "Review of the Contingent Valuation Method for the
proposed RIA for RCRA Corrective Action Rule" by the Environmental
Economics Advisory Committee (Also referred to as CV-1)
2.
EPA-SAB-EEAC-LTR-94-001 "Review of Economic Aspects of the proposed RIA
for the RCRA Corrective Action Rule" by the Environmental Economics
Advisory Committee (Also referred to as CV-2)
3.
EPA-SAB-EEC-94-002 "Review of MMSOILS component of the Proposed RIA for
the RCRA Corrective Action Rule" by the Environmental Engineering
Committee
4.
EPA-SAB-EPEC-COM-94-001 "Commentary on the Ecological Risk Assessment
for the proposed RIA for the RCRA Corrective Action Rule" by the
Ecological Processes and Effects Committee
5.
EPA-SAB-EHC-LTR-94-003 "Review of the Health Benefits for the proposed
RIA for the RCRA Corrective Action Rule" by the Environmental Health
Committee
6.
EPA-SAB-EC-LTR-94-002 "Overview of SAB Comments on the proposed RIA for
RCRA Corrective Action Rule" by the RCRA/RIA Steering Committee
•
APPENDIX B .
US ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
SCIENCE ADVISORY BOARD
RCRA/RIA STEERING COMMITTEE
•
ROSTER
CHAIRMAN
Dr . Paul F . Deisler, Jr ., 11215 Wilding Lane, Houston, Texas 77024
MEMBERS
Dr . Richard A . Conway, Union Carbide Corporation, South Charleston, West
Virginia 25303-0361
Dr . Kenneth L . Dickson, University of North Texas, Denton, Texas 762033078
Dr . Allen V . Kneese, Resources for the Future, Washington, D .C . 20036
Dr . Verne A . Ray, Pfizer Inc ., Groton, Connecticut 06340
Dr . Arthur C . Upton, New York Medical Center (Retired), Sante Fe, New
Mexico 87501
SCIENCE ADVISORY BOARD STAFF
Dr . Edward S . Bender, Designated Federal Officer, US EPA/Science
Advisory Board, 401 M Street, S .W . (A-101F) Washington, D .C . 20460
• Mrs . Marcia K . Jolly (Marcy)
Secretary to the Designated Federal Official
APPENDIX C . Recommendations from the Steering Committee for Clarifying the
Cost Benefit
Presentation
The characterizations of costs and benefits in Chapter 13 can be
roved, particularly in the way the information is presented in Section 13 .3
and in Exhibits 13-1 and 13-2 . These exhibits, in particular, are very
important since they summarize the output of the entire cost/benefit study;
great care should therefore be taken to be sure they are not easily
misunderstood or misused.
i
In Exhibit 13-1, for example, the values given might be designated as
"Preferred Value" instead of "Effect of Corrective Action" and a second line
added entitled "Range of Estimates" with the corresponding figures to give the
decision maker some immediate understanding of the uncertainties . In the
draft as written, the non-use value of ground water would then be shown as the
preferred value of $2 .3 billion (as now, unless changed in response to the SAB
review) and the ranges of the estimate would be given as $0 .17-18 .0 billion
(using different numbers if the numbers should change as a result of the SAB
review) . Exhibit 13-2 also offers opportunities for improvement ranging from
changing captions to more suitable ones (including correcting risk
terminology) to adding further information to make useful comparisons
possible . Here are some examples of desirable changes : the figure of $18 .7
billion should be shown as the preferred value with its ranges of estimate as
suggested for Exhibit 13-1 ; the caption "Avoided Non-Cancer Effects" should be
changed to "Avoided Non-cancer Exposures of Concern", which is what they are;
the 100 to 12 million "cases" under the Non-Cancer column should become
"exposures of concern" since these are not cases of actual effect as in the
case of cancer ; and at least one additional column needs to be added to the
exhibit . It would shed further light on the benefits to be obtained is one
giving the number of "Avoided Cancer Exposures of Concern" ; it would be based
the numbers of people, exposed at levels of exposure yielding a risk of
~cer of 10 or higher using much the same information already used to
estimate cancer risks (as suggested in the EHC report) . As the exhibit now
stands, the cancer and non-cancer effects -- the totality of health effects -cannot be compared or placed in context with each other . Although the
definitions of what is "of concern" differ for cancer and non-cancer effects,
they do nonetheless exist and are accepted as meaningful and so this
additional column, compared to the one retitled "Avoided Noncancer Exposures
of Concern", would provide useful additional information to the decision
maker . If, in the future, columns for non-cancer effects comparable to the
column entitled "Averted Population Cancer Cases" can be provided, so much the
better . Such information might assist in providing a basis for monetizing
non-cancer effects avoidance as do the figures for cancer cases now in hand in
appropriate cases (medical costs and productivity losses avoided and the
like) . Finally, expanding the footnote to offer some idea of the meaning of
current ecological risk and whether corrective action will have any effect on
it will add further to the value of this Exhibit in shedding light on benefits
to be expected from the corrective action.
The two exhibits should also be changed to reflect the fact that there
are two baseline cases : one with the entire population either treating or
substituting its water supply (which now forms the basis of the small monetary
benefit ascribed to averting treatment and substitution in Exhibit 13-1) and a
second in which no one in the population treats or substitutes their water
supply (the one for which the relatively large decreases in cancer incidents
•
shown in Exhibit 13-2 are estimated) . As they stand now, Exhibits 13-1 and
13-2 appear to be anomalous in this regard and the full information that could
be displayed in the characterization is not displayed.
These few examples illustrate ways in which the characterization of the
c ts and benefits can be greatly enriched ; they and others like them apply
not only to the two exhibits cited but to Chapter 13 as a whole .
APPENDIX D.
Contingent Valuation Methodology
Environmental Economics Advisory Committee (SAB/EEAC)
Environmental Engineering Committee (SAB/EEC, also referred to as
"The Committee")
EHC
Environmental Health Committee (SAB/EHC)
EPEC
Ecological Processes and Effects Committee (SAB/EPEC)
MMSOILS A Mathematical Model for Soils (Includes other media transfer from
soils .)
OSW
Office of Solid Waste (U .S . EPA)
OSWER
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (U .S . EPA)
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
RCRA
RCRA RIA Steering Committee
RRSC
RIA
Regulatory Impact Analysis
SAB
Science Advisory Board (U .S . EPA)
Solid Waste Management Units
SWMUs
CV
F C
•
DISTRIBUTION' LIST
Deputy Administrator
istant Administrators
,Regional Administrators
ErA Laboratory Directors
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Office of Research and Development (ORD)
Director, Center for Environmental Research Information (CERI)
Director, Office of Environmental Processes and Effects Research (OEPER)
Director, Office of Health and Environmental Assessment (OHEA)
Director, Exposure - and Assessment Group (EAG)
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response (OSWER)
Director, Office of Emergency and Remedial response (OERR)
Deputy Director, OERR
Director, Office of Solid Waste (OSW)
Deputy Director, OSW
EPA Headquarters Library
EPA Regional Libraries
EPA Laboratory Libraries
November 19, 1993
•
EPA-SAB-EHC-LTR-94-003
Honorable Carol M . Browner
Administrator
401 M Street, S .W.
Subject : Review of the Health Benefits for the proposed RIA
for the RCRA Corrective Action Plan Rule by the
Environmental Health Committee
Dear Ms . Browner:
At the October, 1992 meeting of the SAB's Executive Commit
tee (EC) the Board was asked by the Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response (OSWER) to review the methodology for the
draft Regulatory Impact - Analysis (RIA) . This cost/benefit
analysis is required prior to promulgation of the Agency's final
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Corrective Action Rule.
The EC, recognizing the importance, complexity, and novelty of
OSWER's work and its multi-disciplinary character, established an
ad hoc RCRA-RIA Zteering Committee (RRSC) to assure that certain
as ects of the RIA -- in both methodology and application -•
ived appropriate attention from the relevant SAB committees.
At a public meeting on January 29, 1993, the RRSC concluded,
on the basis of presentations by and discussions with OSWER
personnel, that four SAB individual committees should review the
major segments of the RCRA-RIA . Specifically, the RRSC agreed to
review : a) the contingent valuation (CV) methodology used in the
RCRA RIA analysis (CV-1, by the Environmental Economics Advisory
Committee (EEAC)) ; b) the application of CV in the RCRA-RIA (CV2, by the EEAC) ; c) the principal fate and transport model
(MMSOILS), used in the RCRA-RIA (by the Environmental Engineering
Committee (EEC)) ; d) the ecological risk assessment portion of
the RCRA-RIA (by the Ecological Processes and Effects Committee
(EPEC)) ; and f) the human health risk assessment portion of the
RCRA-RIA (by the Environmental Health Committee (EHC)).
This letter was prepared by the SAB's Environmental Health
Committee following the circulation (by mail) of initial comments
prepared by a Committee Member, and a public teleconference held
on September 24, 1993 . The report focuses on the risk assessment
methodology used to generate the estimated . impacts on human
health resulting from proposed corrective action at RCRA facili
ties . The March .23, 1993 memorandum from Richard Guimond to Dr.
Donald Barnes described the Charge for the SAB's review expresses
•
an interest (page 4) in the implications of the fate and trans
port model assumptions on the ecological and human health risk
assessments . Before such an interest can be addressed, the risk
essments must be reviewed to determine whether they are sound,
to suggest improvements where they are not ; otherwise com
me is on the implications of fate and transport assumptions may
not be meaningful.
Our report is organized into two sections -- some overall
strategic comments which follow in the body of this letter, and
detailed technical points, keyed to specific sections of the
draft RIA, which are incorporated in an Appendix enclosed with
this letter.
Based on our understanding of OSWER's goals, the Committee
views the draft methodology as a screening analysis, as opposed
to a more detailed and definitive analysis . We have therefore
reviewed the material with the following question in mind as our
Charge : "Is this the best that can be done to provide a method
for conducting a screening analysis?"
The screening analysis methodology produced by the Agency
was a very ambitious undertaking . It is also of great potential
importance since implementing the proposed RCRA Corrective Action
regulation could cost many billions of dollars and, in the
future, these techniques for estimating and comparing costs and
benefits may well find application to other important cases as
stated in the document.
In general, the methods used are well known and correspond
t "much-used" guidelines, methods and practices (GMP) . These
have, for the most part, been developed for use in setting
dently
protective standards of exposure to individual sub
p
stances in specific regulatory situations . In the proposed
RCRA/RIA methodology the GMP are being applied to a large set of
complex cases involving multiple exposures to make calculations
of total impact not contemplated when the GMP were first derived.
Determining whether the GMP can be so applied, whether they are
adequately applied, whether their application to determine
overall health impacts is reasonable, whether the important
assumptions and limitations have been clearly identified, and
what reasonable and feasible improvements can be suggested has
been an objective of our review.
The methods developed in Chapter 7 and Appendix E are
obviously the result of much careful and thoughtful work . Care
has been taken to lay out and define the risk assessment process
used and its components . The basic assumptions used in each of
the steps are clearly stated, (including the way in which numeri
cal values were chosen to bring in as much realism as possible at
each step through the use of site specificity where possible).
Alternatives considered and different ways used to calculate the
end results are set forth so as to give an idea of sensitivities
or possible alternative results (e .g ., the decision to analyze a
"less than 100 percent effectiveness" corrective action sce
nario) . Lastly, possible biases and uncertainties inherent in
the whole procedure are . identified.
The net effect of the effort was to produce a construct
ed of many carefully selected parts with which a formal
es imate of cancer population risk can be made, both before and
after corrective action, and with which a formal estimate can be
made of the numbers of persons exposed to contaminant levels
which have some probability (extent unknown) of producing ad
verse, non-carcinogenic effects ,'also before and after correc
tive action . Thus, at least formally, the effect of the regula
tion can be measured in two different ways, one for cancer and
one for non-cancer effects.
Although those responsible for developing . this construct can
be congratulated on their achievement, another group of workers
might have made different specific . choices at various junctures
(for example, some other length of time than the 9 year exposure
period, or the 128 year timeframe) . However, it is doubtful if,
given the state of science, a more "rigorous" method with greater
possible . . at. the present
certainty of giving "right" answers
time .
is
As a construct, given both the state of science and the
impossibility of validating the calculations through any realis
tically achievable, actual measurements, the results reported
must be regarded as coming from an enormously complex, logically
consistent, but mainly hypothetical calculation -- as must the
results of most low exposure-level risk assessments . We do not
use the term "hypothetical"'in a negative sense ; rather, as
c refully devised as it is, the construct cannot give, at best,
.
than a rough estimate of the actual situation . Using these
x- ults in any kind of cost-benefit balancing must be done with
this ambiguity firmly in mind . We suggest that in the final RIA,
this point be made abundantly clear to avoid even the possibility
that the results will be treated as definitive by anyone.
There are some areas where we suggest possible improvements.
It would be very useful to include a way to estimate, even
crudely, the fraction of the population presumably exposed to
significant levels of contaminants (HI > 1) who actually manifest
adverse, non-cancer effects . Without some attempt at providing
such estimates for the most important cases, the cost/benefit
calculation remains seriously incomplete . By including such
estimates, the monetization of both cancer and non-cancer effects
avoidance benefits can be done in a formal sense, and that
portion of the cost/benefit calculation would at least be present
in the overall screening analysis.
The Committee suggests that there is a methodology avail
able to estimate the size of the population affected at a speci
fied level of effects . We suggest (and this
probably the most
significant revision we propose) a change in the basic approach
used for relating toxicant exposure and effects . The proposed
methodology can be expanded to include use of the benchmark dose
is
concept for determining adverse effects, including reproductive
and developmental toxicity, as described by Crump (1984) and
Kimmel and Gaylor (1988), and offered as a suggestion in the
E 's report (EPA, 1990) reviewing proposed revisions to the EPA
alines for Developmental Toxicity . From this benchmark dose,
a traight line can then be drawn to the dose level that represents a 100-fold margin-of-safety, plus any relevant uncertainty
factors, i .e ., the reference dose for developmental toxicity.
The reference dose is considered to be an exposure level unlikely
to cause human developmental effects . At . the beginning of the
low-dose extrapolation below the benchmark dose, the actual
probabilities of adverse effects may be close approximations of
the linear extrapolation . As the extrapolation progresses toward
the reference dose, the calculated probability of adverse effects
may exceed reality to some unknown extent due to the presumed
threshold phenomena operative for most developmental toxicants.
Use of this model would allow both pre- and post-remediation
quantification of reduction of risk in a manner markedly consis
tent with that for low-dose extrapolations for carcinogenesis.
This calculation could be used to monetize remediation efficacy.
The example given here has been for developmental toxicity, but
it is suggested that the report also attempt similar type calcu
lations for reproductive toxicity and other non-carcinogenic
toxicologic endpoint assays . (It should be noted that this method
does not lend itself to quantification of effect severity, e .g .,
cleft lip . verses auricular tags, but it does permit
quantification of classes of adverse effects .)
Addressing other areas, we note that the term "population
risk" (and related terms in connection with both cancer and noner adverse effects) is employed correctly vis-a-vis cancer,
i not with non-cancer effects . As discussed in more detail in
the Appendix, the population risk for cancer is correctly given
as an estimate of the number of people affected by cancer within
the exposed populations . In contrast, for non-cancer effects,
estimates of the number of people who are exposed at levels
exceeding the Hazard Index (HI > 1) do not necessarily coincide
with the numbers presumed affected ; indeed, the fraction of those
actually expected to be affected by non-cancer effects among the
numbers cited is likely to be very small, possibly zero . Also,
within the cancer/non-cancer dichotomy, consideration might be
given in some way to those autoimmune diseases such as lupus, and
certain genetic diseases whose causes may be related to environ
mental factors . The Agency should be more explicit in distin guishing cancer and other disease conditions with respect to risk
and "population at risk ." The SAB's Environmental Engineering
Committee, in its review of the RCRA MMSoils model (EPA-SAB-EEC94-002) had similar concerns about the EPA practice of using
different approaches to cancer and non-cancer risk assessment (as
well as on some misidentification of critical endpoints for some
common landfill constituents).
The benefits of abating disease are not monetized in the RIA
document . At some point, the decrease in cancer cases and the
decrease in numbers exposed to possible risks of non-cancer
adverse effects may need to be balanced, along with other bene
fits (either monetized or not) against the dollar costs of
c rective action . This is a difficult if not impossible aim to
eve in any objective way . Alternatively, using existing
m odologies, the results of the calculations could be used to
estimate direct monetary benefits of cancer avoidance (medical
costs avoided, lost productivity, etc . . . ) as well as indirect
costs (pain and suffering, damage to family relations, damage to
quality of life, etc . . . ) . However, a similar calculation cannot
be made for non-cancer effects based on the results of the
proposed screening method . (The SAB's Environmental Economics
Advisory Committee, as part of its review of the RCRA/RIA, is
considering the monetization of health benefits .) Another
consideration which might be taken into account in estimating
impact or monetizing effects is age of onset of a fatal and/or
disabling disease ; i .e ., cancer in an 80-year old will have
different societal and personal impacts than cancer in a 24-year
old person.
It would be useful to estimate for cancer, the number of
individuals "at risk" (already done for non-cancer effects) so as
to have comparable numbers of people at risk for cancer and noncancer effects . An estimate of the population exposed at levels
of exposure of concern for cancer (i .e ., levels leading to a
lifetime individual risk of 10-6 or greater) would yield such
estimates recognizing the fact that what is of concern is not
identically defined in the two cases.
Lastly, we urge increased emphasis on the collection and
management of good exposure data as a foundation for this, and
r efforts by the Agency . The importance of good exposure
u a can not be underestimated . From what we now understand,
concentrations predicted via the MMSOILS model (as reviewed by
the Environmental Engineering Committee) are subject to large
uncertainties, affecting exposure estimates significantly, and
thereby affecting the results of the risk assessment . Moreover,
the screening methodology will produce results which are completely useless and inaccurate if chemicals released from the
subject facilities are not included in the assessment . We note
that several chemicals which have caused problems around municipal landfills are not included in Table E-1 -- particularly
methane and hydrogen sulfide . These chemicals may well also be
generated at solid waste management units at RCRA facilities.
Although not generally considered a toxic problem, methane has
accumulated In houses and caused explosions ; this is indeed a
public health problem . Hydrogen sulfide is produced when sulfur
containing compounds such as gypsum are buried and become wet.
Hydrogen sulfide releases from several landfills have produced
documented health effects in people living in nearby communities.
Although the importance of exposure data is discussed in the
Appendix, we believe that it is such a basic and important
consideration that it needs to be highlighted in our comments
especially since some problematic chemicals have not been In
cluded in the assessment .
We look forward to receiving your response to our comments.
Sincerely,
Dr . Raymond C . Loehr, Chair
Dr . Arthur C . Upton, Chair
Environmental Health Committee
'ENCLOSURE
•
APPENDIX
S CIFIC COMMENTS : CHAPTER 7
-- Page 7-7 . last para . : The SAB/EEC, in its review of the
MMSOILS transport model as part of the RCRA/RIA review, appar
ently has reservations about the use of such a general model to
predict concentrations for a wide variety of different, specific
cases, along with other reservations about it . It would be
desirable to contact the SAB/EEC (and the liaison members) to
determine what bias or uncertainty this might introduce into the
risk assessment, what might be done instead, and under what
criteria MMSOILS might not be adequate, with suitable precau
tionary considerations, for a screening analysis.
-- Page 7-15, references 17 and 18 : It would be useful to
review the SAB's reviews of these documents, which took place
subsequent to the dates on them, to ensure that the comments
therein are adequately taken into account in this proposed
methodology ; perhaps the SAB's review should be added as a
reference.
-- Page 7-22, top Of the page : The selection of the nine-year
period needs more justification or explanation.
-- Page 7-23, last sentence of 1st para . : This is an inadequate
risk descriptor (See comments re Page 7-41, 2nd para . and further
rated comments as to why).
page 7-29, 1st paragraph : the word "may" appears twice;
delete the second occurrence .
-- Page 7-41 . 2nd para . : The statement, " . . . and 25,000,000
persons experiencing non-cancer health effects over the 128 year
modeling period . . . " is an example of an inaccurate interpreta
tion of the extent of the population whose exposure exceeds an HI
of 1 .0 . (The next sentence is another example as is the wording
in Exhibit 7-17) . The 25,000,000 people correspond to the
population exposed at levels yielding an HI of 1 .0 or higher, not
those " . . .experiencing non-cancer health effects . . . " . Exposure
at or above effect levels does not equal effect, only the proba
bility of effect . (Suppose a news story were to appear asserting
that EPA estimates that 25,000,000 people suffer from etc . . .1)
The number experiencing non-cancer health effects will actually
only be a fraction of the 25,000,000 -- 25, 250 or maybe as many
as 2,500 . The number of people exposed at an HI of 1 .0 or
greater is therefore not a measure (or a descriptor) of popula
tion risk : the number of such people who do actually experience
non-cancer health effects is (as in the case of cancer,population ._
risk is the number of people adversely affected) . The numbers of
people so exposed and the numbers actually experiencing noncancer health effects can, in fact, easily be in reverse order
for different cases so that the figure of 25,000,000 is, again,
not a measure of risk . This wording should be changed (as should
similar wording elsewhere in the text) to reflect this fact and
to emphasize it so that the user/reader will not be misled . As
mP tioned above, one of the matters the SAB's Environmental
omics Advisory Committee is addressing in their portion of
t RCRA/RIA review is the question of monetizing the health
risks so as to calculate the benefits obtained directly from
reducing the risks through regulation . Use of the 25,000,000
figure in such monetization under the impression that it measures
the number of people experiencing non-cancer health effects would
lead to grossly high dollar values.
-- Page 7-42, 1st para . : This paragraph is a most important
observation . It could imply that most of the cost and most of
the benefit of Corrective Action could be attributed to this one
site . It would be highly desirable to quote the site population
figures in this paragraph, compared to the relevant totals, and
to underline or highlight the paragraph to help ensure that its
importance for the rest of the analysis is not missed by the
reader.
-Page 7-42, 2nd para, . last two sentences : The last of the
two sentences corrects the statement of the first one ; I suggest
eliminating the first one and usinV the sense of the second one,
instead, to give a correct impression in the first place.
-- Page 7-42, section entitled " Number of Facilities . ..
"Exhibit 7-18 and all other sections of the material
under review where this comment applies : The cancer and noncancer population "risk" figures should not be combined in any
way and indicated to be somehow of the same type since they are
insically differently defined ; they should preferably be
sented separately . The cancer figures represent an estimate
(however uncertain) of the number of cancer cases whereas the
non-cancer figures represent the number of individuals who merely
might become non-cancer health effects cases . Any . kind of "sum" or
statement of "jointness" is meaningless unless very carefully
labelled . Stating the number or percentage of sites where the
number of cancer cases is expected to be insignificant (less than
one in a million, say) and in which the HI is less than one (and
therefore the number of people in which non-cancer health effects
might not occur in significant numbers if at all) is a
not-misleading statistic that might be helpful to the reader/user.
The text and Exhibits need to be modified to not mix the two
types of estimates in a misleading way . For example, in Exhibit
7-18, the wording No Risk might be changed to 'No' Risk and the
wording _% Risk might be changed to % Risk and Possibly At
Risk . Other examples abound ; for example, in Exhibit 7-24 (a
very useful Exhibit), even though the non-cancer ordinate has a
parenthetical statement defining what is really meant, the title
of the chart should be changed to CUMULATIVE NON-CANCER POPULA
TION POSSIBLY AT RISK and the title of the ordinate should be
changed accordingly.
Throughout the entire text the distinction between the two
types of population estimates should be carefully maintained : population
risk, in the case of cancer, and population at risk,in the case of
non-cancer effects . There are many such instances and I suggest the text be
c efully edited to find and change each and every one of them (for
pie, where the term "risk/effects" is used one might use, instead
^ sk/at risk," or "risk/concern" or "effects/possible effects," etc.
-Sections 7 .4 .1, 7 .4 .2 and 7 .4 .3 : These two sections are well
done and very welcome.
SPECIFIC COMMENTS : APPENDIX E
-- page 5, first paragraph : Too flat and sharp a distinction is
made between carcinogens and non-carcinogens on the basis of the
existence or nonexistence of thresholds . I would suggest the
following words : "It has been the custom to suppose that for
non-carcinogenic or systemic effects protective physiological
mechanisms exist that must be overcome before the adverse effect
is manifested . This may not, in fact, be universally true and
for the non-carcinogenic effects of lead, for example, it appears
not to be true . Similarly thresholds are thought to be absent . in
the case of cancer, i .e ., any level of exposure, however . small,
could result in cancer although there are a very few instances
now known in which this assumption may not hold . Nonetheless, in
this method, the existence of thresholds will be assumed as usual
in the case of non-carcinogens (except for lead, as discussed
below) and the lack of thresholds will be assumed for carcino
gens, also as usual ."
These words describe just what is being done, and the real
assumptions being made, for the user of the method.
110
page 5, second paragraph : The use of "benchmark" to describe
RfDs could be confused with the term "benchmark dose," which
quite different from and RfD . We suggest changing the subject
sentence to read "For many chemicals the RfD approach has been
used as a basis for regulatory decisions in relation to potential
impacts on human health ."
-- Page 27, first paragraph : This is an entirely sensible way to
handle the aggregation of risks from exposures to multiple
carcinogens . it should be mentioned here, however, that synergism
(and/or antagonism) is possible (referring to section 7 .4 .3 of
Chapter 7 where it is already mentioned).
-- Page 27, second paragraph : The second sentence, beginning
"Ratios of contaminant level . . . " should be added to as follows:
"
. non-carcinogenic health affect for exposure to a particular
contaminant . The hazard quotients for different contaminants,
even If they have equal RfDs, do not necessarily indicate which substance
poses the greater risk ." (the material in italics is the added mate
rial) - Also, regarding the HI, the SAB/EHC commented in consid
erable depth somewhat over a year ago on the limitations of the
use of the Hi in its review of the "Risk Assessment Guidelines
for Superfund Sites" . We suggest that the Agency needs to refer
to the SAB/EHC review, especially its Appendix, and to include
mention of the principal limitations of the use of the HI, here,
in Appendix E, since the HI is incorrectly used in identifying
p ulations as being significantly exposed to contaminants having
cancer adverse health effects.
-- page 27,last paragraph (E .3 .3) : Here, again, the comments
made on Chapter 7 need to be taken into account on the subject of
the difference between population risk and population at risk.
The first sentence of this paragraph, as well as further state
ments within it, need modification.
The problem is that the estimates of population risks
associated with carcinogens, despite their well known weaknesses,
at least purport to make some kind of estimate, using a model
which may or may not apply in a given case, of the number of
people affected (true population risk) as a result of exposure
whereas counting the number of people with HI > 1 for non-carcin
ogens estimates the number of people at exposure levels such that
they are . potentially affected but not necessarily affected (this
is not population risk) . Whereas the estimates for carcinogens
at least attempt to get at the number of people affected, the
method for non-carcinogens does not attempt to do so since it
includes those exposed and affected, plus those exposed but not
affected in its count . Unless some effort is made to reconcile
the two methods, the result of the non-carcinogen procedure is
inconsistent with that for carcinogens and the two results are
not comparable . Moreover, as mentioned above, the "popula
tion-at-risk" result for non-carcinogens does not measure risk
and should not be said or inferred to do so here or elsewhere in
the report : it estimates only one factor in characterizing risk,
ly, an estimate of whether an exposed population is exposed
t ossibly meaningful levels of the agents involved, but it
takes no account of the . probability of such a population actually
exhibiting adverse effects . This point needs to be made and
maintained clearly in the text to avoid any misunderstanding by
users if the method.
•
REFERENCES
Crump, K .S . 1984 . A new method for determining allowable daily
intakes . Fund . Appi . Toxicol . (4) :854-871.
E . 1990 . Review of proposed developmental guidelines . EPASAB-EHC-90-013.
Kimmel, C .A . and Gaylor, D . W . 1988 . Issues in qualitative and
quantitative risk analysis for developmental toxicology.
Risk Analysis (8) :15-20.
•
U .S . ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH COMMITTEE
RCRA RIA HEALTH BENEFITS REVIEW
CHAIRMAN
Dr . Arthur Upton, Santa Fe, NM
MEMBERS AND CONSULTANTS
Dr . William B . Bunn, Mobile Administrative Services, Company,
Inc ., Princeton, NJ
Dr . David Gaylor, Department of Health & Human Services, National
Center for Toxicological Research, Jefferson, AR
Dr . Rolf Hartung, School of Public Health, University of Michi
gan, Ann Arbor, MI
Dr . Rogene F . Henderson, Inhalation Toxicology Research Insti
tute, Albuquerque, NM
Dr . Marshall Johnson, Jefferson Medical College, Philadelphia, PA
Dr . Nancy K . Kim, New York Department of Health, Albany, NY
Dr . David Howe Wegman,University of Lowell, Lowell, MA
"Bernard Weiss, University of Rochester School of Medicine,
k ester, NY
DESIGNATED FEDERAL OFFICER
Mr . Samuel Rondberg, Environmental Health Committee, Science
Advisory Board_(1400F), U .S . Environmental Protection Agency,
STAFF SECRETARY
Ms . Mary L . Winston, Environmental Protection Agency, Science
Advisory Board (1400F), Washington, D .C . 20460
This report has been written as a part of the activities of
Science Advisory Board, a public advisory group providing
amural scientific information and advice to the Administrator
other officials of the Environmental Protection Agency . The
Board is structured to provide balanced, expert assessment of
scientific matters related to problems facing the Agency ._ This
report has not been reviewed for approval by the Agency and,
hence, the contents of this report , do not necessarily represent
the views and policies of the Environmental Protection Agency,
nor of other agencies in the Executive Branch of the Federal
government, nor does mention of trade names or commercial prod
ucts constitute a recommendation for use .
t
Distribution List
Administrator
D e% uty Administrator
stant Administrators
D uty Assistant Administrator for Research and Development
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Water
EPA Regional Administrators
EPA Laboratory Directors
EPA Headquarters Library
EPA-SAB-EPEC-LTR-94-004
November 5, 1993
rable Carol M . Browner
Alkni strator
401 M Street, S .W.
Subject : Review of the Environmental Monitoring and
Assessment Program's Draft Assessment Framework
Dear Ms . Browner:
On June 21-23, 1993, the Ecological Processes and Effects
Committee (EPEC) of the Science Advisory Board (SAB) met to
review the draft Assessment Framework (dated May 14, 1993) for
the Environmental Monito r ing and Assessment Program (EMAP) . EPEC
has reviewed strategic aspects of the EMAP Program since its
inception : evaluation of EMAP ecological indicators (EPA-SABEPEC-91-001), and the EMAP program plan (EPA-SAB-EPEC-91-011,
EPA-SAB-EPEC-LTR-92-008) . EMAP's Assessment Framework is a
critical component of the program since it provides the framework
for interpreting and evaluating EMAP results to answer policyrelevant questions, about ecological resources.
In Future Risk : Research Strategies for the 1990's (EPA-SABEC-88-040) and in Reducing Risk : Setting Priorities and
Strategies for Environmental Protection (EPA-SAB-EC-90-021), the
SAB recommended that EPA plan, implement, and sustain a long-term
storing and research program and report on the status and
'.nds in environmental quality . Several years ago, partially in
response to this recommendation, the Office of Research and
Development (ORD) initiated EMAP . EMAP's goal is to monitor and
assess the condition of the Nation's ecological resources and to
contribute to decisions on environmental protection and
management . Specifically, EMAP is intended to evaluate the
Nation's ecological resources in terms of status and trends,
geographic coverage and extent, and associations between stresses
and ecological condition.
In June 1993, EPEC was asked by ORD to review the draft EMAP
Assessment Framework with respect to the following questions:
a)
Is the proposed .assnssment approach consistent with
EMAP objectives?
b)
Is the EMAP Assessment Framework appropriate to guide
assessments in EMAP?
c)
Are the contributions and limitations of the proposed
EMAP assessment approach to the Ecological Risk
Assessment process clear?
We have organized our comments and recommendations under
these three broad questions.
_411Is
the proposed assessment approach consistent with EMAP
objectives?
a) Importance of Assessment
We continue to feel that a greater priority should be placed
on Assessment and Reporting within EMAP . While development of
the Assessment Framework and the creation of an assessment team
are positive steps, resources allocated to this component have
been limited (approximately $600,000 in Fiscal Years 1991 and
1992, and approximately $700,000 in Fiscal Year 1993).
Assessment and reporting, which entails the aggregation,
interpretation, and communication of data from different resource
types, locations, and scales, are the heart of EMAP and is the
process which turns monitoring data into information . We urge
the Agency to allocate a greater portion of the EMAP budget to
the Assessment and Reporting component of the program.
b) Role of Research in EMAP
We acknowledge that the integration and assessment component
of EMAP will probably require research to develop new techniques
to ensure that EMAP assessment goals can be met . However, we
feel that the research component of EMAP should be carefully
delineated and. separated from the data collection process . If
the program is to deliver timely assessments of resource
cn ditions, program managers will need to rely primarily on
blished indicators and analytical methods . Research into new
m hods and procedures at all steps of EMAP is unnecessary . EMAP
should take advantage of existing state-of-the-science methods
and approaches, recognize and identify the associated levels of
uncertainty, and proceed with the development and analysis of
monitoring data . Program managers should, however, retain sufficient
flexibility to incorporate new monitoring methods and indicators that
may be developed in the future.
Nonetheless, research on methods for conducting regional
assessments will be a major contribution from the EMAP Assessment
and should be mentioned under Assessment Tools and Guidelines in
the Assessment Framework.
c) Stressor Monitoring
Although the primary emphasis of EMAP's monitoring effort
should be on effects, we agree with the incorporation of some
stressor monitoring into the program . The EMAP Assessment
Framework should more explicitly indicate the approach that will
be used to incorporate stressor information into the assessment
process . The relation of resource characteristics to potential
stress is an important aspect of EMAP that can help to explain
observed changes in ecological resources . Therefore, inclusion
of stress indicators in the database is important and valuable.
However, these data should be largely derived from other non-EMAP
sources, where available.
In cases where stressor information is deficient or none stent, carefully selected indicators of stress should be
monitored by EMAP . In the case of forests, for example, it may
be appropriate for EMAP to include some wet and dry deposition
monitoring for atmospheric contaminants . Forest floors can
provide extended term records of persistent chemicals such as
heavy metals and chlorinated organic compounds . In addition,
EMAP monitoring of rural/forest ozone may be the only means to
obtain remote ozone exposure values.
2 . Is the EMAP Assessment Framework appropriate to guide
assessments?
Overall, the draft EMAP Assessment Framework clearly
communicates the directions of the EMAP program and provides an
appropriate mechanism for information management and evaluation.
We commend the authors for the critical thinking that is evident
in the document and for the progress this represents . We
recommend, however, that the Agency revise the document to
address the following issues:
a) Diagnosis : The Great Lakes ExampleThe Assessment Framework indicates that EMAP will utilize
"weight of evidence" and "process of elimination" approaches to
identify the most likely associations between effects and causal
a eats . The weight of evidence criteria listed in Table 6 of the
ment are appropriate and well-tested factors . Careful
á lication of these criteria will allow consideration of a wide
array of data analyses, both parametric and non-parametric, when
characterizing temporal and spatial associations . However, the
results from a process of elimination are highly dependent on the
scale at which temporal and/or spatial associations are sought.
For example, the Assessment Framework includes a case study where
the process of elimination is used to narrow the list of factors
responsible for the widespread biotic changes in the Great Lakes
over the last four decades . The choice of scale (the entire
Great Lakes system), and the fact that toxic chemicals are
broadly distributed across all six of the Great Lakes, led to the
conclusion thatimpacts of toxic chemicals should be a dominant
factor in the observed degradation of the biotic communities.
However, this spatial association analysis ' does not consider
concentration, exposure, effects, etc.
In fact, we know from direct observation that the ecological
impacts to the Great Lakes were caused by different factors in
different lakes, e .g . : demise of the Atlantic salmon in Lake
Ontario was caused by habitat destruction ; the perturbation of
Lake Erie was due to eutrophication caused by phosphorus
loadings ; and the declines of the fish stocks in Lakes Huron,
Michigan and Superior were due to overfishing and introduction of
exotic species (e .g ., sea lamprey and alewives) . None of these
events was caused by the impacts of xenobiotic chemicals.
The lesson learned from this example is that temporal and
tial associations should be considered preliminary hypotheses
o causal relationships . Empirical validation, through
literature surveys, professional interviews, and historical case
studies, should be established before further analyses and/or
final conclusions are drawn . Rigorous application of the
criteria for inferring causality (particularly criteria four
through eight in Table 6 of the Framework) would have drastically
modified the conclusions presented in the Great Lakes case study.
Another concern with the Great Lakes assessment is that
different ecological resources (e .g ., fish, mammals, and birds)
were assessed in relation to a common set of stressors . This
approach ignores the fact that different ecological resources can
be (are) at risk due to very different kinds of stresses.
b) Nominal vs . Subnominal Condition
The draft EMAP Assessment Framework discusses classification
of resource condition into nominal and subnominal categories (pp
33-34) . This section of the document should be revised to
reflect the role of both societal values and ecological
variability in this classification . For example, the definition
of nominal vs . subnominal condition is based on a decision as to
the desired state for ecological resources . The Assessment
Framework should describe how the definition of
nominal/subnominal conditions in EMAP relates to similar
decisions under other Agency programs (e .g ., definition of
•erence condition under the Biocriteria Program).
In addition, the Framework should discuss the effect of
natural variability on the definition of nominal/subnominal
conditions . The terms "nominal condition" and "subnominal
condition", as defined in the draft Framework, do not necessarily
equate with "natural" and "anthropogenically altered" conditions,
respectively . In other words, many natural conditions can result
in-uninhabitable, or "subnominal", environments . Such
environments are not undesirable, but rather are an integral part
of the natural world.
Finally, statistical methods that have been developed to
estimate expected values are not necessarily applicable for
estimating the extreme values used to define subnominal
conditions of EMAP indicators . The Assessment Framework should
reference statistical methods (e .g ., extreme event analysis)
designed for this purpose.
c) Consideration of Uncertainty
We feel strongly that the Assessment Framework should
include a discussion of the sources and nature of uncertainties
inherent in EMAP assessments . A critical component of ecological
•
risk assessment that differentiates this activity from
traditional assessment is the explicit consideration of
uncertainties . These uncertainties are propagated through the
essment towards an ultimate expression of risk . Assumptions
uncertainty issues will affect the accuracy of predictions
a., correlations made in all phases of EMAP, and will ultimately
have a major influence on the ability of the program to achieve
its objectives . Readers, user groups, and researchers should all
be made aware of the limitations inherent in the process . An
early and full discussion of these issues should be included in
future drafts of the Framework.
d) Integration Across Resource Groups
We agree that the monitoring and assessment should be
applied across the basic resource groups (agroecosystems, arid
ecosystems, etc .), as well as across landscapes . (Note, however,
that the preferred term for the broad scale group is "landscapes"
rather than "landscape ecology," as contained in Figure 5 of the
draft Framework .) In keeping with this emphasis, we urge that
the integration aspects of EMAP assessment be given sufficient
visibility and resources as a . distinct task . There are crosscutting issues and integration methodologies . that are of
sufficient importance to warrant the focus of a specific unit
within EMAP . Currently, much of the integration and assessment
activity is occurring within the individual resource groups ., We
recommend that EMAP establish a centralized group, including
representatives from each resource group, with the
mission of integration and assessment.
3 . Ís the relation between the proposed EMAP Assessment Approach
410 EPA's Ecological Risk Assessment Framework clear?
EMAP is an example of the application of the Framework for
Ecological Risk Assessment (Ecorisk Framework, EPA/630/R-92/001)
at regional and national scales . As such, the EMAP Assessment
Framework should incorporate the terminology and diagrams used in
the Ecorisk Framework, rather than portraying the EMAP assessment
approach as an - alternative to the Ecorisk Framework . For
example, the steps in EMAP assessments (assessment questions,
data analysis, and interpretation and communication) correspond
directly to the components of ecorisk assessment (problem
formulation, analysis and risk characterization), the selection
of nominal/subnominal conditions corresponds to the selection of
endpoints, etc . Since the Ecorisk Framework will lead to the
over-arching Ecological Risk Assessment Guidelines, all Agency
programs should adopt the Ecorisk Framework nomenclature when
possible . The use of different terminology in the EMAP
Assessment Framework is confusing and unnecessary, and should be
corrected in future drafts.
In order to further clarify the relationship between the
EMAP Assessment Framework and the Ecorisk Framework, we recommend
the following changes to the Assessment Framework :
a)
Delete references to the Ecorisk Framework as being
predictive rather than retrospective . In fact, the
Ecorisk Framework is designed for both predictive and
retrospective ecological risk assessments . Thus,
EMAP's emphasis on retrospective assessment fits within
the Ecorisk Framework.
b)
Indicate that EMAP assessments are not external to the
ecorisk assessment process, and include all phases of
ecorisk assessment . This point might best be made by
revising Figure 4 in the Assessment Framework, and
substituting Ecorisk Framework terminology for that
used in Figures 6, 7, 10 and 14 of the Assessment
Framework.
•
These changes are more than cosmetic, for they emphasize the
relation between the two efforts .
Final Comments
We appreciate the opportunity to review the draft EMAP
Assessment Framework . As the conceptual guide to assessments
in EMAP, we feel the Framework document is important and
w 1-conceived . We understand that work is now underway to
develop an EMAP Assessment Methods Manual . The development of
EMAP assessment tools and guidelines will provide an important
opportunity to couple the EMAP Assessment Framework with other
related EPA efforts (e .g ., biocriteria, bioindicators, ecorisk
issues, and habitat characterization) which are focusing on
operational techniques . Developments from these related programs
must be incorporated into the EMAP assessment guidelines, either
directly or by reference, to provide a consistent and compatible
approach to ecological assessment for the Agency . We hope to
have an opportunity to review the EMAP Assessment Methods Manual
which is being developed, and we look forward to your response to
the issues raised in this letter.
Sincerely,
Dr . Raymond C . Loehr, Chair
Executive Committee
•
Dr . Kenneth L . Dickson, Chair
Ecological Processes and
Effects Committee
U .S . ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
ECOLOGICAL PROCESSES AND EFFECTS COMMITTEE
ROSTER
June 21-23, 1993
CHAIR
Dr . Kenneth L . Dickson, Institute of Applied Sciences,
University of North Texas, Denton, Texas
MEMBERS/CONSULTANTS
Dr . Steven M . . Bartell, SENES Oak Ridge, Inc ., Center for Risk
Analysis, Oak Ridge, Tennessee
Dr . Edwin L . Cooper, Department of Anatomy and Cell Biology,
School of Medicine, UCLA, Los Angeles, California
Dr . William E . Cooper, Zoology Department, Michigan State
University, East Lansing, Michigan
Dr . Virginia Dale, Environmental Sciences Division, Oak Ridge
National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee
•
Dr . Mark A . Harwell, Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric
Science, University of Miami, Miami, Florida
Robert J . Huggett, Virginia Institute of Marine Science,
lege of William and Mary, Gloucester Point, Virginia
Dr . Alan W . Maki, Exxon Company, USA, Houston, Texas
Dr . Frederic K . Pfaender, Institute for Environmental Studies,
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
Dr . Anne McElroy, SUNY at Stoney Brook, Stoney Brook, New York
Dr . William H . Smith, Professor of Forest Biology, School of
Forestry and Environmental Studies, Yale University, New Haven,
Connecticut
Dr . Terry F . Young, Environmental Defense Fund, Oakland,
California
SCIENCE ADVISORY BOARD STAFF
Ms . Stephanie Sanzone, Designated Federal Officer, Science
Advisory Board (1400F), U .S . EPA, 401 M Street, S .W ., Washington,
DC 20460
Mrs . Marcia K . Jolly, Staff Secretary, Science Advisory Board
(1400F), U .S . EPA, 401 M Street, S .W ., Washington, DC 20460
This report has been written as part of the activities of
Science Advisory Board, a public advisory group providing
amural scientific information and advice to the Administrator
á.:d other officials of the Environmental Protection Agency . The
Board is structured to provide balanced, expert assessment of
scientific matters related to problems facing the Agency . This
report has not been reviewed for approval by the Agency and,
hence, the contents of this report do not necessarily represent
the views and policies of the Environmental Protection Agency,
nor of other agencies in the Executive Branch of the Federal
government, nor does mention of trade names or commercial
products constitute a recommendation for use.
DISTRIBUTION LIST
Administrator
Deputy Administrator
Assistant Administrators
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Research and Development
EPA Regional Administrators
EPA Laboratory Directors
•
•
CERCLA Federal Agency Hazardous Waste Compliance Docket Update #
DATE : February 18, 1993
••LY TO
11_N OF : EH-222
SUBJECT : CERCLA Federal Agency Hazardous Waste Compliance Docket Update # 7
TO : Distribution
The Federal Agency Hazardous Waste Compliance Docket (Docket), required by
section 120(c) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act (CERCLA) as amended by the Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act (SARA) was updated for the seventh time in the Federal
Register (FR 7298) published on February 5, 1993.
Facilities that appear on the Docket update are relegated to one of four
categories.
Those categories are New Additions, Deletions, Corrections (to previously
listed site information), and Site Evaluation Accomplished.
Site Evaluation Accomplished is a term used to identify facilities on the
Docket that have been evaluated and determined not to be appropriate for
National Priorities List_(NPL) listing at this time . However, a facility's
SEA status may be subject to chance in the future based on new site
information or changing EPA policies.
The following list identifies DOE facilities that appear in the final
lished version of the Federal Agency Hazardous Waste Compliance Docket
Ilkh update) :
(1) Added to the Docket
o Laboratory for Energy-Health Research (LEHR)
*
o Sandia National Laboratories-Kauai Test Facility (will be delisted in
Update 8)
o Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory
o Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP)
*
o Yucca Mountain Site Characterization Project
o West Valley Demonstration Project
o Perry Nuclear Power Plant
o National Institute for Petroleum and Energy Research
*
o Western Area Power Administration (WAPA)-Pierre Hydroelectric Plant
o Bonneville Power Administration (BPA)-Celilo Converter Station
o BPA-Oregon City
o BPA-Bake Oven Substation
o BPA Cosmopolis
o BPA-Monroe
o BPA-Port Angeles
*DOE is discussing with EPA Regional Offices the appropriateness of the
CERCLA Docket listing of these facilities .
(2) Deletions
o Site D-11 Power Plant (Paducah, KY)
Corrections
o Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory - CERCLA 103a reporting
mechanism added
o Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory - Windsor Site - CERCLA 103a reporting
mechanism added
o Weldon Springs Ordnance Works - Name change to Weldon Springs
Quarry/Plant/Pits
o Ross Aviation, Inc - RCRA reporting mechanism added
o Tonapah Test Range (Sandia National Laboratory) - RCRA reporting
mechanism added
o Fernald Environmental Management Project - Name change from Feed
Material Production Center
o Bettis Atomic Power Laboratory - CERCLA 103c reporting mechanism
added
o Pittsburgh Energy'Technology Engineering Center (PETC) - CERCLA 103c
reporting mechanism added
o Columbia Basin Project AEC Zone 2,4-D Site - Address added
(4) Site Evaluation Accomplished
o Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory
o Stanford Linear Accelerator
o Grand Junction Project Office
o Solar Energy Research Institute
o WAPA-Power Operations
o WAPA-Hinton
o WAPA Casper Field
o Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory-Windsor Site
o Pinellas Plant
o Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
411 o Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant
o Strategic Petroleum Oil Reserves-Weeks Island
o Strategic Petroleum Oil Reserves-West Hackberry Site
o Gasbuggy
o Lovelace Inhalation Toxicology Research Institute
o Tonapah Test .Range (Sandia National Laboratory)
o Colonie Interim Storage Site
Bettis Atomic Power Laboratory
Federal facilities added to the Docket are required to submit a preliminary
assessment (PA) to the EPA within 18 months of the Federal Register
publication of the Docket update in which the listing appears . A site
inspection (SI) may also be required if additional information is needed by
the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to generate a hazard ranking system
(HRS) score for National Priorities List (NPL) evaluation.
The Docket Coordinator in the appropriate EPA Regional Office (Attachment)
should be contacted for information concerning the format and content of PA
submissions . It is necessary to work with the Docket Coordinator in the
appropriate EPA Regional Office to ensure that you fulfill all requirements
for the PA.
The 7th Docket update also includes several Privately Owned, Government
•
Operated (POGO) facilities which had been previously excluded by EPA for
Docket listing, including one DOE facility . DOE will discuss problems
related to potential future listing of DOE POGOs with EPA prior to the next
D cket update.
you have any questions concerning this memorandum or the Docket in
general, please call Juliet Berling of my staff at (202) 586-8144.
Kathleen I . Taimi
Director
Office of Environmental Compliance
Attachment : "EPA Regional Docket Coordinators, May 1992"
•
•
Summary of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Federal
DATE : June 15, 1992
NN YOFTO:
P,~
EH-22
SUBJECT : . Summary of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Federal
Agency Environmental Roundtable, May 21, 1992
TO : Distribution
For your information, a summary of the May 21, 1992, Federal Agency
Environmental Roundtable is provided below.
o EPA Environmental Auditing Guidelines and Protocols . EPA presented an
overview of their Environmental Auditing Policy for Federal Agencies.
All agencies to institute auditing programs and technical assistance is
available from EPA to help design auditing programs [sic] . Future
auditing initiatives include Pollution Prevention Opportunity
Assessments . These assessments focus on production and other waste
sources and the further reduction of wastes and emissions.
o U .S . Army Environmental Compliance Assessment System (ECAS) . The U .S.
Army Environmental Office presented a summary of the ECAS program.
This program assesses the environmental compliance status at military
installations in the continental U .S . and overseas . The program was
patterned after a U .S . Air Force program and similar initiatives have
begun with the U .S . Navy and Marines.
• DOE Environmental Auditing Program . The Office of Environmental Audit
presented an overview of the DOE Audit program . The presentation
discussed the Tiger Teams as well as the Comprehensive Baseline
Environmental Audits, Line Program Environmental Management Audits,
Re-Audit and Special Audits . The level of effort both in manpower and
funding required for the Tiger Team program was discussed as well as
the status of the audits through FY93.
Attached are the meeting agenda, an index of Roundtable handouts, and
copies of selected handouts . The selected handouts included in this
package are listed below ; copies of the remaining handouts are on file in
EH-22.
- Environmental Fact Sheet, May, 1992, Effective Date for Hazardous
Debris Treatment Standard Extended for One Year.
EPA Environmental Auditing Activities, Moving to Pollution Prevention
Audits in the 1990's.
- Environmental Fact Sheet, May, 1992, No Hazardous Waste Listing for
Used Oil that is Being Disposed.
If you have any additional questions about the Roundtable meeting or would
like copies of the handouts which are not attached, please contact Melanie
Pearson, EH-221, on (202) 586-0939 .
Kathleen I . Taimi
Director
Attachments : 1) EPA Roundtable meeting agenda (5-21-92) 2) Copies of
selected Roundtable handouts
•
•
The Hazardous Waste Practice
FACT SHEET
•
Facts:
THE HAZARDOUS WASTE PRACTICE:
TECHNICAL AND LEGAL ENVIRONMENT 1991
o
"The Hazardous Waste Practice : Technical and Legal Environment 1991" is
a publication by the Hazardous Waste Action Coalition (HWAC), an
association of engineering and science firms engaged in hazardous waste
management and consulting (HWAC, 1015 Fifteenth St . NW, Washington, DC
20005, (202) 347-7474).
o
This HWAC report describes the complexities and uncertainties which
hazardous waste consultants must address when dealing with hazardous
waste sites.
Background:
The U .S . Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) hazardous waste
programs are based primarily on two federal statutes : the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), as amended by the 1984 Hazardous
and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) ; and the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA or Superfund), as
amended by the 1986 Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act
(SARA) . These statutes, and their implementing regulations, are so
complex that several significant aspects of a hazardous waste problem
can be subject to more than one authority . Because of this,
consultants are frequently unable to provide clients with clear
statements of what the regulations require, but instead can only
• provide an outline of the various interpretations that the regulatory
agencies may apply . Technologies for assessing the level and location
of contamination and for remediating the site have a very limited base
of experience, which increases the uncertainty and difficulty involved
in hazardous waste cleanup.
Sensitive Issues:
HWAC makes the following recommendations:
o
Current laws and regulations must be changed to ensure that
procedures and treatment standards applicable to currently
generated waste of predictable composition are not applied as
cleanup goals to remediation of hazardous waste sites.
o
EPA should treat guidance documents , as guidance rather than standards
of practice, and should develop a system to organize, disseminate and
update its guidance to eliminate redundancy and potential conflicting
information.
o
Clients should provide adequate indemnity or other liability cost
reimbursement mechanisms to contractors and consultants in order to
improve the current lack of liability insurance and surety bonds.
o
Contracts should contain meaningful risk-sharing provisions' that
recognize that the ultimate responsibility and liability should rest
with the party responsible for the original deposition of waste at the
site.
o• EPA should encourage demonstration and application of innovative
technologies by providing financial support to technology developers and
limiting liability associated with technology development and use.
o
Preemptive federal legislation should establish negligence, as opposed
to strict or joint and several liability, as the standard by which both
federal and state courts judge the liability of hazardous waste
consultants.
o
Standard guidance documents reflect an excessively conservative approach
leading to inappropriate and unachievable risk-based cleanup goals . The
success of cleanup should be judged by its relative reduction in risk
and cost effectiveness rather than attainment of specified risk-based
residual concentration limits.
This fact sheet reflects the views, conclusions, and recommendations of the
report's authors and does not necessarily represent the position of the
Department of Energy (DOE).
Office of Environmental Guidance, RCRA/CERCLA Division, EH-231, FTS : 896-2481
(11/27/91)
•
Summary of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
DATE : December 6, 1991
4,LY
N TO
A N OF : EH-22
SUBJECT : Summary of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Federal Agency
Roundtable, November 21, 1991
TO : Distribution
For your information, a summary of the November 21, 1991, Federal Agency
Environmental Roundtable meeting is provided . A summary of the presentations
is provided below.
o
EPA Hazardous Waste/Superfund Research . EPA's Office of Research and
Development (ORD) presented an overview of its research activities.
ORD's research activities are tied directly to EPA needs and range from
assessment of hazardous waste treatment technology in support of
rulemaking under RCRA land disposal restrictions to testing of
remediation technologies in support of EPA cleanups under Superfund.
ORD provides highlights of its activities in "Tech-Trends," available
from the Center for Environmental Research Information (513 569-7391).
The DOE Five-Year Plan . DOE presented an overview of the Five-Year Plan
(FYP) for Environmental Restoration and Waste Management . DOE
highlighted this year's "institutionalization" of the FYP and the use
of fiscally constrained and unconstrained planning cases . Next year's
plan will focus on developing a comprehensive understanding of legal
• drivers for activities, instituting rigorous cost control and
validation measures, and measuring progress against milestones.
o
o
The Federal Facility Compliance Act of 1991 . EPA discussed the status
and contents of the Federal Facility Compliance Act . Some form of the
bill has now passed both houses of Congress ; the Senate version
(attached), passed on October 24, 1991, contains amendments related to
those requested by the Administration . Of particular concern in the bill
is the Sec . 102, which would require EPA to inspect every Federal
Facility annually, and the waiver of sovereign immunity in Sec . 103(4),
which would allow States to assess penalties . Sec . 105 of the bill
permits storage of mixed waste until 1993, which EPA can extend under
certain circumstances up to 1997, where treatment technologies or
sufficient capacity do not exist . The bill will now go to joint
committee, and an agreed-upon version is not expected until February
1992.
Attached are the meeting agenda, an index of roundtable handouts, and copies
of selected handouts . The selected handouts included in this package are
listed below ; copies of the remaining handouts are on file in EH-22.
o
Draft "Federal Facility Compliance Act," Senate version, October 24,
1991 .
o
•
o
"Update on Implementation of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990," EPA '
Factsheet, June 1991.
"EPA Lists Communities Exceeding Air Quality Standards," EPA
Environmental News, October 30, 1991.
o
"New Form R Reporting Requirement," EPA Pollution Prevention Fact
Sheet, August 1991.
o
"EPA's 33/50 Program," EPA Pollution Prevention Fact Sheet, August
1991.
o
"Statement of William Reilly, Administrator of EPA before the
Subcommittee on Environmental Protection, U .S . Senate," concerning
RCRA reauthorization, September 17, 1991.
If you have questions about the roundtable meeting or would like copies of the
non-attached handouts, please call Marilyn Stone, EH-221 on (202) 586-5942 or
FTS 896-5942 .
Kathleen I . Taimi
Director
A chments :
1) Meeting Agenda 2) Index of Roundtable Handouts 3) Copies of
Selected Handouts
Groundwater Remediation Considerations in Environmental
DATE : August 11, 1992
IlkNY OFTO: EH-231
SUBJECT : Groundwater Remediation Considerations in Environmental
Restoration Activities
TO : Distribution
The purpose of this memorandum is to provide Department of Energy (DOE)
Program Offices and Field Organizations with information on an
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) directive issued to clarify and
expand the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER) policy
concerning remediation of contaminated groundwater, particularly with
regard to nonaqueous phase liquid (NAPL) contaminants . [1] OSWER Directive
No . 9283 .1-06, dated May 27, 1992, subject : Considerations in Ground-Water
Remediation at Superfund Sites and RCRA Facilities -- Update (copy
attached) . This memorandum also transmits a related EPA . Fact Sheet on
"Estimating Potential for Occurrence of DNAPL at Superfund Sites ."
[2] OSWER Publication 9355 .4-07FS, dated January 1992, subject : Estimating
the Occurrence of DNAPL at Superfund Sites (copy attached) . The EPA OSWER
oversees environmental restoration and waste management programs under a
number of authorities including CERCLA and RCRA, and through the issuance
of the referenced directive and fact sheet, is promoting a consistent
approach to groundwater remediation-involving NAPL contamination.
Groundwater contamination is viewed by EPA as one of the most prevalent and
the CERCLA response
challenging probl ems at hazardous waste sites in
and RCRA orrect i cue action programs.
both
c
AIONAPL" contaminant is defined as the undissolved liquid phase of a
compound, such as trichioroethylene . NAPL contaminants entering the
sub-surface may penetrate to significant depths . As NAPL contaminants move
c , a portion becomes t apped in soil poYe spaces (or
through
sub- u
rock fractures) and a portion
continue
migrate . "Free phase NAPL"
the migrating portion which can flow into a well . "Residual NAPL" is
that portion trapped in pore spaces by capillary force, which can not
generally flow into ú well or migrate as a separate phase . In the
unsaturated zone (sub-surface zone above the water table), NAPLs may
release vapor phase organic contaminants to soil pore spaces and eventually
di . solved contaminants to infiltrating waters . In the saturated zone, l
will
Vlfill
NAPLs that are
aT
less 1than
dense hill water (i .e ., light NAPLs or TN P
tend to float on the water table while those more dense than water (DNAPLs)
sink downward, through tha groundwater.
the
s
rfa
r
e
may
to
~
7
.
n
i .:l4 Clr L'J .j
Thee VbJ
C IT
WER directive updates, reiterates, and clarifies technical
.aúa.Luo
ro prier EPA
and .LTy
expands
expands
d ~ upon them
~1 a~
m a. address
recommendations
from
PA directives
a ; recta ♦ en
groundwater remediation problems associ_atL ed with
NAPLs.
In gener al, the
- .jLr :-t
L influence on L}.
_-_._the. _.
presence ofr NAPLs . will L-_.
have_ a sigii
time frame
required or the likelihood of achieving cleanup standards, and should be
evaluated when selecting appropriate remedial actions . EPA's directive
establishes as Agency policy the importance of undertaking the following
activities : (i ) addressing the pí esenee aliu i.Lí!_t:i e of NA N, contamination
Th
t
__ -Z
•
during the site characterization phase of environmental restoration
activities ; (2) taking early or interim action to prevent/minimize further
migration of contaminants ; and (3) documenting early or interim actions to
address NAPL contamination.
Zi directive provides specific recommendations for the investigation and
remediation of contaminated groundwater for both CERCLA response and RCRA
corrective action sites . These recommendations are presented for several
phases of the cleanup including investigation, early or interim action, and
final remedy implementation phases . To prevent/minimize further mig rat ion
of contaminants as early as possible, and before the final remedy is
selected , the OS ER directive emphasizes the importance of taking early or
interim action and documenting these actions as appropriate . EPA defines
"early" r relative
e l
to the timing of an action with respect to other site
response actions (i .e ., early removal and/or early . remedial actions) . At
CERCLA sites, early actions may include or be as pects of removal action
i
Lar m
1a .-i i.
en`
(early) fine? remedy
EPA defines CERCLA
interim e_. .r . . .n
._e inolLH
rineLi .Til eet ;ees t . .e ... are initial ed pr i or ._oi
final remedy selection which should
consistent with and
not_ preclude
dy . . be
- -_i1
te `
implementation of f the final
=n_, remedy.
For RCRA
R~R1 corrective
t~l= v ~
a
~ _,.
._
2,
..,
..;
_
i" ---_ measures can
îi Lú has defined
used - early actions_
interim measures as these required to mitigate or elimieste re7ee i es,
or to prevent further degradation of the medium which may occur if
corrective action is not initiated expeditiously.
raT
1
a
t a
tar-
a e-- a
If you have any questions concerning the attached OSWER directive and
~ 1 ra~- -1h a+.,
i¡ .L•lii~i~ti
related Fact Sheet on groundwater r L-e tlCtllae,̀iíJii considerations
at CERCLA
response
and
RCRA
corrective
action
sites,
please
contact
Katherine
Nakata
rni
~. .
ofr my staffc atL.. (202) 566-0801
TL -
•
~i . i
Thomas T . Ti tctlle :anl
Director, RCRA/CERCLA Division
Attachments : 1) EPA OSWER Directive, Subject - Considerations in
Ground -Water Remediation at Superfund Sites and RCRA Facilities -- Update
.. EPA ~l :i 3tiT,R. Feet net
Estimating Potential for Occurrence of DNAPL at
'
L~ ~
- f..Ü..:sü;ieTí
iii3J r~:i~i i_~~
Metadata Record ::
mi_tle : REVIEW OF THE CONTINGENT VALUATION METHOD FOR THE
POSED RIA FOR RCRA CORRECTIVE ACTION RULE BY THE ENVIRONMENTAL
NOMICS ADVISORY COMMITTEE
ID Number : EPA-SAB-EEAC-94-001
Abstract:
The EEAC addressed the design, conduct, and results of the
contingent valuation study (undertaken for the EPA Office of
Solid Waste by Drs . McClelland, Schulze, et al .), focusing on a
Charge organized around five major questions : a) the survey
respondents' understanding of groundwater resources ; b) selection
of the best method for estimating non-use values from the survey
responses ; c) use of the Box-Cox econometric procedure to address
large bids ; d) the problems of embedding, non-bids, and scenario
rejection ; and e) the applicability of the valuations obtained in
this study as a basis for EPA to determine the non-use values of
groundwater.
Purpose : To give information and advice to the EPA and administrator.
Originator : Environmental Economics Advisory Committtee of the EPA's Science
Advisory Board
Access Constraints : None
Publication Date : November, 1993
ilability:
Distributor : The Science Advisory Board
Order Process : Contact Lori Gross at the Science Advisory Board.
Mail : USEPA,
401 M Street, SW
Mail Code 1400
Fax : 202-260-1889
EMail : gross .lori@epamail .epa .gov
Technical Prerequisites : None
o
Oil Pollution Act of 1990
DATE : February 12, 1992
RFPLY TO
OF : EH-232
410N
SUBJECT : Oil Pollution Act of 1990
TO : Distribution
Attached for your information is a copy of an Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) Quick Reference Fact Sheet on the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA) . The
fact sheet provides an overview of the various provisions of the OPA . The OPA
is a comprehensive statute that amends section 311 of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act (the Clean Water Act) and is designed to expand oil
spill prevention, preparedness, and response capabilities of the Federal
government and industry . The Act establishes a new liability and
compensation regime for oil pollution incidents in the aquatic environment
and provides the resources necessary for the removal of discharged oil.
If you have any questions regarding the OPA, please contact Lois Thompson of
my staff at FTS 896-9581 or (202) 586-9581.
Andrew Wallo, III
Director
Air, Water, and Radiation Division
Attachment : EPA Quick Reference Fact Sheet - Overview of the Oil Pollution
of 1990
dance by owners and operators of onshore,
non-transportation related facilities that handle oil to meet the Clean Water
Act, Section 311(j)(5) requirement for facility response plans . EPA
particularly requests comments on two alternative approaches for identifying
facilities subject to response plan requirements . Also, EPA proposes to
allow six months from the time of discovery or notification that a facility
could cause "substantial harm" to prepare and submit a plan . This is based
on EPA's interpretation that the OPA does not specifically address events
occurring after the statutory deadlines and leaves implementation of the
facility response plan requirement with regard to facilities identified after
the statutory deadline of February 18, 1993, to the discretion of EPA . DOE
facilities that have determined that the statutory requirements apply to
their operations should submit a facility response plan as soon as possible
if they have not already done so.
DOE facilities and program offices are requested to review the proposed rule
and provide comments to this office by April 5, 1993 . Questions regarding
this information should be addressed to Lois Thompson of my staff at
(202) 586-9581 ; Fax : (202) 586-3915.
•
Director
Director
Attachments : 1) EPA NPRM - "Oil Pollution Prevention ; Non-TransportationRelated Onshore Facilities" (2-17-93, 58 FR 8824) 2) EPA Fact Sheet Facility Response Plans
** UNCED 92-- Global Electronic Network **
** Association for Progressive Communications (APC) **
** AlterNex Node-- conference en .unced .documents'**
=___=
name :
Llload date :
From :
Subject :
File size :
TOP152
1 :48 pm Aug 2, 1991
igc :unced
PC/46 Environment & Development (39kB)
38 .4 Kbytes
PC/46 ENVIRONMENT & DEVELOPMENT
Distr.
GENERAL
A/CONF .151/PC/46
19 July 1991
Original : ENGLISH
PREPARATORY COMMITTEE FOR THE UNITED NATIONS
CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT
Third session
Geneva, 12 August - 4 September 1991
Plenary Session
Item 2 c of the provisional agenda
CROSS-SECTORAL ISSUES
The relationship between demographic trends
economic growth, unsustainable consumption patterns
and environmental degradation
Report of the Secretary-General of the Conference
I.
INTRODUCTION
The Preparatory Committee, at its second substantive session, in its
1.
decision 2/6 requested the Secretary-General of the Conference to continue to
study the interrelationship between environment and development, taking into
account decision 1/25 of the Committee at its first session, which identified
main elements of this relationship . The present report was prepared in
response to this decision.
In preparing this report the UNCED Secretariat utilized contributions
2.
commissioned from the Ecological Systems Analysis Group, of Argentina
Pontificia Universidade Catolica de Rio de Janeiro, of Brazil, the
Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research of India, and the Institute
of World Economy and International Relations of the USSR Academy of Sciences .
A study was contributed_ by the World Resources Institute, of the United
States . Many other sources of information were also consulted.
BACKGROUND
•
The3.pressure of human activities impinges on the environment essentially
through the use that humans make of the environment for meeting their
consumption needs . These demands on the environment are function of
per capita consumption standards and the number of people . These in turn are
determined by value systems and other socio-cultural factors, and by income
levels and other economic factors . In order to understand the links between
growth and environmental degradation, it is necessary to look simultaneously
at demographic developments and consumption patterns, in the context of value
systems technological developments and policy orientations which help or
hinder efficiency of resource use . The present report will review these
issues and address main policy conclusions.
III .
DEMOGRAPHIC TRENDS
'Population growth has been sustained since the period of the Industrial
4.
Revolution . There has, however, been a recent acceleration since the 1950's,
following a sharp reduction of mortality rates in developing countries.
>From 1950 to 1990 world population grew from 2 .5 to over 5 billions, at an
annual rate of 1 .9 per cent . These overall figures cover important variations
among regions and country groupings.
5.
In developed countries, which account for 1 .2 billion people, fertility
rates have abated and population growth is slow, stabilization has occurred
in a number of countries . As a result of this trend, the population of
developed countries is gradually aging, which has various consequences such
~financial pressures on the pension arrangements . The trend towards
f
Llanization which characterized the period from 1950 to 1980 and led to an
average proportion of urban population exceeding 70 per cent in developed
countries has now almost stabilized and is not expected to change
significantly.
TABLE 1A . Population Growth rates of the less developed regions
--------------------------------------------------------------------------1950-1955
Africa
Eastern Africa
2 .3
1 .8
Middle Africa
Northern Africa 2 .3
Southern Africa 2 .3
Western Africa
2 .3
Latin America
1 .8
Caribbean
Central America 2 .9
South America
2 .8
Asia
Eastern Asia
1 .8
South-eastern
1 .9
Asia
Southern Asia
2 .0
1985-1990
2020-2025
3 .2
3 .0
2 .7
2 .4
3 .2
2 .1
2 .2
1 .3
1 .4
2 .0
1 .5
2 .3
2 .0
1 .0
1 .3
1 .1
1 .3
2 .1
0 .4
1 .0
2 .3
1 .1
Western Asia
2 .7
2 .8
1 .7
--------------------------------------------------------- -----------------
Source : World Population Prospects 1990 (United Nations publication,
f rthcoming) .
TABLE 1B . Percentage of population living in urban
areas and urban population, 1990-2025
--------------------------------------------------------------------------Urban population
Urban areas
Region
(in millions)
(percentage)
1990 2000 2025 1990 2000 2025
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
World total
45
Less developed regions 37
More developed regions 73
51
45
75
65
61
83
2 .4
, .1 .5
0 .9
3 .2
2 .3
0 .9
5 .5
4 .4
1 .1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source : World Urbanization Prospects 1990 (United Nations publication,
forthcoming).
6. In developing countries, which account for 4 .1 billion people, both birth
and death rates have dropped, but to a lesser and differentiated extent, as
is shown in Table lA . Population growth rates continue to be substantial in
various developing regions.
7. These fast growing populations will , lead to a changing population
structure in the years ahead : a labour force growing overall at a rate
of 2 .3 per cent until the year 2000, (varying from 1 .2 per cent a year in
China, through 2 per cent in South Asia and East Asia, 2 .4 per cent in
'
n America, to 3 per cent and over in West Asia and Africa) and a
C ld-dependency ratio which will range from 70 per cent in West Asia and
sub-saharan Africa, though 50-60 per cent in Latin-America, South Asia and
North Africa, to about 40 per cent in East Asia . The trend towards
urbanization has been gaining momentum, and is expected to continue well into
the 21st century, until urban population rates in developing countries, as is
shown in table 1B reach levels over 60 per cent . This urbanization trend has
led to the development of megacities of several million inhabitants . Providing
adequate shelter and employment opportunities for rapidly increasing urban
population is a great challenge . (See Human Settlements, . . .)
8.
World population is projected to reach 6 .3 billion in 2000, and
approximately 8 .5 billion in 2025. according to the medium variant projections
of the United Nations . Depending on how population programmes will be .
successful, it could reach 10 million or more by the first quarter of the next
century . It could eventually stabilize, depending on how fast fertility rates
are reduced, between 2050 and 2100, at levels between 10 and 14 billion . Most
of the population increase (over 90 per cent) is to take place in presently
developing countries and most of it in cities . Coping with this urban
explosion will be a primary challenge of the 21st Century.
IV . ECONOMIC GROWTH
9.
Economic growth has reached an unprecedented scale in this century . It
is estimated that global GDP was in the order of $US 600 billion in 1900 . It
was about. $US 5 trillion in 1960 and about $US 17 trillion in 1988, the world
economy having grown at an average annual rate of 3 .64 per cent over the
1 60-1988 period . For developed market economies, the growth rate was
per cent over the period, and for developing countries 4 .26 per cent.
ng developing countries, regional rates were 3 .25 per cent in Africa.
(2 .53 per cent in Sub-Saharan Africa, 4 .58 per cent in North Africa),
3 .84 per cent in Latin America, 6 .02 per cent in South and South-East Asia,
3 .31 per cent in West Asia.
10. Growth rates declined in recent decades . Table 2 shows rates of economic
growth in the various region during the 1970's and 1980's . Per capita output
fell in the 1980's in many developing countries of Latin America and Africa.
Table 2 : Growth of world output, 1971-1990, per capita GDP
and share of world population by country groups
Share of
Growth of GDP
GDP per capita world
(annual rate)
(US dollars) a/ population
197119811990
1990
(per cent)
1980
1990
1980
--------------------------------------------------------------------------Developed market
2 .6
10 200
12 500
15 .6
3 .1
economies
Eastern Europe and the
Soviet Union b/
5 .2
Developing coutries
Africa
estern hemisph .
South and
East Asia
China
West Asia
Mediterranean
2 .5
3 200
3 800
7 .8
5 .6
4 .9
5 .5
5 .8
3 .2
0 .5
1 .0
7 .0
760
750
2 320
380
850
580
2 090
570
76 .7
11 .7
8 .5
52 .4
5 .9
6 .5
5 .3
9 .0
0 .2
3 .2
290
4 180
1 940
610
3 000
2 210
21 .7
2 .5
1 .5
100 .0
World
3 .9
. 2 .9
****
Source : Department of International Economic and Social Affairs of
the United Nations Secretariat.
a/ In 1980 , prices .
b/ Net material product.
11. As a result of these grzwthtrends, developed and developing countries
accounted in 1988 for $US 14 .71 trillion and $US 2 .48 trillion in the
$US 17 .19 trillion world GDP . Their shares in global economic output were
respectively over 85 per cent and under 15 per cent, while their shares in
world population were 23 .3 per cent and 76 .7 per cent .. The gap in per capita
output has been widening during the 1980s . The ratio between per capita
output in developed market economies and developing countries was 13 .42 in
1980 and 14 .7 in 1990.
12 . Long-term economic growth predictions do not have a record of great
accuracy . It is envisaged on the basis of observed trends that the world
economy could grow fivefold by the middle of next century.
While growth of economic activity has brought substantial social benefits
a d improved the welfare of many in some regions, the situation of developing
countries continues to be characterized by considerable poverty : out of
approximately 4 billion people in developing countries, over 1 billion live
below the poverty line ; more than 150 million children are malnourished ; over
1,750 million adults are illiterate ; some 1,500 million people have no access
to health services, 2,800 million people have no access to sanitation (UNDP's
Human Development Report 1990) . Among the disadvantaged, the situation of
women and children, who are subjected to the worst deprivations, should be
stressed . The situation of indigenous peoples, who are often marginalized
and deprived of access to power, should also be noted . It is urgent to
improve living standards in developing countries, and the required economic
development will involve accelerated economic growth.
14 . Overall economic growth represents the aggregation of activities in the
various economic sectors . The level and pattern of resource use in the
different sectors generates a variety of environmental problems which are the
issues identified in General Assembly resolution 44/228 . The manner in which
selected sectors of human activity affect the environment is briefly outlined
below . This description should be read in the context of the more detailed
analysis presented in the background documents submitted to the Preparatory
Committee.
(a) Agriculture
15 . Through it :: .process of soil use and alteration of the vegetation cover,
a riculture has an impact on the soil in modifying its structure and
position, and on the flora and fauna it supports . In a number of ways,
iculture has a positive influence on the environment, for instance through
drainage systems and its effects on flood control and water quality . Many
traditional agricultural practices contribute substantially to the
preservation of the environment . At the same time, the introduction of
chemicals to the land affects the food chain, water systems and the air.
Agricultural malpractices may lead to soil degradation through erosion,
salinization, compaction and pollution . Increasing intensity of agriculture
may also cause loss of biodiversity.
(b) Forestry
16 . Forest management can have beneficial effects on the environment however
detrimental effects may be generated if the forest cover protecting a fragile
soil is affected, for instance on steep slopes . The ground may become
waterlogged or otherwise impoverished . The regulatory effect'of'forests in
water catchment areas, which helps better infiltration of rain and snowfall
and reduces flood levels, may also be diminished . Forest exploitation may
also reduce the diversity of tree species and such simplified ecosystems offer
fewer niches for wild life.
(c) Fisheries
17 . Marine fisheries provide 10 to 20 per cent of world protein intake.
•
.
Properly managed such a contribution would be sustainable . But in recent
years global fishery harvests were on average about 85 per cent of the
estimated maximum sustainable yield and on an increasing trend . Overfishing
h depleted individual species in the past and has, in some regions, deprived
le of the income and food derived from this resource . The resource is
al o threatened, particularly in coastal areas, by pollution.
(d) Industry
18 . Among industries, a few sectors play an especially important role in most
raw materials consumption and pollution . The agro-food industry, mining and
reprocessing, cement production, pulp and paper processing, oil refineries and
chemical industries are among such sectors . Industries have a substantial
role in row materials and energy consumption, water consumption, emissions of
nitrogen oxide and sulphur oxide emissions, emissions of greenhouse gases,
pollution of water through biological oxygen demand and suspension substances
release, generation of non-inert waste and the discharge of toxic substances.
The rate of innovation which results in fast product diversification of
products complicates the issue as it is difficult to predict the possible
environmental impacts of the large number of new substances produced
especially in the chemical industry . Risks related to accidental discharges
of toxic substances cause considerable concern, as does the inclusion of
hazardous substances in products of industry which are marketed, utilized and
have to be ultimately disposed of.
(e) Transport
19 . Transport services are necessary for the development of other economic
activities and represent a substantial share of economic output . They have
numerous environmental consequences : emission of air pollutants involving
health risks in cities and ecological impacts at regional level . Transport
responsible for a considerable share of CO, NOx, hydrocarbons, benzene and
a ospheric lead emissions, as well as for CO2 and CFC emissions . Land
utilization for transport infrastructures, the related rubble disposal and the
recycling of metals from decommissioned vehicles also constitute
environmental issues . Pollution of marine environment through oil discharge
and the risks posed by the transport of hazardous substances are another
instance of environmental impact as is consumption of energy (see below)
metals and other non-fuels by the transport sector . A high death toll results
from transport accidents, mainly road transport . Noise pollution and traffic
congestion should also be mentioned.
(f) Energy
20 . Energy supplies are necessary for the development of other economic
activities . The energy sector performs extraction, conversion, transport and
consumption of energy and disposes of energy wastes . Energy sources include
coal and other solid fuels, oil, gas, nuclear power, hydropower and other
renewable sources of energy, as well as electricity . Issues related to energy
use are mentioned in the discussion of other economic sectors above . While
important advances have taken place in energy efficiency of numerous economic
activities and in the fuel - efficiency of vehicles, the operation !af the
energy sector continues to generate considerable environmental impacts such
as, the emission of CO2 and other "greenhouse gases", the emission of SOx, NOx
and hydrocarbons, the generation of radioactive waste, the risks of nuclear
reactor accidents decommissioning problems in the nuclear power industry,
deforestation due to firewood consumption, health risks to workers in energy
industries (coal mines, oils fields, nuclear reactors, etc . . .), oil spills,
d use issues related to mining, solid waste disposal from various
gy-related installations, etc . ., so that a solution to the energy related
e, ironmental impacts would constitute an important step towards sustainable
development.
(g) Human Settlements and Tourism
21 . The importance of human settlements for the environment hardly needs to
be stressed . The issue is addressed in detail in the report contained in
document .A/CONF .151/PC/56 . Its relationship with land-use, transport needs
and energy consumption is evident . Human settlements are also strongly linked
to patterns of atmospheric and water pollution, both of marine and fresh water
resources . Explosive urban growth. underway in developing countries makes
human settlements a central issues for impacts of human activities on the
environment . Tourism, which also grows in an accelerated manner, represents
a form of human settlements, whose effect is compounded by its often
intermittent and seasonal character, so that the imbalance between
infrastructures for environmental protection and peak pressures tends to be
even more pronounced than in urban areas . Its impacts on coastal and mountain
environments should be particularly noted.
(h) Military Activities
22. The relationship between the military sector and the environment deserves
a special mention . Beside the very large financial resources devoted to it,
(probably in the 3 to 5 per cent range of global GDP), this sector has
important environmental impacts which are related to its operating mode,
destruction power being a fundamental characteristic and the ability to
A/herate negative impacts on humans and their environment a criterion of
CWectiveness . In addition to its claim on land use, its consumption of'
energy and various other non-renewable resources, including many rare metals,
the military sector concentrates the use of toxic, radioactive and other
dangerous substances . Environmental protection rules can at best be
internally applied, as secrecy prevents the identification and correction of
many negative impacts on the environment . Emission standards do not apply to
weapons systems . It should be noted in this context that many military tests
are conducted in sparsely populated areas which are the habitat : of indigenous
peoples . The negative ecological impact in peace time is substantial . I,n war
time, destruction is the goal . There is, first of all, the toll in human
lives : several hundred thousand this year alone in various armed conflicts.
Massive devastation caused by World War II, the use of defoliants in
subsequent conflicts, the recent use of oil spills and oil well fires as
tactical actions and the impact on economic infrastructure described as
near-apocalyptic by a recent United Nations report are but a few examples of
the effects of wartime military operations on environment and development.
V . ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION AND CONSUMPTION PATTERNS
23. Humans have always modified the environment in order to meet their needs.
Such modifications in themselves do not constitute environmental problems.
Problems arise when the nature and extent of the modification is such that it
compromises the ability of other groups to meet their needs, where these other
groups could be future generations . It could also be that the way in which
one particular need, let us, say, for energy, is met, compromises the ability
to fulfill some other need, say, for good health.
In recent years, the scale and depth of human interventions in nature are
easing and the pace of change is also accelerating . The rising scale of
A
intervention can be seen in the proportion of freshwater diverted for human
use, in the level of energy use, in the growth of megacities, etc . The
increasing depth of interventions in nature is illustrated by human
interventions in the development of plant varieties which has progressed from
selective breeding of naturally found varieties, to cross-breeding and
hybridisation and now to genetic manipulation . With the growth of the
chemicals and synthetics industry, pressures on the natural environment in one
sense may have reduced but in another sense, the depth of intervention in
nature has increased as natural systems have to cope with exotic substances
leading often to problems of toxicity and hazard . -All of this is leading to
environmental problems which cannot be managed sufficiently on an ad hoc basis
by an individual decision maker or even by a local community . There are some
effects which are essentially global and regional in character, like the risks
of climate change, the depletion of the ozone layer, transboundary air
pollution, marine pollution, depletion of marine resources, etc . There are
certain others like a loss of biodiversity or of forest cover, which though
local in character, could have larger consequences . More localised problems
of land degradation, air and water pollution are now found in so many
localities that they in effect have to be treated as national, regional and
global issues . A detailed analysis of these effects is presented in
background documents submitted to the Preparatory Committee.
25. Rising demands, human interventions in natural systems will continue to
increase . It is necessary that we recognise that such interventions must
respect certain limits at the local, national and global level and, in the
s of the report of the World Commission on Environment and Development,
1O/hg before these are reached, the world must ensure equitable access to the
constrained resource and reorient technology efforts to relieve the pressure".
C . Consumption and waste generation patterns
26. An important determinant of the scale and depth of environmental impact
is consumption, which influences production levels and determines
environmental impacts resulting directly from consumption . Besides, as many
commodities are internationally traded, consumption is a better indicator than
production of the final destination of natural resource inputs into the
economy.
27. Global consumption has skyrocketed in the last decades, driven by.
consumption in the industrialized countries . Since the 1950s, consumption of
copper, energy, steel, meat and wood has about doubled . Cement use and
automobile ownership have quadrupled . Use of plastics and aluminum has grown
respectively five and seven-fold . Air travel has been multiplied by over
thirty times . This fast growing consumption has generated increasing
quantities of waste . It is estimated that worldwide annual emissions of
sulfur dioxide have grown by over 400 per cent and nitrogen oxides by over
900 per cent in this century, reaching respectively levels of over 60 and
20 million metric tons a year . Emissions of carbon dioxide are estimated to
have increased ten-fold in this century . Increasing problems and costs
related to solid waste disposal are an indication of increasing quantities
generated . Aluminum and plastics included in packaging constitute an
increasing share, in weight and volume, of municipal waste . Along with such
w te, new substances toxic in small amounts have been and continue to be
loped at a rate that exceeds the possibilities of testing and regulation.
ticides, whose very toxicity is the reason for their release pose important
problems.
28. In developed market economies, a number of consumer durables automobiles, refrigerators, vacuum cleaners, washing machines, dishwashers,
stereo equipment, televisions, air-conditioning in appropriate climates - are
now found in most households . Others - video cassette recorders, microwave
ovens - are in the process of wide dissemination . Agricultural products such
as vegetables, fruits and flowers are now transported over long distances,
sometimes flown intercontinentally, in order to supply affluent markets.
Intercontinental trade of beverages, including bottled water, is also
widespread . Such consumption patterns serve as a model worldwide, promoted,
inter alia, by universally distributed television programmes, and are adopted
by the affluent in developing countries and countries in transition to a
market economy.
29. The consumption patterns of specific commodities by different country
groupings shows a more complex and differentiated picture . There is, for
instance, a marked contrast between consumption patterns in developed and
developing countries for commodities such as food and wood-based products,
which affect land resources, or textiles, fertilizers, cement, metals, energy
resources and vehicles, which are essential to major manufacturing and
transport activities, with linkages to the atmosphere, mineral resources, the
marine environment, and solid wastes.
30. Generally, consumption in developed countries largely exceeds that in
developing countries, both in per capita and in absolute terms . Per capita
umption of milk and meat, sawnwood, paper, metals, coal and liquid fuels.
Jilteveloped countries is more than five times higher than in developing
countries . For the availability of road transport vehicles, the factor is
more than 10 . For cement, fertilizers and textiles, the ratio is between 3
and 5 . For cereals, it is below 3 and fuelwood is one case where per capita
consumption in developing countries is estimated to exceed that in developed
countries . In absolute amounts, cereals and fuelwood are two natural
resources for which consumption of developing countries exceeds that of
developed countries . For other commodities mentioned above,the consumption
of developed countries is well above that of developing countries . It is more
than double for metals and liquid fuels . Data on waste generation are not
generally available, but regarding gross carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, it
has been computed that shares in current (1988) emissions are about two-third
and one-third for developed and developing countries respectively, and that
per capita emission levels are on average about 8 times higher in developed
than in developing countries .. For cumulated CO2 emissions over the 1950-1988
period, the share of developed countries is estimated to amount to over
70 per cent (see tables 3 - 6).
*****************************************************************
NOTE FOR APC USERS:
Table 3 : Consumption Patterns of Developed and Developing
Countries for Selected Products
•
Table 4 : Availability of Transport Vehicles
Table 5 : Consumption of Fuels and Electricity for 1988 Tonnes of Oil
Equivalent
m le 6 : Shares in Global Emissions of CO2 in 1988
c 1 d not be produced in ASCII, but are available in Word Perfect 5 .1
on en .unced .binary, under the topic "Tables : PrepCom-III - WP5 .1"
********************************************************************
VI . POLICY IMPLICATIONS
31. It appears therefore that consumption patterns in developed countries
have a leading role in rapid depletion of non-renewable mineral and fuel
resources, oceans pollution, land overuse and the emission of greenhouse
gases . Environmental stress is generated in developing countries through two
processes . A form of stress is generated by activities of the modern sector
mainly in agriculture, industry and transports, which resembles that of
developed countries in a smaller overall scale, thereby contributing only in
a limited manner to global environmental stress, but may have acute local
environmental impacts compounded in many cases by inferior environmental
protection actions taken . This is particularly the case in many large cities
of developing countries, where pollution levels often greatly exceed those of
cities of comparable size in developed countries as well as guidelines and
standards . Migration and concentration of population in coastal areas lead
to forms of environmental stress detailed in the report on coastal
development and enclosed seas, marine pollution, living marine resources and
impacts of climate change contained in document A/CONF .151/PC/69 . Another
type of environmental stress is generated by poverty - urban and rural - which
involves overusz .of fragile land resources, deforestation, sometimes ultimate
desertification through processes which are described in the report on Poverty
Environmental Degradation contained in document A/Conf .151/PC/45.
410
32. Rapid population growth in developing countries has not been accompanied
by a commensurate increase in their share in global consumption of many
resources and in waste generation . It has, however, contributed markedly to
an unsustainable consumption of fuelwood, with a direct linkage with.
deforestation, and to pressures on coastal environments and other resources.
In a number of arid countries, there is a growing imbalance between water
supplies and water needs, which are related to population . Most of all, rapid
population growth has acted as a brake on economic growth by diverting
resources away from investment and hampering efforts to raise per capita
income, education, and other ingredients of development.
33. On the basis of the definition of sustainable development given by the
World Commission on Environment and Development : "Sustainable development is
development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the
ability of future generations to meet their own needs" . It is clear that
trends and patterns discussed above are not sustainable:
34. "The needs of the present" are .far from being met, as over 1 billion
people live below the poverty line, as indicated in paragraph 13 above.
Global environmental threats, such as the depletion of the ozone layer, the
risks of climate change, loss of biodiversity and the degradation of oceans,
are clear cases of compromising the ability of future generations -
worldwide - to meet their own development needs . Local environmental
degradation, health impacts of pollution in cities, "acid rain" degrading'
forests and water supply, land degradation reducing agricultural yields,
ar dual depletion of non-renewable resources, even if they do not threaten
illy all the human species, also compromise the ability of future
g erations to meet their own needs . Corrective actions are thereforeurgently n
relevant sectoral documents, conclusions regarding population trends, economic
growth and consumption patterns are outlined below:
35. Concerns regarding the needs of future generations cannot be understood
without a firm commitment to alleviating hardships suffered by . present
generations . Extreme poverty must be eliminated and living standards in
currently developing countries have to be improved . In particular, nutrition,
health, education and housing standards must be substantially raised . Special
efforts must be made in this regard to remove the gender bias . The
marginalized status of indigenous peoples should be corrected . These actions
need not translate into commensurate increase in per capita output . As shown
in the Human Development Report (1991) of UNDP, some improvements can be
achieved through resource redeployment . However, the increase in per capita
output, even if not in proportion to the improvement of living standards, will
have to be important and will cause - technology assumed to remain constant increased environmental impacts.
36. There is a need to stabilize global population as soon and at as low a
level as possible . In each country, a balance should be established between
population, resources and development needs . The reduction of population
growth in developing countries will facilitate their economic growth and the
improvement of living standards . The stabilization of world population at as
low a level as possible will increase the room for maneuver for establishing
an equitable and sustainable world in the next centux'y . If efforts to curb
demographic growth are successful, world population would stabilize
*nd 2,050 at about 10 billion, about twice the current number.
37. It is essential to reduce the environmental impact of economic growth.
The reduction necessary in order to make possible the improvement of
well-being worldwide without increased environmental stress is of a tremendous
magnitude . Technological improvements have achieved substantial efficiency
increases in the past in specific areas . Economic growth has taken place in
a number of developed countries since the mid-70's with no or little increase
in energy consumption . In the future, such technological improvements are
needed throughout the economic process and at a much faster pace : new
production processes, increasingly thrifty in materials use and generating
ever-decreasing
waste quantities, must be developed and disseminated for widespread use . A
balance will have to be found, based on environmental criteria, between the
need for such fast evolution and the need for long-lasting, repairable
products rather than current disposable short-life items . Packaging will need
to be reoriented on the basis of environmental constraints : The utilization
of reusable containers must be maximized as well as recycling of used products
and packaging.
38. Many technological solutions already exist . Developments in. such areas
as electronics, telecommunications, new materials, biotechnology and new
sources of energy open promising prospects regarding the possibility of
progress towards environmentally sounder production and consumption patterns .
Full use must be made of economic instruments, regulations and public
information in order to bring about needed changes in scientific, technical,
productive and consumption systems.
Developing countries, where most of population growth will take place,
a where substantial economic growth is necessary, will experience
considerably increased local environmental pressures and will contribute in
an increased manner to global environmental pressures if improved
technologies, of which many will be generated in developed countries are not
deployed massively in their economic systems . From a global environment
perspective, it would therefore be expedient that advanced technological
systems be in certain cases deployed first in developing countries, before
their widespread use in developed countries is achieved through gradual
replacement of existing systems . Vigorous capacity building actions will be
needed to improve the ability of developing countries to generate new
technologies and to adapt and utilize technologies developed elsewhere.
40. It is clear that current . lifestyles and consumption patterns of the
affluent middle-class of some developed countries, involving high meat intake,
consumption of large amounts of frozen and "convenience" foods, ownership of
motor-vehicles, numerous electric households appliances, home and workplace
air-conditioning, widespread air-travel, space - expansive suburban housing,
motorized commuting and shopping, are not sustainable . Such lifestyles are
shared by the affluent in developing countries and exert irresistible
attraction on all . However, even after substantial efficiency improvements
are brought about by technological advances, they would probably not be
sustainable for a population of 10 billion . A shift is therefore necessary
towards lifestyles providing substantial well-being while less geared to
resource-intensive and environmentally damaging consumption patterns by
emphasising quality over quantity . Such lifestyle changes will be difficult
to bring about : they would require a reversal of current trends which have a
ong momentum ; they would go against the perceived short-term interest of
. octant constituencies : the advertising industry, many consumer goods and
services sectors would be adversely affected in the short-term ; they would
also go against conventional economic thinking which emphasizes output growth
as the main criterion for progress and success . However, wide differences
observable in environmental impacts of developed countries with comparably
high living standards suggest that changed lifestyle can achieve considerable
environmental progress without lóss in well-being . In fact, reduced
environmental impact may coincide with improved quality of life.
41. What will be required to achieve such behavior change is a change in the
underlying values . The increasing importance of environment issues in
national political agendas and the greater awareness of the linkages between
consumption patterns and environmental impacts evidenced by twill require the co
involvement and participation of those concerned at all levels - global,
regional sub-regional, national local, even at the level of neighbourhoods,
in the making and implementation of decisions would enhance the effectiveness
of these actions . Building up the momentum and steering the transition towards
equitable eco-prosperity in the 21st century represents the major challenge
the world community has to address . UNCED is meant to contribute to this
global effort.
END OF DOCUMENT
** End of uploaded text **
•
Applicability of Land Disposal Restrictions to RCRA and CERCLA Gr
DATE : MAR 28 1990
RE LI . TO
OF : EH-231
SUBJECT : Applicability of Land Disposal Restrictions to RCRA and CERCLA Ground
Water Treatment Reinjections
TO : Distribution
BACKGROUND
The purpose of this memorandum is to provide Field Organizations with
information and guidance on the applicability of Land Disposal Restrictions
(LDR) to the reinjection of treated ground water into aquifers during "pump and
treat" operations at Department of Energy (DOE) environmental restoration
sites.
On December 15, 1989, the Environmental Guidance Division .(EH-231) issued a
memorandum to all Program and Operations Offices entitled "Fact Sheets : Natural
Resource Trusteeship Under CERCLA and Management of Contaminated Ground Water
as Hazardous Waste" . The fact sheet on ground water as hazardous waste
described pertinent definitions and facts about the U .S . Environmental
Protection Agency's (EPA) approach to managing contaminated ground water under
the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) . It also alerted readers
that EPA's Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER) planned to
issue an interpretive memorandum which would describe whether LDR applies to
ground water that is reinjected during environmental restoration "pump and
treat" operations . RCRA LDR may be applicable or relevant and appropriate
requirements (ARARs) for certain response actions taken under the Comprehensive
"
ronmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA)1.
The LDR Interpretation for reinjected ground water has been announced by EPA
and is provided for your information as . attachment 1 (OSWER Directive
9234 .1-06) . Briefly stated, the EPA has determined that under certain
circumstances, the LDR do not apply to reinjections of ground water during pump
and treat operations . The driving force behind this action was a Department of
Justice letter to the EPA asking for clarification of the applicability of the
LDR to the injection of treated ground water back into the aquifer from which
it was withdrawn at a Federal facility . The EPA's LDR Interpretation for
reinjected ground water is also consistent with a specific recommendation of a
major EPA report, "A Management Review of the Superfund Program" (EH-231
distributed a synopsis for management on this report in a September 20, 1989,
memorandum entitled "Fact Sheet : A Management Review of the Superfund Program:
The 90-Day Report").
1 The National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP)
requires that CERCLA lead agencies comply with all applicable or relevant and
appropriate requirements pertinent to the remedial action during the course of
the action as well as upon its completion (55 FR 8666, March 8, 1990 ; to be
codified at 40 CFR 300 .435(b)(2).
•
NEED FOR INTERPRETATION
its management review of the Superfund Program, EPA identified the
application of RCRA LDR (which are proscriptive regulations designed to
p vent contamination before it happens), as contributing to the inefficient
implementation of CERCLA (a response program for responding to uncontrolled
releases which have already resulted in contamination) . There is recognition
on the part of EPA that the problem of cleaning up large-scale contamination
(under CERCLA) is quite different from the problem of how hazardous wastes
should be properly managed by an ongoing operation (the focus of RCRA) . EPA
has recognized that in some cases, using RCRA standards as ARARs for CERCLA
response actions confuses prevention for cure.
In general, RCRA LDR prohibit the land disposal of restricted wastes {after the
effective date of the restriction), unless such waste meets promulgated
treatment standards based on best demonstrated available technology (BDAT)
identified by EPA for that particular type of waste . Requiring compliance with
these fundamentally "preventative" provisions of RCRA, could place unnecessary
constraints on CERCLA response actions . The BDAT regimes can be difficult to
apply at CERCLA sites because the wastes that are encountered are usually a
mixture of different types of restricted wastes, non-restricted hazardous
substances and debris, which may be dispersed throughout different
environmental media . Each of the restricted wastes in a CERCLA mixture may
require a different BDAT treatment . Since restricted wastes subject to LDR may
be mixed together with other restricted wastes, it can be difficult to
determine the appropriate BDAT(s) for all of the restricted wastes in a CERCLA
mixture2 . These difficulties can be expected to be magnified at DOE's
environmental restoration sites, because there can be additional technical
problems associ9ted with DOE's soil and debris mixed wastes, containing
restricted hazardous wastes and radioactive wastes.
&ause injection of ground water containing restricted wastes constitutes
"land disposal" under RCRA section 3004(k), the question of whether the LDR are
applicable to reinjected ground water during CERCLA "pump and treat" operations
has been raised . If LDR are applicable, ground water containing restricted
wastes would require treatment to attain standards based on BDAT prior to each
reinjection . Since "pump and treat" remedies may have to operate for many
years, the clean up action could become overly burdensome, technically
impractical and/or prohibitively expensive.
The Applicability of LDR To Ground Water Treatment Reinjection Interpretation
at attachment 1 is one way EPA is attempting to correct the misapplication of
the LDR to RCRA corrective and CERCLA response actions.
BASIS FOR THE LDR INTERPRETATION
RCRA Section 3020(b) prohibits the injection of hazardous waste into or above
an underground source of drinking water, with the following exception : the
prohibition does not apply to "the injection of , contaminated ground water into
the aquifer from which it was withdrawn," if the injection is a CERCLA response
action (or a RCRA , corrective action), the ground water has been treated to
"substantially reduce hazardous constituents," and the action will protect
human health and the environment . The EPA Interpretation that LDR are not
applicable to reinjection of 2 In a September 25, 1989, memorandum to Program
and Operations Offices entitled "RCRA Land Disposal Restriction Guides for
CERCLA Cleanup Actions", EH-231 provided a synopsis and copies of six EPA
publications on the application of the RCRA LDR to CERCLA response actions.
treated ground water during RCRA corrective and CERCLA response actions is
d on the "traditional principle" that the more specific of two overlapping
s tutory provisions should control . In this case, the language of the LDR,
which refers generally'to the land disposal of wastes, was found to be less
specific than another RCRA provision [Section 3020(b)] that directly focuses on
the injection of treated contaminated ground water into Class IV injection
wells (40 CFR 146 .5(d)).
In determining whether RCRA LDR may be "relevant and appropriate" (for CERCLA
response actions), EPA indicates that the requirement must address problems or
situations similar to the circumstances of the response action contemplated,
and be well-suited to the (CERCLA) site . Comparing the CERCLA response
objectives with the purpose and objective of the LDR requirement is the key to
EPA's interpretation of the potential relevance and appropriateness of the LDR
to pump and treat operations conducted under a CERCLA response action.
Treating and reinjecting ground water into Class IV injection wells is
ultimately performed to restore the ground water (aquifer) to drinking water
quality . EPA believes that standards that have been specifically developed tó
establish drinking water quality levels, such as Maximum Contaminant Levels
(MCLs), are well-suited to the accomplishment of the CERCLA response action
(i .e ., pump and treat) objective . Thus, the EPA Interpretation provides that
where drinking water standards are available (e .g ., MCLs), those standards, and
not the standards set by the LDR, will 7enerally be the relevant and
appropriate requirements to use in setting treatment standards for CERCLA
response actions involving the clean up of drinking water aquifers.
o
NECESSARY CONDITIONS
to reinject treated ground water during pump and treat operations at
's environmental restoration sites without triggering the RCRA LDR, three
.order
conditions must be met:
1. the reinjection must be part of a CERCLA section 104 or 106 response
action, or be a RCRA corrective action,
2. the contaminated ground water must be treated to substantially reduce
hazardous constituents prior to such injection, and
3. the response action or corrective action must be sufficient to protect
human health and the environment upon completion.
While the language of RCRA section 3020(b) is straightforward in its
application to RCRA corrective actions, it is not explicit with respect to
CERCLA response actions conducted at Federal facilities . The Federal
government is directed by Section 120 of the Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act (SARA) to comply with CERCLA to the same extent as private
parties, so that a question arises as to which statutory authority Federal
facilities employ for CERCLA response actions . DOE does employ CERCLA section
104 authority consistent with the mandate of SARA section 120, consequently,
DOE's CERCLA response actions satisfy the first condition .3 3The basis for
DOE's use of CERCLA section 104 is found in Executive Order 12580, "Superfund
Implementation", Jan . 23, 1987, Sec . 2(d), by which the President delegated the
President's removal and remedial response authority under CERCLA 104(a) and
remedy selection authority under 104(c)(4) to the Secretaries of Defense and
Energy with respect to releases or threats of releases from any vessel or
f ility under their control, provided that this authority is exercised
.consistent with the requirements of Section 120 of the Act" (i .e ., SARA
sa tion 120) . The second requirement of RCRA section 3020(b) is that the
reinjection must be treated to "substantially reduce hazardous constituents
prior to such injection ." There is no quantitative guidance available at this
time which will provide environmental restoration managers with the certain
knowledge that they have met this requirement . EPA suggests that the steps
necessary to "substantially reduce" hazardous constituents during a RCRA
corrective action or CERCLA response action should be decided on a case-by-case
basis until specific guidance is prepared on the issue . EH-231 will
disseminate the EPA guidance to all Field Organizations once it becomes
available.
As a final condition, the corrective action or response action must be
sufficient to protect human health and the environment upon completion . EPA's
guidance on meeting this requirement is to consult RCRA and CERCLA statutes,
regulations and policies . Pursuant to DOE Orders, RCRA corrective actions and
CERCLA response actions undertaken by the Department are required to be
protective of human health and the environment . When these actions are
performed in compliance with the appropriate governing statute, regulation or
pertinent guidance document, they may be presumed to be protective of human
health and the environment upon completion because of the stringent
protectiveness requirements and the regulatory oversight imposed by these
procedures . The pertinent governing regulations which, if properly
implemented, will confer the appropriate degree of protectiveness for human
health and the environment such that this final condition will be satisfied,
include : 1) the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency
Plan (for CERCLA actions) ; 2) Standards for Owners and Operators of Hazardous
e Treatment, Storage and Disposal Facilities (40 CFR 264, Subpart F) ; and
IlOtCRA Corrective Action requirements, 40 CFR 264, Subpart S (when
promulgated).
Field Organizations are encouraged to consult with their Regional EPA Office on
the proper application of the LDR interpretation for the reinjection of treated
ground water into or above underground sources of drinking water (i .e ., into
Class IV injection wells) at their facilities . If you have any questions about
the attached Interpretation, please contact John Bascietto of my staff at FTS
896-7917 .
Thomas T . Traceski
Chief, RCRA/CERCLA Unit
Attachment : EPA's LDR Interpretation for Reinjected Ground Water, 12/27/89
•
Comments on underground storage tanks
Aust 6, 1987
l. . 2 3
Comments on Underground Storage Tanks and Summary Tank Information
Distribution List
Attached for your information are the Department of Energy's (DOE) comments
transmitted to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on the proposed rule
for Underground Storage Tanks, 40 CFR Parts 280 and 281 (Subtitle I of the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)) . These comments were compiled .
from the numerous comments received from operations offices, the power
administrations, and from the Office of Environmental Analysis which examined
this rule from an industry perspective.
Also attached is some summary information compiled from field and operations
office notifications to the states or EPA in May, 1986 on underground storage
tanks . It is strictly for informational purposes, but illustrates not only
the numbers of tanks, but the age, construction and type of protection, if
any . The first set of tables is a summary from all facilities that submitted
notification forms ; the second set is by facility and includes additional
information . If there are errors or changes, please contact Kay Samec on FTS
896-5771, so that corrections may be made.
•
.Raymond P . Berube
Acting Director
Office of Environmental Guidance and
Compliance
DISTRIBUTION LIST
Malgia Arehart, Alaska Power Administration
Dennis Krenz, Assistant Manager for Safeguards and Safety, Albuquerque
Operations Office
J . G . Themelis, Environment and Health Division, Albuquerque Operations Office
Robert Folstein, Director, Bartlesville Project Office
Donald L Bray, Director, Operational & Environmental Safety Division, Chicago
Operations Office
Roger Mayes, Assistant Director for Environmental Protection, Chicago
Operations Office
Richard Egli, Assistant Manager for Safety & Environment, Oak Ridge Operations
Office
Wayne H . Hibbitts, Director, Environmental Protection Division, Oak Ridge
Operations Office
John Barry, Assistant Manager, Environmental, Safety& Health Programs, Idaho
Operations Office
William D . Jensen, Director, Operational Safety Division, Idaho Operations
Office
JA es H . Capps, Environment, Safety & Health Manger, Office of Resource
Management, Morgantown Energy Technology Center
D- Newquist, Office of Safety, Health and Environment, Naval , Petroleum and
Oil Shale Reserves in Wyoming, Utah & Colorado
Robert W Taft, Assistant Manager for Engineering &Safety, Nevada Operations
Office
Bruce W . Church, Director, Health Physics . Division, Nevada Operations Office
Melvin C Keller, Associate Director for Administration, Pittsburgh Energy
Technology Center
Earl D Shollenberger, Technical Support Project Officer, Pittsburgh Naval
Reactors Office THUR : Deputy Assistant Secretary for Naval Reactors,
NE-60, HQ
A . J . Rizzo, Acting Assistant Manager for Safety, Environment & Security,
Richland Operations Office
Ron Gerton, Director of Energy, Safety & Health, Richland Operations Office
Jim Davis, Director, Environment, Safety & Quality Assurance Division, San
Francisco Operations Office
R P . Whitfield, Assistant Manager for Health, Safety & Environment, Savannah
River Operations Office
S . R Wright, Director, Environmental Division, Savannah River Operations
Office
Donald J . Hamilla, Director, Radiological/Environmental Control & Safety
Division, Schenectady Naval Reactors Office THUR : Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Naval Reactors, NE-60, HQ)
Anthony Morrell, Environmental Manager, Bonneville Power Administration
Karl E . Tucker, Director, Division of Administrative Management, Southeastern
Power Administration
Jim McKnight, Safety & Occupational Health Manager, Office of Human Resources,
Southwestern Power Administration
h ssa Smith, Environmental Safety & Health Division, Strategic Petroleum
Reserve Project Management Office
Warren Jamison, Assistant to the Administrator for Conservation & Environment,
Western Area Power Administration
Major John Klube, Director, Planning Analysis & Program Support Division,
Naval Petroleum Reserves in California, P .O Box 11, Tupman, CA 93276
0
DISTRIBUTION
Captain Lewis Newby, DP-226
Kristine Morris, DP-3
Joseph A . Coleman, NE-24
Jill E . Lytle, DP-12
Edward Williams, EH-22
James C . Johnson, FE-13
Herbert Myers, CE-43
James Farley, ER-65
Henry. Walter, NE-24
Dennis Rusnworth,NE=60
John Tseng, DP-3
Gail Turi, NE-23
Katheline Taimi, EH-232
•
John Lehr, DP-124
Victor Trebules, RW-42
Roger Gale, RW-40
Charlie Billups, DP-226
•
•
Reporting Presence of Underground Storage Tanks on Department of
W h 7, 1986
L1123
Reporting Presence of Underground Storage Tanks on Department of Energy
Installations Under RCRA Section 9002
Heads of Field Organizations
This memorandum provides information to Department of Energy field
organizations preparing to report the existence of underground storage tanks
(UST's) on DOE installations, required by Section 9002 of the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) . This requirement is codified in 40 CFR
280 .3 . The reporting deadline, set by the Act, is May 8, 1986.
Guidance will be issued to DOE field organizations in the near future
reflecting departmental policy regarding the following:
- reporting of UST's containing radioactive materials;
- compliance by DOE installations with existing state and future EPA
technical standards for UST's containing radioactive materials regarding
tank inspection, sampling and monitoring.
BACKGROUND
The 1984 amendments to RCRA establish in Subtitle I a new program to regulate
underground storage tanks that contain "regulated substances"
new Subtitle I is particularly significant because it applies to the
storage of "hazardous substances" as defined in Section 101(14) of CERCLA,
except for hazardous wastes which are regulated separately under the Subtitle
C RCRA permit program . Consequently the coverage of Subtitle I extends to
source, byproduct, and special nuclear materials.
Under Subtitle I, a regulated substance is defined as:
"Any substance defined in Section 101(14) of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (but
not including a substance regulated as a hazardous waste under Subtitle
C of the Solid Waste Act) ; and petroleum, including crude oil or any
fraction thereof which is liquid at standard conditions of temperature
and pressure (60 degrees fahrenheit and 14 .7 pounds per square inch
absolute) ."
Under Subtitle I, an underground storage tank is defined as:
"Any one or combination of tanks (including underground pipes connected
thereto) which is used to contain an accumulation of regulated;
substances, and the volume of which (including the volume of the
underground pipes connected thereto) is 10 percent or more beneath the
ground ."
C
t.
tain tanks are excluded from the provisions of Subtitle I . The exclusions
listed in RCRA Section 9001(1) . The more significant exclusions include
following:
- Flow through process tanks
- Heating oil storage tanks
- Storm wastes or waste water collection systems - Storage tanks in an
underground area, if the tank is situated upon or above the floor
The UST program features of RCRA Sections 9001 - 9007 are summarized in
Attachment 1.
On November 8, 1985, EPA published the final notification require ments, to be
codified at 40 CFR 280 .3 (50 FR 46602) . A copy of these requirements is
provided as Attachment 2 . They include the EPA notification form (EPA Form
7530-1) and a list of agencies designated to receive the notification for each
State, along with an indication of whether the EPA form or the state form is
to be used for notification . Departmental field organizations are ad
vised to contact the applicable state agency, as indicated .in Attachment 2, to
confirm the November 8th form designation (i .e ., the use of the EPA form or
the state form) and to obtain the state form, where EPA has approved use of
the state form.
The notification requirement applies to all underground tanks containing
regulated substances, as specified in Subtitle I . Thus, it includes tanks
(unless excluded under Section 9001(1)) containing source, special nuclear,
and byproduct materials . Note, however, that tanks already included in any
notice provided to a state or local agency pursuant to Section 103(c) of
CERCLA are not subject to this notification requirement . Note also that tanks
en out of operation since January 1, 1974, must be included in the
ification, unless they have been removed from the ground.
EPA GUIDANCE
The Environmental Protection Agency has not issued final guidance for
interpretation of several of the terms contained in the UST regulations . This
includes the terms "connected piping," "flow through process tanks," "tanks
situated in an underground area," "pits," and "liquid traps ." EPA intends to
issue such guidance when it promulgates technical standards for tanks ir .1987
(available information indicates that draft regulations on technical
standards may be issued in May 1986) . EPA advises owners of regulated tanks
to submit the information requested on the notification forms to the best of
their ability, and states that failure to notify is at the owner's risk . EPA
has also stated that the submission of a notification form at this time is not
an admission of ownership for purposes of the Subtitle I program.
The notification requirements of RCRA Section 9002 provide that owners of
tanks taken out of service after January 1, 1974 provide the requested
information to the extent that it is known . In response to comments received
on its draft rule, EPA indicated in the final rulemaking (50 FR 46607) that
the requirements for these tanks do not demand that owners expend extensive
time and resources to obtain the information . Thus, departmental field
elements need not go beyond available documents to obtain the information
requested on the form . However, for tanks still in service, or tanks brought
I o service after the initial notification date deadline, no such relief is
vided in the statute.
For these tanks, EPA states (50 FR 46607) that owners are expected to "take
any available steps to provide the necessary information about their tanks".
However, in recognition of situations where current owners of in-use tanks may
not be able to obtain any or all of the information requested (e .g ., the tank
was originally installed by a previous owner or operator of the installation),
answers may be based on reasonable estimates, rather than indicate that the
information is unknown.
DOE GUIDANCE
DOE operational field elements should compile the necessary information per
the requirements of 40 CFR 280 .3 with regard to all regulated tanks under
Subtitle I.
For tanks otherwise determined to be regulated under Subtitle I by the
definition of underground storage tanks, but containing or proposed to contain
radioactive materials, a question remains as to a potential inconsistency
between the requirements for protection of worker and public health and safety
under the Atomic Energy Act and the eventual substantive requirements of RCRA
Subtitle 1.
Additional guidance regarding tanks that contain radioactive materials will be
provided prior to the May 8, 1986 notification deadline . Any reporting of
tanks containing radioactive materials should await that additional guidance.
NOTIFICATION
The notification is to be completed by the DOE Operations Offices for those
installations under their responsibility, based on completed notification
forms submitted by the responsible field organizations (e .g ., area offices).
Copies of the completed notifications are to be forwarded to DOE Headquarters
at the same time that they are submitted to the States . Updates or revisions
to the notifications should also be submitted to Headquarters when
submitted to the States, as required . Submissions should be made to John
Barker, Director, Office of Environmental Audit and Compliance, EH-24 . Also
to be included in the submission to Headquarters from each Operations Office
is a list, for each installation under its responsibility, of each tank or
other underground structure not included in the notification because it is
believed not to be included under the Subtitle I definition of underground
storage tank.
Requests for additional information on this guidance should be directed to Bob
Stern, Director, Office of Environmental Guidance, EH-23 .
Mary L . Walker
Assistant Secretary Environment, Safety and Health
•
ASDP
ASNE
ASER
ASFE
Director, . NR
Attachments:
1. UST Program Summary
2. EPA Final Rule : UST Notification Requirements
•
•
Technical Resource Document for Obtaining variances from the Seco
A i1 22, 1987
M231
Technical Resource Document for Obtaining variances from the Secondary
Containment Requirement of Hazardous Waste Tank Systems
Distribution List
Attached for your information are the two volumes of the Technical Resource
Document which were published by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in
February 1987.
On July 14, 1986, EPA promulgated revised standards for hazardous waste
treatment and storage tank systems . Under these regulations all new hazardous
waste tank systems or components must meet the secondary containment with
release monitoring requirements as stipulated in Parts 264 .193, and 265 .193
prior to being put into service . The application of the secondary containment
and release monitoring requirements is being phased in for existing tank
systems.
Under Parts 264 .193(g) and 265 .193(g) either a risk-based or a
technology-based variance from the secondary containment requirements can be
obtained . These two volumes discuss both variances in detail, and what must
be demonstrated and submitted to EPA in order to support requests for a
variance . These documents also detail the timeframes and the application_
process by which one must apply for a variance . We recommend that while
variances are allowable, that these documents, the secondary containment
irement, and the variances themselves be studied in-depth prior to
110:sting the resources necessary to prepare a comprehensive petition for a
variance . As with all amendments to a Part B permit, copies of any petitions
should be provided to the Environmental Compliance Division.
Questions you or your staff may have can be directed to Sheryl L . Katz on FTS
896-8505.
Raymond P . Berube
Acting Director
Office of Environmental Guidance and Compliance
2 Attachments
DISTRIBUTION LIST
Malgia Arehart, Alaska Power Administration
Dennis Krenz, Assistant Manager for Safeguards and Safety, Albuquerque
Operations Office
J . G . Themelis, Environment and Health Division, Albuquerque Operations Office
Robert Folstein, Director, Bartlesville Project Office
Donald L Bray, Director, Operational & Environmental Safety Division, Chicago
Operations Office
.r Mayes, Assistant Director for Environmental Protection, Chicago
Operations Office
Richard Egli, Assistant Manager for Safety & Environment, Oak Ridge Operations
Office
Wayne H . Hibbitts, Director, Environmental Protection Division, Oak Ridge
Operations Office
John Barry, Assistant Manager, Environmental, Safety & Health Programs, Idaho
Operations Office
William D . Jensen, Director, Operational Safety Division, Idaho Operations
Office
James H . Capps, Environment, Safety & Health Manger, Office of Resource
Management, Morgantown Energy Technology Center
Dan Newquist, Office of Safety, Health and Environment, Naval Petroleum and
Oil Shale Reserves in Wyoming, Utah & Colorado
Robert W Taft, Assistant Manager for Engineering & Safety, Nevada Operations
Office
-Bruce W . Church, Director, Health Physics Division, Nevada Operations Office
Melvin C Keller, Associate Director for Administration, Pittsburgh Energy
Technology Center
Earl D Shollenberger, Technical Support Project Officer, Pittsburgh Naval
Reactors Office THRU : Deputy Assistant Secretary for Naval Reactors,
NE-60, HQ
A . J . Rizzo, Acting Assistant Manager for Safety, Environment & Security,
Richland Operations Office
Ron Gerton, Director of Energy, Safety & Health, Richland Operations Office
Jim Davis, Director, Environment, Safety & Quality Assurance
Division, San Francisco Operations Office
410F . Whitfield, Assistant Manager for Health', Safety & Environment,
River Operations Office
S . R Wright, Director, Environmental Division, Savannah River
Operations Office
Donald J . Hamilla, Director, Radiological/Environmental Control &
Safety Division, Schenectady Naval Reactors Office THRU:
Deputy Assistant Secretary fOr Naval Reactors, NE-60, HQ)
Anthony Morrell, Environmental Manager, Bonneville Power
Administration
Karl E . Tucker, Director, Division of Administrative Management,
Southeastern Power Administration
Jim McKnight, Safety & Occupational Health Manager, Office of Human
Resources, Southwestern Power Administration
Melissa Smith, Environmental Safety & Health Division, Strategic
Petroleum Reserve Project Management Office
Warren Jamison, Assistant to the Administrator for Conservation &
Environment, Western Area Power Administration
Major John Klube, Director, Planning Analysis & Program Support
Division, Naval Petroleum Reserves in California, P .O Box 11,
Tupman, CA 93276
Identification and Listing of Hazardous Waste Used Oil - Final
DATE : October 22, 1992
'~LY TO
A N OF : EH-231
SUBJECT : Identification and Listing of Hazardous Waste ; Used Oil - Final
Rule
TO : Distribution
On September 23, 1991, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a
Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (SNPRM) in the Federal Register
(56 FR 48000) requesting comments on proposals to list used oil and used oil
residuals as hazardous waste . This SNPRM included data on the composition of
used oil and used oil residuals which EPA would consider in making a final
listing decision . Also, information was provided on proposed used oil
management standards for recycled oil under section 3014 of RCRA . EPA
solicited comments on the SNPRM to list used oil and used oil residuals as
hazardous wastes, the proposed used oil management standards, and the data
provided on used oil.
On October 3, 1991, the Office of Environmental Guidance (EH-23) requested
comments from the DOE Program Offices and Field Organizations on the subject
SNPRM . [1] EH-231 memorandum dated 10/3/91, subject : Used Oil Supplemental
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking . Comments provided to this office were
incorporated into a consolidated DOE response to the notice, and submitted to
EPA . A copy of that submittal was distributed to all DOE Program and Field
Organizations . [2] EH-231 memorandum dated 11/14/91, subject : Consolidated
artment of Energy (DOE) Response to Supplemental Notice of Proposed
emaking on Identification and Listing of Hazardous Waste ; Used Oil.
41l
On May 20, 1992 (57 FR 21524), EPA promulgated a final listing decision for
used oil destined for disposal . [3] EH-231 memorandum dated 6/9/92, subject:
Identification and Listing of Hazardous Waste ; Used Oil - Final Rule . EPA
decided not to list used oils destined for disposal as hazardous waste, based
on. the finding that all used oils do not typically meet the technical
criteria for listing a waste as hazardous . Also, EPA promulgated a
modification to the current exclusions from the definition of hazardous waste
in 40 CFR 261 .4 to provide an exemption for certain types of used oil
filters.
On September 10, 1992 (57 FR 41566), EPA promulgated a final rule, choosing
not to list used oil destined for recycling as hazardous . Instead, EPA is
promulgating management standards for such used oil . These standards cover
used oil generators, transporters, processors and re-refiners, burners and
marketers . These standards will be codified in a new part 279 of chapter 40
of the Code of Federal Regulations . EPA also promulgated a rebuttable
presumption for used oil in 40 CFR 261 .3(a)(2)(v), stating that used oil
containing more that 1000 ppm of total halogens is presumed to be a hazardous
waste because it has been mixed with halogenated hazardous waste.
Persons may rebut this presumption, using an analytical method from the third
edition of SW-846, to show that the used oil does not contain significant
concentrations of halogenated hazardous constituents.
A Regulatory Bulletin on the above referenced EPA listing decisions will be
hcoming . Questions concerning this matter may be directed to Mark Petts
ol y staff on FTS 202-586-2609 .
Thomas T . Traceski
Director, RCRA/CERCLA Division
La identificación y Listado de Desperdicio Peligroso
Utilizado Aceite- Final
FECHE : Octubre 22, 1992
RESPONDA PARA
ATTN de : EH- 231
El TEMA : La identificación y Listado de Desperdicio~Peligroso ; El Aceite utilizado- Final
La regla
rik stribution]
.
A--
En Se tiembre . 23, 1991, la Agencia de Protección
Ambiental ( E ) envió un
Nota plementaria de Propuesto Rulemaking ( Snprm ) en
el Registro Federal
( 56 FR 48000) Solicitando comentarios en propuestas
listar aceite utilizado y el aceite utilizado
[residuals] desperdicio como peligroso . Este SNPRM
incluyó información en la composición de
El aceite utilizado y el aceite utilizado [residuals] que
EPA consideraría al hacer un final
El listado de decisión . También, información estuvo
proveído en aceite utilizado propuesto
Las normas de administración para aceite reciclado bajo
seccionar 3014 DE RCRA.
Los comentarios solicitados en el SNPRM para listar
aceite utilizado y el aceite utilizado [residuals] como
Los desperdicios peligrosos, las normas de administración
de aceite utilizadas propuestas, y la información
Proveído en aceite utilizado.
Octubre n 3, 1991, la Oficina de Guía Ambiental ( EH23) solicitó
Comenta de las Oficinas de Programa de GAMA y
Organizaciones de Campo sobre el 'tema
SNPRM . [1] EH- 231 memorando fechó 10 / 3/ 91, tema : El
Aceite utilizado Suplementario
Nota de Rulemaking Propuesto . Comenta proveída a esta
oficina fue
Incorporada en una respuesta de GAMA consolidada a la
nota, y presentada
EPA.
Una copia de que [submittal], estuvo distribuido a
Programa de GAMA todo el y Campo
Las organizaciones . [2] EH- 231 memorando fechó 11 / 14/
91, tema : consolidado
El departamento de ( GAMA ) ( GAMA ) Respuesta a Nota
Suplementaria de Propuesto
•
Rulemaking en Identification y Listado de Desperdicio
Peligroso ; El Aceite utilizado . 1992 En Mayo 20,
1
•
•
( 57 FR 21524), EPA promulgó una decisión de listado
final para
El aceite utilizado destinó para eliminación . [3] EH- 231
memorando fechó 6 / 9/ 92, tema:
La identificación y - [isting] de Desperdicio Peligroso:
El Aceite utilizado- Regla Final.
Decididos de no listar aceites utilizados destinaron para
desperdicio como peligroso de eliminación, basó
En el hallazgo ese aceites utilizados todos los se no
reune típicamente el técnico
Los criterios para listando un desperdicio como
peligroso . También, EPA promulgó un
La modificación a las exclusiones actuales de la
definición de desperdicio peligroso 40 CFR 261 .4 para proveer una
exención con seguridad tipos de . aceite utilizado
Los filtros.
En Septiembre 10, 1992 ( 57 FR 41566), EPA promulgó una
regla final, I elección
de no listar aceite utilizado destinó por recircular como
peligroso . En lugar de eso, EPA es
El promulgar de administración normas por tal utilizó
aceite . Estas cubierta de normas
Los generadores de aceite utilizados, [transporters],
procesadores y re- [refiners], quemadores y
Los placeros . Estas normas estará codificado en una nueva
parte 279 de capítulo 40
Del Código de Regulaciones Federales . EPA también
promulgó un [rebuttable]
El prejuicio para aceite utilizado en 40 CFR 26" . 3 ( a )
( 2 ) ( v ), plantear que utilizó aceite
Conteniendo más que 1000 P - m de halógenos totales está
presumido para ser unos peligrosos
Desperdicie porque ha sido [mixed] con [haloqenated]
desperdicio peligroso.
Las personas pueden refutar este prejuicio, utilizando un
método analítico de el tercero
2
La edición de SW- 846, mostrar que el aceite utilizado no contiene significativo
Las concentraciones de [halogenated] participantes peligroso.
Un Boletín Regulador en las decisiones de listado de EPA referidas anteriores
será
El acercamiento. Las preguntas que conciernen a esta cuestión puede estar
dirigido para marcadas Petts
de mi equipo técnico en FTS 202 586 2609.
Thomas T.
El director,
La oficina de
Traceski
La División de RCRA / CERCLA
La Guía ambiental
8
Prevention of Oil Spills and
Chemical Accidents
We will enforce legislation and educate
people so that the environment becomes much
safer from the effects of oil spills and
chemical accidents, and we will respond
quickly to contain the damage from spills and
accidents that do occur.
Background
Every day, oil and other hazardous substances
are spilled or released into waterways, the
air, and onto the ground . These pollutants
frequently kill fish and wildlife . They also
can injure nearby workers and residents, who
may experience immediate problems ranging
from mild skin irritation to fatal poisoning,
or longer-term health problems, such as
cancer and reproductive disorders.
Accidental releases of hazardous
substances result from careless handling of
petroleum, tank car derailments, trucking
accidents, fires, leaks, and explosions . Some
accidents have catastrophic consequences . In
1988, a refinery explosion in Norco,
Louisiana killed seven people, injured 50,
and forced the evacuation of 25,000
residents . In 1989, the supertanker Exxon
Valdez spilled 10 .9 million gallons of crude
oil into Alaska s Prince William Sound,
killing approximately 150,000 seabirds and an
estimated 5,000 sea otters . Valuable
fisheries were closed, and over 1,200 miles
of shoreline were polluted with oil.
Reports of accidental releases have
increased steadily in the last decade . The
National Response_ Center and EPA regional
offices received over 24,000 such reports in
1990, and over 40,000 reports in 1992.
EPA's Roles
One of EPA s most important roles is building
state and local authorities capabilities to
prevent and respond successfully to accidents
by providing technical assistance and funding
for designing accident prevention programs
and emergency response plans, and assisting
them in responding to emergencies . EPA can
direct responsible parties in the cleanup or
do the work itself . EPA trains over 5,000
people each year for emergency response
operations.
EPA requires certain facilities that store
oil to prepare plans to prevent spills and
now is developing additional rules that will
require petroleum facilities to plan for
cleanups of worst-case spills . EPA also is
providing rules that will require facilities
handling extremely hazardous substances to
develop detailed plans for preventing,
detecting, and minimizing accidental
releases.
The federal government has established a
National Contingency Plan, which sets
procedures for responding to emergency
releases and sets up a National Response
Team, which coordinates preparation for and
responses to accidents . When an emergency
occurs inland and federal assistance is
required, EPA deploys an On-Scene Coordinator
to manage federal responses or monitor the
cleanup . EPA also maintains the
Environmental Response Team, a group of
scientists and engineers that provides 24hour technical expertise.
Roles of Others
•
State Emergency Response Commissions are
responsible for appointing and supervising
Local Emergency Planning Committees , which
prepare and exercise local emergency response
plans . Industrial facilities handling
hazardous chemicals report information on the
chemicals present at each facility, their
hazards, how they are stored, and any
releases . Operators of vessels or facilities
containing a hazardous substance must notify
the authorities when a release of a
reportable quantity has occurred.
The party responsible for an accident is
responsible for managing and paying for
cleanup . State and local authorities usually
do the actual cleanup work that cannot be
managed adequately by the accountable
parties.
The Department of Transportation is
responsible for regulating the safe
transportation of oil and hazardous
substances . The Coast Guard deploys On-Scene
Coordinators to handle emergencies in coastal
areas and the Great Lakes .
UNEP/GC .16/tnf .4
Page 77
AlI
ERNATIONAL CONVENTION ON CIVIL LIABILITY
FOR OIL POLLUTION DAMAGE
(as amended)
Objectives
To ensure that adequate compensation is available to persons who suffer
damage caused by pollution resulting from the escape or discharge of oil from
ships . To standardize international rules and procedures for determining
questions of liability and adequate compensation in such areas.
Provisions
(a) The owner of a ship at the time of an incident causing oil pollution damage
shall be liable for any damage so caused, unless the incident is caused by act o
war, exceptional natural phenomenon, malicious act of a third party or negligenc
of a Government or other authority in maintaining navigational aids (art . 3);
(b) Contributory liability on part of the plaintiff may be established in certai
(art . 3);
(c) Where two or more ships have caused such damage, the owners shall be
jointly and severally liable (art . 4);
(d) Limits to liability established (art . 5);
Ships carrying over 2,000 tons of oil as cargo must maintain insurance (art.
(f) Limitations of three and six years for rights of action (art . 8);
(g) Warships are excluded (art . 11).
Membership
O
Open to all Members of the United Nations, members of the specialized agencies
or parties to the Statute of the International Court of Justice . Instruments of
ratification, acceptance, approval or accession to be deposited with the
Secretary-General of IMO.
Amendments
Date of adoption
29 .11 .1969
Brussels
Place of adoption
Date of entry into force 19 . 6 .1975
19 .11 .1976
London
8 . 4 .1981
Languages
English,.
French
•
English,
French
25 . 5 .1984
London
Not yet in
force
Arabic,
Chinese,
French,
Russian,
Depositary
IMO
IMO
Spanish
IMO
Parties and dates of entry into force
At
ria
Australia
Bahamas
Belgium
Benin
Brazil
Cameroon
Canada
19 . 6 .1975
5 . 2 .1984
20 .10 .1976
12 . 4 .1977
30 . 1 .1986
17 . 3 .1977
12 . 8 .1984
24 . 4 .1989
UNEP/GC .16/Inf .4
Page 78
Chile
China
Colombia
Cyprus
Denmark
Djibouti
Dominican Republic
Ecuador
Egypt
Fiji
Finland
ce
Germany, Democratic Republic
Germany, Federal Republic of
Ghana
Greece
Guatemala
Iceland
India
Indonesia
Italy
Ivory Coast
Japan
Kuwait
Lebanon
Liberia
Maldives
Monaco
Morocco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Nigeria
Norway
Oman
31 .10 .1977
29 . 4 .1980
14 . 6 .1990
17 . 9 .1989
19 . 6 .1975
30 . 5 .1990
19 . 6 .1975
23 . 3 .1977
4 . 5 .1989
19 . 6 .1975
8 . 1 .1981
19 . 6 .1975
21 . 4 .1982
11 . 6 .1978
18. 8 .1975
19. 7 .1978
27 . 9 .1976
18 . 1 .1983
15 .10 .1980
30 . 7 .1987
30 .11 .1978
28 . 5 .1979
19 . 6 .1975
1 . 9 .1976
1 . 7 .1981
19 . 6 .1975
19 . 6 .1975
14 . 6 .1981
19 .11 .1975
19 . 6 .1975
8 .12 .1975
26 . 7 .1976
5 . 8 .1981
19 . 6 .1975
24 . 4 .1985
Panama
Papua New Guinea
Peru
Pn1and
ar l
,tuga
Republic of Korea
Saint Vincent
and Grenadines
Senegal
Seychelles
Singapore
South Africa
Spain
Sri Lanka
Sweden
Switzerland
Syrian Arab Republic
Tunisia
Tuvalu
Union of Soviet Socialist
Republics
United Arab Emirates
6.
10 .
25 .
16 .
24 .
31 .
18 .
4 .1976
6 .1980
5 .1987
6 .1976
2 .1977
8 .1988
3 .1979
18 . 7 .1989
19 . 6 .1975
11 . 7 .1988
15 .12 .1981
15 . 6 .1976
7 . 3 .1976
11 . 7 .1983
19 . 6 .1975
14 . 3 .1988
19 . 6 .1975
2 . 8 .1976
1 .10 .1978
22 . 9 .1975
14 . 3 .1984
I.
UNEP/GC .16/Inf .4
Page 79
United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Northern
Ireland*
Vanuatu
Yemen
Yugoslavia
19 .
3.
4.
16 .
6 .1975
5 .1983
6 .1979
9 .1976
The Convention applies provisionally in respect of Belize, Kiribati and Solomon
Islands .
•
* Extended to the Bailiwick of Guernsey, the Bailiwick of Jersey and the Isle of
Man on 1 . 2 .1976 ; Bermuda on 3 . 2 .1976 ; the British Indian Ocean Territory, the
British Virgin Islands and the Cayman Islands on 1 . 4 .1976 ; the Falkland Islands
(Malvinas) and Dependencies, Gibraltar, Hong Kong, Montserrat, Pitcairn, St.
.ena and Dependencies on 1 . 4 .1976 ; Seychelles (now an independent State),
°Turks and Caicos Islands and the United Kingdom Sovereign Base Areas of
Akrotiri and Dhekelia on the Island of Cyprus on 1 . 4 .1976 and Anguilla on
1 .9 .1984 .
/
UNEP/GC .16/Inf .4
Page 80
1IO
ERNATIONAL CONVENTION RELATING TO INTERVENTION ON THE
HIGH SEAS IN CASES OF OIL POLLUTION CASUALTIES
Objectives
To enable countries to take action on the high seas in cases of a maritime
casualty resulting in danger of oil pollution of sea and coastlines ; to establis
such action would not affect the principle of freedom of the high seas.
Provisions
(a) Parties may take such measures on the high seas as may be necessary to
prevent, mitigate or eliminate grave and imminent danger to their coastline or
related interests from pollution or threat of pollution of the sea by oil (art.
(b) Before taking action, a coastal State should notify the flag State of the sh
consult independent experts and notify any person whose interests may
reasonably be expected to be affected by such action . In cases of extreme
urgency measures may be taken at once . In any case the coastal State must
endeavour to protect human life and assist persons in distress (art . 3);
(c) Such measures shall not go beyond what is reasonably necessary to achieve
the end mentioned in article 1, and shall be proportionate to the damage, actual
or threatened (art . 5).
Membership
.ln to all Members of the United Nations, members of the specialized agencies
or IAEA or parties to the Statute of the International . Court of Justice . Instrum
of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession to be deposited with the
Secretary-General of IMO.
Date of adoption
Place of adoption
Date of entry into force
Languages
Depositary
29 .11 .1969
Brussels
6 . 5 .1975
English, French
IMO
Argentina
Australia
Bahamas
Bangladesh
Belgium
Benin
Bulgaria
Cameroon
China
Cote d'Ivoire
20 . 7 .1987
5 . 2 .1984
20 .10 .1976
4 . 2 .1982
6 . 5 .1975
30. 1 .1986
31. 1 .1984
12 . 8 .1984
4 . 5 .1990
7 . 4 .1988
Cuba*
Denmark
Djibouti
inican Republic
ador
iii
3.
6.
30 .
6.
23 .
8 .1976
5 .1975
5 .1990
5 .1975
3 .1977
* With a declaration.
E yt
Finland
9
France
Gabon
Germany, Democratic Republic*
Germany, Federal Republic of*
Ghana
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Kuwait
Lebanon
Liberia
aco
.ico
Morocco
Netherlands**
New Zealand
Norway
Panama
Oman
Papua New Guinea
Poland
Portugal
Qatar
Senegal
South Africa
Spain
.
Sri Lanka
Suriname
Sweden
Switzerland
Syrian Arab Republic*
Tunisia
Republics*
'United Arab Emirates
•
4 . 5 .1989
6 . 5 .1975
5 .12 .1976
6 . 5 .1975
21 . 4 .1982
21 . 3 .1979
5 . 8 .1975
19 . 7 .1978
15 .10 .1980
19 .11 .1980
28 . 5 .1979
6 . 5 .1975
1. 7 .1981
3. 9 .1975
6. 5 .1975
7. 7 .1976
6 . 5 .1975
6 . 5 .1975
18 .12 .1975
6 .5 .1975
6 . 5 .1975
6 . 4 .1976
24 . 4 .1985
10 . 6 .1980
30. 8 .1976
15 . 5 .1980
31. 8 .1988
6 . 5 .1975
29 . 9 .1986
6 . 5 .1975
11 . 7.1983
25 .11 .1975
6 . 5 .1975
14 . 3 .1988
6 . 5 .1975
2. 8 .1976
6 . 5 .1975
14 . .3 .1984
United Kingdom of Great Britain
and Northern Ireland***
United States of America****
Y en
slavia
6.
6.
4.
3.
5 .1975
5 .1975
6 .1979
5 .1976
** The Kingdom, including the Netherlands Antilles.
*** The Convention was extended to Hong Kong on 6 .5 .1975 ; Bermuda on
1 .12 .1980 ; and Anguilla, the British Antarctic Territory, the British Virgin Isl
the Cayman Islands, the Falkland Islands (Malvinas) and Dependencies,
Montserrat, Pitcairn, Henderson, Ducie and Deno Islands, St . Helena and
Dependencies, the Turks and Caicos Islands and the United Kingdom Sovereign
Base Areas of Akrotiri and Dhekelia on the Island of Cyprus on 8 .9 .1982.
**** Extended on 6 .5 .1975 to American Samoa, Guam, the Panama Canal Zone,
Puerto Rico, the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands and the United States Vi
Islands.
•
UNEP/GC .16/Inf .4
Page 94
III
ERNATIONAL CONVENTION ON THE ESTABLISHMENT OF
AN INTERNATIONAL FUND FOR COMPENSATION
FOR OIL POLLUTION DAMAGE
(as amended)
Objectives
To supplement the International Convention on Civil
Liability for Oil Pollution Damage, 1969 ; to ensure that
adequate compensation is available to persons who suffer
damage caused by pollution resulting from the escape or
by discharge of oil from ships ; and to ensure that the
oil cargo interests bear a part of the economic
consequences of such oil pollution damage, to the relief .
of .the shipping industry.
Provisions
(a) An International Oil Pollution Compensation Fund
established (art . 2);
(b) Compensation to be paid by the Fund to any person
suffering pollution damage who is unable to obtain full
and adequate compensation under the terms of the'1969
Liability Convention, including the cost of measures
reasonably taken to minimize the damage (art . 4);
The Fund will incur no obligation if the damage was
caused by act of war, hostilities or by discharge from a
warship (art . 4);
(d) Limits to the Fund's obligations set at million
francs (as defined in the 1969 Convention) for any one
incident (art . 4);
(e) The Fund to indemnify shipowners for the amount of
liability incurred in excess of 1,500 francs per ton of
ship's tonnage, but not in excess of 2,000 francs per
ton or in any case of 210 million francs (art . 5);
(f) Contributions to the Fund to be made in respect of
each party by any person, .who '_ in . the calendar year
before the entry into force of the Convention for that
party, received quantities of oil exceeding 150,000
tons, such contributions to be calculated on a "per ton"
basis, as determined by the Assembly of the Fund (arts.
10-12).
Membership
Open to States parties to the 1969 Convention on Civil
Liability for Oil Pollution Damage . Instruments of
ratification, acceptance, approval or accession to be
de osited with the Secretary-General of IMO.
Amendments
Date of adoption
18 .12 .1971 19 .11 .1976 25 . 5.1984
Place of adoption
Brussels
London
London
Not yet in
Date of entry into force 16 .10 .1978 Not yet
in force
force
Languages
English, French
Depositary
IMO
IMO
Algeria
Bahamas
Benin
Cameroon
16 .10 .1978
16 .10 .1978
30 . 1 .1986
12 . 8 .1984
UNEP/GC .16/Inf .4
Page 95
Canada*
Cote d'Ivoire
mark
.rus
Djibouti
Fiji
Finland
France
Gabon
Germany, Federal Republic of
Ghana
Greece
Iceland
India
Indonesia
Italy
Japan
Kuwait
Liberia
Maldives
Monaco
Netherlands
Nigeria
Norway
Oman
Papua New Guinea
24 . 4 .1989
3 . 1 .1988
24 .10 .1989
16 .10 .1978
30 . 5 .1990
2 . 6 .1983
8 . 1 .1981
16 .10 .1978
21 . 4 .1982
16 .10 .1978
16 .10 .1978
16 . 3 .1987
15 .10 .1980
8 .10 .1990
30 .11 .1978
28 . 5 .1979
16 .10 .1978
1 . 7 .1981
16 .10 .1978
14 . 6 .1981
21 .11 .1979
1 .11 .1982
10 .12 .1987
16 .10 .1978'
8 . 8 .1985
10 . 6 .1980
Poland
Portugal
Qatar
Se ychelles
Illin
Lanka
Sweden
Syrian Arab Republic
Tunisia
Tuvalu
Republics
United Arab Emirates
United Kingdom of Great.
Britain and Northern
Ireland**
Vanuatu
Yugoslavia
15 .12 .1985
10 .12 .1985
31 . 8 .1988
11 . 7 .1988
6 . 1 .1982
11 . 7 .1983
16 .10 .1978
16 .10 .1978
16 .10 .1978
16 .10 .1978
15 . 9 .1987
14 . 3 .1984
16 .10 .1978
13 . 4 .1989
16 .10 .1978
** Extended on 16 .10 .1978 to the Bailiwick of
Guernseyy, the Bailiwick of Jersey, Bermuda, the British
Indian Ocean Territory, the British Virgin Islands, the
Cayman Islands, the Falkland Islands (Malvinas) and
.endencies, Gibraltar, Hong Kong, the Isle of Man,
tserrat, the Pitcairn group, St . Helena and
Dependencies, the Turks and Caicos Islands and the
United Kingdom Sovereign Base Areas ofAkrotiri and
Dhekelia on the Island of Cyprus, as well as to the
following now independent States : Belize, the Gilbert
Islands (now Kiribati), Seychelles and Solomon Islands.
Extended on 1 .9 .1984 to Anguilla.
Used Oil Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
DATE : October 3, 1991
LY TO
N OF : EH-231
SUBJECT : Used Oil Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
TO : Distribution
The purpose of this memorandum is to solicit Program Office and Field
Organization comment on an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposal to
regulate used oil under Subtitle C of RCRA . This proposal was published as a
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in the September 23, 1991 Federal
Register (56 FR 48000) . This NPRM includes data on the composition of used
oil and used oil residuals which will be considered by EPA in making its final
decision whether or not to list all types of used oil or certain classes of
used oil as hazardous waste under Subtitle C of RCRA, and to list as
hazardous four wastes from the reprocessing and re-refining of used oil.
Also, information is provided on proposed used oil management standards for
recycled oil under section 3014 of RCRA . EPA is soliciting comments on the
NPRM to list used oil and used oil residuals as hazardous wastes, the
proposed used oil management standards, and the data provided on used oil
composition.
The Office of Environmental Guidance (EH-23) will coordinate DOE comments on
the NPRM . Comments from contributing Program Offices and Field Organizations
must be provided to EH-23 no later than October 28, 1991, in order for the
artment to meet the EPA imposed deadline for comment submission . All
,meats received by this date will be considered in Headquarters'
preparation of a consolidated DOE response to EPA . Comments received after
this date will be forwarded to EPA after the close of the comment period for
possible consideration if new and significant issues are identified . Please
reference specific sections on which comments are being made, so as to
facilitate consolidation of similar comments . Furthermore, in order to
expedite the preparation of a comment package, we are requesting that comments
be provided on a 3 .5" floppy disk in Wordperfect 5 .1 if at all possible.
Also, written comments may be faxed to EH-231 at FTS 896-3915.
Due to the inordinate size of the NPRM, a reproduction of the Federal Register
notice is not included with this memorandum . Questions regarding this NPRM
can be directed to Mark Petts of the RCRA/CERCLA Division at FTS 896-2609.
Director
•
Entry_ID : FWA00217
Entry_Title : Biological and Chemical Data for the California OCS II Program (19&
86)
o
Originating_Center : NOAA/NESDIS/NODC
t_Date : 1986-01-01
p_Date : 1986-12-31
Sensor_name : CAMERAS, AIRCRAFT AND SHUTTLE
Sensor_name : COASTAL ZONE COLOR SCANNER
Sensor_name : CTD > Conductivity-Temperature-Depth
Sensor_name : NANSEN MULTI-BOTTLE WATER SAMP.
Source_name : FIELD SURVEYS
Source_name : SHIPS
Group : Investigator
First_name : JEFFREY
Last_name : HYLAND
Group : Address
Battelle Memorial Institute
1431 Spinnaker Drive
Ventura, CA 93001
End_Group
End_Group
First_name : ANDREW
Last_name : LISSNER
Group : Address
SAIC
4224 Campus Point Court
San Diego, CA 92121
End_Group
End_Group
First_name : HAROLD
Last_name : PETERSON
Phone : 617-934-0571
Group : Address
.Battelle Ocean Sciences
397 Washington Street
Duxbury, MA 02332
End.
.Group
End_Group
Group : Technical_Contact
First_name : GARY
Last_name : BREWER
Group : Address
Minerals Management Service
Pacific OCS Office
1340 West Sixth Street
Los Angeles, CA 90017
End_Group
End_Group
Group : Author
First_name : PETER
Middle_name : L.
Last_name : GRIMM
Email : INTERNET > GRIMM@NODC2 .NODC .NOAA .GOV
S
End_Group
Location : . PACIFIC OCEAN > North Pacific Ocean > Santa Maria Basin
Location : SEA FLOOR
% word : CARBON
ord : FLUME STUDIES
M!Word : LARVAL SETTLEMENT
Keyword : MINERALOGY
Keyword : NORTH PACIFIC OCEAN
Keyword : OIL AND GAS
Keyword : SANTA MARIA BASIN
Keyword : SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
Revision_Date : 1991-04-30
Group : Quality
These data are stored in the format in which they were received by NODC, and
data quality is dependent on the originator's quality control.
End_Group
Group : Summary
This dataset consists of Santa Maria Basin physical and biological data
collected by Batelle on cruises CAMP 1-1, CAMP 1-2, and Physical Oceanography
Cruise 1 as part of the Southern California OCS Program . The chief
investigators for the 1986 study were Dr . Hyland of Batelle and Dr . Lissner of
SAIC . The California Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Phase II monitoring program
is a five-year study set up to monitor potential environmental changes from oil
and gas development in the Santa Maria Basin . There are two main objectives of
the program . The first one is to detect and measure potential long-term (or
short-term) changes in the marine environment near OCS oil and gas development
and production activities, while the other objective is to assess whether
changes in the marine environment are due to oil and gas production activities
or to natural processes . Specific parameters included in this dataset are the
owing : biological community indices and species abundances for hard and
t bottom benthic assemblages ; levels and distributions of trace metals and
hydrocarbons in bottom . . sediments, suspended particulates, animal tissues, and
pore waters ; currents and other physical oceanographic variables ; and
sedimentological properties (e .g . sediment grain size, total organic carbon and
carbonate content, sediment shear strength, distribution of mineral types, and
redox conditions) . Synoptic measurements of these parameters are collected to
assess the biological changes resulting from physical and chemical changes
relating to specific drilling events.
The station design is made up of a series of regional stations and two
additional arrays of site-specific stations near existing or planned oil
activity platforms . These arrays will enable one to study potential nearfield
impacts and possible impact gradients emanating from point sources of platform
discharge . One array is located in unconsolidated substrates offshore of Pt.
Sal while the other can be fc :und .offshore of Point Arguello within a region
of hard bottom features . These arrays consist of a series of platform and
comparison stations . Sampling began in October, 1986 and will continue through
the next five years.
This data is recorded on a 9-track, 1600 bpi tape in ASCII format . Each type
of data is recorded on a separate file . All data pertains to year one of the
California OCS Monitoring Program . Data corresponds with specific chapters of
the California OCS Phase II Monitoring Program : Year-One Annual Report .
The following table lists the reference number and their contents of the files:
REF#
OL00900
Description
Salinity, temperature, and sigma_t data recorded using a
CTD
L00901
Infauna and Epifauna data
L00902
Data derived from the analysis of sediment samples taken
box cores
L00903
Data on the concentration of saturated and aromatic
hydrocarbons
L00904
Data on the concentration of trace metals
L00905
Data on the activity of radioisotopes in sediment cores
L00906
Water quality data derived from the analysis of water samples
collected by bottle-cast
Ancillary Information
California Phase II OCS Monitoring Program
MMS Contract 14-12-0001-30262
Program Overview
Data Documentation
Ancillary Information
MMS CARP Survey Program
Contract 14-12-0001-30388
Allgram Overview
Data Documentation
The above data is available at NODC on two (2) double side, high density
diskettes . Diskette 1 contains 16 files . Diskette 2 contains 9 files.
They can be found under accession number 8900199.
End_Group
Entry_ID : FWA00245
Entry_Title : Tar and Oil Pollution Data for Stations in the Gulf of Mexico and
Caribbean Sea (1979-89)
Or iginating_Center : NOAA/NESDIS/NODC
t_Date : 1979-02-05
S p_Date : 1989-05-03
Source_name : SHIPS
First_name : BILL
Last_name : NODAL
Phone : 305-361-4395
Phone : FTS 350-1395
Group : Address
NOAA/OAR/ERL/AMOL
Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological Laboratory
Ocean Chemistry Division
4301 Rickenbacker Causeway
Miami, FL 33149
End_Group
End_Group
First_name : ANDREW
Last_name : ROBERTSON
Phone : 301-443-8933
Group : Address
NOAA/National Ocean Service
Office of Ocean Resources Conservation and Assessment
Coastal Monitoring and Bioeffects Assessment Division
Washington Science Center, Building 1, Room 312
6001 Executive Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20852
End_Group
Group
up : Author
First_name : PETER
Middle_name : L.
Last_name : GRIMM
Email : INTERNET > GRIMM@NODC2 .NODC .NOAA .GOV
Email : NSI/DECNET > NODC2 : :GRIMM
Phone : (202) 606-5008
Group : Address
Environmental Information Services
NOAA/NESDIS/EIS Ex2
Room 506
1825 Connecticut Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20235 USA
End_Group
End_Group
Group : Data_Center
Data_center_name : NOAA/NESDIS/NODC > National Oceanographic Data Center
Dataset_ID : ACC#8900193 > REF#L00894 to L00896
Group : Data_Center_Contact
Last_name : NATIONAL OCEANOGRAPHIC .DATA CENTER
Email : NSI\DECNET > NODC : :SERVICES
Email : TELEMAIL > NODC .WDCA/OMNET
Phone : (202) 606-4549
Phone : FAX (202) 606-4586
Group : Address
•
User Services Branch
NOAA/NESDIS E/OC21
End_Group
End_Group
End_Group
Campaign : CARIPOL > Caribbean Oil Pollution Database Project
Campaign : NSTP > National Status and Trends Program
Storage_Medium : Magnetic Tapes
Parameter : OCEAN COMPOSITION > DISSOLVED SOLIDS
Parameter : OCEAN COMPOSITION > ORGANIC MATTER
Parameter : OCEAN COMPOSITION > POLLUTANTS
Parameter : OCEAN COMPOSITION > SUSPENDED SOLIDS
Parameter : OCEAN DYNAMICS > TURBIDITY
Discipline : EARTH SCIENCE > OCEAN
Group : Coverage
Minimum_Latitude : 8N
Maximum_Latitude : 32N
Minimum_Longitude : 98W
Maximum_Longitude : 60W
End_Group
Location : ATLANTIC OCEAN > North Atlantic Ocean > Gulf of Mexico
Location : ATLANTIC OCEAN > North Atlantic Ocean > Caribbean Sea
Keyword : CARIBBEAN SEA
Keyword : GULF OF MEXICO
Keyword : HYDROCARBONS
•word : NORTH ATLANTIC OCEAN
ord : TAR
Revision Date : 1991-04-30
Group : Quality
These data are stored in the format in which they were received by NODC, and
data quality is dependent on the originator's quality control.
End_Group
Group : Summary
These data consist of six files of tar and oil pollution data collected by
NOAA's Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological Laboratory from the Caribbean
Sea and Gulf of Mexico as part of the Caribbean Oil Pollution Database
(CARIPOL) project . Two files (REF#L01174, REF#L0894) contain tar on the
beaches data collected from February 1979 to May 1989 . Another set of files
(REF#L01175, REF#L0895) consist of dissolved/dispersed petroleum hydrocarbons
data gathered from November 1979 to May 1989 . The last set of files
(REF#L01176, REF#L0896) contain floating tar data collected from December 1979
to November 1988 . These six files are recorded on two 9-track, 6250 BPI,
magnetic tapes in ASCII format . The data on these tapes largely overlap.
REF#L01174 to L00176 are on one tape, while REF#L0894 to L0896 are on another
tape.
End_Group
Entry_ID : NOS00023
Entry_Title : The Caribbean Petroleum Pollution Monitoring Project
Originating_Center : NOAA/NOS/ORCA/CMBAD
Start_Date : 1979-01-01
Technical_Contact
irst_name : MICHELLE
Last_name : HARMON
Phone : (301) 443-8465
Group : Address
Caribbean Petroleum Pollution Monitoring Project
Office of Ocean Resources Conservation and Assessment, NOAA
End_Group
End_Group
Group : Author
First_name : DAVID
Middle_name : E.
Last_name : IRVINE
Email : INTERNET > IRVINE@NSSDCA .GSFC .NASA .GOV
Email : OMNET > D .IRVINE
Email : SPAN > NCF : :IRVINE
Phone : (301) 513-1677
Phone : 301-513-1677
Group : Address
7601 Ora Glen Drive
Suite 300
Greenbelt, MD 20770
USA
End_Group
Group
up : Data_Center
Data_center_name : NOAA/NOS/ORCA/CMBAD
First_name : ANDREW
Last_name : ROBERTSON
Phone : 301-443-8933
Group : Address
End_Group
End_Group
End_Group
Storage_Medium : Digital, 23 Mbyte
Discipline : EARTH SCIENCE > LAND > Coastal
Discipline : EARTH SCIENCE . > OCEAN > Coastal
Group : Coverage
Minimum_Latitude : 1ON
A
End_Group
Location : ATLANTIC OCEAN > United States > Coast
l.ncation : NORTH AMERICA > United States > Coast
ation : PACIFIC OCEAN > United States > Coast
ord : BEACH TAR
Keyword : COAST
Keyword : COASTAL
Keyword : FLOATING TAR
Keyword : PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS
Keyword : UNITED STATES
Revision_Date : 1992-09-30T10 :16 :25
Science_Review_Date : 1992-06-30
Group : Reference
Atwood, D .K ., H .H . Cummings, W .J . Nodal, and R .C . Culbertson, The CARIPOL
Petroleum Pollution Monitoring Project and the CARIPOL Petroleum Pollution
Database, Carib . J . Sci ., 23(1), 1-3, 1987.
Atwood, D .K ., F .J . Burton, J .E . Corredor, G .R . Harvey, A .J . Mata-Jimenez, A.
Vasquez-Botello, and B .A . Wade, Results of the CARIPOL Petroleum Pollution
Monitoring Project in the Wider Caribbean, Marine Pollution Bulletin, 18(10),
540-548, 1987.
End_Group
Group : . Quality
Although CARIPOL data are generated from numerous sources, uniform sampling and
analytical methodologies have resulted in high quality data which are
intercomparable . The abundance of data is not uniformly distributed (i .e .,
some nations have more active sampling programs than others) . Trinidad and
ago have reported over half of the petroleum residue observations to this
e . Nevertheless, the data provide a relatively good degree of resolution
in selected areas of the Caribbean.
S
End_Group
Group : Summary
The Caribbean Petroleum Pollution Monitoring Project (CARIPOL) is a marine
pollution research and monitoring program that encompasses the wider Caribbean
region . The major element of CARIPOL is the Petroleum Pollution Monitoring
Project, which assesses the degree of petroleum contamination along shorefronts
and at sea, and analyzes petroleum residues to identify their origin . When
combined with other factors, such as prevailing currents and winds, CARIPOL
data may be used to identify probable inputs of petroleum residues in selected
areas of the Caribbean (i .e ., illegal ballast washings and discharges from
tankers, petroleum drilling a*nd production operations, and inputs from the
North Atlantic).
CARIPOL monitors the following parameters : 1) the concentration of petroleum
residues (tar) on beaches ; 2) the concentration of surface (floating)
particulate petroleum residues (tar balls) ; and 3) dissolved and/or dispersed
petroleum hydrocarbons in seawater (DDPH) . In some instances, samples are
chemically analyzed to determine the petroleum residue type (i .e ., Venezuelan
crude oil or Arabian crude).
•
Data are recorded on a standardized log which also includes the country,
institute, sampling time and date, position (latitude and longitude), and wind
direction . Beach tar data also include the beach name, shorefront length,
*ling distance, seashore surface (i .e ., sand, pebbles, or rocks) and time
ow tide . Floating tar and DDPH data include the wind speed, wave height,
water temperature, speed and duration of the sampling tow (floating tar data),
and analytical method (DDPH data).
The CARIPOL Petroleum Pollution Monitoring Project encompasses the wider
Caribbean region, including the Gulf of Mexico, the Straits of Florida and the
eastern approaches to the Caribbean Sea . In addition to the United States, a
number of Caribbean and Latin American nations participate in the program,
including Barbados, Belize, Bonaire, Cayman Islands, Columbia, Costa Rica,
Cuba, Curacao, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Grenada, Guatemala, Guayana,
Jamaica, Mexico, Panama, Puerto Rico, St . Lucia, Trinidad-Tobago, and
Venezuela . Data also have been collected from Argentina and Greece, although
these states are not included in the program . To date, approximately 11,000
observations have been entered into the CARIPOL data base . Petroleum residues
are monitored along shorelines (beaches), and in coastal, estuarine and open
ocean areas . Beach tar samples are collected from randomly chosen sites of 1
to 2 m width from the water line to the backshore . Floating tar deposits are
collected using 1 m width nets, towed at any desirable length . DDPH samples
are collected using 1 gallon bottles lowered from a stationary vessel.
CARIPOL, initiated in 1979, is implemented by the Intergovernmental
Oceanographic Commission's Regional Subcommision for the Caribbean and Adjacent
Regions (IOC/IOCARIBE) in conjunction with the United Nations Environment
Programme (UNEP) Regional Seas Programme (GEMS), the Food and Agricultural
Organization of the United Nations (FAO) Western Central Atlantic Fisheries
Commission (WECAFC), and the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin
rica (ECLA) Caribbean Environment Project.
e
End_Group
a
Entry_ID : NOS00043
Entry_Title : The National Coastal Pollutant Discharge Inventory
Originating_Center : NOAA/NOS/ORCA/SEA
St rt Date : 1982-01-01
1p : Investigator
First_name : DANIEL
Middle_name : R .G.
Last_name : FARROW
Phone : (301) 443-0454
Group : Address
Chief, Pollution Sources Characterization Branch
Strategic Environmental Assessment Division
NOAA/NOS/Office of Ocean Resources Conservation and Assessment
6001 Executive Blvd, Rm . 220
Rockville, MD 20852
End_Group
End_Group
Group : Author
First_name : DAVID
Middle_name : E.
Last_name : IRVINE
Email : INTERNET > IRVINE@NSSDCA .GSFC .NASA .GOV
Email : OMNET > D .IRVINE
Email : SPAN > NCF : :IRVINE
Phone : (301) 513-1677
Phone : 301-513-1677
Group : Address
7601 Ora Glen Drive
Suite 300
Greenbelt, MD 20770
USA
~End_Group
AliGroup
Group : Data_Center
Data_center_name : NOAA/NOS/ORCA/SEA > Strategic Environmental Assessment Div&
ision
Last_name : CHIEF, STRATEGIC ' ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
Phone : (301) 443-8843
Group : Address
Strategic Environmental Assessment Division
6001 Executive Blvd
Rockville, MD 20852
End_Group
End_Group
End_Group
Storage_Medium : Hard Copy Reports
Parameter : HYDROLOGIC PARAMETERS > CONTAMINATION
Parameter : HYDROLOGIC PARAMETERS > OXYGEN DEMAND
Parameter : HYDROLOGIC PARAMETERS > RUNOFF
Parameter : OCEAN COMPOSITION > MAJOR ELEMENTS
Group : Coverage
_Group
ation : ATLANTIC OCEAN > United States > Coast
Location : NORTH AMERICA > United States > Coast
Location : PACIFIC OCEAN > United States > Coast
Keyword : UNITED STATES
Revision_Date : 1992-09-30T16 :09 :20
Science_Review_Date : 1992-09-15
Group : Quality
411
NCPDI estimates are intended to be used for first order analyses at the
national and regional scale . The estimates are less appropriate at more
refined, site-specific levels of analysis . Estimation methods may differ to
some degree for each region . Nevertheless, NCPDI data may be considered to
represent a best-available-estimate of the recent discharge conditions in the
study areas . In addition, all NCPDI reports contain a discussion of data
quality and limitations relevant to the report topic.
End_Group
Group : Summary
The National Coastal Pollutant Discharge Inventory (NCPDI) contains
estimates for all point, nonpoint and upstream sources of pollutants
discharged into the estuarine, coastal, and oceanic waters of the contiguous
United States (excluding the Great Lakes) . A special area of interest is the
estuarine drainage area (EDA), which is defined as the land and water component
of a watershed that most directly affects an estuary . The NCPDI was designed
to bridge the gap between vast amounts of very detailed data available for
e areas (typically *hard to reduce and compare from area to area) and sparse
a available for the rest of the nation's coastal zone.
Discharge estimates are generated for nine pollutant categories : 1)
wastewater or runoff ; 2) oxygen-demanding materials (biochemical oxygen
demand) ; 3) particulate matter (total suspended solids) ; 4) nutrients (total
nitrogen and total phosphorus) ; 5) heavy metals (eight separate elements) ; 6)
petroleum hydrocarbons (oil and grease) ; 7) pesticides (including chlorinated
hydrocarbons) ; 8) pathogens (fecal coliform bacteria) ; and 8) wastewater
treatment sludges . Discharge estimates are primarily expressed in units of
weight per time, or volume per time, depending on the pollutant category and
source.
NCPDI estimates are produced for three regional components - the East Coast,
Gulf of Mexico, and West Coast . The study area for each region is comprised
of a combination of counties and U .S . Geological Survey (USGS) hydrologic
cataloging units . Hydrologic cataloging units are major watershed areas
defined by USGS as representing part, or all of a . surface drainage basin, or a
distinct hydrologic feature . Estimates are made for all or a portion of 526
coastal counties and 339 cataloging units Nationwide . Estimates can be
summarized by county, state, cataloging unit, and estuarine drainage area.
Seasonal and annual estimates are made for each source and pollutant category
for a specific 'base year' . The base year for the East Coast •component is
1982, for the West Coast 1984, and for the Gulf of Mexico 1987 .
Estimates fo :°
the East Coast currently are being updated to 1990 . Base-year estimates can
be considered to approximate pollutant discharge conditions for a five- year
period around the base year . For example, current estimates for the East Coast
roximate conditions during the 1980-85 period . Base periods are used to
4llracterize discharge estimates, because they better reflect the variability
in economic, meterological,and regulatory conditions that affect discharges in
any given year or within a year, and because the data required to estimate
discharges for each source category and pollutant are not always available for
a single year.
The majority of NCPDI data are 'enhanced' as opposed to 'observed' data . That
is, the method used to calculate the pollutant discharge estimate includes one
or more typical or average values relating to the polluting activity.
Estimating pollutant discharge discharges for any source generally involves
three steps : 1)estimating the level of the activity in the base year or
period, e .g ., product outputs of an industrial-facility or acres of specified
crops-in production ; 2) estimating the quantity of wastewater or runoff
discharged per unit of output or over a specified time period ; and 3)
estimating the concentrations of pollutants in the wastewater or runoff, e .g .,
through direct measurement or use of 'engineering estimates' based on the
characteristics of the source . An 'estimation basis code' is assigned to every
estimate in the NCPDI so that the user can determine the relative reliability
of each estimate.
The NCPDI Master Loading File is supported by six data bases:
o
o
o
o
Point Sources
Urban Nonpoint Source Runoff
Nonurban Nonpoint Source Runoff
Upstream Sources
Agricultural Pesticide Use
Fish Kills in Coastal Waters
'•
End_Group
Email : NSI/DECNET > NODC2 : :GRIMM
Phone : (202) 606-5008
Group : Address
Environmental Information Services
•
NOAA/NESDIS/EIS Ex2
Room 506
End_Group
End_Group
Group : Data_Center
Data_center_name : NOAA/NESDIS/NODC > National Oceanographic Data Center
Last_name : NATIONAL OCEANOGRAPHIC DATA CENTER
Email : NSI\DECNET > NODC : :SERVICES
Email : TELEMAIL > NODC .WDCA/OMNET
Phone : (202) 606-4549
Phone : FAX (202) 606-4586
Group : Address
User Services Branch
NOAA/NESDIS E/OC21
End_Group
End_Group
End_Group
Campaign : OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF
Storage_Medium : Magnetic tapes
Parameter : BIOLOGICAL ENTITIES > OCEAN WILDLIFE
Apcmeter: OCEAN COMPOSITION > BIOMASS
meter : OCEAN COMPOSITION > CHEMICAL TRACERS
Parameter : OCEAN COMPOSITION > DISSOLVED SOLIDS
Parameter : OCEAN COMPOSITION > NITROGEN > Nitrite
Parameter : OCEAN COMPOSITION > NITROGEN > Nitrate
Parameter : OCEAN COMPOSITION > OCEAN WILDLIFE
Parameter : OCEAN COMPOSITION > ORGANIC MATTER
Parameter : OCEAN COMPOSITION > OXYGEN
Parameter : OCEAN COMPOSITION > PHOSPHATES
Parameter : OCEAN COMPOSITION > SALINITY
Parameter : OCEAN COMPOSITION > SEDIMENTS
Parameter : OCEAN COMPOSITION > SILICATE
Parameter : OCEAN COMPOSITION > SUSPENDED SOLIDS
Parameter : OCEAN COMPOSITION > TRACE ELEMENTS
Parameter : OCEAN DYNAMICS > CURRENTS
Parameter : OCEAN DYNAMICS > SEDIMENTATION
Parameter : OCEAN DYNAMICS > TEMPERATURE
Discipline : EARTH SCIENCE > OCEAN
Group : Coverage
Maximum Latitude : 41N
Minimum Longitude : 130W
•
113
ANEXO II
TECNOLOGIAS PARA EL TRATAMIENTO Y/O ELIMINACION DE
ACEITES RESIDUALES
•
49
ANEXO II
TECNOLOGIAS PARA EL TRATAMIENTO Y/O ELIMINACION DE
ACEITES RESIDUALES
Title/Abstract : OIL* WASTE*
PATENTS
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
5324417
94
381 140
PA
208/I 13 208/13 20 g /126 208/427
Title : Processing waste over spent FCC catalyst
Abstract:
Distress feeds . such as refinery sludge and slop oils are upgraded , over hot equilibrium catalyst
(E-Cat) removed from an FCC regenerator . I-lot E-Cat demetallizes and/or demulsifies slop and
sludge streams in an auxiliary reactor without contaminating the FCC catalyst inventory.
Waste streams are upgraded with a "waste" catalyst stream . The auxiliary reactor and FCC
reactor may share a product fractionator.
•
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
5323715
94
702444
JPX
110/23 g 110/224 110/262 110/342
Title : Apparatus for treating waste oil
Abstract
In an apparatus for burning a combustible liquid containing a combustible liquid and water, a
furnace (I) has a lower portion . an upper portion and a side portion extending between the
lower portion and the upper portion . A burner (2) is placed at the lower portion of the furnace
(I) for burning a fuel . A heat exchanger (3A) is connected to the furnace (1) for receiving a hot
gas produced in the furnace (I) and heating the combustible liquid so as to vapourize the water ..
A generator (3B) is connected to the heat exchanger (3A) for generating the vapourized water.
A heater (7) is placed at the upper portion of the furnace (I) and connected to the generator
(3B) for heating the vapourized water so as to be dried before it enters into the furnace (1).
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State . / Country
Classification
5322617
94
691341
CAX
20 g /108 20 g /109 208/ 1 10 20 g / l 12 208/126 423/437M 423/651
Title : Upgrading oil emulsions with carbon monoxide or synthesis gas
Abstract:
Several procedures are provided for the thermal rearrangement of a water emulsion . of or a
mixture with water, of a feedstock selected from the group consisting of tar sand bitumen,
heavy oil . refinery residue and a heavy waste oil stream . the feedstock containing a naturallyoccurring . finely-divided mineral material . The essence of such procedures involves contacting
the water emulsion or the water mixture with a gas selected from the group consisting of
synthesis gas and carbon monoxide in the presence of a catalytic amount . i .e . . from about 0 .3%
to about 15% of a bifunctional catalyst that facilitates the water gas shift reaction and also
promotes the hydrogenation and stabilization of cracking reaction products . The bifunctional
catalyst includes the naturally-occurring, finely-divided mineral material which is contained in
the feedstock . The process is conducted under such conditions of pressure and temperature
that the water gas shift reaction occurs . Thermally rearranged liquid oil having a lower
viscosity and a lower density than that of the feedstock is recovered . In addition, separate
streams of gaseous carbon dioxide and gaseous hydrogen are also recovered therefrom.
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
5322026
94
0
MO
110/235 110/302 110/314 431/165 431/351 431/352
Title : Waste combustion chamber with tertiary burning zone
0
Abstract:
This invention relates to a combustion chamber and a method for burning waste material, such
as waste oil, hazardous chemicals . and municipal garbage or trash . in a manner which
generates very little smoke . particulate matter, unburned hydrocarbons . or potentially hazardous
fumes in the exhaust gases . The combustion chamber is enclosed within an outer wall which
provides an inlet for air . fuel, and burnable waste material, and an outlet for exhaust gases.
Enclosed within the outer wall is an annular wall, which divides the chamber into a central
burning region inside the annular wall . and an annular space between the outer wall and the
annular wall . The central burning' region contains a primary burning zone . while the annulus
space carries a portion of the inlet air along the length of the chamber.
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
5315020
94
686347
NJ
554/1 R4 554/ 1 75 554/205.
Title : Method of recovering waste heat from . edible oil deodorizer and improving product
stability
Abstract :
•
The invention relates to a process for recovering heat from deodorized edible oils and
stabilizing the sane comprising : introducing or injecting non-condensible inert gas into hot
deodorized edible oil as the hot deodorized edible oil is cooled by indirectly heat exchanging
with crude oil to be deodorized.
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
5314620
94
701570
CA
210/61 1210/610 210/620 435/264 435/281
Title : Cutting oil treatment
Abstract.
A method and apparatus for the biological purification of cutting oil . such as used in metal
machining apparatus, is disclosed . The invention herein provides a suitable environment for
cultured aerobic bacteria . These beneficial bacteria act to break down the hazardous organic
waste products of anaerobic bacteria and eliminate rank odors . The cutting oil is aerated to
encourage the proliferation of the aerobic bacteria, and to discourage the proliferation of the
unwanted anaerobic bacteria.
•
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
5313991
94
446255
OK
141/86 73/46 137/312 141/98 220/571
Title : Apparatus for containing oil and waste spills at a loading and unloading line connection
Abstract:
An oil and waste line connection spillage containment apparatus, constructed from noncorrosive and rustproof materials, includes a substantially cylindrical container which has two
openings for receiving oil and waste loading and unloading lines therein . The lines are
connected within the container . A circular cover encloses the container and is quickly and
securely fastened and unfastened from the container using a pair of L-shaped members which
extend from the cover and cooperatively . couple with a lip defined around the top of the
container . Any oil and waste spilled from the connection is removed from the container when
the lines are disconnected . or alternatively, a removal line with an auxiliary valve affixed
thereto, is used to siphon the oil and waste from the container to the loading line . When the
unloading line is removed from the opening in the container, a plug having vent holes for
releasing gas from the container, is inserted into the opening . The plug and cover are attached
to the loading line with an attachment cable . A lock having a hasp is received through passages
defined in first and second tabs attached to the container and cover . respectively, for locking the
cover to the container between transfers . Anchor cables can be attached to the container for
securing the apparatus to stakes inserted into the ground . Further, the container may be
equipped with a secondary containment bottom to provide additional protection against
environmental contamination.
•
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
5313808
94
0
MA
62/475 62/292
Title : Portable refrigerant recycling unit for heat exchange with separate recovery unit
Abstract:
A portable refrigerant recycle unit is disposed adjacent to a recycle (reclamation) unit for
receiving excess or waste heat discharged therefrom . Liquid and gas refrigerant (e .g . . freon)
flow from the unit being evacuated to a heat exchanger . A fan draws 'discharged heat from the
reclamation unit across the fins of the heat exchanger . Liquid freon flowing through the heat
exchanger is vaporized as it is heated by the air drawn by the fan containing the heat discharged
from unit . Gaseous freon flows from the heat exchanger to an oil seperator . Freon vapor then
flows from the oil seperator through a filter to the recycle unit output . The reclamation unit
condenses the recycle unit output of vapor freon to a liquid . The liquid freon flows from the
output of the reclamation to a refrigerant receiver.
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
5310282
94
0
TX
. 405/58 405/59 405/128
Title : Hydrocarbon recovery from drilling mud stored in salt cavity
Abstract:
Used drilling mud_ and other high solids oilfield waste which has been contaminated with
hydrocarbons . is pumped dównhole into a salt cavity where the mud and hydrocarbons separate
with the mud gravitating to the bottom of the cavity and the hydrocarbons rising toward the
surface of the ground . Brine separates the accumulated hydrocarbons from the residual mud.
The brine or the hydrocarbons is selectively removed for sales while additional water or
contaminated mud is added to the system as may be required . The salt cavity preferably is
located in a geographical a r a % .herc'n anhydride ledges are formed therewithin upon formation
of the cavity . The resultant ledges form baffle plates that coalesces the separated particles of
oil and enhance formation of the separated hydrocarbon.
Patent Number
5308372
Issue Year
94
Assignee
0
State / Country
MA
Classification
71/25 71/4071/41 71/43 71/64 .1 7I/DIG2
Title : Vegetable oil processing to obtain nutrient by-products
•
Abstract:
A method of processing vegetable oil in which non-toxic reagents are used . so that a waste
stream is evolved suitable for use as a nutrient source and n 'herein the non-toxic reagents
include nutrient components whereby the nutrient value of the waste stream is enhanced.
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
5306351
94
0
CA
134/40 134/22 .1R 134/22 .19 134/25 .1 252/135 252/352 252/356
Title : Waste oil removal composition and method
Abstract:
The composition and process of the present invention involves the use of a material at high
pressure to dissolve, break up and move waste material, especially hydrocarbon based waste
material, also known as fluidization . The composition is a dispersion fluid made from a dilute
mixture of soy flour ; lignin flour, citrus pectin, and sodium silicate . Additional components
which may be added include sodium phosphate . soda ash, and a surfactant . non-ionic TRITON
X100 . The dispersion fluid is sprayed with high pressure . as needed, into the mass of material
to be removed and then pumped out with the suction from a commercially available vacuum
truck :A settling tank enables recirculation of the dispersion fluid to enable a recirculating
process stream and to reduce the net amount of dispersion fluid utilized with a given amount of
sludge to be removed.
•
Patent Number
530366I
Issue Year
94
Assignee Code
0
State / Country
TWX
110/34 1
Classification
Title : Dry process for speedy and continuous recycling discarded rubber
Abstract:
A dry process for speedy and continuous treatment of discarded or used rubber waste is
disclosed wherein discarded rubber waste is pulverized into particles of 20 .-40 mesh and is
transmitted to an air tight vessel in which the pulverized ribber waste is indirectly preheated at
a temperature between 100 .degree .-200 .degree . C . : and is then delivered to a fast reactor 'in
which many additives, such as process oil, minerals, rosin and zeolite, are blended with the
pulverized rubber waste . The mixture is further stirred by way of a motor to permit the process
oil to effectively penetrate into the pulverized rubber waste : and is finally refined to get useful
recycled rubber material.
Patent Number
Issue Year
5303643
94
•
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
33615
WI
100/51 100/50 100/ 125 100/269R 100/902
Title : Waste container crusher
Abstract:
A waste container crusher particularly adapted for crushing automotive type oil filters or other
structurally rigid disposables containing hazardous waste has a housing with an open bottom
which is closed off by an anvil plate . The anvil plate slideably receives three equiangularly
spaced posts which are secured to a roof plate at the top of the housing . above the anvil plate.
Nuts on the posts support the anvil plate below the roof plate . so that the anvil plate is
suspended from the roof plate by the posts . The roof plate is secured to a hydraulic cylinder
which produces a 10 ton driving force for a platen guided by the posts to cnish a container
placed on the anvil plate below the platen . In the anvil plate, four blind bores in a rectangular
pattern in the top surface intersect a central blind bore extending from the bottom surface . and
a smaller central through-bore provides communication between the lower central blind bore
and the top of the anvil plate . In one embodiment . a pneumatic-hydraulic control circuit is
provided in which the hydraulic cylinder is driven until an air powered hydraulic pump stalls.
In an alternate embodiment, an electro-hvdraulic control circuit drives the hydraulic cylinder
according to a timed cycle.
•
Patent Number
5302282
Issue Year
94
Assignee Code
600400
State / Country
IL
208/179
208/86 208/92 208/94 208/100 208/143 208/184 208/25 I R 208/309
Classification
Title : Integrated process for the production of high quality lube oil blending stock
Abstract:
A process for the production of high quality lube oil blending stock from atmospheric
fractionation residue and waste lubricants by means of contacting the waste lubricant with a
hot hydrogen-rich gaseous stream to increase the temperature of this feed stream to vaporize at
least a portion of the ' distillable hvdrocarbonaceous compounds thereby producing a distillable
hvdrocarbonaceous stream which is immediately hydrogenated in an integrated hydrogenation
zone . The vaporization of the waste oil is also conducted in the presence of an asphalt residue
which . is produced in the integrated process . The resulting effluent from the integrated
hydrogenation zone provides at least one high quality tube oil blending stock stream.
Patent Number
5299348
O
Issue Year
94
Assignee Code
700157
State / Country . CAX
Classification
29/403 .3 29/426 .3 29/564 .3
:
Apparatus
for
recycling
waste cartridge filter
Title
•
Abstract
An apparatus for dismembering used cartridge filters . the cartridge filters having a top and
bottom, the top including a baseplate having an outlet and at least one inlet . the baseplate being
adapted to mount with a machine . the filter including a casing extending from proximate the top
to the bottom of the cartridge . filter and affixed to the baseplate proximate the top of the
cartridge filter . the cartridge filter including a disposable filter media included inside the casing:
the apparatus comprising means for receiving waste cartridge filters . means for delivering the
filters to a predetermined position . means for holding the filter at the predetermined position,
means for separating the baseplate and the canister, means for removing the canister from the
remnant of the filter and segregating said canister, means for separating said baseplate from the
remnant of said filter and segregating said baseplate . said remnant including said disposable
filter media, means for handling said remnant and segregating said remnant, means for
collecting and segregating any waste filtrate . such as oil, in 'the apparatus and segregating said
filtrate, whereby waste cartridge filters are dismembered by said apparatus and the components
thereof segregated for recycling purposes.
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
5298043
94
0
TWX
55/223 55/228 55/259
Title : Filter system for smoke or polluted air
Abstract:
A filter system for smoke or polluted air comprises a smoke or polluted air filter device . a bag
filter device . and a water treatment device . A duct and a plurality of power sprayers are
provided in the smoke or polluted air filter device to remove harmful substances in the smoke
or the polluted air . A plurality of filtering bags are provided in the bag filter device to clean the
waste liquid coming from the smoke or polluted air filter device . A plurality of treating troughs
are provided in the water treatment device to purify the liquid flowing down from the filter bag
device . A coarse ash collecting device is provided additionally in the filter system to collect
particle ashes or dusts in the smoke before entering the smoke or polluted air filter device.
Ingredients such as carbon ashes, grease or oily substances . offensive odors . poisonous
substances . and etc . contained in the smoke or the polluted air may be suitably treated by the
filter system.
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
5297496
94
162745
NLX
110/346 110/229 110/236 110/238
Title : Process for the combined treatment of waste materials
Abstract:
•
•
The invention relates to a process for the combined treatment of waste materials of two types A
and B . A being waste material having a relatively high energy content and B being a water
containing waste material having a relatively low energy content . said process comprising the
following steps : I) pyrolvzing material A to produce a gas and/or oil and a carbonaceous
residue . 2) mixing said carbonaceous residue with B to form a water containing mixture C . 3)
shaping said mixture C into individual pieces . 4) drying and baking said pieces to ceramic
bodies . wherein in step 2 . the carbonaceous residue is used in such an amount that less than
about 80% of the totally required baking energy is contained in mixture C.
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
5293887
94
0
LA
134/24 134/ .111 134/ 167R 134/ 169R 134/172 239/743
Title : Robotic tank cleaning system and method
Abstract:
A robotic tank cleaning system' is provided, comprising a light-weight . collapsible, and
robotically controllable frame having an articulatable washing nozzle for spraying a petroleumbased solvent on a surface to be cleaned . Hydraulic power and control units are also provided
which allow an operator to control the motion of the frame . and washing nozzle from outside
the tank, as well as . a solvent suppl y system for delivering solvent to the washing nozzle . A
hoisting mechanism is included to allow placement and retrieval of a waste removal pump . and
a clearing blade is attached to the frame to assist movement of waste material to the waste
removal pump . Waste material comprising dislodged oil sludge and expended solvent is
collected in waste fractioning tanks where the collected oil sludge is allowed to settle below the
expended solvent . The separated solvent in the waste fractioning tanks is redirected through the
solvent suppl y sy stem and is reused for further spraying of the tank interior . A sludge return
pipeline delivers settled oil sludge from the waste fractioning tanks back to the refinery for
further processing . A method of cleaning hydrocarbon storage tanks is also provided using the
robotically controlled frame in conjunction with the waste removal . waste fractioning, and
sludge return components.
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
5288902
94
699165
JPX
562/478
Title : Method of manufacturing ferulic acid
Abstract:
A waste oil . an alkaline oil cake . and a crude fatty acid which are discarded as waste materials
or obtained as a by-product in the manufacture of rice salad oil are subjected to hydrolysis in
the presence of an alkali so as to efficiently manufacture ferulic acid . The waste materials or
by-product accompanying the manufacture of rice salad oil or rice fatty acid, which were
•
disposed of by means of burning in the past, are effectively útilized in the method of the present
invention.
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
5288413
94
508865
TX
210/770 106/745 208/13 210/774 210/777
Title : Treatment of a waste sludge to produce a non-sticking fuel
Abstract:
A waste sludge that contains water. oil and solids is subjected to filtration under vacuum or an
applied inert gas pressure . preferably no more than 50 psia while utilizing a filter aid . to retain
the maximum amount of oil in the filter cake . The filter cake is then dried at a relatively low
temperature . slightly above the boiling point of water . to selectively remove water and produce
a high heating value non-sticking solid . The product thus obtained in suitable for use as a solid
fuel for a cement kiln or other combustion facilities . Depending on the amount of oil present in
the original sludge . the applied pressure can be varied to retain different amounts of oil and to
produce different heating values desired in the final solid fuel.
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
5288408
94
699130
. PA
210/634 203/11 210/181 210/231 210/257 .1 210/319 210/774
252/315 .01 530/355
Title : Method of gelatin recovery and purification from encapsulation processes
Abstract:
The subject invention relates generally to a novel method of recycling gelatin-based
encapsulation waste material and . more specifically, to a process for the recovery and
purification of gelatin and softening agents therefrom . In the preferred embodiment, deionized
water is added to the waste material thereby forming an aqueous solution of gelatin and
glycerine dispersed within + he .emailing oil and residual active-ingredient components of the
waste material . Extraction methods are employed under specific conditions to effect separation
of the bottom aqueous phase from the upper oil phase . The lower phase is hot filtered to remove
any remaining traces of oil or other contaminants and the filtrate is then charged to a
'concentration vessel adapted for vacuum distillation : The water solvent is thus removed under
specific thermal and atmospheric conditions until the desired concentration of gelatin and
glycerine is achieved . A pure . concentrated aqueous gelatin-glycerine solution results which
may be stores'. , or further prepared for immediate reuse.
Patent Number
5288392
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
94
0
CA
208/13 .208/179' 208/182 208/183 210/710
Title : Process for converting acid sludge to intermediate sludge
Abstract:
A process for converting the acid sludge produced by waste oil refineries into an acid sludge
intermediary which can be. used in the production of asphaltic mixtures . The process includes
contacting the entire surface area of acid sludge with a pH altering agent such as an aqueous
inorganic liquid . and separating the liquid layer from the sludge layer, thereby producing an
intermediate sludge having properties which make it suitable for use in asphalt production.
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
5288391
94
. 186590
CAX
208/13 208/45 208/177 208/31 I
Title : .Rendering oily wastes landtreatable or usable
Abstract:
A process for deoiling wastes is disclosed . The process is integrated with a refinery and utilizes
a refinery intermediary hydrocarbon stream as a solvent to recover waste oil for reprocessing in
the refinery and to produce waste solids, which are either reused or disposed for landtreatment.
5288295
Patent Number
94
Issue Year
6991 17
Assignee Code
State / Country
CA
Classification
44/301 44/300
Title : Cement kiln fuels containing suspended solids
Abstract:
A fuel comprised of liquid and solid refinery waste streams is described . The fuel is a blend of
a heavy paraffinic oil . an emulsified waste oil, water and solids . The fuel is blended both to
achieve a viscosity which enables the fuel to be pumped. and to obtain the required Niel value
for burning in a cement kiln while simultaneously Having a high solids content . The amount of
the heavy paraffinic oil present in the final fuel is related to the ambient temperature at which
the fuel is to be pumped, stored and consumed . Typically . the higher the ambient temperature
the more heavy paraffinic oil that can be used in the fuel blend.
Patent Number
5287589
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
94
119825
NC
15/321 15/340 .1
Title : Self-contained cleaning and retrieval apparatus
Abstract:
A mobile . self-contained . environmentally safe, cleaning . apparatus . including a supply of
recycleable cleaning fluids and devices for heating. filtering and pressurizing such fluids for
removing, capturing and packaging for safe disposal oils, dyes . fibers . lead paint and
contaminated hazardous wastes . with the apparatus equipped with a water tank, a liquid ring
pump adapted to create a wet vacuum recovery system, a water heater, a waste particle/liquid
separator . a demister filter . and a retractable combined fluid supply and vacuum recovery
umbilical cord for attachment to external remote cleaning devices.
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Conntry
Classification
5286374
94
0
TWX
208/400 44/628 201/25 208/118 208/122 208/419 241/17 241/24
241 /DIGS 1502/213 502/242 502/263
Title : Process for cracking waste rubber tires
•
Abstract:
An economic and safe process includes a catalytic cracking of the rubber tires and rubber
products in the presence of mica catalyst selected from muscovite . sericite and biotite at a
reaction temperature of 230,degree .-400 .degree . C . under a pressure of 1-2 .5 atmospheres for
forming mixed oils . carbon black, gaseous products . and other residual products.
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
5286349
94
0
CAX
196/46 196/98 196/116 196/ 1 32 196/135 196/ 138 196/ 141
Title : Apparatus for reclaiming useful oil products from waste oil
Abstract:
Apparatus for reclaiming a useful oil product has an evaporation chamber, including an inlet
for the waste oil . and an outlet for the vaporized oil . as a useful oil product . Burners are
provided for heating the evaporation chamber to vaporize oil from the waste oil . A pump and a
float arrangement are provided for monitoring the level of waste oil in the evaporation chamber,
and for pumping additional waste oil into the chamber to maintain the waste oil at a desired
level . Continuous operation of the apparatus results in a build up of solid wastes . e .g . heavy
metals, in the chamber . After a period of operation . the burners are turned off. and the chamber
•
opened, to enable the solid residue to be removed from the chamber . The vaporized oil can be
condensed and collected.
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
5284991
94
508865
TX
585/802 208/13 210/770 210/772 585/833 585/864 585/867 588/245
Title : Cyanide removal from oily solid using a solvent extraction process
Abstract:
A process for the removal of cyanides from contaminated oily solid waste performed by
utilizing a single processing zone wherein multiple processing steps are carried out to remove
contaminants . The steps include loading a contaminated oily solid waste . into a zone where the
solid is reduced in size, adjusting the pH of the oily solid waste . dewatering or deoiling the oily
solid waste and drying the resulting solid, extracting the resulting dried solid with organic
solvent, and further drying the extracted solid to remove residual moisture. cyanide, solvent, and
volatile organics.
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
5282928
94
305775
JPX
162/5 162/4 252/60 252/174 .21 252/174 .22
Title : Deinking composition
Abstract:
A deinking composition which shows a good drinking performance . a good defoaming property
and excellent operation characteristics whereby a deinked pulp having a high whiteness and
little contamination with the total remaining ink can be obtained in the reclamation of waste
papers by flotation . washing or a combination procedure thereof and wherein the deinking
composition comprises a reaction mixture (II) . as a deinking agent . obtained by the addition
reaction of alkvlene oxide (D) with a mixture (I) comprising a fat and oil (A) which is
onstituted with a mixture of higher fatty acids (a) comprising fatty acids having 8 to 24 carbon
atoms : having an average carbon atom number of from 12 .7 to 22 .5 : containing from 9 .6 to
70 .6`%, by weight of higher fatty acids having 20 to 24 carbon atoms and having an iodine value
(IV) of 70 or less and glycerol (b-I ) . and/or . a transesterification reaction mixture (B) obtained
by reacting the fat and oil (A) with glycerol (b-2) . and at least one mono- to tetradecahvdric
alcohol (C).
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
5279740
94
26790
NJ
Classification
210/610 166/246 210/747
Title : Ground contamination remediation process
Abstract:
Disclosed is a process for improved removal of contaminants including oily wastes and other
organic hydrocarbonaceous materials from ground waters and areas adjacent to or in the
vicinity of ground water locations . Ground and ground water contamination due to its unique
nature, as being below ground and often not readily removable, has presented unique
challenges to efforts seeking to render contaminated sites safe for habitation and/or contain and
prevent contaminants to other . non-contaminated areas . The present process presents a viable
solution to the problem of removing hydrocarbonaceous contaminating materials from ground
and ground water . The process includes the use of at least two injection wells and at least one
extraction well . One of the injection wells is being used for introduction of steam into a
subsurface saturated zone . The other of the injection wells is being used for introduction.
simultaneously with introduction of steam . of nutrients effective to enhance the growth of
naturally occurring hydrocarbon degrading biota present in the subsurface area and/or of nonnaturally occurring hydrocarbon degrading biota and nutrients effective to enhance the growth
thereof. Upon application of a \vithdrawing force to the extraction well(s) at least a portion of
the contaminants in the subsurface: saturated zone is caused to be displaced toward the
extraction well . in liquid or vaporized form or in combination thereof . These contaminants are
then withdrawn through and removed from the contaminated area by the extraction well(s).
•
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
5279637
94
698323
WA
71 / 12 71/63 71/64 .01 165/92 210/702 210/710 210/769 210/770
Title : Sludge treatment system
Abstract:
A method of converting industrial . domestic or other sludge . into a pelletized or granular
fertilizer, as well as a sludge converter for practicing the method . The sludge is dewatered to
form sludge cake solids which are dried in a dryer, and then sorted with a sorter into a sorted
product comprising oversized . undersized . and standard sized product . A portion of the sorted
product is recycled for mixing and sizing in a mixer with the dewatered sludge cake solids . To
control dust and odors . cyclones and a condenser remove a substantial portion of the gaseous
particulate matter and condensable gases from the converter, and any remaining
noncondensates are burned in the heat source flame . A waste oil burning heat source supplies
heat energy to the dyer . The heat source exhaust gas by-products are filtered in a bag house
using a conditioner additive . such as lime or sodium bicarbonate . which may be reclaimed and
supplied to the standard sized product to serve as a pelletizing binder . to enhance the fertilizer
nutrient value . or to enhance the fertilizer shelf life.
Patent Number
5271851
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / County
Classification
93
3 11265
OK
210/770 210/ 193 210/328 210/778
Title : Integrated treatment system for refinery oily sludges
Abstract:
A process for the treatment of refinen oily sludges to produce an oily fraction that is
reprocessed in the refiner into (i) salable products and (ii) a solid residue meeting
environmental regulator agency requirements for disposal in non-hazardous solid waste
landfills . The process includes mixing the refinery oily sludge with a particulate filter aid and
preferably a single solvent selected from refiner intermediate and product streams and
contacting this mixture with plate filters in a closed filter vessel . A cake residue forms on the
filter plates and a filtrate mixture of oil . water and solvent is produced . The filtrate is separated
into an oily fraction and a water fraction . The oily fraction is rerouted to refinery operating
units for processing into salable products . The water 'fraction is routed to a refiner water
treatment system . When filter cake residue has built to a predetermined level, charge to the filter
vessel is discontinued . The filter cake residue is washed with a predetermined quantity of
solvent and then steam stripped to remove petroleum hydrocarbons to a desired residual level,
e .g . less than about 1 .000 ppm or less than 500 ppm . The steam stripped filter cake is then
removed from the filter vessel for disposal in an environmentally approved landfill.
Patent Number
5271808
Issue Year
93
Assignee Code
0
State / County CAX
196/46 137/428 196/98 196/ I 1 1196/116 196/ 125 196/132 196/ 135
Classification
I96/138 196/141 210/128
Title : Apparatus from waste oil for reclaiming a useful oil product
Abstract
An apparatus and a method are provided reclaiming a useful oil product from waste oil . such as
used lubricating oil . The apparatus comprises an oil feed means . a boiler, a heater and a
separating means . The heater is used to heat the waste oil in the boiler to a temperature such
that lighter hydrocarbo•s .email unvolatilized . trapping contaminants therewith . The
separating means separates the volatilized lighter hydrocarbons from the unvolatilized heavier
hydrocarbons and contaminants.
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Co'.,;
State / Country
Classification
5271691
93
0
LA
405/60 210/924 405/63
Title : Oil absorption apparatus using kenaf fiber and core portions
Abstract:
An oil cleanup method and apparatus uses processed kenaf that is processed using a cutter to
preliminarily cut the kenaf stalks into short pieces or billets . These billets are threshed to
separate fiber and core portions of the kenaf billets . The billet size thus defines the fiber length
and thus fiber product texture . Separators grade the particulate core after threshing . The core
particles are added to a container such as a bale or boom that will float on the surface of an oil
slick in an aquatic or marine environment . The bales can also be added to dry spills to absorb
the oil . The particulate kenaf core can be added to a treatment vessel . such as a vertical column
and with inlet and outlet portions . Wastewater with an oil portion can be added to the treatment
vessel and the core particles removes oil from the wastewater stream . Sludge solidification can
be accomplished with the kenaf particles.
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
2 10/905
5269939
93
0
IL
210/705 44/552 71/13 210/710 210/727 210/730 210/769 210/770
426/441
Title : Method of solids recovery for use in animal feed or as a fuel utilizing natural flocculents
Abstract
A waste stream such as from an animal or poultry processing plant is mixed with bentonite or
Grafted Bentonite and then with liquid Chitosan as . natural flocculents to form a rigid floc
which removes fats, oils, greases . and/or proteins from the waste stream . The flocculated solids
(sludge) is removed and dried . and either formed into granules or pellets . The recovered material
may be used as animal feed, when appropriate . However . it is particularly useful when mixed
with coal fines and pelletized to farm fuel pellets or used in granule form as a fuel source.
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
5269934
93
101491
CA
210/651 210/636 210/639 210/652 210/653 210/778
Title : Removal of oily residues from aqueous waste streams
Abstract:
A process for removing oily residues from aqueous waste streams using a cross flow filtration
system in which the efficiency of a dynamic membrane system comprising a gel layer and
supporting semipermeable membrane is optimized by applying a controlled shear force parallel
to the plane of the membrane.
Patent Number
5269906
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
93
0
MD
208/13 208/179 208/ 186 210/770 210/774 210/787 210/806
Title : Process for the recovery of oil from waste oil sludges
Abstract:
Commercially valuable oil is recovered from refinery-produced . Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act classified, hazardous waste oil sludges by a series of volatilizing and condensing
steps (which may vary depending on the oil . water . and solids content of the sludge) resulting in
the production of nonhazardous water-and solid waste byproducts . A pumpable . low viscosity.
high oil- and/or water-content sludge is first centrifuged to separate free oil and water . If the
waste sludges are' acidic or if , nickel is present in the sludges in sufficient quantities so as to
result in unacceptable levels in the TCLP leach filtrate, a base (such as calcium oxide) is
admixed with the thick waste oil sludge . centrifuge solids . or other sludges low in oil and/or
water content to render the sludges basic . The basic . admixed sludges are heated to volatilize
the contained water and oil . Dry, friable, dcoiled solids are recycled with the oily sludge feed
to prevent material agglomeration and heat exchanger' fouling . Oil and water vapor from the
high-temperature . volatilization . apparatus is recycled as an indirect heat source to the lowtemperature volatilization apparatus . The volatilized oil and water are condensed and combined
with the oil and water centrate, and the oil and water are essentially separated as by gravity.
The oil is separated from any entrained water and solids . The nearly oil free . nonhazardous
waste water and nonhazardous . dcoiled solids can be disposed of in a conventional manner, and
the commercially valuable recovered oil is suitable for further refinery processing.
Patent Number
.5258101
Issue Year
93
Assignee Code
696241
State / Country
OH
Classification
202/131 202/136 202/268 432/251
Title
Pyrolytic conversion system
Abstract:
A pyrolytic converter utilizing a rotatable dnim surrounded by an outer drum support stricture
and disposed in an oven chamber pyrolyzes materials including plastic waste . tires, materials
from automobile shredding operations . containers and trays of plastic material, ribber, leather,
garbage, sewage sludge, coal, oil shale . broken asphalt and the like . These materials are formed
into cartridges by a compactor using a reciprocating ram which forms cartridges in an injection
tube wherein another ram injects the cartridges into the converter drum . The converter is
disposed on a fulcrum near the injection end thereof while the discharge end is suspended by
cables to accommodate thermal expansion of the converter . Cables also suspend collection and
separation apparatus having water filled chutes . into one . of which the products of pyrolyzation
of low density (char) and solids of higher density are discharged from the converter drum.
Lower and higher density solids are separately collected tanks.
Patent Number
5256304
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
93
62580
PA
210/708 210/728 210/730 210/912 210/913 210/914 252/180 252/338
252/358
Title : Methods of removing oil and metal ions from oily wastewater
Abstract:
Methods are disclosed for removing oil and metal ions from oily wastewaters . Polymeric tannin
amine compounds are added to the oily wastewater to demulsifv the oil, and flocculate the
metal ions.
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
5256286
93
0
TX
210/242 .3 210/923
Title : Shallow water oil-skimming barge
Abstract:
A' barge for cleaning the surface of water is disclosed . The vessel has a hull with a vertical
bow line, a bow angle of over 90 degrees . a flat bottom and parallel sides . An inlet for surface
water and contaminants is located on each side of the barge . toward the stern, and is covered
with a grill . Pumped water is used to clean the grill and to push waste sternward along the sides
of the barge.
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
5256251
93
240255
NJ
159/47 .3 34/371 159/2 .1 159/17 .2 159/17 .3 159/20 .1 159/901 159/DIG8
202/174 203/14 203/71 203/88 210/712 210/770 2 10/806
Title : Process for drying and solvent-extraction of solids and sludges
•
Abstract:
A continuous evaporation process, for drying water-wet waste solids and sludges . using a
paraffin oil solvent . until the waste is dried to a near-zero wastewater product, without
experiencing sticky solids . The invention involves (1) mixing the input solids or sludges with a
paraffin oil solvent . (2) feeding the mixture into two or more stages of evaporation in parallel
to evaporate some of the water present in the input solids or sludges and to extract some of the
indigenous solvent-soluble compounds from the solids . (3) feeding the slurry from the parallel
stages of evaporation to one or more final evaporation stages in series, and (4) feeding the
slum- from the final stages of evaporation to a centrifuge or other device for separating most of
the solvent from the solids .
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
5255634
93
35 I9R0
MD
I22/4D 122/24 43 1/1
Title : Pulsed atmospheric fluidized bed combustor apparatus
Abstract:
A pulsed atmospheric fluidized bed reactor system is disclosed and claimed along with a
process for utilization of same for the combustion of. e .g . high sulfur content coal . The system
affords a economical. ecologically acceptable alternative to oil and gas fired combustors . The
apparatus may also be employed for endothermic reaction, combustion of waste products . e .g ..
organic and medical waste . drying materials . heating air . calcining and the like.
Patent Number 5254253
Issue Year
93
Assignee Code 639745
State / Country CAX
210/607 210/151 210/195 .2 210/195 .3 210/205 210/22 210/625 210/626
Classification
210/629
Title : Modular shipboard membrane bioreactor system for combined wastewater streams
Abstract:
Raw sewage ("black water " from toilets) . wastewater from showers, sinks . kitchen facilities
("grey water") and oily water from the bilge of a host vessel ("oily water"), in combination.
unexpectedly provide the essential nutrients for a live mass of mixed microorganisms which are
peculiarly well-adapted to ingest the nutrients . To facilitate availability of oxygen to the
microorganisms so as to provide growth of the microorganisms . and also . to allow them destroy
to themselves . excess oxygen is discharged . in a combination of microbubbles and
macrobubbles . into a membrane bioreactor ("MBR") . The mixture of bubbles is preferably
generated with coarse (>2 mm) and fine (<20 .mu .m) bubble diffusers . An auxiliary stream,
whether alone, or a recirculating stream into which air is drawn . may provide the coarse
bubbles . The air is entrained . in a jet aerator or eductor. in a recirculating loop of activated
sludge taken from the MBR . Another portion of the contents of the MBR is pumped to a
semipermeable membrane which provides water (permeate) of excellent quality . The remaining
concentrate is led to a gas micronizing means which produces a tail jet of . microaerated
concentrate . The tail-jet is returned to the MBR to provide kinetic energy for maintaining a
high velocity of liquid flow in the MBR . A portion of the concentrate is disposed of . Preferably
the liquid waste to be treated on-board does not substantially exceed about 21 meters .sup .3
/day.
Issue Year
93
•
Assignee Code 0
State / Country LA
Classification
210/787 134/ 10 134/33 134/40 210/791 210/805
Title : Pollution pad reconditioning/recycling system
Abstract:
A pollution pad cleaning system for recvclably removing hydrocarbons from an absorbent
material such that the material is re-useable as originally designed . As the preferred embodiment
a pollution pad cleaning system comprises a multi-stage treatment process wherein
polypropylene absorbent pads soaked with waste oil and the like are treated via a system of
squeeze rollers . a solvent shower, centrifuge spin . and then drying and fluffing . restoring the
pads to a "like new . " reusable condition . The collected waste oil and solvent are removed at a
predesignated concentration from the system for recycling . While the preferred embodiment
utilizes a continuous system with conveyors and the like . and wherein the contaminated pads
are placed upon the ingress portion of the system and the cleaned, reusable pads are discharged
from the exit end of the system, an alternative, working embodiment utilizes a system
comprising a plurality of treatment stations which may be economically configured utilizing a
minimum of labor and start-up costs . The present invention provides an inexpensive,
environmentally sound method of treating and recycling pollution absorbing pads wherein in
the past the pads were disposed of in landfills . creating still another pollution problem . and at
a disposal cost greater than the cost of implementing the present cleaning and recycling system.
•
Issue Year
.93
State / Country DEX
Classification
210/653 96/10 96/1 1210/490 210/500 .25 210/500 .26 210/510 .1 428/315 .5
Title : Procedure for the preparation of microporous ceramic membranes for the separation of
gas and liquid mixtures
•
Abstract:
Microporous membranes for the separation of gas and liquid mixtures . The new membranes
show a temperature stability up to 500 .degree . C . and a gas separation with separation factors
better than the Knudsen . 0 nit . ConHuous microporous inorganic membranes of any desirable
thickness can be prepared by e-beam evaporation of metal oxides on a support membrane.
which has substantially larger pores than the metal oxide membrane . It is advantageous when
the support membrane consists of the sane material as the microporous membrane . The
'membranes are of porous structure with a narrow pore size distribution of pores, where the
majority of the pores have diameters smaller than I nm . The membranes can be used in all
areas of gas and liquid separation, where the selective separation of smaller molecules from
mixtures is .d :sired (f.e . gas concentration by removal of water from natural gas, hydrogen
from synthesis gas) : for the concentration of aqueous solutions (fruit juices with retention of
aroma compounds, vitamins and other compounds important for the flavor and nutritional
value of the juice : biological liquids like lymphe . blood, or others with retention of valuable
compounds including small peptides, hormones, antibiotics and others) and for the
•
concentration of organic solutions with retention of molecules larger than the solvent Including
oligomers and polymers : and for the concentration of waste water with retention of organic
contaminants like phenol resins and coal oil at coking plants . If the membranes have been made
catalytically active, the membranes can also be used for the selective and poison resistant
conduction of heterogeneously catalyzed three phase reactions by having the reaction gas
diffusing through the catal y ticall y active membrane to react at the other side of the membrane
with the liquid . consisting of molecules too large to penetrate the pores.
Issue Year .
93
Assignee Code 160I65
State / Country WV
Classification
220/263 220/260 220/262 220/264 220/908
Title : Plastic waste can for oily waste
Abstract:
A plastic waste can for collection of flammable waste has a self-closing cover disposed on a
body portion or receptacle . A foot pedal situated in a channel formed in the bottom wall of the
body portion and pivotally secured therein is depressed by a user to raise a lift bar which
engages the cover to raise the cover. A cover lift accelerator is provided on the undersurface of
the cóver, with a hinge pin . hingedly connecting the cover to the body portion through first and
second hinge pin supports . The cover is arranged to open to no more than 70 .degree . to the
horizontal so as to assure that the cover will close . by gravity . upon release of the foot pedal
by a user.
Issue Year
93
Assignee Code 0 .
State / Country CA
141/I 141/7 141/8 141/65 141/67 141/98 141/249 141/363 141/375
Classification
184/106
Title : Process and flushing device for removing oil from waste oil filters
Abstract:
An apparatus is used to focus a stream of pressurized air into an oil filter thereby opening ally
one way valve in the oil filter and forcing the waste oil out of the oil filter . The oil is then
drained into a sealed oil barrel . The apparatus consists of an inlet funnel at the top, . a fluid
collection convergence funnel and a threaded hollow discharge spigot at the bottom of the
fiinnel, which is designed for convenient attachment into a threaded open port of a standard oil
dnim . The throat of the fluid collection convergence funnel above the inlet of the discharge
spigot has a chamber which is fitted with a hollow threaded holder for retaining a used oil
filter cartridge . The chamber has passages for directing the pressurized air connected to a
conventional general service compressed air hose fitted with an on/off trigger valve . The
passages connect to the inlet passages on the retained oil filter cartridge . As oil is flushed into
the oil drum, fumes in the oil drum are forced through a low pressure exhaust and through an
air filter, which filters the fumes before releasing the air to the atmosphere.
Patent Number 524951 1
Issue Year
93
Assignee Code 0
State / Country KY
Classification
99/408 99/403 137/358 141/I 141/82 210/167 210/DIGS
Title : Bulk cooking oil distribution and waste removal system
Abstract:
A bulk cooking oil system has filter, waste, supply, and fryer stations connected by piping for
movement of oil along preselected pipe paths . The filter station functions to filter cooking oil
from the fryer station and has a valve adapted to open and close pipe lines that lead to and
away from the filter station . The waste station stores used oil and has a valve adapted to open
and close a pipe line leading to and away from the waste station . The supply station stores oil
to be used at the fryer station for cooking food products and also has a valve adapted to open
and close a pipe line leading to and away from the supply station . The fryer station has a fryer
that receives and heats the cooking oil to cook food products and a valve adapted to open and
close a pipe line leading to and away from the fryer station . All of the various valves are
selectively operated and controlled so that a predetermined pipe path can be established
between identified stations . A pump moves the oil along the selected pipe path.
Patent Number
5244580
Issue Year
93
Assignee Code
0
State / Country
TWX
Classification
210/666 2I0/671 210/674 210/691 210/695
Title : Method of removal and recovery 'of oil and grease from wastewater
Abstract:
There is disclosed a method of removal and recovery of oil and grease from wastewater
wherein ferrite powders are used to adsorb the oil and grease contained in the wastewater, and
then the oil and grease are separated from the wastewater by an external magnetic 'field . The
ferrite powders are individually recovered for re-use.
93
Issue Year
State / Country IL
Classification
20S/92 208/49 208/57 208/78 208/86 208/94 20X/100 208/1 13 208/143
20X/ 179 20X/25 I R
Title : Integrated process for the production of distillate hydrocarbon
Abstract :
•
A process for the production of distillate hydrocarbon from atmospheric fractionation residue
and waste lubricants by means of contacting the waste lubricant with a hot hydrogen-rich
gaseous stream to increase the temperature of this feed stream to vaporize at least a portion of
the distillable hydrocarbonaceous compounds thereby producing a distillable
hydrocarbonaceous stream which is immediately hydrogenated in an integrated hydrogenation
one . The vaporization of the waste oil is also conducted in the presence of a . vacuum
fractionation residue which is produced in the integrated process . The resulting effluent from
the integrated hydrogenation zone and a distillable hydrocarbon stream recovered from the
atmospheric fraction residue is catalytically converted to produce lower molecular weight
hydrocarbon compounds.
93
Issue Year
Assignee Code 0
State / Country ND
Status
CC
Classification
44/505 44/502 44/545 44/606
Title : Preparation of chemically dried cellulosic fuel
•
Abstract:
Wood chips . bark, sawdust and other cellulosic products containing unacceptably high
cuantities of water are dried and enriched in BTU content . The green or freshly cut wood
product is immersed in hot oil to dry the wood . After water exits the wood pores as steam.
some oil enters these interstices, impregnating the dried Wood . thereby increasing its BTU
content and improves its storing and burning characteristics . Chips and bark dried in and
impregnated with used or waste oil, provide an environmentall y acceptable means of disposing
of and utilizing used or waste oils . Wood chips dried and impregnated with vegetable oil,
provide a clean burning . non-toxic fuel for lighting 'or starting charcoal and wood.
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
5243754
93
599690
MD
29/801 29/33 .52 29/403 .2 29/426 .3 29/564 .1
Title : Apparatus for severing of an oil filter, separating the components of the filter and
crushing of the same to facilitate recycling or waste disposal thereof
Abstract:
Apparatus cyclically severs a cap from one end of an oil filter canister and permits separation
of the components of the filter and crushing of those components . A front plate extends
vertically upwardly from a table top and supports the canister whose axis is horizontal . A
plurality of rotatable wheel cutters move radially into contact with the outer periphery of the
canister to support the canister . captured behind the cutter wheels . A vertical back plate moves
horizontally across the table top and supports a rotatable block carrying sharp horizontally
projecting impaling pins which penetrate the bottom of the canister . A rotary air wrench drives
the rotary block causing severance of the cap . During movement of the back plate rearwardly,
the canister is separated from the cap, and from the internal hollow filter element captured by a
filter element gripper mechanism . The gripper mechanism is axially retractable thereby
releasing the filter element . The filter element falls downwardly by gravity and the canister is
automatically released after separation from the oil filter element . The back plate then moves
towards the front plate. and the canister and the filter element are serially crushed . Retraction
of the cutter wheels permits the captured cap to fall.
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
5242604
93
694883
MS
210/768 210/519 210/521 210/x02 210/805 210/DIGS
Title : Lateral flow coalescing multiphase plate separator
Abstract:
Oil, water, and sludge are' separated from a mixture thereof to provide waste; oil, usable water,
and concentrated sludge . The sludge can be further reduced in volume to facilitate disposal.
The invention includes a system having a vessel with a coalescer supported therewithin to form
an upper oil containment chamber at the top of the vessel, a contaminated water inlet chamber
at one side, a lower sludge containing chamber at the bottom, and a treated water outlet
chamber at the other side . The coalescer includes a number of corrugated plate members
disposed parallel to one another and inclined respective to the horizontal . The corrugations of
the plate members . when viewed in horizontal cross-section, form a sinusoidal wave pattern.
There being a wide, long, thin, inclined . sinusoidal passageway formed between the plate
Members that extend from the inlet chamber to the outlet chamber . The oil separates and rises
up the inclined troughs to the top of the vessel while the sludge separates and descends down
the inclined troughs toward the bottom of the vessel while contaminated water is progressively
cleaned and becomes separated water during its gentle flow along the parallel paths and into the
outlet chamber while oil and sludge is removed from the mixture.
Issue Year
93
Assignee Coda 694850
State / Country CA
Classification
405/128 37/142 .5 37/359 37/464 37/904 37/906 110/346 405/258 405/303
88/228
Title : Surface remediator
Abstract:
A soil surface remediation apparatus useful for decontamination of oil or chemical spill sites
and toxic waste containing sites comprises a soil treatment apparatus mounted on a mobile
trenching machine tractor which excavates trenches in a contaminated site to remove
contaminated soil to the surface apparatus where the soil is decontaminated and is immediately'
replaced into the excavated trench in a continuous operation . Hydrocarbons or other useful by-
products such as precious metals may be recovered from the soil . Both deep trenching and
shallow trenching embodiments are disclosed.
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
5242032
93
493565
NC:
184/1 .5 184/1051 184/l 06 312/228
Title : Mobile oil change cart
Abstract:
A mobile oil change cart for a sewing machine or the like . The cart has a generally rectangular
parallelepiped shape whose upper surface defines a work surface for supporting the sewing
machine . The upper work surface includes a rubber . mat on which the machine can be placed
and which prevents the machine from sliding about . Adjacent to the rubber mat is a recessed .
sink for containing fluids which may be spilled from the sewing machine during maintenance.
A rack across the surface of the sink supports the sewing machine while draining the oil from
the machine . Wheels mounted to the lower surface of the cart permit it to be easily moved from
one work station to another . Underneath the work surface is a tank compartment for receiving
and storing both fresh and waste oil . In addition, the tank compartment also includes pump
means for both delivering fresh oil to the sewing machine and retrieving waste oil from the
sewing machine . A second storage compartment located at the other end of the cart provides for
storage of oil filters and the like for use during maintenance.
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
5240405
93
0
_WA
431/62 110/348 431/12
Title : Waste oil heater system
Abstract:
An improved system to control the flame, efficiency and flow rate in a waste oil feed system
and burner . The system control : .;r co 1iprises a positive displacement waste oil pump . a variable
speed motor connected to and driving said pump . and a motor speed control which control the
speed of the motor . the speed of the pump and . consequently, the flow rate of the waste oil.
Controlling the flow rate of the waste oil precisely allows the more efficient atomization and
combustion of waste oils with different combustion and °flow properties.
•
Patent Number
523896
Issue Year : .
93
Assignee Code
379770
State / Country
JPX
Classification
521/79 521/95 521/97 521/I82
Title : Process for preparing a degradable high polymer network
•
Abstract:
A degradable polymer network obtained by adding from 0 .2 to 10 parts by weight of a foaming
agent to 100 parts by weight of a polvlactic acid-base resin composition comprising from 80 to
100% by weight of polvlactic acid or a lactic acid-hvdroxycarboxylic acid copolymer and from
0 to 20% by weight of a plasticizer . conducting melt-foaming extrusion of resulting mixture,
and opening the foam cells in the extrudate . The high polymer network is characterized in
suitable flexibility and hvdrolyzability and thus useful as a material for absorbing of oils and
body fluids, screens for sunlight . heat-insulating materials, filter media and packaging
materials : and does not accumulate as industrial wastes because of hvdrolvzability in the
natural environment . even though abandoned after use.
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
5236585
93
0
FL
210/242 .3 210/256 210/259 210/301 210/52I 210/538
Title : Oil accumulator
Abstract:
An oil accumulation system having a first separating station and a second separating station.
wherein the first separating station includes a tank for receiving contaminated water with an
inclined plate separator disposed therein . The tank has an adjustable skimmer which delivers
oily waste water to the second separating station by gravity . The second separating station
includes an outer housing which encompasses an inner housing . forming two interior chamber.
The inner chamber collects the oily waste from the skimmer for additional oil/water separation
. by use of a first laminar flow area . or alternatively by use of a fiber foam filter . At the bottom
of the inner housing is . an outlet . which forms an inlet to the second interior chamber, so that
water is gravity-forced from the first chamber to the second chamber . forming a second laminar
flow area for further oil/water separation . The outer housing has an outlet proximal its lower
end connected to a vertical standpipe for maintaining a fluid height within the chambers of the
housings.
Issue Year
93
State / Country IN
210/651 210/195 .2 210/198 .1 210/257 .2 210/260 210/671 210/693 210/694
Classification
210/708 210/804 210/805 210/806 210/807
Title : Method and apparatus for processing oily wastewater
Abstract:
A . five stage treatment system for treating oily wastewater to fit it for discharge to surface
waters comprising a coalescer for separating free oil, an ultrafiltration unit for separating
emulsified oil, an activated carbon filter for separating residual light organic compounds . a
0
cation exchanger for removing heavy metal ions . a pH adjusting unit for adjusting the treated
water to substantially neutral pH prior to discharge. and a controller for regulating the
operation of the system . An optional gravity separation stage and/or a clarifier stage may also
be included . if desired . Flow of permeate from the ultrafiltration stage is monitored and control
valves admitting feed solution to the ultrafiltration unit or discharging retentate from the
ultrafiltration unit are adjusted in response to the measured values to maintain a desired rate of
permeate flow.
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Cod
State / Country
Classification
5227057
93
0
OR
210/174 210/374 210/377 2I0/394
Title : Ring centrifuge apparatus for residual liquid waste removal from recyclable container
material
•
Abstract:
The present invention is a centrifuge device which separates chips or shreds of containers from
whatever liquid residue remains within these containers . Though this technology is suitable for
a number of applications, a primary objective is the separation of the recyclable plastic of a
motor oil container from the remaining re-usable motor oil within the container after the
container has ostensibly been emptied . It is an objective to accomplish this in an economicall y
advantageous manner which uses neither a solvent nor a wash process . and which reclaims the
oil in a suitable form for reprocessing . In its preferred embodiment, the present invention may
be utilized as a compact. free-standing size reduction and reclaiming device at the location
where the container is used . such as in automotive service stations, and the like . In a second
embodiment, production units may be used in plastic reclaiming plants where large quantities
of a given plastic container are being centrally processed.
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
5226926
93
0
JPX
44/530 44/550 52 1/40 521/46 .5
Title : Plastic and oil waste processing method
Abstract:
A waste plastic material, e .g . hard plastic waste constituted of vinyl chloride . polyethylene, and
foamed polystyrene . soft plastic waste . or other plastic waste containing metal fragments . is
mmersed in a vegetable or mineral oil heated to I IO .degree . to I80 .degree . C . for melting in to a
saturation of the plastic . waste . the proportion of the plastic waste added to the oil being
sufficient to saturate the oil . The melted plastic material . in which quantities of the oil are
entrapped is mixed with a given dose of a neutralizing agent . e .g . calcium hydroxide . at a
temperature of 220 .degree . to 00 .degree . C . Then . the resultant mixture, in which a quantity
•
of the oil is entrapped is shaped into a solid fuel product . or into a predetermined form
disposable in a landfill.
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
5225044
93
620646
OH
202/I 13 201/26 202/137 202/151 432/12R 432/152
Title : Pyrolytic conversion system
Abstract:
A rotary . continuous pyrolytic conversion system converts solid hydrocarbons into gases . liquid
hydrocarbons and char by pyrol zing feed stocks including : plastic waste, tires and plastic
from automobile shredding operations : containers and trays of styrofoam and other plastic
materials such as used in "fast food" restaurants : rubber : leather: tires : garbage : sewage sludge:
coal : oil shale : broken asphalt and the like . These materials are preferably shredded and kinds
thereof having different melting points are mixed to facilitate movement of the feed stock
through the converter without clogging . Preferably, the materials are baled and injected into
the converter where they are severed as they are injected . The materials are fed by gravity from
the input end of a converter drum to the discharge end thereof: the input end being elevated
above the discharge end . The converter drum is contained within an outer drum which is in
substantially air-tight relationship with the injector for the bales and with a discharge chute for
• the solid products of pyrolysis . A casing around the outer stationary drum defines an oven
chamber which is heated by combustion products . from a burner providing a heat source,
which circulate in heat exchange relationship with a matrix of fins extending into the oven from
the stationary outer drum . A rod extends into the injection end of the converter drum for
supporting scrapers against the inner periphery of the converter drum . A crusher bar is carried
in the drum at the discharge end thereof and crushes the solid products which consists of char
(mostly carbon black), metals and other non-organic materials . A chute containing water
receives the pulverized discharge product and balances the pressure in the converter to maintain
an air-tight seal therein . A second pyrolysis reactor may receive the solid pyrolysis products
and be operative at higher temperature than the first converter to destroy chlorinated
hydrocarbons . To assist in such destruction . lime may be injected into the first converter . A
plurality of converters may be operated in parallel and utilize common equipment for cleaning
the product gases released upon pyrolysis and to supply them to the burners of each of the
reactors . Flue gases from the oven chambers of one of the plurality of converters may be
supplied to the burner of the next converter for preheating gases for combustion therein.
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
5222534
93
0
CO
141/xR 141/86 141/31 IA 141/378 220/573 220/737 248/5l9
Title : Container restraint or holder
•
•
Abstract:
A device for the retention of various sizes of containers used in the collection of waste fluids
such as anti-freeze . oil and other liquids including a receptacle with a raised platform for
supporting a container to be filled and a trough surrounding the raised platform for collecting
spilled fluids . The raised platform having a plurality of peg receptacles each capable of
receiving a peg for providing support to the container being filled . Drain channels are provided
between the peg receptacles and the trough permitting spilled fluids to drain into the trough and
providing structural support to the device.
Issue Year
93
State / Country DEX
Classification
428/213 405/38 .405/107 405/109 405/115 428/220 428/234.
428/241 428/246 428/283 428/300 428/332
Title : Water and/or oil-permeable sealing mat consisting substantially of a substrate laver . a
layer of swellable clay and a cover layer
•
Abstract:
A water and/or oil-impermeable sealing mat is provided in form of a bentonite non-woven
fabric combination with the possibility of transmitting shear from one batt layer to the other,
i .e . on a slope shearing forces can be transmitted by the covering batt material through .the
layer of swellable clay into the supporting batt material . Such a sealing mat is a fiberreinforced mineral seal permitting the transmission of shearing forces on slopes . withóut the risk
of the layer of swellable clay itself becoming the preferred sliding plane . The sealing mat
consists of a non-woven textile material as substrate layer, a layer of swellable clay . preferably
sodium bentonite . and a cover laver consisting preferably also of a non-woven teXtile material.
all three layers having been needlepunched together in the conventional manner in a needle
loom . When moistened . the clay swells and forms the water and/or oil-impermeable layer . The
water and/or oil-impermeable sealing mat is used especially in hydraulic engineering and in
waste dispose) engineering.
Patent Number
Issue Year
93
Assignee Code
State / Country
MS
237/19
237/57 431/207
Classification
Title : Outside waste oil furnace
Abstract:
A furnace located outside of a building or other enclosure to be heated with the furnace
utilizing waste oil as a combustible fuel . The furnace is associated with a storage tank for the ,
oil which includes a preheater or warmer therein as well as an oil ,preheater located in the oil
supply line between the tank and furnace with the oil preheater being located adjacent the
furnace and being preheated by the hot water produced by the furnace with the preheater or
warmer in the tank also being communicated with the hot water heated by the furnace to reduce
the viscosity thereof to facilitate the oil being pumped to the preheater and furnace . The hot
water produced by the furnace can be used to heat water to be used for domestic purposes
through a heat exchanger and also provide fan coil units with hot water and many' other
purposes . The furnace includes a unique arrangement of combustion chamber, heat transfer
chambers and stack or chimney with a water jacket including a condenser unit to retain and
condense water vapor or steam produced by the furnace.
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
521 7628
93
0
OR
210/787 209/725 210/803
Title : Method of batch centrifugal removal of residual liquid waste from recyclable container
material
Abstract:
The present invention is a method for using a batch centrifuge to separate the granulated
material of a container from whatever liquid residue remains within the container . Though this
technology is suitable for many diverse applications, a primary objective is the separation of
the recyclable plastic of a motor oil container from the remaining reusable motor oil within the
container after the container has ostensibly been emptied . The apparatus may be utilized as a
compact . free-standing size reduction and reclaiming device at the location where the container
is used . It uses neither a solvent nor a wash process and reclaims the oil in a suitable state for
reprocessing . In a second method . a rinsing mechanism is employed by which a residual liquid
waste . such as soap . may be concentrated and separated without introducing this residual liquid
waste in dilute form into the waste water treatment process . A further method provides for the
re-orientation of the granulated material so that complete removal of the liquid waste is
achieved during the centrifugal process.
Patent Number 52I 1856
Issue Year
93
Assignee Code 0
State / Country CNX
Classification
210/799 06í : 03 210/ 175 210/ 180 210/220 210/774 210/776
Title : Method of oil/water separation and device for purification of oil
Abstract:
This invention provides a new low vacuum oil/water mixture liquid separation method and an
improved oil purification device for oil/water separation . Fully diffused purified gas is
introduced an oil/water mixture liquid in a low vacuum container, enabling the liquid to
produce cone
.
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
Classification
5221043
93
692877
Title:
Abstract :
entrated micro fine gas bubbles, enabling in the liquid to be in a state of gas/liquid two-phase
mixture . This greatly increases the surface area of the oil/water mixture liquid, speeding up the
oil/water separation . This invention provides an oil/water separation rate ten times higher than
that of the conventional method . This invention is not only suitable for the purification of new
oil, but is adequate in the recovery, regeneration and purification of various waste lubrication
oils, hydraulic oils . and transformer oils.
93'
Issue Year
Assignee Code 9630
State / Country CA
Classification
149/109 .6 149/19 .92 149/124 588/202
Title : Desensitization of waste rocket propellants
•
Abstract:
Waste solid energetic compositions such as waste solid rocket propellant are desensitized for
purposes of disposal and burning by being combined with a diluent and a filler which lower the
sensitivity . energy output and flame temperature of the compositions and improve their ability
to burn in a controlled manner by increasing the burn time . The diluent is an oil with a viscosity
of at least about 600 centipoise . and the filler is any of a variety of solid organic material,
preferably agricultural waste or wood flour.
Issue Year
93
Assignee Code 0
State / Country FL
Classification
210/704 210/708 210/709 210/743 210/745 210/748 210/776 210/804
Title : Industrial waste water reclaniation process
Abstract:
A process and systeim for continuously recovering industrial waste water characterized as
divergent hydro-lipophilic waste streams for industrial reuses to enhance water conservation
and to reduce environmental pollution is disclosed . The process and system are especially suited
for reclaiming animal and food processing discharge water having blood . fat, oil and grease
contaminants in the water . for industrial reuse in evaporative condensers, hydraulic system
cooling' and equipment . non-food contact vehicles and plant or factory area wash-downs . The
•
process can operate continuously for supplying water for such industrial uses, but also
includes an automatic shut down if the incoming influent to be treated is too turbid . The
process includes chemical pH adjustment . separation of fat . oil and grease (FOG) from the
influent and particulate removal in polishing filters . Sensors are used to monitor the pH and
component internal water pressures throughout . An air sparging coil and three individual tanks
separate the FOG and water in three stages . The polishing filters then remove particulates
(including the heme molecules) . Finally . the processed water is treated with ultraviolet
disinfection to kill microfloura and microfauna bacteria . The water is then ready for industrial
reuse in evaporative condensers (cooling towers) water cooled hydraulic systems, vacuum
pump systems . wash down of docks . recovery areas or vehicles and outdoor reuse.
Issue Year
e>3
State / Country TN
Classification
134/42 134/40 252/153 252/170 252/542
Title : Nonhazardous solvent composition and method for cleaning metal surfaces
Abstract:
A solvent composition for displacing greasy and oil y contaminants as well as water and/or
aqueous residue from metallic surfaces . especially surfaces of radioactive materials so that
such surfaces can he wiped clean of the displaced contaminants . water and/or aqueous residue.
The solvent composition consists essentially of a blend of nonpolar aliphatic hydrocarbon
solvent having a minimum flash point of about I40 .degree . F . and 2 to 25 volume percent of a
polar solvent having a flash point sufficiently high so as to provide the solvent composition
with a minimum flash point of at least I40 .degree . F . The solvent composition is
nonhazardous so that when it is used to clean the surfaces of radioactive materials the waste in
the form of paper or cloth wipes . lab 'coats and the like used in the cleaning operation is not
considered to be mixed waste composed of a hazardous solvent and a radioactive material.
Issue Year
93
State / Country WI
Classification
32/92 30/418 30/441 32/ 101
Title : Oil filter recycler apparatus
Abstract:
An oil filter recycler for severing the casing of an automotive oil filter, for separating the filter
into its components for recycling, and for removing engine waste oil for environmentally safe
disposal . characterized by a turntable for rotating a cylindrically shaped filter about its' axis
and a knife for severing the casing of the filter as it is rotated . The turntable is rotatable either
manually or automatically . The knife is radially adjustable relative to the axis of the turntable.
A releasable ratchet pawl spring biased for engagement with a rotatable threaded rod on a
•
slidable knife holder provides for slidable, rotatable adjustment of the knife, and for quick
release and retraction of the knife.
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Counts
Classification
5204001
93
639745
CAX
210/608 210/ 151 210/195 .2 210/195 .3 210/622 210/626
Title : Membrane bioreactor system for treating synthetic metal-working fluids and oil-based
products
Abstract:
A system to treat wastewater from a metal-working facility . such as an automotive
manufacturing plant in a bioreactor using live microorganisms . Such wastewater contains
waste fluids which are a mixture of relatively easily biodegradable fats and oils . much less
easily biodegradable synthetic fluids . oils and greases . and non-biodegradable material
including inorganic finely divided solids such as metal and silicon carbide particles . Such waste
fluids require a hydraulic retention time (HRT) and a solids retention time (SRT) which is 10
times greater than for sewage . High quality water is separated from suspended solids which are
removed from the reactor at an essentially constant rate and fed to an ultrafiltration membrane.
Concentrate is recycled to the reactor . except for a bleed stream to remove solids periodically.
The membranes acquire a long and effective life despite large variations in membrane flux.
• because of a permeate recycle which permits operation of the bioreactor at constant volume:
permits flow of feed wastewater to the reactor at constant flow rate : and allows operation of the
membrane modules at a relatively low pressure in a narrow range which does not damage the
membranes . Such operation of the bioreactor allows one to use a reactor which is one-half the
size (volume) than one which would be required with a system without a permeate recycle.
Effective and long-lived operation of the membranes is obtained by filtering out (through a 140
mesh screen) all solids greater in diameter than about 106 .mu .m . Pilot plant tests conducted
with wastewater from automobile manufacturing plants over a period of more than a year
provide evidence of the surprising effectiveness of the system over a prolonged period.
Issue Year
93
Assignee Code 0
State / Country TX
210/703 209/208 210/708 210/741 210/7-44 210/774 210/800 210/804
Classification
Title : Waste water treatment system
•
Abstract:
Improved techniques are provided for separating mixtures of materials having different
densities . The apparatus of the present invention is well suited for separating oil from water,
defining a cylindrical water storage chamber and a
and includes a separation tank
frustroconical separation chamber spaced above an adjoining the water storage chamber . Fluid
is input to the separation tank at the lcvèl of the oil/water interface . An oil leg is spaced above
the separation chamber, and an adjustable oil overflow unit is provided adjacent the oil outlet
for selectively varying the head pressure of oil in the oil leg . A water leg is provided in parallel
with the separation tank, and an adjustable water overflow unit is provided adjacent the water
outlet for selectively varying the head pressure of water in the water leg . The adjustable
overflow units allow the head pressure in the oil leg relative to the head pressure in the water leg
to maintain the interface within the upper portion of the separation chamber . Sensing means are
provided for monitoring the elevation of the oil/water interface within the separation chamber.
Issue Year
93
State / Country IL
Status
CC
Classification 210/708 210/709 210/710 210/727 210/734 210/736 210/745 210/778 252/358
Title : Emulsion destabilization and treatment
Abstract : .
A method for treating and resolving a phosphorus containing ' oily waste emulsion is described.
The treatment uses an emulsion destabilizing cationic polymer of low molecular weight in
combination with filter aids to form a coacérvate slurry . The coacervate slurry can be
optionally - treated With either high molecular weight anionic or cationic coagulents, or
combination thereof. The suspended solids formed by the above treatments are removed from
the slurries and wasted or discarded or incinerated . The remaining liquids may be recycled.
reused, or treated as effluent meeting environmental standards.
Patent Number
5I96 117
9Issue
3
Year .
Assignee ode
690622
State /. Country
GBX
Classification
210/265 210/260 210/262 210/266 210/DIG5
Title : Apparatus for separating oil from an oil/water mixture
Abstract:
Apparatus for separating oil from an oil/water mixture . The mixture is introduced into a vessel
through entry ports and passes through a coalescing filter, flowing therethrough into a
settlement chamber . Separation of oil and water occurs in the chamber and oil flows therefrom
through an outlet to a waste collection vessel . Water is taken from the lower part of the chamber
through a pipe and passes through a sorbcnt bed prior to discharge through an outlet located at
a level below the level of the oil outlet opening.
Issue Year
93
State / Country CA'
Classification
210/ 181 210/182 210/195 .1 210/196 210/199 210/202 210/203 2 1 0/205
210/206 210/259 210/284 210/314
Title : Processing mixed waste
Abstract:
Removing radioactive contaminants from liquid hazardous material such as oil, includes
recirculating the material between a processing tank and a filter medium . The material is heated
to increase viscosity during the circulation through the tank and filters . Chemicals including
chelating agents are added to enhance the removal of the radioactive elements . Water is added to
the processing tank or upstream . in a settling tank, to effect a water wash of the liquid
hazardous material . A pre-filter stage upstream of the settling tank is followed by a mid-range
filter stage in the recirculation loop with the main processing tank . A finishing filter stage is .in
the outlet from the main processing tank.
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
5192455
93 .
0
LA
210/787 134/10 134/33 134/40 210/791 210/805
Title : Pollution pad reconditioning/recycling system
Abstract:
A pollution pad cleaning system for recvclably removing hydrocarbons from an absorbent
material such that the material is re-useable as originally designed . As the preferred embodiment
a pollution pad cleaning system comprises a multi-stage treatment process wherein
polypropylene absorbent pads soaked with waste oil and the like are treated via a system of
squeeze rollers . a solvent shower . centrifuge spin_ and then drying and fluffing, restoring the
pads to a "like new ." reusable condition . The collected waste oil and solvent are removed at a
predesignated concentration from the system for recycling . While the preferred embodiment
utilizes a continuous system with. convevors and the like . and wherein the contaminated pads
are placed upon the ingress portion of the system and the cleaned, reusable pads are discharged
from the exit end of the system, an alternative, working embodiment utilizes a system
comprising a plurality of treatment stations which may, be economically configured utilizing a
minimum of labor and start-up costs . The present invention provides an inexpensive.
environmentally sound n etbod . .)f tr. :ating and recycling pollution absorbing pads wherein in
the past the pads were disposed of in landfills . creating still another pollution problem . and at
a disposal cost greater than the cost of implementing the present cleaning and recycling system.
93
Issue Year
Assignee Co(! ::
682380
State / Country CA
Classification
119/17) 252/106 252/139 424/54
Title : Odor controlling animal litter with pine oil
•
Abstract:
The invention provides a liquid composition for deodorizing animal wastes by contact
therewith . The composition comprises an aqueous dispersion which contains an ammoniacontrolling-effective amount of pine oil and a dispersion aid . The dispersion aid is selected
from anionic . nonionic . cationic . amphoteric surfactants . and mixtures of these surfactants.
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
5188156
~)3
0
CA
141/98 141/106 141/114 141/244 141 /314 141/331 141/334 141 /339
141/340 141 /364 184/1 .5 184/ 106 220/573
Title : Waste oil recycling apparatus
•
Abstract:
An apparatus to include a storage container arranged for vertical mounting to a support
surface, wherein the storage container mounts an outlet conduit and valve associated therewith.
The container is provided with a cavity to receive and store a fluid-receiving pan container
permitting ease of disposal of waste oil from an associated vehicular oil change . Waste oil
containers are thereafter positioned below the storage container conduit to receive the waste oil
for subseauent recycling . A modification of the invention includes a first and second storage
container mounted to opposed side walls of the primary storage cóntainer to include respective
granular absorbing material and saturated oil absorbing material respectively . An underlying'
tray is positioned below a manifold mounted to the container conduit for permitting filling of a
plurality of waste oil containers simultaneously.
Issue Year
93
State / Country MD
Classification
210/94 210/1 36 210/232 210/440 210/444 .210/450 210/455 210/DIGI7
Title : Plastic oil filter assembly
Abstract:
A plastic oil filter assembly comprises a closure plate having a plurality of radial supporting
fins disposed on the inside surface thereof a filter member having a saw-toothed coupling for
tightly engaging with the plurality of radial supporting fins of the closure plate through a
multiple-slit rubber valve, and a transparent exterior enclosure . The plastic oil filter assembly is
simple in constriction . inexpensive to manufacture . durable in use . and permits easy checking
of the contamination level in filters of the filter member . The plastic oil filter assembly can
reduce waste by permitting, recycling of the used plastic filter assembly as a raw material.
Patent Number
Issue Year
5180405
93
e,
•
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
6890 ; I
TWX
55/227 55/257 .I 55/259 55/279 95/92
Title : Oily smoke purifying apparatus of central processing system type
Abstract:
An oily smoke purifying apparatus of central processing system type . comprising an upright
housing on the inside bottom of which is provided a water tank equipped with a water pump
that is connected to a multitude of branch pipes capable of spraying a screen of water so that
the space between these pipes and a slant catch plate located under the pipes forms a cooling
chamber . As oily smoke is drawn into the cooling chamber by the fans located in the upper
portion of the housing . oil and steam are separated : the oily mud dropping into the water tank
and then being collected in the waste oil tank . the steam being exhausted via the upper portion
of the housing after being multiply filtered.
Patent Number
5179903
Issue Year
93
Assignee Code
0
State / Country
LA
Classification
110/ 345 I 10/204 1 10/216
Title : Closed loop incineration process
Abstract:
An incineration process which can utilize any type of incineration means for disposing of
hazardous, as well as non-hazardous . burnable waste . Such waste include toxic combustible
liquids, oil slurries . soils contaminated with dioxin . PCBs . creosote, or any other potentially
toxic combustible material . In particular . the present invention relates to an incineration
process which has no continuous stack . discharge or pollution . In this process . a portion of the
flue gas stream is enriched with oxygen and recycled to the incineration means . The remaining
portion of the flue gas stream is scrubbed to remove acid gases and passed through a
purification' zone wherein any remaining contaminates are removed.
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
5174903
92
0
NC
210/725 210/728 210/730
Title : Process for removing proteinaceous materials, fats and oils from food processing
wastewater and recovering same
Abstract:
A process for removing proteinaceous materials . fats and oils from food processing wastewater
using a coagulant such as lignin or a halogen ion containing compound together with a
flocculent such as a natural polymer such as a polysaccharide or synthetic polymer is
•
described . The combination of lignin or halogen and polymer is effective for coagulating and
flocculating proteinaceo. us materials, fats and oils in food processing wastewater at low pH.
Issue Year
92
Assignee Code 68300
State / Country NJ
Classification
134/95 .1 134/102 .1 134/107 134/I08 134/109 134/200 201/38 210/747
Title : Apparatus and process for removing contaminants from soil
Abstract:
An apparatus and process are described for removing contaminants from soil or other substrate
materials . A hot pressurized liquid is continuously supplied to a volume of soil or other
material contained in a processing vessel . The hot pressurized liquid may be steam, which
vaporizes a fraction of the contaminant which is then released through a vapor filter to prevent
atmospheric cross-pollution . The remaining contaminant is removed as either a liquid phase or
a solid solution phase along with the steam driver . The waste stream and stream driver
condense in a collector and are removed from the system . The driver may be recovered for reuse
or may be discarded along with the waste stream . The processor may also be used to remove
various types of contaminants ranging from light hydrocarbons . chlorinated, solvents . and
water soluble organics to heavy oils . paints . heavy metals . and radionucleides.
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
5167829
92
0
NJ
210/708 210/752 210/804 210/DIGS
Title : System for treating commercial waste effluents
Abstract:
In accordance with the present invention, there is provided a system for treating commercial.
industrial and institutional effluents to remove contaminants such as : fats, oils and greases.
(FOGs) from the waste water . The system generally features a continuous processing treatment
of the effluent . but can also be adapted on a small scale to a batch procedure . The system
comprises the feeding of an emulsified waste stream to a first screening station . where solid
matter and large particulates are removed . The FOGs in the waste stream are initially
emulsified during the laundering or cleaning process by an alkaline detergent . The alkaline,
emulsified waste stream is then fed to a first stage of a pH adjustment station . Here, the
emulsified FOGs begin the process of being released and dispersed within the fluid, through the
downward adjustment of the pH, i .e . by treating the effluent with acid . Finally, the dispersed
emulsion stream is introduced into a separation station comprising either a separator . coalescer.
,clarifier or combination thereof. In the separation station. the fats . oils and grease. and any
remaining solid waste is separated from the aqueous phase . syphoned off and/or pumped away.
The waste water is now in condition to be discharged . Other processing can subsequently be
•
done, such as environmental pH adjustments, or the removal of other contaminants such as
heav y metals.
Issue Year
92
Assignee Code 0
State / Country NY
Classification
202/105 100/232 201/6 201/25 202/136 202/262 414/173 414/198
Title : Apparatus for pyrolysis of tires and Waste
Abstract:
Method and apparatus for pvrolvzing used tires into a char fraction . wire, fiberglass, oil
fraction and gas fraction . The tires are continuously conveyed to a preheating chamber where
they are heated to a temperature level of 200 .degree . F . to 400 .degree . F . The heated tires are
metered into a cavity having disposed therein a ram system, which shapes and forces the whole
tire into a pipe which leads to a pvrolvzing chamber . The tires form a plug at the front end of
the system to prevent the release of toxic gases into the atmosphere and also tb prevent air from
entering the pvrolvzing chamber . Similarly, solid residue produced by pyrolysis of the
apparatus is forced into a discharge column, forming a plug to seal the system at its outlet end.
An alternate embodiment of the invention apparatus operated manually can also be used for
compacting . neutralizing and disposing of medical waste, infectious materials and the like as
well as'auto tires.
•
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
5161564
92
0
VA
137/ 172 137/ 192 137/423
Title : Automatic separator valve
Abstract:
An automatically resetting mechanical valve used to control unwanted discharge of liquids less
dense than water . principally oil . which may be present in waste water flows . The valve is
closed by sinking both a primary float and a secondary float . each less dense than water but
more dense than the liquid whose discharge is to he stopped . The , sinking primary float
effectively closes an orifice in an outlet conduit upon the sinking primary float's becoming
sufficiently immersed in the less dense liquid . Upon the reintroduction of water . the secondary
float acts upon a lever of high mechanical advantage . which pries the primary float upward.
which . in turn . allows hydraulic pressure inside and outside the conduit to equalize . thereby
allowing the primary float to unseat and the valve to automatically re-open.
Patent Number
5160441
Issue Year
92
Assignee Code 0
•
State / Country OR
210/781 134/17 134/132 134/133210/374 210/787 2l0/803 494/53
Classification
Title : Method of continuous centrifugal removal of residual liquid waste from recyclable
container material
Abstract:
The present invention is a method for using a horizontal, continuous process auger centrifuge
to separate the granulated material of a container from whatever liquid residue remains within
the container . Though this technology is suitable for many diverse applications . a primary
objective is the continuous separation of the recyclable plastic of a motor oil container from the
remaining reusable motor oil within the container after the container has ostensibly been
emptied . It is an objective of the method to accomplish this separation in an economically
advantageous manner which uses neither a solvent nor a wash process . and which reclaims the
oil in a suitable state for reprocessing . In a second method . a rinsing mechanism is employed by
which a residual liquid waste, such as soap . may be concentrated and separated in a first rinse
stage without introducing the residual liquid waste in dilute form into the waste water treatment
process.
•
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Status
Classification
5 160439
92
150620
IL
CC
210/709 210/86 210/96 .1210/I98 .I 210/745 2Ií)/746 364/502
Title : System for controlling coagulant treatment based on monitoring of plural parameters
Abstract:
A system is disclosed for controlling the amount of treatment composition . e .g ., cationic
coagulant . to be introduced into an aqueous medium . e .g . . a laundry waste water, having a
content of fats, oils and/or grease (FOG) which is to be reduced . This system comprises a
plurality of detectors each of which is adapted to determine a parameter . other than the FOG
level, of a material comprising the components of the aqueous medium and to provide a
determined signal indicative of the determined parameter : and an automatic processor provided
with a relationship of the amount of treatment composition to be introduced into the aqueous
medium to reduce the 'FO 'I of the aqueous medium to a given level as a function of the
plurality of determined signals . and adapted to receive the plurality of determined signals and to
provide a control signal to a source of treatment composition to control the amount of treatment
composition introduced from the source of treatment composition into the aqueous medium.
i
•
Patent Number
I56098
Issue Year .
0?
. Assignee Code 0
State / Country TX
110/238 110/186 110/212 431/39
Classification
Title : Two chamber burner apparatus for destroying waste liquids
•
Abstract:
A burner apparatus provides on-site destruction of waste liquids such as liquid anti-freeze;
waste motor oil . and the like independently of the liquid concentration thereof. The apparatus
comprises a storage tank for waste liquid including a reservoir and a level sensor for sensing
the level of the waste liquid in the reservoir, and a burner unit energized responsive to the level
sensor when the level of waste liquid exceeds a predetermined value . The burner unit includes
first and second chambers connected together by a flame port provided . between the chambers
at the bottom of the chambers . An atomizing injector injects waste liquid from the storage tank.
in an atomized form . into a flame produced by a first burner located at the top of the first
chamber so that combustion products that are produced fall towards the bottom of the first
chamber and pass through the flame port into the second chamber . A second burner burns
combustion products exiting from the flame port into the second chamber.
Issue Year
92
Assignee Code
315 1 1 0
State / Country
MI
Classification
1 .34/22 .1 I23/196R 134/22 .18 134/22 .19 134/26 184/1 .5
Title : Integrated method for cleaning .and flushing an internal combustion engine
Abstract:
A first pump can withdraw waste fluid from an oil pan reservoir and is used to introduce
flushing fluid having a base material of re-refined oil through the oil filter and internal oil
lubrication distribution passage system, to recirculate the flushing fluid within the internal oil
lubrication distribution passage system, to withdraw the waste flushing fluid from the oil pan
reservoir for disposal and storage in an external storage receptacle for storing both the expired
oil and flushing fluid . An air purge connection is provided for evacuating fluid retained within
the oil filter clement and any fluid remaining in the internal oil lubrication distribution passage
system into the oil pan reservoir prior to withdrawal of the fluid by the first pump . A second
pump is provided for supplying fresh motor oil from an external storage receptacle through the
oil filter and the internal oil lubrication distribution passage system . Optionally, a remote oil
filter and drain mounting bracket provdes a central . easily accessible location within the engine
compartment for connection to the oil changing apparatus and for changing the oil filter
element . A drain plug adapter is connectible to the oil pan reservoir to provide connection to
the first pump . Methods for removing waste or spent fluid and introducing fresh fluid through
the oil filter element and internal oil lubrication distribution passage system ; and for
introducing . recirculating and removing flushing fluid from the internal oil lubrication
distribution passage system are also disclosed .
.
Patent Number 51í234I
Issue Year
92
Assignee Code O
State / Country MA
Classification
l66í/248 405/128
Title : Electromagnetic method and apparatus for the decontamination of hazardous materialcontaining volumes
Abstract:
Methods for decontaminating near-surface facilities and water-containing regions of the earth
contaminated with hazardous materials provide for (I) degrading hazardous materials in situ
and/or (2) extracting hazardous materials from near-surface facilities in conjunction with other
hazardous waste treatment technologies to produce a synergistic response for hazardous waste
management . The method also includes using a phase-modulated multiple antenna system for
decontaminating larger near-surface facilities or water-containing regions and for creating
steerable and variable heating patterns . The radio frequency antenna apparatus can be used for
extracting hazardous materials trapped in rock formations . decontaminating storage tanks.
railroad cars, and oil drums, and catalyzing the microbial degradation of certain hazardous
materials.
Issue Year
Assignee Code 0
State / Country OR
. Classification
210/174 134/104 .2 134/153 210/210 210/365 210/376 210/377
Title : Centrifuge apparatus for residual liquid waste removal from recyclable container
material
Abstract:
The present invention is a centrifuge device which separates chips or shreds of containers from
whatever liquid residue remains within the containers . The device is suitable for many
applications . including the separation of the recyclable plastic of a motor oil container from the
remaining re-usable motor oil within 'the container after the container has ostensibly been
emptied . The device may be utilized as a compact . free-standing size reduction and reclaiming
device at the location where the container is used . such as in automotive service stations . and
the like . or production units may be used in plastic reclaiming plants where large quantities of
a given plastic container are being centrally processed.
Patent Number . 5149260
Issue Year
92
Assignee Code 0
State / Country VA
Classification
431/1 1 4 3 l / í 2 43 1/28 43 1/32 43 1/36 43 1/37 43 1/208 43 1/2 1 l
Title : Device and method for combustion of waste oil
•
Abstract:
The present invention concerns a device sequence for burning waste oil and includes a
circulating system having a pump for circulating the oil therein and a heater for heating the oil
to a suitable combustion temperature during this circulation . A combustion oil system is
included for diverting a portion of the circulating oil to an atomizing gun for combination
therein with a source of atomizing air . The gun includes a heat exchange body portion in fluid
communication with the circulating system . A linear actuator is included having a rod with a
needle end that is operated by the . actuator in a linear manner along the central axis of the
atomizing gun for extending through the injection orifice for providing mechanical cleaning
thereof and for regulating oil flow therethrough . The present invention includes a control
system for regulating the operation thereof. In particular, oil is heated and circulated prior to
diversion to the combustion system which also allows for pre-heating of the atomizing gun . The
control system also provides for a cooling cycle after combustion is stopped wherein the oil
heater and oil is circulated through the gun during the removal of residual heat from the
combustion chamber that exists after heating cycle shut-down.
Issue Year
92
194865
Assignee Code
State / Counts' BEX
Classification
210/695 134/1 134/10 134/34 134/40 209/3 209/214 210/74 210/749
210/771 210/772 210/791 210/805
Title : Process for treating wastes from the machining of ferromagnetic materials
Abstract:
A process and apparatus for treating waste which contains ferromagnetic components . such as
the grinding sludge from grinding ferromagnetic materials which contains ferromagnetic
particles contaminated with water and oil . in which the• waste is introduced into a separating
tank containing a washing solution and mixed with the solution by stirring until the oil
dissolves . Subsequently . a magnetic field is produced at the separating tank wall which causes
magnetic components to accumulate on the all . The wash solution is then filtered to remove
non-ferromagnetic solids . The magnetic field is subsequently removed . and accumulated
ferromagnetic components are released into the wash solution . The ferromagnetic components
are then filtered out from the wash solution and dried . and the filtered wash solution is conveyed
to an oil separation tank where oil separated from the waste is' recovered.
Issue Year
92
Assignee Code 0
State / Country TX
210/104 137/172 210/115 210/137 210/181 210/lRR 210/195 .1 210/197
Classification
210/221 .2 210/519 210/521
Title : Waste water treatment system
Abstract:
Improved techniques are provided for separating mixtures of materials' having different
densities . The apparatus of the present invention is well suited for . separating oil from water,
and includes a separation tank defining a cylindrical water storage chamber and a
frustroconical separation chamber spaced above an adjoining the water storage chamber . Fluid
is input to the separation tank at the level of the oil/water interface . An oil leg is spaced above
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
5 121794
92
0
CA
166/81
Title : Waste fluid containment and recovery apparatus
Abstract:
This invention is a waste fluid containment and recovery apparatus for installation on the wellhead of an oil well in-line with a pair of interfacing flanges thereof . There is a pan having a
bottom and surrounding sidewalls . The bottom has a bore therethrough . There is also a flange
interface having a pair of opposed interfacing surfaces which interface with respective ones of
the pair of interfacing flanges disposed around the bore for sealable connecting the bottom of
the pan in line with the yell-head . A drain pipe is connected through the bottom for connection
to a hose leading to waste fluid recovery apparatus.
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Status
Classification
5110503
92
0
TX
CC
252/325 252/338 252/344 252/358
Title : Dcmulsifving
Abstract:
The present invention deals with compositions utilized to demulsify wash liquors, tramp oils or
coolants . The compositions of the present invention are useful per se as cleaning compositions.
The ability to rapidly demulsifv from a waste liquor solution allows rapid recovery of fats.
greases and oils and rapid passage of the effluent to a sewage treatment facility.
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
5105226
92
381140
TX .
405/128 166/305 .1 405/53
Title : TECHNIQUE FOR DISPOSAL OF DRILLING WASTES
Abstract:
A method for disposing of drilling wastes where an aqueous saline solution is used to disperse a
drilling fluid . ,r mud . The saline solution containing the dispersed drilling fluid or mud is
injected into a disposal well or high permeability oil depleted zone . An interval of the formation
adjacent to the disposal well is hydraulically fractured so as to allow continued injection of the
solution containing the drilling fluid or mud at substantially low pressures . Hydraulic fracturing
the separation chamber. and an adjustable oil overflow unit is provided adjacent the oil outlet
for selectively varying the head pressure of oil in the oil kg . A water leg is provided in parallel
with the separation tank, and an adjustable water overflow unit is provided adjacent the water
outlet for selectively varying the head pressure of water in the water leg . The adjustable
overflow units allow the head pressure in the oil leg relative to the head pressure in the water leg
to maintain the interface within the upper portion of the separation chamber . Sensing means are
provided for monitoring the elevation of the oil/water interface within the separation chamber.
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
514I526
92
508865
TX
44/576 44/589 44/605 106/747 106/755 106/758 210/777
Title : Fuel preparation from a waste sludge
Abstract:
Waste sludge that contains water . solids and oil . is mixed with a filter aid that has filter aid
characteristics and a heating value of at least 1 .000 Btu/lb . The admixture obtained is
subjected to filtration yielding a high-Btu combustible material . useful as fuel . This combustible
material . optionally after drying to remove water . is very suitable for use as fuel in a cement
kiln.
•
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
5135656
92
39I745
TX
210/650 210/662 210/664 210/669 210/674 210/692
Title : Process for removing water soluble organic compounds from produced water
Abstract:
A process for the removal of water soluble organic compounds from produced water is
provided . The process allows for the removal of water soluble organic compounds by passing
the produced water through a column of adsorbing resin which is capable of removing the
soluble organic compounds from the water and providing an environmentally acceptable
effluent . The removal of polllutants from the produced water is monitored continuously by a
fluorescence detector . The process further allows for the generation of the adsorbing resin by
regenerating the resin with a solvent capable of eluting accumulated soluble organic compounds
from the column followed by treatment of the resin with steam to remove residual eluting
solvent . The process further allows for the treatment of the eluting solvent and soluble organic
compound admixture in a manner to allow reuse of the solvent and to allow recovery of the
soluble organic compound or to allow direct injection of the soluble organic compound
admixture into the oil stream . Thus . the invention provides a process for removal and recovery
of water soluble organic compounds from produced water which creates no environmentally
hazardous waste streams .
is used to' re-establish communication with a disposal zone whenever a "skin" builds up due to
filtration of the solids from the injected drilling fluids or muds.
Issue Year
92
State / Country TX
Classification
210/650 210/662 210/664 210/669 2 10/674 210/692
Title : PROCESS FOR REMOVING WATER SOLUBLE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS FROM
PRODUCED WATER
Abstract:
A process for the removal of water soluble organic compounds from produced water is
provided . The process allows for the removal of water soluble organic compounds by passing
the produced water through a column of adsorbing resin which is capable of removing the
soluble organic compounds from the water and providing an environmentally acceptable
effluent . The process further allows for the regeneration of the adsorbing resin by backwashing
the resin with a solvent capable of eluting accumulated soluble organic compounds from the
column . The process further allows for the treatment of the . eluting solvent and soluble organic
compound admixture in a manner to allow reuse of the solvent and to allow recovery of the
soluble organic compounds or to alloW direct injection of the soluble organic compound
admixture into the oil stream . Thus . the invention provides a process for removal and recovery
of water soluble organic compounds from produced water which creates no en v ironmentally
hazardous waste streams.
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
5102261
92
434706
AK
405/70 405/63 405/72
Title : FLOATING CONTAINMENT BOOM
Abstract:
A floating containment boom for containment and isolation of waterborne pollutants . such as
oil, silt, medical waste, bacteria, debris, and suspended particulates . The containment boo-ill is
comprised of a floatation unit, a ballast, a continuous . curtain of at least one sheet of a flexible
geosvnthetic fabric, and at least two tow cords . The curtain has an upper sleeve containing the
flotation unit and may have a lower sleeve containing the ballast . The geosynthetic fabric is
wáter-pervious and may be' oil-absorbing . The fabric allows water to pass through while
containing the waterborne pollutants . The booni of the invention may also be used as a seining
device, to define a swim area . and as a littoral flow trap.
Issue Year
92
Assignee Code 3 13841
State / Country CAX
Classification
141/339 70/164 141/86 141 /297 141 /331 220/334 220/366
Title : EMERGENCY VENTING CAP AND FUNNEL ASSEMBLY
Abstract:
The invention relates to a combined funnel and cap member which can be attached to containers
for receiving waste fluid such as fuel or lubricating oils . The cap member is pivotally attached
to a funnel body and can be latched to the funnel body opposite the hinge mechanism . The hinge
mechanism or the latch mechanism is constricted in such a manner as to permit the cap member
to rise relative to the funnel body in the event of overpressures within the container so as to
provide an emergency venting path for gases under pressure within the container . Once the
verpressure condition has been relieved the cap member will return to its normally closed
position under its own weight . The cap member can be unlatched from the funnel body and
opened so that fluids may be introduced into the container therebelow.
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Status
Classification
•
5092998
92
0
JPX
CC
210/257 .1 204/149 209/149 210/ 186 210/188 210/512 .2
Title : DEVICE FOR TREATING OIL SLUDGE AND OIL-CONTAINING WASTE
WATER
Abstract:
A mixture of an oil sludge and an oil-contained waste water is first separated into a first oilcontained water and an oily dust containing metal-contained dust . fine metal powder and small
fragments . Secondly . the oily dust. is washed and separated into a harmless oil-free dust and a
second oil-contained water containing the metal . Finally, both the first and second oil-contained
water are separated into oil . harmless water and metal hydroxide by electrolysis . Thus, the
mixture of the oil sludge and the oil-contained waste water is separated into components . which
are in turn recovered . recycled . or converted into new materials, and the purification of the
waste water can be realized.
Issue Year
92
Assignee Code
11056
State / Country CAX
210/688 210/667 210/75I 264/66
Classification
Title : METHOD FOR PRODUCING INSOLUBLE INDUSTRIAL RAW MATERIAL
FROM WASTE
Abstract:
A method for handling, treating. heating and incinerating, on-site, liquid waste, sewage, sludge.
cakes or solid waste . The primary treatment process utilizes a 0 .1-50% power of plastic clay
and may include separation, absorption, precipitation . neutralization, sedimentation,
flocculation . coagulation . filtration or dewatering . The residue remaining after the primary
treatment is mixed with additional clay or silicates and a suitable absorbent for either organic or
inorganic : liquid material . to form a solid mixture of approximately 5-50% clay or silicates and
0 .1-10% absorbent . The solidified mixture is formed into granules or other shapes having large
surface area . The stable, solid granules are transferred to a convevorized oven, dried and
pyrolized or fired . Resulting organic gases may be condensed to oil or exhaust gases may be
vented into a secondary incineration unit . The resulting product is composed of stable granules.
detoxified of organic waste and With all inorganic waste converted into silicate form.
Issue Year
92
Assignee Code
391745
State / Country
TX
Classification 134/22 .14 134/22 .19 134/40 252/170 252/173 252/174 .21 252/174 .22
252/DIG 1
Title : METHOD OF USING AN AQUEOUS CHEMICAL SYSTEM TO RECOVER
HYDROCARBON AND MINIMIZE WASTES FROM SLUDGE DEPOSITS IN OIL
STORAGE TANKS
•
Abstract:
Sludge deposited in a crude oil storage tank is treated with a warm-water based nonionic
surfactant to minimize waste and recover hydrocarbon . The process entails draining oil from the
storage tank . adding water with a nonionic surfactant . and adding diluent to recover
hydrocarbon . The tank contents are heated to I45 .dcgree . F . to I80 .degree . F . When no sludge
remains on the tank bottom . the diluent layer containing the recovered hydrocarbon can be
drained directly into the crude unit, without upsets . and the aqueous layer into the API unit.
Issue Year
92
State / Country PA
Classification
431/207 239/128 431/1 1431/36 431/37 431/41 431/208
Title : APPARATUS FOR PREHEATING WASTE OIL
•
Abstract:
A preheater system for waste oil burners utilizes a primary preheater remote from the burner
nozzle and a secondary preheater adjacent the burner nozzle . The primary preheater ordinarily
provides heat to the waste oil when the burner is operating . The secondary preheater ordinarily
maintains the waste oil adjacent the burner nozzle at atomization temperature when the burner
is not operating . Flow of waste oil from the primary_ preheater to the burner nozzle is precluded
when the burner is not operating.
Issue Year
92
Assignee Code 81745
State / Country IN
Classification
137/205 137/236 .1 137/907 251/61 .5
Title : VACUUM SEWERAGE SYSTEM HAVING NON-JAMMING VACUUM VALVES
WITH TAPERED PLUNGERS
•
Abstract:
An improved vacuum sewerage system for transmitting sewage . including at opposite ends a
sewage collection tank at atmospheric pressure and a vacuum collection tank under vacuum
pressure . The sewage is intermittently injected into a transport conduit under vacuum or
subatmospheric pressure when a non-jamming vacuum control valve interposed in the conduit is
opened in response to a predetermined pressure condition . The conduit is laid out in a sawtoothed fashion . having a riser. a low point . and a downslope . When no sewage is being
transported through the conduit . any residual sewage collects in the low point, which generally
does not completely fill with sewage so that vacuum or subatmospheric pressure is
communicated throughout the conduit . When the control valve is opened . the sewage
transported through the conduit forms a generally hollow cylindrical mass, which is propelled
toward the vacuum collection tank . The control valve has a substantially tapered . rigid plunger.
and will not jam in the open or semi-open position as a result of repetitive cycling of the valve
by an associated control unit . The plunger is mounted at one end of an axially disposed shaft of
a piston operator in the valve chamber. and the valve is sealed to prevent leakage of air or
liquids . The non-jamming valve is capable of facilitating a flow rate of thirty gallons per
minute . The combined vacuum valve and vacuum transport system may be used to convey other
types of collected waste liquid, such as used cutting oils.
Issue Year
91
Assignee Code
19655
State / Country OK
Status
CC
Classification
141/98 184/106 220/571 220/573
Title : WASTE OIL COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SYSTEM
Issue Year
91
State / Country DEX
208/1 12 208/144 208/180 208/400 208/434 585/240 585/241
Classification
:
PROCESS
FOR
THE HYDROGENATIVE CONVERSION OF HEAVY OILS AND
Title
RESIDUAL OILS . USED OILS AND WASTE OILS . MIXED WITH SEWAGE SLUDGE
91
Issue Year
•
Assignee Code 0
State / Country JPX
Status
CC
Classification
210/771 134/26 134/27 134/28 204/98 204/ 1 86 204/188 204/190 208/13
208/187 209/149 210/737 210/770 210/787 210/806
Title : METHOD AND DEVICE FOR TREATING OIL SLUDGE AND OIL-CONTAINING
WASTE WATER
Issue Year
91
State / Country . PA
Classification
110/238 43 1/208
Title : WASTE OIL DELIVERY SYSTEM
Issue Year
91
State / Country OR
Classification
210/242 .1 210/242 .3 210/923
Title : APPARATUS TO COLLECT OIL AND OTHER WASTE MATERIAL FROM THE
SURFACE OF WATER
91
Issue Year
Assignee Code 0
State / Country ITX
Classification
524/426 524/401 524/518 524/527 525/88 525/240 525/247
Title : COMPOSITION FOR GIVING BITUMINOUS CONGLOMERATES HIGH
MECHANICAL CHARACTERISTICS AND RESISTANCE .TO HIGH AND LOW
TEMPERATURES, ALSO BY USING SLUDGE OBTAINING FROM THE TREATMENT
OF WASTE LUBRICATING OIL
Issue Year
91
Assignee Code 0
State / Country LA
1.1 0
.21C/513
/ 5 2 1
Classification
210/494 .2 210/497 .12
210/512
Title : APPARATUS FOR SEPARATING SAND AND OIL FROM A WASTE WATER
STREAM
•
Issue Year
91
Assignee Code 62580
•
State / Country PA
Classification
210/708 210/725 210/728 210/736 252/329
Title : SILICATE COAGULANT AID FOR TREATMENT OF OILY WASTEWATERS
Issue Year
91
State / Country AUX
Status
CC
Classification
208/85 201/20 201/25 208/13 208/48Q 208/131 585/240
Title : RECYCLE OF OILY REFINERY WASTES
Patent Number 500087(
Issue Year
91
State / Country JPX
Classification
252/183 .1 1 252/1 10 252/1 17 252/182 .12 252/182 .32 252/192 252/369
252/548
Title : WASTE OIL PROCESSING SUBSTANCE
•
Issue Year
91
State / Country NJ
Classification
208/50 196/104 196/105 201/2 .5 201/25 202/96
Title : OIL RECOVERY PROCESS AND APPARATUS FOR OIL REFINERY WASTE
9I
Issue Year
Assignee Code 0
State / Country CO
Classification
208/ 13 210/770 210/774 210/787 210/806
Title : PROCESS FOR THE RECOVERY OF OIL FROM WASTE OIL SLUDGES
4983782
Patent Number
Issue Year
91
State / Country DEX
585/240 585/241 585/242 585/254
Classification
Title : PROCESS FOR TREATING WASTES AND THE LIKE BY LOW TEMPERATURE
CARBONIZATION AND FURTHER PROCESSING OF THE LOW TEMPERATURE
CARBONIZATION OIL
•
90
Issue Year
Assignee Code 0
State / Country . CAX
Classification
588/255 264/4 .1 264/4 .7 428/402 .21
Title : PROCESS FOR ENCAPSULATION OF OILY LIQUID WASTE MATERIALS
Issue Year
90
Assignee Code
177005
State / Country
FL
Classification
210/709 208/179 208/251R 210/716 210/725 210/912 210/914 423/1
423/43 423/92
Title : METHOD FOR REMOVING DISSOLVED HEAVY METALS FROM WASTE
OILS . INDUSTRIAL WASTEWATERS . OR ANY POLAR SOLVENT
Issue Year
90
Assignee Code
10149I
State / Country CA
Classification
208/ 13 208/ 181 208/182 208/299
Title : CLEANUP OF OILY WASTES
90
Issue Year
State / Country NJ
196/46 196/ 108 196/117 196/134
Classification
Title : WASTE OIL PURIFYING APPARATUS
Issue Year
90
Assignee Code . 139550
State / Country
NJ
.
Classification
210/707 210/759
Title : FAT, OIL AND GREASE FLOTATION TREATMENT OF POULTRY AND FOOD
INDUSTRY WASTE WATER UTILIZING HYDROGEN PEROXIDE
Patent Number
. Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country
Classification
4894140
90
0
DEX
208/72 202/237 203/DIG6 208/67 208/92 208/106 208/132 208/179
208/184
Title : METHOD OF TREATING WASTE OIL
•
Issue Year
89
Assignee Code 43435
State / Country TX
Classification
110/244 110/224 110/226 110/238
Title : METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR TREATING OIL-WATER-SOLIDS SLUDGES
AND REFINERY WASTE STREAMS
Issue Year
89
Assignee Code 0
State / Country WA
Classification
43 1/28 43 1/37 43 1/208
Title : SYSTEM CONTROL MEANS TO PREHEAT WASTE OIL FOR COMBUSTION
Issue Year
89
State / Country NJ
Classification
208/131 201/2 .5 208/13 208/50 208/85
Title : RECYCLE OF OILY REFINERY WASTES
•
Issue Year
89
Assignee Code 86900
State /Country CAX
Classification
44/604 44/593
Title : PREPARATION OF COMPOSITE FUELS, WITH REDUCED SULFUR EMISSION
CHARACTERISTICS . FROM OILY AND CARBONACEOUS WASTES
Issue Year
89
Assignee Code 0
State / Country LA
Classification
210/512 .1 55/257 .4 55/348 55/399 96/216 2 10/DIG5
Title : CENTRIFUGAL OIL SEPARATOR FOR REMOVING OIL FROM A WASTE
FLOWING STREAM
Issue Year
89
State / Country
IL
Classification
95/196 210/708 210/712
Title : PAINT DETACKIFICATION USING OIL-IN-WATER EMULSIONS FROM OILY
WASTE TREATMENT PLANTS
•
•
Patent Number
4797214
Issue Year
89
Assignee Code
0
State / Country
CT
Status
CC E
Classification
210/651 210/708 210/727 252/329 252/358
Title : METHOD OF TREATMENT OF WASTE STREAMS
EMULSIONS OR SOLUTIONS
OF OIL/WATER
Issue Year
89
Assignee Code . 0
State / Countnv
WA
Classification
43 I /2X 43 1 /37 43 1 /208
Title : SYSTEM CONTROL MEANS TO PREHEAT WASTE OIL FOR COMBUSTION
Issue Year
88
State / Country JPX
252/369 252/1 17 252/121 252/367 252/368 252/547 252/548 252/DIG14
Classification
Title : SUBSTANCE AND PROCESS FOR CONVERTING WASTE COOKING OIL INTO
LIQUID SOAP
Issue Year
88
Assignee Code
176875
State / Country TX
588/230 110/211 110/2 15 110/216 110/236 110/246 110/346 588/228
Classification
588/900
Title : TREATMENT OF OIL FIELD WASTES
,.
Issue Year
88
Assignee Code 0
State / Country LA
Status
E
210/188 96/183 210/260 210/521
'Classification
STREAM
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
4726301
88
0
•
State / Country
LA
Classification
110/250 110/227 1 10/228 110/234 110/257 122/20B 219/388 219/390
Title : SYSTEM FOR EXTRACTING CONTAMINANTS AND HYDROCARBONS FROM
CUTTINGS WASTE IN OIL WELL DRILLING
Issue Year
88
Assignee Code 0
State / Country TX
Classification
210/710 175/66 210/724 210/769
Title : TREATMENT TECHNIQUES FOR DRILL FLUIDS . CUTTINGS AND OTHER OIL
FIELD WASTES
Patent Number 469767(
Issue Year
87
Assignee Code 0
State / Country MA
Classification . 184/1 .5 141/86 141/340 141/378 184/106 220/8 220/573 248/132 403/330
Title : WASTE OIL COLLECTION DEVICE
•
Issue Year
87
Assignee Code
0
State / Country
CT
Status
E
Classification
48/105 48/94 196/ l 1 1196/ 127 588/900
Title : APPARATUS FOR GASIFYING WASTE OIL
Patent Number 467308I
Issue Year
87
Assignee Code 0
State / Country NJ
Status
E
Classification
206/223 141/98 184/106 220/573 222/484
Title : WASTE OIL DRAIN COLLECTOR AND STORAGE CONTAINER KIT
Issue Year
87
Assignee Code 0
State / Country NJ
208/184 196/46 208/179 208/187 585/91 I
Classification
Title : WASTE OIL PURIFYING PROCESS
•
Patent Number
4652376
Issue Year
87
Assignee Code
194870
State / Country JPX
Status
E
Classification
210/694 210/799
Title: METHOD FOR DISPOSING
WATER
EMULSIFIABLE OIL-CONTAINING WASTE
Issue Year
87
State / Country LA
Classification
588/228 110/236 110/238 110/346 588/234 588/240
Title : METHOD FOR TREATING OIL FIELD WASTES CONTAINING
HYDROCARBONS
•
Issue Year
86
Assignee Code 0
State / Country LA
Status
E
Classification
210/799 95/253 96/183 210/188 210/260 210/521 210/802
STREAM
Issue Year
86
Assignee Code 0
State / Country VA
Classification
2 I 0/,104 210/114 210/170 210/ 172 210/532 .1
Title : DOCKSIDE SYSTEM FOR THE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL OF BILGE
WATER AND WASTE OIL
Issue Year
86
Assignee Code 0
State / Country LA
110/250 34/141 34/179 110/224 110/228 219/388 219/390 432/139
Classification
588/228 588/900
Title : SYSTEM FOR EXTRACTING CONTAMINANTS AND HYDROCARBONS FROM
CUTTINGS WASTE IN OIL WELL DRILLING
•
Issue Year
86
State / Country JPX
Classification
252/5 1 208/180 208/181 210/634 252/54 568/604 568/615 568/621
Title : PROCESS FOR REGENERATING WASTE OILS OF SYNTHETIC LUBRICANTS
CONTAINING FLUORINE ATOM
Patent Number
4575336
Issue Year
86
Assignee Code
162185
State / Country
LA
Status
E
Classification
432/72 1 10/238 110/246 588/900
Title : APPARATUS FOR TREATING OIL FIELD WASTES CONTAINING
HYDROCARBONS
4551345
Patent Number
Issue Year
85
Assignee Code
492520
State / Country
JPX
Status
E
Classification
210/705 210/710 210/738
Title: METHOD OF TREATMENT FOR
CONTAINING SLURRY WASTE
SEPARATION OF OIL FROM OIL-
Issue Year
85
Assignee Code
154825
State / Country LA
Classification
210/721 210/724 210/778
Title : PROCESS FOR HANDLING WASTE FROM OIL WELL OPERATIONS
Issue Year
85
Assignee Code
17890 .
State / Country NY
Classification
210/781 210/360 .1 .210/532 .1 210/787 210/804
Title : METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR TREATMENT OF OILY WASTE
•
Issue Year
84 .
Assignee Code 0
State / Country
IN
•
Status
E
Classification 588/228 110/23 g 431/3 431/11 431/12 431/28 431/41 431/77 431/208 431/281
Title : PROCESS AND APPARATUS FOR UTILIZING WASTE OIL
Issue Year
84
State / Country FL
Classification
562/530 562/527 562/528 562/529
Title : DECONTAMINATION OF KA OIL REFINEMENT WASTE STREAM
Issue Year
84
Assignee Code 0
State / Country IL
73/54 .0I 137/92
Classification
:
METHOD
AND
APPARATUS FOR RECOVERING OIL FROM WASTE OIL
Title
EMULSION
•
Issue Year
83
198435
Assignee Code
State / Country ATX
Classification
588/228 110/238 137/14 431/2 588/900
Title : METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR BURNING WASTE OILS
Issue Year
83
State / Country CAX
Status
E
208/179 208/181 208/252 208/253
Classification
Title : PROCESS FOR REMOVING CONTAMINANTS FROM WASTE LUBRICATING
OIL .BY CHEMICAL TREATMENT
Issue Year
83
Assignee Code 0
State / Country OH
Classification
210/772 134/10 134/12 210/259 210/804
:
METHOD
AND APPARATUS FOR CLEANING FINE WASTE MATERIAL
Title
MIXED WITH OIL AND WATER
•
4402664
Patent Number
Issue Year
83
Assignee Code
0
State / Country
WI
E
Status
Classification
431/79 126/93 431/75 431/340
Title : WASTE OIL HEATER
Patent Number
4399252
Issue Year
83
437030
Assignee Code
State / Country
PA
Status
E
Classification
524/484 208/184 524/571 524/575
Title : METHOD OF EMPLOYING PROCESS OILS FROM CONVERTED WASTES IN
SYNTHETIC RUBBERS
Patent Number
Issue Year
Assignee Code
State / Country_
Status
Classif cation
4396504
83
0
TX
E
210/86 208/188 210/180 210/ 181 210/ 187 210/305 210/307 210/313
210/522 210/535
Title : MOBILE WASTE OIL CLEANING APPARATUS
Patent Number
4392820
Issue Year
83
Assignee Code
0
State / Country
IN
Status
E
431/284 1 10/23 8 431/2 431/11 431/161
Classification
Title : PROCESS AND APPARATUS FOR UTILIZING WASTE OIL
Issue Year
83
Assignee Code
0
State / Country
DEX
E
Status
126/93 126/58 126/94
Classification
:
OIL
STOVE
FOR BURNING WASTE OIL AND NORMAL HEATING OIL
Title
•
83
Issue Year
State / Country CAX
Status
E
Classification
208/183 208/179
Title : CLAY CONTACTING PROCESS FOR REMOVING CONTAMINANTS FROM
WASTE LUBRICATING OIL
Issue Year
82
Assignee Code 0
State / Country DEX
Classification
126/93 431/79 431/336
Title : COMBUSTION APPARATUS FOR BURNING WASTE OILS
Issue Year
82
Assignee Code 0
State / Country TX
Status
E
Classification
210/708 210/ 178 210/ 199 210/512 .2 210/780 210/787 210/804 210/806
Title : METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR RECOVERING WASTE OIL
•
Issue Year
82
State / Country JPX
208/180 208/ 181 208/ 188
Classification
Title : METHOD FOR TREATING A WATER-CONTAINING WASTE OIL
Patent Number : 4333822
Issue Year
82
Assignee Code 5 1 8395
State / Country CSX
Classification
208/184
Title : METHOD OF TREATING WASTE ENGINE OILS
82
Issue Year
State / Country FL
Classification
209/3 .3 209/578
Title : PROCESS FOR SEPARATING OIL SHALE WASTE MATERIAL
Issue Year
82
State / Country . JPX
Classification
210/694 502/402
Title : OIL-CONTAINING WASTE WATER TREATING MATERIAL CONSISTING OF
MODIFIED ACTIVE CARBON
Issue Year
82
State / Country MD
Classification
210/639 210/651 210/717 210/778
Title : METHOD FOR INCREASING THE CROSS-FLOW MICROFILTRATION FLUXES
OF WASTE WATERS CONTAINING SUSPENDED SOLIDS AND/OR EMULSIFIED OIL
Issue Year
82
Assignee Code 0
State / Country DEX
Classification
126/93 126/58
Title : OIL STOVE FOR BURNING WASTE OIL AND NORMAL HEATING OIL
•
Issue Year
81
Assignee Code 0
State / Country NY
Classification
126/93 431/78
Title : WASTE OIL HEATER HAVING FUEL CONTROL SYSTEM
Issue Year
81
State / Country
NJ
Classification
585/I4 208/15
Title : PROCESS FOR UTILIZING WASTE LUBRICATING OILS
Issue Year
81
Assignee Code 0
State / Country OH
210/772 134/10 134/ 12 210/259 210/804
Classification
Title : METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR CLEANING FINE WASTE MATERIAL
MIXED WITH OIL AND WATER
•
Issue Year
8I
Assignee Code 0
State / Country MI
Classification
166/305 .1 166/275 166/307 166/308 166/312 208/390 208/435 252/8 .551
252/8 .552 252/8 .554 252/331
Title : SIMULTANEOUS OIL RECOVERY AND WASTE DISPOSAL PROCESS
Issue Year
81
State / Country GBX
208/179 196/46 196/46 .1 210/806
Classification
:
METHOD
AND
APPARATUS FOR RE-PROCESSING WASTE OIL
Title
Issue Year
81
Assignee Code 28400
State / Country MI
210/766 208/183 210/765 210/774 210/804
Classification
Title : WASTE OIL RECOVERY PROCESS
Issue Year
81
186590
Assignee Code
State / Country
NJ
210/680 210/693 210/924
Classification
Title : PROCESS FOR REMOVING OIL FROM OILY WASTE WATER STREAMS
Issue Year
8I
State / Country NC
Classification
210/1 15 210/124 211)/187 210/195 .1 210/258
:
APPARATUS
AND METHOD FOR REMOVING OIL CONTAMINANTS FROM
Title
WASTE WATER
Issue Year
80
State / Country GA
210/800 210/104 210/ 123 210/ 138 210/540 210/801 2 1 0/806
Classification
Title : WASTE WATER-OIL SEPARATOR
•
Issue Year
80
Assignee Code 0
State / Country DEX
Classification
210/771210/783
Title : APPARATUS FOR THE PURIFICATION OF OILY EMULSIONS . SOLUTIONS.
AND INDUSTRIAL WASTE WATERS
Issue Year
80
Assignee Code 27915
State / Country OK
Classification
210/287 2 10/484 2I 0/708 210/787
Title : REMOVING OIL FROM WASTE WATER WITH SULFUR
80
Issue Year .
State / Country JPX
Classification
502/62 210/925 502/401 502/402
Title : METHOD OF PRODUCING OF TREATING MATERIAL FOR OIL-CONTAINING
WASTE WATER
•
80
Issue Year
0
Assignee Code
State / Country
JPX
Classification
210/691 252/324
Title : PROCESS FOR REMOVING OIL PARTICLES FROM WASTE WATER
CONTAINING THE SAME
Issue Year
80
State / Country JPX
Classification
194/241 184/1 .5
Title : COMBINED NEW OIL VENDING AND WASTE OIL REMOVING APPARATUS
Patent Number 4I 7055 I
Issue Year
79
State / Country
GBX
588/228 110/346 210/179 210/187 210/197 210/799 210/806 210/DIGS
Classification
431/2 588/900
Title : WASTE OIL RECOVERY UNIT
Issue Year
79
Assignee Code 0
State / Country MT
Classification
431/1 18 23Q/425 .5 431/1 19 431/165 431/352
Title : WASTE OIL BURNER
Issue Year
79
State / Country KS
Classification
196/ 114 196/ 121 196/ 127 196/ 128 202/205 202/234 202/236 208/184
208/359 208/366
Title : CYCLONIC DISTILLATION TOWER FOR WASTE OIL REREFINING PROCESS
Issue Year
79
State / Country PA
203/87 203/96 208/341 208/356 585/804 585/867 585/950
Classification
Title : PROCESS AND APPARATUS FOR SEPARATING LIGHT OIL FROM A
MIXTURE COMPRISING WASTE OIL
Issue Year
78
1045 35
Assignee Code
State / Country CAX
Classification
208/180 208/182
Title : PROCESS FOR THE RECLAMATION OF WASTE HYDROCARBON OILS
Issue Year
78
State / Country PA
Classification
201/2 :5 18/ ;:09 2('.1/23 201/25 208/13 208/85 208/I 13 208/131 208/434
52 1/40 521/40 .5 521/44 .5 521/45 .5 521/46 .5 521/47 521/49
Title : CONVERSION OF SOLID WASTES TO FUEL COKE AND GASOLINE/LIGHT
OIL
Issue Year
78
Assignee Co
317050
State / Country JPX
Classification
210/669 208/22 208/40 210/671 210/924
Title : METHOD FOR TREATMENT OF OIL-CONTAINING WASTE WATER BY
USING AN OIL ADSORBENT
•
Issue Year
78
Assignee Code
550315
State / Country JPX
Classification
588/228 210/713 588/234
Title : METHOD OF DISPOSING OF WASTE WATER CONTAINING EMULSIFIED OIL
Issue Year
78
State / Country OK
Classification
208/180 208/ 181 208/ 1 84
Title : METHOD FOR RECLAIMING WASTE LUBRICATING OILS
Patent Number 40737 I9
78
Issue Year
State / Country OK
Classification
208/180 208/ 181 208/ 1 84 208/211
Title : PROCESS FOR PREPARING LUBRICATING OIL FROM USED WASTE
LUBRICATING OIL
Issue Year
78
State / Country KS
Classification
208/180 208/184
Title : METHOD OF RECLAIMING WASTE OIL BY DISTILLATION AND
EXTRACTION
Issue Year
77
Assignee Code 0
State / Country NY
Classification
44/320 44/301 44/314 44/354 44/357 44/458
Title : PROCESS TO EMBODY WASTE AUTOMOTIVE LUBRICATING OILS INTO A
FUEL ADDITIVE TO REDUCE CORROSION AND AUGMENT ENERGY
AVAILABILITY
•
77
Issue Year
Assignee Code 0
State / Country OK
Classification
264/129 427/212 428/2
Title : METHOD OF CONVERTING OIL AND WASTE CONTAINING SLUDGE TO DRY
WASTE
•?
Patent Number 40595 I5
Issue Year
77
Assignee Code 62580
State / Country NJ
Classification
210/725 210/736 252/344 252/358
Title : PROCESS FOR CLARIFICATION OF OIL-CONTAINING WASTE
Issue Year
77
State / Country JPX
Classification
210/708 210/799 210/807 210/DIGS
Title : METHOD FOR CLARIFYING WASTE WATER CONTAINING FINELY DIVIDED
OILY MATERIALS
Issue Year
77
Assignee Code 0
State / Country OR
Classification
210/85 210/172 210/209 210/261 210/262 210/263 210/320 210/322
210/522 210/525 210/923
Title : OIL AND WASTE WATER RECEPTION FACILITY AND PROCESS
Issue Year
77
Assignee Code
103580
State / Country MI
Classification
210/705 210/708 210/713 210/724
Title : METHOD OF TREATING WASTEWATER CONTAINING EMULSIFIED OILS
Issue Year
77
Assignee Code 0
State / Country NY
Classification
220/573 220/555
Title : COMBINED CONTAINER FOR NEW AND WASTE CRANKCASE OIL
Issue Year
77
State / Country CAX
Classification
210/693 2 I 0/DIGS
Title : PROCESS FOR REMOVING OIL FROM OILY WASTE WATER STREAMS
76
Issue Year
State / Country
IL
Classification
210/667 210/691 210/708 252/358
Title : TREATMENT OF WASTE ROLLING OIL
Issue Year
76
Assignee Code 40040
State / Country NOX
110/238 110/260
Classification
Title : COMBINED INCINERATOR FOR OIL SLUDGE AND SOLID WASTES
Patent Number 398055 I
Issue Year
76
State / Country
CA
Classification
208/179 208/251H
Title : REFINING OF WASTE LUBE OIL TO PREPARE USABLE LUBESTOCK
•
76
Issue Year
State / Country JPX
588/900 110/165R 110/259 588/228 588/234 588/236
Classification
:
INCINERATOR
FOR OIL-CONTAINING WASTE SLUDGE AND METHOD
Title
THEREOF
76
Issue Year
Assignee Code 27915
State / Country OK
Classification
210/265 210/266 210/290 210/307 588/900
Issue Year
75
0
Assignee Code
State / Country_
LA
431/202 137/510
Classification
Title : WASTE OIL BURNER
•
•
Issue Year
75
Assignee Code
118225
State / Country MD
Classification
568/621 554/176 554/177 554/178 568/913 568/920
Title :PROCESS OF RECOVERING ALCOHOLS AND OIL FROM WASTE MIXTURES
Issue Year
75
State / Country NY
Classification
201/2 .5 201/25 201/33 201/45 203/49
Title : PROCESS FOR TREATING CITRUS WASTES TO OBTAIN WATER INSOLUBLE
ESSENTIAL OILS
Issue Year .
75
State / Country MA
202/154 202/174 203/85 203/96
Classification
Title : APPARATUS FOR THE RECOVERY OF TRICHLORETHYLENE FROM
OIL WASTE
•
Issue Year
75
State / Country JPX
426/32 426/7 426/56 426/59 426/63
Classification
Title : PROCESS FOR RECOVERING FATS . OILS AND PROTEINS FROM WASTE
LIQUOR
Issue Year
75
Assignee Code 62580
State / Country PA
Classification
530/206 162/ 16 162/29 252/61 252/DIG I
Title : METHODS AND COMPOSITIONS TO ENHANCE TALL OIL SOAP
SEPARATION FROM WASTE PULPING LIQUOR
Issue Year
75
State / Counts JPX
Classification
208/180 208/182 208/184
Title : TREATING MUDDY-LIKE WASTE OILY MATERIAL
•
Issue Year
74
Assignee Code 27915
State / Country OK
Classification
210/708 210/71 l 210/DIGS 252/324 252/330
Issue Year
74
IL
State / Country
Classification
134/ 10 134/2 134/ 19 134/25 .5 134/32 134/34 134/40
Title PROCESS FOR CLEANING OF OIL-LADEN METAL WASTE TO RECOVER THE
METAL AND TO RECLAIM THE OIL
74
Issue Year
Assignee Code
0
State / Country
JPX
Classification
588/219 204/149 204/152
Title : METHOD FOR TREATING OIL-CONTAINING WASTES
Issue Year
.74
State / Country MA
Classification
203/84 203/85 203/96 203/97 203/98 570/262
Title : METHOD FOR RECOVERY OF TRICHLORETHYLENE FOR OIL WASTE BY
PLURAL STAGE DISTILLATION
Patent Number 378120I
Issue Year
73
Assignee Code 0
State / Country LA
Classification
210/669 210/680 210/691 210/924
Title : METHOD FOR SEPARATING OIL FROM A MIXTURE OF OIL AND WASTE
WATER FROM AN OFFSHORE RIG
•
Issue Year : .
73
State / Country
IL
210/671 210/695
Classification
Title : OIL REMOVAL FROM WASTE WATERS
•
Issue Year
73
State / Country PA
Classification
134/ 13 134/ 10 134/25 .5 134/40
Title CLEANING OIL LADEN METAL WASTE TO RECOVER THE METAL AND
RECLAIM THE OIL
Issue Year
73
State / Country PA
Classification
201/25 48/209 201/2 .5 208/39 423/DIG18
Title : CONVERSION OF MUNICIPAL REFUSE . SEWAGE SLUDGE AND OTHER
WASTES TO HEAVY OIL OR BITUMEN
Issue Year
73
State / Country NY
Classification
' 208/13 210/774 252/346
Title : H16H PRESSURE THERMAL TREATMENT OF WASTE
OIL-CONTAINING SLUDGES
•
Issue Year
72
State / Country JPX
Classification
122/136R 122/DIG I
Title : METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR INCINERATING WASTE OIL
Issue Year
72
Assignee Code 0
State / Country JPX .
Classification
204/188 204/ 171
Title : METHOD OF REFINING WASTE OILS
Issue Year
72
State / Country JPX
Classification
431/ 190 110/238 110/247
Title : INCINERATOR FOR WASTE OIL AND THE LIKE
•
Issue Year
72
Assignee Code 0
State / Country . OK
Classification
210/242 .4 210/526 210/923
Title : WASTE OIL RECOVERY UNIT
Issue Year
72
State / Country PA
Classification
134/ 13 134/10 134/25 .5 134/40
Title : CLEANING OIL LADEN METAL WASTE TO RECOVER THE METAL AND
RECLAIM THE OIL
Issue Year
71
State / Country
IL
Classification
208/179 208/ 181
Title : RE-REFINING OF WASTE CRANKCASE AND LIKE OILS
Issue Year
7I
Assignee Code
461690
State / Country
IL
Classification
208/ 1 8 1 208/179
Title : RE-REFINED WASTECRANKCASE OILS AND METHOD
Issue Year
71
State / Country CA
210/704 210/221 .2 210/721 210/763 423/571
Classification
Title : PROCESS FOR PURIFICATION OF OIL PRODUCTION WASTE WATER
Issue Year
71
Assignee Code
0
State / Country LA
Classification
210/649 2 10/96 .2 2 10/284 210/296 2 10/644 252/324
Title : EXTRACTING OIL WASTE
•
Patent Number 355233 I
Issue Year
71
Assignee Code 0
State / Country DEX
Classification
110/238 110/212 110/244 588/900
Title : DEVICE FOR BURNING OF MATERIALS WASTE OILS . OILS SLUDGES AND
CHEMICAL WASTE PRODUCTS DIFFICULT TO BURN
Issue Year
70
State / Country PA
Classification
134/ 13 134/1 '0 134/25 .5
Title : METHOD FOR THE CLEANING OF METAL WASTE AND THE RECOVERY OF
OIL THEREFROM
Issue Year
70
PA
State / Counts
Classification
2 .0X/182
Title : METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR RECLAIMING WASTE INDUSTRIAL OILS
•
REGISTER OF MODEL AND INDUSTRIAL DISIGNING.
Patent Number RE29908
Issue Year
79
Assignee Code 6258(
State / Country NJ
210/708 210/725 210/727 210/736 252/344 252/35X
Classification
:
PROCESS
FOR
CLARIFICATION OF OIL-CONTAINING WASTE
Title
Patent Number D341597
Issue Year
93
Assignee Code 0
State / Country UT
Classification
D I5/5
Title : Turbo waste gate oil drain
Abstract : The ornamental design for a turbo waste gate oil drain . as sho\Ni and described .
•
Issue; Year
93
Assignee Code 0
State / Country TX
D34/I D23/200 D34/7
Classification
Title : A container for waste motor oil
Abstract : The design for a container for waste motor oil, as shown and described.
Patent Number D33 1105
92
Issue Year
State / Country MO
Classification
D23/418
Title : Combined guiding support and air swirl inducing unit for a burner nozzle and electrode
subassembly unit of a waste oil burner
Abstract:
The ornamental design for a combined guiding support and air swirl inducing unit for a burner
nozzle and electrode subassembly unit of a waste oil burner . as shown.
•
Patent Number D33 1104
Issue Year
92
Assignee Code 6X7374
State / Country MO
Classification
D23/41 X D23/416
Title : Combined burner nozzle, nozzle-supporting heat exchange block, and control valve
subassembly unit for a waste oil burner
Abstract:
The ornamental design for a combined burner nozzle, nozzle-supporting heat exchange block.
and control valve subassembly unit for a waste oil burner . as shown.
Issue Year
92
Assignee Code 0
State / Country NE
Classification
D9/337 D9/52R D 12/2 I X D15/152 D34/ I
Title : WASTE OIL CONTAINER
Patent Number D26XO50
R3
Issue Year
Assignee Code 0
State / Country MN
Classification
D34/1 .1
Title : FORCED AIR WASTE OIL INCINERATOR
Issue Year
83
Assignee Code 0
State / Country MN
Classification
D34/1 .1
Title : FORCED AIR WASTE OIL INCINERATOR
.•
•
•
ANEXO -lj (i)
EVALUACION DE COSTO BENEFICIO DEL
ANTEPROYECTO DE NORMA OFICIAL MEXICANA, QUE
ESTABLECE LOS REQUISITOS PARA EL MANEJO DE
LUBRICANTES USADOS
ANEXO 1
EVALUACIÓN DE COSTO BENEFICIO DEL ANTEPROYECTO DE NORMA
OFICIAL MEXICANA, QUE ESTABLECE LOS REQUISITOS PARA EL
MANEJO DE LUBRICANTES USADOS.
1. Datos del Comite Consultivo Nacional de Normalización
1 .1 Denominación:
Comité Consultivo Nacional de Normalización para la Protección al Ambiente
1 .2 Dependencia que preside el Comité:
Secretaría de Mejoramiento del Ambiente, Recursos Naturales y Pesca.
1 .3 Institución promotora del anteproyecto de norma:
( )Comité
(X)Dependencia
( )Organización privada
( )Otro (describir)
Denominación de la institución:
Secretaría de Mejoramiento del Ambiente, Recursos Naturales y Pesca
/Instituto Nacional de Ecología
2. Descripción del anteproyecto de Norma Oficial Mexicana:
2.1 Título:
EVALUACIÓN DE COSTO BENEFICIO DEL ANTEPROYECTO DE NORMA
OFICIAL MEXICANA, QUE ESTABLECE LOS REQUISITOS PARA EL MANEJO
DE LUBRICANTES USADOS.
2 .2
Finalidad
del
anteproyecto:
•
24
El proyecto de norma se orienta a reglamentar aspectos en las siguientes áreas:
(X)
(X)
La salud humana
El ambiente en general
2.3 Objetivo específico:
Esta norma oficial mexicana establece los requisitos para el manejo de aceites`
lubricantes usados .
_\
2 .4 Razón científica, técnica y/o de protección al consumidor que justifica
la expedición de la norma
Es necesario regular las situaciones específicas asociadas con el manejo de los
lubricantes usados con la finalidad de evitar que éste sea inadecuado, ya que
toda norma encaminada a .regular la generación y manejo de lubricantes usados
debe incluir mecanismos para estimular la participación y el cumplimiento por
parte de todos los generadores y de aquellos que se dediquen a su manejo, no
debe constituir un peso económico excesivo.
Es menester instrumentar un balance entre las buenas prácticas de manejo para
reducir los riesgos potenciales asociados con las actividades de
almacenamiento, recolección, transporte, alojamiento, reuso, tratamiento,
reciclaje, incineración y disposición final inadecuados de los lubricantes usados
y minimizar las regulaciones y gravámenes que pudieran desalentar su manejo
adecuado.
Los lubricantes son productos de recursos naturales no renovables y el Plan
Nacional de Desarrollo, así como la Ley General del Equilibrio Ecológico .y la
Protección al Ambiente establece que tales recursos deben utilizarse de modo
que se evite el peligro de su agotamiento y la generación de efectos ecológicos
adversos.
Existen el país diversas opciones de manejo de lubricantes usados que
permiten reducir considerablemente el peligro del agotamiento de un recurso
natural no renovable y la generación de efectos ecológicos adversos a través de
la reutilización adecuada de estos residuos.
2 .5 Elementos esenciales de la norma, incluyendo su campo de aplicación
Definición de los diferentes conceptos y esquema de participación de los
diversos protagonistas en el manejo de los aceites y lubricantes usados .
25
Prohibición de todo vertido de lubricantes usados, sus residuos y subproductos
derivados de su tratamiento en cualquier cuerpo de agua superficial,
subterránea, zonas del mar territorial, sistemas de drenaje y alcantarillado o
descargas de aguas residuales. Queda también prohibido su depósito o vertido
con efectos nocivos sobre el suelo o cualquier superficie circunscrita al territorio
nacional, al igual que cualquier emisión que provoque una contaminación
atmosférica que exceda los límites máximos permisibles establecidos por las
disposiciones vigentes.
Prohibición de mezclar, intencionalmente o por negligencia, lubricantes usados
con agua u otros productos diferentes de lubricantes usados y especialmente
con cualquier otro tipo de residuo considerado como peligroso, de conformidad
con la norma oficial mexicana NOM-052-ECOL-1994.
9'
•
La Secretaría podrá autorizar a una empresa de manejo para realizar
operaciones de mezcla de lubricantes usados con otros residuos peligrosos
será considerada como residuo peligroso y deberá .. ser manejada como tal,
según ló establecen el Reglamento y las Normas Oficiales .Mexicanas
respectivas.
2 .6 Especificar de que manera contribuye la norma propuesta al logro del
objetivo específico para corregir la situación existente.
El establecimiento de reglas claras permitirá que los involucrados en el manejo
de aceites y lubricantes usados tomen conciencia de las ventajas de un manejo
seguro y las posibilidades económicas de este residuo cuya característica es
poder ser útil aún . Existe demanda capaz de absorberlo como combustible, en
condiciones que no representen un deterioro de la atmósfera.
El deslizamiento de la paridad respecto al dólar ofrece condiciones para el
reciclaje que prácticamente desapareció cuando la importación de aceite muy
barato sacó del mercado a una empresa paraestatal y a varias pequeñas y
medianas industrias .
•
26
3. Beneficios
•
3 .1 Beneficios cuantificables que deriven de la aplicación de la Norma
Oficial Mexicana, por años y por sectores público, privado o sociales.
3.1 .1 . Beneficios Públicos (susceptibles de cuantificarse, pero
considerados cualitativamente)
BENEFICIOS PÚBLICOS
AÑOS
-EVITAR DISPOSICIÓN EN EN FORMA PERMANENTE
REDES
DE
ALCANTARILLADO Y LOS
COSTOS ASOCIADOS POR
TRATAMIENTO
-DISMINUCIÓN
DEL EN FORMA PERMANENTE
NUMERO DE CASOS DE
ENFERMEDADES
PROVOCADAS
POR
LA
INGESTIÓN
DE
AGUA
CONTAMINADA
POR
ACEITES Y LUBRICANTES
USADOS.
-DISMINUCIÓN
DE EN FORMA PERMANENTE
ENFERMEDADES
RESPIRATORIAS
OCASIONADAS
POR
INHALACIÓN
DE
COMBUSTIÓN
NO
CONTROLADA DE ACEITES
Y LUBRICANTES USADOS
-REDUCCIÓN
DE
LOS EN FORMA PERMANENTE
COSTOS
EN
DE
REHABILITACIÓN
SUELOS CONTAMINADOS
CON
ACEITES
Y
LUBRICANTES USADOS .
27
3.1 .2. Beneficios privados (Miles de N$) (Ver 3 .3).
AÑOS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
•
BENEFICIOS PRIVADOS
MILES N$
POR
EL
USO
COMO VALOR PRESENTE NETO
COMBUSTIBLE (Precio del DE BENEFICIOS
combustóleo N$0 .31)
114.06
114.06
114.06
114.06
114.06
114 .06
114.06
114 .06
114.06
114.06
740.814
3.2 Beneficios no cuantificables que deriven de la aplicación de la Norma
Oficial Mexicana.
De acuerdo con los procedimientos de caracterización de riesgos estándar
desarrollado por U .S .E .P .A. se tiene una reducción de riesgos derivados de la
implantación de una norma sobre manejo de aceites y lubricantes usados, de la
siguiente magnitud .
28
Escenario de
combustión
Riesgos
Riesgo Post-regulatorio
actuales de
línea
de
referencia
de Peor caso
Promedio
6.6*10-8
3 .3*10-8
Igual
Igual
Plantas de Asfalto
Peor caso
Promedio
1 .4*10-6
7 .1 *10-7
2 .8*10-8
1 .4*10' 8
Calderas
industriales
Peor caso
Promedio
1 .6*10-6
7.8*10' 7
8.8*10-8
4.5*10'8
Pequeño
Peor caso
Quemador
de Promedio
Lubricante usado
3.*10-8
1 .5*10-8
NA
NA
Hornos
cemento
Como lo muestra la tabla, los riesgos en los escenarios de línea de referencia
actual variaron dentro de muchos órdenes de magnitud a través de las .unidades
de combustión . Se encontró que los mayores riesgos en la Iínéa de referencia
estaban asociados con las calderas industriales y las plantas de asfalto, de las
cuales se asume que están quemando lubricantes usados sin equipos de
control de contaminación del aire . Sin embargo, los hornos de cemento que
operan con equipos de control de emisiones, tuvieron riesgos de línea de
referencia significativamente más bajos.
Como resultado de derrames en tierra y agua durante el almacenamiento y
transporte de lubricantes usados, pueden presentarse serios daños ambientales
potenciales. En los ecosistemas terrestres, un derrame de un producto
petrolero puede dar como resultado la exposición de plantas, en el lugar del
derrame, poniéndolos en contacto directo con el producto de lubricantes usados
libre. La masa de efectos nocivos de un derrame ocurre como consecuencia de
su contacto inicial con el producto fresco, lo que puede resultar en la muerte de
una gran proporción de los organismos afectados . Lo derrames de tanques o
camiones sobre superficies pavimentadas pueden alcanzar a los ecosistemas
acuáticos en grandes volúmenes con relativamente poca atenuación . Incluso
pequeños derrames de lubricantes usados pesados que entran a cuerpos
acuáticos a través de alcantarillas de desague o fluyen directamente, pueden
causar manchas y películas oleosas que se extienden sobre grandes superficies
29
o distancias.
El control sobre el almacenamiento de lubricantes usados en tanques o sobre
su transporte, deberá reducir los impactos potenciales de tales malos manejos.
3.3 Supuestos y bases utilizados para el cálculo de beneficios
(cuantificables y no cuantificables) que se deriven de la aplicación de la
norma, por sectores beneficiados.
Para la estimación monetaria de beneficios derivados de la aplicación de la
norma, supondremos:
Dado que el potencial de generación de calor es casi igual a la del combustóleo,
su preció puede equipararse al de éste . Independientemente de los beneficios
al medio ambiente que por el momento se consideran en forma cualitativa, la
mala disposición de aceites y lubricantes es equivalente a perder una cantidad
semejante al precio del combustóleo o al del aceite de primer uso.
Contamos con costos unitarios de instalación y funcionamiento de una rerefinadora de aceite, en Estados Unidos, así como sus gastos de operación y
mantenimiento, pero habría que adecuarlos muchísimo para las condiciones
actuales de México.
En todo caso no es posible determinar cuántos empresarios estarían
dispuestos a intentar esta actividad.
Por todo lo anterior, los beneficios cuantificables se estimarán con relación al
precio del combustóleo.
3.4 Enunciar personas o grupos que se benefician:
Se considera que la población en general se beneficia, principalmente las áreas
marginadas que no tienen acceso a los servicios de agua potable y asistencia
médica.
•
30
4 . Costos
•
4 .1 Costos cuantificables que se deriven de la aplicación de la Norma
Oficial Mexicana, por años, por sectores afectados.
4.1 .1 Costos públicos (miles N$) (Ver 4 .3).
AÑOS
_
_
_
_
_
__
_
_
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
COSTOS PÚBLICOS
MILES N$
EQUIPO
OPERACIÓN
0
31 .3
31 .3
31 .3
31 .3
31 .3
31 .3
31 .3
31 .3
31 .3
31 .3
31 .3
31 .3
.31 .3
31 .3
SUBTOTAL
0
31 .3
31 .3
31 .3
31 .3
31 .3
31 .3
31 .3
31 .3
31 .3
31 .3
31 .3
31 .3
31 .3
31 .3
•
31
4.1 .2 Costos privados (miles N$) (Ver 4 .3).
COSTOS PRIVADOS
_
MILES N$
OPERACIÓN
_AÑOS
_ 1
68.37
_ 2
68.37
_ 3
68 .37
_ 4
68 .37
5
68 .37
_ 6
68 .37
_ 7
68 .37
8
68 .37
~_ 9
68 .37
10
. 68 .37
SUBTOTAL
68.37
68.37
68.37
68.37
68.37
68.37
68.37
' 68.37
68.37
68.37
4.1 .3 Costos Totales (miles N$) (Ver 4 .3).
COSTOS
PÚBLICOS
COSTOS TOTALES
MILES N$
_
COSTOS
TOTAL (COSTOS VALOR
PÚBLICOS
+ PRESENTE
PRIVADOS
COSTOS
DE COSTOS
PRIVADOS)
31 .3
31 .3
31 .3
31 .3
31 .3
31 .3
31 .3
31 .3
31 .3
31 .3
68.37
68.37
68.37
68.37
68 .37
68 .37
68 .37
68.37
68.37
68.37
_
AÑOS .
_
_ 1
2
r 3
4
__ 5
_ 6
_ 7
8
_ 9
_ 10
.
99.67
99.67
99.67
99.67
99.67
99.67
99.67
99.67
99.67
99.67
647 .3.75
32
4.2 Costos no cuantificables en términos monetarios derivados de la
aplicación de la norma.
Debido a que no es posible estimar el número de empresas que decidirán
establecerse y realizar nuevas inversiones en equipo de transporte y en
almacenamiento, suponemos que cada una de ellas cubrirá sus costos .y .
obtendrá una utilidad moderada.
4.3 Supuestos y bases utilizados para el cálculo de costos (cuantificables
y no cuantificables) que se deriven de la aplicación de la norma, por
sectores afectados:
El valor presente neto de los costos y beneficios se calculó al 10%, como tasa
de interés real ; es decir, aquélla que no considera el efecto de la inflación . Esta
tasa es adecuada para evaluar proyectos de interés social.
Para el cálculo de costos públicos se consideró:
•
Número de inspectores, número de visitas al mes, número de normas que
deben supervisar los inspectores, utilización de vehículos, gasolina y su
mantenimiento, viáticos, gastos de administración, materiales utilizados para la
verificación . En todos los conceptos se trató de estimar únicamente la parte
correspondiente a la verificación de la presente norma.
Para el cálculo de los costos privados se consideraron pequeños incrementos
en los costos de transporte y almacenamiento, del orden de N$0.25 por metro
cúbico, considerando un costo promedio de transporte a diferentes puntos del
país.
La suposición básica es que actualmente los aceites y lubricantes usados se
transportan y almacenan de alguna manera . Unicamente se tendrán que realizar
algunas mejoras para cumplir con lo establecido en esta norma.
No se consideraron costos por control de la contaminación del aire porque
existe una norma que especificamente señala los límites máximos permisibles
de emisiones a la atmósfera para los procesos de combustión en fuentes fijas .
•
33
4.4 Enunciar personas o grupos que asumirán la carga de la aplicación de
la norma:
En esta norma se pretende que las empresas obtengan beneficios por la
comercialización de un residuo, cuya mala disposición genera degradación del
ambiente y en cambio puede restablecerse su utilidad dentro del aparato
productivo.
Si no fuera posible obtener en el mercado un precio atractivo para conservar la
utilidad necesaria como incentivo a las . empresas, sería conveniente buscar un
mecanismo de financiamiento que asegurara su permanencia como
distribuidores que finálmente cerrarían el ciclo para que este residuo no fuera
dispuesto en forma inadecuada.
5 Beneficios netos potenciales (beneficios menos costos):
BENEFICOS NETOS
MILES N$
BENEFICIOS 740.814
•
VALOR
PRESENTE
TOTALES
VALOR
PRESENTE
COSTOS 647 .375
TOTALES
VALOR PRESENTE DE BENEFICIOS 93.439
NETOS
En su caso, comparación versus costos y beneficios no cuantificables.
Aún cuando la diferencia beneficios-costos es positiva y se demuestra que
socialmente es deseable controlar la contaminación desde el punto de vista
económico, es necesario recalcar que la mayor parte de los beneficios son
sumamente difíciles de cuantificar debido a que nos encontramos en una
situación de deterioro, en la cual no es posible evaluar el valor de lo que se
perdió anteriormente, puesto que no existía ningún inventario de especies,
vegetales y animales cuyo hábitat destruido determinó su extinción .
34
6. Justificación de la emisión de una Norma Oficial Mexicana como la
mejor alternativa.
6.1 Otras alternativas consideradas.
Alternativa 1.
Fijación de un impuesto adicional sobre el consumo de aceites.
Alternativa 2.
Depósito - reembolso
6.2 Justificación de la norma propuesta como la alternativa más costo
efectiva.
•
Respecto a la alternativa número 1, los impuestos tal como se han manejado en
los países de la OCDE son muy transparentes en cuánto a su origen y destino.
Ninguno se ha convertido en un pretexto para aumentar la recaudación y se es
muy cuidadoso en sensibilizar a la población en cuanto a los beneficios que
obtendrá . En México es casi imposible de asegurar que una vez ingresados a
las arcas nacionales, pudieran canalizarse al mejoramiento del ambiente o del
bienestar de los consumidores.
En la segunda alternativa, se ha visto que es súmamente difícil implementar
este mecanismo de mercado, porque existe diferencia entre los sitios de compra
y los sitios de disposición.
Por otro lado, desde el punto de vista de la sociedad en su conjunto, la
contaminación del agua y del suelo es un ejemplo clásico de externalidad, ya
que los afectados no pueden mediante un pago, evitar la presencia de un
elemento que les impide maximizar su utilidad . En este caso, el Estado al
imponer una norma para el manejo de aceites y lubricantes usados, favorece la
eficiencia económica, pues tanto las empresas como los individuos internalizan
costos que anteriormente recaían sobre otros miembros de la sociedad .
•
35
BIBLIOGRAFIA
•
OECD, ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY BENEFITS : MONETARY VALUATION,
PARIS, 1992
OECD, BENEFITS ESTIMATES AND ENVIRONMENTAL DECISION MAKING,
PARIS, 1991.
A.C . HABEREGER; THE OPPORTUNITY COST OF PUBLIC INVESTMENT
FINANCED BY BORROWING, QUEENS UNIVERSITY, KINGSTON ONTARIO,
1969
COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS, SELECTED READINGS, EDITED BY RICHARD
LAYARD ; GREAT BRITAIN, 1972.
UNIVERSIDAD AUTONOMA METROPOLITANA . DERECHO AMBIENTAL,
MEXICO, 1994
SEDESOL SERIE MONOGRAFIAS No.6 BASES PARA UNA ESTRATEGIA
AMBIENTAL PARA LA INDUSTRIA EN MEXICO . MEXICO 1994
SECOFI; GUTA PARA LA EVALUACION COSTO BENEFICIO DE LOS
ANTEPROYECTOS DE LAS NORMAS OFICIALES MEXICANAS . MEXICO.
1993
•
'36
41,4 .
9APENDICE
A
PROCESOS PARA EL TRATAMIENTO DE ACEITES
USADOS
PROCESOS PARA LA REGENERACION DE ACEITE.
Un aceite lubricante, después de haber sido sometido a determinados procesos, puede
lograrse que sea tan útil y de tal calidad, que pueda compararse con un aceite lubricante
"virgen" ; esto debe desterrar la idea de que un aceite lubricante regenerado o reciclado sea
de una calidad inferior a un aceite no-regenerado o nuevo . Sobre todo, no hay que perder de
vista que se degrada el aditivo, más el lubricante base queda casi intacto por lo que al
recuperarse éste, y agregándosele posteriormente algún aditivo, puede llegar a tener las
mismas características que el aceite inicial.
En la actualidad existen varios procedimientos para lograr la purificación de los aceites
lubricantes usados, pero no todos ellos reúnen los requisitos indispensables para producir un
lubricante regenerado adecuado.
Dentro de todos estos procesos, cualquier operación que haga decrecer la cantidad de
contaminantes en el aceite es buena . Pero no hay que perder de vista que entre mayor
cantidad de operaciones e insumos se necesiten en el proceso, harán que se refleje en el
costo, y en el caso contrario, un proceso excesivamente simple y barato se reflejará en la
dudosa calidad del producto.
PROCESO DE SEDIMENTACION.
El proceso de sedimentación consiste en alimentar el aceite usado a un tanque sedimentador,
el cual tiene un serpentín que conduce vapor con el que se calienta el aceite para acelerar el
efecto de sedimentación de las impurezas sólidas de gran tamaño.
Este tanque cuenta con dos purgas que se encuentran a diferentes niveles, la primera se
encuentra al fondo del tanque y tiene como finalidad descargar las impurezas sólidas ya
sedimentadas y la segunda está ubicada en la parte inferior del tanque para desalojar el agua
que acompaña al aceite sucio.
Una vez separado la mayor parte de sólidos y de agua, el aceite pasa a través de un
precalentador en donde se calienta hasta una temperatura de 70°C, de ahí, el aceite entra a
una centrifuga en donde son separadas las partículas de menor peso específico, el tiempo de
residencia en esta última etapa depende de la cantidad de impurezas contenidas en el aceite.
Figura no . 1
De las principales ventajas que se obtienen de este proceso se puede mencionar que el costo
inicial es bajo, así mismo, lo es el costo de operación, y por último el mantenimiento es fácil.
Las principales desventajas en este proceso es que sólo se eliminan algunos sólidos
suspendidos y agua, además no se desechan completamente los diluyentes .
PROCESO DE FILTRACION.
El aceite usado es pasado a través de un filtro resultando aceite limpio . En este tipo de
proceso, el aceite no recibe un tratamiento para eliminar los principales contaminantes típicos
de un aceite usado, los cuales son : lacas, gomas, barnices de bajo punto de ebullición, y la
de sólidos solubles a sólidos insolubles, remoción de agua, ácidos , aditivos y otros.
En este tipo de proceso, de las principales ventajas se puede mencionar que el costo inicial
es sumamente bajo, el costo de operación es nulo, el mantenimiento es fácil y rápido . Figura
no. 2.
De las principales desventajas se tiene que para asegurar una filtración efectiva se tiene que
repetir el proceso, otra es de que no elimina los aditivos y compuestos nocivos, y es
recomendable para aceites de corte y transformador.
PROCESO MILWAUKEE.
El proceso consiste en mezclar el aceite usado con arcilla activada o tierra "Fuller" en
proporción del 7% al 10% en peso del aceite usado, en el proceso de mezclado se crea un
vacío y se eleva la temperatura mediante resistencias eléctricas, una vez llegado a un vacío
de 10 pulgadas de mercurio y una temperatura de 120°C se inyecta agua por el fondo del
mezclador, en estas condiciones el agua se convierte en vapor, arrastrando así combustibles
y ácidos contenidos en el aceite, al término de esta destilación, el aceite destilado es pasado
a través de filtros para así separar la arcilla utilizada en la primera etapa, obteniendo así el
aceite ya purificado . Figura no. 3.
Las principales ventajas de este proceso es que el costo inicial es moderado, debido a la
sencillez del proceso y debido al poco equipo utilizado, los costos de operación y
mantenimiento son mínimos.
Las principales desventajas de este proceso son:
a) No desdobla por completo las impurezas químicas existentes en el aceite.
b) No neutraliza el aceite final.
c) Es apto sólo para aceites de corte, transformador o de laminación.
PROCESO YOUNGSTON MILLER.
El aceite usado es alimentado a un tanque provisto de un serpentín, en donde es calentado
a 60°C, después es pasado a una centrífuga para así separar la mayor parte de los
contaminantes insolubles, pero no los compuestos derivados de la oxidación.
•
•
Posteriormente el aceite se lleva a un tanque de acidulación, el cual está provisto de un
agitador, y en el cual se adiciona ácido sulfúrico al aceite, esto en una proporción de 0 .05 Kg
de H2SO4/lt de aceite sucio, que junto con la acción del agitador aceleran la sedimentación
de la mayor parte de las , impurezas solubles . Una vez finalizada esta operación el aceite es
bombeado a un recipiente que cuenta con un agitador, un ventilador en la parte superior y
un banco de resistencias eléctricas.
El aceite se introduce por la parte superior y se va mezclando con arcilla activada la que es
alimentada por la parte media del recipiente, al mismo tiempo que se alimenta la arcilla
activada, se incrementa la temperatura hasta 400°C, en este mismo periodo se mezclan todos
los componentes.
Al llegar la mezcla a la temperatura de 400°C, se comienza a efectuar una ebullición de los
diluyentes ligeros que se encuentran contaminando al aceite . Estos compuestos se escapan
en forma de vapor y son eliminados con la ayuda del ventilador, descargando los vapores a
la atmósfera.
Al finalizar la operación anterior, la mezcla se alimenta al filtro prensa en donde es separada
la arcilla del aceite ya tratado como producto final . Figura no.4.
De las principales ventajas de este proceso se pueden mencionar:
a) El costo inicial es moderado
•
b) Costo de operación y de mantenimiento moderados.
Las desventajas de el proceso son:
a) Descompone el aceite base debido al manejo de altas temperaturas.
b) No neutraliza el aceite regenerado.
PROCESO REFINOL . El aceite usado es alimentado a un tanque mezclador provisto de un serpentín, en este tanque
el aceite alcanza una temperatura de 120°C, el aceite es agitado, mientras tanto en el tanque
mezclador se agrega retrol, ya mezclado el aceite con el retrol, se pasan a un tanque en donde
es sometida la mezcla a un vacío de 4 pulgadas de mercurio, se calienta la mezcla hasta una
temperatura de 218°C, en esta etapa del proceso, comienza la destilación de los diluyentes
que contaminan el aceite . Los diluyentes salen en forma de vapor y son condensados para
su posterior almacenamiento . Después el aceite es pasado a través de un filtro para separar
los sólidos suspendidos y así obtener el aceite regenerado . Figura no . 5.
Las ventajas de este proceso son:
a) Costo inicial moderado.
b) Costo de operación y de mantenimiento moderados.
a) No se realiza previamente alguna sedimentación ocasionando que la filtración es
ineficiente.
b) No se neutraliza el producto final.
PROCESO TEXACO.
El aceite sucio es alimentado a un tanque mezclador en donde se mezcla con fosfato de
diamonio, el objetivo es de eliminar los metales contenidos en el aceite, la mezcla es
calentada yagitada perfectamente . Las partículas metálicas en suspensión, forman fosfatos
metálicos, las impurezas como lo son el agua y los ligeros son evaporados, y los aditivos son
destruidos por efecto de las altas temperaturas . Después de esta etapa el aceite es filtrado, en
el etapa de filtración se utilizan tierras de diatomeas como filtro ayuda, el aceite libre de
sólidos entra a la etapa de hidrogenación, poniendo en contacto el aceite con hidrógeno al
99%, después de la hidrogenación el aceite es pasado a través de una cama de arcilla o tierra
fuller con el fin de remover gomas e impurezas que no fueron filtradas anteriormente.
Después el producto pasa a través de dos camas de catalizador Ni-Mo (Níquel-Molibdeno)
en donde el cloro, Oxígeno, nitrógeno y azufre son separados en forma de gases como ácido
sulfúrico y clorhídrico, amoníaco y agua, también en esta etapa se mejora el color del
producto final, después el aceite es pasado a una columna fraccionadora en donde el aceite
es fraccionado en dos tipos de aceites básicos, en pesado y en ligero, además en combustibles
ligeros, la cual es una mezcla de diesel y gasolinas . Figura no . 6.
De las principales ventajas, la más importante es la de la eliminación de todos los
contaminantes sólidos y líquidos, debido a que es un proceso altamente sofisticado debido
al gran número de etapas que se tienen en él y por lo consiguiente a los equipos que se
emplean, se tiene que el costo inicial es elevado, así mismo lo es el costo de operación y el
de mantenimiento, es además un proceso de alto riesgo debido al manejo de hidrógeno y
otros reactivos .
PURIFICACION DE ACEITE DE LAMINACION.
•
Los aceites generados en procesos industriales, generalmente están en contacto con
materiales ajenos al aceite, tales .como agua y partículas sólidas como son escorias metálicas
y óxidos, al continuar el uso del aceite lubricante, la cantidad de materiales extraños en el
aceité se incrementan gradualmente hasta un punto que el aceite está contaminado con esos
materiales extraños y ya no puede ser utilizado y debe ser desechado o, en su caso,
regenerado.
El aceite lubricante utilizado en un proceso básicamente metalúrgico, es contaminado con
metales y con agua, en este proceso de purificación, el aceite contaminado es inicialmente
calentado a una temperatura de 60°C, esta temperatura es variable, ya que depende del tipo
de aceite, el objetivo es sólo de calentar para así lograr una disminución de la viscosidad,
después de calentado se agrega una solución alcalina al 10% de metasilicato de sodio, la
cantidad es de un 10% v/v de aceite sucio, la mezcla se agita bien con el objeto de asegurar
la dispersión de la mezcla alcalina y de que el aceite sucio reaccione con la misma solución,
después del mezclado, el aceite mezclado pasa a un sedimentador en donde se sedimenta una
fase pesada (acuosa) y una fase ligera (aceite), el aceite es separado por la parte superior y
pasa a través de una serie de filtros, obteniéndose así aceite limpio listo para ser reutilizado,
la fase acuosa es pasada a través de filtros obteniéndose así un líquido parcialmente alcalino,
el cual es reutilizado en el proceso.
En la etapa de mezclado, en la reacción que lleva a cabo el metasilicato de sodio con el aceite
sucio, se desprende hidrógeno, el cual es mandado a la atmósfera mediante un ventilador . En
este proceso, también puede ser utilizados otros reactivos alcalinos como son : hidróxido de
sodio, hidróxido de potasio, e hidróxido de calcio . Su uso tiene la desventaja de que la
producción de hidrógeno es mayor y la fase acuosa es más dificil de filtrar . Figura no . 7.
PROCESO MEIKEN.
Este proceso consta de cinco etapas, es parcialmente automatizado y es también
automatizado con respecto a consumo de energía, las etapas de proceso han sido diseñadas
para obtener una mejor calidad en el producto y una optimización en el manejo de energía,
se minimiza la cantidad de alquitrán ácido que se forma en las etapas de reacción, además
de minimizar también la mano de obra, reduciendo también la cantidad de ácido sulfúrico
utilizado, y el alquitrán ácido es acumulado por medio de un mezclador intensivo . El aceite
es alimentado a una columna de destilación la cual es calentada indirectamente mediante un
fluido caliente, así protegiéndose de sobrecalentamientos y reacciones de craking, es usado
el 2% de arcilla blanqueadora en el refinado de destilación . La arcilla es continuamente
separada del residuo de destilación por filtración, la calidad de los refinados obtenidos es
satisfactoria, los aditivos presentes en el material base son separados prácticamente, las cinco
etapas de las que consta el proceso son :
a) Etapa de deshidratación.
b) Unidad de refinamiento.
c) Etapa de adsorción.
d) Etapa de destilación.
e) Etapa de filtración.
t) Una última etapa adicional de incineración.
El aceite usado es alimentado en una columna de destilación en donde se separan agua e
hidrocarburos ligeros del aceite, de esta etapa el aceite es mezclado con ácido sulfúrico en
un reactor, y después es llevado a tanques separadores en donde se separa el alquitrán ácido,
formado en la etapa anterior, del aceite acidificado, el aceite es mezclado después con arcilla
y de allí es pasado de nuevo a un evaporador, el aceite de fondos es pasado a un filtro prensa
para la obtención de aceite base, mientras el aceite que sale de la parte superior de la columna
entra a otra etapa de separación (destilación) en donde es separado volátiles y aceite spindler.
Figura no . 8.
PROCESO IFP (Instituto Francés del Petróleo).
En el proceso desarollado por el Instituto Francés del Petróleo, los principales contaminantes
son separados en una columna de extracción líquido-líquido utilizando propano, como
resultado se obtiene una reducción significativa del uso del ácido sulfúrico y de arcilla
blanqueadora, hay un decremento en la acumulación de alquitrán ácido . El aceite es
alimentado a una columna de destilación a presión atmosférica para la eliminación de agua
y de hidrocarburos ligeros, después es puesto en contacto con propano en una columna de
extracción líquido-líquido, las impurezas se van al fondo de la columna, el propano es
separado de la mezcla aceite-propano, y el aceite es mandado a refinación, antes de la
despropanización, los sedimentos son mezclados con aceite combustible para mantener el
residuo en forma fluidizable, y este es utilizado como combustible en la planta . Figura no.
9.
PROCESO SNAMPROGETTI.
Este proceso es similar al desarrollado por el IFP, pero este incluye extracción con propano
antes y después del proceso de destilación (al vacío) y se adiciona una etapa de
hidroterminado, eliminando así la etapa de tratamiento con ácido sulfúrico, el rendimiento
es significativamente más alto que el obtenido con el tratamiento ácido, además se eliminan
los residuos como son las arcillas blanqueadoras . Primeramente el agua y compuestos

411 - Instituto Nacional de Ecología y Cambio Climático

Transcription

Similar documents

Diptico de la Comarca de Guadix

St. Therese

St. Joseph Catholic Church

St. Jerome Church - St. Jerome Catholic Church

23-June-The-influenc..

January 17, 2016

3 de Junio 2012 - La Santísima Trinidad

- Our Lady of Peace

St. Jerome Church - St. Jerome Catholic Church

Pray For - St. Clement Catholic Church