Voglio sapere a riguardo di…

jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES5

916

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 3 / Wednesday, January 6, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
proposed rule, regulations promulgated under the authority of RCRA, govern the disposal of hazardous and nonhazardous wastes. Although PCTP is not a listed hazardous waste under RCRA, it is subject to the requirements applicable to solid waste under Subtitle D of RCRA. This means there is a general prohibition on open dumping, which includes a prohibition on open burning.
Wastes containing this chemical that do not otherwise meet the criteria for hazardous waste would be disposed of in municipal solid waste landfills MSWLFs, industrial nonhazardous, or, in a few instances, construction/
demolition landfills. Non-hazardous solid waste is regulated under Subtitle D of RCRA, and states play a lead role in ensuring that the federal requirements are met. The requirements for MSWLFs include location restrictions, composite liners, leachate collection and removal systems, operating practices, groundwater monitoring, closure and post-closure care, corrective action provisions, and financial assurance. Industrial waste non-hazardous landfills and construction/demolition waste landfills are primarily regulated under state regulatory programs, and in addition they must meet the criteria set forth in federal regulations which may include requirements such as siting, groundwater monitoring and corrective action depending upon what type of wastes are accepted. Disposal by underground injection is regulated under both RCRA and SDWA. In view of these comprehensive, stringent programs for addressing disposal, EPA
determined that it is not practicable to impose additional requirements under TSCA on the disposal of the PBT
chemicals, including PCTP.
EPA received a number of comments on this aspect of its proposal. Some commenters agreed with EPAs proposed determination that it is not practicable to regulate disposal, while others disagreed. However, in EPAs view, establishing an entirely new disposal program for PCTP-containing wastes would be expensive and difficult to establish and administer. A
requirement to treat these wastes as if they were listed as hazardous wastes would have impacts on hazardous waste disposal capacity and be very expensive for states and local governments, as well as for affected industries. Therefore, EPA has determined that it is not practicable to further regulate PCTPcontaining wastes. More information on the comments received and EPAs responses can be found in the Response to Comments document Ref. 4.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

21:01 Jan 05, 2021

Jkt 253001

EPA proposed not to use its TSCA
section 6a authorities to directly regulate occupational exposures. As explained in the proposed rule, as a matter of policy, EPA assumes compliance with federal and state requirements, such as worker protection standards, unless case-specific facts indicate otherwise. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration OSHA has not established a permissible exposure limit PEL for PCTP. However, under section 5a1 of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, 29 U.S.C. 654a1, each employer has a legal obligation to furnish to each of its employees employment and a place of employment that are free from recognized hazards that are causing or are likely to cause death or serious physical harm. The OSHA Hazard Communication Standard at 29 CFR 1910.1200 requires chemical manufacturers and importers to classify the hazards of chemicals they produce or import, and all employers to provide information to employees about hazardous chemicals to which they may be exposed under normal conditions of use or in foreseeable emergencies. The OSHA standard at 29 CFR
1910.134a1 requires the use of feasible engineering controls to prevent atmospheric contamination by harmful substances and requires the use of respirators where effective engineering controls are not feasible. The OSHA
standard at 29 CFR 1910.143c details the required respiratory protection program. The OSHA standard at 29 CFR
1910.132a requires the use of personal protective equipment PPE by workers when necessary due to a chemical hazard; 29 CFR 1910.133 requires the use of eye and face protection when employees are exposed to hazards including liquid chemicals; and 29 CFR
1910.138 requires the use of PPE to protect employees hands including from skin absorption of harmful substances. The provisions of 29 CFR
1910.132d and f address hazard assessment, PPE selection, and training with respect to PPE required under 29
CFR 1910.133, 1910.135, 1910.136, 1910.138, and 1910.140. EPA assumes that employers will require, and workers will use, appropriate PPE
consistent with OSHA standards, taking into account employer-based assessments, in a manner sufficient to prevent occupational exposures that are capable of causing injury.
EPA assumes compliance with other federal requirements, including OSHA
standards and regulations. EPA does not read TSCA section 6h4 to direct EPA
to adopt potentially redundant or
PO 00000

Frm 00052

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

conflicting requirements. Not only would it be difficult to support broadly applicable and safe additional measures for each specific activity without a risk evaluation and in the limited time for issuance of this regulation under TSCA
section 6h, but imposing such measures without sufficient analysis could inadvertently result in conflicting or confusing requirements and make it difficult for employers to understand their obligations. Furthermore, EPA
cannot conclude that broadly imposing specific measures is practicable for all of the varied workplaces. Rather, where EPA has identified worker exposures and available substitutes, EPA is finalizing measures to reduce those exposures. As discussed in the proposed rule, EPA assumes that the worker protection methods used by employers, including in response to existing OSHA
standards, in addition to the regulatory measures taken for each chemical, meaningfully reduce the potential for occupational exposures. Although some commenters agreed with this approach, others thought EPA should establish worker protection requirements for those uses that would be allowed to continue under the final rule.
Information provided to EPA before and during the public comment period on the proposed rule indicates that employers are using engineering and process controls and providing appropriate personal protective equipment PPE to their employees consistent with these requirements and EPA received no information on PCTP
to suggest this is not the case. Further, EPA has not conducted a risk evaluation on PCTP or any of the other PBT
chemicals. Without a risk evaluation and given the time allotted for this rulemaking, EPA cannot identify additional engineering or process controls or PPE requirements that would be appropriate to each chemical-specific circumstance. For these reasons, EPA
has determined that it is not practicable to regulate worker exposures in this rule through additional engineering or process controls or PPE requirements.
EPA received comments regarding the use of PBT chemicals in research and development and lab use. Lab use is addressed under newly established 40
CFR 751.401b as the manufacturing, processing, distribution-in-commerce and use of any chemical substance, or products and articles that contain the chemical substance, for research and development, as defined in new 40 CFR
751.403. Research and Development is defined in new 40 CFR 751.403 to mean laboratory and research use only for purposes of scientific
E:FRFM06JAR5.SGM

06JAR5