1
Summary
of
Meeting
with
the
Ferroalloys
Association
January
28,
2002
On
January
28,
2002,
Marianne
Lamont
Horinko,
Assistant
Administrator
for
the
Office
of
Solid
Waste
and
Emergency
Response
(OSWER)
and
staff
from
the
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(OSW)
met
with
members
of
the
Ferroalloys
Association
(tFA)
at
EPA's
offices
at
401
M
Street
SW,
Washington,
D.
C.
A
list
of
attendees
is
attached.

TFA
members
made
a
presentation
to
Ms.
Horinko
and
EPA
staff
describing
current
regulatory
barriers
affecting
recycling
of
spent
catalysts
from
petroleum
refining
hydroprocessing
operations.
A
copy
of
TFA's
presentation
is
attached.

Following
tFA's
presentation,
Ms.
Horinko
mentioned
that
Agency
resources
available
for
regulatory
development,
particularly
within
the
Office
of
Solid
Waste,
are
scarce.
Guidance
to
assist
the
regulated
community
in
complying
with
current
regulations
and
in
understanding
the
benefits
of
recycling
and
resource
conservation,
although
preferable
under
current
budget
constraints,
may
be
controversial
and
could
lead
to
legal
petitions
for
judicial
review.

Elizabeth
Cotsworth,
Director
of
OSW,
asked
if
members
of
tFA
could
meet
with
the
generators
of
spent
petroleum
catalysts
to
negotiate
a
mutually
beneficial
agreement
for
managing
spent
catalysts.
TFA
members
explained
that
achieving
such
an
agreement
may
not
be
possible
given
that
petroleum
refineries
generally
make
their
waste
management
decisions
based
entirely
upon
cost.
TFA
members
stressed
that
the
current
RCRA
regulations
governing
spent
petroleum
catalysts
allow
these
wastes
to
be
treated
and
disposed
in
manners
that
are
less
costly
than
reclamation,
despite
the
fact
that
the
spent
catalysts
contain
significant
levels
of
hazardous
constituents
and
recoverable
levels
of
metals,
primarily
vanadium.
TFA
members
pointed
out
that
EPA
may
have
a
better
chance,
than
tFA,
of
calling
members
of
the
petroleum
refining
industry
to
the
table
to
discuss
catalyst
recycling
opportunities.

Matt
Straus
of
OSWER
asked
if
refineries
are
mislabeling
or
mis­
characterizing
spent
catalysts.
TFA
members
said
that
almost
all
spent
hydroprocessing
catalysts
that
are
landfilled
are
labeled
K172.
The
LDR
treatment
standards
for
K172
do
not
require
treatment
for
the
presence
of
PAHs,
while
the
LDR
standards
for
K171
require
that
the
spent
catalysts
be
treated
for
the
presence
of
PAHs.
In
addition,
the
current
definitions
for
the
ignitable
and
reactive
hazardous
waste
characteristics
are
problematic
in
that
there
are
not
tests
for
determining
when
solids
fit
within
the
scope
of
the
characteristics.
Therefore,
spent
catalysts
often
are
not
labeled
as
exhibiting
either
characteristic
and
may
be
accepted
for
disposal
in
landfills.
The
tFA
member
pointed
out
that
if
spent
catalysts
were
required
to
carry
the
waste
codes
for
ignitability
(D001)
or
reactivity
(D003),
landfills
probably
would
not
accept
the
wastes
for
disposal.

A
member
of
tFA
pointed
out
that
a
petroleum
refinery
located
in
Louisiana
has
submitted
a
delisting
petition
for
several
categories
of
refinery
waste,
including
spent
catalyst
that
is
treated
to
remove
the
oil
content
and
then
re­
designated
as
F037
(per
40
CFR
261.4(
a)(
12)(
i)).
The
tFA
2
member
indicated
that
tFA
is
concerned
that
the
State's
review
of
the
delisting
petition
may
not
include
an
analysis
of
the
presence
of
sulfides
in
the
spent
catalyst
waste,
which
could
lead
to
the
release
of
hazardous
constituents
from
the
waste
under
certain
landfill
conditions.

Matt
Hale
of
OSW
asked
if
the
Agency
could
encourage
additional
recycling
of
spent
petroleum
catalysts,
if
the
Agency
reduced
the
regulatory
requirements
for
spent
catalysts
that
are
recycled.
TFA
members
indicated
that
reduced
management
standards
for
spent
catalysts
that
are
recycled
would
not
affect
the
costs
associated
with
recycling.
However,
there
may
be
some
benefit
to
petroleum
refineries
of
not
having
to
label
and
report
the
waste
as
hazardous.

James
Allen,
counsel
to
tFA
asked
Elizabeth
Cotsworth
if
OSW
staff
would
be
reviewing
tFA's
petition
requesting
a
review
of
the
current
LDR
standards
applicable
to
K171
and
K172.
Ms.
Cotsworth
said
that
OSW
could
only
initiate
such
a
review
if
the
office
could
identify
available
and
qualified
staff
to
undertake
the
review.
Ms.
Cotsworth
said
that
OSW
does
not
have
sufficient
extramural
resources
to
dedicate
to
a
review
of
the
petition.
