Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: steve in DC
Did you read the article link to in reply 12?
37 posted on 09/29/2003 11:20:09 AM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies ]


To: Ben Ficklin
Yes, and I stand by what I have posted.

Did you read it?

The EPA's claims are long on rhetoric and short on substance.

The interesting claim is that the EPA has "found" "... traces of the solvent, which contains hexane, alcohol and methanol...outside the plant in a burn pit and in barrels."

"McNabb said the plant has no burn pit and that the barrels contained the old solvent."

The interesting thing about the hazardous waste regulations is that it ain't waste until the generator says its waste. So if he is storing solvent in barrels, and it isn't "waste", then it isn't a problem.

He is also allowed to store up to 1000 kilograms of hazardous waste prior to disposal as a Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator, with no limit on how long he can store it, as long as he doesn't cross the 1000kg threshold.

As far as burn pits are concerned, with the vapor pressure of this material and its flamability, one would reasonably presume that tehre would be precious little alcohol or hexane in any "burn pit", even if there was one.

And, as anyone who knows the hazardous waste rules can tell you, a drum is "empty" when it contains less than 1 inch of residual material. And, 1 inch of hexane would certainly show up as "trace" while still not being hazardous waste. (It would be an "empty" drum and one would be expected to dispose of it as ordinary waste, as "industrial waste" or "special waste", depending on state regulations.)

39 posted on 09/29/2003 11:40:39 AM PDT by steve in DC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson