39348 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 137 / Wednesday, July 18, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
that no worker shall be permitted in any area that
can adversely affect them when demolition
operations are being performed.
assumed that such buildings would be
demolished once every 30 years, based
on the Internal Revenue Service
allowable straight-line depreciation for
non-residential real property of 31.5
years. The Agency determined that
demolition practices, as noted by the
National Association of Demolition
Contractors, would generally generate
dusts for periods rarely in excess of 20–
30 minutes when buildings are
imploded. Furthermore, the Agency has
reviewed the fugitive dust demolition
regulations in Oklahoma, Missouri, and
Kansas and found that building
demolition requires a general fugitive
dust permit that mandates that
demolition related dusts be contained
within the property line (most often
through the use of water sprays). Based
on this information, the Agency
concludes that dusts from the
demolition of nonresidential buildings
with chat contained in PCC are not
likely to present a significant threat to
human health.
Even if chat metal levels do not trigger
OSHA requirements, however, other
OSHA controls would still be utilized to
address worker health risks from
exposure to fine particulates, which
indirectly addresses the issues
associated with chat. In particular,
demolition of concrete structures is
known to produce extremely fine
particles of crystalline silica. Breathing
crystalline silica dust can lead to
silicosis, a commonly known health
hazard which has been associated
historically with the inhalation of silicacontaining
dusts. Silicosis is a lung
disease which can be progressive and
disabling; it can lead to death. The
OSHA standards for exposure to dust,
(29 CFR 1926.55) prohibit employee
exposure to any material at
concentrations above those specified in
the ‘‘Threshold Limit Values of
Airborne Contaminants for 1970.’’
OSHA has established for crystalline
silica dust a Permissible Exposure Level
which is the maximum amount to
which workers may be exposed during
an 8-hour work shift. NIOSH has
recommended an exposure limit of 0.05
mg/m3 as a time-weighted average for
up to a 10-hour workday during a 40-
hour workweek. Although the Agency
has no reason to believe that chat
contained in PCC would increase the
levels of fine particulates, including
crystalline silica, we believe the OSHA/
NIOSH standards will provide adequate
protection to workers from potential
exposure.
OSHA has also established worker
health and safety standards specific to
building demolition in 29 CFR 1926
Subpart T. These standards require an
engineering survey of the building prior
to demolition to identify any risks and
implementation of project wide dust
controls. The standards also require
compliance with NIOSH respirable dust
standards which essentially require the
use of respirators, if standards noted in
29 CFR 1910 are exceeded. Based on the
Agency’s review of the OSHA standards,
we conclude that these regulations
provide adequate protection to onsite
demolition workers.
One of the Peer Reviewers noted that
NIOSH and OSHA standards may not
apply to county or State highway
workers and that those safeguards
would not actually protect workers
potentially exposed to dusts during
milling or demolition. The Agency has
reviewed State and Federal worker
health and safety laws as they apply to
demolition, and does not agree that
there is insufficient regulatory
protection of workers. The commenter
also noted that existing regulations are
not being enforced. While the Agency
has not been able to determine whether
this allegation is accurate, it is beyond
the scope of this effort to determine
whether these regulations are being
enforced by the states or others.
(5) The Risk From the Generation of
Chat Fines During Processing Was Not
Evaluated
The peer review commenters noted
that the rule should include criteria
addressing the handling and disposal of
chat fines resulting from the wet sizing
of chat. First, the Agency would note
that this final rule does not require that
the raw chat be washed or sized prior
to being used. Therefore, any fines that
are generated would not be the result of
this rule. Nevertheless, the Agency
evaluated the risks from exposure to
fines from chat washing facilities during
Superfund Site investigations at the
NPL Sites in the Tri-State Mining
District. The information we have shows
that fines may release metals into the
environment. However, the release of
these metals can be effectively
controlled by EPA through its oversight
authority of the Tar Creek Superfund
site. In addition, we believe that most
chat washing will continue to be
conducted at the two known
commercial chat washing facilities
located within the Superfund Sites.
However, to the extent that other chat
washing facilities become operational,
we also believe that they will be
adequately controlled based on our
review of the air and water regulations
in Oklahoma, Missouri and Kansas. (See
Section III for a discussion of EPA’s
evaluation of the states regulatory
programs to control air and water
releases at asphalt plants, PCC plants
and chat washing facilities.)
(6) Ecological Risks
The peer review commenters noted
that there should be a more
comprehensive analysis of the
ecological risks from chat use.
Environmental quality information
presented in several studies indicated
that damages to streams had been
documented for the Tri-State Mining
Area; however, these studies did not
address encapsulated chat uses, but
were from multiple sources of
contamination associated with lead and
zinc mining, including subsurface
sources (flooded mine shafts), surface
sources (chat piles, tailing sites), and
smelting operations. SPLP analyses for
chat encapsulated in hot mix asphalt
(OU, 2005) shows that zinc
concentrations, when detected, were
below EPA’s National Recommended
Water Quality Criteria (http://
www.epa.gov/waterscience/criteria/
wqcriteria.html) for the protection of
aquatic life. This study did not find
detectable levels of lead or cadmium in
any leachate using the SPLP method.
We do not foresee that environmental
conditions could occur where metals
from chat used in transportation
projects, that are funded, in whole or in
part, using Federal funds, would reach
surface waters at levels of concern either
through run-off to nearby soils, which
would have subsequent attenuation
before reaching surface waters, or via
the groundwater pathway, which would
have additional attenuation and dilution
in groundwater before reaching nearby
receiving waters.
B. What Are the Economic Impacts?
This Part summarizes projected cost
impacts, economic impacts, and benefits
associated with this final rule. A brief
market profile is first discussed,
followed by specification of the
economic baseline. Costs and economic
impacts are next discussed. These
estimates are presented on an
annualized basis. Finally, this Part
presents a qualitative discussion of
potential benefits associated with this
final rule.
1. Chat Market Profile
Chat is a byproduct of mining and
milling operations that has been
exempted from regulation as a
‘‘hazardous waste’’ under Subtitle C of
VerDate Aug<31>2005 10:08 Jul 18, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\18JYR1.SGM 18JYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES