Imagine having to send several hundred thousand gallons of laboriously collected used oil to a hazardous waste incinerator. Last year, Oregon-based used oil collector Oil Re-Refining Co. had to do exactly that when a small amount of oil laden with carcinogenic polychlorinated biphenyls contaminated everything it touched – trucks, tanks and storage facilities – to eventually taint around 700,000 gallons of Orrcos stock. More than half of that had been diluted to the point that its PCB content would be considered safe. But since it had mixed with oil that contained a high level of PCBs, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency deemed it all unacceptable for sale, burning as fuel or rerefining. Orrcos president Bill Briggs said the incident almost put his company out of business.
The company did everything it could as a responsible oil collector, Briggs told LubesnGreases last year. Orrco collected from a generator that certified the pickup was PCB-free, tested the yield once back at its lab, shut down all affected facilities when it discovered the contamination, and immediately reported the incident to the EPA. But after a three-year tug-of-war with the EPA, Orrco was helpless. According to the Toxic Substances Control Act of 1979, waste recyclers are allowed to store and use oil that contains PCBs at levels below 2 parts per million. However, the federal anti-dilution rule dictates that if an original source with more than 50 ppm dilutes other volumes, then the diluted oil must be destroyed as well, regardless of whether its resulting PCB content is quantifiable or not.
This scenario plays out too often, and it threatens to destroy the nations used oil collection system, said Scott Parker, executive director of NORA, the Association of Responsible Recyclers, which represents liquid waste handling companies of all sizes throughout North America. Weve seen companies go bankrupt because of PCBs, Parker told LubesnGreases last month.
What were dealing with is not intentional blending – that is wrong and should not occur, Parker said. What we are seeing is an increase in unintentional blending; dilution that occurs as a result of circumstances that our industry cannot prevent based on existing testing measures and other constraints.
There are only two ways to guarantee that waste oil collectors do not pick up PCB-contaminated material, and both would destroy the used oil collection system, Parker continued. The first would involve sending a truck to a generator, taking multiple samples from different parts of the sites holding tank, locking that tank, transporting the samples to a laboratory, testing it, waiting for the results, then going back to the tank, unlocking it and pumping it out. Because the used oil collection business is based on collecting one gallon at a time – 50 gallons here, 100 gallons there, 500 gallons there, Parker said, that method would be impossible.
The second method, which Parker deems ludicrous, would be to have a full lab – along with a certified lab technician – on the back of every truck, on every collection run. The EPA realizes that neither of these methods is feasible, he said.
But without a legitimate, portable field test that can measure PCB content, used oil collectors are at the mercy of waste oil generators, Parker explained. You have to take generators at their word. However, under the federal governments current used oil management regulations, collectors and processors often take the hit, even though they have no control over the waste stream before it gets to their facilities.
Unfortunately, its also almost impossible to go after the generators in these situations, Parker continued. While there are several hundred companies that gather used oil, there are hundreds of thousands of business that generate it – and theyre generally smaller outfits that dont have the resources to test their own oil and would typically go bankrupt on even one occasion of a contamination crackdown. Generators are often a small garage or sole proprietorship, or even a county municipal dump, he explained. Wheres the return in the effort to try to hold them accountable?
Its up to either the EPA or Congress to make changes to support the industry, and NORA has spent around $200,000 to date on working with both to spur reforms, in what Parkers said is NORAs most significant project in years.
Luckily for NORAs members and the used oil recycling industry, Parker said EPA sees that oil collectors and processors are being unfairly penalized, and seems willing to work with NORA and other stakeholders on revising TSCA/PCB policy.
This month, NORA is due to receive feedback from the EPA on proposals the trade group submitted that lay out a framework for reform. The proposals revolve around best management practices, which entail having NORA members follow a set of precautions, such as identifying culprit generators, retaining used oil samples and certifications from generators, reporting PCB hits, and most notably, testing all incoming oil in guard tanks, and locking the oil down if its found to be contaminated.
I really think that our members should be incentivized to report PCB occurrences, and not have a penalty applied to it, Parker observed.
For companies that follow the best management practices, and yet are stuck with contaminated oil, NORA is requesting the EPA to reconsider its anti-dilution rule. To take the most usual situation, where the original source of the PCBs exceeds 50 ppm, but the concentration in the guard tank was below 50 ppm, the used oil in the guard tank could be sent to a qualified rerefiner using an EPA-approved hydrotreatment process that destroys PCBs, or it could be burned as off-spec used oil in an industrial furnace, explained Chris Harris, NORAs general counsel. This approach preserves the value of the used oil – rather than condemn it to expensive destruction by an incinerator.
Weve spent a long time working with a small focus group making sure these proposals would not only help large companies, but mid-size and small companies as well, all while doing our best to make sure the environment is protected as well, Parker said, adding that NORA is very optimistic that there will be reforms. The group of people from EPA that is working on this is extremely interested. They are bound by rules and laws but they recognize the issue and are trying to work with us, he noted. We fully expect positive results.
NORA is no stranger to positive results. Celebrating its 30th anniversary this year, NORA has helped shepherd the industry through countless cases in which it was threatened by unwieldy regulations. Founded in 1984 by a handful of companies, the groups first effort was to help reverse EPAs initial designation of used oil as a hazardous waste and to help establish used oil management standards.
The trade association, based in Gainesville, Va., has seen its membership grow to more than 400, including companies in Canada and Mexico, and is fresh off the heels of another victory after a protracted litigation with the EPA over the agencys Non-Hazardous Secondary Materials rule. That rule had mandated that waste oil generated through industrial uses (otherwise known as off-spec oil) not be rerefined or burned as fuel oil, because it was comparable to burning scrap tires and other highly polluting solid wastes. Instead, it would have to be destroyed in specially permitted incinerators.
In 2011, NORA sued EPA on the grounds that the NHSM rule was unsound public policy. It also submitted third-party tests from Summit Laboratories demonstrating that off-spec used oil is far more clean-burning than coal, which can be burned. Following months of litigation, the EPA revised its policy and allowed off-spec used oil – which by NORAs estimates accounts for some 120 million gallons a year in the United States – to be compared more favorably to coal, thereby preserving its status as a valuable alternative fuel. Having won a crucial concession from the EPA, there is no point in continuing the lawsuit, Harris said, as the trade group withdrew from the litigation. NORA is still working with EPA to create a regulatory framework for off-spec oil.
Like many of its endeavors, however, which range from helping revise ozone transport commission rules relating to solvent degreasers in New England states, to persuading state authorities that their bans on asphalt flux material are flawed, NORA understands that shifts in public policy sometimes only come after years of effort.
Such is the case in its work with the Life Cycle Assessment of Used Oil Management, a study conducted by the University of California at Santa Barbara for the states CalRecycle agency. As a stakeholder in the years-long study, NORA is eager to see what legislative results it may bring, but the report still has not been presented to Californias legislature.
The LCA was the most expensive study ever in our industrys history, Parker said. The project was developed within the scope of used oil generated in California – thus very California-specific – but agencies from other states and even other countries will pick it up and introduce legislation based on it, and so weve seen an incredible amount of interest in the study.
The scientific study analyzed all forms of used oil disposal and management, including distillation, rerefining, burning for fuel and incinerating, taking into account each methods potential to cause global warming, acidification, eutrophication, smog, ecotoxicity, cancers and other health effects in humans, and more. Roland Geyer, who led the study at UCSBs Bren School of Environmental Science and Management, told NORAs annual meeting last November that no clearcut winner emerged across all categories. Rather, every recycling method offers some benefits, leading him to conclude, Any decision or action that moves used oil from informal to formal management will reduce its environmental impact across all these categories. And all disposition routes are better than dumping.
Its still up to the California legislature, Geyer added, to decide which used oil management methods should be favored, at what cost, and what mix of policies will encourage the highest used oil collection rates.
Although the studys findings dont lend themselves overwhelmingly to promoting any form of waste oil collection and processing over others, Parker said, they do favor reuse versus incineration. Thats good for NORA members.
He added that the American Petroleum Institute is now working with consultancy Environmental Resources Management to conduct its own study, titled Lifecycle Analysis Follow-On Study of Used Oil Management in California. API is using the CalRecycle study as a baseline, and has elected NORA as a stakeholder.
Theres going to be a whole lot of new research coming onto the marketplace, Parker concluded, and for now, were very interested to see what comes out of the legislature.