Welcome Guest to Coatings World    Login || Register
Last Updated Monday, July 28 2014
Print

NPCA Comments ON EPA’s Proposed Dye and Pigment



Published August 11, 2005
Related Searches: Color
NPCA Comments ON EPA’s Proposed Dye and Pigment Production Waste Listing
NPCA has submitted comments to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency regarding the Nov. 2003 proposed Dye and Pigment Production Waste Listing. The rule would list non-waste waters from the production of certain dyes, pigments and FD&C colorants as hazardous waste under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) if these wastes contain certain levels of o-anisidine, p-cresidine, 1,2-phenylenediamine, 1,3-phenylenediamine, 2,4-dimethylaniline, and toluene-2,4-diamine. In addition, wastes containing these chemicals would be subject to treatment standards and land-ban restrictions.
NPCA opposed the listing of non-waste waters in question as hazardous waste, calling attention to the fact that in EPA has mistakenly assumed the dye and pigment manufacturing industries are one in the same, which they are not. The two industries use different raw materials and generate different wastes. As a result, EPA has overestimated the waste streams generated by the two industries, the concentrations of constituents of concern in the wastes streams of the two industries and inaccurately modeled its proposal using disposal methods not utilized by the two industries.
In addition, EPA has not substantiated risks from non-waste water solid wastes generated by the dye and pigment manufacturing industry. NPCA firmly maintains that dye and pigment non-waste waters do not pose significant risk to human health and the environment, and thus, there is no rationale for a hazardous waste-listing.
NPCA also alerted EPA that it overestimated risks of the non-waste waters because it modeled clay or unlined landfill disposal scenarios, not utilized by the industries. Synthetically lined landfills are the only kind used by dye and pigment manufacturing facilities for waste management. Thus, EPA’s modeling overestimated the risk from dye and pigment manufacturing wastes.
NPCA also reported that based on


blog comments powered by Disqus
Receive free Coatings World emails
Sign up now to receive the weekly newsletter, and more!

Enter your email address:
Company Spotlight
Sun Chemical Corporation Performance Pigments
5020 Spring Grove Avenue
Cincinnati, OH, 45232
USA
View Profile
Sunin Machine Co., Ltd.
No.96, Chiao Ho Rd ,Chungho Dist
New Taipei City, Taiwan , 235
Taiwan Roc
View Profile
Shamrock Technologies, Inc.
Foot of Pacific Street
Newark, NJ, 07114
USA
View Profile
Buhler Group (Nanotechnology)
13105 12th Ave. North
Plymouth, MN, 55441-4509

View Profile
Keeneyes
18F, No.85, Sec. 1, Chung-Shiao E. Rd.
Taipei, Taiwan, 100
R.O.C.
View Profile
AZ Electronic Materials Co., Ltd.
No. 458-6, Sinsing Road Hu Kou Township Hsinchu Country 303, Taiwan
Hsinchu Country, Taiwan, 303
Taiwan
View Profile
Micro Powders, Inc.
580 White Plains Rd.
Tarrytown, NY, 10591
US
View Profile
Lubrizol Advanced Materials, Inc.
9911 Brecksville Road
Cleveland, OH, 44141
US
View Profile
Houchi Chemical Co., Ltd
No.56, Fu Chow Street
Taipei, Taipei, 100
Taiwan
View Profile
BASF Corporation
100 Campus Drive
Florham Park, NJ, 07932
US
View Profile
Follow Coatings World On