Solid Waste Permitting and Management Rules, Utah Administrative Code R315-301 Through 320 Adopted Thereunder, a Permit Is Issued To

Department of Environmental Quality

Alan Matheson Executive Director

DTVISION OF WASTE MANAGEMENT GARY R. HERBERT AND RADIATION CONTROL Govemor Scott T. Anderson Director SPENCER J. COX Lieutenant Govemor

August 3l,2Ol7

Jay Vance, P.E. Environmental Quality Manager Stericycle, Inc. 90 Foxboro Drive North Salt Lake, UT 84054

RE: Stericycle Tooele Medical Waste Incinerator Permit Approval

Dear Mr. Vance:

Please find enclosed the final Permit for the Stericycle Tooele County Incinerator with all attachments. The effective date for this permit is September l,2Ol7.

The Division of Waste Management and Radiation Control has reviewed and prepared a response to the comments received during the public comment period. Enclosed with this letter are the public comments to the Draft Permit and the Division's responses to those comments.

If you have any questions, please call Roy Van Os at (801) 536-0245.

Division of Wastb Management and Radiation Control

STA/RVO/al

Enclosures: Stericycle SolidWaste IncineratorPermit (DSHW-2O15-012567) Attachment 1, (Permit Attachments) (DSHW-20 1 6-00554 1 ) Response to Public Comments, Stericycle Tooele Medical Facility (DSHW-2017-007121) c: Jeff Coombs, EHS, Health Officer, Tooele County Health Department Bryan Slade, Environmental Health Director, Tooele County Health Department Al Burson, Stericycle

DSHW-2017-007046 195 No(h 1950 West. Salt Lake City, UT l Mailing Address: P.O. Box 144880. Salt L,ake City, UT 84114-4880 Telephone (801) 536-0200. Fax (801) 536-0222 'T.D.D. (801) 5364284 zuww.deq.utah.goa Printed on 1007o recycled paper DIVISION OF WASTE MANAGEMENT AND RADIATION CONTROI- SOLID WASTE INCINERATOR PERMIT

Stericycle Tooele County Medical Waste Incinerator Facility

Pursuant to the provisions of the Utah Solid and Hazardous Waste Act, Title 19, Chapter 6,Part l, Utah Code Annotated (Utah Code Ann.) (the Act) and the Utah Solid Waste Permitting and Management Rules, Utah Administrative Code R315-301 through 320 adopted thereunder, a Permit is issued to

Stericycle, Inc. as owner and operator, (Permittee), to own, construct, and operate the Stericycle Tooele County Medical Waste Incinerator Facility. The Permittee has selected a4O-acre parcel on which to locate its facility. The parcel is described as the southwest quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 3, Township 1 North, Range 8 West, Salt Lake Base and Meridian, Tooele County, Utah as shown in the Permit Application.

The Permittee is subject to the requirements of R315-301 through32} of the Utah Administrative Code and the requirements set forth herein.

All references to R315-301 through 320 of the Utah Administrative Code are to regulations that are in effect on the date that this permit becomes effective.

This Permit shall become effective September 1. 2017

This Permit shall expire at midnight Ausust 31.2021

Closure Cost Revision Date Aueust 3I.2022

Signed

Division of Waste Manasement and Radiation Control FACILITY OWNER/OPERATOR INFORMATION

INCINERATOR NAME: Stericycle Tooele County - Medical Waste Incinerator Facility

OWNER NAME: Stericycle, Inc.

OWNER ADDRESS: 28161North Keith Drive, Lake Forest, Illinois, 60045

OWNER PHONE NO.: (866) 783-9816

OPERATOR NAME: Stericycle, Inc. 90 Foxboro Drive, OPERATOR ADDRESS: North Salt Lake, UT 84054

9250 Rowley Road, Skull Valley, Utah 84029

OPERATOR PHONE NO.: (80 1 ) 936- 1 260 (NSL # until facility construction).

TYPE OF PERMIT: Incinerator Facility

BASE CAPACITY: The base capacity, for the purpose of compliance with UTAH CODE ANNOTATED 19-6-108(1)(c), of this incinerator, is 49.3 tons per day. The annual capacity is based on 365 days per year.

PERMIT NUMBER: 1601

LOCATION: The Stericycle Tooele County Medical Waste Incinerator Facility is located in Township 1 North, Range 8 West, Section 3, SLB&M, Tooele County, Lat.40o50'57", Long. ll2" 43' 53". The address is 9250 Rowley Road, Skull Valley, Utah 8029. The facility is located on the east side of Rowley Road approximately 10.7 miles north of the I-80 interchange at Exit 77.

PERMIT HISTORY Permit signed August 31,2017.

The term "Permit" as used in this document is defined in R315-30I-2(55) of the Utah "Director" as in this Permit refers to the Director of the Division of Administrative Code.tl used

Page 2 of 15 Waste Management and Radiation Control.

Attachments 1 through 9 to this permit are hereby incorporated into this Permit. All representations made in the attachments are part of this Permit and are enforceable under R315- 301-5(2) of the Utah Administrative Code. Where differences in wording exist between this Permit and the attachments, the wording of this Permit supersedes that of the attachments.

Compliance with this Permit does not constitute a defense to actions brought under any other local, state, or federal laws. This Permit does not exempt the Permittee from obtaining any other local, state or federal permits or approvals required for the facility operation.

The issuance of this Permit does not convey any property rights, other than the rights inherent in this Permit, in either real or personal property, or any exclusive privileges other than those inherent in this Permit. Nor does this Permit authorize any injury to public or private property or any invasion of personal rights, nor any infringement of federal, state or local laws or regulations, including zoning ordinances.

The provisions of this Permit are severable. If any provision of this Permit is held invalid for any reason, the remaining provisions shall remain in full force and effect. If the application of any provision of this Permit to any circumstance is held invalid, its application to other circumstances shall not be affected.

By this Permit, the Permittee is subject to the following conditions.

Page 3 of 15 PERMIT REQUIREMENTS

I. GENERAL COMPLIANCE RESPONSIBILITIES

I.A. General Operation

I.A.1. The Permittee shall operate the Stericycle Tooele County Medical Waste Incinerator Facility in accordance with all applicable requirements of R315-301 through 320 of the Utah Administrative Code that are in effect as of the date of this Permit unless otherwise noted in this Permit. Any permit noncompliance or noncompliance with any applicable portions of Utah Code Ann. $ 19-6-101 through I25 and applicable portions of R315-301 through 320 of the Utah Administrative Code constitutes a violation of the Permit or applicable statute or rule and is grounds for appropriate enforcement action, permit revocation, or modification.

I.B. Acceptable Waste

I.8.1. This Permit authorizes the incineration of the following non-hazardous solid wastes (See Attachment 1):

I.B.1.a. Biohazardouswasteincludingpathologicalwaste: I.B.l.a.(1) Laboratorywasteincluding: I.B.1.a(1)(i) Cultures - medical or pathological; I.B.1.a(l)(ii) Cultures/stocks of infectious agents - research and industrial; LB.l.a(1)(iii) Vaccines and related waste generated in the production thereof; I.B.l.a(lXiv) Microbiologic specimens andrelated waste; I.B. 1.a( 1)(v) Surgical specimens or tissues, contaminated animal parts, tissues carcasses or body fluids; and I.B.1.a(l)(vi) Fluid blood or blood products, containers or equipment and exudates, secretions, body fluids including, but not limited to, isolation waste.

I.8.1.a.(2) Sharps waste including, but not limited to: I.B.1.a(2)(i) Needles, syringes, blades, needles with attached tubing, disposable surgical instruments; and I.B.1.a(2)(ii) Medical or laboratory glassware including slides, pipettes, blood tubes, blood vials, contaminated broken glass.

I.B.1.a.(3) Other medical waste as required by the infection control staff, physician, veterinarian or local health officer to be isolated and handled as regulated medical waste.

I.B.1.a.(4) Trace-contaminated chemotherapy (antineoplastic/cytotoxic drugs) waste.

I.B.1.a.(5) Gowns, gloves, masks, barriers, fV tubing, empty bags or bottles, needles and syringes, empty drug vials, spill kits, and other items generated in the preparation and administration of antineoplastic drugs. I.8.2. Other Wastes:

Page 4 of 15 I.8.2.a. Expired and unused pharmaceuticals;

I.B.2.b. Confidential records, including, but not limited to, proprietary packaging and products;

I.8.2.c. Contraband (e.g. police evidence);

I.8.2.d. Agriculture Waste, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) waste including regulated garbage from domestic and international sources;

I.8.2.e. Outdated,off-specificationorunusedconsumercommodities;

1.8.2.f. Recalled or outdated disposable medical equipment or supplies;

I.8.2.g. Sharps and I.V. tubing and bags or bottles which are being discarded and are considered incidental to preparation and administration of the drugs;

I.B.2.h. "Municipal solid waste" as defined by R315-30I-2(47) of the Utah Administrative Code that is contaminated with infectious waste as listed in R315-30I-2(7L)(iv);

I.8.2.i. Other non-hazardous waste as approved by the Director of the Division of Waste Management and Radiation Control;

I.B.zj. Special wastes as defined by the R315-301-2(71) of the Utah Administrative Code limited to the following:

I.B.2j.(1) Furniture contaminated with potentially infectious materials; l.B.2j.(2) Infectious waste; and

I.B.2j.(3) Dead animals.

I.C. Prohibited Waste

I.C.1. The following wastes are prohibited from incineration:

I.C.1.a. Hazardous waste as defined bv R315-1 and R315-2 of the Utah Administrative Code;

I.C.1.b. Complete human remains, (e.g., that include head and/or torso), cadavers, and recognizable fetal remains;

I.C.1.c. Compressed gas cylinders and canisters (including intact aerosol cans);

I.C.1.d. Radioactive materials;

I.C.l.e. Explosive materials; I.C.l.f. Bulkcytotoxicmaterials;

I.C.1.g. Full or partially full I.V. bottles/bags and vials of chemotherapy agents that meet the definition of hazardous waste:

Page 5 of 15 I.C. 1.h. PCBs as defined by R3 15-301-2 (53) of the Utah Administrative Code;

I.C.1.i. Household waste, municipal waste, special waste, construction/demolition waste as defined by R315-30I-2(16) of Utah Administrative Code except as allowed in Section LB., above;

I.C.l j. Yard waste;

I.C.1.k. Industrial waste;

LC.1.l. Asbestos;

I.C.1.m. Asphalt; and

1.C.2. Any prohibited waste received and accepted for incineration or storage, at the facility shall constitute a violation of this Permit, of Utah Code Ann. g 19-6- 10 I through 125 and of R315-301 through 320 of the Utah Administrative Code.

I.D. Wastes that Require Approval

I.D.1. The following wastes cannot be accepted by the Permittee unless prior approval by the Director has been granted. The Permittee shall petition the Director for approval to accept these wastes. The petition shall demonstrate to the Director that the facility can safely manage and incinerate the waste and waste residue:

I.D.1.a. Ebola waste;

I.D.1.b. Prion wastes containing diseases such as "Mad Cow Disease" (Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy, BSE);

I.D.1.c. Chronic Wasting Disease;

I.D.1.d. Avian Influenza: and

I.D.1.e. Infectious waste, the management and disposal of which is being regulated by the Center for Disease Control (CDC), Department of Transportation (DOT), Department of Agriculture or Homeland Security.

LE. Inspections and Inspection Access

I.E.1. The Director or an authorized representative, or representatives from the Tooele County Health Department may enter at reasonable times and:

Page 6 of 15 I.E.1.a. Inspect the incinerator or other premises, practices or operations regulated by this Permit or R315-301 through 320 of the Utah Administrative Code;

I.E.1.b. Have access to and copy any records required to be kept by this Permit or R315-301 through 320 of the Utah Administrative Code;

I.E.1.c. Inspect any loads of waste, treatment facilities or processes, pollution management facilities or processes, or control facilities or processes required by this Permit or regulated by R315-301 through 32o of the utah Administrative code; and

I.E.1.d. Create a record of any inspection by photographic, video, electronic or any other reasonable means.

I.F. Noncompliance

I.F.1. In the event of noncompliance with any permit condition or violation of an applicable rule under R315-301 through 320 of the Utah Administrative Code, the Permittee shall promptly take any action reasonably necessary to correct the noncompliance or violation and mitigate any risk to the human health or the environment. Actions may include eliminating the activity causing the noncompliance or violation and containment of any waste or contamination using barriers or access restrictions, placing of warning signs, or permanently closing areas of the facility. I.F.2. The Permittee shall:

|.F.2.a. Document the noncompliance or violation in the daily operating record on the day the event occurred or the day it was discovered;

r.F.2.b. Notify the Director by telephone within 24 hours, or the next business day following documentation of the event;

I.F.2.c. Give written notice to the Director of the noncompliance or violation and measures taken to protect human health and the environment within seven days after the Director has been notified; and

\.F.2.d. Submit a written report to the Director within thirty days after documenting the event. This report shall describe the nature and extent of the noncompliance or violation and all remedial measures taken or to be taken to protect human health and the environment to eliminate the noncompliance or violation. Upon receipt and review of the assessment report, the Director may order the Permittee to perform appropriate remedial measures, including development of a site remediation plan for approval by the Director.

LF.3. In an enforcement action, the Permittee may not claim as a defense that it would have been necessary to halt or reduce the permitted activity in order to maintain compliance with R315-301 through320 of the Utah Administrative Code and this Permit.

I.G.

Page 7 of 15 r.G.1. This Permit is subject to revocation if the Permittee fails to comply with any condition of the Permit. The Director will notify the Permittee in writing prior to any proposed revocation action under R3l5-31 l-2(3) of the Utah Administrative Code. Such action shall be subject to all applicable hearing procedures established under R305-7 of the Utah Administrative Code and the Utah Administrative Procedures Act.

I.H. Attachment Incorporation

I.H.l.a. Attachments to the Permit are incorporated by reference into this Permit and are enforceable conditions of this Permit, as are documents incorporated by reference into the attachments. Language in this Permit supersedes any conflicting language in the attachments or documents incorporated into the attachments.

LL Ash Analysis

I.I.1. Once every five years, the Permittee shall perform the full TCLP analysis on one composite sample of the bottom ash to ascertain that incineration removes all organic TCLP constituents.

I.t.2. Every three months, the Permittee shall perform a TCLP metals analysis on the bottom ash resulting from the incineration of medical and other permitted waste in accordance with R315-306-2(7) of the Utah Administrative Code and Attachment 2:

I.I.2.a. The Permittee shall select a single bin of ash to make the waste determination of the ash generated by the Permittee. Waste characterization for the subsequent three- month period shall be based on samples collected from that single bin;

1.1.2.b. Sixteen random locations shall be chosen within the bin using a random number generator to obtain grab samples. Each consecutive four samples shall be mixed to generate a composite sample. Four composite samples shall be sent to the laboratory for analysis for this sampling event;

1.1.2.c. Laboratory results shall be evaluated for quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) before any waste determinations are made. After demonstrating that laboratory QA/QC has been maintained, the statistical demonstration for each chemical of concern (COC) shall be made. The standard deviation and variance for each COC shall be evaluated on the results of the four composite samples. The confidence interval (CI) for each COC shall be determined for the 80Vo Cldouble-sided or gOVo CI single-sided t-test. The methods used to calculate these confidence intervals are outlined in SW-846, Chapter 9, Equation 6 and Table 9-2 of Sw-846, Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, PhysicaVChemical Methods, EPA Guidance Document: and

Page 8 of 15 I.I.2.d. Additional random samples may be taken from the same bin and analyzed if more than four composite samples are required to obtain a representative data base of the waste in the selected bin as determined by the Permittee. In anticipation of the possible need for additional samples for the waste determination, the Permittee may collect additional random composite samples from the selected bin that may be analyzed as needed. Analyzed and validated results shall be added to the statistical pool calculating the CI for each COC. I.I.3. If the upper limit of the CI is greater than the regulatory threshold (RT) for any COC, the waste in the selected bin shall be managed as a hazardous waste and disposed in a permitted hazardous waste landfill. In the case where the upper limit of the CI exceeds the RT, bottom ash shall be characterized on a bin-by-bin basis as outlined in I.I.4 or be managed as hazardous waste and disposed in an approved hazardous waste landfill for the subsequent three months (quarter).

I.I.4. Bottom ash in bins characterized on a bin-by-bin basis shall be characteized based on the TCLP analysis of a single composite sample comprised of four random grab samples within the bin. If the concentration is less than the RT for each COC, the bin may be disposed as a non-hazardous waste. If the concentration is greater than the RT for any COC, the bottom ash in the bin shall be disposed in an approved hazardous waste landfill.

LI.5. If the upper limit of the CI is below the RT for each COC, the ash in that corresponding bin may be disposed at a non-hazardous waste and all bottom ash generated during the subsequent three months (quarter) may be managed as non- hazardous waste and may be disposed in a permitted non-hazardous waste landfill. I.r.6. Each quarter's sampling event shall be statistically separate from previous sampling events. r.1.7. The Permittee may petition the Director to reduce the ash analysis sampling frequency from once every three months to once every six month after four consecutive sampling events where the results have demonstrated that the ash is non-hazardous in accordance with Section I.I.5.

I.I.8. If ash sampling analysis fails to demonstrate that the ash is non-hazardous for each COC while the facility is performing the ash sampling frequency once every six months, the ash sampling frequency shall be increased to once every three months until four consecutive sampling events demonstrate the ash is non-hazardous waste in accordance with I.I.7.

I.I.9. Results of ash analysis shall be submitted to the Division no later than 45 days after the sampling event.

I.I.10. Results of all testing shall be kept on file at the facility office and available for inspection for a minimum of three years.

I.I. 1 1. If any composite samples test positive for a hazardous characteristic, the facility shall notify the Director within two business days after receipt of the results. t.r.tz. Written notification shall be provided to the Director within ten business days.

Page 9 of 15 I.I.13. All ash bins shall be stored on site until a final determination based on the results of the composite samples. Alternatively, the ash bins may be disposed based on analysis of a single composite sample comprised of four random grab samples as described in I.I.4. il. DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION

II.A. Design and Construction

II.A.1. The Permittee shall construct the incinerator and any run-on diversion system, runoff containment system, waste treatment facility, and leachate handling system in general accordance with the conceptual design submitted as part of permit application and in accordance with the R3l5-301 thru 320 of the Utah Administrative Code. Il.A.2. Subsequent to construction, the Permittee shall notify the Director of completion of construction of the facility or any portion of the facility, any engineered control system, or any waste treatment facility. The Permittee shall submit as-built drawings for each construction event. Each drawing shall be stamped and approved by an engineer registered in the State of Utah.

II.B. Run-On Control

II.B.1. The Permittee shall construct drainage features and maintain them at all times to effectively prevent runoff from the surroundin g arca from contacting any stored waste. il. INCINERATOR OPERATION

III.A. Plan of Operations

III.A.I. The Permittee shall keep the Plan of Operations included in Attachments 1 through 9 on site at the Stericycle Tooele County Medical Waste Incinerator Facility. The Permittee shall operate the incinerator facility in accordance with the Plan of Operations. If necessary, the Permittee may modify the Plan of Operations in accordance with R315-301 through32O of the Utah Administrative Code. The modification shall be approved by the Director in accordance with R315-311-2(l) of the Utah Administrative Code. The Permittee shall keep approved modifications of the Plan of Operations in the daily operating record.

III.B. Security

III.B.1. The Permittee shall restrict unauthorized entry to the facility. The Permittee shall:

III.B.1.a. Lock all facility gates and other access routes during the time the facility is not incinerating waste, processing waste or receiving waste and closed for business;

Page 10 of l5 III.B.1.b. Have at least two persons employed by the Permittee at the facility during all hours that the facility is open for business, incinerating waste, processing waste or receiving waste; and

III.B.l.c. Construct and maintain all fencing and any other access controls as described in Attachment 6 to prevent access. m.c. Training ru.c.1. The Permittee shall train on-site personnel in facility operation, including waste load inspection, hazardous waste identification, and personal safety and protection as described in Attachment 5. The Permittee shall train employees to recognize prohibited wastes and safely remove and reject them from treatment.

III.D. Fire Control

III.D.1. The Permittee shall extinguish all accidental fires as soon as reasonably possible. In the event of fire or other emergency, the Permittee shall implement the Contingency Plan as described in Attachment 7.

III.E. Waste Tracking

III.E.1. The Permittee shall maintain a waste tracking system that records the origin of each container of medical waste and shall track the waste from the origin to the destruction or treatment as described in Attachment 3.

TIT.E.2. The Permittee shall maintain a waste acceptance program that trains customers to recognize which wastes are acceptable for incineration and which are unacceptable.

IILE.2.a. Personnel trained in recognition of hazardous waste and other unacceptable waste shall visually inspect waste prior to incineration; and

III.E.2.b. When unacceptable waste is discovered, the non-conforming waste shall be removed and information about the non-conforming waste shall be recorded in the daily operating record by the end of the operating day.

Itr.F. Radiation Screening Protocol

III.F.I. Prior to treatment, the Permittee shall screen all containers in accordance with the Radiation Screening Protocol described in Attachment 9 using a radiation monitor. Any container with a radiation reading above 30-36 pR/hr shall be rejected from treatment.

III.G. Self Inspections

III.G.1. The Permittee shall inspect the facility to prevent malfunctions and deterioration, operator errors, and discharges that may cause or lead to the release of wastes or contaminated materials to the environment or create a threat to human health or the environment. lnspections shall be performed in accordance with Attachment 4 and shall include: | |

Page 11 of 15 III.G.1.a. Daily Inspection l-ng I Summary;

III.G.1.b. Transportation Inspection Log / Summary;

III.G.1.c. Radiation Screening Unit Checks and Calibration; and

III.G.1.d. Facility Monthly and Quarterly Inspections. III.G.2. The Permittee shall complete general inspections which include the following areas: lIl.G.2.a. Fences and access controls: III.G.2.b. Roads;run-on/run-offcontrols;

IILG.2.c. Litter controls; and

III.G.2.d. Records

III.G.3. The Permittee shall perform the general inspections listed above no less than quarterly and place a record of the inspections in the daily operating record on the day of the inspection. The Permittee shall correct the problems identified in the inspections in a timely manner and document the corrective actions in the daily operating record.

III.G.4. A copy of the forms used for Inspections are included in Attachment 4.

III.H. Recordkeeping

III.H.1. The Permittee shall maintain and keep on file at Stericycle Tooele Incinerator Facility, a daily operating record and other general records of facility operation as required by R315-302-2(3) of the Utah Administrative Code. The facility operator, or other designated personnel, shall date and sign the daily operating record at the end of each operating day. Each record shall contain the signature of the appropriate operator or personnel and the date signed. The daily operating record shall consist of the following documents:

III.H.1.a. Daily Summarl' of Total Waite Incinerated; - III.H.l.b. The total waste incinerated during a calendar day shall be determined and logged. The log of daily total waste incinerated shall be completed and placed in the operating record at the end of each day in accordance with R315-3O2(3)(a) of the Utah Administrative Code.

III.H.l.b.(1) The log shall include the following information: III.H.1.b(1Xi) Date; III.H. 1 .b( l Xii) Total Weight of Waste Incinerated for each day; III.H. 1 .b( I Xiii) Comments and deviations from the approved Plan of Operation; and III.H.l.b(l)(iv) Printed name and signature of facility manager (or designee).

III.H.1.c. Daily Summary of Primary Combustion Temperatures.

Page 12 of 15 III.H.1.c.(1) The log of daily primary combustion temperature ranges shall be completed and placed in the operating record at the end of each day in accordance with R315- 302(3)(a) of the Utah Administrative Code. The log shall include the following information: III.H.1.c(lXi) Date; III.H.1.c(lXii) Range of Primary Combustion Chamber Temperatures while waste is being incinerated; III.H.1.c(l)(iii) Comments and deviations from the approved Plan of Operation; trLH.1.c(lXiv) Printed name and signature of facility manager (or designee); and III.H.1.c(lXv) Log of temperature while waste is being incinerated

III.H. Lc.(2) Comments and deviations from the approved Plan of Operations

III.H.1.c.(3) Printed name and signature of facility manager (or designee) ILI.H.Z. Other General Records:

III.H.Z.a. lnspection Records and General Records.

III.H.2.a.(1) The Permittee shall keep the following general records as part of the Daily Operating Record These records shall be included with the daily operating record on the date information is documented: III.H.2.a(1Xi) Monthly summa.ry reports of the daily records may be included in the daily operating record by the twentieth of the month following the previous month but shall not replace the daily records; III.H.2.a(l)(ii) A copy of this Permit, including all attachments; III.H.2.a(1)(iii) Results of inspections conducted by representatives of the Director, and of representatives of the local Health Department, when forwarded to the Permittee; III.H.2.a(1)(iv) Records of employee training.

III.I. Reporting

III.Ll. The Permittee shall prepare and submit to the Director an Annual Report as required by R3l5-302-2(4) of the Utah Administrative Code. The Annual Report shall include the period covered by the report, the annual quantity of waste incinerated, all training programs completed and an annual update of the financial assurance mechanism.

III.J. Roads

III.J.1. The Permittee shall improve and maintain all access roads within the facility boundaries.

III.K. Litter and Fugitive Dust Control

III.K.l. The Permittee shall minimize litter resulting from operations of the facility. The Permittee shall manage dust from the parking lots, access roads, bottom ash system and fly ash system

Page 13 of 15 ry. CLOSURE REQUIREMENTS

IV.A. Closure

IV.A.l. The Permittee shall perform closure in accordance with Attachment 8. Closure shall be performed by removing all waste from the waste holding area and all ash from the incinerator and decommissioning all process equipment. The Permittee shall notify the Director when all closure operations are complete.

IV.B. Financial Assurance ry.8.1. The Permittee shall submit to the Director, for review and approval, closure cost estimates and a financial assurance mechanism that meets the requirements of R315-309 of the Utah Administrative Code. w.B.2. The Permittee, prior to receipt of waste, shall establish the approved mechanism and fund it as required. The Permittee shall keep the approved financial assurance mechanism in effect until closure activities are completed and the Director has released the facility from all closure requirements.

V. ADMINISTRATTVE REQUIREMENTS

V.A. Permit Modification

V.A.1. Modifications to this Permit may be made upon application by the Permittee or by the Director as outlined in R315-3II-2 of the Utah Administrative Code. The Permittee shall be given written notice of any permit modification initiated by the Director.

V.B. Permit Transfer

V.8.1. This Permit may be transferred to a new permittee or new permittees by complying with the permit transfer provisions specified in R315-310-l I of the Utah Administrative Code.

V.C. Expansion

V.C.l. This Permit is for an incinerator with a throughput of 49.3 tons per day (for all incinerators). Any modification of throughput of more than 5OVo above the original permitted throughput will require a new permit and the approvals required in Utah Code Ann. 19-6-108(1).

V.D. Expiration

Page 14 of 15 V.D.1. If the Permittee desires to continue operation after the expiration date of this Permit, the Permittee shall submit an application for permit renewal at least 180 days prior to the expiration date, as shown on the signatuqe (cover) page of this Permit in accordance with R3 15-3 I 1- I (a)(a) of the Utah Administrative Code. If the Permittee timely submits a permit renewal application and the permit renewal is not complete by the expiration date, this Permit shall continue in force until renewal is completed or denied.

V.E. Status Notification

V.E.l. Eighteen months from the date of this Permit, the Permittee shall notify the Director in writing of the status of the construction of this facility unless construction is complete and operation has commenced. If construction has not begun within 18 months the Permittee shall submit adequate justification to the Director as to the reasons that construction has not commenced. Y.E.2. The Permittee shall notify the Director in writing when the Legislature and the Govemor have approved the Permit as provided in Utah Code Ann. $19-6- 108(3)(c). The Permittee shall not commence construction of the facility until the Permittee gives this notice to the Director and the Director acknowledges to the Permittee, in writing, that the Director has received this notice.

Page 15 of 15

ATTACHMENT 1

ACCEPTABLE WASTES

I. WASTE MANAGEMENT PROCEDURES

1.0 DESCRIPTION OF WASTE

A. Acceptable Wastes

The medical waste processed at the facility is solid waste generated in healthcare or healthcare-related facilities, animal care, and research, pharmaceutical manufacturing and distribution facilities. The facility also processes special waste streams approved by the Division of Waste Management and Radiation Control.

Typical wastes include paper, plastic, cloth, diagnostic cultures, human and animal tissues generated by hospitals, nursing homes, clinics, and other medical, dental and veterinary facilities; and expired and unused pharmaceuticals.

Regulated medical waste is generally defined as any waste that can cause an infectious disease or that reasonably can be suspected of harboring human pathogenic organisms. It is also known as red bag waste, infectious waste, potentially infectious waste, biomedical waste, and biohazardous waste. Regulated medical waste includes single-use disposable items such as needles, syringes, gloves, and laboratory, surgical, emergency room and other supplies, which have been in contact with blood, blood products, bodily fluids, cultures or stocks of infectious agents.

The following wastes are acceptable at the Stericycle facility:

Wastes, including regulated medical wastes that are generated in the diagnosis, treatment, or immunization of humans or animals or related research, in the production/testing of biological materials (vaccines), and in the preparation and administration of chemotherapy waste, including waste defined by federal, state and local laws as medical, biohazardous, biomedical, infectious, and other wastes identified below:

1 Biohazardous waste including pathological waste:

2 Laboratory waste including:

 Cultures – medical/pathological  Cultures/stocks of infectious agents – research and industrial  Vaccines and related waste generated in the production thereof

Page 1

 Microbiologic specimens and related waste

3 Surgical specimens/tissues, contaminated animal parts, tissues, carcasses or body fluids

4 Fluid blood/blood products, containers/equipment and exudates, secretions, body fluids including, but not limited to, isolation waste

5 Sharps waste including, but not limited to:

 Needles, syringes, blades, needles with attached tubing, disposable surgical instruments

 Medical/laboratory glassware including slides, pipettes, blood tubes, blood vials, contaminated broken glass

6 Other medical waste as required by the infection control staff, physician, veterinarian or local health officer to be isolated and handled as regulated medical waste.

7 Trace-contaminated chemotherapy (antineoplastic/cytotoxic drugs) waste:

 Gowns, gloves, masks, barriers, IV tubing, empty bags/bottles, needles and syringes, empty drug vials, spill kits, and other items generated in the preparation and administration of antineoplastic drugs

8 Other Wastes:

 Expired and unused pharmaceuticals

 Confidential records / proprietary packaging and products

 Contraband (e.g. police evidence)

 Agriculture (APHIS) Waste, including Regulated Garbage from domestic and international sources

 Outdated, off-specification or unused consumer commodities

 Recalled or outdated disposable medical equipment or supplies

9 Sharps and I.V. tubing and bags/bottles which are being discarded and are considered incidental to preparation and administration of the drugs.

Page 2 10 Intravenous tubing, bags, bottles, vials and syringes used in chemotherapy preparation and administration that contain only residual amounts of antineoplastic drugs.

11 “Municipal solid waste” as defined by UAC R315-302-2 (46) contaminated with potentially infectious materials

12 Other non-hazardous waste as approved by the Division of Waste Management and Radiation Control.

13 Special wastes (as defined by UAC R315-302-2 include):

 Furniture contaminated with potentially infectious materials  Infectious waste  Dead animals

B. Estimated Annual Quantities:

The maximum incineration capacity of the facility is 4,110 pounds per hour averaged. This estimated quantity accounts for up to two incinerators. The estimated annual maximum quantity of waste incinerated at the facility is approximately 18,000 tons per year.

C. Areas Served by Facility:

This facility serves the greater Salt Lake City area as well as the entire state of Utah. As part of Stericycle’s business network, this facility also services various markets throughout North America. The primary market served is Stericycle’s Western Regional system, including but not limited to the Pacific Coast and Intermountain States.

D. Non-conforming Waste:

Non-conforming waste will not be accepted for treatment and includes:

1. Chemical materials which are regulated as hazardous waste under RCRA or UAC Subsection 19-6-102 (10) and Section R315-2-3;

2. Complete human remains (e.g., that include head and/or torso), cadavers, and fetal remains; (Stericycle will not accept recognizable fetal remains);;

3. Compressed gas cylinders and canisters (including aerosol cans);

4. Radioactive materials (as outlined in Section 3);

Page 3 5. Explosive materials;

6. Bulk cytotoxic materials;

7. Full or partially full I.V. bottles/bags and vials of chemotherapy agents that constitute a hazardous waste.

A copy of Stericycle’s Waste Acceptance Protocol is provided as an attachment to this application.

Any waste that is outside of the bounds of approved wastes must go through prior authorization by the State.

E. Waste Tracking:

Stericycle, Inc. currently employs a tracking system in which waste containers are labeled with the generators’ unique codes and tracked.

Containers of waste are labeled and entered into the waste tracking system. Containers are picked up from the customer and taken to Stericycle treatment and/or logistics centers where the waste is accordingly treated or forwarded for treatment. Waste that is disposed via incineration at Stericycle is received and entered into our tracking system as part of the incineration process, allowing tracking of waste from pickup at the generator to final treatment.

F. Waste Screening Procedures and Policies:

Waste acceptance, screening procedures and guidelines are outlined in Section III-Waste Acceptance Protocol.

2.0 WASTE HANDLING AND STORAGE

A. Container Management:

1. Waste Receiving/Storage:

Typically, drivers load waste designated for management at Stericycle that is packaged at customers’ facilities. Waste is transported to Stericycle’s facility. Collection and transport vehicles arriving at the facility are directed either to an unloading dock or to a holding area. When directed or scheduled, vehicles are moved from the holding area to the unloading docks.

Waste received will be disposed within 30 days from the day of pickup as listed on the shipping manifest.

Page 4

If infectious waste is to be stored longer than seven days prior to processing, it must be stored at or below 40 degrees F (5 C).

Waste received may be determined by Stericycle management to be consolidated and/or shipped to other facilities based on capacity, costs, customer needs, company policy, and/or waste properties.

2. Requirements to control pests and disease vectors are outlined in Section XII.

B. Container Management Practices:

1. Container Flow in Management Area:

Incoming waste containers are removed from vehicles onto the dock allowing adequate aisle space for workers to move about the receiving area and to allow for periodic cleaning.

Containers of waste for processing or transfer may be staged on the south dock, in the building, or on the truck. Containers may not be staged outside of these areas. Closed containers may be transferred from the processing area of the building for staging in the dry storage or other indoor areas of the building.

Waste received for treatment or transfer is weighed and screened for radiation, and the weight transfer and treatment is entered into the waste tracking system.

When non-conforming waste is encountered (e.g., waste labeled as hazardous waste, radioactive waste, compressed gas containers, containers of chemicals, or other non-conforming waste), the container of non-conforming waste is logged into the operating record as non-conforming waste and is taken to the non- conforming waste storage area where it awaits transport for further management elsewhere.

2. Container Handling:

Containers are loaded into the incinerator using loaders, forklifts, conveyors, and/or manually. Containers and/or lids may be washed out above the incinerator feed system, within a designated container wash area, or using a container wash system.

Page 5 An operator may mix the waste containers and materials fed into incinerator as needed to achieve BTU and/or operational parameters.

3. Decanting of Containers:

Containers and bags of waste may be decanted/consolidated into other containers (e.g., macro bins) for subsequent management either on site or at another facility following transport.

4. Reusable Containers

Rigid reusable containers are available to Stericycle customers as a means of reducing exposure to blood borne pathogens. Reusable containers reduce the risk from leaking, soiled and/or mis- packaged boxes. Reusable containers also reduce the risk of needle-stick and sharps-type injuries.

5. Disinfection of Reusable Containers

The reusable containers are disinfected after each use. Reusable containers are disinfected as outlined in 5.1, Section XII, Control of Disease Vectors.

6. Waste Containers

Various waste containers (of different kinds, sizes, and configurations) of reusable and diposable (incinerable) containers may be used at the facility that meet Federal DOT requirements under 49 CFR and which have been approved by Stericycle for use.

C. Removal of Liquids:

Liquids that are captured as part of the quenching and air quality control processes that are not placed into the quench tank will be placed into a holding tank. The contents of the holding tank are periodically pumped into a tanker truck to be hauled away off-site to an appropriate facility for water treatment and/or disposal. The on-site sanitary septic system is designed to accept wastewater from the employee bathroom/shower and office related facilities as well as wastewater from the tub wash process. The on-site sanitary septic system is under the jurisdiction of the Tooele County Health Department.

D. Waste Transportation:

Page 6 Vehicles used to transport regulated medical waste shall comply with USDOT and applicable local transportation requirements. For personnel training requirements, see Section V.

E. Alternative Waste Handling or Disposal

A second, step-hearth incinerator similar to the first incinerator is planned for this facility. Once a second incinerator is approved for use at the facility along with the first, the incinerators may be used concurrently or alternatively. Using two incinerators is expected to reduce facility down time compared to a facility with one incinerator.

When the facility is not able to incinerate waste, during periods of outage and as needed to maintain compliance with applicable storage requirements, arrangements will be made for handling and disposal at other Stericycle locations or industry partners that are approved for such management, including arrangements for transport and delivery of waste for treatment to those facilities.

F. Litter Control / Spill Cleanup Plan

This plan applies to litter and waste-related spills from operations of the incinerator facility. Waste Handling

Waste handling and related activities are completed within the enclosed incinerator facility building. Consequently, litter or spillage of liquids is typically contained to the covered concrete floor of the facility within the enclosed structure.

Pickup and Cleanup Activities

Floor conditions will be monitored for litter and liquid spillage. If noted in sufficient quantities, the affected areas will undergo litter pickup or other necessary actions to sufficiently clean and/or disinfect the area. These activities will be performed on an as-needed basis as determined and directed by the facility manager or designee(s).

If the litter or liquid spillage meets the definition of a release as outlined in Section IX, protocols outlined in Section IX shall be followed.

Page 7

ATTACHMENT 2

ASH ANALYSIS PLAN

• •• Stericycle • Protecting People. Reducing Risk. Stericycle, Inc. 90 Foxboro Drive North Salt Lake, UT 84054

With Assistance from:

Golder Associates Inc. 5B Oak Branch Drive Greensboro, NC 27407

January 2016 Ash Analysis Plan January 2016 Stericycle, Inc. j

Table of Contents

1.0 PURPOSE AND OVERVIEW 1 2.0 SAMPLE COLLECTION 2 3.0 ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES 3 4.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE AND QUALITY CONTROL PROGRAM 4 5.0 DATA EVALUATION AND WASTE MANAGEMENT 5 6.0 REPORTING 7 7.0 RECORDKEEPING 7 8.0 REFERENCES 7

Attachment 1 Stericycle Regulated Medical Waste Acceptance Policy Ash Analysis Plan January 2016 Stericycle, Inc. 1

1.0 PURPOSE AND OVERVIEW The purpose of this plan is to outline procedures and requirements, for the reestablishment of characterization of the bottom ash from Stericycle's Hospital Medical Infectious Waste Incinerator (HMIWI) located in North Salt Lake, Utah. This plan employs elements of the US EPA June 1995 Guidance for the Sampling and Analysis of Municipal Waste Combustion Ash for the Toxicity Characteristic, EPA530-R-95-036 (1995 EPA Guidance) and sampling protocols in Chapter 9 of Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste (SW-846). The state of Utah does not have specific regulations that apply to HMIWI, and consequently Stericycle draws on these Federal guidance documents, as well as its experience with medical waste incinerators located in multiple states that have more specific regulatory requirements, in creating this plan. This plan includes requirements for sampling, analysis, and related quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) for determining hazardous waste characteristics and also outlines waste management requirements.

Stericycle has been operating a HMIWI in North Salt Lake, UT since 1989 and has been generating bottom ash since that time. Stericycle's bottom ash is a solid waste that is generated from the incineration of regulated medical waste from healthcare or healthcare-related facilities, and research, pharmaceutical manufacturing and distribution facilities. Based upon the experience at this and other Stericycle facilities, the bottom-ash waste stream is well understood and fairly homogeneous, as compared to that for municipal solid waste incinerators. Unlike municipal solid waste incinerators that could potentially accept exempt household hazardous waste, Stericycle has a Regulated Medical Waste Acceptance Policy1 that is built into its contracts with its clients. Additionally, Stericycle provides regular training and informational material to generators to ensure proper policy adherence. The incineration process for medical wastes and the ash produced has not significantly changed since the initial operations in 1989. Additionally, many of the hazardous materials used in healthcare have been eliminated over time, such as cadmium-based bags and mercury containing instruments. Bottom ash management and testing has followed the permit conditions as they have been stated over time and since the last permit was issued in 2006.

An overview of the sampling scheme and sampling frequency in this plan is as follows:

• Samples will be collected as random composite samples of bottom ash from various positions and depths in a bottom-ash bin and analyzed for Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) metals. The procedure for random sample collection is provided in Section 2.

See attached Stericycle Regulated Medical Waste Acceptance Policy. Ash Analysis Plan January 2016 Stericycle, Inc. 2

• Four (4) initial2 composite samples will be collected and analyzed from one bottom-ash bin during each of four (4) calendar quarters for the first year of sampling. The first sampling quarter will begin on the calendar month following the date on which Stericycle's revised solid waste permit is issued, as approved with changes related to bottom-ash sampling and this plan. Each subsequent quarter will cover a three (3) month interval with no gaps between months. During each quarterly sampling event, samples will be collected and a determination made regarding hazardous/non-hazardous waste characterization based on the analytical results of the composite samples collected within a calendar quarter in accordance with this plan. The first sampling quarter begins on the first day of the calendar month following the month wherein occurs the approval described in this section of this plan.

• Following the completion of four (4) consecutive quarters showing the waste is non- hazardous, sampling will continue on a semi-annual basis as outlined in this plan. If any semi-annual test indicates that a upper confidence interval exceeds the regulatory threshold, then Stericycle will revert back to quarterly testing until four consecutive quarters successfully indicate the ash is "non-hazardous".

• Hazardous/non-hazardous waste determinations will be made using SW-846 Chapter 9 guidance, the 1995 EPA guidance, and applicable hazardous waste determination rules, as outlined in this plan. At least every five (5) years, starting during the first calendar quarter of sampling, a sample will be analyzed for the full TCLP constituents, including the organic constituents3.

2.0 SAMPLE COLLECTION The procedures for collecting bottom-ash samples are presented below.

Random sampling from a bin will be as follows: randomly generate a set of three numbers for each sample to be taken (1 through 4), to correspond with 64 (4 x 4 x 4) three-dimensional quadrants within the bottom ash in a bin. In the event that the same quadrant is identified more than once within the same bin by this randomly generated set of numbers, a separate sampling location within that identified quadrant should be selected for each sample taken, or another non-identical quadrant will be randomly generated for the location of that sample.

The initial quarterly bottom-ash samples will be collected as four (4) composite samples. Each composite sample will be created from four (4) randomly selected locations within a bottom ash bin using the random

Additional samples may be taken following initial or subsequent evaluation of calculated upper confidence intervals, as outlined later in this plan and in accordance with guidance for hazardous waste determinations outlined in SW-846. This full-list TCLP composite sample will be collected during one of the quarterly composite samples taken as part of a quarterly sampling event (but is only required to be collected once every five years). Ash Analysis Plan January 2016 Stericycle, Inc. 3.

sampling protocols described in the previous paragraph4. The four (4) initial samples each quarter will be analyzed for TCLP metals. During the first calendar quarter of sampling, and then once every five years, one of the four (4) initial samples will also be analyzed for the full TCLP constituents, including the organic constituents.

Clean, powder-free nitrile gloves will be worn by sampling personnel during sample collection. Each composite sample should be thoroughly mixed prior to sample material being placed into the final laboratory-supplied sample container(s). Larger pieces within the composite sample that have particle size5 significantly greater than 9.5 mm may be reduced in particle size prior to completing the thorough mixing, and/or discarded. Such materials may be reduced by crushing, cutting, breaking, or grinding6. Tools, including mechanical tools (e.g., a mechanical crusher), may be used for particle-size reduction of such sample material.

Following mixing procedures (outlined above), samples should be placed directly into the laboratory- provided sampling containers. For TCLP metals analysis, each composite sample should fill an 8-ounce (or larger) jar. When full TCLP analysis is to be conducted7, two (or more) 8-ounce (or larger) jars will be filled. Containers specified by the laboratory for organic analyses will be utilized in accordance with laboratory instruction.

Collected samples will be shipped to the laboratory for analysis. Paperwork associated with sampling (i.e., chain-of-custody, custody seals, sample identification label, and shipping form8) should be prepared and available (i.e., obtained from the analytical laboratory) prior to each event. The samples will be packaged9 for shipment, sealed with a custody seal, and either hand-delivered (local laboratory) or shipped overnight by a commercial carrier. The chain-of-custody record is required for tracing sample possession from time of collection to time of receipt at the laboratory. A chain-of-custody record will accompany each individual shipment of samples. A copy of the completed chain-of-custody form will be returned to Stericycle after the shipping container reaches its destination and/or will be provided to Stericycle with the data package.

3.0 ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES The laboratory should have both National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (NELAP) and Utah state certifications for all required analytes. Analyses will be performed in accordance with US EPA SW-846. The laboratory analytical documentation will, at a minimum, include the following information:

In other words, aliquots or sub-samples of bottom ash will be obtained from sixteen (16) randomly selected locations within the initial bin, and these 16 subsamples will be formed into four (4) composite samples. Based on visual inspection and sample-collector's estimation. 6 See 1995 EPA Guidance, page 6, item 7. Or to further ensure adequate sample material is provided or available for laboratory analysis A shipment form is used if the samples are to be sent to the laboratory via a third-party delivery service. g Preservatives for analysis of organics will be incorporated to samples as part of packaging as required by SW-846. Ash Analysis Plan January 2016 Stericycle, Inc. 4

• Cover letter/Sample Information: Will include a brief description of the sample group10 (number and type of samples, field and associated laboratory sample identification numbers, preparation and analytical methods used). The laboratory data reviewer should also include a statement about whether all holding times and Quality Control (QC) criteria were met, samples were received intact and properly preserved, with a brief discussion of any deviations potentially affecting data usability. This discussion includes, but is not limited to, test method deviation(s), holding time violations, out-of-control incidents occurring during the processing of QC or field samples and corrective actions taken, and repeated analyses and reasons for the re-analyses (including, for example, contamination, failing surrogate recoveries, matrix effects, or dilutions). Dilution factors, including the reasons for the dilution (if any) should be provided. The report cover letter will be signed by an authorized laboratory representative, signifying that all statements are true to the best of the reviewer's knowledge (except as noted). One letter is required for each sample group (or sub-group of samples, if the planned set of samples is not sent to the laboratory all at once).

• Original chain-of-custody form (or a faithful copy, electronic version, or facsimile of the original).

• Analytical results: Will be provided for all parameters for which the samples were requested to be analyzed.

• Blank Data: For the requested analyses, the laboratory will provide the results of any preparation or analytical blanks associated with the sample group.

• QC Summary: The laboratory will provide summary forms detailing laboratory QC sample results, which include individual recoveries and relative percent differences (if appropriate) for the following QA/QC criteria: surrogates, batch Matrix Spike (MS) analyses, batch Matrix Spike Duplicate (MSD) analyses, Laboratory Control Standard (LCS), and sample duplicate analyses. QC limits will also be reported; if any QC limits are exceeded, a flag or footnote will be placed to indicate the affected samples. A minimum Level 2 data package should be provided by the contract laboratory.

4.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE AND QUALITY CONTROL PROGRAM The assessment of blank analysis results will be in general accordance with US EPA guidance documents (US EPA 2014a and 2014b). No positive sample results will be relied upon unless the

The sample group may be a sub-group of the total set of samples to be collected. Ash Analysis Plan January 2016 Stericycle, Inc. 5

concentration of the parameter in the sample exceeds five times the amount detected in a blank. If necessary, re-analysis or re-sampling11 will be performed to confirm or refute suspect data.

Concentrations of any contaminants found in the blanks will be used to qualify the data following US EPA protocols. Any parameter detected in the sample, which was also detected above the reporting limit in any associated blank, will be qualified "B" when the sample concentration is less than five times the blank concentration. The "B" qualifier designates that the reported detection is considered to represent cross- contamination and that the reported constituent is not considered to be present in the sample at the reported concentration. If a result is "B" flagged and above the regulatory limit for any constituent as described below, re-sampling (of that composite sample) should occur.

Laboratory interference checks should be incorporated as part of the QA procedures. The QA procedures should include verification of the correct acidity for the leaching procedure to ensure representative analyses. The contract laboratory should ensure that the aliquot of leachate used for MS/MSD analysis is derived from the same leachate used for analysis of the primary sample. Laboratory control samples will be analyzed to verify that the analytical system meets method-specific criteria.

5.0 DATA EVALUATION AND WASTE MANAGEMENT Following laboratory analysis, the data package will be provided to an independent data validator for evaluation of the package for QA/QC compliance. Following Level 2 validation of the data submitted, the independent data validator will provide a written narrative summarizing the validity of the data to Stericycle.

Following receipt of validation from the independent data validator of all of the initial, quarterly, composite sample results (and of subsequent sample results if additional samples are taken), upper confidence interval calculations will be determined for each parameter using the equation12 in Chapter 9 of SW-846 (and in the 1995 EPA Guidance). These calculated upper confidence intervals will be compared to the regulatory thresholds for the associated TCLP parameter. The regulatory limits for the full TCLP list may be found at http://www.epa.aov/superfund/proqrams/clp/download/som/som22nfq.pdf.

If the upper limit of the confidence interval is less than the applicable regulatory threshold, the contaminant is not considered to be present in the waste at a hazardous concentration and the study is completed.

Re-sampling would be necessary when a result of a calculation of the upper confidence interval comes into question and the sample result is believed to be material or would make a difference in the associated waste-determination decision. 12

The equation for the upper confidence interval: Cl (upper) = X+(t20) ( s.x); where 120 is a t-value for a two-tailed confidence interval and a probability of 0.20; s.x is the standard error of sample, calculated as follows: s.„ = s/(Vn); where n = the number of samples, and s = the sample standard deviation Ash Analysis Plan January 2016 Stericycle, Inc. 6

If any of the calculated upper confidence interval values exceed the regulatory limits for any of the constituents (especially if the generator believes that the sample mean xis greater than u, the population mean), additional sample results from the initial bottom-ash bin may be included into the upper confidence interval calculation13. The number of additional samples estimated to complete a quarterly sampling event may be derived by utilization of Equation14 8 in SW-846 and determining how many additional samples15 to take. If it is determined that additional samples16 are to be taken, the number of samples to be taken for a subsequent addition to a quarterly sampling event may exceed the number determined by utilization of Equation 8.

Stericycle will not ship the bottom ash waste bin from which the initial samples were taken, and subsequent bins generated, until the analytical results are reviewed to determine the characterization of the material. If the upper confidence interval for the initial bottom-ash bin is below the regulatory threshold for all TCLP metals, the corresponding bin and subsequent bottom ash bins prior to the next quarterly (or semi-annual) sample may be transported to a non-hazardous waste landfill for disposal.

If the initial upper confidence interval exceeds (is greater than) the regulatory threshold for one or more of the TCLP metals, additional random composite samples17 from the corresponding bin may be analyzed and the hazardous/non-hazardous waste determination made using guidance from SW-846 Chapter 9 and the 1995 EPA Guidance. The results are pooled with the initial data set and the confidence limits are recalculated with the additional samples. Original data is not excluded from these calculations. After completion of all sampling and analysis of the initial bin in accordance with the applicable guidance, should the upper confidence interval for the quarterly sampling exceed the regulatory threshold for any of the TCLP constituents (metals), then all subsequent bins for the quarter (and any bins of waste prior to the next quarter's sampling) will be evaluated on a bin-by-bin basis. These subsequent bottom ash waste bins may be sampled on a bin-by-bin basis via a composite sample as outlined in this plan and if the result of any such sampled bin is less than the regulatory thresholds, then that specific bin of bottom ash waste may be sent for disposal as non-hazardous waste at a non-hazardous waste disposal facility. If any of the TCLP constituents analyzed from the composite sample exceed the regulatory threshold (RT) for any constituent, then the bin analyzed will be disposed of as a hazardous waste at a Subtitle C landfill.

It is recommended that the statistics also be run using analytical results for prior sampling events (but not using data prior to July 2015) to see if the upper confidence interval is less than the regulatory threshold. 2 2 2 The equation for the number of samples is n = (t2o) s / A , where t20 is a t-value for a two-tailed confidence interval and a probability of 0.20; s is the standard deviation of a sample; and, A is the difference between the regulatory threshold, RT, (e.g., 5.0 mg/L for TCLP lead) and the sample mean, often stated as X or "x bar") with A represented as the equation A = RT - X 15 The statistical mean for a specific analyte for the composite samples is calculated as follows: X = Ix / n, where: X ("x bar") is the sample mean for a specific analyte, Ix is the sum of all results for a specific analyte, and n is the total number of results for a specific sample event. See guidance in SW-846, Chapter 9 (page NINE-14, Item 9, as an example). 17 Based on Equation 8, Chapter 9, SW-846, the appropriate number of samples to collect (n) can be determined using the following 2 2 2 equation: n = (t.2o) s / A , where t20 is a t-value for a two-tailed confidence interval and a probability of 0.20; s is the standard deviation of a sample; and, A is the difference between the regulatory threshold, RT, (e.g., 5.0 mg/L for TCLP lead) and the sample mean, often stated as X or "x bar") with A represented as the equation A = RT - X. Ash Analysis Plan January 2016 Stericycle, Inc. 7

6.0 REPORTING The following will be submitted in a report to the Utah Division of Waste Management and Radiation Control (DWMRC) no later than forty five (45) days from the date of completion of collection of all of the samples from quarterly sampling and for all four (4) initial calendar quarters: the upper confidence interval calculated for each parameter, the underlying data points for each of the initial samples, and a copy of the written narrative from the independent data validator.

If additional samples are taken following the initial samples, a similar report will be submitted no later than forty five (45) days from the date of completion of each set of subsequent samples taken.

Stericycle will also notify the Utah Division of Waste Management and Radiation Control where there is a positive TCLP result (above the regulatory threshold) when bins are analyzed on a bin-by-bin basis. This notification to the Division will be made within seven (7) days of receiving a positive TCLP result from the laboratory.

7.0 RECORDKEEPING Records, including laboratory analytical data and other pertinent paperwork pertaining to each sampling event, should be maintained in the facility's files for a period of no less than 3 years. Hard copies of reports will be submitted to the Utah DWMRC following evaluation of data as described above.

8.0 REFERENCES US EPA. February 2007 (SW-846). SW-846 Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste. Physical/Chemical Methods, Final Update IVB. http://www.epa.gov/osw/hazard/testmethods/sw846/online/index.htm

US EPA. 2014a. National Functional Guidelines for Inorganic Superfund Data Review. OSWER 9355.0-131), EPA 540/R-013-001. August 2014. http://www.epa.gov/superfund/programs/clp/download/som/som22nfg.pdf

US EPA, 2014b. National Functional Guidelines for Superfund Organic Methods Data Review Multi- Media. Multi-Concentration (OSWER 9355.0-132), EPA 540/R-014-002. August 2014. http://www.epa.gov/superfund/programs/clp/download/ism/ism22nfg.pdf

US EPA 1994. Sample Eguipment Decontamination, SOP #2006, Rev. 0.0. August 1994.

US EPA 1995 (1995 EPA Guidance). Guidance for the Sampling and Analvsis of Municipal Waste Combustion Ash for the Toxicity Characteristic - 530-R-95-036 - 1995 • Stericycle® • Protecting People. Reducing Risk.

REGULATED MEDICAL WASTE ACCEPTANCE POLICY STERICYCLE REGULATED MEDICAL WASTE ACCEPTANCE POLICY CHECKLIST

Stericycle policy requires compliance with all applicable regulations regarding the ACCEPTED REGULATED MEDICAL WASTE collection, transportation and treatment of regulated medical waste. Federal Department of • Sharps - Means any object contaminated with a pathogen or that may become contaminated Transportation (DOT) Regulations require the generator of regulated medical waste to certify with a pathogen through handling or during transportation and also capable of cutting or that the packaging and documentation of transported regulated medical waste complies penetrating skin or a packaging material. Sharps includes needles, syringes, scalpels, broken with DOT regulations regarding waste classification, packaging, labeling and shipping doc glass, culture slides, culture dishes, broken capillary tubes, broken rigid plastic, and exposed umentation. To ensure that neither Stericycle nor the generator of regulated medical waste ends of dental wires. violates applicable regulations, it is imperative that all parties understand the rules regarding • Regulated Medical Waste or Clinical Waste or (Bio) Medical Waste - Means a waste or reusable proper identification, classification, segregation and packaging of regulated medical waste. material derived from the medical treatment of an animal or human, which includes diagnosis The purpose of this policy is to summarize the minimum requirements for preparing your and immunization, or from biomedical research, which includes the production and testing of medical waste for collection, transportation and treatment. Additional facility or state-specif biological products. ic waste acceptance policies may apply based on permit specifications. Please contact your ACCEPTED REGULATED MEDICAL WASTE WHICH MUST local representative for further information. You may also call (866) 783-7422. BE IDENTIFIED AND SEGREGATED FOR INCINERATION

REGULATED MEDICAL WASTE • Trace Chemotherapy Contaminated Waste - RCRA Empty drug vials, syringes and needles, spill kits, IV tubing and bags, contaminated gloves and gowns, and related materials as defined in Stericycle accepts medical waste generated in a broad range of medical, diagnostic, therapeutic applicable laws, rules, regulations or guidelines and research activities. The term "medical waste" includes biohazardous, biomedical, infectious • Pathological Waste - Human or animal body parts, organs, tissues and surgical specimen (decanted or regulated medical waste as defined under federal, state or local laws, rules, regulations and of formaldehyde, formalin or other preservatives as required per hazardous waste rules). guidelines. Except as defined by specific state regulations, this excludes RCRA hazardous waste pharmaceuticals, all DEA scheduled drugs including Controlled substances, bulk chemotherapy, • Non-RCRA Pharmaceuticals - Must be characterized and certified as non-RCRA hazardous waste containing mercury or other heavy metals, batteries of any type, cauterizers, non-infectious material by the generator. Excludes all DEA scheduled drugs, including controlled substances* dental waste, chemicals such as solvents, reagents, corrosives or ignitable materials classified as • California Only - Solidified Suction Canisters - Suction canisters that have been injected with hazardous waste under Federal and State EPA Regulations. In addition, Stericycle cannot accept solidifier materials to control liquids or suction canisters made of high heat resistant plastics bulk liquids, radioactive materials, or complete human remains (including heads, full torsos and such as polysulfone fetuses). Stericycle cannot accept these excluded materials packaged as regulated medical waste. REGULATED MEDICAL WASTE NOT ACCEPTED BY STERICYCLE All lab wastes or materials which contain or have the potential to contain infectious substances arising from those agents listed under 42 CFR 72.3 are strictly prohibited from medical waste by • Untreated Category A Infectious Substances federal law and must be pretreated prior to disposal. Separate protocol and packaging requirements • RCRA Hazardous Pharmaceutical Waste and all DEA controlled drugs, including apply for the disposal of non-hazardous pharmaceuticals. Hazardous waste transportation services controlled substances* may be offered in certain geographical locations, under separate contract. Please contact your local • Chemicals - Formaldehyde, formalin, acids, alcohol, waste oil, solvents, reagents, fixer developer representative for details and packaging specifications. • Hazardous Waste - Drums or other containers with a hazard warning symbol, batteries and *Un-dispensed from DEA Registrant other heavy metals WASTE SEGREGATION AND PACKAGING • Radioactive Waste - Any container with a radioactivity level that exceeds regulatory or permitted The generator is solely responsible for properly segregating, packaging and labeling of regulated limits; lead-containing materials medical waste. Proper segregation and packaging reduces the potential for accidental release of • Complete Human Remains (including heads, full torsos, and fetuses) the contents and exposure to employees and the general public. DOT regulations require (49 CFR • Bulk Chemotherapy Waste 173.197) that all packages of regulated medical waste be prepared for transport in containers meet • Compressed Gas Cylinders, Canisters, Inhalers and Aerosol Cans ing the following requirements: 1) rigid; 2) leak resistant; 3) impervious to moisture; 4) of sufficient strength to prevent tearing or bursting under normal conditions of use and handling; 5) sealed • Any Mercury Containing Material or Devices - Any mercury thermometers, to prevent leakage during transport; and 6) puncture resistant for sharps. All regulated medical Sphygmomanometers, lab or medical devices waste must be accompanied by a properly completed shipping document (See 49 CFR 172.202). • Mercury-Containing Dental Waste - Non-contact and contact amalgam and products, chairside traps, amalgam sludge or vacuum pump filters, extracted teeth with mercury fillings and empty MANAGEMENT OF NON-CONFORMING WASTE amalgam capsules As required by regulation and company policy, Stericycle employees may refuse containers that are 'Consult Stericycle Representative for specific requirements non-conforming because of their contents or are improperly packaged, leaking, damaged or likely to Additional waste acceptance policies may apply based on state or permit specific requirements. Hazardous waste create a risk of exposure to employees or the general public. Any non-conforming waste identified in transportation services may be offered in certain geographical locations, under separate contract. Please refer to route to or at a Stericycle location may be returned to the generator for proper packaging or disposal. your local Stericycle Representative for additional information and options for possible hazardous waste handling. For additional information on container and labeling requirements contact our Stericycle Customer Service Proper segregation and packaging is essential to ensure compliant and safe handling, collection, Department at (866) 783-7422. transportation and treatment of regulated medical waste. Copyright © 2010 Stericycle. Inc. All rights reserved. Rev (5/10)

ATTACHMENT 3

WASTE TRACKING

III. WASTE ACCEPTANCE PROTOCOL

Stericycle’s customer training on waste acceptance protocols includes person-to-person training, informational materials, and resources provided online (stericycle.com), which may include waste-acceptance information, a blog, and contact information for assistance to customers who have questions about waste acceptance and segregation.

1.0 WASTE ACCEPTED FOR TREATMENT Section I, Waste Management Procedures, lists wastes that are accepted for treatment.

2.0 NON‐CONFORMING WASTE NOT ACCEPTED Prohibited waste is listed in Section I, Waste Management Procedures. Prohibited waste screening requirements are outlined below:

2.1. Radioactive Waste:

2.1.1. Prior to treatment, all containers will be screened using a radiation monitor. Any container with a radiation reading above 30-36 μR/hr will be rejected from treatment.

2.1.2. If radiation is detected above 30-36 μR/hr, the Radiation Screening Protocol will be followed. (See attached Radiation Screening Protocol.)

2.2 Hazardous Waste:

2.2.1 Hazardous waste, as defined under Utah Administrative Code (UAC) R315-301-2 (30), and PCBs, as defined UAC R315-301-2 (53), will be rejected from treatment and arrangements will be made to return the waste to the generator or forward it to a proper treatment, storage, and/or disposal facility.

Training requirements are outlined in Section V, Personnel Training, and include training on Waste Acceptance Protocol which includes identification of non- conforming waste (waste in hazardous waste containers, waste with hazardous waste labels, compressed gas cylinders, waste in containers with radioactive waste labels, containers of chemicals, etc.)

3.0 PACKAGING OF WASTE Waste containers must meet DOT standards and have a sealed, gasketed lid, or other container-closure device. Regulated medical waste received for treatment will be packaged in either reusable plastic containers, in single-use containers that can be incinerated, or other approved containers.

Page 10 Sharps containers and Gaylord-style boxes may be received in groups (i.e., palletized). Containers are to meet DOT requirements and have a sealed, gasketed lid as required.

Containers that are leaking or damaged are rejected for further use, disinfected, and incinerated or may be shrink-wrapped and sent to an off-site facility for repair or processing. Spilled material will be appropriately cleaned as outlined in this plan.

4.0 REUSABLE WASTE CONTAINERS Infection control requirements for reusable containers are outlined in Section XIII.

5.0 WASTE TRACKING

5.1 System for Tracking Waste:

Waste shipments received at the facility via a medical waste transporter must be accompanied by a shipping/tracking document (electronic or paper).

An electronic tracking system is used to record tracking data. For a description of waste tracking, see 1.0.E, Waste Tracking, in Section I, Waste Management Procedures.

A tracking system administrator addresses discrepancies within the electronic tracking system.

6.0 MANAGEMENT OF NON‐CONFORMING WASTE AT THE FACILITY Wastes that are non-conforming are rejected from treatment.

Procedures for non-conforming waste that inadvertently and/or unexpectedly arrives at the facility:

 The non-conforming waste is rejected from treatment by setting it aside and not placing it on the feed conveyor or processing into subsequent management (i.e., autoclaving at an off-site facility).

 Generator information from the non-conforming waste’s container label is written into the log book as part of the operating record, along with the date, and the type of waste non-conformity.

Page 11  The facility manager (or designee) is informed about the non-conforming waste.

 The non-conforming waste is labeled in accordance with its non- conformity and the date.

 The non-conforming waste is taken to the non-conforming waste storage area.

 The generator or generator’s representative is informed about the non- conforming waste and told that they are to make arrangements for the waste to be returned to them or sent to an appropriate waste management facility. They also are told to take measures to prevent non-conforming waste from being sent.

 Stericycle works with the generator to make these arrangements and ensure that the non-conforming waste is properly dispositioned.

 The disposition of the non-conforming waste is recorded in the operating record.

Page 12

ATTACHMENT 4

INSPECTIONS

IV. INSPECTION PROCEDURES

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Records of inspections shall be maintained in the site operating record as required. Inspection items may be performed and records kept as part of the plant maintenance, transportation, and/or safety programs.

Inspection forms when required will note the inspection date and the inspector’s name or initials.

Deficiencies found that require corrective action will be noted. An inspection may also note other observations and/or recommendations for corrective action. If a repair is immediately correctable (such as by replacing a sign, or getting another fire extinguisher) the corrective action may be noted on the form. Corrections made prior to completing the inspection need not be noted as a deficiency. If an item is not applicable, it will be noted on the form along with the reason, if required.

As site conditions change, inspection procedures and items will change.

2.0 FREQUENCY OF INSPECTIONS

The following specifies the minimum frequency of inspection for each required item.

2.1 Daily: Daily inspections are not required to be recorded and may be performed by multiple personnel.

 Inspect loading and unloading areas  Inspect liquid-waste tank system for leaks  Inspect above ground-piping for leaks  Inspect sumps and/or secondary containment  Visually inspect incinerator temperature-monitoring instrumentation  Inspect temperature settings of refrigerated trailers when in use

2.2 Weekly

 Perform a facility walk through of areas around the incinerator, container storage, and air-pollution control system.  Inspect emergency eyewash and showers  Inspect containers and related containment systems

Page 10 2.3 Monthly

 Check radiation screening system for proper operation  Inspect fire extinguishers

2.4 Quarterly

 Inspect perimeter lights, notice signs, and security fence  Inspect spill kits  Check operation of the HMIWI chart recorder  Check calibration and operation of the weight scale system

2.5 Annual

 Check calibration and operation of the radiation-monitoring system  Check facility emergency signals and conduct an evacuation drill

3.0 AREAS OF INSPECTION

Inspection criteria are noted in the table, below. The following outlines some of the items that will be checked during the inspections.

3.1 Containers

Fly ash bags and waste containers are inspected for proper labeling and closure, cracks, tears, leaks, spills, and stacking stability.

3.2 Wastewater Storage Tank

The wastewater tank receives wastewater from the facility processes.

3.3 Incinerator

The inspection schedules for the incinerator are included in this section. See tables, below.

3.4 Sumps and Secondary Containment Areas

The sumps are located under the incinerator, ash quench tank and in the storage area.

If a sump contains any material that would compromise its function, it will be cleared as needed to prevent overflow.

Page 11 3.5 Other Areas

Safety and security inspections are made of the fence, locks, fire extinguishers, alarms, emergency eyewashes and showers.

4.0 CORRECTIVE ACTION

The status of items being inspected will be noted on the inspection logs. A blank will not be used to indicate an acceptable status. A work order number may be referenced as necessary if additional corrective-action work needs to be done. Corrective actions will be completed in a timely manner.

5.0 EXAMPLE INSPECTION MATRIX

The matrix contained in this section is only an example. The forms may be changed as site conditions change. Additionally, they may be electronic or exist in some other format.

Example Daily Inspection General Suggested Inspection Loaded refrigerated trailers Operable, correct temperature North loading/unloading area Leaks, spills South loading/unloading area Leaks, spills Sump under incinerator Operational, free of obstructive material Sump under bottom ash (quench tank) Operational, free of obstructive material Incinerator Monitoring Instrumentation

Secondary Combustion Chamber Temperature Good working order, recording properly Primary Combustion Chamber Temperature Good working order, out of tolerance, recording properly Bag house Good working order Incinerator Temperature Chart Recorder Good working order, out of tolerance, recording properly

Example Weekly Inspection Inspection Item Suggested Inspection System Walk Through Containers (reusable) in Process Area Operational, good working order, proper labels, as applicable Storage Area – Containers (fly ash) Closed, bulging, leaking, proper placement, labels Eyewashes Operable Showers Operable

Page 12 Example Monthly Inspection Inspection Item Suggested Inspection Outcomes to be Indicated Radiation Monitoring System Operable Fire Extinguishers Tagged, charged, in-place, damage

Example Quarterly Inspection Inspection Item Suggested Inspection Outcomes to be Indicated Safety and Security

Gate closed, no breach in exterior wall that would allow Exterior Wall unauthorized entry

Warning Signs Legible, visible and secured Perimeter Lighting All lights working Spill Kits Inspect and restore if necessary Instrumentation

HMIWI Chart Recorder Operable Weight Scale System Calibrated and check Data Acquisition System (DAS) Signal

Example Annual Inspection Inspection Item Suggested Inspection Outcomes to be Indicated Radiation Monitoring System Operable, calibrated Evacuation Drill Check alarms and for proper response

Page 13

Daily Inspection Log / Summary Tooele County Incinerator Plant

The purpose of this Daily Inspection Log / Summary is to provide a daily record (log or summary) of observations of the facility related to malfunctions and deterioration, operator errors, and discharges which may cause or lead to the release of wastes to the environment or to a threat to human health.

The following areas are to be observed as part of this inspection: ●Loading ●Unloading ●Material Storage ●Waste Storage ●Waste Liquid Storage ●Sumps ●Material Feed Systems ●DAS & Instrumentation ●Containers ●Above-Ground Piping ●Fly Ash Collection & Storage Areas ● Bottom Ash Collection & Storage Areas ●Secondary Containment ●Continuous Emissions Monitoring System ●Process and Residue Handling Systems ●APC System

OK Fix Check/look for leaks, spills, cracks, tears, gaps, damage, proper operation and/or function, corrosion, erosion, integrity, proper labeling/closures, cleanliness, and stability

______/_____ Inspector Name (print) Inspector Name (sign) Date of Inspection / Time

Applicable additional notation for items marked “Fix” above. ______

______

______(Note if additional work needs to be done. Use additional pages, if necessary.)

Monthly / Quarterly Inspection Tooele County Incinerator Plant

The following areas are to be observed as part of this inspection: ●Exits ●Fire Extinguishers ●Eye Wash Stations ●Emergency Showers ●First Aid Cabinets ●Alarms ●Spill Kits

Note: If problems are found, the equipment is tagged out of service and a requisition is placed with maintenance for immediate repair. All equipment will be maintained as necessary to assure its proper operation in time of emergency.

OK Fix Check/look for ______clear/unobstructed exits, ______properly marked exits and lighting, ______area around first aid stations and fire extinguishers clear and accessible, ______extinguishers properly marked / charged / inspected, ______first aid cabinet properly stocked , ______spill kits present and properly stocked

______/_____ Inspector Name (print) Inspector Name (sign) Date of Inspection / Time

OK Fix Inspection Instructions (what to inspect & acceptable criteria)

______Perimeter lights, notice signs, and security fence: Visually inspect for presence, integrity

______Absorber liquor circulation feed and DAS: Check for current calibration and verify operation

______Emergency by pass stack cap DAS signal: Check for operation during emergency conditions during quarter

______Scale system: Check for current calibration and verify operation

______Secondary chamber temperature controller and DAS: Check for current calibration and operation

______Ensure that inspections associated with state and local air pollution laws are being completed (i.e., emergency generator log, carbon bed log)

Applicable additional notation for items marked “Fix” above. ______

______

______(Note if additional work needs to be done. Use additional pages, if necessary.)

______/______Inspector Name (print) Inspector Name (sign) Date of Inspection / Time Transportation Inspection Facility: Tooele County

For Month Of: ______.

TEMPERATURES LEAKS OR PROBLEMS TIME OF AND SETTINGS WITH RUN‐OFF/ DATE INSPECTION AS REQUIRED? RUN‐ON CONTROLS? COMMENTS INITIALS 1 YES / NO YES / NO 2 YES / NO YES / NO 3 YES / NO YES / NO 4 YES / NO YES / NO 5 YES / NO YES / NO 6 YES / NO YES / NO 7 YES / NO YES / NO 8 YES / NO YES / NO 9 YES / NO YES / NO 10 YES / NO YES / NO 11 YES / NO YES / NO 12 YES / NO YES / NO 13 YES / NO YES / NO 14 YES / NO YES / NO 15 YES / NO YES / NO 16 YES / NO YES / NO 17 YES / NO YES / NO 18 YES / NO YES / NO 19 YES / NO YES / NO 20 YES / NO YES / NO 21 YES / NO YES / NO 22 YES / NO YES / NO 23 YES / NO YES / NO 24 YES / NO YES / NO 25 YES / NO YES / NO 26 YES / NO YES / NO 27 YES / NO YES / NO 28 YES / NO YES / NO 29 YES / NO YES / NO 30 YES / NO YES / NO 31 YES / NO YES / NO

Print Name ______Initials ______Signature ______

Radiation Screening Unit Check

Facility: ______TOOELE COUNTY ______.

For Month Of: ______. TIME UNIT CHECK SOURCE ALARM / LIGHT DATE WAS CHECKED USED TO TEST UNIT FUNCTIONING? COMMENTS INITIALS 1 YES / NO 2 YES / NO 3 YES / NO 4 YES / NO 5 YES / NO 6 YES / NO 7 YES / NO 8 YES / NO 9 YES / NO 10 YES / NO 11 YES / NO 12 YES / NO 13 YES / NO 14 YES / NO 15 YES / NO 16 YES / NO 17 YES / NO 18 YES / NO 19 YES / NO 20 YES / NO 21 YES / NO 22 YES / NO 23 YES / NO 24 YES / NO 25 YES / NO 26 YES / NO 27 YES / NO 28 YES / NO 29 YES / NO 30 YES / NO 31 YES / NO

Print Name ______Initials ______Signature ______

ATTACHMENT 5

TRAINING

V. PERSONNEL TRAINING

1.0 INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW

This section addresses training requirements for waste management activities at the facility. Training is provided via introductory training programs for new hires and continuing training programs for facility personnel.

Both introductory and continuing training may be provided via online platforms or in classroom settings. Online training sessions are followed by quizzes which require 100% competency to complete.

During the first 180 days of employment, new hires may work under supervision of a trained employee until classroom or online training is completed, unless otherwise noted in Table 1.

Annually, a contingency exercise or drill will be conducted that includes implementation of the Contingency Plan, a written evaluation of employees’ response to the drill, and a headcount of employees that participated in the drill.

2.0 SCOPE OF TRAINING PROGRAM

2.1 Stericycle Employees

Stericycle employees are categorized as: Plant Workers, Maintenance Technicians, Drivers, Supervisors and Managers.

2.2 Non Stericycle Employees – Temporary Employment Agency

Temporary employees are utilized on an as-needed basis. Temporary employees are typically hired for shorter periods of time (e.g., less than 6 days or less than 3 months).

2.3 Contractors (3rd Party)

Contract workers receive training prior to beginning unsupervised on-site work involving waste. A contractor representative may sign an acknowledgment for required Stericycle training prior to beginning on-site work involving waste.

2.4 Non-Waste Workers, Visitors, Inspectors, etc

Visitors, inspectors, and non-waste workers are escorted as necessary during the course of their site visit.

Page 15 Visitors, inspectors, and non-waste workers shall not be directly involved in waste handling or waste management activities.

3.0 PERSONNEL TRAINING RECORDS

Training required by this plan is documented either electronically (in the True North, or equivalent, database) or in manual training record files.

Training records of current personnel must be kept until closure of the facility. Training records on former employees must be kept for at least three years from the date the employee last worked at the facility.

Page 16 TABLE 1 – LIST OF TRAINING TOPICS

(Unless noted, all topics are completed prior to an employee beginning unsupervised, waste-related work and annually thereafter.)

TRAINING TOPIC Driver Driver Plant Plant Maintenance Supervisor/ Worker Supervisor/ Technician Manager Manager Access to Exposure and Medical Records X X X X X

Bloodborne Pathogens X X X X X

DOT Hazardous Materials* X X X X X

Emergency Action Plan X X X X X

Eye Wash and Emergency Shower X X X

Fire Extinguishers X X X X X

Hazard Communication X X X X X

Hazardous Waste Management** X X X

Incinerator Operator*** X X X

Personal Protective Equipment – PPE X X X X X

Radiation Training X X X X X

Respiratory Protection*** X X X X X

Spill Response X X X X X

Tub Wash Water Training X X X

Waste Acceptance Protocol X X X X

* Complete Training within 90 Days of Date of Hire ** Where applicable. Training also includes proper handling and emergency procedures appropriate to the type, or types of universal waste handled at the facility *** Where applicable 1

Page 17

ATTACHMENT 6

CONSTRUCTION – FENCING &

ACCESS CONTROLS

VI. FACILITY SECURITY

1.0 24‐HOUR SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM

The facility is occupied 24 hours per day during normal operations. The facility is monitored by employees or by using security cameras.

2.0 BARRIER

The internal areas of the facility are to be surrounded by gates and a six-foot, chain-link fence. The main gate is to be electrically controlled and can be opened or closed from the front office or by code. Visitors and trucks are logged by name, and date of entrance.

During non-business hours, the main gate and front door will be locked. Visitors arriving during non-business hours will be able to communicate with the facility (e.g., a plant supervisor) by telephone or radio.

3.0 MEANS TO CONTROL ENTRY

Non-Stericycle vehicles must stop at the gate to sign in and obtain docking or contact information. Trucks will be checked to ensure they are scheduled and then routed to the appropriate area.

Local law enforcement will be called in the event of offensive trespassing.

4.0 WARNING SIGNS

At entry points to the facility, notifications will be posted. Example: UNAUTHORIZED PERSONNEL KEEP OUT. VISITORS MUST SIGN IN AT THE FRONT OFFICE (or FRONT DESK).

Page 18

ATTACHMENT 7

CONTINGENCY PLAN

VII. PREPAREDNESS AND PREVENTION PLAN

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This Preparedness and Prevention Plan outlines the equipment and procedures in place at the Stericycle, Inc. facility to prevent and respond to emergencies at the facility. These emergencies include fires, explosions, or any unplanned sudden or non-sudden release of hazardous waste or hazardous waste constituents.

2.0 EQUIPMENT

2.1 Internal Communications

The communications system at the plant includes telephone and audible alarms. Telephones will be available at the front desk and in the employee area (e.g., break room). Personnel will have access to a phone or the internal alarm system during operations.

2.2 External Communications

The plant is equipped with a standard telecommunications system that is connected to the public phone system by standard lines. Outside emergency calls can be made by dialing the emergency number 911 using any phone.

2.3 Emergency Equipment

Facility communications or alarm systems, fire protection equipment, spill control equipment, and decontamination equipment, where required, will be tested and maintained as necessary to assure its proper operation in time of emergency.

2.4 Spill Control Equipment

Spill kits are located in the dry storage area, incinerator area, and in the Air Pollution Control area. Spill kits vary in content based on storage location.

2.5 Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)

Required PPE is made available to employees.

2.6 Water for Fire Control

A water system is available for fire control within the facility. The fire water pump system is in full compliance with the requirements of NFPA 20.

Page 19 3.0 TESTING AND MAINTENANCE OF EQUIPMENT Emergency eyewashes, showers, fire extinguishers, sumps, spill kits, alarms, and other emergency equipment are inspected regularly. If problems are found, the equipment is tagged out of service and a requisition is placed with maintenance for immediate repair. All equipment will be maintained as necessary to assure its proper operation in time of emergency.

4.0 AISLE SPACE REQUIREMENTS All areas of the plant are accessible by fire protection equipment around the perimeter plant area. Container placement and aisle space in the waste management area (dry storage area) will be maintained at two feet between the stored containers and any stationary items in the adjacent driveway area in the building.

5.0 PREVENTIVE PROCEDURES, STRUCTURES, AND EQUIPMENT

5.1 Unloading Operations

The unloading areas for trailers of containers are provided with dock levelers to minimize the potential for mishandling containers due to uneven surfaces or trailer movement. Lighting devices are provided to illuminate the transport vehicle cargo areas during unloading and loading. Containers are off-loaded by handcarts, forklifts, conveyors or by other material handling equipment or means.

5.2 Runoff

The process operations are contained within facility structure with appropriately designed containment. No waste or process water is expected to migrate beyond these areas. Waste containers are stored in the building or on trailers. No runoff from the waste processing or storage areas is expected. The site drainage is to the southwest.

5.3 Equipment and Power Failure

Equipment failure is monitored by instrumentation. Detection of an abnormal operating condition or process parameter initiates a waste feed lockout or controlled shutdown of the equipment. In the event of a loss of external power, the facility generator will be started to provide power to critical process equipment.

Page 20 6.0 PREVENTION OF REACTION OF IGNITABLE, REACTIVE AND INCOMPATIBLE WASTES

Stericycle utilizes a strict waste acceptance policy. See Section I, Waste Management Procedures, and Section III, Waste Acceptance Protocol. Ignitable, reactive or incompatible wastes are not received for treatment. If an ignitable, reactive, or incompatible waste is generated incidental to operations, it will be stored and labeled as required by 40 CFR 262.34(a)(3) until transported to a permitted treatment, storage, and disposal facility. Precautions for segregating incompatible or reactive materials (e.g., strong acids and bases) will be employed, and materials will be safeguarded from flame, spark, or other ignition sources when ignitable.

Page 21 VIII. SPILL PREVENTION CONTROL AND COUNTERMEASURE PLAN

The Stericycle Tooele County facility is not required to have a Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasures Plan. The plant has an aggregate above-ground storage capacity less than 1,320 gallons.

For requirements, policies and practices applicable to the Stericycle Tooele County facility related to spill prevention, inspection, and spill response, refer to Sections I, IV, V, VII, and IX of this Plan of Operations.

Page 22 IX. CONTINGENCY PLAN

1.0 EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN (ERP)

Contact Information

One or more of the following key management members may be contacted in the event of an emergency:

Brian Kirkwood Phone # 801-349- Facility Manager 9111 Matt Thompson Phone # 801-885- Transportation Manager 7992 Dale Rich Phone # 704-787- Region Operations Director 3134 Alan Inkley Phone # 801-503- Area Safety Manager 5985 Jay Vance Phone # 801-971- Environmental Quality Manager 2042

Emergency Telephone Numbers

In case of fire, explosion, personal injury, law enforcement, or any other emergency: Call 911

To outsource clean up and spill reporting to government entities call (or similar contractors):

Chemtrec for Spills Hotline: 800-424-9300 ERTS for Spills (per SH-P 002) Hotline: 800-210-6804

For Major Medical Waste Spills (not including in-facility spills), deemed unmanageable, should be reported to the Utah Department of Environmental Quality.

Utah Department of Hotline (during business hours) 801-536-0200 Environmental Quality Hotline (after hours for timely response) 801-536-4123

Medical responses are initiated by the Emergency Coordinator via the following facilities:

Serious Mountain West Medical Center 911 Emergency Care 2055 North Main Street 435-843-3600 Tooele County, UT 84074 Airmed (Thru Dispatch) 911

Page 23 Mountain West Ambulance Transport, 911 Tooele County, UT (435) 882-1900 Urgent Urgent Care of Tooele Valley (435) 882-3968 Night/Weekend 1244 N. Main, Suite 201 Mon-Sun 9AM -10PM Care Tooele UT 84074 Non urgent Intermountain InstaCare (435) 228-1200 weekday care 777 N Main St., Tooele, Utah 84074 9 AM – 9 PM Mountain West Family Practice (435) 882-2350 2356 North 400 East, Suite 201, M-F 8 AM – 9 PM Tooele, Utah

2.0 EVACUATION PLAN AND INFORMATION

A. Evacuation Instructions

1. The facility shall be evacuated according to the following steps: a. Announcement of evacuation both by alarm and oral instructions b. Facility personnel will evacuate via the routes and exits per the evacuation plan. (Note: Personnel exiting through the yard gate will use the manual open switch in the event of a loss of power during an evacuation.) c. Personnel will move to the rally point located in the southwest corner of the property

2. The Emergency Coordinator Responsibilities: a. The Emergency Coordinator will conduct a roll call. All employees shall be accounted for by each supervisor. b. Emergency Coordinator will use this information to determine missing persons c. Emergency Coordinator will direct effort to account for any missing personnel. d. Emergency Coordinator will share headcount information with emergency responders e. Following an evacuation, personnel will not return to work until the “all clear” is given by the Emergency Coordinator.

3. Evacuation Plans/Maps a. Posted in the facility b. Exits and routes are indicated c. Rally point is indicated. d. Other emergency equipment is indicated on the posted maps, e.g. fire extinguishers, eye wash, spill kits, first aid kits, shelters, hydrants, gas and utility shut off

Page 24

Page 25 3.0 CONTINGENCY PLAN

A. Implementing this Contingency Plan

1. This plan shall be implemented immediately in the event of the following contingencies: a. Fires b. Explosions c. Releases

For purposes of this plan, a release is defined as discharge of materials that have the potential to become a threat to human health or the environment (i.e., hazardous waste or material which, when spilled, becomes hazardous waste) to non-contained, unpaved, or unlined areas outside of the incinerator facility.

2. Contingency Plan Procedure a. Any employee, contractor, or other worker upon discovery of a fire, explosion, or release at the facility shall implement this Contingency Plan b. Following discovery of a fire, explosion or release, the discoverer shall notify an individual on the list of Emergency Coordinators. (See page 21.)

3. Access to Corporate Resources a. All employees shall have access to Stericycle resources for emergency response

4. Arrangements with local response organizations. The following agencies have been contacted: a. North Tooele County Fire District (key entry and/or gate entry access will be arranged, as necessary). b. Tooele County Health Department (annual inspections and permitting)

5. Records of implementation of this Contingency Plan will be kept in the operating record.

B. Copies of Contingency Plan

1. The Permittee shall keep a copy of this Contingency Plan in the facility office.

C. Amendment of this Contingency Plan

1. The plan shall be reviewed and amended, as necessary, under any of the following circumstances: a. The permit or facility is modified affecting this Contingency Plan. b. The emergency names (emergency coordinators) or their telephone numbers change. D. Emergency Equipment

Page 26

1. Below lists the facility emergency equipment and provides a brief outline of their capabilities, location in the facility, or use:

Emergency Equipment Capabilities, Location, or Use

Eye Wash Shower Stations Shower and eye wash One Each in each bay First Aid Kits Portable 1-Office area 2-Breakroom Fire Suppression Wet system – heat activated Fire Extinguishers “ABC” & 1 “C” -Electrical Indicated on Evacuation Chart Evacuation Alarm Audible Plant Spill Kits For spills of RMW, aqua Kits with absorbent, ammonia, and caustic soda containment PPE (Respiratory) Full Face and Universal Accessible for plant employees Cartridges (includes Ammonia) PPE (Hands) Gloves Latex for RMW; nitrile for chemicals PPE (Body) 1. Tyvek with hood, boots, For use during shutdown tape maintenance 2. Heat Suits: with hood PPE (Head) Helmets (hard hats) In pollution control area

PPE is available in the safety equipment dispensary.

E. Emergency Coordinator Duties

1. For imminent or actual emergencies: Activate internal facility alarm or communication systems, notify and evacuate facility personnel. Notify appropriate response agencies if their help is needed.

2. For a release, fire, or explosion: As reasonably possible, identify the character, exact source, amount, and areal extent of any released materials.

a. For threats to human health and/or environment within and/or outside of the facility: Emergency Coordinator shall respond and report as outlined in this plan.

b. For threats to the larger local area: If the Emergency Coordinator’s assessment indicates that evacuation of nearby areas may be advisable, the Emergency Coordinator shall immediately notify appropriate authorities. The Emergency Coordinator shall be available to help appropriate officials decide whether local areas should be evacuated.

Page 27

4.0 COORDINATION AGREEMENTS

Arrangements with Emergency Response Contractors:

The facility has agreements with, the following Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facility:

Clean Harbors Environmental Services, Inc. Grassy Mountain 3 Miles East 7 Miles North of Knolls Clive, UT 84029 (801) 323-8900

5.0 REQUIRED REPORTS

As required in the event of an applicable contingency, the facility shall immediately notify the Utah Department of Environmental Quality (Division of Waste Management and Radiation Control).

The report will include: - Name and telephone number of reporter; - Name and address of facility; - Time and type of incident, e.g., discharge, fire; - Name and quantity of material(s) involved, to the extent available; - The extent of injuries, if any; and - The possible hazards to human health or the environment, outside the facility.

The facility will record Contingency Plan incidents in the operating record, as required.

Where required, the facility will submit a written report to the Executive Secretary within 15 days after an incident that required implementation of the Contingency Plan. The report will include:

- Name, address, and telephone number of the owner or operator; - Name, address, and telephone number of the facility; - Date, time, and type of incident; - Name and quantity of material(s) involved; - The extent of injuries, if any; - An assessment of actual or potential hazard to health or the environment, and - Estimated quantity and disposition of recovered material that resulted from the incident.

Contained spills or discharges that do not threaten human health need not be reported.

Page 28

As required by 40 CFR §302.6, spills on site involving reportable quantities (RQ) will be reported to the National Response Center at 800-424-8802. As required, they will also be reported to the Utah Division of Waste Management and Radiation Control, Tooele County Health Department, and the U.S. EPA, Region VIII.

As required, reports to the Director will be sent to: Director Utah Division of Waste Management and Radiation Control P.O. Box 144880 Salt Lake City, Utah 84114-4880

Required reports to EPA Region VIII will be submitted to: Regional Administrator U.S. EPA - Region 8 1595 Wynkoop Street Denver, CO 80202-1129

Required reports to Tooele County Health Department will be submitted to: Tooele County Health Department 151 North Main Street Tooele, UT 84074

Immediate reporting of certain events to the Utah Department of Environmental Quality, as outlined in this plan, shall be made to the following:

Utah Division of Waste Management and Radiation Control (801) 536-0200 (during office hours); or

Utah Department of Environmental Quality (801) 536-4123 (24-hour answering service)

Page 29

ATTACHMENT 8

CLOSURE

XIV. CLOSURE/ FINANCIAL ASSURANCE PLAN

1.0 CLOSURE INTRODUCTION

This closure plan applies to the Stericycle, Inc. Incineration Facility in Tooele County, Utah. The closure plan was prepared in accordance with the requirements of R315-302- 3. The closure plan assumes a worst-case cost scenario which would occur when the maximum waste inventory is stored on-site and a third-party contractor is hired to conduct the closure. The maximum inventory on-site includes all waste items and materials which Stericycle, Inc. may have stored in the facility. The closure plan addresses the shipment offsite for treatment/disposal of the waste items and materials as well as decontamination of the process area and equipment, and all sample analyses.

This section also contains information required under R315-309 regarding financial assurance.

Decontamination of storage areas, process areas, floors, walls, and internal structures will be performed. Decontamination techniques following removal of waste inventory will utilize a combination of flushing and steam cleaning to effectively remove contaminants. Where necessary, the surface areas will be manually scrubbed or steamed and the liquid generated from this process will be collected by vacuum, sumps, and/or pumps to convey the liquid into tanks or other approved containers. The collected liquids residues will then be characterized, and if necessary, sent for treatment/disposal at state and/or EPA approved facilities.

2.0 CLOSURE SCHEDULE AND NOTIFICATION OF CLOSURE

At least 60 days prior to the initiation of closure activities, Stericycle, Inc. will notify the Utah Division of Waste Management and Radiation Control that closure activities will begin on a date specified in the notice.

A detailed schedule identifying the time frame for closing the individual units at the facility will be submitted with the notification of closure. Per R315-302(3)(d), if is determined that an amendment of the closure plan is required, a closure plan amendment will also be submitted with the notification for closure. If an amendment is submitted, closure activities will not commence until the amendment has been reviewed and approved by the Utah Division of Waste Management and Radiation Control.

3.0 HEALTH AND SAFETY

Those involved in closure activities will follow the facility procedures for the protection of worker health and safety. For the purpose of this closure plan, levels of worker protection are defined as follows:

Page 39 Level B Protection Level C Protection

Self-contained breathing apparatus Air purifying respirator and cartridges Air lines and tanks Steel-toe, leather boots Steel-toe, leather boots Boot covers Boot covers Tyvek or cotton coveralls Tyvek coveralls Chemically resistant gloves Chemically resistant gloves Hardhat Hardhat Eye protection Eye protection

Level D protection includes the standard health and safety equipment for construction activities.

4.0 CLEANUP LEVEL

Stericycle, Inc. intends to decontaminate all the process equipment to non-contaminated levels as required by the State of Utah at the time of facility closure.

All areas of the incineration facility including the incinerator, gas cleaning train and storage areas, concrete floors, and building walls are to be decontaminated to the levels required by the State of Utah at the time of closure.

5.0 START OF CLOSURE

Closure of the facility will begin on the closure date specified in the notification letter to the State of Utah. An early step in closure of the facility will be removal of waste inventory. Before final decontamination of a specific unit begins, all waste will be incinerated on-site, and/or sent to an approved medical waste treatment facility.

6.0 CLOSURE PROCEDURES

The closure/decontamination procedures shall include, but not necessarily be limited to, the following activities for each type of process equipment:

6.1 Shutdown and Cleaning of the Incinerator

All incoming waste deliveries will be terminated. Waste inventories will be processed and/or sent to an approved medical waste facility. After the final charge of the incinerator, the unit will continue operating until the waste inside the primary chamber has combusted for a minimum of 2 hours. The APC equipment will continue operating until the combustion process has been completed.

Page 40 When the incinerator has had the opportunity to cool down, the incinerator will be locked out for final cleaning of the primary and secondary chambers.

Any bottom ash in the quench tank will be removed. The bottom ash will be disposed of in an approved disposal facility following applicable waste characterization requirements.

6.2 Preparing the Incinerator for Decommissioning

Once the final clean out has occurred, the incinerator will be disconnected from the gas feed system. The hydraulic systems will be cycled to place the equipment in the proper position and the hydraulics will be dismantled. The hydraulic oils will be collected and disposed/recycled appropriately. The air systems will be disconnected. The electrical systems will be disconnected rendering the incinerator and APC equipment inoperable.

6.3 Cleaning and Decommissioning the APC

A third-party company permitted to perform such operations will clean the APC equipment. The contractor will provide a certification that the equipment has been properly decontaminated and all residual materials have been disposed of in accordance with applicable regulations.

The Filter Fabric Bag House will be pulsed to remove as much fly ash as possible. The baghouse hopper will be emptied with the resulting fly ash being treated and disposed of by an EPA approved TSDF. All electrical equipment for operation of the incinerator will be de-energized and locked out.

Once the APC equipment has been decontaminated, waste disposal will occur.

6.4 Decommissioning the Incinerator

- Usable parts such as burners, blowers, control systems, thermocouples, etc. may be removed from the incinerator prior to dismantling the primary and secondary chambers. - The stacks and associated breeching will be lowered to the ground with a crane or alternative equipment. - Depending upon the final disposal options, the refractory will be removed and characterized. Removed scrap metal may be sent to a recycler. - The charging platform, hydraulic cylinders, and charging door will be separated from the primary chamber. - The ash plows in the primary chamber will be removed and recycled or disposed of. - The refractory in the primary chamber will be removed and tested as described above. - The ash dragon will be removed and reused or recycled.

Page 41 - The quench water will be removed, characterized and disposed of accordingly.

6.5 Area Cleaning

The concrete pad and surrounding area will be cleaned.

Gas lines and electrical lines to the incinerator will be removed back to the gas meter and the electrical panel.

Residual materials such as sodium bicarbonate, hydraulic fluids, caustic soda, etc. will be utilized or disposed of at an approved facility.

7.0 SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS

Sampling and analytical testing during the closure performance period shall conform to applicable requirements.

8.0 CLOSURE COST ESTIMATES

The total cost to close the facility using third party cost in 2015 dollars is estimated to be $500,000.

9.0 POST‐CLOSURE PLAN

As discussed above, Stericycle, Inc. will fully decontaminate all waste management units of the facility to non-contaminated status except where noted. Contaminated items that cannot be decontaminated will be disposed of at an approved hazardous waste or medical waste facility as appropriate. It is therefore not anticipated that any post-closure monitoring of the site will be required. In addition, this site is not used for land-based or water-based disposal, as such, a post-closure plan is not required under Utah Department of Environmental Quality regulation R315-302-3(1).

10.0 CLOSURE COSTS AND FINANCIAL ASSURANCE

To satisfy financial assurance closure cost requirements, Stericycle, Inc will establish financial assurance in accordance with R315-309. The mechanism for compliance with financial assurance requirements will be selected consistent with the options presented in R315-309 and the relevant proof will be submitted prior to the facility receiving waste.

Page 42 11.0 FINAL INSPECTION BY REGULATOR AGENCIES

A final inspection will be scheduled with regulatory agencies upon final closure of the facility. Upon completion of closure activities, a professional engineer registered in the state of Utah will submit certification that the facility was closed in accordance with the closure plan.

Page 43

ATTACHMENT 9

RADIATION PROTOCOLS

RADIATION SCREENING PROTOCOL – Tooele County, UT

Federal, state and local laws govern the safe handling and disposal of radioactive materials, and it is the intent of Stericycle, Inc., to fully comply with these laws.

It is the policy of Stericycle, Inc., to prohibit the treatment or disposal of medical waste that emits radiation. The procedures associated with this policy are outlined below:

Screening

Stericycle, Inc. will not accept waste for disposal when radiation is detected as outlined in this protocol. All waste containers delivered to the Stericycle, Inc., treatment facility, will be scanned for radiation.

1. Radiation detection (e.g., meters and probes) shall be used to detect radioactivity in each package as part of the weighing and scanning process for incoming waste. If the readout from the radiation detector shows radiation levels greater than 30-36 μR/hr (a multiple of background for a single probe meter), the material will be rejected for treatment, and the facility manager (or designee) will be notified, verbally and/or by log book notation.

2. Containers with radiation lower than the 30-36 μR/hr limit (for a single probe meter) may be accepted for treatment in accordance with normal procedures.

The following procedures will be utilized for waste with radiation levels above these limits:

1. Radiation level between the screening limit and 500 μR/hr

a) Record the date, generator name, and initial radiation reading (in μR/hr) from the radiation detector on the appropriate Radiation Tracking Document.

b) Ensure that the container is strong and that there will be no leakage of the radioactive material during conditions normally incident to management and transportation.

i) Label or mark the outside of the container with the word "Radioactive" or otherwise to communicate that the container is not acceptable for processing.

ii) Place container in the Non-conforming Waste Storage Area (in dry storage adjacent to the Haz Waste storage area)

c) Storage of waste with radioactivity for decay-in-storage is not allowed (per Operations Plan).

d) The generator or generator’s representative is contacted, and given the reason for rejecting the material. The generator must arrange transport of the radioactive container back to generator site or to an appropriate location designated by the generator.

Note: State regulations may require the use of a licensed low-level radioactive waste transporter. As applicable, each shipment that is transported to the generator or sent to a generator-designated location must be properly labeled, placarded, and accompanied by a notice, which contains the following information:

 Name of the consignor or consignee

Rev. July 2015

 The following statement: "This package conforms to the condition and limitations specified in 49 CFR 173.421 for exempted radioactive material, limited quantity, NOS, UN2910.

e) Upon rejection of material for radiation, the generator or generator’s representative will be reminded and/or informed of the policy of Stericycle, Inc. on not accepting waste with radioactive materials.

2. Level of Radiation Greater than 500 uR/hr

In addition to the requirements in 1., above:

Immediately notify the facility manager (or designee). Isolate and mark the container as radioactive in a storage area within the facility and away from employee activity. Isolate the area (e.g., with a barrier tape) at the point where radiation levels equal background.

a) The generator and transporter are contacted immediately and are given the reason for rejecting the material. The generator must arrange for transportation back to their site or an alternative location. Stericycle, Inc. vehicles are not to be used to transport waste that are screened at or above the 500 μR/hr limit.

b) Facility will complete the appropriate radiation-tracking log.

General Requirements

Waste will only be stored in those situations where the facility is awaiting communication and transportation back to a generator's facility or along to an appropriate disposal and/or management location.

If, while awaiting arrangements for proper transportation back to the generator or to the generator’s designated facility, a scan of the container indicates that its contents are below the alarm set point (30-36 μR per hour), the container may be processed, and its disposition noted on the radiation tracking document.

Historically, in the vast majority of instances, due to the medical use of radioactive materials that decay relatively quickly, radiation in waste containers that have initial radiation above the screening limits are seen to decay to acceptable levels prior to completion of the arrangements with a generator that are outlined above. This does not mean that Stericycle may utilize decay in storage. (See 2.c, above.) Radiation re-testing may be done the following business day prior to contacting a generator. Additionally, containers with initially high radiation detected may be re-tested for radiation at any time.

3. Training and Informing Employees

Employees at Stericycle, Inc. will be trained in the specifics of radiation protocol.

Rev. July 2015

RADIATION SCREENING PROTOCOL

(ATTACHMENT)

Radiation Screening Unit Check Protocol:

1. Retrieve check source (can) from its designated radioactive material storage area.

2. Place check source near the radiation detector(s) installed at the weigh station(s).

3. Ensure that each detector’s audible alarm sounds and its light illuminates when the meter is above 30-36 μR/hr (for a single-probe meter) or twice the upper limit of background radiation.

4. Return check source to its designated radioactive material storage area.

5. Record check in the Waste Acceptance Protocol log book on the corresponding Radiation Screening Unit Check form. Note the following:

a. Check time b. Source used (i.e., can) c. Alarm light functioning (Yes or No) d. Initials

Note: Comments may also be provided on the form

Rev. July 2015

RADIATION TRACKING DOCUMENT

(Radiation level between 2x background and 500 μR/hr)

DISPOSITION DATE Initial Test: Re-Test: (include Date Transported Back to RECEIVED GENERATOR NAME RADIATION LEVEL RADIATION LEVEL Generator, if applicable.)

Rev. July 2015

RADIATION TRACKING DOCUMENT

(Radiation level greater than 500 μR/hr)

Initial Test: DATE TRANSPORTED DATE GENERATOR NAME RADIATION LEVEL BACK TO GENERATOR COMMENTS RECEIVED OR TO OFF-SITE FACILITY

Rev. July 2015

Radiation Screening Unit Check

Facility: ______TOOELE COUNTY ______.

Print Name ______Initials ______Signature ______

Response to Public Comments Stericycle Tooele Medical Waste Facility

General Response to Public Comments

The Director of Waste Management and Radiation Control (Director) provides a description of his permitting authority and the permitting process as an introduction to his response to the comments he has received. He then responds to specific comments.

The foundation of the State of Utah’s solid waste program is the Solid and Hazardous Waste Act, Utah Code Ann. §§ 19-6-101 through 19-6-125. In the Act, the Legislature sets the policy and the standards for regulatory oversight of solid waste activities in the State. In so doing, the Legislature has determined that when Stericyle or any other solid waste disposal facility performs in compliance with the Act, the Rules promulgated under the Act, and the Permit the Director issues under the Act, its actions are protective of human health and the environment.

The Legislature gave the Board the authority to make rules establishing minimum standards for management of solid waste. Those standards are to be protective of human health and the environment. Utah Code Ann. § 19-6-105(1)(a). The Board has promulgated the Solid Waste Permitting and Management Rules in accordance with the Utah Administrative Rulemaking Act, Utah Code Ann. §§ 63G-3-101 through 63G-3-702. The public had opportunity to comment on these rules as they were promulgated. As with the Solid and Hazardous Waste Act, when Stericycle complies with the Rules, its actions are protective of human health and the environment. See Utah Admin. Code R315-301-6.

Under Utah Code Ann. § 19-6-108(9)(b), Stericycle’s permit must contain evidence that the disposal of non-hazardous solid waste will not be done in a way that may “cause or significantly contribute to an increase in mortality, an increase in serious irreversible or incapacitating reversible illness, or pose a substantial present or potential hazard to human health or the environment.”

An applicant for a medical waste incinerator permit from the Division of Waste Management and Radiation Control begins the permitting process by submitting an application using a form created by the Division. The application form requires the applicant to provide information needed for the Director and the public to evaluate whether the proposed facility poses unacceptable risk to human health or the environment. For example, the applicant must show:

Where the facility will be located;

There are no endangered species in the site;

Geologic features, faults, and unstable areas where the facility will be built; Expected elevation level of flood water in a 100-year flood;

Wetlands;

Description of on-site waste handling procedures;

Schedule for conducing inspections and monitoring;

Contingency plans in the event of a fire, explosion, or other releases, such as explosive gases or failure of water run-off collection system;

Fugitive dust control measures;

Procedures for excluding the receipt of prohibited hazardous or PCB- containing wastes;

Procedures for controlling disease vectors;

Training and safety plan for site operations; and

Information required by Utah Solid and Hazardous Waste Act Subsections 19-6-108(9) and 19-6-108(10) (See R315-310-3(2)(a)).

Stericycle submitted its application for the proposed Tooele County Medical Waste Incinerator on February 26, 2015. The Director’s staff then reviewed the permit application. During the review process, the Director required Stericycle to provide additional information concerning the Ash Analysis Plan, the Plan of Operation and the Contingency Plan. Stericycle provided the required information.

Under Utah Code Ann. § 19-6-108(9), it is the permit (“plan,” in the statute) the Director issues that must include evidence that the facility will not pose an unacceptable risk to human health or the environment. The issued permit is based on the information Stericycle provided in its permit application and information developed during the permit review process.

The draft Stericycle permit has been submitted to the public for review and comment. The Director has reviewed the comments he received concerning the draft permit and where appropriate, has changed the language of the permit based on those comments.

The Stericycle permit tells Stericycle what wastes it may accept for incineration, what wastes it is prohibited from receiving, and how to identify those wastes. It tells Stericycle how to track waste, how to train its employees, how to respond to emergencies, and how to handle the ash from the incineration process. The permit does not deal with the incineration process itself, including the management of gasses generated during incineration. Those matters are governed under an Approval Order issued by the Director of the Division of Air Quality. The Director believes the permit complies with the Solid and Hazardous Waste Act and with the Solid Waste Permitting and Management Rules. He has reviewed the information provided in the permit application and developed during the permit review process, and he believes the permit provides the evidence required by the Act to show that when Stericycle manages solid waste in compliance with the permit, its management will be protective of human health and the environment.

It is possible that Stericycle will, on occasion, fail to comply with the permit. Should that happen, the Director has the authority to cause Stericycle to return to compliance. If necessary, he can revoke Stericycle’s permit in accordance with Utah Code Ann. § 19-6-107(2)(j).

Responses to Specific Comments

Comment

A commenter said that the Administrative Procedures Act governs internal procedures of agencies and how agencies interact with the public. It is unclear whether the commenter was referring to the federal Administrative Procedures Act, 5 U.S.C §§ 551-559, the Utah Administrative Procedures Act, Utah Code Ann. Title 63G, Chapter 4, or some other statute. The commenter also said the Division is subject to Utah Admin. Code R315-124, Procedures for Decisionmaking, in responding to public comments. The commenter made other observations about how an agency is to respond to public comments and cited two federal court cases as support for the commenter’s opinions.

Division Response

The commenter did not identify the Administrative Procedures Act to which the comment referred, which does not provide reasonable specificity to enable the Director to fully consider the substance and significance of the commenter’s reference to an Administrative Procedures Act. See Utah Code Ann. § 19-1- 301.5(4)(b). The federal Administrative Procedures Act does not apply to public comments made on the Stericycle Tooele County Medical Waste Incinerator draft permit. Nor does the Utah Administrative Procedures Act (UAPA) apply to those public comments. See section 63G-4-101(2)(k) of the UAPA.

Utah Admin. Code R315-124 is also inapplicable to public comments on the Stericycle permit, although the Director believes his review of those comments would meet the requirements of R315-124 if it were applicable. See Utah Admin. Code R315-124-1, which lists the actions of the Director that are subject to R315- 124. Review of public comment on draft solid waste permits is not among the actions governed by R315-124.

The commenter also cited federal court cases, Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition v. Hurst, 604 F.Supp.2d 860 (2009) and North Carolina v. F.A.A., 957 F.2d 1125 (1992), that are inapplicable to the Director’s review of public comments on the Stericycle permit.

The Director’s review and response to public comments on the Stericycle permit is governed by Utah Admin. Code R315-311-3, which says that he is to give due consideration to all public comments. The Director is giving due consideration to all public comments on the Stericycle permit.

No changes are made to the permit based on this comment.

Comment

A commenter said that the intent of Utah Code Ann. § 19-6-108, as originally enacted, was to prevent new incinerators from being built in Utah as of 1990. The commenter apparently concluded that because the incinerator Stericyle plans to build in Tooele County is a new incinerator, section 19-6-108 should prohibit its construction. The commenter said that Senate Bill 196, enacted in the 2014 general session of the Utah Legislature, should not be understood to alter the Legislature’s intent, as expressed in section 19-6-108, that no new incinerators be built in Utah.

Division Response

The commenter’s understanding of Utah Code Ann. § 19-6-108 and Senate Bill 196, now codified at Utah Code Ann. § 9-6-125, is incorrect. Rather than prohibiting incinerators, the Legislature has stated the requirements a new incinerator must meet to receive a permit.

The Legislature’s intent to allow new incinerators to be built is clear from the language of the Solid and Hazardous Waste Act, including Utah Code Ann. §§ 19-6- 108 and 19-6-125. When the language of a statute is clear, no further investigation into legislative intent is necessary or appropriate. See Flowell Elec. Ass'n, Inc. v. Rhodes Pump, LLC, 796 Utah Adv. Rep. 14, 2015 UT 87, ¶ 34, 361 P.3d 91 (2015) (“The best indication of legislative intent is the statute’s plain language.”).

In section 19-6-108(3)(c), the Legislature directs that no person may construct a commercial nonhazardous solid waste disposal facility unless the person first receives a permit (“operation plan” in the statute) from the Director, approval from the local government where the facility would be located, approval from the legislature, and after all these approvals are obtained, approval from the Governor. When the person receives all these approvals, he may construct the facility.

The Legislature tells the Director, in subsections 19-6-108(9) and 19-6-108(10), some of the things a solid waste permit must contain. In section 19-6-105(1)(a), the Legislature gives the Waste Management and Radiation Control Board the authority to make rules for solid waste disposal facilities to protect human health and the environment and to ensure compliance with the Legislature’s instructions in section 19-6-108.

A nonhazardous solid waste incinerator, including the proposed Stericycle Tooele County Medical Waste Incinerator, is a solid waste disposal facility. See Utah Admin. Code R315-301(69). The Legislature did not direct in section 19-6-108 that no new incinerators would be built in the State of Utah. Instead, the Legislature told the Director and the Board what was required for a new incinerator to receive a permit and then be built.

Utah Code Ann. § 19-6-125 says the Division may not issue a permit for a new infectious waste incinerator that is within a two-mile radius of an area zoned on January 1, 2014 for residential use. This statute says nothing about prohibiting a new facility that complies with section 19-6-125 from being permitted under section 19-6-108. The proposed Stericycle Tooele County Medical Waste Incinerator will not be located within a two-mile radius of an area zoned for residential use, and it complies with Section 19-6-125.

The language of sections 19-6-108 and 19-6-125 demonstrates that, contrary to the commenter’s assertion, the legislature did not intend to prohibit future non- hazardous solid waste incinerators in the State of Utah. In its 2014 General Session, the Legislature approved Stericycle to construct and operate a commercial non- hazardous solid waste disposal facility in Tooele County, assuming Stericycle receives the other approvals required by section 19-6-108. H.J.R. 6, 2014 General Session. This authorization shows the Legislature’s intent to allow Stericycle to receive a permit and build a new facility in Tooele County, assuming Stericycle meets the other applicable requirements.

No changes are made to the permit based on this comment.

Comment

A commenter said the Division “is the trustee and steward of the ‘Public Trust Doctrine’ that is incorporated into the solid waste statutes and regulations,” and that the Division has a fiduciary duty to assure that facilities comply with those statutes and regulations. The commenter said the Public Trust Doctrine is a part of common law incorporated into those statutes and regulations. The commenter believes the Division’s fiduciary duty of prudence and caution as a public trustee requires it, under the Public Trust Doctrine, to deny the Stericycle permit. The commenter cites Mary Christina Wood, Nature’s Trust: Environmental Law for New Ecological Age, 2014, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 978-0-521-14411-7, pages 201 and 203, as support for the commenter’s position.

Division Response

The Public Trust Doctrine in Utah applies to certain natural resources, such as state-owned lands (not including school and institutional trust lands) and, at least in certain circumstances, the beds of navigable waters. See Utah Const. Art. XX, Utah Admin. Code R. 652-2-200.

The Public Trust Doctrine does not apply to the Solid and Hazardous Waste Act, to the Director, or to the permits he issues under the Act. In the Act, the Legislature establishes Utah’s solid and hazardous waste programs and instructs the Waste Management and Radiation Control Board and the Director on how to administer those programs. The Legislature has not made the Director a trustee under the Public Trust Doctrine, the Utah Uniform Trust Act, or any other legal authority. Nor has it given him responsibility for regulating state lands that may be subject to the Public Trust Doctrine.

The Utah solid and hazardous waste programs are statutory creations. While they embody principles that may also be found in the common law, they are not common law programs. Rather than incorporating the common law, the legislature displaced common law when it created the Solid and Hazardous Waste Act. See: Utah Code Ann. § 68-3-2(2) (“A statute of the Utah Code establishes the law of this state respecting the subjects to which the statute relates.”); Rio Grande Western Ry. Co. v. Salt Lake Inv. Co., 35 Utah 528, 101 P. 586, 592 (Utah 1906) (concluding that the common law is excluded from all subjects regulated by statute); and In Re Garr’s Estate, 31 Utah 57, 86 P. 757, 762 (Utah 1906) (stating that the common law cannot be an authority in opposition to positive legislative enactments).

Professor Wood, in Nature’s Trust, identifies certain environmental problems and argues that federal, state, and local governments charged with preventing and correcting these problems are failing in their duties. She urges that, as the title of her book suggests, natural resources, such as water, land, and air, are subject from ancient times to the Public Trust Doctrine (including the precautionary principle, discussed below), and that environmental protection agencies should be held accountable as trustee-fiduciaries to protect those natural resources and correct prior damage to them.

The commenter said the Director is obligated under the Public Trust Doctrine, as discussed by Professor Wood, to deny the Stericycle permit. Regardless of the potential value of Professor Wood’s ideas, her position that environmental regulators, including the Director, are, or should be, trustees under the Public Trust Doctrine and are legally obligated to act as trustees in carrying out their responsibilities, does not reflect Utah law.

As discussed above, the Director’s office is created by statute. Statute tells him what his responsibilities are and how to perform them. He is not a trustee and has no discretion to regulate as if he were. He has no discretion under the Solid and Hazardous Waste Act to refuse to issue a permit to an applicant who meets the statutory and regulatory requirements to receive a permit. He concludes that Stericycle meets the applicable statutory and regulatory requirements, and he therefore issues the Stericycle Tooele County Medical Waste Incinerator Permit.

No change is made to the permit based on this comment.

Comment

A commenter said the Division should adopt the “Precautionary Principle,” which, in the commenter’s words, means that “When an activity raises threats of harm to human health or the environment, precautionary measures should be taken even if some cause and effect relationships are not fully established scientifically.” The commenter believes the Division has a fiduciary duty to apply the Precautionary Principle, as the commenter understands it, in evaluating the proposed Stericycle permit.

The commenter said there have been medical studies dealing with how exposure to compounds affects human health and the environment, but the commenter does not identify those studies.

Division Response Whether or not the Director has authority to adopt the “Precautionary Principle,” he declines to do so. The Solid and Hazardous Waste Act and the Solid Waste Permitting and Management Rules are written to provide standards that are protective of human health and the environment. They are “precautionary” by nature. For example, as the commenter points out, Utah Code Ann. § 19-6-108 (9)(b) requires Stericycle’s permit to contain evidence that disposal of nonhazardous solid waste will not be done in a manner that may pose significant risk to human health or the environment. This is a precautionary statutory requirement.

The Director disagrees with the commenter’s assertion that the Solid and Hazardous Waste Act has by definition incorporated the “precautionary principle” as the commenter defines it. Whether or not the Legislature intended to incorporate that principle as the commenter defines it, the Director intends to follow the instructions of the statute, and he will not adopt the commenter’s proposed extra- statutory “precautionary principle” to do so.

The commenter did not identify the medical studies to which the commenter referred. This omission does not provide reasonable specificity to enable the Director to fully consider the substance and significance of the studies to which the commenter refers or the issue to which the commenter apparently believes these studies relate. See Utah Code Ann. § 19-1-301.5(4)(b). If the compounds to which the commenter refers are part of emissions from the incinerator to the atmosphere, they are not subject to his regulation, but may be subject to the Air Conservation Act, which is administered by the Director of the Division of Air Quality.

The Director believes the permit he is issuing requires Stericycle to operate so as to not pose a significant risk to human health or the environment.

No change is made to the permit based on this comment.

Comment

A commenter said the Divisions of the Department of Environmental Quality and other agencies “have not developed analytical data to determine and address applicable requirements” in the statute (presumably section 19-6-108) suggesting that this failure is a violation of their fiduciary duty under the Precautionary Principle. The commenter said that Stericycle had not addressed the effects of its proposed emissions on human health and the environment and had not considered the combined effects of its own emissions with the emissions of other manufacturing industries in the area.

Division Response

The commenter did not identify analytical data the commenter believes the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) should develop; nor did the commenter identify the statutory provisions the commenter believes require the Department to develop this analytical data. It is impossible for the Director to respond with precision to this comment when the commenter does not identify concerns with reasonable specificity. See Utah Code Ann. § 19-1-301.5(4)(b). The Legislature has not charged the Director to perform scientific research. Nor has it provided him resources to perform it. The Director has no authority or responsibility for the activities of other Divisions within the DEQ, but he understands that like him, the Directors of those Divisions are not tasked or funded to perform scientific research.

If by “analytical data,” the commenter meant “scientific research to show that incineration of medical waste is safe,” the commenter correctly concludes the Director has not done it. The Director is not required to do it, does not have resources to do it, and without both instruction and funding from the Legislature, will not do it. If the commenter meant something else by “analytical data,” the Director does not know what the commenter meant and cannot respond to the comment.

The commenter made other comments concerning specific provisions of Utah Code Ann. § 19-6-108. The Director’s responses to those comments may also be responsive to this comment.

The Director does not regulate emissions to the atmosphere from the incinerators Stericycle intends to use, and the permit he is issuing to Stericycle does not deal with those emissions. Those emissions are regulated by the Division of Air Quality. The Director understands that the Director of the Division of Air Quality is reviewing public comments on a draft Approval Order that prescribes emission limits for those incinerators.

The Director does regulate waste management activities at the Stericycle Tooele County facility that are not part of the actual incineration process. His permit identifies wastes Stericycle may incinerate and wastes it is prohibited from incinerating. The permit instructs Stericycle on how to analyze incinerator ash to determine whether the ash is hazardous waste or non-hazardous solid waste, and how to manage any ash that is hazardous waste. The permit instructs Stericycle concerning such subjects as facility construction, personnel training, fire control, and waste tracking.

To obtain a solid waste permit from the Director, Stericycle is not required to demonstrate the effects emissions from the facility may have on human health and the environment. Nor is it required to consider the combined effects of its own emissions with the emissions of other facilities in the area.

No change is made to the permit based on this comment.

Comment

A commenter suggested that the Division might be failing to require Stericycle to comply with the permitting requirements of section 19-6-108, particularly subsection 19-6-108(9)(b), because it assumes the proposed Stericycle incinerator’s remote location makes compliance unnecessary.

Division Response The commenter is incorrect in the speculation that the Director might assume that because of the remote location of the Stericycle Tooele County facility, legal requirements do not apply, that the requirements are somehow satisfied solely by the remoteness of the facility, or that requirements are relaxed because of remoteness. Wherever in the state a solid waste disposal facility is located, it must comply with the Solid and Hazardous Waste Act, the Solid Waste Permitting and Management Rules, and its permit. The Stericycle Tooele County facility will have to comply with the Act, the Rules and the permit. Remoteness of location is irrelevant to that requirement.

No change is made to the permit based on this comment.

Comment

A commenter said that Stericycle should use a technology other than incineration at its Tooele County facility.

Division Response

Incineration of medical waste is legal in Utah under the Solid and Hazardous Waste Act. See, for example, Utah Code Ann. §§ 19-6-104, 19-6-108, and 19-6-125. The commenter may oppose incineration and may think other technologies are superior to incineration. But the Act allows for incineration of solid waste, including medical waste. As discussed elsewhere in this response to comments document, there are wastes that, in Utah, may be disposed of only through incineration. The Director does not have the authority to prohibit Stericycle from operating a medical waste incinerator if it meets the legal requirements for a permit to construct and operate such a facility.

No change is made to the permit based on this comment.

Comment

A commenter suggested that the Division is merely listing statutory requirements applicable to the Stericycle Tooele County Medical Waste Incinerator, rather than requiring Stericycle to demonstrate that it has the ability to comply with those requirements. The commenter identified subsections 19-6-108(9)(b), 19-6-108(10) and 19-6-108(11) as specific statutes with which, in the commenter’s opinion, the Division has failed to require Stericycle to show evidence that it is or will be in compliance.

Concerning subsection 19-6-108(9)(b), the commenter said that applicable agencies have not stated standards of performance that allow the public to determine whether the evidence required is present. The commenter says that Stericycle must show evidence of its ability to comply with applicable standards, and that the Director is acting arbitrarily and capriciously if he merely lists requirements and does not require Stericycle to show evidence that it can comply with those requirements.

Division Response

The Stericycle Tooele County Incinerator permit, including attachments 1 through 9, tell Stericycle how it is to operate those elements of its operation that are subject to the Solid and Hazardous Waste Act. That information satisfies the requirements of Utah Code Ann. § 19-6-108(9)(b); it is the “evidence” the statute requires. The permit states the “standards of performance” that Stericycle must meet, and the public is able to compare those standards to the Act and the implementing Rules. When Stericycle operates its Tooele County Incinerator in compliance with the permit, it is operating so as to protect human health and the environment, as subsection 19-6-108(9)(b) requires.

It is not clear to the Director what “evidence” the commenter is looking for from which the commenter can reach conclusions about Stericycle’s ability to comply with its permit. The Act, the Rules, and the permit tell Stericycle what it must do to comply, and thus to be protective of human health and the environment. From the time the permit is issued, “compliance” is a matter of evaluating future events against the requirements of the permit. There is no “evidence” that Stericycle will, in the future, comply with the permit any more than there is “evidence” that someone who meets the requirements to be issued a driver’s license will comply with traffic laws.

Stericycle has been operating a medical waste incinerator in Utah for a number of years. The director is able to make judgments about its future ability to comply based on its past compliance history, and he believes Stericycle has the ability to comply with the permit for the Tooele County permit. He is neither guarantying nor assuming that Stericycle will never be out of compliance with that permit. As described elsewhere in this document, he has the tools to correct any noncompliance.

Stericycle is aware that the Director can take enforcement action if he believes Stericycle has violated the Act, the Rules, or the permit. Such enforcement action can be very costly to Stericycle. Stericycle knows the Director can revoke its permit if a violation is serious enough to warrant revocation. These negative consequences are a strong motivation for Stericycle to comply.

Concerning Utah Code Ann. § 19-6-108(9)(b), Stericycle has demonstrated that it knows how to run a medical waste incinerator. Concerning continuity of operations under Utah Code Ann. § 19-6-108(9)(c), Stericycle has at least sufficient resources to prepare the application and pay the Division’s fees for reviewing the application. It will have to provide financial assurance for closure before it can accept waste.

No change is made to the permit based on this comment.

Comment

Concerning subsection 19-6-108(10), a commenter said that in analyzing the beneficial effects of the Tooele County incinerator, the Division has a fiduciary duty to include “public cost and burdens such as health care costs.” The commenter said there is no analysis to help the public in evaluating the “need, public benefit, and market analysis for the proposed doubling of the size” of the Tooele County incinerator over the size of Stericycle’s current facility in North Salt Lake.

Division Response

The Director’s responsibilities are defined by the Solid and Hazardous Waste Act. His duties are statutory, not fiduciary. The Act, particularly subsection 19-6- 108(10), does not explicitly or implicitly direct him to evaluate health care costs or other public costs and burdens, if any, that might arise from Stericycle’s operation under the Director’s permit. The Legislature has not provided him resources to do such analysis. If the Legislature wants him to evaluate these costs and burdens, it will tell him so and will give him the resources to do this work.

Concerning the information subsection 19-6-108(10) does require, Stericycle said on page 14 of its Permit Application that it has been operating its existing North Salt Lake facility for[now more than] 25 years. It has an established local and regional market for its medical waste services. It provides incineration services to customers who want to incinerate their medical wastes, whether incineration is required by law or business policy or whether customers simply prefer incineration. It is possible that Stericycle’s customer base may change when it opens its new facility in Tooele County, but Stericycle believes its customer base will support its operations at the new facility.

Stericycle’s North Salt Lake facility is the only commercial medical waste incinerator in Utah. The Director understands that Stericycle will cease incineration at its North Salt Lake facility when the new Tooele County facility opens. Stericycle thinks there is a market for increased capacity to incinerate medical waste at the Tooele County facility.

Stericycle of course faces competition from other medical waste incinerators in the United States and abroad and from other facilities that use different technologies to manage medical waste. It has competed successfully in the past and believes it will continue to complete successfully. The Director sees no reason to second-guess that belief. If Stericycle is unsuccessful, it will close in accordance with the terms of the permit.

The Director believes Stericycle has satisfied the requirements of subsections 19-6- 108(10)(a) and 19-6-108(10) (b).

Concerning subsection 19-6-108(10)(c), the Director is familiar with Stericycle’s compliance history. He has issued Stericycle one warning letter since the facility opened. Should Stericycle fail to comply with its new permit, he has the tools to bring the facility back into compliance. He believes Stericycle has satisfied the requirements of subsection 19-6-108(10)(c).

No change is made to the permit based on this comment. Comment

Concerning Utah Code Ann. §19-6-108(10), a commenter stated that the Director may not approve a commercial nonhazardous solid or hazardous waste operation plan that meets the requirements of Subsection 19-6-108 (9) unless it contains the information required by the board including:

(a) evidence that the proposed commercial facility has a proven market of nonhazardous solid or hazardous waste, including

(i) information on the source, quantity, and price charged for treating, storing, and disposing of potential nonhazardous solid or hazardous waste in the state or regionally;

(ii) a market analysis of the need for a commercial facility given existing and potential generation of nonhazardous solid or hazardous waste in the state and regionally;

(iii) a review of other existing and proposed commercial nonhazardous solid or hazardous waste; 19-6-108(10)(b) a description of the public benefits of the proposed facility, including: (i) the need in the state for the additional capacity for the management of nonhazardous solid or hazardous waste.

Division Response

Section I.E. of the permit application shows that there is a market for local and regional medical waste incineration. As discussed above, Stericycle has been operating a medical waste incinerator in North Salt Lake for many years. Stericycle has increased its capacity to incinerate waste at that facility to the maximum allowed capacity. Stericycle’s continued success in obtaining medical waste and the price it charges for managing it support the conclusion that it has a proven market for its services. Stericycle’s potential customer base is expected to be essentially the same in its new location as in its North Salt Lake location. The Director does not see a need for an additional market analysis for him to be satisfied that Stericycle has demonstrated the proven market for its services.

Most generators of medical waste do have options to incineration for disposing of their waste. Under the Solid Waste Rules, those options include landfilling, steam autoclaving, or some other means of sterilizing the waste. While these options have long been available for customers to dispose of medical waste, Stericycle has demonstrated that there is a market demand to manage these wastes through incineration.

The Director is satisfied that Stericycle’s Tooele County facility meets the requirements of Section 19-6-108(10)(a).

Concerning Utah Code Ann. §19-6-108(10)(b), as discussed above, the public benefits of this facility include providing customers who need or desire to dispose of medical waste through incineration a facility in the State of Utah where they can do so. Stericycle’s North Salt Lake incinerator operates at or near capacity, and Stericycle reasonably believes that if it had greater capacity, it could better serve its customers.

The location of Stericycle’s new facility in Tooele County removes Stericycle’s incinerator operations from North Salt Lake, where it is surrounded by homes and businesses, to a location where it will be many years, if ever, before it is again surrounded by them.

No change is made to the permit based on this comment.

Comment

Concerning subsection 19-6-108(11), a commenter asked what analysis the Division has done to demonstrate that “the probable beneficial environmental effect of the facility to the state outweighs the probable adverse environmental effect." The commenter also asked what analysis has been done to determine whether there is a need for the Stericycle Tooele County incinerator. The commenter said there are other technologies that could manage the waste that Stericycle would incinerate.

Division Response

The Director does not regulate emissions to the atmosphere from the incinerator. The Director and his staff have experience in regulating solid waste prior to incineration at Stericycle’s North Salt Lake facility. They also have experience in regulating ash from Stericycle’s incinerator. The Director does not believe that there are significant probable adverse environmental effects from Stericycle’s management of solid waste prior to incineration or its ash after incineration at its new Tooele County facility.

Concerning subsection 19-6-108(11)(a), the Director believes the probable beneficial environmental effect of the Stericycle Tooele County incinerator outweighs the probable adverse environmental effect of the facility. The Director sees that incineration of medical waste, in addition to being legal, is an effective, environmentally responsible way to manage many kinds of medical waste. Incineration renders medical waste non-infectious, reduces waste volume, and conserves landfill space.

Concerning subsection 19-6-108(11)(b), the Director sees a need for the Stericycle incinerator to serve customers within the state who desire to incinerate medical waste. As discussed elsewhere in this document, Stericycle’s existing customer base shows that there are people and businesses in the state who want their medical waste and related waste incinerated. The Director believes the requirements of subsection 19-6-108(11) have been met for this permit.

No change was made to the permit based on the comments concerning subsections 19-6-108(9)(b), 19-6-108(10) and 19-6-108(11)

Comment

A commenter stated that under Utah Code Ann. § 19-6-108(11), the Director may not approve a nonhazardous solid or hazardous waste facility operation plan unless, based on the application, and in addition to the determination required in Subsections (9) and (10), the Director determines that: (a) the probable beneficial environmental effect of the facility to the state outweighs the probable adverse environmental effect; and (b) there is a need for the facility to serve industry within the state. The commenter indicated that although the permit application was determined to be “complete”, there were no sections in the public documents that discussed the statutory requirements of 19-6-108(11).

Division Response

Based on review of the permit application, the Director concludes that the environmental benefit outweighs the probable adverse impact.

The Division believes that rendering the medical waste non-infectious through incineration reduces the volume of waste to ash, protects landfill workers, eliminates the potential spread of disease, and preserving landfill disposal capacity within the state are probable beneficial environmental effects.

As stated elsewhere in this document, the Director does not expect the short-term storage of untreated medical waste or of incinerator ash to have a significant negative environmental impact.

No change is made to the permit based on this comment.

Comment

A commenter said that the Division has said that various agencies “. . . have established standards of performance, operation and handling related to solid waste to protect human health and the environment,” but the Division has not stated what those standards are, leaving the public unable to determine whether Stericycle is in compliance with those standards.

Division Response

The commenter did not identify where the Division said various agencies have established standards of performance, operation, and handling of solid waste, which does not provide reasonable specificity to enable the Director to fully consider the substance and significance of the commenter’s comment. See Utah Code Ann. § 19- 1-301.5(4)(b). His staff has searched unsuccessfully for this language.

As stated in the Director’s General Response and elsewhere in this document, the standards for a solid waste facility are those set by the Legislature in the Solid and Hazardous Waste Act, by the Waste Management and Radiation Control Board in the Solid Waste Permitting and Management Rules, and by the Director in the permit. The commenter is incorrect in the conclusion that the Division has not stated the standards with which Stericycle is required to comply. No change was made to the permit based on this comment.

Comment

A commenter said that it is arbitrary and capricious for the Division to assume that it can list the requirements with which Stericycle must comply in public participation documents without showing evidence that Stericycle has the ability to comply with those requirements. The commenter asks what is the evidence that treatment and storage of waste will not be done in a way that may cause or significantly contribute to an increase in mortality, an increase in serious irreversible or incapacitating reversible illness, or pose a substantial present or potential hazard to human health or the environment.

Division Response

As stated elsewhere in this document, the Solid and Hazardous Waste Act, the Solid Waste Permitting and Management Rules, and the permit tell Stericycle how to operate its facility so as to be protective of human health and the environment. The Director disagrees with the commenter’s conclusion that he acts arbitrarily and capriciously in telling Stericycle the requirements with which it must comply without demanding additional evidence that Stericycle has the ability to comply with those requirements. Stericycle has been running a medical waste incinerator for years. Stericycle’s permit application satisfies the Director that Stericycle understands the requirements applicable to its Tooele County facility. He has written a permit that intelligibly tells Stericycle and the public the requirements Stericycle must meet. That is all the evidence of ability to comply there is; it is all the “evidence” that is required.

No change to the permit is made based on this comment.

Comment

A commenter said that the Division has not performed or required analyses of synergistic effects, bioaccumulative effects, and chemicals of concern. The commenter suggests that there are other analyses that the Division should have done or required, but does not identify them. The commenter believes that the Division’s failure to perform or require Stericycle to perform these analyses violates section 19-6-108.

Division Response

The commenter is incorrect in the conclusion that either the Director or Stericycle is required to perform analysis of synergistic effects, bioaccumulative effects, or chemicals of concern as a prerequisite to the Director’s issuing the permit. The commenter does not identify which synergistic or bioaccumulative effects, or which chemicals of concern, the commenter thinks the Director should have had analyzed, which makes it difficult for the Director to respond to the comment. See Utah Code Ann. § 19-1-301.5(4)(b). The Director understands that some people believe that the synergistic and bioaccumulative effects on humans, animals, and plants from gasses emitted to the atmosphere from the incineration process should be analyzed. He does not regulate gaseous emissions from the incineration process to the environment. He does not see a significant potential for Stericycle’s receipt and short-term storage of waste prior to incineration to have a synergistic or bioaccumulative effect on any creature. He does not see a significant potential for ash from the incineration process to have such effects. As discussed elsewhere, he is not tasked or provided with resources to do research on synergistic or bioaccumulative effects.

As to the unidentified chemicals of concern, the Director also understands that in the context of the Stericycle medical waste incinerator, such chemicals are of most concern if they are emitted from the incineration process into the atmosphere. Again, he does not regulate those emissions.

The permit limits the wastes Stericycle can accept. For example, Stericycle is prohibited from receiving hazardous waste, radioactive materials, and PCBs. The Director sees little potential for chemicals of concern to be released into the environment so as to pose a significant risk to human health or the environment from pre-incineration receipt and short-term storage of the wastes Stericycle is permitted to receive. He sees little potential for any chemicals of concern in the ash from incineration to be released into the environment to pose significant risk to human health or the environment.

No change is made to the permit based on this comment.

Comment

A commenter said that a “recent legislative bill” did not intend to allow Stericycle to double its capacity. The commenter also said there is no analysis, market or otherwise, showing the need or public benefit for the new facility to double in incineration capacity. The commenter apparently objects to this increase in capacity.

Division Response

The commenter did not identify the bill to which the commenter referred, which does not provide reasonable specificity to enable the Director to fully consider the substance and significance of the commenter’s comment. See Utah Code Ann. § 19- 1-301.5(4)(b). The Director assumes the commenter meant to refer to H.J.R. 6, 2014 General Session of the Utah Legislature. He also assumes the commenter objects to the fact that under the new permit, Stericycle’s Tooele County facility will have two incinerators, rather than one.

The Legislature approved the facility with its two incinerators, provided it gets all other required approvals. This is a new facility with a new permit, not an existing facility that is expanding, and it is therefore not subject to requirements applicable to existing facilities that are expanding. If it meets the statutory and regulatory requirements, it qualifies for a permit and will receive one. The fact that the new facility has two incinerators, rather than one, which may theoretically double its capacity, is irrelevant to whether it qualifies for a permit.

As discussed above, Stericycle has demonstrated that there is a market for its incineration services. During the time it has operated its North Salt Lake facility, Stericycle, through permit modifications, has increased the capacity of that facility to the maximum allowed by Utah Code Ann. § 19-6-108(1)(c) without obtaining a new permit. It is reasonable for Stericycle to conclude that the market for its incineration services would support an increase in capacity.

The Director is satisfied that there is a need and a market for, and a public benefit from, medical waste incineration service to manage medical waste generated in Utah and regionally, as described in Utah Code Ann. § 19-6-108(10).

No change is made to the permit based on this comment.

Comment

A commenter suggested that Stericycle be required to post a bond to assure its compliance with applicable laws.

Division Response

There is no legal requirement for Stericycle to post a bond to assure that it complies with applicable laws. If Stericycle violates the Solid and Hazardous Waste Act, the Solid Waste Rules, or its permit, the Director may take enforcement action against it, which could include financial penalties and permit revocation. See Utah Code Ann. § 19-6-112, Utah Admin. Code R315-317-3, and permit condition I.A.1.

No change is made to the permit based on this comment.

Comment

A commenter indicated that in the permit list of acceptable waste, there was a description referenced in I.B.1.(a)(ii): cultures/stocks of infectious agents – research and industrial. The commenter questioned what the term “industrial” implied for clarification.

Division Response

The list of acceptable wastes includes industrial and commercial cultures/stocks of infectious agents. The term “industrial” includes those cultures and stocks that may be provided by facilities that manufacture or analyze specimens. While hospitals clearly would generate cultures and stocks as a consequence of patient care, there are also laboratories that receive specimens that require analysis that would generate cultures and stocks of infectious agents. These would be considered “industrial” sources.

No change is made to the permit based on this comment. Comment

In Section I.B.2, Other Wastes: a commenter questioned why this category was not underlined like other categories and needed to be clarified.

Division Response

The wastes listed in I.B.1 of the Permit are typical medical wastes. The wastes listed in I.B.2 are also acceptable wastes; however, they may not be typical medical wastes. Both lists of wastes are acceptable waste under I.B. Creating these two lists is the Director’s stylistic choice. The Director does not believe this choice creates ambiguity.

No change to the permit was made based on this comment.

Comment

Concerning Section “I.B.1.a.(5): Gowns, gloves, masks, barriers, IV tubing, empty bags or bottles, needles and syringes, empty drug vials, spill kits, and other items generated in the preparation and administration of antineoplastic drugs,” a commenter stated that Stericycle is claiming that it is the only facility able to provide service for this type of waste stream and asked what analysis was used for this determination considering that there were other treatment facilities currently in operation in the State that could possibly handle this waste. The commenter wanted clarification.

Division Response

A review of Section 1.B.1.a.(5) does not seem to indicate there were claims by Stericycle that they were the only one to provide service for this type of waste. Stericycle in the Permit Application, Page 14 (Market Analysis and Public Benefits) does make the claim that they are “the only provider of collection, transportation, treatment, and disposal services for certain types of medical waste, including those that are required by law or organizational policy to be incinerated.”

No change is made to the permit based on this comment.

Comment

Concerning Section 1.B.2.b: “Confidential records, including, but limited to, proprietary packaging,” a commenter indicated that there were several currently permitted facilities in the state that could and did treat and destroy confidential records and proprietary packing and further questioned the need or requirement that Stericycle perform these services. The commenter questioned what market analysis was used to make this determination and requested clarification.

Division Response

Section 1.B.2.b. states: “Confidential records, including, but not limited to, proprietary packaging and products” are acceptable wastes. While the Division recognizes that other businesses may manage documents, packaging and/or products, there is no requirement precluding Stericycle from also providing these services without the additional market analysis. The Director does not understand Utah Code Ann. § 19-6-108(10)(a)(ii) to require a market analysis for each waste stream Stericycle is permitted to accept. In any event, Stericycle has customers who choose to pay Stericycle for the services.

No change is made to the permit based on this comment.

Comment

Concerning Section 1.B.2.c, “Contraband (e.g. police evidence)”, a commenter indicated that this section needed to be more descriptive. The commenter indicated that police evidence could include, but not be limited to, weapons that might have projectiles or drug paraphilia that requires hazardous materials professionals to remove and are known to have explosive properties. The commenter asked if Stericycle accepted this waste, would Stericycle be violating Section 1.C.1.e, “Prohibited Waste.”

Division Response

“Contraband” means those wastes the require destruction through incineration, such as drugs. While not specifically outlining which items are included in the term “contraband,” the Division has included a description of wastes that Stericycle is prohibited from accepting for incineration.

Prohibited wastes include “explosive materials” in 1.C.1.e and “hazardous wastes defined by R315-1 and R315-2 of the Utah Administrative Code.” The Division believes that prohibiting these wastes would prevent acceptance of weapons or hazardous waste. As a practical note, cleanup of drug labs is usually done by hazardous materials professionals who can be expected to properly characterize and dispose of waste at an appropriate facility.

No change is made to the permit based on this comment.

Comment

Concerning Section 1.B.2.e, “Agriculture Waste, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), that includes regulated garbage from domestic and international sources”, a commenter indicated that this section should be divided into two sections. One section should be APHIS waste and the other section should be “regulated garbage from domestic and international sources.” The commenter further questioned if wastes from international sources were part of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). The commenter also wanted clarification on what was the definition of “international sources” and questioned if there was a market need for Stericycle to incinerate these wastes if other facilities in the state could meet the need for managing them.

Division Response The reference to APHIS waste in the DRAFT PERMIT was actually in Section 1.B.2.d.

The Division interprets APHIS waste to include wastes from domestic or international airline flights. The Division relies on APHIS to determine which wastes from these flights require incineration. Since “regulated garbage” is part of the APHIS program, the Division will keep the wording in this section intact.

No change is made to the permit based on this comment.

Comment

Concerning Section 1.B.2.h: “Municipal solid waste” as defined by the R315-301-2(47) of the Utah Administrative Code contaminated with potentially infectious materials, a commenter questioned the ability to differentiate general municipal waste from municipal waste contaminated with potentially infectious materials and requested clarification.

Division Response

The permit section 1.B.2.h will be changed to read: “Municipal solid waste” as defined by R315-301-2(47) of the Utah Administrative Code that is contaminated with infectious waste as listed in R315-301-2(71)(iv).

Comment

Concerning Section 1.B.2.i: “Other non-hazardous waste as approved by the Director of the Division of Waste Management and Radiation Control,”

A commenter thought the description of other non-hazardous waste was too vague for the Director to approve and wanted clarification to this section.

Division Response

The Director cannot identify in advance all possible wastes that Stericycle might appropriately dispose of in its incinerator. Rather than requiring Stericycle to modify its permit to dispose of a waste that it may receive only one time, and that may need to be incinerated quickly to protect human health and the environment, the Director will allow Stericycle to request his approval to incinerate such waste. He will base his decision to approve or disapprove the request on applicable rules, information from such organizations as the Center for Disease Control, Stericycle’s ability to safely manage and dispose of the waste, and his experience in regulating solid waste.

No change is made to the permit based on this comment.

Comment Concerning Section 1.C.1.c, “Compressed gas cylinders and canisters (including aerosol cans” and Section 1.C.1.e: “Explosive materials,” a commenter thought that the compressed gas cylinders and canisters seemed to describe a subset of explosive materials and suggested that the permit list explosive materials first and describe examples that the Division wanted to include as explosive materials.

Division Response

The prohibited wastes identified in Condition 1.C. are not listed in order of potential hazard. Stericycle is prohibited from receiving them for incineration.

No change is made to the permit based on this comment.

Comment

Concerning Section 1.D.1.b: “Prion wastes containing diseases such as “Mad Cow Disease” (Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) and 1.D.1.C “Chronic Wasting Disease,”” a commenter indicated that both sections identified forms of prion disease and suggested that the listing order should state prion waste containing disease followed by examples of these diseases such as “mad cow disease”, “chronic wasting disease”, “Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE)” The commenter stated that the current permit statement implied that “mad cow” and “BSE” were similar in form, but in fact, “mad cow” and “wasting disease” and “BSE” react differently and the prion is shaped differently

Division Response

The Division intended to prohibit incineration of any diseases containing prions without prior approval of the Director. Only when Stericycle could demonstrate that incineration could completely destroy prion-containing wastes safely would the Director approve Stericycle to incinerate these wastes.

The Division will rewrite the section as follows:

1.D.1.b Wastes containing prions that cause “Mad Cow Disease”

1.D.1.c Wastes containing prions that cause Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE)

1.D.1.d Wastes containing prions that cause “Chronic Wasting Disease”

Comment

Concerning Section 1.D.1.e: “Infectious waste, the management and disposal of which is being regulated by the Center for Disease Control (CDC), Department of Transportation (DOT), Department of Agriculture or Department of Homeland Security.” A commenter suggested that the section be rewritten as “Infectious waste, the management and disposal of [which] are being regulated by the Center for Disease Control (CDC), Department of Transportation (DOT), Department of Agriculture, Department of Homeland Security, and any other government agencies”

Division Response

The permit will be changed to read: Infectious waste, the management and disposal of which is being regulated by the Center for Disease Control (CDC), Department of Transportation (DOT), Department of Agriculture, Department of Homeland Security, or any other government agency with relevant expertise.

Comment

Concerning Section 1.I.1: “Once every five years, the Permittee shall perform a full TCLP analysis on one composite sample of the bottom ash to ascertain that incineration removes all organic TCLP constituents,” a commenter questioned why was this analysis performed only once every five years and not more frequently.

A commenter also stated that this type of permit was renewed every five years.

Division Response

The Director understands that organic constituents found in the waste being incinerated will be vaporized in the primary combustion chamber and destroyed in the secondary combustion chamber. The Director believes that testing the ash for organic TCLP constituents once every five years is sufficient to demonstrate that the primary and secondary combustion chambers adequately destroy probable organic constituents.

Stericycle would be required to test the bottom ash for organic constituents more frequently if the bottom ash tested positive for organic constituents.

Permits for solid waste facilities are valid for ten years, rather than five years, before the permit needs to be renewed.

No change is made to the permit based on this comment.

Comment

Concerning Section I.I.2.b: “Sixteen random locations shall be chosen within the bin using a random number generator to obtain grab samples. Each consecutive four samples shall be mixed to generate a composite sample. The total of four composite samples shall be sent to the laboratory for analysis for this sampling event,” a commenter stated that the sampling of four is only 25% of the 16 and stated that a higher number of samples would result in a more reliable data set.

A commenter also stated that a minimum of six samples would be needed and that the regulator, not the Permittee, should make the determination of the number of samples obtained in the data set. Division Response

The Director believes that the statistical method outlined in the section “Ash Analysis” follows the protocols outlined the SW-846, which is the EPA guidance document for performing a statistical analysis. Obtaining composite samples is an appropriate methodology for making a regulatory determination of whether a waste is hazardous or nonhazardous.

The commenter’s interpretation that only 25% of the 16 grab samples will be analyzed is incorrect. All 16 grab samples are incorporated in the composite samples to be analyzed.

Under Condition I.I.2.b., the Permittee takes sixteen grab samples from a single bin of ash. The Permittee mixes each consecutive four samples to generate a composite sample, resulting in four composite samples. All four composite samples are analyzed, meaning that 100% of the 16 grab samples are analyzed.

If the validity of statistical analysis can be demonstrated with sufficient confidence using four composite samples, then the required demonstration is adequate. Otherwise, more composite samples will need to be analyzed and included in the calculations to make the waste determination. If Stericycle, using more composite samples, is still unable to demonstrate with required confidence that the bottom ash is not hazardous, the ash must be managed as a characteristic hazardous waste until the next sampling event.

No change is made to the permit based on this comment.

Comment

Concerning Section 1.I.2.c, “After demonstrating that laboratory QA/QC has been maintained, the statistical demonstration for each chemical of concern (COC) shall be made. The standard deviation and variance for COC shall be evaluated on the results of the four composite samples,” a commenter stated that nowhere in the public participation document is there a list of chemicals of concern (COC); nor is there an explanation of “standard deviation and variance” such that a reasonable determination can be made for the evaluation results.

A commenter further stated that six samples, rather than four samples, should be required. The commenter asked for clarification on how the number of samples needed for the statistical demonstration is determined.

Division Response

The guidance document for statistical methods can be found in SW 846 (Chapter 9) where the methodology and calculations for determining standard deviation and variance are explained. SW 846 was specifically referred to in Section 1.I.2.c and can be found on the EPA website or through an internet search. The Division believes that referring to the source of the calculations and methodology in this section of the permit fulfills the requirement for public participation. The Permit requires in Section I.I.1 and Section I.I.2 that samples be analyzed for TCLP organic constituents and TCLP metals. The list of these constituents is located in the Code of Federal Regulation, CFR 261.24. This list identifies chemicals of concern (COC) and is the basis of making the regulatory determination that is waste is hazardous or nonhazardous.

As stated above, if the validity of statistical analysis can be demonstrated with sufficient confidence using four composite samples, then the required demonstration is adequate. Otherwise, more composite samples will need to be analyzed and included in the calculations to make the waste determination. If Stericycle, using more composite samples, is still unable to demonstrate with required confidence that the bottom ash is not hazardous, the ash must be managed as a characteristic hazardous waste until the next sampling event.

No change is made to the permit based on this comment.

Comment

Concerning Section II.A.1: “…in accordance with the design submitted as part of the permit application and in accordance with the R315-301 thru 320 of the Utah Administrative Code.”

A commenter questioned why R315-319 “Coal Combustion Residuals Requirement” was being applied here and requested clarification.

Division Response

Section II.A.1 will be rewritten as follows:

“…in accordance with the design submitted as part of the permit application and in accordance with the applicable requirements of R315-301 thru 320 of the Utah Administrative Code.”

Comment

Concerning Section III.G.1: “The Permittee shall inspect the facility to prevent malfunctions and deterioration, operator errors, and discharges that may cause or lead to the release of wastes or contaminated materials to the environment or create a threat to human health or the environment.”

A commenter stated that while malfunctions or deterioration could be measured, how would Stericycle determine a threat to human health or the environment? The commenter would like clarification on this statement.

Division Response

The Director’s intent in Section III.G.1 is to place on Stericycle the burden of operating and maintaining the facility in compliance with its solid waste permit. While it is impossible to predict the cause or magnitude of an emergency situation that would lead to the release of waste, the Contingency Plan would be implemented in any circumstance where there was an immediate threat to the facility or employees. The Contingency Plan primarily addresses releases that would impact worker safety. After the Contingency Plan is implemented, the facility is required to contact the Division.

Releases of medical waste, ash, or other nonhazardous waste to the environment do not necessarily pose a risk to human health or the environment. However, in accordance with Section I.F., the Permittee is required to inform the Director of releases of these wastes to the environment. The Permittee’s report is to state what actions the Permittee has taken or is taking to protect human health and the environment. The Director may order the Permittee to take additional remedial action as necessary to protect human health and the environment.

No change is made to the permit based on this comment.

Comment

A commenter cited a section of the permit application that states: “…Stericycle is currently the only provider of collection, transportation, treatment, and disposal services for certain types of medical waste, including those that are required by law or organizational policy to be incinerated.”

The commenter asked what statutes and/or regulation is Stericycle using to confirm the statement “…including those that are required by law”?

Division Response

The statement to which the commenter refers is in the Market Analysis and Public Benefits section of Stericycle’s permit application. That statement did not result in a permit condition with which Stericycle must comply.

The Solid Waste Permitting and Management Rule R315-316-2(2) states: “Infectious waste consisting of recognizable human anatomical remains including human fetal remains shall be disposed by incineration or interment in a location appropriate for human remains.”

As stated elsewhere, Utah law allows for incineration of solid waste. Stericycle’s permit describes the wastes it may incinerate and the wastes it may not accept for incineration.

No change is made to the permit based on this comment.

Comment

A commenter referred to the cultural resource inventory for the State of Utah School and Institutional Trust Lands report submitted with the Stericycle permit application. The commenter stated that the reports ended by stating that the sites could be adversely affected by the proposed Stericycle facility and questioned whether the archeological benefit, understanding and discoveries of the two referenced sites (42TO5955, 43TO5957) outweighed the “profiteering of Stericycle.”

Division Response

The Director has concluded from the October 6, 2014 letter from State of Utah School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration (SITLA) and the October 9, 2014 letter from Utah Division of State History that the archeological sites would not be impacted by the construction of this facility at the location denoted in the permit application.

No change is made to the permit based on this comment.

Comment

The commenter called attention to the June 6, 2014 letter from the US Fish and Wildlife Service and the June 2, 2017 letter from the Utah Division of Natural Resources, both of which are included in Exhibit E of the Permit Application. The commenter was concerned that Stericycle had not performed the Migratory Bird Treaty Act review recommended by the US Fish and Wildlife Service or given appropriate consideration to burrowing owls under the Utah Sensitive Species List. The commenter believes the Director has a fiduciary responsibility under the Public Trust Doctrine and the Precautionary Principle to require Stericycle to consider the matters raised in these letters.

Division Response

Under R315-302-1(2) (a)(ii) , facilities are not allowed to be located within ecologically and scientifically significant natural areas, including wildlife management areas and habitat for threatened or endangered species as designated pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1982.

The Stericycle facility is not located in an ecologically or scientifically significant natural area. The US Fish and Wildlife Service letter included recommendations, not requirements. The Department of Natural Resources letter said that there are records of burrowing owl presence within a two-mile radius of the facility. The letter said the burrowing owl is included in the Utah sensitive species list; it did not identify the burrowing owl as a threatened or endangered species.

The Director discusses the Public Trust Doctrine and the precautionary principle elsewhere in his response to public comments.

No change is made to the permit based on this comment.

Comment

Referring to Appendix A: Plan of Operations, Section 2.0, a commenter indicated that nowhere in this section was there a discussion of covering the sanitation containers such as garbage cans or a discussion of waste reduction such as a recycling program on site. The commenter requested clarification.

Division Response

Under Utah Administrative Code, R316-306-2(14) and R315-303-4(6)(a), a large incinerator that allows the public to deliver household solid waste directly to the facility is required to provide containers in which the public may place recyclable materials. Stericycle does not receive general household solid waste; nor does it allow the general public to deliver waste directly to the Tooele County facility.

The Solid Waste Permitting and Management Rules do not require that sanitation containers, including garbage cans, be covered. Nor do the rules require Stericycle to have a waste reduction or recycling program. The Director does not believe it is necessary to require these things in Stericycle’s permit.

No change is made to the permit based on this comment.

Comment

Concerning Section 8.0: Closure Cost Estimates, the statement “The total cost to close the facility using third party cost in 2015 dollars is estimated to be $500,000,” a commenter stated that this cost needs to be reviewed yearly to assure there are the necessary funds to cover closure costs and not based on a single year dollar value.

Division Response

Solid Waste Permitting and Management Rule R315-309 “Financial Assurance” outlines the requirements for all facilities to establish and maintain a financial assurance mechanism for the life of the facility. As part of this rule, the cost estimate for closure and post-closure must be updated for inflation and submitted to the Division each year with the Annual Report. Every five years, the facility must review the closure costs and provide the Division with a new Closure and Post- Closure cost analysis.

No change is made to the permit based on this comment.

Comment

A commenter noted that there were in-depth analysis for a geotechnical investigation, cultural resources, historical survey, species concerns, and hydrological analysis. The commenter asked why were there no analyses that include, bio cumulative and synergistic effects, to name a few, as well as chemicals of concern to validated evidence, as the statutory requirements of Utah Code Ann. § 19-6-108? Division Response

The intent of Utah Code Ann.§19-6-108 is to generally outline the requirement for a facility to construct and operate in such a manner that it is protective of human health and the environment. The Division believes that requiring a new facility to provide the analyses of geotechnical investigation, cultural resources, historical survey, species concerns, and hydrological analysis sufficiently fulfills the requirements to demonstrate that the facility can be constructed at the proposed location without adversely impacting the local environment.

As Stericycle operates its facility in compliance with its solid waste permit, it is protective of human health and the environment. Stericycle is not required to analyze synergistic or bio-accumulative effects under the solid waste program. Chemicals of concern that may be emitted to the atmosphere are subject to regulation by the Director of the Division of Air Quality.

No change is made to the permit based on this comment.

Comment

A commenter requested that the permit reference to the incinerator be referred to as the “incinerator facility.”

Division Response

The permit was modified to reflect the incinerator facility except in the case where the capacity of the incinerator was specifically called out.

Comment

A commenter noted several typographic errors and requested these errors be corrected.

Division Response

Several errors were corrected, including misspellings, capitalization of the word “Permittee”, corrected zip code of mailing address, reference to Tooele County instead of North Salt Lake, and clarification of language.

Comment

A commenter questioned whether empty and non-intact aerosol cans would be an acceptable waste.

Division Response

The permit language was modified in Section I.C.1.c to specify that prohibited waste included “intact aerosol cans” as well as compressed gas cylinders.

Comment Concerning Section I.D.1.d, a commenter indicated that since Avian Bird Flu was a waste that is easily rendered non-infectious with temperature, the Director’s approval could easily be obtained through a telephone call requesting approval.

Division Response

All requests for Director’s approval shall be documented formally.

No change is made to the permit based on this comment.

Comment

Concerning the Permit condition Section I.D.1.e., a commenter requested that this section be removed or edited since Stericycle was already approved to accept infectious medical waste and the condition conflicted with requirement for the Director’s approval of wastes that were regulated by the Center for Disease Control, Department of Transportation, Department of Agriculture or Homeland Security.

Division Response

The Division included this section of the Permit based on the potential restrictions for management of waste that were of such national importance that those wastes would be specifically regulated by these agencies. The Director believes that any disease that would require scrutiny by these agencies would also require a review and approval from the Director.

No change is made to the permit based on this comment.

Comment

Concerning Permit condition I.I.2.b., a commenter requested clarification of the language clarifying the number of samples sent to the laboratory but allowing for more samples to be obtained from the ash bin.

Division Response

Language in Section I.I.2.b. was changed to clarify that “Four composite samples” are to be sent to the laboratory and the words “A total of…” were removed to allow for more samples to be taken from the ash bin.

Comment

A commenter questioned whether the statement in Section I.I.c.2 referred to the confidence intervals discussed in EPA’s guidance document SW-846 in Chapter 9.

Division Response

The discussion in this section of the permit also refers to SW-846 Chapter 9 and the discussion of confidence intervals. No change is made to the permit based on this comment.

Comment

A commenter requested a language change that more clearly states the intent of obtaining more samples from the ash bin.

Division Response

Language in Section I.I.2.d. was reworded to state “If more than four composite samples are needed to obtain a representative data base from the waste….”

Comment

A commenter requested a permit change that added a statement that the fly ash could also be managed as a nonhazardous waste using the same methodology as the bottom ash.

Division Response

The Director does not dispute that this would be an appropriate change in the future, but believes that the addition of this language is not required to permit this facility and would be better addressed in the future as a separate project.

No change is made to the permit based on this comment.

Comment

Concerning Section II.A.1., a commenter requested that the language be changed to reflect that Stericycle only had conceptual drawings at the time of the permit application and that the drawings would be modified at the time of construction.

Division Response

The Director concurs that only conceptual drawings were available at the time of this permitting process and the language has been modified to reflect this language.

Complete stamped drawings are required before construction begins. As-built drawings describing any changes to the constructions drawings shall be submitted to the Division to reflect the actual construction of the facility.

Comment

Concerning Section III.A.1., a commenter requested that the language of the condition’s third sentence be modified for clarity.

Division Response

Language in Section III.A.1. was changed to “The Permittee shall keep approved modifications of the Plan of Operation in the daily operating record.” Comment

Concerning Section III.B.1.a and III.B.1.b, a commenter requested that the language be clarified to describe when the facility is “operating” instead of “open.”

Division Response

Language in Sections III.B.1.a. and III.B.1.b. were changed to:

I.A.1.a. Lock all facility gates and other access routes during the time the facility is not incinerating waste, processing waste or receiving waste and when it is closed for business;

I.A.1.b. Have at least two persons employed by the Permittee at the facility during all hours that the facility is open for business, incinerating waste, processing waste or receiving waste; and

Comment

Concerning Section III.B.1.c., a commenter requested that the word “construct” be changed to “maintain.”

Division Response

Language in Section III.B.1.c has been modified to:

“Construct and maintain all fencing and any other access controls as described in Attachment 6 to prevent access.”

Comment

Concerning Section III.C.1., a commenter requested clarification of language to better describe the process of rejecting waste.

Division Response

Language in Section IIIC.1. was modified to:

“The Permittee shall train on-site personnel in facility operation, including waste load inspection, hazardous waste identification, and personal safety and protection as described in Attachment 5. The Permittee shall train employees to recognize prohibited wastes and safely remove and reject them from treatment.”

Comment

Concerning Section III.E.2.b., a commenter requested the language be modified for clarity to describe the activity. Division Response

Language in Section III.E.2.b. was modified to:

“When unacceptable waste is discovered, the non-conforming waste shall be removed and information about the non-conforming waste shall be recorded in the daily operating record by the end of the operating day.”

Comment

Concerning Section III.H, a commenter disputed the requirement for Stericycle to assemble a “daily” operating record. The commenter objected to the requirement that the “daily operating record” be signed at the end of each day and that the operating record consist of a unique document that summarizes the incinerator operation in view of the fact that Stericycle maintains a computer data acquisition system that records weights and temperatures of the incinerator.

Division Response

Utah Administrative Code, R315-302-2(3)(a) and (b) require that a daily operating record be completed at the end of each day of operation. In accordance with Utah Administrative Code, R315-302-2(3)(b)(vi), the Director requires the daily operating record to be signed by the person responsible for preparing it.

No change was made to the permit based on this comment.

Comment

The commenter objected to the permit requirements that the daily operating record include the average primary combustion chamber temperature (See Permit Section III.H.1.) and the weight of ash (See Permit Section III.H.2.) generated each day. The commenter stated that there was no requirement in R315-302-2(3) for the requirement of recording the primary combustion temperature.

Division Response

Section III.H.1.C of the Permit requires that the range of the primary combustion temperature range be recorded in order to demonstrate whether solid wastes are being treated effectively.

Under Administrative Code R315-262-11, Stericycle is required to determine whether the ash from the incineration process is hazardous or nonhazardous waste. To avoid the expense of testing all ash as it is generated, Stericycle has proposed to evaluate a single bin of its bottom ash once every three months for hazardous waste constituents. Based on statistical analysis, Stericycle and the Director assume that if this bin does not constitute hazardous waste, the ash generated during the next three months will not constitute hazardous waste. This assumption is based on the underlying assumption that the processing conditions are consistent during the next three months with the conditions that produced the bin of ash that was evaluated.

The daily record of the primary combustion chamber temperature demonstrates whether the conditions during the next three months are consistent with the conditions that produced the test bin of ash. Without this information, Stericycle would have to test the ash as generated to determine whether it is hazardous.

Based on the comment, the requirements to record the daily generation of bottom ash and fly ash are removed from the permit.

Comment

A commenter stated that Stericycle’s proposal for a 20th-of-the-month report, instead of a daily operating record, was submitted in good faith as a more reasonable, meaningful and accurate record of the facility’s generated waste.

Division Response

Utah Administrative Code, R315-302-2(3)(a) and (b) requires that a daily operating record be completed at the end of each day of operation. In accordance with Utah Administrative Code, R315-302-2(3)(b)(vi), the Director requires the daily operating record to be signed by the person responsible for preparing it.

No change was made to the permit based on this comment.

Comment

A commenter questioned the process of making a regulatory determination of the bottom ash and indicated that the ash analysis plan would be modified in the future based on EPA’s final rules (May 30, 2017) that requires that solid and hazardous waste determinations be accurate.

Division Response

The ash analysis plan in the Permit is the plan the Director and Stericycle agreed upon after months of discussion. Stericycle may propose a modification to the permit, and the Director will entertain a proposed modification.

No change is made to the Permit based on this comment.