ATA Opposes EPA Plan To Label Tires as Waste

This story appears in the Aug. 16 print edition of Transport Topics.

An Environmental Protection Agency proposal to designate scrap tires and used oil as solid waste could be extremely costly for the trucking industry, American Trucking Associations said.

EPA’s proposal would reduce the options for truckers to discard these materials, said Glen Kedzie, ATA’s vice president and environmental affairs counsel.

If the proposal becomes law, facilities that traditionally have accepted scrap tires and used oil would be required to add costly emissions devices to comply with federal Clear Air Act requirements. As a result, carriers could face increased fees to dispose of the materials because of a decline in the number of outlets available that can accept the materials or burn them as fuel in industrial furnaces.

“ATA does not want to turn back the hands of time and undo the progress our industry has made in recycling these items, nor do we wish to see the rates we pay for legal disposal of tires and oil skyrocket,” Kedzie wrote in comments to EPA. “As the saying goes, if it is not broke, why fix it?”

ATA’s comments were among the hundreds filed with EPA, many of them opposed to the proposed rule.

ATA said that most motor carriers treat scrap tires as a useful commodity, keeping them properly stored and “subsequently contracting with third parties to deliver them to beneficial end-use markets.”

In its supporting documents, EPA said that about 15% of all scrap tires come from heavy-duty trucks. The agency said it proposed the rule to comply with congressional mandates and recent federal court rulings.

ATA also expressed concern that the proposal could eliminate important markets for used oil.

Trucking companies require a significant amount of oil to keep their engines running, ATA said. The nation’s 2.3 million over-the-road trucks, for example, require 44 quarts of oil per oil change, which occurs typically five times a year.

Most fleets, truck dealers and other maintenance facilities enter into long-term contracts with fuel processors for the sale of their used oil, ATA said.

“The used oil fuel industry has run seamlessly and been economically viable for many decades,” ATA said. “ATA does not support EPA’s attempt to reinvent a process with a proven track record of success.”

Classifying off-specification oil as a solid waste and allowing its combustion only in the relatively few facilities would “invite midnight dumping and other alternative disposal practices that harm the environment,” ATA warned.

Off-speculation oil — the type of oil generally used by trucking — contains halogens, a group of five chemically related nonmetallic elements, in a concentration of more than 4,000 parts per million, Kedzie said.

In testimony at a June EPA hearing, Scott Parker, executive director of NORA, an association of recyclers formerly known as the National Oil Recyclers Association, said there currently is a “steady and reliable market” for off-speculation used oil.

If the proposed rule is adopted, Parker said, “fewer outlets will result in dramatically increased transportation costs from the geographically diverse generator locations to these limited facilities.”

The Automotive Aftermarket Industry Association also urged EPA to reconsider its designation for used oil.

Since 1985, regulations governing used oil have encouraged recycling. They “are now considered traditional fuels and have become valuable commodities as a result,” said Aaron Lowe, vice president of government affairs for AAIA.

“If the markets for used oil are diminished, the cost of doing business for many companies will increase due to higher treatment and disposal costs associated with the commodity being classified as a “solid waste,” Lowe wrote. “These additional costs will further negatively impact the economics of our business in the midst of a worldwide recession.”