United States Solid Waste and
Environmental Protection Emergency Response ! EPA530-R-95-006
Agency (5305W) ; May 1995
vxEPA RCRA Implementation
Plan (RIP):
Fiscal Years 1996-97
-------
-------
RCRA Implementation Plan (RIP)
FY 1996-1997
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Solid Waste/RCRA Information Center (5305W)
401 M Street SW
Washington, D.C. 20460
-------
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D:C. 20460
MAY.', 8 IS95
. . • . -OFFICE OF
SOLI-O WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
ition Plan
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: FY 1996-9? RCRA
PROM: Elliott P. La'
_ '.. Assistant Admini
TO: Regional Waste Management Division Directors
Regions I - X
.State Waste Management Directors
Attached is the final FY 1996-97 RCRA Implementation Plan -
(RIP). We appreciate the commitment you made to assist us in
developing this guidance. OSWER has for several years looked for
opportunities to increase available Regional and State
flexibility in our RCRA operating guidance. As part of that
effort, in FY 1994 OSWER piloted the conversion of its annual
operating guidance to a two year cycle. As part of this pilot,
the FY 1995 RIP was issued as a brief, clarifying addendum to the
guidance issued in FY 1994. As the States and Regions have
enthusiastically endorsed the concept of a 2-year planning cycle,
the FY 1996-97 RIP is our first 2-year guidance issued as
standard operating procedure.
As part of our effort to develop comprehensive operating
guidance and accountability -mechanisms, we invited Regional,
State, and Tribal, representatives to participate in our RIP and
State Grant workgroups this year. These workgroups completed
five months of work and made recommendations in Washington D.C.
at the December 13-15, 1995 National RIP/State Grant meeting.
The attached ,FY 1996-97 RIP includes both changes and
clarifications to the FY 1994 RIP, the FY 1995 Addendum, as well
as additional guidance in the following areas:
Waste Minimization -
Corrective Action -
State Grants
Beginning of Year Plans -
Indian Programs
Environmental Justice
Information Management
State'Authorization
Permitting\Closure
Subtitle D activities
Printed an Recycled Paper
-------
However, we need to draw special attention to several areas.
These include: ,
- Budgeting for Community-based Environmental Protection,
- Environmental Justice,
- Coordination with the Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance (OECA), and
Substantive changes in the .Beginning of Year Plan (BYP).
In an effort to improve how EPA serves the public, the
Agency is moving forward with Community-based Envirbnmental
Protection. In his February 15, 1995, memorandum to Regional
Administrators, Deputy Administrator Fred Hahsen outlined the
steps EPA Regional Offices should be considering in developing
their strategies to implement this concept. For FY 1996 and FY
1997, a minimum level of 20% of each Regional budget should be
directed to support Community-based Environmental Protection;
this change should.also reflect an equivalent number of FTEs
assigned .to community-based efforts. The FY 1996-97 RIP provides
Regions and States with the flexibility to balance existing
programmatic priorities with new EPA. initiatives such as
Community-based Environmental Protection.
In the area of Environmental Justice, OSWER has developed an
Action Agenda which forms a^ strategy for addressing key
environmental justice issues. The overall strategy makes a
concerted effort to identify explicit actions which can be taken
by Headquarters and the Regions to address environmental justice
issues. This agenda can be used to address environmental justice
concerns and form the basis of. Regional strategies for site
specific activities. The importance of addressing environmental
justice concerns during RCRA permitting activities continues to
be a priority for the Agency and this Office. The Regions should
continue to implement environmental justice pilots as discussed
in the RIP.. :.
During FY.95, EPA HQ completed a reorganization of all
enforcement into a new Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance (OECA).. As a result, of this reorganization/ some
corrective action responsibilities have been reassigned from
OSWER to this Office. To ensure consistent reporting for
corrective action, OSWER and OECA will be working together to
coordinate the content and timing of OSW's Beginning, of Year Plan
process with OECA's MOA process.
Finally, there have been several changes made to the FY 1995
BYP format. In response to concerns raised by Regions and States
over reflection of actual workload, we have added questions to
the BYP on Permit Renewals, Waste Minimization, Tribal Programs,
and Geographic/Combustion Initiatives. In addition, there will
be no agency STARS reporting in-FY 1996. As mandated by the
Government Performance and Results Act, EPA is currently
developing a system for establishing environmental goals, and for
measuring progress made in.meeting those goals. For example, the
-------
agency will be using more environmental indicators and less bean
counting as measures of performance. However, until a new system
.is in place, the FY 1996 BYP guidance will serve as the primary
accountability mechanism for the RCRA program. The FY 1996 BYP
will be issued as. an addendum to the FY 1996-97 RIP after a final
agreement is reached with OECA regarding coordination with their
MOA process.
Thank you for your active participation in developing the
various comppnents of the FY 1996-97 operating guidance . As
.always, w.e would appreciate any comments or suggestions you have
for improving future guidance development.
Attachment ;
cc: Tom Kennedy, Executive Director, ASTSWMO
Michael Shapiro, Director, OSW
Steven Herman, .Assistant Administrator, OECA
RCRA Branch Chiefs, Regions I - X
Devereaux Barnes, Director, PSPD
Jeff Tumarkin, PSPD >
-------
-------
INTRODUCTION
The FY 1996-97 RCRA Implementation Plan .(RIP) defines the
-.national policy and strategic goals and. priority, activities for.
the RCRA solid and hazardous waste.program. These goals and
.activities are key elements- in EPA, State', and Tribal efforts "to
promote waste minimization, ensure environmentally sound waste
.management,, -and-reduce risks posed by releases of hazardous waste
to.the environment. The Office of Solid.Waste's(OSW) vision is
to move toward a more flexible- RCRA program tihat protects public .
health and the environment through a variety of regulatory and
non-regulatory approaches' in partnership with the States and
Tribes. , •'''.••.•-.- • '
• As the RCRA program faces changing priorities, it is
essential that we' take steps to both strengthen the program and
better .communicate the results of the RCRA program. OSW's
strategic goals for-FY 1996-97 are to: • . : ' . :
••,/'.' o Exercise leadership in,promoting industrial
• . waste minimization while moving, towards a • ••'-•'
• waste management system that tailors .
managreiment approaches to risk. .
o Refocus information and recordkeeping to meet
customer needs .and. take advantage of new
\technology to streamline information ,-..''
'collection, management, and dissemination. '
o Establish a dynamic partnership among EPA, ; .
States, and Trib.es that provide for mutual
. ' priority setting and worksharing to implement
the. RCRA program. . . ,
.o Reduce federal.oversight while emphasizing •',-•'
technical assistance and core program
. consistency issues. , •'
o Provide national leadership for municipal
solid waste source reduction and recycling.
o Make:cleanups happen; focus on performance
; rather than process.
' The FY 1996-97 RI-P was developed within the above .strategic
framework, as well as the broader agency themes of Environmental
Justice and Community-based, Environmental Protection.
-------
In the area of Environmental Justice, OSWER' has developed an
Action Agenda which forms a strategy for addressing key: _ . [
environmental justice issues. The'overall strategy identifies
explicit actions' which can be taken by Headquarters and the
Regions to address environmental justice issues. This agenda
should be used to address environmental justice concerns and form
the basis of Regional strategies for site specific activities..
The importance of'addressing environmental justice concerns
during RCRA permitting and cleanup activities continues to be a
priority f oar-the Agency and this Office. The Regions should
continue to implement environmental justice'pilots as discussed .
in the RIP. ,
Additionally, the FY 1996-97 RIP provides the flexibility to
balance existing programmatic priorities with the new Community-
based Environmental Protection (CBEP) initiative. The purpose of
this initiative is to bring the government- closer to the people
it is meant to' serve. Instead of addressing environmental
problems piecemeal, statute by statute., and then applying a one-
'size-fits-all-solution, CBEP addresses environmental problems in
the context of the community in which they occur. .On February
15, 1995, the Deputy Administrator of EPA asked each Region and
each national program office to develop action plans for
promoting CBEP. In response to this 'request, OSWER issued a
draft action plan on April 28, 1995, which presents current,
short-term and Ipnger-term OSWER activities to support CBEP.
Regions will also-be expected to incorporate appropriate RCRA
activities into the action, plans that they develop.
Within this framework, the FY 1996 and FY 1997 Beginning of
Year Plans (BYP) will serve as the primary vehicle through which
EPA Regions will.report on projected activities and
accomplishments in the RCRA program.
-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PERMITTING & CLOSURE
. -. The permitting strategic.goals/for FY'96. and FY' 97"are'to:
(1) demonstrate progress in the permitting"universe consistent
with the priority .ranking of facilities; (2) develop a strategy '
to ensure that operating Boilers and,Industrial Furnaces (BIFs)'
meet all- appropriate requirements for safe operation; and (3).
prevent and reducing risks at closed and closing land disposal
facilities. Permitting priorities for the next two years are:
1. High priority interim status land disposal and
combustion facilities; and
2. Permit renewals for high priority land disposal and
combustion facilities. ,
. ' - • '< '• '•
CORRECTIVE ACTION
. ' In FY 96-97 Regions and States are strongly'encouraged tor
make renewed efforts to expedite investigations and cleanup
decisions at RCRA facilities, however, EPA--along with the States
and other .stakeholders---is exploring, alternatives that may result .
in a "faster, better" program. Certain, "streamlining" approaches
have already been found successful by Regions and States.
' . - • ..' ' ' .-.•'.''" •.'(•.•
In addition, "FY 96 will.be the first year for the program to
fully implement several important new.tools that will allow EPA"
and the States to do a much- better job of tracking the^ progress
and measuring the environmental results of the corrective action.
program. These new. tools.are expected to be of considerable
benefit to Regions, States and EPA headquarters..
STATE AUTHORIZATION
During FY'96-97, EPA will continue exploring authorization
process and management structure changes that will improve the
pace of Subtitle C authorization among the States. Through the
HWIR rule-making process, we will explore the possibility of '
increased authorization flexibility. EPA will soon issue -
guidance to streamline the authorization process, for EPA rules
that are less stringent, and therefore optional for States to
adopt, since many of them offer more flexible'.procedures. EPA
will also explore streamlining opportunities for all other rules.
-------
RCRA §3011 STATE HAZARDOUS WASTE GRANT
' This is the .first, time in several years that." the .State
Hazardous Waste Grant has "been addressed in the RIP. As the
allocation methodology for this grant has recently gone through a
substantive reevaluation process, this section of the RIP
highlights changes that will be .made in the FY'96 allocation
methodology. This section also provides clarification, for the
Geographic Initiatives (GIs) portion of the grant through a._
discussion.of expectations for.and restrictions associated with
these initiatives.
WASTE MINIMIZATION '
The Waste Minimization National Plan (November 1994)
outlines major goals, objectives, and action items toward
national reductions in persistent, bioaccumulative', and toxic.
constituents present in hazardous waste. Particular preference.
is given to source reduction and recycling as waste management
techniques. implementation of the Waste-Minimization National
Plan requires program emphasis toward 'more contact and
interaction with hazardous waste'generators. Regions and States
are encouraged to promote opportunities- for waste minimization in
facility permitting, inspection,. enforcement, outreach, and
technical assistance activities.
RCRA INFORMATION MANAGEMENT '
During FY'96-97 information resources should be targeted towards
areas addressing both immediate and strategic improvements:
4 collection and quality.assurance of data for the 1995
Biennial Report;
+ assuring that information reflecting, program milestones and
environmental goals-will be timely, accurate and complete in
RCRIS; •'••'-. ' -
+ supporting.information and business re-engineering
activities for the Waste Information Needs (WIN) initiative;
and • ' ' •. . ,':...'.
4 utilize existing databases to prioritize waste
minimization activities. .'-.-•
-------
RCRA ACTIVITIES IN INDIAN COUNTRY;
. .The objective of QSW s; Indiari 'Program is 'to: 1) build tribal
capacity to implement RCRA,'2) develop tribal organizational .
infrastructures 'to support RCRA activities and 3) build
partnerships among tribes, states and local communities.
, The primary goal for FY'96-9.7 will be to assist-tribes in
building,the capacity to develop and .administer environmental
programs. The Regions and,Tribes . should work together to '
determine which specific program activities each Tribe 'should
undertake, depending on need, capacity and resource.availability.
While Tribes are not currently eligible to receive funding under
RCRA Section 3011, they are eligible to receive grant.assistance
for ..both" hazardous and solid waste activities under RCRA Section
8001. • . . ' •, -
MUNICIPAL AND INDUSTRIAL
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT .
The objectives -of EPA's municipal'solid waste (MSW) 'program
for FY 1996-97 are to: (1) ensure protection of health arid the-
environment; (2) comply with the mandates of Subtitle D .of RCRA;
(3) promote pollution prevention .by fostering source reduction
and recycling; (4) implement the Administrator's recycling
market development strategy ("Recycling Means Business"); (5)
actively participate in partnerships to promote and implement
integrated waste management; and, (6) provide national
leadership. -••. ' . " ' .
-------
-------
PERMITTING
&
CLOSURE
-------
-------
PERMITTING & CLOSURE
The permitting strategic goals for.FY'96 and FY' 97 are to:.
(1) demonstrate-progress in the permitting universe.consistent
with the priority ranking of facilities; -(2)'develop a strategy
to'ensure that operating Boilers and Industrial -Furnaces (BIFs) '
meet all appropriate requirements for safe operation; and; (3)
prevent, and reducing risks at closed'and closing land disposal"
facilities. Permitting priorities for the next two years are:
1. High priority interim status land disposal and
combustion facilities;, and
- ' • -*••• ' " /•-'•. - • .'.'''
2. Permit renewals for high priority land disposal and
combustion facilities.
; When deciding on priorities between these two areas, the .'-..-
Regions and States should decide which activity provides the most
environmental benefit. in addition, the Regions and States
should emphasize risk reduction through closure activities and
waste minimization along with .environmental justice
considerations. Permitting a'ctivities at certain Subpart X
facilities are aLso important. •- .
Final permit determinations, permit modifications, permit
renewals, closure plan approvals, and certification of closure
are benchmarks,for facilities as they meet their environmental'
obligations under RCRA. These activities are key measures for
-bringing facilities fully into the RCRA system and for ensuring
that they fulfill their obligations-throughout facility life.
DEMONSTRATING PROGRESS AT PRIORITY FACILITIES
It is important for Regions and States to demonstrate
progress in all areas of the permitting universe consistent
with the priority ranking of facilities.
Regions\and States should implement activities to achieve
both timely reduction of existing risk and long term .prevention
of future risks at facilities in the permitting universe.
. Regions and States emphasize permitting of high priority land
disposal facilities and combustion facilities. As a means of
reducing risk, Regions and States should look at waste reduction
opportunities during permitting of these high priority
facilities. Reducing risk at closed and closing facilities is
also a priority. However, Regions and States should look for
opportunities in corrective action and enforcement mechanisms to
accomplish this goal. . . '. ' .
Regions and States should continue to emphasize permitting
activities at high.priority land disposal facilities, boilers and
industrial.furnaces, and closed facilities. Regions and States
-------
emphasize permit renewal activities at high priority land
disposal facilities and combustion facilities. Due to resource
considerations, Regions and States ..will be given flexibility to
determine how many priority facilities are targeted for permit
renewals. • • •
States- and Regions must choose how to. handle medium and low
priority facilities where activities are underway. If
substantial work has been completed toward a permit activity, the
most efficient choice may be to complete that activity. However,
where substantial work remains, .movement through the pipeline may
not be justified. Regions and States should expedite action at
high priority facilities, even if 'this means deferring activity
at lower priority facilities. "
Permitting activities should emphasize the most effective
means to achieve timely risk reduction. At/some facilities,
obtaining timely risk reduction may mean expediting permit . .
issuance. At other facilities, especially, those requiring
closure activities, imposing corrective .action through Section
3008 (h) orders may be the most effective way to accomplish near
term risk reduction while permitting Activities are on a longer
schedule. Likewise, risk reduction may be accomplished through
waste minimization and pollution prevention activities at -
facilities. These, activities should be encouraged when
developing Regional and State permitting strategies for high
priority activities.
BOILERS AMD INDUSTRIAL FURNACES (BIPs) ARE A SIGNIFICANT CATEGORY
OF FACILITIES TEAT REMAIN TO BE PERMITTED
Regions and States should develop a strategy 'to ensure that.
operating BIFs meet all applicable requirements for safe .
operation.
For FY'96, Regions and State should continue their
permitting priorities for combustion facilities in accordance
with the priority scheme included in the November, 1994 release
of the Waste Minimization and Hazardous Waste Combustion
Strategy. This-consists of giving higher priority to existing
interim- status facilities for which a final permit decision would
result in the greatest environmental benefits to the surrounding
communities or 'the. greatest reduction in overall risk to the
public. Regions and States now have flexibility to include
permit renewals in this category if they meet the priority
criteria. Low priority should continue to be given to those
permit applications of new, non-replacement combustion
facilities. . • .
Regions and States should continue to call in all
outstanding permit applications according to the permitting
priority of the strategy, but in a manner that would not trigger
-------
permitting'-time -requirements which'may divert resources away, from
the high•priority" permit actions. However, the overall goal.is
.. . to call in .all co'mJpustion permit Applications within the shortest
time possible. ... • • . •. ' • ' ' . .'...'• * . "
PREVENTION AND RISK REDUCTION AT CLOSED AND CLOSING LAND DISPOSAL
• FACILITIES. ;.- . . •• • : ' ; .
Addressing, environmental risks at closed- and closing.land
disposal, units is an important goal of the RCRA.program.
Regions and States should continue to conduct a variety -of -
activities to address .environmental risk at high priority land
.. disposal facilities. At some facilities, post-closure permits •
should, be issued, while at others, environmental risk.may be
addressed using enforcement, actions or state. mechanisms. For:'.
previously permitted facilities, the permit should.be extended to"
cover the.post-closure cafe period., At'unpermitted facilities/
Regions and States'should select the activity"to address the
facility based on site-specific factors including the financial
status of the owner or operator, recalcitrance,' and availability
;of suitable state mechanisms. '.'•'' . . '' •
SUBPART X (MISCELLANEOUS UNITS), PERMITTING ASSISTANCE .
Implementation of' Subpart X. in Regions and States should
promote national consistency. .' '. . . • "
During FY'95, OSW will complete development of> the "Subpart X
Permit Writers' Technical Resource Document and the Subpart X
Permit Writers' training course. Although the permitting ' .
priorities in FY' 9j6 will continue to focus on making progress at
high priority land disposal and BIF facilities, and reduction of
risks at-high priority closed facilities, it is anticipated that
some permit determinations at high priority Subpart X (e.g;,
- OB/OD) facilities will be made. High priority Subpart X
facilities could include .Federal .facilities treating large
volumes of ordnance on a regular basis; To help foster a
consistent .approach'in the permitting of these types of TSDFs,.
the Office of Solid Waste will selectively provide technical
assistance where needed.' . ,."•'•,'..•
DEVELOP A STRATEGY TO RESPOND EFFECTIVELY TO ALL ENVIRONMENTAL
JUSTICE ISSUES .
Regions and States should consider environmental justice
concerns as they .arise during, the RCRA permitting process. .
Regions and States should develop mechanisms to respond
effectively to environmental 'justice concerns.at priority;ranked
: 'facilities. The" importance of addressing environmental _ justice ,
concerns at hazardous waste management.facilities was discussed
-------
in che FY'95 RIP Addendum and the'OSWER 1994 Environmental
Justice Task Force Draft-Report. The Regions have recognized the
importance of responding'to environmental justice in the
Implementation Plans they submitted in response to the-OSWER's .
Task Force Draft Report. .
•i .
For FY'96 Regions and -States should continue their
commitment'to look for opportunities to address, patterns of
disproportionately high and adverse environmental effects and
human health impacts on low-income and minority communities that
may result from hazardous waste management activities. . Regions
and States should commit to conducting at least one environmental
justice pilot project in an area- that is targeted in FY'96 for ,
priority permitting activities. These pilot projects could.
involve various activities including: increasing public
involvement by tailoring outreach activities to affected
communities, factoring unique environmental justice •
considerations into public health surveys or assessments,
evaluating demographics (e.g., examine population and income
levels at. various RCRA.sites), and including specific permit • •
conditions to address demographic concerns. ,
THE OFFICE OF RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT WILL PROVIDE TECHNICAL
REVIEW OF RD&D PERMITS
As the corrective, action program continues-to progress,
facilities are likely to have a greater interest in conducting
small and large-scale treatability .studies for treatment
technologies. Small-scale studies can be implemented both on-
and off-site through the current or revised treatability Study
Exemption rule (assuming the state has adopted the rule). .
However, larger pilot-scale, studies (i.e., greater than 10,000
kg), including most in-situ studies, may require permit-
modifications or RD&D permits (40'CFR 270.65). For these .
situations-; RCRA permit writers may consider using the Office of
Research and Development's' (ORD's): expertise to assist in the '
review of permit'applications. ORD has agreed to provide-
technical support .for RD&D applications when, staff resources are
available. The permit writer may .contact Doug Grosse with ORD's
Cincinnati Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory at (513/569-
7844) for further information. • ;
-------
CORRECTIVE ACTION
-------
-------
CORRECTIVE ACTION
I. Overview . .
For the'past several years the general strategy for -
implementing the RCRA Corrective'Action program'has. consisted of
the following 'main elements: ,
'.'. . -; Work toward completing .initial assessments and NCAPS
rankings' at all TSDFs. : ..''..
- Focus resources and .actions at High NCAPS facilities;
- Continue implementing'the.stabilization-initiative;
. - Build the program's capabilities through effective
worksharing arrangements with the States;
- Tailored oversight .and disinvestment from lower priority
.,' 'facilities when feasible. .;.-.•'"
This strategy has been successful in a number, of areas: most
TSDs. have been assessed and prioritized for corrective action;
.twenty-four states -are authorized for 'the program; and, there has
been improvement in implementing the stabilization initiative.
The Agency believes that this general strategy for implementing'
the program still makes sense given the size of the program and
the finite resources available to EPA and the States. Thus, in
FY 96 Regions and States should continue to direct-their '.
activities and resources according to this same general strategy.
It has become increasingly evident, however,, that this
strategy.(which originated from the 1990 RCRA Implementation
Study), has not been entirely successful. The rate of progress in
implementing actual cleanup actions at RCRA facilities has not
,,met the original expectations of the Agency. . To some extent this
can be attributed to the-"command and control" oversight approach
that has been the norm in this program, and has been presumed in
guidance (e.g., the CAP) since the program/s inception, as well
as in the 1990 Subpart S proposal. -In the context of; finalizing
Subpart S regulations, EPA--along with the States and other
stakeholders--is exploring alternatives-to this traditional
oversight approach that may result in a "faster, .better" program.
•In the meantime, Regions and. States are strongly encouraged to
make renewed efforts to expedite investigations and cleanup
decisions at RCRA facilities. Certain "streamlining" approaches
have already been found successful by Regions and States; these
are discussed further in Section III of this Chapter.
In addition, FY 96 will be the first year for the program to
fully.implement several important- new tools that will allow EPA
and the States to do a much better job of tracking the progress
• and measuring the environmental results of the corrective action
program.'.These new tools, which are expected to be of
: ' ' • - . 10 . . '- •." - ' • ;
-------
considerable benefit to Regions, States and EPA headquarters, are
•described in Section III of this chapter. ' , . , .
II. General Implementation Approach
A. ASSESSMENTS
'Regions and States should ensure that initial ' , .
assessments have Jbeen completed at all TSDs'in the
Workload Universe by the end of FY96.
For several years one: of the primary goals of this program
has been to complete the task of assessing all TSDs as identified
in the workload universe by the end of FY96. We are fairly close
to achieving this assessment'goal. As explained in previous
RIPs, the universe of TSDs subject to this deadline is limited to
the "core" universe of facilities, that are required by statute to
address corrective action concerns. xThis does' not include
converters, non/late filers, .or clean closed facilities. (For
further explanation 'on the workload universe see Sectipn III of .
this Chapter, and the Information Management Chapter of this
.RIP) - ':
Under certain circumstances, there will be some TSDs that
will not be assessed because the RCRA program is transferring
cleanup responsibility to another program (e.g., Federal
facilities to be transferred to Superfund). Regions and States
should finish assessing all remaining TSDs in the workload
universe to ensure that the program can accurately describe the
core universe and can show that program resources are directed
towards the highest priority facilities.
B. IMPLEMENTING .THE STABILIZATION INITIATIVE
The prog-ram will continue to emphasize stabilization
actions to address actual or imminent exposures and to
prevent the further spread of contamination.
The.Stabilization Initiative is the primary implementation
strategy of the corrective action program. The RCRA corrective
action program perceives a greater environmental benefit through
controlling releases, stabilizing, and reducing risks to human
health and the environment at all High priority facilities in the
near term, than in achieving "final", cleanup at fewer sites. The
Stabilization Initiative includes not only implementing near term
interim measures, but also disinvesting from stabilized
facilities where possible and moving on to the next High priority
facility. . ' .
11 • . ' . . .
-------
.Specific guidance on implementing the stabilization
initiative.is available through the Stabilization Strategy and
Guidance (October, 1991). However, .there are a.few points that •
deserve emphasis. .' First;, stabilization measures should be^ ' •
implemented at facilities as-early as possible (i.e., post RFA,
early RFI) and should be implemented~in phases where appropriate
(e.g., source removal in. phase I, and pump and treat of
groundwater in phase' II). Secondly, the Agency continues to
strongly encourage the stabilization of High priority facilities
whether under Federal/State authorities,or through-voluntary
actions.- Lastly, with certain^ exceptions .(e.g. base closure),
final cleanups should be pursued only at High priority facilities
where it is, determined that a.stabilization approach is
inappropriate.based on timing and/or resource considerations, or
is impractical for technical reasons. ; . ' '"• • •-
C. WORKSHARING WITH THE STATES
: Regions should continue to build good working
relationships with the States to increase capabilities
and move States•toward authorization.
The program has seen a significant- increase in the number of
authorized States1 and In the amount, of State involvement with .
corrective action. .As more States become authorized or assume
corrective- action responsibilities prior to. authorization, more
resources will become"available to address the universe of
facilities. Where possible, States not yet authorized but
showing full capability should be given the oversight role at
facilites to free up Regional resources to move, on to other High
priority,facilities. • • •
It should be understood that worksharing arrangements with
States should strive to minimize duplication of effort by
Regional and State .staff.
D. FOCUS ON HIGH PRIORITY FACILITIES--DISINVESTMENT AND
DIFFERENTIAL OVERSIGHT .
Regions and States should seek opportunities ,to
disinvest. from and tailor the level of _' corrective
action oversight at Medium or Low NCAPS facilities
already in the pipeline. .
In FY96, Regions and States should continue efforts to
disinvest from Medium/Low NCAPS facilities. Some progress has
been made in this area, and some Regions- and States have
developed specific policies, and strategies for. disinvesting form
lower priority facilities (Region V is. one example). However,
one of the general findings of the corrective action Regional
....."' 12 . • • --..' ' . '
-------
reviews was 'that considerable opportunities remain for
disinvestment. This will continue to be a program emphasis.
III. Accelerating the Pace of the Program, Making Improvements in
Tracking and Reporting for Corrective Action, and
Environmental Justice.
A. ACCELERATING THE PACE OF THE PROGRAM
• .As explained earlier in this Chapter, the program must
redouble its efforts to increase the rate , at which corrective_
action occurs. In many cases, the-administrative process,, which -
"was designed to be a. flexible'tool to help implement the program,
has become a rigid•structure that can impede rather than assist •
in implementing corrective action at facilities. In order to
achieve the objective of faster; better cleanups, the program
must look for opportunities to use innovative techniques and
processes that will streamline corrective action. A,number of
tools and techniques have been adopted by Regions and States to
expedite the investigation and decision making process, and have.
been described in previous RIPs. These include.:
- Working with owner/operators to.implement priority
stabilization actions as early in the process as. possible;
Encouraging the use of.innovative technical tools? including
new site characterization techniques, and treatment
technologies (e.g. direct push technologies);
- Using performance standards in specifying cleanup
requirements in permits and orders, rather than reviewing
and approving detailed plans;
- Communicating (and educate if necessary) with .
owner/operators early in the process;
- Working with States to encourage the use of .alternate State
authorities to implement cleanups at RCRA facilities, when
feasible and analogous/consistent with RCRA;
- Encouraging owner/operators to initiate appropriate cleanup
actions voluntarily (i.e., 'without prior direction/approval
including cases where there is no existing permit or order,
and no oversight by regulators); . '
- Disinvesting or substantially scaling back oversight of
lower priority sites, as well as certain High priority
facilities where the owner/operator is capable and
trustworthy; . , • •
- ' 13 ' . •: . :
-------
- Working closely and effectively, with.other State/Federal
agencies to share the workload and .avoid any duplicative
oversight. • • . '•"•'••-. ,•••'.
Using the CAMU rule when appropriate,(i.e.,'when.a CAMU -will
result in a better remedy); ' . ' .
Avoiding, unnecessary procedural steps whenever feasible >''
(e.g., eliminate the CMS if a. desirable.remedy can be /
• identified without one).. ' Presumptive remedy guidance ', '•
developed by Superfund may be useful in these situations/
• - Focusing investigations-and cleanup actions based on the
specific environmental priorities within the facility (e.g.,
stabilize the hot spots or off-site- releases while;
.investigating the rest of the site) . •-.'••
Regipns and.. States should also continue to fully and
flexibly' use all available corrective action tools. In keeping
with the FY96 OECA priority operating principles,.the, full range
of enforcement and compliance assurance tools -should be usesd 'in
the corrective,action program. This"includes, relying on
alternative state authorities to implement corrective actions. .
R.CRA enforcement authorities under §7003 and §3013 can be used to
require investigations. Section 7003 is also a powerful tool to
compel cleanups. In addition, multi-media approaches such as
coordinating with the Superfund program and using authorities
under, the CERCLA statute may help expedite investigation and .
cleanup.' ' ' . : • • : '
B. ENVIRONMENTAL INDICATORS
The Environmental Indicators will be the primary measures of
success for the program beginning in FY96. All TSDs
. currently in the pipeline should be evaluated for
Environmental Indicators by the end of FY97.
. In the FY94 RIP, the Environmental Indicators were
introduced as .-"a set of specific, mid- to long-term
implementation goals for the Corrective Action program...These
goals will be oriented toward achieving specific environmental
results." In-July of FY94, the definitions and guidance for two
Environmental indicators were finalized. These Environmental
Indicators represent a significant departure from the current
reliance on administrative processes to indicate the corrective
action status. Instead, the Environmental Indicators are a
direct evaluation of site conditions and allow the Agency to
report the result of activities. . . .•
The Environmental Indicators are. an outgrowth of the
Stabilization Initiative. The Stabilization Initiative uses
-------
•us
interim measures to achieve near term environmental results
(controlling releases and exposure) . The Environmental-;
Indicators provide the means to measure' the results of those near-
term actions, as well as the results of longer term final
cleanups. The Environmental Indicators give the program a unique
opportunity to structure the program's priorities, and measures of
success based'on the actual conditions of the site and the effect
of any actions taken. We no longer .need to travel through the"
entire corrective action pipeline in order to claim success.
The Environmental Indicator determinations were meant to be
achievable goals that should not require exhaustive documentation
or a large expenditure of resources. In many cases, it is'
expected that these determinations can be based on a relatively
cursory review, of information readily available to the Region or
the State. Accordingly, we-are setting-the goal of having all
'facilities currently in the pipeline•evaluated for Environmental
Indicators by the eiid of FY97..
C. IMPROVEMENTS IN TRACKING AND REPORTING CORRECTIVE ACTION
' * . . '
Regions and States should track as many actions taking
place at RCRA facilities as possible, including state
analogous actions and. -voluntary aqtions,
In addition to improving the rate of corrective action,, the
program also needs to better communicate its successes. The
program now has the capability to account for the work happening
under EPA or an authorized state, state programs with analogous
remedial activities, and. work occurring through voluntary
actions. Tracking ,'each of these activities is highly encouraged.
The program is also moving towards results-oriented tracking and
reporting'. Accordingly, use of the Environmental Indicators is
key to measuring the program's success.
Non-HSWA state- cleanup programs play a significant role in
implementing remedial actions analogous to corrective action at
RCRA facilities in many Regions. Although the Region may not be
able to directly influence where a non-HSWA program focuses its
resources, it is to the benefit of the entire program to at least
track any analogous action taking place at a RCRA facility where
.the corrective action concerns are addressed. A few Regions,
such as Region IX, have already evaluated state analogous
programs and have been pleased with the results. Region IX
developed criteria and a checklist to evaluate analogous state
actions which are available to the other Regions as references.
In addition to actions taking place under a non-HSWA
authority, Regions and States also have the option of relying on
voluntary actio'ns to increase the amount of corrective action.
• ' 15 ' '
-------
Regions should encourage 'reliable owner/operators to' conduct
voluntary corrective action, particularly stabilization measures
. The corrective'action program has a data•improvement
initiative underway to expand the scope.of actions tracked in
RCRIS and to move towards results-based reporting. A. few of the
changes have been brought about due to,the Permit Module
Redesign. , The Redesign will finally allow us to "accurately
capture, the universe of facilities subject to corrective .action.
Other change's involve relying on more of the instruments • :
currently available in.RCRIS to report, on a broader group of ,
activities. • • • • •
The corrective action program will have two universes set .up
in RCRIS- (See chapter on Information Management for ' , . '
configurations). . The universes have been developed to " •_' •
distinguish .between the group of.facilities that are -st.atutorily
required to address corrective action (i.e.. TSDs) from those-
facilities where the Agency has discretionary authority to .impose
corrective action.. ' '. ','_.: • . .
The first universe is the "Universe Subject to Corrective
Action."' 'This universe captures all facilities potentially
subject to corrective action except facilities that can pnly.be"
.reached through a §7003 order (i.e. generators) where corrective
action has not been imposed. This the broadest universe for
corrective -action. • _ . '
The second universe is the "Workload Universe," a subset of
the Universe .Subject to Corrective Action. The Workload Universe
includes those. facilities which are statutorily required to
address corrective action because they are subject to permit •
requirements, and any other; .facility'where corrective action has
been imposed. The statutory requirement for corrective action is
not only limited to facilities with current permits. For
example, interim .status facilities undergoing closure are still
technically subject to .RCRA permit requirements.1 However, this
universe structure does eliminate clean closed facilities,
non/late notifiers, and converters from the universe unless
corrective action has been imposed. Regions and states are not
.precluded from working on these facilities;., they just will not
be accounted for in the Workload Universe.until corrective action,
is actually imposed. It should be noted that with the. exception
of the clean closed facilities, the facilities excluded from the
Workload Universe can" be addressed under Superfund through the
CERCLA Deferral Policy. ; . '' .
the post-closure rule has been finalized, these:
facilities will no longer be subject to permitting requirements.
However, they will remain in the~ Workload Universe because, under
the rule, they are still required to complete corrective action. .
'16
-------
- To -briefly summarize the universe discussion, the two
corrective action universes differ in how they identify-
facilities where corrective action has' yet to be initiated.
However, all corrective 'action accomplishments will be included
in both universes, and reports of 'accomplishments to date will be
identical, regardless of which universe is requested.
In addition to refining the universes, new reports have b~eeh
developed for corrective action to better account for all
activities taking place at RCRA facilities.' The national.reports
will now include state analogous 'actions and voluntary actions.
Regions and States are strongly encouraged to enter this data
into RCRIS. The reports will also keep track of the -number of
facilities that,have been transferred,to Superfund and the number
of facilities where the RFA shows there is no need for corrective
action. , .
The two Environmental Indicator event codes'in RCRIS will be
added to the standard national RCRIS reports. In addition,_the
Environmental* Indicators will become the key corrective action
events for whichever Agency wide strategic reporting system •
replaces .STARS. These new strategic reports will be used to
measure program success at the Agency level as part 'of the
Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA). Therefore, it is
to the program's benefit to perform the Environmental Indicator
evaluations as soon as possible and enter the data in RCRIS. /
D. ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
Environmental Justice concerns should be taken into
account when implementing corrective action.
Environmental Justice is one- of the top priorities for the
Agency. OSWER's Environmental Justice Task Force has developed
an Action Agenda for environmental justice. This document
provides a description of general steps that are being taken by
the Agency to address environmental justice concerns. .To date,
we have not developed site-specific guidance for corrective
action'environmental justice concerns. However, several Regions
have forged ahead and developed their own strategies to address
environmental justice issues. These actions are being reported
in the OSWER Environmental Justice Progress Report. ' We encourage
these efforts, and urge Regions and States to routinely consider
environmental justice when implementing corrective., act ions.
•Environmental justice concerns will most typically come into
play in establishing overall priority for .the facility.
Although, the NCAPS ranking must remain based on technical
details, the overall priority ranking-for the facility can be
raised based on environmental justice concerns. In FY92, tne
laid out a program-wide policy under the Strategic Management
17
-------
Framework where 15% of the facilities being actively addressed
could be worked, on for reasons other'than environmental " .
significance 'or benefits. These facilites can. be listed as High
Overall based on environmental justice concerns. Environmental
justice may also be a reason to select between High NCAPS
facilities. < \ ••>•...•". '"•'..''
Public participation-is another area which can address -
environmental justice concerns. .,.'"' ' _ • .
18
-------
-------
STATE AUTHORIZATION
-------
-------
STATE AUTHORIZATION
'EPA maintains a.strong commitment to authorization- of.State
programs and to enhancing the State/Federal relationship. '•
Congress envisioned RCRA Subtitle. C as a "delegated" program
•through which States are the primary, implementors of the national
.hazardous waste management .program. As the National Program ,
Manager, EPA's major,responsibilities include 'supporting and
assisting States in the performance'of their environmental-
management responsibilities. As the States succeed in '
implementing an effective RCRA program,. EPA succeeds.
We continue' to strive to enhance' the State/Federal
relationship: •During FY'96, EPA will continue exploring •
authorization process and management structure changes that will
improve, the'pace-of Subtitle C authorization'among the-States.
Through the HWIR rule-making process, we will explore the
possibility of increased authorization flexibility,.. , ;EPA will -. •
soon issue guidance .to streamline the authorization process >'for
EPA rules that are less stringent,.; and• therefore -optional for
States, to adopt, since many of them offer more flexible
procedures, EPA will also explore streamlining opportunities for
'all other rules.' • • ' . ,, . V... -
1 . Although Authorization progress was not included as ah
'Explicit component of "the FY'96 State Grant Allocation Formula,
EPA HQ and Regions agree that trying to find positive incentives
for increased levels of authorization 'is a high priority.
In FY'96, additional emphasis will be placed on identifying
impediments to State .authorization for other key elements of the
HSWA program.. State regulation development efforts should also
focus on-gaps in the pre-HSWA program'that .are n'ot currently
addressed by States or. EPA. For example, pre-HSWA rules are not
. in effect until States adopt these rules and become, authorized
.for them. EPA also encourages States to seek authorization for
the'delisting of hazardous wastes and .the new universal waste
rule, as well as Mixed Waste. In FY?96 EPA will assess•the .
State/Regional/Headquarters 'efforts at overcoming these ,;
impediments"through both Regional reviews and the Beginning of.
'.. Year Plan. ; ., •' • ' ...,.'.
Historically, EPA and'the States have viewed authorization
as the. ultimate measure of .success in .the-transition to State
implementation of RCRA. While authorization progress remains a
primary measure of.State implementation success,. it' does .not
alone present a. complete picture of RCRA implementation
• nationally.- ' . - -•'.' .•'.'..' ' , .
19
-------
The program's State Authorization Tracking System,{StATS)
suggests significant improvement in authorization and RCRA rule_
'adoption progress by the States. Between March 1991 (when EPA
delegated revision program reviews•to the Regions on a pilot
basis) and December 31, 1994, overall authorization progress
improved from 23% of the program's authorizlable rules', to 64%'.
The StATS data indicate particularly promising developments in '.
the HSWA program.- Almost half ' the .States have been authorized
for Corrective Action .and Toxicity Characteristics, while_27
States have been authorized for the major components of the Land
Disposal Restriction (LDR) program. ' .
When States' rule'adoption progress was also assessed, it
was determined that the States have adopted over 87% of the RCRA
program rules that were due as of July 1, 1994. The States'
adoption of State law counterparts to the RCRA regulations (as a
precursor to authorization) demonstrates States' commitment to
full participation in the RCRA program. Now that StATS serves as
a. reliable tool to track State rule adoption, we will look at
both adoption and authorization status as measures of success. —
As EPA and the States work together to. build long term State
program capacity to implement RCRA, Regions and States
should explore shared implementation .arrangements. EPA
. encourages worksharing arrangements, both to build State
capability, and to ensure .the efficient use of State and
Federal resources for environmental results, ,
EPA recognizes that both EPA.and the States will" again"
experience serious resource.constraints in fully implementing -c
RCRA during FY''96. The statutorily mandated program;has
continued to expand with new implementation responsibilities,
with little parallel growth of Federal and State funding to £
match. Thus, even as the States increase their authority to
manage the RCRA program, the need for joint Federal/State
implementation will remain in the foreseeable future. The ,
program must.promote optimal use of constrained program
resources,, and therefore the optimal sharing of program .
'implementation responsibilities. ~
In FY'96, EPA encourages the Regions and States to identify
worksharing opportunities, that will, fill gaps in current RCRA
program coverage, and that provide the most cost effective si»
• allocation of specific technical expertise. Worksharing may
extend to both authorized and unauthorized elements of a State's
program, as long as'the activities address RCRA priorities agreed
to by the Region and State. While authorization status may
define lead roles for specific areas, it alone should not
encumber the identification of worksharing opportunities.
20
-------
An additional tool, to facilitate State authorization and
ensure-effective, program implementation ^ is authorizing
incomplete or "overdue" clusters.. . ... .
In November 1992, EPA-Headquarters issued additional
authorization'program guidance on"the "Cluster Rule." This
guidance amplifies EPA's discretion to authorize'State •
regulations in cases where documentation of other rules contained
in a "cluster" is overdue for review -or incomplete.in some
respects. This policy, offers the. potential for significant
progress in'authorizing, as many RCRA provisions as possible,
since individual regulations that meet authorization standards
may be'approved, even if other regulations in.the cluster are
held back'while issues are resolved. , • ,
During FY'96, there will be a new emphasis placed on EPA and
States identifying regulatory components from various 'clusters
and pending applications that are candidates for accelerated
authorization under..the November 1992 Cluster Rule • .
interpretation! Priority should be placed on authorizable rules
that are free from any capabilityiissues, identified as having
particular strategic importance given a Staters needs and
resources, and adopted under pre-HSWA statutory authority that
'cannot'take'effect as RCRA requirements until approved by EPA.
Another,means to enhance joint State and Federal .
implementation is through interim authorization.
• In December 1992, EPA published an immediate final rule
which'extended the availability of HSWA interim authorization for
10 additional years-- until January 1, 2003. HSWA interim.
authorization for corrective action has'been used in three States
to demonstrate capability. Idaho and North Carolina received
interim authorization in 1989 and 1992, respectively. -In- 1992,'
Idaho was granted 'final authorization because the State , :
demonstrated that it had the corrective action expertise and ,
infrastructure, to warrant, receiving final authorization. North
'Carolina received final authorization in January _ 1995.. The. third
State, Missouri, received interim authorization in 1994. The
extension of interim authorization, authority for 10 more years
will ensure that these and other States retain the greater
flexibility afforded by interim authorization in taking on
implementation responsibilities for complex parts of the. HSWA
program. •' • . •
'''In FY'96, EPA Headquarters encourages Regions and States to
• be more innovative in using HSWA interim authorization as both a
vehicle for building full State capability for HSWA and as a •
means for implementing/HSWA worksharing leading to full State
implementation. Emphasis will also;be placed on. identifying
approaches that.will make interim authorization a more_attractive
option .-for States, particularly approaches that will minimize the
• . ' •' " ' '. " ',21. . ' -"• •.-.'"' " ' '
-------
I
-•si
paperwork necessary, to progress from HSWA interim authorization
to final authorization status..'.•-.
22"
-------
STATE GRANT
-------
-------
RCRA S3Oil STATE HAZARDOUS WASTE GRANT
This is the first time in several years that'.the State
Hazardous Waste Grant has been addressed'in the RIP. As the
allocation methodology for this grant has recently gone, 'through a
substantive reevaluation process, this section of the- RIP will
highlight changes that will be made-in the FY'96 allocation
methodology. This section also'provides clarification for the;
Geographic Initiatives (GIs) portion of /the grant through a
discussion of expectations for and restrictions .associated with
these initiatives. - •" • ' ' ' -"-.'. • • '••.••
BACKGROUND , .
The State Hazardous Waste Grant issued annually under
authority of Section'3011 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act (SWDA)',
is a formula'grant that provides funds, through the Regions, to ..."
the States for Subtitle '-"C" -activities. The SWDA describes in
.paragraph §'3011 (b), those factors that must be considered in
making funding allocations. These factors.-are "the extent'to
which hazardous waste,is generated, transported2, 'treated,
stored., and disposed of within' a State". We are 'further tasked '.
by the Act with considering the extent of'human and.environmental .
exposure to such "waste. - • ' . . " • ' •
In response to these mandates, in the past the. Base ;
Allocation (approximately 80% Of the total grant) portion of 'the
grant has been distributed based on five components. The'
allocation of each component's portion of the grant is 'based-on
the ratio of Regional universe to the National universe. An
example is a -ratio of the number of 'people living -in a'Region •
over the National population. The components are; • . .
, ; .j .,',•' '
1). The Population - ,This factor is used as a surrogate for
relative human exposure. •
2) ' The Universe, of Large Quantity,Generators (LQGs)
3) The Universe of Land Disposal Facilities (LDFs) "• .
4) The Universe of Storage and Treatment units (S/Ts)
5) . The Universe of Incinerators -. This factor considers both .
human - exposure and treatment. -
CHANGES IN THE FY' 96 ALLOCATION METHODOLOGY
In addition to the base formula allocation, HQ has used
initiatives and set-asides in the past, to target specific. . •
priority activities. Three examples,are the corrective.action
set-aside, the geographic initiatives,,and the.combustion
:Although waste transportation is listed in the SWDA as a factor for consideration, the regulatory authority over
this factor is the responsibility of the Department of Transportation. Consequently, the §3011 grant has never used
it as' a factor. . . . , '•
. . -.',•'•.•• - 23 .' . - :
-------
initiative. One of these, the CA set-aside, will change
significantly in the FY'96 allocation. In response to Regional,
State, and HQ comment, FY'96 funding previously distributed
through the corrective action set-aside will instead be allocated
through a-new, sixth component. As it precedes the completion of
the Permit Module Redesign, in the FY'96 allocation this
component will .allocate CA funding based on the total "Subject to
CA" universe as defined1 by STARS. Funding for this- component is
made up of funding from the previous set-aside and from funds
previously incorporated into other components such, as the LDF and
S/T universes. . • ,
HQ has made two additional substantive changes this fiscal
year to the methodology used in determining the Regional
allocation: 1)' minimum funding; and
2) the restructuring of the incinerator component.
HQ will include a minimum funding factor to the FY'96
allocation to address'a priority for maintaining hazardous.waste
programs in small States and States with small universes. In the
FY'96 allocation, HQ will adjust funding to those Regioris ..with
.States''that would- receive less than '$350, 000 if funds were' '
totally universe and initiative''based. These Regions will .
receive funds from the base allocation that will raise their
Regional allocation (from which States receive their hazardous
waste funding) to the level necessary to provide $350,000. "It.
should be noted, however, that EPA,Regional offices still have
the responsibility for workplan negotiations and that funding .
levels for individual States may be placed below the $350,000
level. In-determining minimum funding, HQ will count States,
authorized Trust Territories, and the District of Columbia.
In FY'96 Boilers and Industrial Furnaces (BIFs) ' will be
counted in the Incinerator component universe instead of in the
S/T-universe. This type of accounting is more . in line with the
National Combustion Strategy. This expanded universe has been
renamed the Combustion universe.
As a. result of the'above-referenced changes, the FY'96
allocation will allocate funding to the Regions using a base
formula, two initiatives and an adjustment, for,minimum funding. .
Based on the Presidential budget, these portions of the grant
will be funded-as follows: .
Base Allocation , • ' $86,602,800 .,-•-'..•
Geographic Initiatives $. 5,195,400
Combustion Initiative $ 6,500,000
Total ' , .- $98,298,200 '
• -24
-------
GEOGRAPHIC INITIATIVES
,In FY192, EPA began using Geographic- Initiatives (GI) to -•
strengthen funding for. specific program priorities. 'The-first of
these regional priorities was addressing pollution.associated
with the 'Great Lakes. • In FY'93 this geographic targeting was
additionally expanded to include the Gulf of Mexico, ,the .Mexican
Border, the, Caribbean, and the Chesapeake Bay. . •-. " './..- -
Recently, -Regions and States have asked questions regarding
GIs. Primary interests have centered on whether Geographic -
. Initiatives will continue to be a, part'of the allocation '••'
methodology, and on expectations for and geographic limitation on
the use of funding related to these initiatives.'
Today, EPA's Administrator continues to consider these
.initiatives a priority. While actual funding levels for the.
§3011 grant program are set through Congressional appropriations,
EPA HO expects GI'funding, through this program to be continued
for the-next two to -four-years. .., .. • ." '' . • •-'
,'-«••_..) ••,;.. ''•..' .
General Expectations . - - ' ' : •-•"'•.-•.'...'•.'
In the FY'92 and.FY'93 budget submissions to OMB, HQ
.outlined"activities for which these funds were specifically
/targeted. These activities included;- ' ' -
• ._ Great Lakes - Pollution within the Great Lakes and
, ' remediation required of handlers in the Great
• . • '. .' ' -.. ' Lakes .Basin,. ' .••••'. ' . • . ,% ' ,
• .Gulf of Mexico - Grouridwater.contamination from closed ,
. and,, operating land disposal facilities,
, • Mexican Border - -Enhance cooperative efforts to reduce
:, , risks associated with transboundary,
. • movement of wastes, ' ,'
• Caribbean - Intensify levels of inspections and
corrective action, activities within the
• . 'ecosystem, and ' . '
• Chesapeake Bay - Intensify, levels of inspections and
'.• ' " • . ' . corrective, act ion activities within the
watershed/ecosystem. ; ;
' ' "'.•••,"•••''.
In the FY'95 budget justification sent to. OMB, HQ' expanded'
the activity descriptions for all -above GIs to include: , ;
1. Comprehensive- inspection and* enforcement programs, . • ••
2. Remediation activities required of handlers, ' ' ,
3. Pollution.prevention of high risk waste streams, : .
4. Development of groundwater protection plans^ in support dfs
corrective action activities,. .
5.: Monitoring of commercial hazardous waste incinerators and-
commercial BIFs, ' . ...
.. . . t . r
. ' '•'.'•' ''•'..' 23 ' ' - ' , :-. . - ' . . ' '..
-------
6. Development of expanded waste minimization programs, and-
7. .Location of inactive and abandoned waste disposal sites.
States have also asked-guestions regarding whether GI
funding' could be used for hiring. In addition to the types of
activities listed above, Geographic Initiative funding' may also
be used for additional ETE. .
Geographic limitations on Use and Areas of Flexibility . -' • •
Other than the -current restrictions that' exist for all §3011
funding -(such as being restricted to Subtitle C activities-)-3,
the only additional restrictipns for GIs are .based on geographic
location. . GI funded 'activities should be confined to one of two
types of areas. . , ;'
"* '«* ''• " ' ' • * ' '
1. If the geographic area is related to water basins such as
the Gulf of Mexico or the Chesapeake Bay, activities should
be, restricted to qualified'geographic .units'. Examples of
these units include•designated counties dn Texas, parishes
in Louisiana, and ZIP codes in phio. For a complete listing
of locations and types of these units, contact Newmari Smith
at (703) 308-8757.. . ' ' ' :
2. If the geographic.area is related to a political' boundary
such as' the Mexican Border, activities should be restricted
'to sites that are within the United States 100 miles of the
boundary.. ;. ' , . '. .
3HQ is currently evaluating the use of performance partnerships as a method for increasing flexibility in grants.
The current Subtitle C restrictions on the use of §3011 funds may be amended in FY'96 funding.
26 " '.'.-'•
-------
WASTE MINIMIZATION
-------
-------
WASTE MINIMIZATION
; INTRODUCTION • . , ' " " ' ' ' ^ •
The Waste Minimization National Plan (November 1994) outlines
major goals, objectives, and .action items toward-national •
reductions' in persistent, bioaccumulative, and'toxic constituents
present in hazardous.waste. Particular preference is given to
source: reduction and recycling as waste management, techniques.
In the FY96'RCRA Implementation Plan, waste minimization •
activities shall be incorporated into all areas (e.g.,
permitting, enforcement, corrective action> etc.), Regions should
provide for maximum.flexibility when establishing state/EPA.
Agreements^for states to set aside specific 'funding amounts -to
accomplish waste minimization activities. • -
Implementation of the Waste Minimization National Plan
requires program emphasis toward'more contact and interaction.
with hazardous waste generators. Regions and States are
encouraged to promote opportunities for waste" minimization in
facility permitting, inspection, enforcement, "putreach, -.and
technical assistance activities. .' • '
IMPLEMENTATION . -.. . .. ' '. • ' . • -;
The National Plan focuses on reducing the generation and
- subsequent release .to the environment-of the most persistent,
.bioaccumulative, and.toxic, constituents- in hazardous wastes, and •
establishes three.goals: • • •
1) To reduce, as, a nation, the presence of'the most persistent,
bioaccumulative, and toxic constituents, by 25 percent by.the
year 2000 and by 50 percent by the year 2005. ' ; ,
2') To avoid transferring these constituents across
environmental media. . • •
•' 3). To ensure that these constituents are reduced at .-their >
source whenever possible; or, when .not possible, .that they
are ..recycled in an environmentally sound manner.
EPA .does not expect that each and every generator of : "
'persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic constituents in hazardous
waste'will reduce the generation of tl^ese constituents in waste'
by the levels'and time frames presented above. EPA intends for
these reductions to be achieved nationally by EPA, states, and
generators working together. ', ' '••'.;
EPA encourages all states and generators of hazardous waste •
containing,persistent, bioaccumulative, and, toxic constituents to
define their own, baseline years-, set their own goals and target
" -" '• '•' ,. • 27 . ' -' ' . ' . .""'
-------
years for achieving their goals, and track their own .progress
toward their goals.- This flexibility will allow states and '
generators that have already begun source reduction arid pollution
prevention to begin measuring their successes from the year .they
started, and will 'give them flexibility in how they contribute to
the'national goals. . -
Implementation of the Plan should focus, on items which will
achieve-the objectives described below. This year, HQ is asking
that each Region identify .and.report in the BYP at least one
waste minimization, pilot project. .Emphasis and priority should
be given- to proposals which support EPA projects listed under
each objective. . . • '
Objective 1: Develop a framework for setting national priorities;
develop and distribute a flexible screening tool for identifying
priorities at individual facilities;'identify constituents of
concern. •. . .
4- EPA. HQ will develop screening tools and a list' of high-
priority constituents for source reduction and recycling.
* EPA HQ will use the results from the prototype screening
approach to set priorities for metals. •
Objective 2: Promote multimedia environmental benefits and -
prevent cross-media transfers.
* EPA encourages the implementation of multimedia pollution.
prevention programs including training/ technical assistance
and technology information sharing.
Objective 3: Demonstrate a strong preference for source
reduction; shift attention to the nations hazardous waste
generators to reduce hazardous waste generation at its"source.
* ' EPA will implement several VOLUNTARY MECHANISMS, including:
1) Promote focused technical assistance to small- and
medium- sized generators of constituents of concern.
(EPA HQ, Regions and States) .' ' .
2). Developing outreach and communication mechanisms. (EPA
• HQ, Regions and States)
3) Providing guidance to states on incorporating waste
minimization in hazardous waste management planning.
(EPA HQ-and Regions) . '
* EPA will implement several mechanisms within the RCRA
REGULATORY framework, including: .
; 28 •'.'•.•
-------
1) Develop a program for.working with generators to
- promote waste minimization.(EPA HQ, Regions and States)
2) Issue revised guidance on the use of Supplemental
- • • Environmental Projects (SEPs) as a tool/to achieve
• , greater source reduction!(EPA HQ) • . .
3) Work with EPA Regions and'states to provide waste
. ^minimization training for inspectors, permit writers '
and enforcement officials;(EPA HQ)
4) Promote the development of alternatives of processes or
, . products which have been identified as ^resulting .in
• ' large-quantities of persistent, -bioaccumulative, and
. • • ' toxic constituents.- (EPA,HQ) - • • •
*.. EPA will implement several INSTITUTIONAL MECHANISMS/ that
will .allow the RCRA program t,o be implemented, so as to,
encourage the EPA Regional Offices and State environmental
. agencies to facilitate generators' waste minimization
actions, including: , .'.'-'..".' •
1)-. Incorporating the goals developed in the National Plan
into the RCRA -Implementation Plan (RIP). . "•- .
2) Developing accountability measures and incentives for'
the Regions and states to'promote accomplishments
. .. toward achieving the national 'goals. '(In future years,
• , •'', .these, measures .will be .focused more on results,' rather
than activities.) ; . ; :
Qb-iective 4: Clearly define and track measures of progress. ,
Promote accountability for EPA, states and industry. .
*", EPA will identify necessary data using BRS, TRI, or Bother
already existing mechanism to evaluate progress in reducing.
the most persistent,, bioaccumulative, and toxic '
• . . constituents. (EPA HQ, Regions and .States)
Objective 5; Involve citiz-ens in waste minimization • '
implementation decisions. • .
••*.. EPA. will continue to .encourage generators of hazardous
wastes to share waste minimization priorities and
initiatives, • and be .•accountable to the public. (EPA HQ,
Regions and States) • , ' ,
* • ,EPA HQ will publish guidance to Regions, states, and'
industry, identifying when and how waste minimization
information should be made available to the public during,
• the permit process. ," '...'' .
• • . ' '.' ' 29 - ' - .
-------
PROGRAM EXPECTATIONS AND WASTE MINIMIZATION ACTIVITIES
Regions and States are encouraged to fully integrate and
promote waste minimization in all program areas. In particular,
Regions and 'States are encouraged to focus attention on waste
minimization opportunities at large quantity generators,
including but not limited to", those who may also manage waste
onsite under a RCRA permit. In some cases, this may mean
reinvesting resources from other program areas to identifiable
target areas such as large quantity generators. Focus can also ••
be placed in those areas such as1small business which may not
have access to waste minimization technical information. Working.
with companies in a cooperative mode to identify ways, to reduce
waste generation will have a long-term ,affect;on .permitting and
compliance initiatives. Many opportunities have been identified
by States and Regions to set priorities for reducing-high hazard
and/or large volume waste streams. EPA HQ encourages all Regions
and States to identify their waste minimization program
implementation priorities and integrate, where appropriate and
feasible, the goals and objectives of the Waste Minimization
National Plan. Information on these approaches can be obtained
from Headquarters. Those, along with'other activities to focus
on eliminating obstacles to waste minimization and recycling and
reuse as well as technical assistance should be promoted. Waste
Minimization National Plan goals and objectives could be^targeted
at specific industry categories and further prioritized by the .
most persistant, bioaccumulative, and toxic constituents (PBTs)
in the waste, or included in existing or proposed geographic,
environmental justice, and. Common Sense Initiative activities, or
community-based and small business initiatives. . ,
MEASURE OP ACTIVITIES AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS ,
The measurement of:activities and accomplishments which will
eventually lead to achieving the goals- and objectives, of 'the
National Waste Minimization Plan could occur in a number of
different areas. They include:
Staff training on waste minimization _
Technical assistance in waste minimization
Distribute fact sheets to assist hazardous waste
generators with waste minimization
Target priority constituents, waste streams,
processes, etc.in technical assistance,
.inspection, and SEPs. .
Use SARA '313 and BRS or, other means, to measure
waste minimization progress
Incorporate waste minimization in pre-permit
negotiations
Incorporate waste minimization in permit
negotiations , •
30 ' • ' .
-------
'Incorporate'waste minimization in public - '
participation meetings
Foster.compliance/waste .minimization assistance ' "
program. . ' ' . , ....
Identify and eliminate programmatic and statutory
obstacles to waste minimization •
Evaluate regional/state waste minimization
programs to. determine resource needs and
effectiveness of waste minimization efforts "
Incorporate waste minimization in pre-enforcement
negotiations . " • '
Incorporate waste minimization in enforcement. '
settlements • ..••.••
Incorporate waste minimization into multi-media
activities- • • - •'••,-/ , . ' . '••
Innovative•pilot programs that will promote
achievement of the goals of the Waste Minimization
National Plan . • ' . . ...'•"
31
-------
-------
INFORMATION MANAGEMENT
-------
-------
RCRA INFORMATION MANAGEMENT
During,FY'96 information resources should be targeted towards
areas addressing both immediate and strategic improvements:-
* . collection and quality assurance of data for the 1995 .'..
- Biennial Report;'' . ' '• .''.'.' ' '
*" assuring that information reflecting program milestones
and environmental goals will be timely, accurate and
•-. .' . 'complete in/RCRIS; and' ' ' ... ...
* /supporting information and business re-engineering
• activities for the Waste Information Needs '(WIN) •
initiative. . ' -..'•'•''.. - , .... ,
* -utilize existing databases to prioritize waste :
• •. .minimization activities''. . •. . • . .
On'one. hand, we need to demonstrate the status and >success- .
of the RCRA program nationally via our current information
infrastructure. At the same time we'must .begin to move forward
on essential strategic changes. These changes must, minimize , .
information collection, and management burden, and ..also :improve .
the usefulness and ••accessibility of that information for the
program, and the-public. . , '
During the first quarter of FY'96, States and Regions will
distribute the 1995 Biennial Reports to Generators and TSDFs.
Headquarters will distribute Biennial Reporting System ~(BRS)
software V/4:0 to States and Regions- BRS software .will allow
States and Regions to enter-the* 1995 Biennial Report .data,
perform the necessary, .data quality checks, and transfer the .data,
to Headquarters for the National Oversight Database.
1..)'" Collection and Quality Assurance of Data for the 1995
Biennial Report
States and-Regions will collect the 1995 Biennial Reports
and begin to enter the Biennial Report data into BRS during,
• • 'the second quarter of FY'96. • • '.' '
During the third'quarter of FY'96, States :and Regions will
complete data entry.of 1995 Biennial. Reports .and will begin
' the data quality checks using .the tools provided in BRS.
: - States will prepare for an initial full data submission to,
the Region during the fourth quarter of FY'96. >
. States and Regions; will continue to perform data quality
checks to identify and correct errprs during the fourth
quarter of FY'96. Each State, will .provide an initial full
* • •' ' . • •• 32 ' - ' ;.'
-------
submission of 1995. Biennial, Report data to the Regiqn.by_
July 1 1996. Upon receipt of each -State's data submission,
Regions will perform additional .data quality checks and work
. with each State to correct identified errors. Regions will
provide a full submission of 1995 Biennial Report data for
each State to Headquarters by September 30, 1996.
2.) Timely, Accurate and Complete RCRIS Data:
For FY'96, no new major or programmatic -changes are being
made to the structure of RCRIS. This decision reflects the,-
reality that resources are limited at all levels and_data, -
quality efforts must be focussed on making_the existing key
information components more robust and reliable. , ,
The essential areas' for data quality correspond, to the
national .program accomplishment strategic reporting measures
and current'program status. These depend upon the validity
of the program universes and the timeliness of the events.
' Regions and States should assure that a key milestone event
which occurs in a given -month (e.g. Corrective Action
environmental indicators determination) will, appear in
national reports not more than two months following ....
completion of the-activity. Program universes are
determined based upon the current operating and legal status
codes for facilities. Any changes to operating and/or-legal
status should also be reflected in national reports not more
than two months following the change.in facility status.
Operating and legal status data should reflect the current
status- of all processes/units not later than September 30,
1995. Current operating/legal status-data.is the foundation
for the,new program universes (described below) to be used
•for national program reporting. '. Please refer to the
Prices included with this, document for the final ver.sion
of how the operating/legal status-codes will *» ™Jto
identify facilities which should appear in the respective
program universes. The matrices reflect,comments received
from States and Regions. x •
To the extent that- States and Regions wish to -target data
quality review and updating on particular areas of past
program activity and accomplishments to build case history
information they are encouraged to do so provided the
issSSSal data Sality objectives identified above are met.
louver? there" S no national program requirement to assess
historical data quality issues.
3.) waste Information Needs Strategic Initiative (WIN)
Duriria 1996 States, Regions and Headquarters -will .select the
shor^term busines^ process and information - streamlining .
33
-------
opportunities identified as . a result .of WIN activities being
conducted, during 1995. . . ;
Disinvestment and system streamlining -changes will be ; ,
.:. defined and developed during FY'96, and implemented .early • in
FY'97 with the. next .major RCRIS and BRS releases . . ;, .
4.) Utilizing Existing Databases - • —
1 Regions/States should explore databases that contain
information oh hazardous waste quantities and how they
• 'are managed (such as BRS) and on how tdxic "chemicals
are released to the environment and are managed (TRI)- ' .
for measuring progress in waste minimization.. Emphasis
should be placed , -on wastes' continuing persistent, :
bibaccumulative, and toxic constituents . Those
databases could be used to prioritize inspections, '• :,
technical* assistance and public outreach programs.
NEW REPORTING . UNIVERSES
For FY'96, we will begin using the new workload ,
universes established as part of the RCRIS, Permit
Module Redesign for national reporting. These
universes will form the basis for all national reports, , "
including the FY'96 Beginning of Year Plan. Appendix 1
includes the operating and legal .status matrices for
the new permitting, closure, post -closure,' and
. corrective action universes-. ' The .following is a, brief
description of the new universes: .
, PERMITTING/CLOSURE/POST- CLOSURE PROGRESS UNIVERSE
Designed for reports to track accomplishments in the
permitting, closure, and post-closure, areas. Includes
all units that are or were at. some time sub j ect , to the
requirement to obtain a, RCRA permit to operate as a
' '' '
*••,-•,'
[NOTE: Select logic will have to look 'to previous
event's where most recent event is "RD, " ' "EM,." "RU, " or.
"SR. ";] ; . •
PERMIT WORKLOAD REPORT UNIVERSE
Designed for reports to evaluate workload related to
permit issuance. Includes units in the permit pipeline
as well' as units with active permits . "_,"•'•
.34
-------
CLOSURE WORKLOAD REPORT UNIVERSE
Designed for reports to evaluate workload related to
closure. Includes units that are closing up to the
time that closure certification is verified by the
agency. • .
POST-.CLOSURE WORKLOAD REPORT UNIVERSE
Designed for reports to evaluate workload related-to ,' '
post-closure. Includes closing land disposal units, and
storage units closing as landfills up to the time that
clean closure certification is verified by the agency.
CORRECTIVE ACTION UNIVERSES
Corrective action will have'two universe matrices in RCRIS.
The first is the Universe Subject to Corrective Action.
This is the broadest category and is designed to capture any.
facility that is'potentially subject to corrective action,
except those captured only through a §7003 order 'that have
not had corrective action imposed. The second universe is
the Workload Universe which is a subset of the'Universe
Subject to Corrective' Action. The Workload Universe focuses
on those facilities which' are statutorily required to
address corrective action because they are subject to permit
requirements (i.e. TSDs) . . .'-.'.'.
For corrective action, the universes will be pulled in two •
steps. '.First, all-facilities in the corrective action
module that have an RFI Imposed'or beyond will be captured.
This step will insure.'that we are pulling all facilities
that are undergoing corrective action so we take credit for
all the activity occurring at RCRA facilities. The second
step involves comparing the first list from.the corrective
action module against the two matrices that use the legal
and operating status codes in the permit module. This
second step will add the facilities appropriate for each
universe that have, not had corrective.action imposed.
The two universes differ only in 'how they identify
facilities where•corrective action has not been imposed.
All accomplishments will be included, in both universes and
reports of accomplishments will be identical, regardless of
which universe is requested. The Workload Universe is
comprised of,'a smaller group of facilities by relying on-
fewer operating and legal codes in the matrix. The Workload
Universe does not include converters, non/late notifiers,
and clean closed facilities unless"they have corrective
action imposed. ' ,
35
-------
RCRA ACTIVITIES IN INDIAN COUNTRY
-------
\
-------
RCRA ACTIVITIES IN INDIAN COUNTRY
-. f ' , ' ' ,' ' ' -
Program Objectives
The objective of -OSW'.s Indian Program is to: 1) build tribal •
capacity to implement RCRA, 2) develop tribal organizational1.
.infrastructures'-to support RCRA activities and 3} 'build .
partnerships among-tribes, states and local communities.
These Indian Program objectives directly support EPA's 'Indian
policy.of recognizing Native:American tribes and Native Alaskan
Villages ,as sovereigns and, as suchfj the primary implementors of
environmental programs in Indian country. The objectives also
ensure tribal participation in the. Subtitle C and D-programs and
- facilitate the implementation of these programs by tribes. • •
. -Assistance 'in meeting these goals will be .provided through '••...
training, policy -and implementation guidance, -technical . •
assistance, and' the generation and/dissemination of information.
National Priorities
'' ' ' .-..'• '..'•'' ' ".. '"• ''• , . '
The primary goal for FY'96 will be to assist, tribes in
. building the capacity to ,develbp and administer environmental
programs. The Regions and Tribes should work'together, to
.determine which specific program activities each Tribe should.
..undertake, depending on need, capacity and resource availability.
While Tribes are not currently eligible to receive funding: under
_ RCRA Section 3011, they are eligible to receive grant assistance
. for both hazardous and solid waste activities under RCRA Section
8001. ' • . , ' , - • . , , . ,'•".•-' ." .
All efforts' should be made to'ensure that tribal
governments have every opportunity for participation in making
decisions that directly affect the reservation populace and
•environment. 'Environmental justice principles should be
integrated, as appropriate, into all EPA/tribal activities. The
• Regions should, encourage the development of Federal-Tribal.
environmental programs comparable, in protection to Federal-State .
environmental programs. Special attention should be given to '
initiatives related to public outreach and access to information,
training and technical assistance.
The'Regions should assist.the tribes in enacting applicable
and necessary environmental codes and ordinances .and developing
organizational infrastructure to support environmental programs.
Because of their relatively small size and limited
resources, tribes need federal assistance to build'the skills
necessary to manage these programs and identify tribal-specific.
activities to address Tribal-.specific environmental issues.
Particularly.useful to tribes is training in grant writing, code .
development, waste, management- planning, and hazardous waste
inspections. Regions should make a particular effort to notify
• ' . . ' ' ' . 36 '•'" • •"••••..''
-------
Tribes of training opportunities and assist them, whenever
possible, to take advantage of these opportunities. Regional
Tribal meetings are excellent vehicles to provide training tor
the Tribes and their-continuation is highly recommended:
Regions also need to assist Tribes in raising environmental
awareness and the Tribes' responsibility to comply with Federal
environmental regulations. -Regional offices need to ensure^that
Tribes 'have access to the information they need to administer
their programs and that communication between EPA and the TnJoes
is enhanced. . •
Finally, Regions are encouraged to work with other Federal
agencies (BIA, IHS)' having responsibility in Indian country in
order to leverage resources, avoid duplicative efforts, .and build
broad based partnerships. ...
Subtitle C
While recognizing that Tribal Subtitle C issues do not
aeherally cause the same level of concern'to the. Tribes as those
?elatina to Subtitle.D, Tribes shoulS 'nonetheless be encouraged
to assist the Regions in conducting Subtitle C activities (e.g.*
insolctions hazardous waste site inventories, notifications , as
ip^lSpria?!'. ThSse types of, efforts are useful tools .in building
tribal capacity. ; •
Subtitle D
All effort should be made to ensure that tribes comply with
All ei-i-uiu onwi^ __-,.j ,.« -v-^^,,1 ai—i^s Wh^-re Tribes
SgilnS should wok with Tribes to develop adequate
progras -d approvable^pplicatio^.^^ ^ appro
roou, on : providing techn i-
e
section.
37
-------
SUBTITLE D
-------
-------
MUNICIPAL AND INDUSTRIAL
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT
PROGRAM OBJECTIVES
The objectives of EPA's municipal.solid waste (MSW) program
.are to: (1) ensure protection of health and the environment; ._. [
(2) comply with the mandates of Subtitle -D of RCRA; (3) promote
pollution prevention by fostering source reduction and recycling;
(4) implement the Administrator's recycling market development
strategy. ("Recycling Means Business"); (5) actively participate .
in•partnerships'to promote and implement integrated waste . .
'management; and, (6) provide national -leadership.
The objective of EPA's industrial solid waste program is to
promote protective management of industrial, solid waste, through:
(1) promulgation of minimum standards for facilities that dispose
of non-municipal solid waste and,conditionally exempt small
quantity generator hazardous waste (CESQG) ; and, .(2). a State/EPA
partnership to develop voluntary facility standards' for disposal-
of 'industrial solid waste.
These objectives incorporate the-vision, guiding principles, •
priorities, and values of EPA's Strategic Plan and 'directly s .
address OSW's .municipal and industrial non-hazardous waste
strategic priorities. The discussion that follows incorporates
these, objectives within'the priorities and highlighted_
activities. . WhiXe States, Tribes, and local governments remain
the primary impletnentors of the national municipal and industrial
solid waste program, EPA's role is to actively'facilitate
effective implementation and lead by example.
MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE NATIONAL PRIORITIES
Encourage source .reduction activities among localities,
businesses, .and households through 'education, project
support, and technical assistance,:
There-are a wide variety o.f activities available1 to Regions
to promote source reduction,, .the most preferred tactic in EPA's
hierarchy of solid waste options. This year's national focus is
on unit pricing and deduction.of waste with an emphasis on paper.
Headquarters and the Regions will continue to implement the
National Unit Pricing Outreach Strategy, to provide information
•and technical assistance on this proven waste reduction mechanism
to local officials and citizens throughout the U.S. Headquarters
,-wi'll work with the Regions to plan, promote, and implement- a
series of workshops and a satellite forum on unit .pricing. ;We
will distribute EPA's unit pricing guide'and related materials
and develop additional" outreach vehicles., In addition, ' .
: ' ' 38 . • ."' '' -'- . - •
-------
Headquarters and the Regions will work together to create local ,
projects to facilitate unit pricing programs.
The Regions are encouraged to undertake projects and_ _
activities that reduce the waste'stream, building on the initial
successes of EPA's. Paper-Less Office Campaign. Such projects may
include promoting EPA guidance materials; conducting pilot
studies; and encouraging Federal/State/Tribal and local .
governments,' organizations, and institutions to initiate waste
prevention programs and campaigns. .
Facilitate the nation's recycling efforts by implementing
the Administrator's recycling market development
initiatives: "Recycling Means Business? and "Jobs through
Recycling". . , ' ' . . '
Headquarters and the Regions are expected to continue and
enhance their efforts to achieve the three goals stated m
Recycling Means Business:
(1) Support and strengthen the,.link between increased
market capacity and sustainable economic growth;
(2) 'Leverage Federal resources and build Federal •
partnerships for market development; and,
(3) Develop infrastructures that support markets for
recyclables and.recycled products.
Example activities to promote these three goals includei
(1) Fostering .partnerships between the economic _ _ -
development, 'financial, and recycling communities by
demonstrating the economic viability and value-added
aspects of recycling businesses;
(2) Promoting--the use of recycled feedstock;
(3) Maximizing the purchase, of recycled products.; •
(4) Facilitating access to information and research; and,
(5) Strengthening "State, Tribal, and local government
capabilities. ' •
Procurement implementation will be a key area in FY 199€ for
both MISWD and the Regions. Efforts in ..this area will focus on
providing assistance to ensure compliance with the CPG, RMAN, and
EO specific activities may include developing outreach
materials, workshops, seminars, technical assistance, etc.
39
-------
Because the' areas served by each Regional Office have unique
characteristics and .specific market needs, implementation
-'activities will vary among.Regions. The Regions are encouraged
to wprk-with 'their partners in States/ Tribes, local governments,
environmental groups, and business/industry to determine, the most
effective methods for achieving these goals. .Each Region may
select- different methods and focuses depending on the
partnerships established, ongoing efforts, and needs-of the area."
Regions will continue,to report, on.successes in implementing
Recycling Means Business for annual reports to the Administrator.
Headquarters and the Regions will work together to, communicate
progress made in implementing Recycling Means Business to EPA-'s
constituents and will collaborate on specific projects of mutual
interest. " . • •-• '. ' • •/ " .-.''.
Jobs through Recycling is Ta major component of Recycling
Means Business and will continue to require both Headquarters and
'Regional resources in FY.1996. Priority activities under the
Jobs, through Recycling .initiative include: (1) managing new and
ongoing grants; (2) providing technical assistance to grantees;
(3) participating in t'he development df FY 1997 initiatives; and,
(4) promoting successes to•encourage replicatipn of these
efforts. . . '' ' • ." ,; '•••-•".•..
Achieve substantial source reduction and recycling in
American businesses through WasteWi$e, EPA's voluntary MSW
challenge program. • . •
• . ' WasteWi$e remains a national priority .for FY 1996 and
beyond. WasteWi$e is, a. voluntary program in which participants
commit to prevent waste, recycle, -and increase their, purchase or
manufacture' of recycled products./ It is the primary EPA outreach
• mechanism for. fostering reduction." of .municipal solid waste by
xlarge businesses. Headquarters looks to the Regions to
participate in implementation and policy development for the
WasteWi"$e program. Key Regional activities may include:
(1) Promoting WasteWi$e to large.businesses in the Region;
(2) Providing technical assistance to current and
prospective,WasteWi$e partners through workshops and
on-site waste assessments; . , ' •
1 . , (3) Participating in- the' development of overall policy'
directions and related waste prevention outreach
' efforts, .as resources "allow;' and,
. (4) Acting as WasteW.i$e representative to Was.t.eWi$e '.
' partners -from the Region. -.- ••_•
40
-------
Enhance Federal-State/Tribal and local partnerships by
fostering effective implementation of municipal solid waste
programs. ,
There are five priority activities under this objective:
recycling measurement, source reduction measurement, full cost
accounting, approval of State/Tribal landfill permit"programs;
and, Tribal activities. Each of these priorities are discussed
separately. ...
Recycling Measurement: Headquarters'is developing various
model measurement methodologies and related definitions to
provide to State/Tribes, local governments, business/industry,
and other interested parties to more consistently measure
recycling and the purchase of recycled goods. The Regions are .
encouraged to facilitate the use of these methodologies and
related definitions, once developed, through outreach and
information dissemination activities. ., • •
Source Reduction Measurement; Headquarters is working with
State and local governments and other experts to develop various
measurement pilots and models for source'reduction -measurement.
The. Regions are encouraged to assist with the implementation and
peer review of measurement pilot studies, measurement .
methodology, and information-transfer tbpls..
Full Cost Accounting; During FY 1995, Headquarters will
develop the following outreach, materials on.full cost accounting
(FCA) : FCA manual, FCA resource,guide, ,FCA brochure, FCA primer,
and FCA slide show with talking points. - Headquarters, also will
initiate development of.technical worksheets to assist local
communities in implementing a full cost accounting program.
During FY 1996, the Regions. are encouraged to promote the FCA
concept through the use of the various outreach-materials at
conferences, meetings, etc. Headquarters and the Regions will
work together to develop and implement a FCA training program.
Permit Program Approval/Modifications: A number of Regions
will need to.continue to focus resources on permit program
approval activities. Program -approval activities may include
moving partial .approvals to full approvals, ensuring
modifications receive.appropriate approvals, continued1 work with
Tribal approvals, and processing alternative liner petitions as
appropriate. ' '
Tribal Activities.; EPA. remains committed to maintaining a
government-to-government relationship with Tribes. Tribes are to
be incorporated intp the activities listed under each of the
above goals, as appropriate. Headquarters and the Regions will
continue to seek opportunities that enhance Tribal capabilities.
Tailored approaches, including technical assistance, , may be
needed to address specific Tribal circumstances. For additional
41
-------
' discussion of Tribal activities please- refer to the RIP section
"RCRA ACTIVITIES IN INDIAN COUNTRY". • •,
- In addition to the activities highlighted above, the Regions
may undertake other activities•to enhance Federal-State/Tribal
and- local partnerships. ' ' -. '• ' ' - .
, ' ' \ " ' "' • ' "
INDUSTRIAL SOLID WASTE NATIONAL PRIORITIES ' ; '
Non-Municipal/CESQG Disposal Rule. ..,.-.
Under a-court-ordered deadline, EPA will propose in. May 1995
a new 40 CFR-Part 257.5, defining minimum standards for non-
. -municipal solid waste facilities that .receive CESQG ha-zardous
waste.. This rule will .complete the statutory mandate.in RCRA
section 4010 (c) under which the municipal landfill criteria in 40
CFR Part 258 were .promulgated. At a minimum, the stat.ute
requires that these facilities must meet location restrictions
and have ground-water monitoring and corrective action..' The
final rule will- be promulgated in July 1996. As with the Part•
258 Criteria, States will have 18 months to adopt and implement
new requirements. States that have an approved MSWLF program can
seek, EPA approval through the program revision process. •
State/EPA Industrial D Initiative. , ,
\ ' s _ ; , - • •','''• ' •'•--'
EPA and ASTSWMO are launching, ah initiative to develop . •.
voluntary guidelines for safe management of industrial non-
hazardous waste in surface impoundments, landfills, land
application .unit's, and waste piles. The initiative, beginning in
the-summer of '1995-and continuing through 1996,. will include a
wide range of stakeholder and public' input into the development
of the guidelines. The overall goals of the initiative will be
to: ,(1) establish a baseline for safe management that ' .
industrial facilities and states can use as a voluntary guide to
improve their practices and programs; and, (2) affirm.state
leadership and strengthen the credibility of State industrial
solid waste programs. ' , . '•'.'•"
42
-------
-------
APPENDIX 1
-------
-------
Appendix 1
LEGAL STATUS CODES •
PI Permitted ' • / ' - ''-.-••'•
PC Post-Closure Permitted ' , ';.,..'•
PT Permit Terminated/Permit Expired, not Continued .
PR Proposed „ .-•.'. '" .. . p .
IS ' Interim Status • -• . ' •'••-•
LI- Loss' of Interim Status - . • . ' . ' " •
IT Interim'Status Terminated
TA. Temporary Authorization .....' , '
?M Pre-Mod Authorization
LP Loss 'of Pre-Mod Authorization';
NN Non-notifier/Illegal . ' .
RQ Requested but Not Approved
.NR Never Regulated as ..a TSD
'DL Del.isted t.- "•' • ' , ; , , \
RD /Research, Development, and Demonstration Permit,
RU Permit-by-Rule ' ' ' \ ,
EM -Emergency Permit ; '<'•''.-'
SR State Regulated . ' . •
OPERATING STATUS CODES
OP Operating, Actively Managing RCRA-Regulated Waste
CN Constructed, Not Yet Managing Hazardous Waste .
UC. Under Construction . .
BC Before Construction
IN .Inactive/Closing, but not yet RCRA Closed
• CC Clean Closed . • ;' :' , :
CP /Closed with Waste in Place • • •
CO Completed Post-Closure Care
DC •Delay of Closure ' • :
•CV Convertedvbut Not RCRA Closed - .
CR Conducting Activities not.Requiring a Permit
AB Abandoned • •; • .
SF Referred to CERCLA
PF Protective Filer : ' . '
'43
-------
PERMITING/CLOSURE/POST-CLOSURE PROGRESS REPORT UNIVERSE
OP CN "UC BC IN CC CP CO DC CV CR AB SF PF
PI 00000,0000.o o o o
PCoooooooo.ooooo
Jj ' PT O O O ' O O O O . O O" O O O O.
E . •" '
GPRooooooooooooo
A
L IS o o ' o o o o o' o o o o o o
S. LI o o o o o o oo o o oo o •
T : " •
A IT o o o o o o o p o o ' o o o
T '.• " ' ' • " . .. .. .
U *TA oo o o oo 6 oo o oo o
S •/ ; ; • . . . - . • .. .
PM o o o o o ,o o o o o o o o
c " '.. ' ' ' ': ' ' ' "' -• '
0 LP p o o o o o '• o o ' o o p o o
D • • ' .•/.. \ : .' .
E NN o o o.oo boo o q o'o o'
8 ' ' • • ' *" • ' : -
RQ O O O O O O ' O . O O O OOO
NR • • . . •';-•• ' • ' . ' • • -' . .;, . ' • - ../•.
DL o.o o o o . o o o o o o o o
'• " '^ • . . •".'•• " ••"-'• '-••'.'
RU •-••'*'"-•..•.'. ' . : • :'. " . - . . •
EM-. - - ., " ' " . . '. .. - ' : " • -
--••'- - *-•-•'
SR \ -,' '.:•'•'• '-'.-•' -;.--. ,
•* TA units should be included'if a Part B or a permit modification application has been
submitted.
-------
L
E
6
A
L
S
T
A
T
U
S
C
0
D
E
S
OP CN UC
PI 0 0 0
PC
PT
PR 0 0
IS ; o o o
••, LI o
IT o
*TA oo o
PM o o - '. o
LP o
\ '•.'•- - ' •
NN o o o
RQ O O O
NR
DL
RD
RU
BC
o
o
o
o
1
o
6
PERMIT WORKLOAD REPORT UNIVERSE
OPERATING STATUS CODES:
IN CC CP CO DC CV CR AB SF PF
SR • . .' ••".'• .-•"••. '• - ' ' ' v. .. . "•
* TA units should be included if a Part B'or a permit modification application has been
submitted. . ' • . . ' ~. .''.. * •.."•• ' . • -
, ' r '. ' .. " • ;- 45- " ''."•'-. .'•':• ' ' : '
-------
CLOSURE WORKLOAD REPORT UNIVERSE
OPERATING .STATUS CODES*
L
E
6
A
L
S
T
A
T
U
S
C
0
D
E
S
OP QN UC BC IN CC
PI °
PC °
PT °
PR
IS 0
LI -..'-• 0
IT °
TA o
PM o
LP °
•s " , •
NN o ,-
RQ
NR
DL
RD
RU
Cr uU JJU uv UK /us or
o . o o o
o o o q
o o o o
-
Q O O O
O O 0 . O
o o o o
O 00
o o o o
o o o o
\
o .0 o o
•
SR
n f
-------
EM
POST-CLOSURE WORKLOAD REPORT .UNIVERSE*
OPERATING STATUS CODES
L
E
0
A
L
S
T
A
T
U
S
C
0
D
E
S
OP CN UC BC IN CC ur v.
PI ° . °
PC ° °
PT o o
'•'.'•." • • • . ' • • • >''
PR .
IS 0,0
LI o o
— .
IT ° °
• ' . ' - ' ;
TA ° °
PM o . 0
LP ° 0
•---,/-•'
NN ° °
.-' RQ •' .. '•"- ••/ : :'• ' • ''.
;> DL: .'., : ' . . " •;"•• _ •.
• RD .-'.'•'-'." ; •" - • ', •'•• . .
RU
;U JJV, V.V UK. - n.o an
.0 o . o o
o o o o
o o o b
. S
o o o o
'o o o o
o o .0 o
b o q
o o o o
o o o o
• *
O 'O O O
••
PF
SR - ' '- : •." , ' ' • -''• - •'•--" '• - '•' -"••
*land disposal units and storage and treatment units closing as landfills (process codes
for these units are changed to D8Q)
47
-------
P,ERMITING/CLOSURE/POST-CLOSURE PROGRESS REPORT UNIVERSE
Designed for reports to track accomplishments in the permitting, closure, and post-closure
areas. Includes all units that are or were at some.time subject to the requirement to
obtain a RCRA permit to operate as a TSD.
» " • „
[NOTE: Select logic will have to look to previous events where most recent event is "RD"
"EM", "RU", or "SR".] ,..„-'•
PERMIT WORKLOAD REPORT UNIVERSE -
Designed for reports to evaluate workload related to permit issuance. Includes units in
the permit pipeline as well as units with active permits.
CLOSURE WORKLOAD REPORT UNIVERSE
Designed for reports to evaluate workload related to closure. Includes units that are
closing up to the time that closure certification is verified by the agency.
POST-CLOSURE WORKLOAD REPORT UNIVERSE
Designed for reports to evaluate,workload related to post-closure. Includes closing land
disposal units and storage units closing as landfills up to the time that clean closure
certification is verified by the agency.
48
-------
CORRECTIVE ACTION WORKLOAD
OPERATING' STATUS CODES
L
E
G
A
L
S
T
A
T
U
S
C
O
D
E
S
OP CN UC BC IN CC CP CO DC
PI o o o p o o o
PC opo o o o o
PT . • . . ..•";.•..; :
PR •'•..' •- • •
IS 0 0 0 O 00 0
LI 0 O O O ° ° °
IT '• -.. • ' ' •' • - • -
TA 0 00 0 0 0 0
- "".''" . ' - -"
PM o o o o o o . o
••.'•'-' . - •' ' •
LP o o o o o o ••:.-. o
•. • ' '••'''' '••'''
• NN " ' " '•-. ' '.•••'' -'.. . '
- '• -• • • - •'
RQ '•'.'-'•. - ' ' - '--.'..
', NR - ' : - . •••"•.-. •'•'. '
•' DL ; .'.••-
RU
EM " ;: -...". ••'-'•"..•-
CV CR AB SF
° °
p o
0 0
:'•-•;. b o
0 0
00
0 0
A • '. '••''•
" • a , . :
• ' ' .
. ~~
PF
PLUS facilitieB with corrective action,events RFI imposed and beyond
49 •
-------
SUBJECT TO CORRECTIVE ACTION
. OPERATING STATUS CODES
OP CN UC BC IN CC CP CO DC CV CR AB SF PF
PI o o o o. o o "' 6. o o o o o
PC o o o oo oo o o • o o o * ,
L PT
E
Q PR
IS o
o o o • o o oo . o o
S LI o o o o o oo o o o oo
T -
A IT
T - - . •
U . TA o o o o oooo Q o o o
s • • - ' ' • . ' - • * - ' "
PM o o oooo 60 o o o o
C ' • • • " '''.'
0 LP o o o o.o o o o o o . o o
D •• . - • • .*'.'..
E .NN v'o o oo o o o o o -- o o o
S . ' ' • -
RQ
NR ' ' . • . ' • .
DL - ' . - "•' ..•-.- "• \ • '
RD
RU O 00 O 00 O 00. O O O
EM ' _ ..'• ."•"""' . ; •
• t . -
SR ; • . ' • . - ' . -
, PLUS facilities with corrective action events RFI imposed and beyond
-------
APPENDIX 2
-------
-------
Appendix 2
EDF v. Browner Civ. No. 89-0598 (D.D.C.)
Law suit. EDF sued EPA for failure to meet a muber :of statutory deadlines in HSWA - :
1984. EDF's major issues include: ' .
1) numerous listing determinations (§ 3001 (e)); *
2) liquids in landfills restrictions (§ 3004(c)); - ' •
3) leak detection system standards (§3004(o)) ;
4) land disposal restrictions for newly listed and identified wastes (§
3004 (g).); : .. , .
5) a cement kiln dust Report to Congress (§ .8002 (o));'
6) pos t- closure, permits (§ 3005(c)); and ,.
7) additional characteristics (§ 3001(h)).
• • " . i -. '- ' * ' • •' •• , " , • - '"'"'.' • "
Settlement. EPA and EDF agreed to a settlement which set deadlines for items 1-5
above. Listing determinations comprise the bulk of the settlement, which sets .forth
both'the scope of the listings and deadlines for-proposed and final rules. The
settlement was filed with the court as a proposed consent decree in 1989 and was
finalized'by the court 12/94.
, . " • • • - . . • • \. • .
Outstanding issues. Parties agreed to stay the litigation on issue 6 through the end,
of 1992. The issue will probably settle or be dismissed when the post-closure rule
is •promulgated. Parties agreed to litigate issue 7. This issue was fully briefed,in
1991. In 12/94, the court ruled/in favor of the Agency, based on the merits of the
case. . ' •.-'•-. • '". - . * • •'-,"''••'•
• ' ' ' ... ' •
Implementation. To datej EPA'has met its deadlines. In an increasing number of
instances, the Agency has. requested additional time or flexibility on particular
,obligations. Although reluctant, EDF has agreed to various deadline extensions. We
are currently interested in additional time/flexibility for additional obligations
(e.g.,,chlorinated aliphatics rulemaking). . . . '
51
-------
•Other Suits/Agreements
* American Petroleum Institute -- used oil . -
* Hazardous Waste Treatment Council -- K061
* Chemical Waste Management -- "Third Third" LDR .
* ' Hazardous Waste Treatment Council -- burners, emission stds " • ' •
* Gearhart -- fossil fuel utility wastes
* . EDF -- treatability variance
* Sierra Club -- Industrial D/CESQG • .
* Environmental Technology Council and Chemical Manufacturers Association --HWIR
52
-------
1/17/95 Chem Waste Mgmt
1/31/95
3/31/95 '
4/30/95
5/15/95
6/30/95 .
8/15/95
8/31/95
9/30/95
11/30/95
11/30/95
1/16/96
1/31/96
5/31/96
5/31/96
6/36/96
6/30/96
7/1/96
10/31/96
10/31/96
EOF '
EDF
EOF
Sierra Club
EDF
Env Tech Council
EDF ' ..;•'•
Treatment Council
EDF
EDF . .
CWM
HWTC -
EDF •-.'••'"•
EDF :
EDF
EDF.
Sierra Club
EDF • f '
EDF
1995-96 Deadlines ,
NPRM LDRs for wastewaters, carbamates, organobromines; final
"Third Third" „
CKD, final regulatory decision
NPRM, listing category II & III solvents -
final, listing organobromines ;
NPRM, Industrial D/CESQG ' "
NPRM; LDR Phase iv ..
HWIR •''.''.'-.-- -.."--'
NPRM, listing petroleum refining
NPRM, tech emission stds, burners
NPRM, listing chlorinated aliphatics
final, listing dyes and pigments
final, LDR Phase. I II and .Third Third
final, K06.1 encapsulated uses
final, listing category II & III solvents
final report, spent solvents .
final report, petroleum refining
• 1: •• ( . ' - "•
final, LDR Phase IV . " . . - .
final, Industrial D/CESQG . ; " , -
final, listing chlorinated aliphatics
final, listing petroleum refining .
S3
-------
11/30/96 EOF
12/15/96 ETC
12/15/96 HWTC
12/31/96 EDF
final, LDR cat. II & III solvents
final, HWIR
final; tech emission stds burners
NPRM, listing paint prod, wastes
-------
APPENDIX 3
-------
-------
58246 Federal
,^_^
EPA—SDWA
Vol. 59. No. 2187 Monday. November H. 1894.V Unified- Agrafe
'"' ==^
Final Rule Stage
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 142
Legal Deadline: None >
Abstract: EPA will promulgate
revisions to the regulatory language
which concerns- EPA's initiation of
proceedings that could result in
withdrawal of State primary
enforcement responsibility for, the
Public Water System Supervision
Program. EPA is promulgating this
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (EPA)
Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)
4041. INDIAN RULE FOR THE
WELLHEAD PROTECTION PROGRAM
AND SOLE SOURCE AQUIFER
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 35
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (EPA)
Noise Control Act (NCA)
revision in part, in response to the
court's remand in National Wildlife
Federal v. EPA. 980 F. 2D-765 (DC
Circuit' 1992). National Wildlife
Federation v. EPA. 980 F.2D 765 (DC"
Small Entities Affected: None
Government Levels Affected: State
Tribal. Federal
Additional Information: SAN No. 3359.
Timetable:
he Action
« NPRM
his Final Action
Oat*
08/08/94
09/00/95
MnMMHHH>i^^Mi
•; Agency Contact Judy Lebowich.
PR Cite Water. (4604), Washington. DC 204fin
59 FH 40458 «".•«*•••'»»
RIN: 2040-AC19
Completed Actions
Completed:
Reason Date PR Cite
Withdrawn- No 09/01/94 ,-
further action is
expected in the
next 12 months. ' »
Small Entities Affected: None
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact fane Marshall-Farris
202260*8897
RIN: 2040^-AB18
4042. WITHDRAWAL OF PRODUCTS
FROM THE AGENCY'S REPORTS
IDENTIFYING MAJOR NOISE
SOURCES AND WITHDRAWAL OF
PROPOSED RULES
Legal Authority: 42 USC
4904(b)(l)/NCA 5fl))(l); 42 USC
4905(a)(l)/NCA 6{a)(l)
CFR Citation: Not applicable
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This action proposes to
withdraw certain products, from the
Agency's report identifying major noise
sources issued under authority of
Section 5(b){l) of the Noise Control Act
of 1972. These products are: Truck
Transport Refrigeration Units. Power
Lawn Mowers. Pavement Breakers.
Rock Drills, Wheel and Crawler
Tractors and Buses. This action also
proposes to withdraw proposed noise
regulations for Wheel and Crawler
Tractors, and Buses, issued under the
authority of Section 6(a)(l) of the Act.
Timetable:
Action
PR Cite
NPRM
Fir* Action
12/01/82
00/00/00
47 PR 54108
Final Rule Stage
^MMHBMM^MMMMM
Small Entities Affected: None
Government Levels Affected: Federal
Additional Information: SAN No. 2046.
No CFR parts pertain. This action
withdraws proposals which were not
codified.
Agency Contact Ken Feith..
Environmental Protection Agency. Air
and Radiation. (ANR-443). Washington.
DC 20460. 202 280-4996
RIN: 2060-AB24
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (EPA)
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
Prerule Stage
4043. MODIFICATIONS TO THE
DEFINITION OF 3OLJO WASTE AND
REGULATIONS OF HAZARDOUS
WASTE RECYCLING: GENERAL
Legal Authority: 42 USC 6905/RCRA
1004: 42 USC 6921 to 6928/RCRA 3001
to 3008
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 261; 40 CFR 286
Legal Deadline; None
Abstract: This rulemaking will propose
to modify the current regulatory
framework to improve the
implementation of the regulations that
define a solid waste and the regulations
governing the recycling of hazardous
wastes.
Timetable.
Action
PR Cite
ANPRM 00/00/00
NPflM 00/00/00
SmaM Entities Affected: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected:
Undetermined
Additional Information: SAN No..2872.
NOTE: EPA has not yet identified what
the next action will be. An ANPRM
may be issued, or regulatory changes
may be proposed, or both.
Agency Contact Mitch Kidwell.
Environmental Protection Agency.
Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
(5304), Washington, DC 20460, 202
2804551
RIN: 2050-AD18
55
-------
....... .„...„ , VoL 59. No. 218 / Mo-day. Noven.be, t4. 19S4 / Unified Agad. 582*7
^^!^=SSS^==^ " Proposed Rule Stag*
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (EPA)
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
FACILITY RESPONSE
FNTNG FOR DELEGATED
OFFSHORE FACILITIES
Legal Authority: 33 USC 1321/Clean
Water Act: EO 12777
CFR Citation: 40 CFR
Legal Deadline: Final. Statutory.
August 18.1992.
Abstract The Oil Pollution Act of 1990
(OPA) expands the scope of private .
planning and response activities
associated with discharges of oil. The
revision to sections 20 and 21 ot the
facility response plan rule
implementing these requirements
would extend applicabi lityof_t£ei rule
to non-transportation related offshore
faXesUno-ward of the the low water
S Regulation of these facilities was
****" ****o»» __ , » 4,AM«««vanrllint
rlal&cat&d to EPA by 3 MQHioraiiuum
of Understanding of 2/3/94 from the
Department of Interior/Minerals
Management Service.
Timetable;
Action
Dete
FR CM*
03/OQJ*
Final Action 12AXV96
Smelt Entities Affected: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: State.
Local. Tribal. Federal .
Sector* Affected: 131 Crude Petroleum
' and Natural Ga«
Analysis: Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis
Additional Information: SAN No. 342S.
Agency Contact: Bobb* !**•£
DiSold. Environmental Protetfion
Anencv Solid Waste and Emergency
RfsjSse (5202G). 703*58*774
RIN: 2050-AE18
4045 REGULATIONS TO COHTROi.
of Hazardous Wastes and Their
Disposal. EPA will propose regulations
which will implement the terms of the
convention, as implementing legislation
requires. The final regulations would
replace the current import/export
regulations at 40 CFR 262, Subparts E
and F. In addition. EPA may propose. -
additional regulations as necessary to
improve and implement the waste
import/export program under RCRA
(e.g. codification of bilateral
agreements, changes to regulations
implementing the Organization for
Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD) Council Decision
C(92)39/FINAL).
Timetable; . —
•»_te CB Cite
* »i|..Fi DW rn *^iw
ACUQfl "
SPRM ~" oo/oo/oo
Small Entities Affected: Undetermined
Government Levels Effected: State.
Local. Tribal. Faderal
Additional Information: SAN No. 3426.
Agency Contact Julie Lyddon.
~ Environmental Protection Agency. -
Solid Waste and Emergency ^P0"?®'
(5304). Washington DC 20460. 202 260-
7944
RIN: 20SO-AEX3 '
4048. HAZARDOUS WASTE
MANAGEMENT SYSTEM;
Lsgal Authority: 42 USC 8905 et seq
CFR Citation: 40 CTR »**«
40 CFR 262; 40 CFR 283; 40 CFR
40 CFR 265; 40 CFR 288
Legai Deadline: None . • . ,
Depending on the toptementing
legislation. there mty be a NPRM
deadline of one year from, the date of
the enactment
Abstract Once the U.S. passes
legislation needed to ratify and become
• aParty to the Basel Convention on the
Control of Transboundary Movements
^^KS^LS
(ENCAPSULATED USES)
Legal Authority: 42 USC 8905.6912(a).
6921. 6922.6924.6934. and 8938
CFR Citations 40 CFR 261; 40 CFR 266
Lsoal Deadline: NPRM. Judicial.
December 13.1994. Final. Judicial.
December 13.1995.
Abstract Th« Agency anticipates
amending th« generis exclusion for
.KO61. KO62. and FOO8 residual stags
bv either (1) allowing encapsulated
uses of the slags under the existing
exclusion. OP (2) setting new levels .
under this exclusion for encapsulated
uses of the slags.
Timetable:
Additional Information: SAN-No. 3428.
Agency Contact Narendra K.
Chaudhari, Environmental Protection
Agency. Solid Waste and Emergency
Response. (5304). Washington DC >
20460. 202 260-4787
RIN: 2050-AE1S
4047. .ALTERNATIVES FOR .
GROUND-WATER MONITORING AT
SMALL, DRY/REMOTE MUNICIPAL
SOLID WASTE LANDFILLS '
Legal Authority: RCRA 4004. RCRA
1008. RCRA 2002. RCRA 4010
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 258
Legal Deadline: None
" Abstract Alternative strategies for
- conventional ground-water monitoring
are under consideration by the Agency
for use at certain small, dry/remote
municipal solid waste landfills, as
necessary to detect contamination on a
site-specific basis. Examples of
alternative strategies may include early
detection vadose zone monitoring.
analysis for indicator parameters and
major ions in place of trace elements
and volatile organic compounds, or
Sempting small landfills from ground-
water monitoring require™ents based
on a demonstration that there is no
potential for leachate migration to the
uppermost aquifer. Examples of site-
specific factors important to the
alternative selection process include
costs, hydrogeology. straugrapny. ^
climate and availability of equipment
and technical expertise. There' are ^
Srum geographic areaswhere there
may be no clear-cut effective
Stematives to conventional ground-
water monitoring, such as areas ot
Alaska with permafrost or in
communitieiwith extremely low per
capita income, (cont)
Timetable;
Action
Date
FR Cltt
12/00/9*
pinat Action 12/00/96
Small Entitles Affected: None
Government Levels Affected: State.
Local. Federal
Small Entities Affected: Government
Jurisdictions
Qov«mment Levels Affected: State.
Local. Tribal » ,
Additional information:
SAN No. 3546.
ABSTRACT CONT: ™« «nsiderauc
of alternatives flows from a recent
decision by the U.S., Court of Apoea
Fwthe District of Columbia Circuit '
56
-------
round-water
nities being frveu^"--ses<
«^.25t,£Sd perceni
uirein
rnonitonng r^uirein ^
ovide sws an
rnon
ould provide
Sm.« EntitW Att^t«l: None
Gov«nm^U^.Att^:None
Addition.l.n1onnrton:SANNo.3547.
SSStfSSSSSS.-.
s&^sy£sss.s««~-
3282
IN: ""'n-AE24
^.UPOAT*^^^^
§&**•«*
j correct
requirem^nu b^^n* ^ finand«l
^5-ft ^fsstfssy*****
SiS^^-b'SSA :-«»-
•Sl^irCSJSfflSi^1----' TW»«^«S.
S»5S5«««SU-.. ^=^. o^
^^i^^0480'703
V30M«23
^5ST P*«»^L
01/OOWB
M-i-
Third Edition of i». Trib«i
•
*-.
Final Action
07/00/97
WN-.2050-AE27
57
-------
Federal Register /
•••
EPA—RCRA
mechanisms available for addressing
post-closure care at hazardous waste
land disposal facilities. It would allow
substitution of enforcement
mechanisms for post-closure permits m
some cases, while still retaining the
permit as an option to.address these
Faculties. The rule would also require
States to adopt enforcement authority
to compel corrective action ^ intenm
status facilities, consistent with Federal
section 3008th] authority.
Timetable:
^ «• / Monday. November 14. .994 t Unified Ag^da 58249
Proposed Rule Stage
Final Acton
Smalt Entitle* Affected: None
Government Level* Affected: None
Additional Information: SAN No. 3042.
Agency Contact Barbara Foster.
Environmental Protection Agency.
Solid Waste and Emergency Respon».
(5303W). Washington. DC 20460. 703
308-7057 .
RIN: 20SO-AD5S _
Small Entities Affected: Undetermined
(Government Levels Affected:
Undetermined ,
Additional Information: SAN No. 3134.
Agency Contact Ron Josephson.
Environmental Protection Agency.
Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
(5304). Washington. DC 20460. 202
260-4770
RINt 2050-AD84 ..
4054. CHLORINATED ALIPHATICS
LISTING DETERMINATION
Leoal Authority: 42 USC 6905/RCRA
1006: 42 USC 6912(a)/RCRA^Q02(a): 42
USC 6922/RCRA 3001: 42 USC
9602/CERCLA 102: 33 USC
1361/FWPCA 311: 33 USC
1321/FWPCA 501
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 261; 40 CFR 271;
40 CFR 302
4053. SPENT SOLVENTS LISTING
DETERMINATION
Leoal Authority. 42 USC 6905/RCRA
UO* 4\ulc 6912/RCRA 2002; 42
USC 6921/RCRA 3001; 42 USC
6922/RCRA 3002; 42 USC MOB/KBA
3006: 42 USC 9602/RCRA BOOK 33 •
USC 1361/FWPCA 1361; 33 USC
1321/FWPCA 1321
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 261:40 CFR 271;
40CFR302
Legal Deadline: NPRM. Judicial. March
311995. Final. Statutory. February 8.
1986. Final. Judicial. May 31.1996.
Abstract: This action wiU propose to
list or not list as hazardous w*81**
under RCRA 14 spent MlvenUand/or
still bottoms from their recovery. The
solvents are cumene. phenoU
isophorone. acetonitnle. nufural.
epichlorohydrin. methyl chlonde.
etoylene dibromide. benzyl-chlonde. p-
dichlorobenzene. 2-methoxyethanol. 2-
methoxyethanol acetate. 2-
ethoxyethanol acetate, and •
lyclohexanol. Anysolvents listed will
be added to the CERCLA list of
hazardous substances with reportable
quantities.
Timetable:
Legal DsadHn*-. NPRM. Judicial.
November 30.1995. Final. Judicial.
October 31.1996.
Abstract This action will propose to
list or not to list as hazardous wastes
under RCRA wastewaters and
wastewater treatment sludges from toe
production of approximately 25
chlorinated aliphatic*. These wastes, if
identified as hazardous under REBA.
will be designated hazardous
substance* under CERCLA. with .
reportable quantities established. The
Agency will use this opportunity to
investigate waste minimization
possibilities.
4055. NEW AND REVISED TESTING
METHODS APPROVED FORRCRA
SUBTITLE C, IN "TEST METHODS
FOR EVALUATING SOLID WASTE,
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL METHODS"
(SW-846), THIRD EDITION, UPDATE III
Legal Authority: 42 USC 6912/RCRA
2002: 42 USC 6921/RCRA 3001; 42
USC 6924/RCRA 3004: 42 USC
6925/RCRA 3005: 42 USC 6926/RCRA
3006
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 260: 40 CFR 261:
40 CFR 262: 40 CFR 264: 40 CFR 265:
' 40 CFR 268; 40 CFR 270
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract This regulatory action will
revise certain testing methods and add
other new testing methods that are
approved or required under Subtitle C
or RCRA. These new and revised
methods are found in Update III to the
Third Edition of "Test Methods for
Evaluating Solid Waste.
Physical/Chemical Methods .EPA
publication SW-846. The revision to the
manual is necessary to provide
improved and more complete analytical
methods for RCRA-relating testing.
Timetable;
Action
Oat*
FR Cite
NPRM
Final Action
DMe
,11/00/96
10/00/96
FK CM*
04/00/95
Final Action 09/00/96
SmaH Entities Affectad: None
Government Levels Affected: Federal
Additional Information: SAN No. 3427,
Agency Contact Kim Kirkland.
Environmental Protection Agency.
Solid Waste and Emergency Respo/1,88!
£5304). Washington DC 20460. 202 260-
6722
RBI; 20SO-AE14
NPRM
Final Action
Small Entities Affsctsd: Undetermined
Government Levels Affsctsd: None
Additional Information: SAN No. 3151.
Agency Contacts Wanda l^rine,
Environmental Protection Agency.
Solid Waste and Emergency Z**?™3*'
(5304),Washington. DC 20460. 202
260-7458
RIN:.2050-AD88
• 58 •
USC 6949/RCRA 4009
CFHCttation:40CFR2S8
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract This rule would allow
SSaUy strong corporate entities that
own/operate municipal solid waste .
tadR* option of using a financial
test or guarantee to demonstrate
fiSStaf aswranca for costs associated
with closure, post-closure, and
corrective action of known releases.
-------
58250 Federal Register / Vol. 59. No. 218 /Monday, November 14. 1994 / Unified Agenda
•^•^•^•^"^•^•••••^^^
EPA—RCRA
Proposed Ruto Stag*
Timetable:
Action
Oat*
FR Cite
NPRM ' 10/00/94.. .
Final Action 09/00/95
Small Entities Affected:. None .
Government Levels Affected: None
Additional Information: SAN No. 3179.
Agency Contact: Tim O'Malley.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Solid Waste and Emergency. Response,
(5303WK Washington. DC 20460. 703
308-8613
BIN: 2Q50-AD77
4057. REVISIONS TO CRITERIA
APPLICABLE TO SOLID WASTE
DISPOSAL FACILITIES THAT MAY
ACCEPT CESQG HAZARDOUS
WASTES EXCLUDING MUNICIPAL
SOLID WASTE LANDFILLS
Legal Authority. 42 USC 6907. 6944,
6949/RCRA 4010, 1008. 2002. and
4004: 33 USC 1345
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 257
Legal Deadline: NPRM. Judicial. May
15. 1995. Final. Judicial. July 1. 1996.
Abstract RCRA section 4010(c) directs
EPA to revise existing Criteria in 40
CFR part 257 for facilities that may
receive hazardous household wastes
(HHW) or Conditionally Exempt Small
Quantity Generator (CESQG) hazardous
wastes. In October 1991. EPA
promulgated the Municipal Solid Waste
Landfill Criteria (40 CFR 258). thereby
satisfying part of the statutory mandate.
EPA is under a settlement agreement
with the Sierra Club to fulfill the
remainder of the statutory mandate by
promulgating regulations pertaining to
the disposal of CESQQ hazardous
wastes at solid waste disposal facilities.
Depending on actual practices at
specific facilities, these regulations .
might be applicable to commercial and
private industrial waste facilities and
construction and demolition wast*
facilities managing non-hazardous
wastes.
Timetable:
Agency Contact Paul F. Cassidy,
Environmental Protection Agency,
Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
(5304), Washington DC 20460,202 260-
4682
RIN: 2050-AEll
4058. REMOVAL OF
PENTACHLOROPHENOL FROM F027;
RESTORE IT AS U242; CHANGE
TQXICITY DESIGNATION OF F021;
AND CLARIFY BASIS FOR LISTING
CRITERIA
Legal Authority: 42 USC 6921/RCRA
3001
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 261; 40 CFR 260;
40 CFR 264; 40 CFR 265; 40 CFR 271;,
40 CFR 302
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: the Agency is proposing to
amend the regulations for hazardous
waste management under RCRA by
amending the basis for listing a
hazardous waste (i.e..
pentacnlorophenoi production wastes)
under 40 CFR 281.31. The Agency is
•also proposing to amend one hazardous
waste (i.e., delete part of FO27 -
discarded unused formulations of ,
pentacnlorophenoi and compounds
derived from pentachlorophenol) listed
in 40 CFR 261.33 and to add one waste
(i.e.. U242 - pentacnlorophenoi) to the
list of hazardous wastes in 40 CFR 261.
FO21 and U242 would no longer be
subject to management standards for
acute hazardous wastes. Lastly, the
Agency is proposing to clarify the
criteria used in 40 CFR 261.11 for
listing solid wastes as hazardous. This
rule proposes less stringent hazardous
waste management standards for FO21
and discarded unused portions
containing pentacnlorophenoi. ,
Timetable: .
Action
FRO*
NPRM 05/00/96
Final Action, 07/00/98
SmaH Entities; Affected: Businesses.
Governmental Jurisdictions
Qovemment Levels Affected: State.
Federal
Addition* Information: SAN No. 3416.
Action
Fft CNe
4059. LISTING DETERMINATION OF
WASTES GENERATED DURING THE
MANUFACTURE OF AZO,
ANTHRAQUINONE, AND
TRMRYLMETHANE DYES AND
PIGMENTS
:Legal Authority: 42 USC 6921/RCRA
-.3001
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 261: 40 CFR 264:
40 CFR 265; 40 CFR 271; 40 CFR 302
Legal Deadline: NPRM. Judicial.
November 30, 1994. Final. Judicial.
November .30,1995.
Abstract This action will propose the
Agency's determination whether or not
to list as hazardous wastes under RCRA
wastes generated during the production
of three classes of dyes and pigments.
The Agency is considering several
alternatives to listing, specifically
management standards, pollution
prevention, waste minimization,
recycling, reclamation, process changes.
and substitution of starting materials.
Timetable:
NPRM 00/00/00
Final Adtan 00/00/00
SmaM Entities Affected: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected;
Undetermined
Addtttonat Information: SAN No, 3178.
Agency Contact Anthony CaneU.
Environmental Protection Agency.
Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
(5304). Washington. DC 20460. 202
260-6807
RIN: 2050-AD78
Action*
Oat*- FR Clt*
NPRM 11/00/94
Final Action 11/00/95
SmaR Entities Aff*ct*d: Undetermined .
Government Levels Affected: None
Additional Information: SAN No.
3066/3068/3069.
Agency Contact Wanda Levine.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
(5304). Washington. DC 20460. 202
260-7458
RIN: 2050-AD80
4060. IDENTIFICATION AND USTINQ
OF HAZARDOUS WASTE:
PETROLEUM REFINING PROCESS
WASTES
Legs* Authority; 42 USC 6921/RCRA
3001
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 261; 40 CFR 264:
40 CFR 285:40 CFR 271: 40 CFR 302
: DeadHne: NPRM. Judicial.
August .31.1995. Final, Judicial.
October 31.1996.
Abstract This action will propose to
list or not to list as hazardous wastes
under RCRA these waste streams from
the petroleum refining process: l)
clarified slurry oil from catalytic
cracking: 2) crude storage tank sludge.
3) spent hydrotreating catalyst: 4) sulfur
complex and hydrogen sulfide removal
59
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59. No. 218 f Monday. November 14. 1994 / Unified Agenda 58251
proposad Rul« Stag*
EPA—RCRA
specification product and fines:-5)
spent catalytics reforming catalysts; 8)
unleaded storage tank sludge: 7) spent
hydrorefining sludge: 8) spent catalyst
and fines from catalytic cracking; 9)
spent catalyst from sulfur complex and
hvdrogen sulfide removal facilities: 10)
spent caustic from liquid treating; 11)
spent catalyst from sulfuric acid
alkylation, 12) sludge from hydrofluoric
alkylation: and I3)sludge from sulfunc
acid alkylation. The Agency is
considering alternatives to listing •
including management standards based
on pollution prevention, recycling.
reclamation, or feedstock, to other
manufacturing processes. This action
will also adjust the reportable
quantities for waste streams F037 and
(cont)
Timetable; ._
Waste Export Notifications, and permit
fees for EPA-issued RCRA permits. .
Timetable:
TlmataWa:
Action
Data
FH Ota
Action
Data FR Ctta
Action
Dsta
FR Ota
NPRM 08/00/95
Find Action 10/00/96
Small intitie* Affactad: None
Government Leveto Aff«et«*
Undetermined
Additional Information: SAN No. 3064.
ABSTRACT CONT: F038 (sludges from
petroleum separation processes) under
CERCLA as amended. Depending on
the number of listed wastes and their
generation quantities, the costs of this
• action could be very significant.
Aoency Contact Maximo (Max) Dia*.
Jr7. Environmental Protection Agency.
Solid Waste and Emergency Response,
(5304). Washington. DC 20480.202
260-4788
BIN: 20SO-AD88
4061. RCRA FEES: HANDLER -w%__
NOTIFICATIONS AND WASTE EXPORT
NOTIFICATIONS
Legal Authority: Independent Offices
Appropriations Act of 1951
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 262: 40 CFR 263;
40 CFR 265
Legs) Deadline: None
Abetract The Omnibus Budget and
Reconciliation Act requires EPA to
• raise S38 million annually in user fees
as part of an overall Federal deficit
reduction program. To help achieve
this level. EPA will use the authority
of the Independent Offices
Appropriations Act of 1951 to propose
for RCRA Handler Notifications.
1.1/0096
Final Action • 11/00/96
Small Entities Affactad: Undetermined
Government Levela Affactad:
Undetermined
Additional Information: SAN No. 3211.
Agency Contact: Val de 1m Fuente,
Environmental Protection Agency,
Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
(5304); Washington. DC 20460. 202
260-4874
RIN: 20SO-AD92
4062. REVISED TECHNICAL^
STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS^
WASTE COMBUSTION FACILITIES ;
Regulatory Plan: This entry is Seq. No.
148 in Part n of this issue of the
Federal Register.
RIN: 2050-AEOl
ANPRM . 10/24/91 56 FR 55160
NPRM 06/00795
.Final Action . 06/00/96
Small Entities Affactad: Undetermined
Government Levela Affected:
Undetermined
Analyaia: Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis
Additional Information: SAN No. 3366.
ADDITIONAL AGENCY CONTACT:
Sue Slotnick. 703 308-8467.
Agency Contact Sherri Stevens.
Environmental Protection Agency.
Solid Waste and Emergency Response,
. S302W, Washington. DC 20460, 703
308-8467
RIN: 2050-AE05 •
4064. IDENTIFICATION AND LISTING
OF HAZARDOUS WASTES;
HAZARDOUS WASTE IDENTIFICATION
RULE (HWIR): CONTAMINATED
MEDIA
4083. LAND DISPOSAL
RESTfUCTWNS-PMASEiy:
.TREATMENT STANDARDS FOR
CERTAIN MWERAL PROCESSING
WASTES; TC METALS; NEWLY
SsTEDWASTES FROM WOOD
RESERVING AND DYES AND
PIGMENTS
Legal Authority: 42 USC 6905. 6912(a).
6921.6924
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 268
Legal Deadline: NPRM. Judicial. June
1995. Final. Judicial. June 1996.
» Abstract The Hazardous and Solid
Waste Amendments of 1984 require
EPA to promulgate regulations
establishing treatmwit standards tnat
must bewaet before hazardous waste
may be disposed of on land. The
proposed rulemaking establishes
treatment standards for certain
characteristic mineral processing
wastes, spent aluminum potliners.
wood preserving wastes, and TC
metals. It also addresses issues arising
from a September 25.1992 decision of
the U.S. Court of Appeals in Chemical
Waste Management v. EPA. 978 F. 2d
(D.C. Cir. 1992) on the equivalency pi
treatment in wastowater treatment
systems regulated under the Clean
Water Act to treatment of wastes under
RCRA.
60
Regulatory Plan: This entry is Seq. No.
149 in Part n of this issue of the
Federal Register.
RIN: 2050-AE22 "
4086. HAZARDOUS WASTE MANIFEST
REGULATION
Legal Authority: 42 USC 6922/RCRA
3002(a)(5)
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 260; «CFR26l:
40 CFR 262: 40 CFR 263; 40 CFR 264:
40 CFR 265: 40 CFR 270: 40 CFR 271
Legal Deadline-. None
Abatract The purpose of this rule is
to amend the existing Uniform
Hazardous Waste Manifest rule to make
it truly "uniform" across the country.
Presently What is supposed to be a
"uniform" manifest is instead a
patchwork of varying State manifests.
Interstate shipments become qurta
burdensome when industry must deal
with several different forms with varied
requirements. This is compounded
stace States have difficulty tracking and;
verifying interstate loads.
The major issues involve the specific
data elements that should be on the
•uniform manifest form. Most States '
want to see a truly uniform manifest
that would be used by all States, but
they also want a certain degree ot
-------
58252 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 218 / Monday. November 14, 1994 / Unified Agenda .
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^SS^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^*^*****^^11^^^^^^^^^^^^™**™"!""""""™^™-——
EPA—RCRA Proposed Rule Stag*
flexibility to add data elements to suit
their needs. Therefore, the goal of this
rulemaking will be to achieve
consensus on a manifest form that all
States can live with.
The costs of this action should be
minimal to the .regulated industry since
the new Federal form will only add a
few data elements,that in most cases
are already being required by the
various State forms.
timetable:
Action
Oat*
FR cite
NPRM
Final Action'
01/00/95
01/00/96
Small Entities Affected: Businesses.
Organizations
Government Levels Affected: State,
Local. Tribal. Federal
Additional Information: SAN No. 3147.
Agency Contact: Rick Westlund.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
(2136). Washington. DC 20460.202
280-2745
RIN: 2050-AE21
4060. LOCATION STANDARDS FOR
HAZARDOUS WASTE FACILITIES
Legal Authority: 42 USC 6912/RCRA
2002; 42 USC 6924(o)(7)/RCRA
3004(o)(7)
CFR CHatton: 40 CFR 260: 40 CFR 264:
40 CFR 265: 40 CFR 270
Legal Deadline: None
Abatraet Section 3004(o){7) of RCRA
authorizes EPA to restrict the siting of
hazardous waste treatment, storage, and
disposal facilities in environmentally
sensitive locations. EPA's goal for the
location standards would be to ensure
siting of new hazardous waste
treatment, storage and disposal
facilities in the most suitable locations.
Timetable:
Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
(5303W), Washington. DC 20460, 703
308*6634
BIN: 2050-AB42
4067. LAND DISPOSAL
RESTRICTIONS—PHASI III:
STANDARDS FOR
DECHARACTERIZED WASTES AND'
TREATMENT STANDARDS FOR
NEWLY LISTED CARBAMATE,
ORGANOBROMINE WASTES, AND
SPENT ALUMINUM POTUNERS
Regulatory Plan: This entry is Seq. No.
150 in Pan n of this issue of the
Federal Register.'
RIN: 2050-AD38
4088. RULE IDENTIFYING WHEN
MUTARY MUNITIONS BECOME
HAZARDOUS WASTES AND
MANAGEMENT STANDARDS FOR
SUCH WASTES
Legal Authority: 42 USC 6924(y)/RCRA
3004(y)
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 260:40 CFR 261;
40 CFR 262: 40 CFR 264: 40 CFR 265:
40 CFR 270
Legal Deadline: NPRM. Statutory. April
6,1993. Final. Statutory, October 6.
1994.
Abatraet Section 107 of the Federal
Facilities Compliance Act of 1992
requires EPA to issue a rule identifying
when military munitions, ordnance.
and chemical warfare agents become
hazardous wastes subject to Federal
, hazardous waste transportation, storage.
treatment, and disposal rules. The rule
may also identify management
standards for such waste*
Timetable;
mate
Action
mote
NPRM 0900/96
Final Action 09/00/96 .
Small Entities Affected; Businesses.
Governmental Jurisdictions
Government Levels Affected: State.
Federal
Analysis: Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis
Additional Information: SAN No. 2303.
Agency Contact Felicia Wright
Environmental Protection Agency,
4069. STREAMLINE PERMITTING FOR
MIXED WASTE
Legal Authority: 42 USC 6925/RCRA
3005 ,
CFR Citation: Not yet determined
: Legal Deadline: None'
Abstract On January 13.1992. the
Utilities Solid Waste Activities Group
(USWAGJ petitioned EPA to create a
conditional exemption from full
Subtitle C permitting requirements for
certain small commercial mixed waste
generators that are already permitted by
the NRC The generators, include
medical schools, universities.
biotechnology laboratories, and
pharmaceutical companies. This new
category would include NRC licensees
that generate less than 1000 kg/month
of mixed waste, counting mixed waste
as distinct from other hazardous waste.
EPA and NRC must together determine
how to ensure adequate protection of
human health and the environment in
order for any streamlined permitting of
NRC licensed facilities to be
implemented.
Timetable:
NPRM
Fins* Action
07/00/96
07/OC-98
SmaH Entrees Affected: None
Govei
•to Affected: State.
Federal. „
Additional information; SAN No. 3235.
Agency Contact Ken Shuster.
Environmental Protection Agency,,
Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
(5303W). Washington. DC 20460, 703
3008759
RIN: 2050-AD90
Action
Date
FR Cite
NPRM 00/00/00
Final Action 00/00/00 •
SmaH EntWes.Affected: Businesses
Government Levels Affected; .
Undetermined
Analysis: Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis
Additional Information: SAN No. 3218.
Agency Contact Richard LaShisr,
Environmental Protection Agency.
Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
(5303W), Washington. DC 20460, 703
30*4762
RM: 2050V-AD65
4070. RCRA SUBTITLE C INDIAN
PROGRAM AUTHORIZATION
Legal Authority: 42 USC
6926(bV3006(b)
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 271:40 CFR 270
; None
Abstract This action would clarify that
Indian Tribes may become authorized
for the Subtitle C hazardous waste
program and that they may share in
grant funds made available to States to
assist in implementation of authorized
hazardous waste programs. The action
61
-------
Federal Register ' Vol. 59. No. 218 / Monday. November 14. 1994 / Umnea ..geaaa
Proposed Rule Stage
EPA—RCRA . , . ..'
would establish a definition of Indian
Tribe and the cnteria which a Tribe
must meet for authorization purposes.
The rule wbuld further clarify that .
Indian Tribes, unlike other States, may
be considered for approval of partial
RCRA programs, under criteria that
would also be announced in the rule.
' The rule is of great symbolic
significance to the Tribes, and it would
implement EP.Vs 1984 Indian Policy by
recognizing the sovereign status ot
Tribes and their primacy in
implementing RCRA. The rule would
deal with the issues of Indian Tribe .
capability, alternatives to authorization
that also'advance Tribes' participation
in RCRA. and special attributes of
Indian Tribe jurisdiction. The action
would be closely coordinated with
similar efforts in other media programs.
Tlm*t»bl«: . _ .
0*» FRCU*
.ground-water samples for measuring
metals to avoid potential false
indications of releases to ground-water.
The commenters maintain that the
analytical results using filtered samples
are sufficiently protective and are as
effective as unfiltered samples specified
in the Criteria. This notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) seeks comment on
the appropriateness of allowing
States/Tribes with EPA-approved
permit programs to lift the ban on a
site-specific basis. This rulemaking will
not impose new requirements on local
government landfill owners and
operators: rather, it could alleviate the
need to institute new sampling
protocols in certain locations.
Timetable;
Action
Timetable:
Action
Oat* . FR Clt*
Oat*
FR at*
NPRM
Final Action
00/00/00 x
00/00/00
NPRM 01/00/95
Final Action • ' 01/00/96 -
Small Entities Affected: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: State.
Local. Tribal
Additional Information: SAN No. 2827.
Agency Contact Richard La Shier.
Environmental Protection Agency.
Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
(5303W). Washington. DC 20460. 703
308-8760
RIN: 2050-^AD07
4071. FIELD FILTERING OF GROUND-
WATER SAMPLES
Leoal Authority: 42 USC 6944(a)/RCRA
iSSafcMUSC 1345(d) and (e)/CWA
405*42 USC 6945/RCRA 4005: 42 USC
6907/RCRA 1008: 42 USC6912/RCRA
2002: 42 USC 6949a(cVRCRA 4010(c)
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 258.51(b)
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract The RCRA Subtitle D Solid
Waste Disposal Facility Criteria, among
other provisions, require
owners/operators of municipal solid
waste landfills to monitor ground-water
to detect releases from their landfills.
The Criteria ban the filtering of ground-
water samples in the field because
filtering potentially removes some of
the contamination found in the solid
phase of the samples. Since
promulgation of the Criteria, a number
' of States and industry groups have
stated that it is important to field filter,
RCRA
0
NPRM
Final Action
10/OC/94 .
09/00/95
Small Entities Affected: None
Government Levete Affected: State
Addition^ Information: SAN No. 3150.
Agency Contact Tracy Bon*.
Environmental Protection Agency.
Solid Waste and Emurgency Response,
(5306). Washington. DC 20460, 202
260-5649
RIN: 2050-AD86
•PERM"! . --— —
OP ADEQUACY
Lsoal Authority: 42 USC 6945/RCRA
4005: 42 USC 6912/RCRA 2002
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 239
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract This action would describe
procedures EPA would us* tomato
determiHation* of adequacy for
State/Tribal solid waste PS™"""1* ,
programs, as required by Section 4005
of the Solid Wast* Disposal Act. as
amended (RCRA). Section 400S(c)(lHB)
requires States to adopt and implement
alermit program, other system of pnor
approval, within 18 months, after the
promulgation of revised criteria under
Section4004(a). as requirediby Section
4010(c). Section 4005(c)(l)(a requires
the Administrator to determine whether
each State has developed an "adequate
permit program."
Small Entities Affected: None
Government Levels Affecjed: State.
Tribal
Additional Information: SAN No. 2751.
Agency Contact Henry Ferland,
Environmental Protection Agency.
Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
(5306). Washington. DC 20460. 202
260-3384
RIN: 2050-AD03 -
4073. GUIDELINE FOR FEDERAL
PROCUREMENT OF PAPER AND
PAPER PRODUCTS CONTAINING
RECOVERED MATERIALS
Legal Authority: 42 USC 69l2(a)/RCRA
6002
CFR Cttatioh:,40 CFR 247
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract Section 6002 of the RCRA
requires EPA to issue guidelines for the
procurement of recycled products.
From time to time. EPA must revise
the guidelines for use by procuring
agencies. EPA is to designate items
which can be made with recovered
materials and to recommend practices
for the procurement of those items by
Federal procuring agencies. Once
designated, procuring agencies are
required to purchase these items with
the highest percentage of recovered
materials practicable. EPA issued its
final paper guideline in June 1989-
Action
Oat*
FH en*
NPRM
Fin*! Action
12/00/94
10/00/95
SmaU Entities Affected: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: State,
Local. Federal
Additional Information: SAN No. 3032.
Agency Contact Dana Arnold.
Environmental Protection Agency.
Solid Waste and Emergency Respop58-
(5306). Washington. DC 20460, 202
260-8518 "
RIN: 2050-AD41
62
-------
S8254 f«aerat Kegisier / vol. ay. .NO. 4.10 i .Monday. iNovemoer 14.
/ - uniitea Agenaa
£PA—RCRA
4074. • REVISIONS TO THE
COMPREHENSIVE GUIDELINE FOR
PROCUREMENT OP PRODUCTS
CONTAINING RECOVERED
MATERIALS
Legal Authority: 42 USC 6912(a)/RCRA
6002(e)
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 247!
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: RCRA'section 6002 requires
EPA to issue guidelines for the
procurement of recycled products. EPA
is to designate items that are made with
recovered materials and to recommend
practices for government procurement.
Once designated, procuring agencies
are required to purchase these items
with the highest percentage of
recovered materials practicable. In
addition. Executive Order 12873.
Federal Acquisition, Recycling, and
Waste Prevention., designating items in
a Comprehensive Procurement
Guideline (CPG) and recommending
procurement practices in a Recovered
Materials Advisory Notice (RMAN).
The Order requires EPA to update the
CPG and issue RMANs annually-. To
date. EPA has issued procurement
guidelines for five items, including
paper and paper products; re-refined
lubricating oil. retread tires, building
insulation, and cement and concrete
containing fly ash. and proposed a
Comprehensive Procurement Guideline
(59 PR 18852) designating 21 new items
for government procurement. This
action would propose the first update
to the CPG. once it is promulgated.
Timetable:
Action
Date
FR Cite
NPRM 09/00/95
Final Action 09/00/96 -
Small Entities Affected: Governmental
Jurisdictions .
Government Levels Affected: State.
Local. Federal •
Additional Information:
SAN No. 3545.
Agency Contact: Beverly Golblatt.
Environmental Protection Agency.
Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
SE:. Washington. DC 20460. 202 260-
7932
RIN: 2050-AE23
4073. UNDERGROUND STORAGE
TANKS CONTAINING HAZARDOUS
SUBSTANCES • FINANCIAL
RESPONSIBILITY REQUIREMENTS
Legal Authority: 42 USC 699ib/RCRA
9003
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 280
Legal Deadline; Final. Statutory.
August 31.1988.
Abstract: This action would establish.
under Subtitle I of RCRA (as amended
by SARA), requirements for
demonstrating financial responsibility
for taking corrective action and
compensating third parties for bodily
injury and property damage caused by
releases from underground storage
tanks (USTs) containing hazardous
substances. An ANPRM was published
to help gather data le.g.. frequency of
releases from such USTs. costs of -
corrective action and third-party
damages, and the regulated
community's financial condition and
use of financial assurance mechanisms)
needed for the development of a
proposed rule.
Timetable:
Action
ANPRM
NPRM
Final Action .
Date
.02/09/88
02/00/96
. 02/00/97
FR Cite
53.FR381S
Small Entities Affected: Businesses.
Governmental Jurisdictions.
Organizations
.Government Levels Affected: Local
Analysis: Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis "
Additional Information: SAN No. 3433.
Agency Contact: Mark Barolo.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
(5402W). Washington. DC 20460. 703
308-8374 •
Rttfc 2050-AC15
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (EPA)
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
Final Rute Stage
4076. REVISIONS TO THE OK.
POLLUTION PREVENTION
REGULATION
Legal Authority 33 USC 1321/CWA
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 112
Legal Deadinsff None
Abstract: Following a major inland oil
spill with substantial environmental
impacts (i.e.. Ashland. Oil in Florefle.
PA. in January, 1988) an intengency
task force reviewed the adequacy of
existing EPA regulations concerning the
prevention and control of oil spills (40
CFR 112). The task force recommended
a number of steps to improve and
extend the regulations. The final rule
would implement some of the task
force recommendations. It would clarify
that many provisions of the existing
regulations that may be interpreted as
recommended practices by the
regulated community are in fact
required practice*.
Timetable;
Fit ate
NPRM 10/22/91 56 FR 54612
Final Acton 00/00/Oft
Small EntrUos Affected: Businesses.
Governmental Jurisdiction*
Government Levels Affected; State.
LocaL Federal
Analysis: Regulatory Flexibility
.Analysis .
AddtttonaJ Information: SAN No. 2634.
Agency Contact Dan* SUlcup.
Environmental Protection Agency.
Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
(5202G), Washington. DC 20460, 703
603-8735
RIN: 2050-ACB2
4077. MODIFICATIONS OF THE
HAZARDOUS WASTE RECYCLING
REGULATIONS: UNIVERSAL WASTES
Legal Authority: 42 USC 690S/RCRA
1004; 42 USC 6921 to 6928/RCRA 3001
to 3008
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 261: 40 CFR 273
Legal Deadline; None '
Abstract: This rulemaking proposed to
modify the regulatory program for
management of certain "universal"
hazardous wastes, including hazardous
waste batteries and recalled hazardous
.63
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59. No. 218 / Monday. November 14. 1994 / Unified 'Agenda 58255
EPA—RCRA
Final Rule Stag*
waste pesticides. The Agency proposed
streamlined management requirements
for these universal, or widely
generated, hazardous wastes in order to
facilitate separation from the municipal
waste stream, collection, and proper
treatment and/or recycling for these
materials.
Timetable; •
Action Data FR Cite
NPRM 02/11/93 58 FR 8102
Supplemental Notice 06/20/94 59 FR 31568
Final Action 12/00/94
Small Entitles Affected: None
Government Levels Affected: None
Additional Information: SAN No. 2870.
Agency Contact: Charlotte Mooney,
Environmental Protection Agency,
Solid Waste and Emergency Response,
(S304). Washington. DC 20460, 202
26O-8531
RIN: 2050-AD19
4078. NO-MIGRATION VARIANCE FOR
PROHIBITED HAZARDOUS WASTE
LAND DISPOSAL
Legal Authority: 42 USC 6905/RCRA
1006; 42 USC 6912(a)/RCRA 2002(a); 42
USC 6921/RCRA 3001: 42 USC
6924/RCRA 3004
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 268
Legal Deadline: None •
Abstract The Agency has proposed a
regulation that further specifies the
.process for operators to apply for and
receive variances that would allow the
land disposal of untreated hazardous
wastes that have been prohibited from
land disposal under 40 CFR 288. The
variance would be available for land
disposal units that successfully
demonstrate that there will be no
migration of hazardous constituents
from the unit for as long as the waste
remains hazardous.
Timetable:
assists facility owners and operators in
characterizing environmental media of
concern and environmental pathways
along which constituent migration may
occur. • •
Agency Contact Chris Rhyne,
Environmental Protection Agency,
Solid Waste and Emergency Response,
(5303W). Washington. DC 20460, 703
308-8658
RIN: 2050-AC44
4079. LISTING DETERMINATION FOR
HAZARDOUS WASTES -
ORGANO8ROMINES CHEMICAL
INDUSTRY
Legal Authority: 42 USC 6905/RCRA
1006; 42 USC 6912(a)/RCRA 2002(a); 42
USC 6922/RCRA 3001; 42 USC
9602/CERCLA 102; 33 USC
1361/CERCLA,311: 33 USC
1321/CERCLA 501 ' '
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 261; 40 CFR 271;
40 CFR 302
Legal Deadline: NPRM. Judicial. April
30, 1994. Final. Judicial, April 30.
1995.' .
Abstract This action proposed to list
as a hazardous waste under RCRA one
additional waste stream from those
wastes generated during the production
of organobromine compounds.
Timetable: '_
Action
Date
f* CMe
NPRM
Final Action
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 260; 40 CFR 261:
40 CFR 262: 40 CFR 264: 40 CFR 265;
40 CFR 268; 40 CFR 270
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract This regulatory action would *
revise certain testing methods and add
other new testing methods that are
1 approved or required under Subtitle C
of RCRA. These new and revised !
methods are found in Update n to the
Third Edition of "Test Methods for
Evaluating Solid Waste.
Physical/Chemical Methods," EPA
publication SW-846. The revision to the
manual is necessary to provide
improved and more complete analytical
methods for RCRA-relating testing. A
portion of this regulatory action
revising the ph testing method which
is required under Subtitle C of RCRA
will be finalized in the later final action
(see timetable).
08/11/92 57 FR 35940
00/00/00
Small Entities Affected: None
Government Levels Affected: State,
Federal
Additional Information: SAN No. 2524.
Accompanying draft guidance manual
was made available concurrent with
publication of proposal. Guidance
Action
Date
FR Cite
NPRM
Fmel Action
06/11/94
04/00/95
59 FR 24530
SmaU Entities Affected: None
Government Lev*i* Affected: None
Additional Information: SAN No. 3065.
Agency Contact Edwin Risanama.
Environmental Protection Agency.
Solid Waste and Emergency Response,
(5304). Washington. DC 20460.202
260-4785
RIN: 20*50-AD79
4080. NEW AND REVISED TESTING
METHODS APPROVED FOR RCRA
SUBTITLE C HAZARDOUS WASTE
TESTING MANUAL SW-846, THIRD
EDITION, UPDATE «
Legal Authority. 42 USC 6912/RCRA
2002: 42 USC 6921/RCRA 3001: 42
USC 6924/RCRA 3004: 42 USC
6925/RCRA 3008; 42 USC 6926/RCRA
3006
Timetable:
Action
NPRM
Final Action
FINAL ACTION (ph
.Date FR ate
08/31/93 58 FR 46052
12/00/94
04/00/95
SmaH Entitles Affected: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected:
Undetermined
Additional Information: SAN No. 2826.
Agency Contact Charles Sellers and
Kim Kirkland. Environmental •
Protection Agency, Solid Waste and
Emergency Response. (5304),
Washington. DC 20460, 202 260-4781
RIN: 2050-AD06 -
4081. HAZARDOUS WASTE
MANAGEMENT SYSTEM,
AMENDMENT TO SUBPART C
RULEMAKING PETITIONS: USE OF
GROUNOWATER DATA IN DEUSTING
DECISIONS
Legal Authority: 42 USC 6903/RCRA
1004: 42 USC 6921/RCRA 3001
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 260.22
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract This amendment as proposed
will generally require those who submit
delisting petitions for hazardous wastes
to provide groundwater monitoring data
as part of their petition. The amended
regulations will clarify the Agency's
existing authority to consider the
impact of a petitioned waste on i
groundwater and deny a petition based
' on groundwater contamination. EPA is
64
-------
.-NO.
EPA—RCRA
seeking this amendment to clarify its
authority to request and consider such
data in dalisting decisions.
Timetable:
Action
D«t»
FR at*
10/12/89 54 Ffl 41930
oo/oo/od
NPRM
Final Action
Small <-ntra•
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: In the final hazardous waste
Toxicity Characteristic (TQ rule. EPA
decided to temporarily defer a final
decision on the application of the TC
rule to media and debits contaminated
with petroleum from underground
storage tanks (USTs) that are subject to
UST corrective action requirements
under 40 CFR Part 280. The Agency
believed the UST regulations governing
cleanups at these sites would be
adequate in the- interim. The
application of the TC rule to UST
cleanups was temporarily delayed so
that the Agency could evaluate the
extent and nature of these impacts and
alternative nwriipifrnt for
implementing UST cleanups. The
Agency has completed studies of the
characteristics of UST corrective action
sites.-and current practices for
management of media and debris under
subtitle I State programs. As a result
of these studies. EPA proposed to
exempt UST -putmhiiimw^nntmnifijtyy
.media and debris from certain portions
of EPA's Hazardous Waste Regulations.
Timetable.
•MPRM
Final Action
PBOle
02/12/93 58 FR 8804
06/00/96
Snuff Entities Affected: None
Qovemment Levels Affected: None
AddHtonal Information: SAN No. 3189.
Agency Contact: John HefleHlnger.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Solid Waste and Emergency Response,
(5401W}, Washington. DC 20460. 703
3084881
4084. IMPORTS AND EXPORTS OF
HAZARDOUS WASTE:
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE OECD
DECISION FOR RECYCLABLE
WASTES
Legal Authority: 22 USC 2656: 42 USC
6901/RCRA 3001
: CFR Citation: 40 CFR 260; 40 CFR 261:
40 CFR 262; 40 CFR 263; 40 CFR 264:
40 CFR 265: 40 CFR 266
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: On March 30.1992. the
Organization for Economic Cooperation
and Development (OECD) adopted the
Council's Final Decision on the Control
of Transfrbntier Movements of Wastes
Destined for Recovery Operations. The
United States, a member of the OECD.
supported the Decision, which is
legally binding. The Decision
established a graduated system of
procedural controls for the export and
import of wastes for recovery,
depending on whether a waste is
included in the green, amber, or red
lists. Green wastes are subject only to
controls imposed in normal
international commercial shipments.
Amber and red wastes that are .
considered hazardous an subject to
additional controls regarding:
notification to and consent from the
exporting, importing, and transit
countries: contracts: tracking
documents: and. racordkeeping* The
, Agency is codifying these provisions in
an interim final rule which would
replace the current RCRA export/import
regulations for hazardous waste
destined for recovery within the OECD.
(com)
TlflMflMMtS • .-
Action
Fft Cite
Final Action
10/00/94
Additional Information: SAN No. 3033. RIN: 2050-AD69
Smafl Entities Affected: None
Government Levels Affected: State.
Federal
Additional Information: SAN No. 3114.
ABSTRACT CONT: These changes do
not affect the RCRA- export/import
regulations for hazardous wastes
moving for treatment or disposal within
the OECD or moving for treatment,
disposal or recovery purposes to other
countries outside the OECD.
Agency Contact Sosaa Nogss.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
65
-------
EPA—RCRA
Federal Register ; Vol. 59. No. 218 / Monday. Novemoer 14.. 1994 / umnea .^genaa 58Z57
Final Rule Stage
(5304). Washington. DC 20460. 202
260-4534
RIN: 2050-AD87
4085. REGULATORY DETERMINATION
ON REMAINING WASTES FROM THE
COMBUSTION OF FOSSIL FUELS
Legal Authority: 42 USC
6921(b)(3)(C)/RCRA 3001(b)(3)(C)
CFR Citation: Not yet determined
Legal Deadline: Final. Judicial. April
1. 1998.
Abstract As required by consent
decree, the Agency determined on
December 1.1992. that additional study
of four large-volume wastes ~ fly ash.
bottom ash. boiler slag and flue gas
emission control wastes - from the
combustion of coal by electric utility
power plants was not necessary, and
that a Final Regulatory Determination
would be made on these wastes by
August 2, 1993. (This determination
was signed on August 2.1993 and
published in the Federal Register on
August 9.1993). The Agency also
determined that for the remaining
fossil-fuel combustion wastes.
additional data collection is necessary
to make a Regulatory Determination on
these wastes and a final regulatory
determination will be made by Apnl
'l, 1998. The phrase "remaining wastes
refers to (l) fly ash. bottom ash. boiler
slag, and flue gas emission control
wastes from the combustion of coal by
electric utility power plants when such
wastes are mixed with, co-disposed, co-
treated, or otherwise co-managed with
other wastes generated in conjunction
with ttie combustion of coal or other
fossil fuels, (cont)
Timetable: .
Action Oa» FRO*
RCRA other than those subject to the
August 1992 Regulatory determination
referenced above.
Agency Contact Patricia Whiting.
Environmental Protection Agency.
Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
(5302W)..Washington, DC 20460. 703
308-8421
RIN: 2050-AD91
4086. HAZARDOUS WASTE
MANAGEMENT SYSTEM;
MODIFICATION OF THE HAZARDOUS
WASTE PROGRAM; MERCURY
CONTAINING LAMPS
Legal Authority. 42 USC 6905; 42 USC
6912: 42 USC 6921: 42 USC 6922: 42
USC 6938
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 261
•02/12/93 58 FR 8273
OS/0083 58FR424M
Notice of Data
Availability
Regulatory
Determination
(Phase I Four
Fossd Fuel Wastes)
Regulatory 04/00/98-
Oetemnnation t
(Phase II
Remamtng Wastes)
Small Entities Affected: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected:
Undetermined
Additional Information: SAN No. 3201.
ABSTRACT CONT: and (2) any other
wastes subject to section 8002(n) of
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: EPA is considering two
deregulatory options for the
management of spent mercury-
containing lamps based on data which
indicate that these lamps may be safely
managed outside of the RCRA
hazardous waste system or within a
reduced regulatory structure under it.
Option one would exclude mercury-
containing lamps from regulation as
hazardous waste if they are disposed
of in municipal solid waste landfills
(MSWLFs) that are registered.
permitted, or licensad by states with
EPA approved MSWLF permitting
programs, or in stato registered.
permitted; or licensed mercury-
reclamation facilities. Under this
option, incineration of lamps in
municipal waste combustors would be
prohibited. Option two would reduce
Subtitle C requirements by adding
mercury-containing lamps to the
proposed universal waste system (58
FR 8102.4/25/93) for certain widely
generated hazardous wastes (primarily
nickel-cadmium batteries and cancelled
pesticides).
Timetable;
(5304). Washington. DC 20460. 202
260-6721
RIN: 2050-AD93
4087. RCRA EXPANDED PUBLIC
PARTICIPATION AND REVISIONS TO
COMBUSTION PERMITTING .
PROCEDURES " M
Regulatory Plan: This entry is Seq. No.
165 in. Part II of this issue of the
Federal Register.
RIN: 2050-AD97
4088. REPORT TO CONGRESS AND
FINAL REGULATORY -
DETERMINATION ON CEMENT KILN
OUST
Legal Authority: 42 USC 6921/RCRA
3001(b)(3)(A)(iii); RCRA 8002(0)
Action
FRCtt*
CFR Citation: Not yet determined
Legal Deadline: NPRM. Judicial.
December 31.1993. Final. Judicial,
January 31.1995.
Abstract RCRA 8002(o) requires that
the Cement Kim Dust Report to
Congress studythe sources and
volumes of cement kiln dust, current
and alternative waste management
practices and their costs and economic
impacts, documented damages to
human health and the environment
from cement kiln dust disposal, and
existing state and Federal regulation of
these wastes. EPA will use this
information to develop a
recommendation as to whether
regulation of cement kiln dust is
warranted under Subtitle C of RCRA.
After an opportunity for public
comment on the Report to Congress,
EPA will make a final regulatory
determination.
Under the terms of a proposed consent
decree, the Cement Kiln Dust Report
to Congress was completed by
December 31,1993: the Regulatory
Determination must be made by
January 31.1995.
Timetable;
07/27/94 59 FR 38288
Rnat Action 07/00/9S
Small Entities Affocted: None
Government Levels Affected: None
Additional Information: SAN No. 3237.
Agency Contact Greg Helms.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
Action
Oate
FR Cite
01/08/94 59FR709
01/00/96
Interim Final Rule
Regulatory
OetMiranstfon
SmaH Entities Affected: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected:
Undetermined
Additional Information: SAN No. 3334.
66
-------
58258 Federal Register / Vol. 59. No. 218 / Monday. November 14. .1994 /..Unified Agenda
EPA—RCRA Final RuW Stag*
Agency Contact: William Schoenborn.
Environmental Protection Agency.
Solid Waste and. Emergency Response.
(5302VV). Washington DC. 20460. 703
308-8483
RIN:-2050-AE02 ;
4089. CORRECTIVE ACTION FOR
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT UNITS
(SWMUS) AT HAZARDOUS WASTE
MANAGEMENT FACILITIES
Legal Authority: 42 USC 6924/RCRA
3G04(u). 3004(v)
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 264: 40 CFR 270
: Legal Deadline: None''
Abstract: This action would set forth
the technical and procedural
requirements for conducting corrective.
action to clean up significant releases
to air. surface water, groundwater and
soil at solid waste management units
(SWMUs) at operating, closed, or
closing,RCRA facilities. The regulations
, would define the structure of the
program, and the requirements for
implementing remedial action, remedy.
selection and corrective measures.
Currently, the permitting agencies must
make case-by-case decisions using a
scant regulatory framework. This
regulation will be issued in several
phases. The next phase (Phase n) will
finalize certain provisions of the 1990;
proposal. Phase n will involve
reproposing remaining elements of the
original proposal.
Timetable:
4090. RCRA SUBTITLE C FINANCIAL
TEST CRITERIA (REVISION)
Legal Authority: 42 USC 6905/RCRA
1006; 42 USC 6912(a)/RCRA 2002(a): 42
USC 6924/RCRA 3004; 42 USC
6925/RCRA 3005
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 264: 40 CFR 265;
40 CFR 280: 40 CFR 761
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This amendment would
revise financial test criteria that must
be satisfied by TSDF owners and
operators employing the test to
demonstrate RCRA financial
responsibility requirements. The
anticipated revisions would adjust test
criteria so as to increase availability of
this assurance mechanism to financially
viable and stable firms and increase
sensitivity to bankruptcy prediction.
Timetable:
Action •
FR One
.Action
gate PR Cite
07/01/91 56 FR 30201
09/16/92 57 FR 42832
NPRM 07/27/90 55 FR 30798
Rnel Rule (Phase. I) 02/16/93 56 FR 8668
Final Rule (Phase II) 09/00/96
NPRM (Phase III) 00/00/00
Final Action 00/00/00
Smalt Entitles Affected: None:
Government Levels Affected: State.
Federal
Analysis: Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis
Additional Information: SAN No. 2390.
Agency Contact: Guy To
Environmental Protection Agency,
Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
(S303W). Washington. DC 20460. 703
308-8622
RIN: 2050-AB80
NPRM
Final Action (3rd
Party Liability;
Closure/Post •
Closures)
Final Action 00/00/00
. (Corporate
Financial Test)
Smart Entities Affected: None
Government Levels Affected: None
AddWohal Information: SAN No. 2647.
Agency Contact: Tim O'MaUejr.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
(5303W), Washington. DC 20460.703
306-8613
RIN: 2050-AC71
4091. TREATMENT. STORAGE, AND
DISPOSAL FACILITY—RCRA AIR ,
EMMStON STANDARDS
Legal Authority: 42 LfSC 6924/RCRA
.3004.3007
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 264: 40 CFR 265
Legal Deadline; Final. Judicial.
November 1994.
Abstract The purpose of this action is
to investigate the health and
environmental impacts of non-
combustion source air emissions from
hazardous waste treatment, storage, and
disposal facilities and to develop
standards for monitoring and control as
needed. Sources include tanks, surface.
impoundments, landfills, waste-piles.
land treatment operations and
wastewater treatment facilities.
Pollutants to be considered by such
standards would include volatile '
organic compounds, paniculate matter.
specific toxic substances, or a
combination of these. The mandate for
standards development-under RCRA is
to protect human health and the
environment. The Agency has adopted
: a three-phase approach: Phase I
regulates organic emission from
equipment leaks and process vents:
Phase II will address tanks, containers.
surface impoundments, and
miscellaneous units: and Phase III will
address residual risk associated with
particular hazardous organic
constituents.
Timetable; '
Phseekteeke end Vents .
NPRM 02/05/87 (52 FR 3748)
Final Action 06/21/90 (55 FR 25454)
Pheee II: Tanks end Impoundments
NPRM 07/22/91 (56 FR 33490)
Final Action 10/00/94
SmaH Entities Affected: Governmental
Jurisdictions
Government Levels Affected: State.
Local, Federal .
Additional Information: SAN No. 2240.
Agency Contact: Michele Aston.
Environmental Protection. Agency,. Air
and Radiation. (MD-13). Research
Triangle Park. NC 27711. 919 541-2363
RtN: 2050-AO62
4092. HAZARDOUS WASTE
MANAGEMENT SYSTEM;
AMENDMENT TO GENERIC
EXCLUSION LEVEL FOR KO61, KO62
AND FOO6 HTMR RESIDUALS (NON-
ENCAPSULATED USES); FINAL RULE
Legal Authority: 42 USC 6905/RCRA
1005: 42 USC 6912(a)/RCRA 2002(a); 42
; 6924/RCRA 3004
CFR Citation: 4O CFR 266
Legal Deadline: NPRM. Judicial. .
February 14.1994. Final, Judicial.
August 15.1994.
Abstract Certain non-encapsulated
uses of slag residues derived from high
temperature metal recovery (HTMR)
treatment of KO61. KO62. and FOO6.
as waste-derived products placed on
the land, will be prohibited unless
there is compliance with ail Subtitle C
standards applicable to land disposal.
67
-------
EPA—flCRA
Federal Register ' Vol. 59. No. 218 / Monday. November 14. 1894 /Unified Agenda 58259 -
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^r^^SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS^SSI^SSS
Final Rule Stag*
Timetable:
Action
Data
PR Otc
NPRM 02/23/94 59 FR 8583
Final Action 10/00/94
Small Entities Affected: None
Government Level* Affected: State,
Local. Federal
Additional Information: SAN No. 3368.
Agency Contact Narendra K.
Chaudhari, Environmental Protection
Agency, Solid Waste and Emergency
Response. (5304). Washington. DC
20460. 202 260-4787
RIN: 2050-AE09
4093. EXTENSION OF STATES
INTERIM AUTHORIZATION OPTION TO
CARRY OUT POST-HSWA
REGULATIONS'
Legai Authority: 42 USC 6926/RCRA
3006(g)
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 271.24
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract This action proposes to
extend the interim authorization option
available to States beyond January 1,
1993. Interim authorization allows a
State which has been granted RCRA.
base program authorization to cany out
post-HSWA regulations'once it has .
submitted evidence that these
regulations are substantially equivalent
to the federal requirements. The
Agency proposes to extend the
availability of interim authorization to
January 1,2003.
Timetable:
Action
PR Ota
Intenm Final Rule 12/18/92 57 FR 60129
Final Action 12/00/94
Small Entities Affected: None
Government Levels Affected: None
Additional Information: SAN No. 3094.
Agency Contact Richard La Shier.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
(5303W). Washington. DC 20460. 703
308-8760
RIN: 2050-AD57
4094. FINANCIAL TEST FOR LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS THAT
OWN/OPERATE MUNICIPAL SOLID
WASTE LANDFILLS • .
Legal Authority: 42 USC 6941 to
6949/RCRA 4001 to 4009
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 258
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract This rule would allow
financially strong local governments
that own/operate municipal solid waste
landfills the option of using a financial
test to demonstrate financial assurance .
for costs associated with closure, post-
closure, and corrective action of known
releases.
Timetable:
Action
Date
PR Cite
NPRM
Final Action
12/27/93 58 FR 68353
04/00/95
Small Entities Affected: Governmental
Jurisdictions
Government Leveiii Affected: Local
Additional Information: SAN No. 2761.
Agency Contact Tim O'MaUey.
Environmental Protection Agency.
Solid Waste and Emergency Response,
(5303W). Washington. DC 20460, 703
308-8613
RIN: 2050-AD04 .
4096. COMPREHENSIVE GUIDELINE
FOR PROCUREMENT OF PRODUCTS
CONTAINING RECOVERED
MATERIALS
Legal Authority: 42 USC 6912(a)/RCRA
6002U)
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 247
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract RCRA 6002 requires EPA to
issue guidelines for the procurement .of
recycled products. EPA is to designate
items which can be made with
recovered materials and to recommend
practices for the procurement of those
items by Federal procuring agencies.
Once designated, procuring agencies.
are required to purchase these items
with the*highest percentage of
recovered materials practicable. Under
RCRA 6002. EPA has issued
procurement guidelines for five items:
paper and paper products, lubricating
oil, tires, building insulation, and
cement and concrete. Until now. both
the item designation and the
procurement recommendations were
proposed and finalized as one
document in the Federal Register and
subsequently codified in 40 CFR Parts
247-253.
Timetable:
Action
Date
PR Cite
NPRM
Final Action
04/20/94 59 PR 18852
12/00/94 • *
Small Entities Affected: Undetermined
^Government Levels Affected: State, ,
Local. Federal
Procurement This is a procurement-
related action for which there is a
statutory requirement. The agency has
not yet determined whether there is a
paperwork burden associated with this
action.
Additional Information: SAN No. 3384.
Agency Contact Beverly Goldblatt,
Environmental Protection Agency.
Solid Waste and Emergency •Response.
(5306), Washington. DC 20460. 202
26O-7932
RIN: 2050-AE16
4096. UNDERGROUND STORAGE
TANKS—LENDER LIABILITY
Legal Authority- 42 USC 6991/RCRA
9001; 42 USC 6991/RCRA 9003
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 280
ins: None
Abstract This regulation will address
die liability of secured creditors
("lenders") regarding contaminated
properties they hold as collateral. The
regulation is needed to remove a
currant barrier to the financing of
underground storage tank (UST)
facilities and increase the amount of
capital available to UST owners.
Without adequate financing, many UST
owners will be unable to make die
improvements to their facilities
necessary to comply with
environmental regulations. '
Timetable:
Action
PR ate
NPRM 06/13/94 59 PR 30448
Final Action 08/00/95
SmaN Entities Affected: None
Government Levels Affected: None
Additional Information: SAN No: 3149.
Agency Contact Shelley Fudge.
Environmental Protection Agency.
Solid Waste and Emergency Response,
(5401W). Washington. DC 20460, 703
308-8838
RIN: 2050-AD67
63
-------
-------
------- |