SUMMARY OF OSW'S




RCRA REGULATORY REFORM ANALYSIS




     (PRELIMINARY RESULTS!

-------

-------
FINDINGS




MANY OF OUR REGULATIONS SHOULD BE DELETED, REVISED OR INVESTIGATED FURTHER



     20  NO ACTION




     12  OBSOLETE




     34  REVISION OF RULES UNDERWAY,  PLANNED OR NEEDED



     31  POSSIBLE REVISION OF RULES,  BUR FURTHER INVESTIGATION NECESSARY



MANY IMPORTANT ACTIVITES ARE ALREADY UNDERWAY,  BUT MANY OTHER ACTIVITIES ARE UNFUNDED

-------
EXAMPLES OF REGULATORY PROBLEM AREAS IDENTIFIED IN OSW'S ANALYSIS

     MANY OF OUR REGULATIONS ARE OBSOLETE

          —e.g., MEDICAL WASTE (PART 259),THERMAL PROCESSING OF SOLID WASTES
               (PART 240),GUIDELINES FOR DISPOSAL OF SOLID WASTE (PART 241),
               INTERIM STANDARDS FOR OWNERS AND OPERATORS OF NEW HAZARDOUS WASTE
               LAND DISPOSAL FACILITIES (PART 267), ETC.

          —  CAPACITY ASSURANCE REGULATIONS

     SEVERAL OF OUR REGULATIONS ARE REDUNDANT (BOTH WITHIN RCRA AND ACROSS OTHER MEDIA)

          —e.g., NOTIFICATION, REPORTING, SOME RECORDKEEPING
                  PART 265 INTERIM STATUS STANDARDS,
                  TRAINING (RCRA VS. OSHA)
                  AIR (RCRA VS. CAA)
                  PREPAREDNESS AND PREVENTION (RCRA VS, CEPPO)

     SOME ARE VERY PRESCRIPTIVE

          - POSSIBILITIES EXIST IN SOME AREAS WHERE WE COULD REPLACE DESIGN AND OPERATING
            STANDARDS WITH PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

               ~ e.g., TANKS, CONTAINMENT BUILDINGS

-------
EXAMPLES (CONTINUED!

     SOME OF OUR REGS MAY BE OVERPROTECTIVE IN SOME SITUATIONS

          - WE SHOULD CONSIDER NEGOTIATING FLEXIBILITY IN COMBUSTION REQUIREMENTS FOR 4-
            9'S ORE.

     OSW REGULATIONS AND PROCESSES FOCUS ON PRIOR APPROVAL RATHER THAN SELF-IMPLEMENTATION

          —e.g., PERMITTING, MANY OF OUR PART 264 MANAGEMENT STANDARDS

     SOME REGULATIONS ARE INCONSISTENT

          —e.g., CERTIFICATION BY INDEPENDENT, QUALIFIED REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL,
          ENGINEER VS. PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER

          -- RELEASE RESPONSE NOTIFICATION (ONE POUND OF HAZARDOUS WASTE IN TANK STANDARDS
               VS. RQ QUANTITIES FOR HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES

     SOME OF OUR DEFINITIONS LACK CLARITY, RESULTING IN AMBIGUITY AND INCONSISTENT
     INTERPRETATIONS ON THE PART OF BOTH REGULATED COMMUNITY AND REGULATORS

          —e.g., TANK, REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLE, SECONDARY MATERIALS, INTERMEDIATES,
          AQUEOUS, ETC.

     IN GENERAL, RCRA REGULATIONS ARE NOT USER-FRIENDLY

          — e.g., WE HAVE A CONVOLUTED REGULATORY SCHEME;
          WE DO NOT ENCOURAGE ELECTRONIC TRANSFER OF INFORMATION  (MANIFEST), BUT INSTEAD
          RELY ON PAPER

     SMALL BUSINESSES MAY NOT BE OBTAINING THE SAME BENEFITS AS LARGE BUSINESSES IN
     OBTAINING THE SAME RATE OF RETURN ON THEIR ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT INVESTMENTS.

-------
HAflY ONGOING ACTIVITIES RESPOND TO THE PRESIDENT'S INITIATIVE ON "REINVENTING



     - SETTING PRIORITIES BASED ON SOUND SCIENCE

          — REFOCUS RCRA ON HIGH RISK WASTES

               	 DEFINITION OF SOLID WASTE
               	 DEFINITION OF HAZARDOUS WASTE (HAZARDOUS WASTE IDENTIFICATION RULE)
               	 CLEAN-UP OF CONTAMINATED MEDIA

     - BUILDING PARTNERSHIPS


          — STREAMLINED STATE AUTHORIZATION EFFORTS UNDER DEFINITIONS OF SOLID WASTE AND
             HAZARDOUS WASTE EFFORTS

          — REGULATORY NEGOTIATION

          — FLEXIBLE FUNDING FOR STATES AND TRIBES

     - CUTTING RED TAPE

          — 25% REDUCTION IN PAPERWORK


               	 WASTE INFORMATION NEEDS PROJECT (REPORTING & RECORDKEEPING)
               	 DEFINITION OF SOLID WASTE (SIMPLICITY/SELF-IMPLEMENTATION/MANIFEST)

               - BETTER ACCOUNTABILITY, COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCEMENT

          — PERMITS IMPROVEMENT TEAM (STREAMLINED PERMITTING)

-------
MANY CHALLENGES STILL REMAIN WHERE REGULATORY BURDENS COULD BE REDUCED

     - DESIGN FOR THE ENVIRONMENT (I.E., POLLUTION PREVENTION AND WASTE MIN)

          — WASTE MIN COULD BE FACTORED INTO REGS AS AN INCENTIVE FOR COMPLIANCE

     - BETTER ACCOUNTABILITY

          ~ SELF^CERTIFICATION/SELF-IMPLEMENTATION  VS  APPROVAL AND OVERSIGHT
             IN MANY OF OUR REGULATIONS

     - RISK-BASED ENFORCEMENT

          — PERFORMANCE STANDARDS VS. DESIGN AND OPERATING STANDARDS

     - THE POWER OF INFORMATION

          — PUBLIC ELECTRONIC ACCESS  (MANIFEST/BIENNIAL REPORT)

     - NEW TOOLS FOR GOVERNMENT AND INDUSTRY

          — GREATER EMPHASIS ON POLLUTION PREVENTION AND WASTE MINIMIZATION

     - ALTERNATIVE PERFORMANCE BASED STRATEGIES

          ~ LINKAGE OR REDUNDANCY WITH CAA, DOT AND OSHA RULES ON CLEAN  AIR,  MANIFEST AND
               GENERAL FACILITY STANDARDS, RESPECTIVELY

     - SMALL BUSINESS IMPACTS

     - GOOD HOUSEKEEPING PRACTICES

          — ELIMINATION OF OBSOLETE REGULATIONS
          — INCONSISTENCY IN REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
          — CLARITY IN DEFINITIONS
          — USER-FRIENDLY REGULATORY  STRUCTURE/CFR

-------

-------
           APPENDIX A




REGULATION-BY-REGULATION OVERVIEW




 RCRA REGULATORY REFORM ANALYSIS

-------
                              OSW Regulatory Reform Analysis
Activity  fPart/Subpart/CFR reference!   Review
                                        Category
ICR Burden Red
No   Yes  Poss.
                              Resource
                              Avail,
                              No   Yes
MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE

Part 238 (Degradable Plastic Ring Carriers)  OB
Part 240 (Guidelines for Thermal Processing
          of Solid Hastes)                   OB

Part 241 (Guidelines for Disposal of Solid
          Wastes)                            OB
Part 244 (Solid Wastes Guidelines for
          Beverage containers)

Part 245 (Resource Recovery Facility
          Guidelines)
OB
OB
Part 246 (Source separation for Materials
          Recovery Guidelines)               OB

Parts 248/250/252/253 (Procurement Guide'1)  R
          X


          X
          X

          X
                         X
CODES

NA - NO ACTION

OB - OBSOLETE

R -  REVISE RULE(S)


FS - POSSIBLY REVISE RULES, BUT FURTHER STUDY REQUIRED

-------
                              OSW Regulatory Reform Analysis

Activity fPart/Subpart/CFR reference)
Review
Category
Part 255 (Identification of Regions and
          Agencies for Stolid Waste Mgt.)     OB

Part 256 (Guidelines for pevelopmement
          and Implementation of State
          Solid Waste Mgt. Plans)            OB

Part 258 (Criteria for Classification
          of Solid Waste Disposal
           Facilities and Practices)         R

Part 258 (Financal Assurance Criteria)       R

MEDICAL WASTE

Part 259 (Medical Waste Tracking
          and Standards)                     OB

HAZARDOUS WASTE;GENERAL/ANALYTICAL METHODS

Part 260 (Hazardous Waste Mgt System:Gen.)   NA
Part 260/Subpart B/40 CFR 260.10-11
           (Definitions)

Part 260/Subpart C/ 40 CFR 260.20
           (Rulemeaking Petitions

Parts 260/261/264/266/268/270
           (Analytical Methods)
     FS
     NA
     FS
               X
ICR Burden
No   Yes  Poss.
               X



               X



                    X

                    X
     X
Resource
Avail.
No   Yes
                    X
                    X
X
                         X

                         X
                    X

-------
                              OSW Regulatory Reform Analysis
Activity (Part/Subpart/CFR reference)
HAZARDOUS WASTE IDENTIFICATION
Review
Category
Parts 261/266. (Identification and Listing
     of Hazardous Waste/Recyclable Matls)    R
     (Definition of Solid Waste)

Part 261/40CFR 261.3/260.22
     (Definition of Hazardous Waste and
          Delisting Petitions)               R

Part 261/40 CFR 261.4 (b)(3,4,5,7) (Exclus.) NA

Part 261/40 CFR 261.4 (a)(4)

Part 261/40 CFR 261.4 (b)(8) (Exclus.)

Part 261/40 CFR 261.5 (Reg. for CESQG)

Part 261/40 CFR 261.7 (Residues of
 Hazardous Waste in empty Containers)        R

Part 261/ Subpart B/40 CFR 261.10-11
     (Criteria for Identifying and
     Listing Hazardous Waste)                R

Part 261/Subpart B/40 CFR 261.11 (a)(3)
  (Appendix VIII Constitiuents)              R

Part 261/Subpart C/40 CFR 261.20-24
     (Characteristics of Hazardous Waste)    R

Part 261/Subpart C/ 40CFR 261.24
     (Toxicity Characteristic for Silver)    R
ICR Burden Red
No   Yes  Poss.
               X
                    X
FS
R
R
X
X
X
Resource
Avail.
No   Yes
                                   X
                                   X
                                   X
                                        X
                         X

                         X
                    X
                    X

-------
                              OSW Regulatory Reform Analysis
Activity (Part/Subpart/CFR reference)
Review
Category
Part 261/Subpart D/40 CFR 261.30-32
     (Lists of Hazardous Wastes)             NA

Part 261/Subpart D/40 CFR 261.33
     (Lists of Haz Wast- Discarded CCP)      FS

Part 261/Subpart D/40 CFR 261.35
     (Deletion of certain Haz Waste codes)   FS
  |     :„"","'•          ''  - ..
GENERATOR STANDARDS

Part 262/Subpart A/40 CFR 262.10-11
     (Purpose, Scope and Applicability,
     Hazardous Waste Determianation)         NA

Part 262/Subpart A/40 CFR 262.12
     (EPA Identification Numbers)            R/FS

Part 262/Subpart B/40 CFR 262.20-23
               (Manifest)                    R

Part 262/Subpart C/262.30-33
     (Pre-Transport Requirements)            NA
ICR Burden Red
No   Yes  Poss.
                    X
                    X
                    X
Resource
Avail.
No   Yes
                                    X
                    X
                         X
Part 262/Subpart C/40 CFR 262.34(a)/(a)(4)
     (Accumulation Time for Generators-
          Addressed under Part 264)          NA

Part 262/Subpart C/40 CFR 262.34(b) and  (f)
     (Accumulation Time > 90 days)           FS
                    X
                    X

-------
                              OSW Regulatory Reform Analysis
Activity (Part/Subpart/CFR reference)
Review
Category
Part 262/Subpart C/40 CFR 262.34 (c)-(e)
     (Accumulation Time- Satellite Points)   FS

Part 262/Subpart D/40 CFR 262.40-44
     (Recordkeeping and Reporting)            FS

Part 262/Subpart E/40 CFR 262.50-57
     (Exports of Hazardous Hastes)            .FS

Part 262/Subpart F/40 CFR 262.60
     (Imports of Hazardous Wastes)            FS

Part 262/Subpart G/40 CFR 262.70 (Farmers)   NA

TRANSPORTERS

Part 263/Subpart A/40 CFR 263.10
     (Scope)                                 NA

Part 263/Subpart A/40 CFR 263.11
     (EPA Identification Number)             FS

Part 263/Subpart A/40 CFR 263.12
     (Transfer Facilities)                   FS

Part 263/Subpart B/40 CFR 263.20-22
     (Manifest and Recordkeeping)            R

Part 263/Subpart C/40 CFR 263.30-31
     (Hazardous Waste Discharges)            NA
ICR Burden Red
No   Yes  Poss.
                    X
                    X
                    X
                    X
                    X
Resource
Avail.
No   Yes

X
                                   X
                    X
                         X
                    X
                    X
                                        X

-------
                              OSW Regulatory Reform Analysis
Activity (Part/Subpart/CFR reference)
Review
Category
Facility standards.  Treatment Standards

Part 264/Subpart A (General)            NA
Part 264/Subpart B (General Facility
          Standards)
FS
Part 264/Subpart C  (Prep and Prev. and
     Subpart D  (Cont Pin & Emerg Proc)  FS
                   i
Part 264/Subpart E  (Manifest and
      Recordkeeping)                     R

Part 264/Subpart F  (Ground Water Releases
     Subpart G  (Closure & Post Clos.)    R

Part 264/Subpart H  (Fin.Responsibility)  R
ICR Burden
No   Yes  Poss.
                    X

                    X
Resource
Avail.
No   Yes
                    X
                         X

                         X
Part 264/Subpart J  (Tanks)              FS

Part 264/Subpart K  (Surf.Impoundments)  NA

Part 264/Subpart L  (Waste Piles)        NA

Part 264/Subpart M  (Land Treatment)     NA

Part 264/Subpart N: Liquids
           in Landfills)                 R

Part 264/Subpart O  (Incinerator  Stand.) R

-------
                              OSW Regulatory Reform Analysis
Activity (Part/Subpart/CFR reference)
Review
Category
Part 264/ Subpart X, Part 265/Subpart P:
     (Miscellaneous Units)              NA

Part 264/Subpart W (Drip Pads)          FS

Part 264/ Subparts AA, BB. CC
   (RCRA Air Emissions)                 R

Part 264/Subpart DD (Containment Bldgs) FS
Part 265/Subpart I (Containers)

Part 265/Subparts A-DD

Part 266/Subpart H/40 CFR 266.100
  (Light Ht. Aggregate Kiln)

LAND DISPOSAL RESTRICTIONS

Part 268/Subpart A/40
 (Regulatory Language,Records,
 Ref Tables)

Part 268/Subpart C/40 CFR 268.6
 (No Migration Petition)

Part 268/Subpart A/40 CFR 268.7
 (Land Disp Haste Analysis
 Subpart D/40 CFR 268.41-43
  Land Disp Treat Stand)
R
FS
ICR Burden
No   Yes  Poss.
     X

     X

     X

     X
Resource
Avail.
MS   Yes
X


X

X

X

X
                                        X

-------
                              OSW Regulatory Reform Analysis
Activity (Part/Suboart/CFR reference)
State Program Authorization and Grants

PART 271/Subpart B/40 CFR
 271.121-138.3(c),(e),.20(e)
    (Interim Auth for States)

Part 271/Subpart A/40
 CFR 271.1-20,.22-.26: Final
    State Authorization-Base Program
                   i
Part 271/Subpart A/40
  CFR 271.21: Revisions of State Prog.

Permits

Part 124 (Public Participation in
          Permitting)

Part 270 (Haz Waste Permit Program)

CORRECTIVE ACTION

Part 24 (Rules Governing Issuance
     of Administrative Hearings on
     Corrective Action)

CERCLA 108(B): Financial Resp
    (regs never promulgated)
Review
Category
OB
NA
FS
FS

FS
FS

R
ICR Burden
No   Yes  Poss.
X

X
Resource
Avail.
Njo
                    X

                    X
X

X
Part 264/Subpart S  (Corrective Action) R

-------
                              OSW Regulatory Reform Analysis
Activity (Part/Subpart/CFR reference)   Review
                                        Category
Land Disposal Restrictions (continued!
               ICR Burden
               No   Yes  Poss.
     Resource
     Avail.
     No
Part 268: Treat Stand Equiv. with Clean
     Water Act

3004(1): Ban on Oust Suppression
     FS
X
X
Capacity Planning

40 CFR 300.510(e): Capacity
 Assurance Plan
OB

-------
          APPENDIX B




       DETAILED SUMMARY




RCRA REGULATORY REFORM ANALYSIS

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

 I.  CFR Reference (Part,  Subpart, Regulatory cltatlon(s) and
    Title:  40  CFR Part  24
           Rules  governing  issuance of and administrative hearings
           on  interim status  corrective action orders	

 II. Purpose of CFR  Reference;  These rules establish procedures
 for governing issuance of  administrative orders for corrective
 action pursuant  to  sections  3008(hi and 9003(h) of RCRA. and
 conduct of administrative  hearings on such orders, except as
 governed by 40 CFR  part  22.	

 III. Recommended Review  Category (Check One):

           —  No  action
           —  Obsolete
           —  Revise  Rule(s) or Statute
           x   Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
    Rule Change
    Statutory Change
Description of Change; Headquarters has surveyed the Regional
RCRA corrective action program contacts to see if there is a need
to revise this rule.  They have indicated no such need.  The only
provision identified as needing review relates to retention of
the administrative record, a provision which, if burdensome, is
burdensome more to EPA than to the regulated community.
Headquarters will survey the Offices of Regional Counsel at the
beginning of April 1995 to determine if there are other
provisions of this rule which should be modified/revised.
V.    Environmental Benefit:
      Reduction of Burden:
VI.   Currently Funded or Planned?
    No  Change
    Small-Moderate  Improve.
    Significant  Improvement
    Need  more  information
 X  None
	 Small-Moderate  Reduction
	 Significant  Reduction
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate);  To be determined.

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities;   See discussion in f IV.
above.

-------
                OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis
I. Part 124. Subpart A

II. Purpose of CFR ReferencetPublic Participation in Permitting

III. Recommended Review Category (Check One):

          — No action
          — Obsolete
             Revise Rule(s)  or Statute
          X  Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
                                        Rule Change
                                        Statutory Change
Desription of Revision; Review S124.1 - $124.21 and decide if it
is possible to coordinate the public participation regulations of
four permitting program areas fRCRA. UIC.  PSD,  and NPDES).—In
addition, we will attempt to move statute-specific public
participation events into part 124.  so that any permittee or.
citizen could find all of EPA's public involvement reaulatio
                                                           ons in
one part of the CFR.  Our work will follow from work done by the
            cipation subgroup of the Permits Improvement Team.
            of our efforts, permittees will be able to look at
Part 124 as a model of public participation for the agency.	The
coordination of public participation programs will make the
process easier to understand, standardize notices, etc.. and let
public parti
As a result
           Lng agency coordinate notices, public hearings, fact
sheets, and other vehicles.
the permitti:
V.    Environmental Benefit:
      Reduction of Burden:
VI.   Currently Funded or Planned?
                                        No Change
                                        Small-Moderate Improve.
                                        Significant Improvement
                                        Need more information

                                        None
                                        Small-Moderate Reduction
                                        Significant Reduction

                                        Yes
                                        No
VII. Planned Milestones  (if appropriate); To follow planned
report by the Permits Improvement Team  (Fall '95) and final RCRA
public participation in  permitting rule (August  '951.	:	

VIII. Key Questiong/Tasues/ActivitiesiWe will need to coordinate
with PIT members as well as colleagues  from the  various
permitting branches.  Also, we will have to consider possible
integration with Air permitting programs.

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

 I.  Part 238 (Degradable Plastic Ring Carriers)

 II.  Purpose of CFR Reference:   To require  manufacturers to
 produce rings that are  degradable in the marine environment.

 III. Recommended Review Category (Check One):

           -- No action
           — Obsolete
           -- Revise Rule(s)  or  Statute
           X  Possibly Revise Rules,  but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:  N/A


V.    Environmental Benefit:




      Reduction of Burden:
Rule Change
Statutory Change

No Change
Sma11-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Sma11-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction
VI.   Currently Funded or Planned? _
                                   _X

VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate): N/A
Yes
No
VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities:  May be difficult to
remove since it was a statutory mandate.  May receive opposition
from manufacturers who prefer a single federal standard and who
sued EPA to force promulgation of the rule.

-------
                OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

I. Part 240 (Guidelines for the Thermal Processing of Solid
Wastes).

II. Purpose of CFR Reference: Prescribes minimum levels of
performance required of any solid waste thermal.processing
operation receiving waste generated by federal agencies
regardless of whether processed or disposed of on or off federal
property.

III. Recommended Review Category (Check One):

          — No action
          X  Obsolete
          — Revise Rule(s) or Statute
          __ possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:   N/A


Description of Revision: NA

V.    Environmental Benefit:
      Reduction of Burden:
VI.   Currently Funded or Planned?
Rule Change
Statutory Change
No Change
Small-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction

Yes
No
VII. Planned Milestones  (if appropriate) :N/A.

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities:New Source Performance
Standards and Emission Guidelines (40 CFR part 51 & 52)
promulgated on 2/11/91 260 proposed amendments of 9/20/94 require
all facilities larger than 39 tpd to meet maximum levels of
environmental control.  These new standards and guidelines are
more protective than this part 240 guideline.

-------
                  OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

 I.   Part  241  (Guidelines  for the Land Disposal of Solid Wastes),
 II. Purpose of CFR Reference:  These guidelines are intended to
 ensure that design, construction, and operation of land disposal
 sites for non-hazardous wastes meet health and environmental
 standards.  These guidelines are mandatory for federal agencies
 and recommended to state and local governmental agencies.

 III. Recommended Review Category (Check One):

           — No action
           X  Obsolete
           — Revise Rule(s)  or Statute
           — Possibly Revise Rules,  but further study necessary
 IV.  Revision Approach:   N/A
Rule Change
Statutory Change
 V.     Environmental Benefit:
      Reduction  of  Burden:
VI.   Currently Funded or Planned?
No Change
Small-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction

Yes
No
VII. Planned Milestones  (if appropriate):.

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: These rules were
promulgated in 1974.  Virtually all states incorporate these
guidelines in existing state land disposal regulations.  These
regulations are obsolete and would have no measurable impact if
deleted from the CFR.  The technical requirements in these
guidelines are now contained in the Criteria for MSWLFs, 40 CFR
Part 258.

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

I. Part 244  (Solid Waste Management Guidelines for Beverage
Containers)

II. Purpose of CFR Reference: To achieve a reduction in beverage
container solid waste and litter, resulting in savings in waste
collection and disposal costs,to the federal government and
achieve the conversion and more efficient use of energy and
material resources through the development of effective beverage
distribution and container collection.

III. Recommended Review Category (Check One):

          — No action
          X  Obsolete
          — Revise Rule(s)  or Statute
          — Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach: N/A
Rule Change
Statutory Change
V.    Environmental Benefit: N/A
      Reduction of Burden:
VI.   Currently Funded or Planned?
No Change
Sma11-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction

Yes
No
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate):N/A

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: This Part requires that
federal agencies/contractors impose container deposit/refund
systems.  Agencies/contractors are in general non-compliance,
posing potential embarrassment.  From time-to-time this issue is
brought to EPA/s attention by members of Congress, the public,
and agency officials, requiring explanation of our lack of
authority and resources to require compliance.  Deletion of the
guidelines would eliminate this situation.

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

 I.  Part 245 (Promulgation Resource Recovery Facilities
 Guidelines)

 II.  Purpose of CFR Reference:  Requires  federal  agencies having
 jurisdiction over waste  disposal activities to  separate and
 recover materials as energy from such solid waste.

 III.  Recommended Review  Category (Check One):

           — No action
           X  Obsolete
           — Revise Rule(s)  or Statute
           — Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach: N/A
Rule Change
Statutory Change
V.    Environmental Benefit: N/A
      Reduction of Burden:
VI.   Currently Funded or Planned?
No Change
Small-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction

Yes
No
VII. Planned Milestones  (if appropriate);N/A

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities:This Part provides
guidelines which are very general and are intrinsic to reasonable
practices that would be  followed, anyway.  To the extent that the
Guidelines foster recycling, they are superseded by Clinton's
October 1993 Executive Order.

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

I. Part 246 (Source Separation for Materials Recovery Guidelines)

II. Purpose of CFR Reference: Requires source separation of
residential, commercial, and institutional solid wastes.
Explicitly excluded are mining, agricultural, industrial solid
wastes, hazardous wastes, sludges,  construction and demolition
wastes, infectious wastes, and classified wastes.  These
requirements are mandatory for federal agencies that generate
solid waste and they are recommended to state, interstate,
regional, and local governments for use in their activities.

III. Recommended Review Category (Check One):

          — No action
          X  Obsolete
          — Revise Rule(s) or Statute
          — Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach: N/A
     Rule Change
     Statutory Change
V.    Environmental Benefit:
      Reduction of Burden:
VI.   Currently Funded or Planned?
	-__ No Change
 X   Small-Moderate Improve.
	. Significant Improvement
_____ Need more information

	, None
_X__ Small-Moderate Reduction
	 Significant Reduction
VII. Planned Milestones  (if appropriate):N/A

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities:To the extent that this
Part provide guidelines which foster recycling, they are
superseded by Executive Order 12873, which was signed by
President Clinton on October 20, 1993.

-------
 I.
            OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

40 CFR 247 - Guidelines for Procurement of Products That
Contain Recovered Materials; 40 CFR 248 - Guideline for
Federal Procurement of Building Insulation Products; 40 CFR
248 - Guideline for Federal Procurement of Cement and
Concrete Containing Fly Ash; 40 CFR 250 -  Guideline for
Federal Procurement of Paper and Paper Products; 40 CFR 252
- Guideline for Federal Procurement of Lubricating Oils
Containing re-refined Oils; and 40 CFR 253 - Guideline for
Federal Procurement of Retread Tires
 II.  Purpose of CFR Reference:  To designate recycled  products  and
 provide procurement recommendations to "procuring agencies"  (as
 defined in RCRA section 6002)  on buying recycled  products  to  help
 them meet their statutory requirements for buying recycled
 products.

 III.  Recommended Review Category (Check One):

           — No action
           — Obsolete
           X  Revise Rule(s) or Statute
           — Possibly  Revise Rules,  but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
                                  Rule Change
                                  Statutory Change
Description of Revision: Issue Comprehensive Procurement
Guideline which will revised obsolete provisions in 40 CFR 247
and delete 40 CFR Parts 248, 249, 250, 252, and 253 from the CFR
and consolidate their requirements into 40 CFR 247.  The
recommendation sections of Parts 248, 249, 250, 252, and 253 have
been removed from the CFR and reissued as guidance in the notice
section of the FR.  Also proposed revisions to old 40 CFR 250,
which will be added to new Part 247 when finalized.  In addition,
we will no longer issue procurement recommendations in the pFR,
but instead issue guidance in the notice section of the FR.
These revisions were made possible by assisting in drafting E.O.
language to streamline the procurement guideline process.
V.    Environmental Benefit:
      Reduction of Burden:
                                  No Change
                                  Small-Moderate Improve.
                                  Significant Improvement
                                  Need more information

                                  None
                                  Small-Moderate Reduction
                                  Significant Reduction
VI.   Currently Funded or Planned?  X
                                  Yes
                                  No

-------
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate):Proposed rule issued on
April 20, 1994 due to be issued final in April 1995.  proposed
recommendations on old Part 240 issued in March 1995.  Plan to
finalize in late 1995/early 1996.

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: We have been working with
the public and private sector to avoid any adverse reactions to
these activities.

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

I.   Part 255  (Identification of Regions and Agencies for Solid
     Waste Management)

II. Purpose of CFR Reference:These guidelines are applicable to
policies, procedures, and criteria for tue identification of
those areas which have common solid waste management problems and
which are appropriate units for planning regional solid waste
management services.  The guidelines also define and guide the
identification of which functions will be carried out by which
agencies.

III. Recommended Review Category (Check One):

          — No action                   .
          X  Obsolete
          — Revise Rule(s) or Statute
          — Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:  N/A


V.  Environmental Benefit: N/A




      Reduction of Burden:



VI.   Currently Funded or Planned?
Rule Change
Statutory Change

No Change
Small-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate): N/A

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: These guidelines provided
direction for establishing Regional planning authorities and
practices. These guidelines were applicable to policies,
procedures, and criteria for the identification of those areas
which have common solid waste management problems and which are
appropriate units for planning regional solid waste management
services pursuant to section 4002 (a).  Major Federal facilities
and Native American Reservations should be treated for the
purposes of these guidelines as though they are incorporated
municipalities, and the facility director or administrator should
be considered the same as a locally elected official.  Indian
Tribes are still eligible for funding and technical assistance
under Section 8001.

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

 I.    Part 256 (Guidelines for Development  and  Implementation of
      State Solid Waste Management  Plans)

 II.  Purpose of CFR Reference:These guidelines  were developed to
 assist in the development and implementation of state solid waste
 management plans,  address minimum  requirements for approval of
 state plans,  and set  forth the responsibilities of state, local,
 and  regional  authorities  in the  implementation of state plans.

 III.  Recommended Review Category (Check One):

           —  No action
           X  Obsolete
           —  Revise Rule(s) or Statute
           —  Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:  N/A


V.  Environmental Benefit: N/A




      Reduction of Burden:



VI.   Currently Funded or Planned?
Rule Change
Statutory Change

No Change
Small-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate): N/A

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: These guidelines were
designed to provide criteria and procedures for states to develop
and implement solid waste management plans for EPA approval.  EPA
provided funds to states for development of their plans and for
initial implementation.  Since 1980 EPA has not provided funding
to the states, nor has it exercised its authority to approve or
disapprove state plans.  State planning has progressed without an
EPA role.    -u

-------
 I.
            OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

Part 258 (Criteria for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills)
 II.  Purpose of CFR Reference: To  allow  local governments with
 sufficient  financial  strengths  to avoid third party costs  of
 financial assurance for closure,  post closure monitoring and
 maintenance and corrective  action.

 III. Recommended Review Category  (Check One):

          — No action
          — Obsolete
          X Revise Rule(s) or  Statute
          — Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
                                   Rule Change
                                   Statutory Change
Description of Revision:Adding language for Part 258,74(f) to
allow local governments with sufficient financial strengths to
avoid third party costs of financial assurance for closure, post
closure monitoring and maintenance, and corrective action.
V.    Environmental Benefit:
      Reduction of Burden:
VI.   Currently Funded or Planned?
                                   No Change
                                   Smal1-Moderate  Improve.
                                   Significant  Improvement
                                   Need more  information

                                   None
                                   Sma11-Moderate  Reduction
                                   Significant  Reduction
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate): October 1, 1995, the
rule will be promulgated.

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: Has widespread support
from local governments who will save the added cost of third
party financial assurance instruments.

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

 I.  Part 258,  Subpart G (Financial Assurance Criteria),  40  CFR
 258.74(e)  (Corporate financial  test),  and  40 CFR 258.74(g)
 (Corporate guarantee)  (  Proposed changes at 59  Federal  Register
 51323,  October 12,  1994).

 II.  Purpose of CFR  Reference: 40 CFR 258 Subpart G requires
 owners  and operators of  municipal solid waste landfills to
 provide financial assurance  for closure, post closure and
 corrective action costs.  This  ensures that these landfills close
 properly and  that there  are  sufficient financial resources to
 respond to releases.  These regulations can  currently be met with
 trust funds,  surety bonds, letters of  credit, insurance, and
 state approved mechanisms or state assumptions  of responsibility.


 III. Recommended Review  Category (Check One):

           —  No action
           —•  Obsolete
           X  Revise Rule(s)  or  Statute
           —  Possibly Revise Rules, but further  study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
Rule Change
Statutory Change
DEscription of Revision: A corporate financial test and a
corporate guarantee will allow private owners and operators of
municipal solid waste landfills with sufficient financial
strength to avoid the cost of obtaining a third party financial
assurance instrument to assure proper closure, post closure
monitoring and maintenance, and corrective action at these
landfills.
V.    Environmental Benefit:
      Reduction of Burden:
VI.   Currently Funded or Planned?
No Change
Small-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate): May 1996 for
promulgation.

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: Supported by the industry.
Will be promulgated with similar revisions to the hazardous waste
financial responsibility rules.

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

 I.  CFR Reference (Part,  Subpart, Regulatory citation(s) and
    Title;  40  CFR Part  259.  Standards  for the Tracking and
 Management of Medical  Waste
II. Purpose  of  CFR Reference:   To provide special standards for
used oil generators, transporters, and other handlers of medical
waste.  These regulations were required under the Medical Waste
Bracking Act for a 2 year demonstration program.  The regulations
expired in 1991f and is not applicable to anyone.	

III. Recommended Review Category  (Check One):

          	 No action
          2L_ Obsolete
          	 Revise Rule(s) or Statute(s)
          	Possibly Revise Rule(s), but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
     (check all that apply)
    Rule  Change
    Statutory  Change
    Consensual Negotiations
Description of Revisionr Delete the Part.
V.  Expected Impact:

  A.  Environmental Benefit:




  B.  Reduction of Burden:




VI.   Currently Funded or Planned?
    No  Change
    Small-Moderate  Improve.
    Significant  Improvement
    Need more  information

    None
    Small-Moderate  Reduction
    Significant  Reduction
    Need More  InformatJ on
	 Yes
 X  No
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate):

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: Possibility might exist to
link deletion of Part 259 with Medical Waste Report tp Congress.

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

I. Part 260  (Hazardous Waste Management System: General), Subpart
A - General; 40 CFR 260.1-3

II. Purpose of CFR Reference: 40 CFR 260.1 provides background
information on the purpose of subsequent citations in Part 260.
40 CFR 260.? (Availability of information; confidentiality of
information) sets forth the rules that EPA will use in making
information it receives availoable to the public and sets forth
the requirements generators, transporters and treatment, storage
and disposal facilities must follow to assert claims of business
confidentiality with respect to information submitted to EPA
under parts 260 through 265 and 268 of this chapter to the extent
and in the manner authorized by the Freedom of Information Act.
40 CFR 260.3 (Use of number and gender) establishes the rules of
grammatical construction for parts 260 through 265 and 268 of
this chapter.

III. Recommended Review Category (Check One):

          X  No action
          — Obsolete
          — Revise Rule(s) or Statute
          — Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
Description of Revision: NA

V.  Environmental Benefit:
     Reduction of Burden:
VI. Currently Fundo.d or Planned?
Rule Change
Statutory Change
Consensual Negot.
No Change
Small-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction

Yes
No
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate): NA

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: NA

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

I. I. Part  260  (Hazardous Waste Management System: General),
Subpart B - Definitions; 40 CFR 260.10-11

II. Purpose of  CFR Reference: 40 CFR 260.10 defines terms terms
which are used  in parts 260 through 265 and 268 of this chapter.

III. Recommended Review Category (Check One):

          — No action
          — Obsolete
          — Revise Rule(s) or Statute
          X Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
Rule Change (possibly)
Statutory Change
Consensual Negot.
Description of Revision: Certain definitions are unclear,
creating uncertainty on the part of both regulators and the
regulated community in complying with, or trying to foster
compliance with RCRA regulations. Examples include: the
definition of tank, aqueous, secondary materials, and
intermediates. As appropriate, definitions would be clarified to
avoid this outcome.
V.  Environmental Benefit:
     Reduction of Burden:
VI. Currently Funded or Planned?
No Change
Small-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction

Yes
No
VII. Planned Milestones  (if appropriate): NA

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: Statutary definitions
could limit ability to change some definitions through regulatory
changes.

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

I. I. Part 260 (Hazardous Waste Management System: General),
Subpart C (Rulemaking Petitions), 40 CFR 260.20

II. Purpose of CFR Reference: 40 CFR 260.20 establishes
procedures for petitioning EPA to amend, modify, or revoke any
provision of parts 260 through 265 and 268 of this chapter and
establishes procedures governing EPA's action on such procedures.

III. Recommended Review Category  (Check One):

          X  No action
          — Obsolete
          — Revise Rule(s) or Statute
          — Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:



Description of Revision: NA

V.  Environmental Benefit:




     Reduction of Burden:



VI. Currently Funded or Planned?
Rule Change (possibly)
Statutory Change
Consensual Negot.
No Change
Small-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction

Yes
NO
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate): NA

VIIT. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: NA

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

 I. Analytical Methods  (Specific CFR Citations Noted Below):

 (1) Section 260.22(d)(1)(i) - Submission of data in support of
 petitions to exclude a waste produced at a particular facility
 (i.e.,  delisting petitions);

 (2) Section 26l.22(a)(l)  and (2)  -  Evaluation of waste against
 the corrosivity characteristic;

 (3) Section 261.24(a) -  Leaching procedure for evaluation of a
 waste against the  toxicity characteristic;

 (4) Section 261.35(b)(2)(iii)(A)  -  Testing rinsates from wood
 preserving cleaning  processes;

 (5)  Sections 264.190(a),  264.314(c),  265.190(a), and 265.314(d)  -
 Evaluation of a waste to  determine  if free liquid  is a component
 of the  waste;

 (6)  Sections 264.1034(d)(l)(iii) and  265.1034(d)(1)(iii)  -
 Testing total  organic concentration of air emission standards for
 process vents;

 (7)  Sections 264.1063(d)(2)  and 265.1063(d)(2)  - Testing total
 organic concentration of  air emission standards for equipment
 leaks;

 (8)  Section  266.106 (a) - Analysis in  support  of compliance with
 standards  to control  metals  emissions from burning  hazardous
 waste in boilers and  industrial furnaces;

 (9)  Section  266.112(b)(1)  and  (2) (i)  -  Certain analysis  in
 support of exclusion  from  the definition of a hazardous waste of
 a residue which was derived  from burning hazardous  waste  in
 boilers and  industrial furnaces;

 (10) Section 268.7(a) - Leaching procedure  for  evaluation of  a
waste to determine if the  waste is  restricted from  land disposal;

 (11) Section 268.32(i) - Evaluation of a waste  to determine if it
 is a liquid  for purposes of certain land disposal prohibitions;

 (12) Sections 268.40(a),  (b), and (f), 268.41(a), and  268.43(a)  -
 Leaching procedure for evaluation of  waste  extract  -co  determine
 compliance with Land  Disposal treatment standards;

 (13) Sections 270.19(c)(1)(iii) and (iv),  and 270.62(b)(2)(i)(C)
 and  (D)  - Analysis and approximate  quantification of the
hazardous constituents identified in  the waste  prior to
 conducting a trial burn in support of an application for  a

-------
hazardous waste incineration permit; and

(14) Sections 270.22(a)(2)(ii)(B) and 270.66(c)(2)(i) and (ii) -
Analysis conducted in support of a destruction and removal
efficiency (ORE) trial burn waiver for boilers and industrial
furnaces burning low risk wastes, and analysis and approximate
quantification conducted for a trial burn in support of an
application for a permit to burn hazardous waste in a boiler and
industrial furnace.

II. Purpose of CFR Reference:

     EPA Publication SW-846, "Test Methods for Evaluating Solid
Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods" contains the analytical and
test methods that EPA has evaluated and found to be among those
acceptable for testing under subtitle C of the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA), as amended.  All of
these methods are intended to promote accuracy, sensitivity,
specificity, precision, and comparability of analyses and test
results.  Several of the hazardous waste regulations under
subtitle C of RCRA require that specific testing methods
described in SW-846 be employed for certain applications; these
applications are found in 40 CFR parts 260 through 270 (see above
citations) and either require the use of a specific method for a
particular application, or the use of appropriate SW-846 methods
in general.  There may also be other citations in 40 CFR (e.g.,
CAA or CWA) for which the use of SW-846 methods is required.

III. Recommended Review Category (Check One):

          	: No action
          	 Obsolete
          	 Revise Rule(s) or Statute
           X   Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary

IV. Revision Approach  (Check One):

            X  Rule Change
          	 Statutory Change
          	 Consensual Negotiations
Description of Change:

     EPA could remove all regulatory citations that require  "EPA
approved" methods  (making SW-846 guidance for those applications)
and allov regulated parties to  select appropriate methods.   We
could encourage  the use  of m  thods approved by private
organizations, such as the American Society for Testing  and
Materials  (ASTM).  Certain applications, however, such as the
characteristics  (citations #2,  #3 above) and determining liquids
in landfills  (citation #5 above), will  remain mandatory  since
these methods are  in essence  the regulatory performance  standard
that defines  when  a waste is  hazardous  or restricted  from
landfill.

-------
 V.  Environmental Benefit (Check One):

           	 No Change
            X   Small-Moderate Improve.
           	 Significant Improvement
           	 Need more information
       Reduction of Burden:
           	 None
            X   Small-Moderate Reduction
           	 Significant  Reduction

VI.   Currently Funded  or  Planned?
VII. Planned Milestones  (if appropriate):
VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities:

     We do not know if States like having the simplicity of
requiring "EPA-approved" methods rather than judging the
appropriateness of other methods.  We may also find that method
developers, while wanting faster approval, still want the "EPA-
approved" imprimatur.  SW-846 actually provides a service to the
regulated community:  all the changes we make are in response to
the regulated community's requests.  We have also streamlined the
promulgation process based on the regulated community's dislike
of the 30 or more months it takes to formally approve methods
once they are well developed; it now only takes 15-18 months from
proposal to promulgation.

     A more fundamental issue involves the ability to enforce
such an approach.                             :

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

I. Part 261 (Identification and Listing of Hazardous Waste),
Subpart A (General), 40 CFR 261.1,  261.2,  261.4, 261.6, and Part
266, Subparts C  (Recyclable Materials Used in a Manner
Constituting Disposal, Subpart F (Recyclable Materials Utilized
for Precious Metals Recovery, and Subpart G (Spent Lead-Acid
Batteries Being Reclaimed) and related provisions in Part 260
(40 CFR 260.30-31, 260.40 and 260.41).

II. Purpose of CFR Reference: These citations identify those
solid wastes which are subject to regulation as hazardous wastes
under parts 262 through 265, 268,  and parts 270,'271, and 124 of
this chapter and which are subject to the notification
requirements of section 3010 of RCRA. Specific citations address
the definition of solid waste (261.2), material exclusions from
the definition of solid waste (261.4), requirements for hazardous
recyclable materials (261.6), with variances for other materials
in.40 CFR 260.30-31 and 260.40-41.

III. Recommended Review Category (Check One):

          — No action
          — Obsolete
          X  Revise Rule(s) or Statute
          —Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
Rule Change
Statutory Change
(Possibly)
Consensual Negot.
Description of Revision: EPA, in partnership with the States, is
in the process of revising the definition of solid waste (261.2)
and related provisions  (261.4, 261.6) as well as certain Subparts
of Part 266 (C, F, and G) to identify those materials and
recycling practices that are outside of RCRA jurisdiction and
identify streamlined, yet protective management requirements for
recycled materials and recycling practices subject to RCRA
jurisdiction. The goals of this effort are (1) to resolve the
historical jurisdictional issues by establishing clear rules for
determining which practices are part of an on-going production
process and not part of the waste management problem;(i.e.,
outside of RCRA), and which practices may contribute to the waste
management problem;  (i.e.,within RCRA jurisdiction); and (2)
simplify and streamline the management requirements for those
recycled materials and recycling practices subject to RCRA.
V.  Environmental Benefit:
No Change
Small-Moderate  Improve.
Significant  Improvement
Need more  information

-------
     Reduction  of  Burden:
VI. Currently Funded or Planned?
	 None
	 Small-Moderate Reduction
 X   Significant Reduction

_X	 Yes
	 No
VII. Planned Milestones  (if appropriate): Proposed rule in Spring
of 1996.  (Tentative).

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: Numerous issues exist.
They include: what criteria should be used to determine those
materials/recycling practices subject to RCRA,, or conversely,
outside of RCRA jurisdiction; what are the appropriate management
practices for materials and recycling practices subject to RCRA,
what approval systems are appropriate for different types of
recycling; what tracking mechanisms should be used for materials
sent off-site for recycling; should there a legitimacy test for
recycling.

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

I. Part 261  (Identification and Listing of Hazardous Waste;
Subpart A  (General); 40 CFR 261.3 (Definition of hazardous
waste).	40 CFR 260.22 (Petitions to amend part 261 to exclude
a waste produced at a particular facility)

II. Purpose of CFR Reference: Generally, 40 CFR 261.3 defines a
hazardous waste as not excluded from regulation under 261.4 (b),
and as meeting any of the following criteria: it exhibits a
characteristic of hazardous waste identified in subpart C of 40
CFR 261; it is listed in subpart D of 40 CFR 261; it is a mixture
of a solid and a hazardous waste that is listed in subpart D.

III. Recommended Review Category (Check One):

          •— No action
          — Obsolete            ,
          X  Revise Rule(s)  or Statute
          X  Possibly Revise Rules,  but further study necessary
              (delisting petitions)
IV. Revision Approach:
Rule Change
Statutory Change
Consensual Negot.
Description of Revision: The current definition of hazardous
waste includes hazardous waste mixed with other solid waste, and
waste treatment residuals, regardless of the concentration of the
hazardous constituents. These rules are called the "mixture" and
"derived-from" rules. These rules are overly-broad and can
include waste with very low concentrations because of good
treatment practices, differences in processes across industry, or
source reduction and process changes that have occurred since the
waste was listed.

     To overcome these problems, the Agency has initiated the
hazardous waste identification rule (HWIR) to correct the over-
regulatory aspects of these "mixture" and "derived-from" rules.
The objective of this rule is to develop a system (exit criteria)
for allowing low risk listed waste, treatment residues and
mixtures, to exit from subtitle C requirements. Risk-based exit
concentrations would eventually be developed for all or most of
the 440 constituents on RCRA regulation Appendices 7,8, and 9.
Wastes containing less than the exit concentration for ALL of
these constituents would be eligible to exit subtitle C. EPA
currently plans to propose an option requiring evaluation of
risks from hazardous waste constituents for both human health and
ecological endpoints, by transport along numerous environmental
pathways, and disposal by six different likely (non-subtitle C)
disposal alternatives.

-------
     A related  impact  from this process possibly could be the
elimination of  some delisting petitions under 40 CFR 260.22.

V.  Environmental Benefit:          X   No Change
                                   __	 Small-Moderate Improve.
                                   	 Significant Improvement
                                   	 Need more information

     Reduction  of Burden:          	 None
                                        Small-Moderate Reduction
                                        Significant Reduction

VI. Currently Funded or Planned?


VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate): We plan to propose in
August 1995, and finalize in December 1996*

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: Numerous issues exist
including: scope of multipathway analysis; setting exit levels
when toxicity data are incomplete; generator interaction with
State where methods inadequate; enforceability; ability of States
to oversee and  review certification data from industry,
relationship to treatment standards under RCRA Land Disposal
Restrictions, etc.

-------
I.
            OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

Part 261. 40 CFR 261'. A fbl f 3 .4 .5.71  Exclusions
II. Purpose of CFR Reference: Designation of solid wastes which
are not hazardous wastes.

III. Recommended Review Category  (Check One):

          _JS No action
          	 Obsolete
          	 Revise Rule(s) or Statute(s)
          	 Possibly Revise Rule(s), but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:;
     (check all that apply)
                                   Rule Change
                                   Statutory Change
                                   Consensual Negotiations
Description of Revision: Example: These regulations relieve most
"special wastes"  (i.e., large volume, low hazard wastes) from
regulation, as hazardous wastes; therefore, no revisions are
recommended.  (Any revisions which could be made would largely be
clarifications to cross-referenced citations to make the rules
easier to read.)  For those special wastes from mineral
processing not excluded from hazardous regulation (by
261.4(b)(7)i), any future regulations should make appropriate
revisions in existing rules, reference citation(s), explain what
we are doing/should do to determine whether rules should be
revised.
V.  Expected Impact:
  A.  Environmental Benefit:
  B.  Reduction of Burden:
VI.   Currently Funded or Planned?
                                   No Change
                                   Small-Moderate Improve.
                                   Significant Improvement
                                   Need more information

                                   None
                                   Small-Moderate Reduction
                                   Significant Reduction
                                   Need More Information

                                   Yes
                                   No
VII. Planned Milestones  (if appropriate): NA

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: NA

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

 I.  Part 261,  Subpart A (General),  40 CFR 261.4  (a) (,(4)  Exclusions
 —  Source,  special nuclear or byproduct  material  as  defined by
 the Atomic  Energy Act of 1954,  as  amended.

 II.  Purpose of CFR Reference:  This citation  excludes from
 regulation  special nuclear or byproduct  material  as  defined by
 the Atomic  Energy Act of 1954,  as  amended.
III. Recommended Review Category  (Check One):

          	 No action
          	; Obsolete
          	 Revise Rule(s) or Statute(s)
          X  Possibly Revise Rule(s), but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
      (check all that apply)
Rule Change
Statutory Change
Consensual Negotiations
Description of Revision: In conjunction with the Department of
Energy, resolve issues associated with the management of wastes
that are a mixture of hazardous and nuclear wastes.
V.  Expected Impact:

  A.  Environmental Benefit:




  B..  Reduction of Burden:




VI.   Currently Funded or Planned?
No Change
Sma11-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Sma11-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction
Need More Information

Yes
No
VII. Planned Milestones  (if appropriate): NA

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: NA

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis
 I.  Part 261, 40 CFR 2 61.4(b)(8)   (Exclusions)
 ZZ.  Purpose of CPR Reference:  Designation  of  Solid Wastes Which
  are Not Hazardous Wastes:   Cement Kiln  Dust  (CKD) waste.

 ZZZ.  Recommended Review Category (Cheek  One):

           	 No action
           	 Obsolete
           x_ Revise Rule(s)  or Statute(s)
           	 Possibly Revise Rule(s), but  further study necessary
 ZV. Revision Approach:
      (check all  that  apply)
     Description of Revision:
Rule Change
Statutory Change
Consensual Negotiations
     The Agency made a regulatory determination on cement kiln
     dust  (60FR7366), published 2/7/95 that removes the exemption
     from RCRA Subtitle C hazardous waste regulation.  Instead of
     full Subtitle C regualtion, however, the Agency has decided
     to create new, minimally burdensome regulations under the
     provisions of Subtitle C that are tailored specifically to
     the risks posed by these wastes.  The Agency is taking a
     common sense approach to the regulation development process
     and is involving all stakeholders in a series of meetings
     early in the process.
V.  Expected Impact:

  A.  Environmental Benefit:
  B.  Reduction of Burden:
No Change
Sma11-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction
Need More Information
VZ.   Currently Funded or Planned?
Yes
No

-------
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate):

     Initial plans are to promulgate new regulations for cement
     kiln dust by December of 1996.

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities:

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

I.   Part 261  (Identification and Listing of Hazardous Waste),
     Subpart A (General), 40 CFR 261.5; Special Requirements for
     Hazardous Waste Generated bv Conditionally Exempt Small
     Quantity  Generators

II.  Purpose of CFR Reference:  This provision defines
     Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generators  (CESQGs) as
     those that generate less than 100 kg of hazardous waste or
     less than 1 kg of acutely hazardous waste in a month.  Also
     sets forth requirements for CESQG management of hazardous
     waste.

III. Recommended Review Category (Check One):

          	 No action
          	 Obsolete
            X  Revise Rule(s) or Statute
          	 Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV.  Revision Approach:
     Rule Change
     Statutory Change
     Consensual Negot.
     1.  Description of Revision 1:  Several minor revisions
     could be made to section 261.5 to clarify a number of issues
     about which we frequently receive questions.  This would
     make the requirements more clear to the regulated community,
     thus reducing confusion and time smaller businesses spend
          researching requirements.  A) Clarify requirements for
          wastes from generators who switch generator categories
     from      month to month (261.5 and part 262).
     B) Clarify requirements for off-site in-transit storage of
     CESQG waste (261.5(f)(3) and (g)(3)).

     2.  Description of Revision 2:  Clarify paragraph 261.5(c)
     to make it easier for generators to determine their
     generator category.   This would clearly identify those
     wastes that must be counted, thus reducing confusion and
     time spent clarifying.
V.   Environmental Benefit:
     Reduction of Burden:
VI.  Currently Funded or Planned?
     No Change
     Small-Moderate Improve.
     S igni f icant Improvement
     Need more information

     None
     Small-Moderate Reduction
     Significant Reduction
Xf2) Yes
xm NO

-------
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate):  Revision 2: Final rule
     scheduled for June 1995.

VIII.Key Questions/Issues/Activities:

     Revision 1: revisions relatively simple, but reduction of
     burden likely to be minor.

     Revision 2: should make it easier for small generators
     (including many small businesses) to determine that they fit
     into the less regulated category of Conditionally Exempt
     Small Generators.

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

 I.   Part 261  (Identification and Listing of Hazardous Haste),
     Subpart A  (General), 40 CFR 261.7; Residues of Hazardous
     Waste in Empty Containers

 II.  Purpose of CFR Reference:  This provision defines when a
     container that held hazardous waste is empty and is no
     longer subject to the hazardous waste regulations.

 III. Recommended Review Category (Check One):

          	 No action
          	 Obsolete
            X  Revise Rule(s) or Statute
          	 Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV.  Revision Approach:
Xfl&2) Rule Change
	 Statutory Change
X (2.1 Consensual Negot.
     1.  Description of Revision 1:  Clarify the status of
     residues removed from containers that meet the definition of
     empty.  Resolving the existing confusion and disagreement
     over this issue would make the requirements clear to state
     implementing agencies and the regulated community, thus
     reducing confusion and time spent debating the issue.

     2.  Description of Revision 2:  Clarify the regulatory
     status of and requirements applicable to facilities that
     remove residues from containers.  Resolution of this issue
     would reduce confusion and disagreement and remove the
     threat of enforcement action at cleaning facilities caused
     by uncertainty over applicable requirements.
V.   Environmental Benefit:
     Reduction of Burden:
VI.  Currently Funded or Planned?
     No Change
     Small-Moderate Improve.
     Significant Improvement
     Need more information

     None
     Small-Moderate Reduction
     Significant Reduction
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate):  NA
VIII.Key Questions/Issues/Activities: Resolution of issues would
     require some resources and, although administrative burden
     would be reduced, such a revision could result in some
     increased burden if residues are currently being managed
     inconsistently with the regulations and we conclude such
     management is inappropriate.

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

 I.  Part 261,  Subpart B  (Criteria  for  Identifying the
 Characteristics  of Hazardous Waste and  for Listing Hazardous
 Waste;  40  CFR 261.10 (Criteria  for identifying characteristics
 of  hazardous  waste);  40  CFR 261.11 (Criteria for listing
 hazardous  waste).

 II. Purpose of CFR Reference: These citations describe the
 criteria necessary for identifying and  defining a characteristic
 of  hazardous  waste,  and  listing a hazardous waste, respectively.

 III. Recommended Review  Category  (Check One):

           —  No action
           —  Obsolete
           X   Revise Rule(s) or  Statute
           —  Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
     Rule Change
     Statutory Change
     Consensual Negot.
Description of Revision: Delete 40 CFR 261.11 (a)(1) which
references the use of characteristics as being a criteria for
listing a hazardous waste. This citation is not used in
determining listing decisions..
Environmental Benefit:
     Reduction of Burden:
No Change
Small-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction
VI. Currently Funded or Planned?
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate): NA

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: NA

-------
                OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

I. Part 261, Subpart B,  40 CFR 261.11 (a)(3)  (Appendix VIII
Constituents)

II. Purpose of CFR Reference: This citation references Appendix
VIII, which contains a list of toxic constituents that the
Administrator may conclude is capable of posing a substantial
present or potential hazard to human health or the environment
when improperly treated, stored, transported or disposed of, or
otherwise managed.
III. Recommended Review Category (Check One):

          	 No action
          	 Obsolete
          X_ Revise Rule(s) or Statute(s)
             Possibly Revise Rule(s),  but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
      (check all that apply)
Rule Change
Statutory Change
Consensual Negotiations
Description of Revision: Review list of Appendix VIII
constituents and determine whether sufficient environmental and
health data exists to warrant their removal because they do not
pose a substantial present or potential hazard through improper
management.
V.  Expected  Impact:

  A.   Environmental Benefit:




  B.   Reduction of Burden:




VI.    Currently Funded or Planned?


VII.  Planned Milestones (if appropriate):  NA

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities:  Possible adverse public
 impact.
No Change
Small-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more  information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction
Need More  Information

-------
                  OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

 *• Part 261/ Subpart C  (Characteristics of Hazardous Waste); 40
 CFR 261.20-24                                             '

 II. Purpose of CFR Reference: These citations identify and define
 tne characteristics of solid waste that are hazardous waste under
 this subpart. More specifically, 40 GFR 261.21 identifies frh*
 properties for a solid waste exhibiting the characteristic of
 ignitability to be a hazardous waste; 40 CFR 261.22 identifies
 the properties for a solid waste exhibiting the characteristic of
 corrosiyity to be a hazardous waste; 40 CFR 261.23 identifies the
 properties for a solid waste exhibiting the characteristic of
 reactivity to be a hazardous waste; and 40 CFR 261.24 identifies
 the properties of a solid waste exhibiting the characteristic of
 toxicity to be a hazardous waste.

 III.  Recommended Review Category (Check One):

           — No action
           — Obsolete
           X  Revise Rule(s)  or Statute
           — Possibly  Revise Rules,  but further  study necessary
 IV. Revision Approach:
     Rule Change
     Statutory Change
     Consensual Negot.
Description  of Revision: Modify 40 CFR 261.21-23 to incorporate
the  latest properties  for  identifying a hazardous waste related
to exhibiting the characteristics of ignitability, corrosivity
and  reactivity. The current properties are outdated and conflict
with criteria already  in use by DOT and others. As a result,
industry faces uncertainty and the burden of disproving their
materials are not hazardous waste.
Environmental Benefit:
     Reduction of Burden:
No Change
Small-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction
VI. Currently Funded or Planned?
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate): NA

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: Need to coordinate with
DOT in any regulatory efforts.

-------
                OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

I. Part 261, Subpart C (Characteristic of Hazardous Waste);
40 CFR 261.24 fbl  fToxicity Characteristic for Silver)
II. Purpose of CFR Reference: Table 1 of 40 CFR 261.24 (Maximum
concentration of contaminants for the toxicity characteristic)
identifies particular contaminantss as as hazardous waste if it
exceeds a specified regulatory threshold. One such contaminant is
silver.

III. Recommended Review Category (Check One):

          — No action
          — Obsolete
          X  Revise Rule(s) or Statute
          — Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
Rule Change
Statutory Change
Consensual Negot.
Description of Revision: Healh studies have shown silver not to
be a health concern. Therefore, modify Table 1 of 40 CFR 261.24
(b) to eliminate silver as a toxic contaminant of concern.
Thousands of small businesses  (dentists, printers, photographers)
would be affected by this modification.
V.  Environmental Benefit:
     Reduction of Burden:
VI. Currently Funded or Planned?


VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate): NA

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: NA
No Change
Sma11-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Sma11-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction

-------
                  OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

 I. Part 261, Subpart D (Lists of Hazardous Wastes), 40 CFR
 261.30—32.

 II.  Purpose of CFR Reference: These citations identify listed
 hazardous wastes from non-specific sources (40 CFR 261.31)  and
 from specific sources (40 CFR 261.32).

 III.  Recommended Review Category (Check One):

           X  No action
           — Obsolete
              Revise Rule(s)  or Statute
           — Possibly Revise Rules,  but further study  necessary
 IV. Revision Approach:



 Description of Revision: NA

 V.  Environmental Benefit:




     Reduction of Burden:



VI. Currently Funded or Planned?
Rule Change
Statutory Change
Consensual Negot,
No Change
Sma11-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Sma11-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction

Yes
No
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate): NA

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: NA

-------
                OSWER  Regulatory Reform Analysis

I. Part 261, Subpart D (Lists of Hazardous Wastes),
40 CFR 261.33 (Discarded commercial chemical products, off-
specification species,  container residues, and spill residues
thereof).

II. Purpose of CFR Reference: This citation identifies materials
or items that are hazardous wastes if and when they are discarded
or intended to be discarded as described in 40 CFR 261.2(a)(2)(i)
pertaining to the definition of solid waste.

III. Recommended Review Category (Check One):

          — No action
          -r- Obsolete
          — Revise Rule(s) or Statute
          X  Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
Rule Change
Statutory Change
Consensual Negot.
Description of Revision: The current test (sole active
ingredient) for listing discarded commercial chemical products
may be obsolete. Other, more accurate and reliable methods may
exist (or soon exist) that provide a more realistic estimate of
risks from such products.
V.  Environmental Benefit:
     Reduction of Burden:
No Change
Small-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction
Need more information
VI. Currently Funded or Planned?
Yes
No
VII. Planned Milestones  (if appropriate): NA

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: NA

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

 I.  Part 261,  Subpart D (Lists of Hazardous Wastes),  40  CFR 261.35
 (Deletion of  certain hazardous waste codes following equipment
 cleaning and  replacement).


 II.  Purpose of CFR Reference:  This  citation describes the
 requirements  that  must be met for wastes  from wood preserving
 processes at  plants that do not resume or initiate use  of
 chlorophenolic preservatives to not meet  the listing definition
 of  F032.

 III. Recommended Review Category (Check One):

           —  No action
           —  Obsolete
           —  Revise Rule(s)  or Statute
           X  Possibly Revise Rules,  but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
Rule Change
Statutory Change
Consensual Negot.
Description of Revision: The cleaning and replacement
requirements necessary for wastes from wood preserving processes
not to be listed are very detailed and prescriptive. At issue is
whether enforceable performance standards could be devised
lessening the regulatory burden, while still protecting human
health and the environment.
V.  Environmental Benefit:
     Reduction of Burden:
VI. Currently Funded, or Planned?
No Change
Small-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate): NA

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: Ability to devise reliable
and enforceable performance standards.

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

I.   Part 262 (Standards Applicable to Generators of Hazardous
     Waste), Subpart A (General), 40 CFR 262.10 Purpose. Scope
     and Applicability

II.  Purpose of CFR Reference:  This provision describes the
     overall scope and applicability of regulations governing
     generators of hazardous waste.

III. Recommended Review Category  (Check One):

            X  No action
          	 Obsolete
          	 Revise Rule(s) or Statute
          	Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:



Description of Revision: NA

V. Environmental Benefit:




   Reduction of Burden:



VI. Currently Funded or Planned?
Rule Change
Statutory Change
Consensual Negotiations
No Change
Smal1-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction

Yes
No
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate): NA

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: NA

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

 I.    Part 262 (Standards Applicable to Generators  of  Hazardous
      Waste),  Subpart A (General),  40 CFR 262.n  Hazardous Waste
      Determination

 II.   Purpose  of CFR Reference:  This provision  describes the
      procedure a person  who generates a solid  waste must use to
      determine if  that waste is a  hazardous waste.

 III.  Recommended Review  Category (Check One):

            X  No  action
          	 Obsolete
          	 Revise Rule(s) or Statute
          	 Possibly  Revise  Rules,  but further study necessary

 IV.   Revision Approach:             	 Rule Change
                                    	 Statutory Change
                                    	 Consensual Negotiations

      Description of Revision: NA


V.    Environmental Benefit:         	 No Change
                                    	 Small-Moderate Improve.
                                    	 Significant Improvement
                                    	 Need more information

      Reduction of Burden:           	 None
                                    	 Small-Moderate Reduction
                                    	 Significant Reduction

VI.   Currently Funded or Planned?   	 Yes
                                   	 No

VII.  Planned Milestones  (if appropriate): NA

VIII.Key Questions/Issues/Activities: NA

-------
                OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

 I.    Part  262  (Standards  Applicable to Generators of Hazardous
      Waste), Subpart A (General), 40 CFR 262.12; EPA
      Identification  Numbers

 II.   Purpose of CFR  Reference:  This provision requires
      generators of hazardous waste to obtain an EPA
      identification  number from the Administrator using the
      notification form.

 III.  Recommended Review Category  (Check One):

          	  No action
          	  Obsolete
          Xf2)  Revise Rule(s) or Statute
          Xf1)  Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
                                   Rule Change
                                   Statutory Change
                                   Consensual Negotiations
     1.  Description of Possible Revision 1:  Modify the
     notification form to reduce: 1) any redundancy with other
     notification or reporting requirements (e.g., other EPA
     program reporting requirements, part A permits, biennial
     reports), 2) requests for unnecessary information, and 3)
     requests for any unnecessarily detailed information.

     2.  Description of Revision 2:  Revise the regulation to
     specify that one EPA identification number may be used for
     certain situations where numerous small locations (sites)
     are under the control of one entity (e.g., universities,
     utility sites).  Would reduce burden for regulated community
     and for agencies that issue identification numbers.
V.
Environmental Benefit:
     Reduction of Burden:
VI.  Currently Funded or Planned?
No Change
Small-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction

Yes (internal study)
No
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate):  Revision 1: An on-
     going study (Waste Information Needs (WIN) study) is
     assessing information needs and overlaps in information
     collection.  Recommendations will be made in the fall of
     1995.

-------
VIII.Key Questions/Iesues/Activities:

Revision 1: Coordination required with other EPA program
offices.  Integration of needs of all users of information
necessary.

Revision 2: Would require identification of appropriate
situations for use of one EPA ID number.

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

 I.    Part  262  (Standards  Applicable to,Generators of Hazardous
      Waste), Subpart  B  (Manifest). 40 CFR 262.20-23 and Appendix.

 II.   Purpose of  CFR Reference:  These provisions describe the
      manifest  tracking  system,that generators must use when
      shipping  hazardous waste off-site.  These include general
      requirements  (262.20), acquisition of manifests (262.21),'
      number of copies (262.22), use of the manifest (262.23), and
      the manifest  form  (appendix).

 III.  Recommended Review Category (Check One):

          	 No  action
          	 Obsolete
            X  Revise Rule(s) or Statute
          	 Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV.  Revision Approach:
V.
                                     Rule Change
                                   _ Statutory Change
                                   X(2) Consensual Negot.
     1.  Description of Revision 1:  As part of the Agency's
     Definition of Solid Waste rulemaking, possible alternatives
     to the existing manifest system to be used for tracking
     shipments of recycled hazardous waste are being analyzed.
     The goal is to develop an alternative manifest system that
     is less burdensome for generators, transporters, and
     implementing agencies but that ensures accountability for
     the waste and meets other needs of users of the manifest
     system.

     2. Description of Revision 2:  As agreed with a regulatory
     negotiation committee, revise the manifest form to minimize
     variation from state to state, allowing the use of a more
     consistent form for all hazardous waste transportation.
     Also standardize procedures for use of the form in certain
     unusual situations to eliminate confusion and inconsistency.
Environmental Benefit:
     Reduction of Burden:
VI.  Currently Funded or Planned?
  X  No Change Projected
	 Small-Moderate Improve.
	 Significant Improvement
	 Need more information

	 None
X(2) Small-Moderate Reduction
X(l) Significant Reduction
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate):

-------
     Revision 1: Definition of Solid Waste rule proposal —
     Spring 1996.

     Revision 2: Proposed rule summer 1995, final rule spring
     1996.

VIII.Key Questions/Issues/Activities:

     Revision 1: Ability to ensure accountability for waste;
     consistency with DOT rules and impact on interstate
     transport issues; impact on current State information
     management systems and State user-fee systems; possibility
     of expanding revised system to cover all wastes, not just
     recycled wastes.

     Revision 2: Federal burden reduction small or none because
     the revised form would require more information than the
     current federal form.  The additional information, however,
     has been required by states in the past, thus the overall
     burden (state plus federal)  is likely to remain roughly the
     same.  There should be some reduction in the overall burden
     due to increased consistency among states.

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

 I.    Part  262  (Standards Applicable to Generators of Hazardous
      Waste), Subpart  C  (Pre-Transport Requirements), 40 CFR
      262.30  (Packaging)' f 40  CFR  262.31  (Labeling)r  40 CFR 262.32
      (Marking)  and  40 CFR  262.33  (Placarding).

 II.   Purpose of CFR Reference:  These provisions apply to
      generators shipping hazardous waste off-site.  They refer
      generators to  the appropriate Department of Transportation
      requirements for packaging,  labeling, marking, and
      placarding shipments.

 III.  Recommended Review Category  (Check One):
               No action
               Obsolete
               Revise Rule(s) or Statute
               Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
	 Rule Change
	 Statutory Change
	 Consensual Negot.
Description of Revision: NA — EPA references applicable DOT
regulations.
V.  Environmental Benefit:
     Reduction of Burden:
VI'. Currently Funded or Planned?
     No Change
     Small-Moderate Improve.
     Significant Improvement
     Need more information

     None
     Small-Moderate Reduction
     Significant Reduction

     Yes
     No
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate): NA

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: NA

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

I.   Part 262  (Standards Applicable to Generators of Hazardous
     Waste), Subpart C  (Pre-Transport Requirements), 40 CFR
     262.34(a) Accumulation Time.

II.  Purpose of CFR Reference:  262.34(a) allows large quantity
     generators to accumulate hazardous waste on-site for 90 days
     or less without a permit.  262.34(a)(1) sets forth technical
     management requirements for accumulation units, including
     references to portions of 40 CFR part 265 (subpart I for
     containers, subpart J for tanks, subpart W for drip pads,
     and Subpart DD for containment buildings).  See 40 CFR part
     265, subparts I, J, W, and DD, for recommended revisions to
     these provisions.

III. Recommended Review Category (Check One):

            X  No action
          	 Obsolete
          	 Revise Rule(s) or Statute
          	 Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
Rule Change
Statutory Change
Consensual Negot.
Description of Revision: See 40 CFR part 265, subparts I, J, W,
and DD, for related recommendations.
V.  Environmental Benefit:
     Reduction of Burden:
VI. Currently Funded or Planned?
No Change
Small-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction

Yes
No
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate): NA

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: NA

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

I.   Part 262 (Standards Applicable to Generators of Hazardous
     Waste), Subpart C (Pre-Transport Requirements), 40 CFR
     262.34(a)(4) Accumulation time.
II.  Purpose of CFR Reference:  262.34(a) allows large quantity
     generators to accumulate hazardous waste on-site for 90 days
     or less without a permit, and sets forth requirements for
     these generators.  262.34(a)(4) references portions of 40
     CFR part 265 (subpart C for preparedness and prevention
     requirements, subpart D for contingency planning
     requirements, and 265.16 for personnel training
     requirements).   See 40 CFR part 264, subparts C, D, and
     264.16 for recommended revisions to these provisions.

III. Recommended Review Category (Check One):

            X  No action
          	Obsolete
          	 Revise Rule(s) or Statute
          	 Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV.  Revision Approach:
Rule Change (if approp.)
Statutory Change
Consensual Negot.
     Description of Revision: See 40 CFR subparts C and D and
     264.167 for specific recommendations.
V.  Environmental Benefit:
     Reduction of Burden:
VI. Currently Funded.or Planned?
No Change
Small-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction

Yes
No
VII. Planned Milestones  (if appropriate): NA

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: NA

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

 I.    Part  262  (Standards Applicable to Generators of Hazardous
      Waste), Subpart  C  (Pre-Transport Requirements), 40 CFR
      262.34(b)  and  (fl : Accumulation Time

 II.   Purpose of CFR Reference:  These provisions apply permitting
      requirements to  generators who accumulate hazardous waste
      for more than  90 days  (large quantity generators) or 180/270
      days  (small quantity generators).  Also allow EPA or the
      state to grant a 30-day extension to the 90/180/270-day
      period on  a case-by-case basis if necessary due to
      unforeseen, temporary  and uncontrollable circumstances.

 III.  Recommended Review Category (Check One):

           	  No action
           	  Obsolete
           	  Revise Rule(s) or Statute
            X   Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV.  Revision Approach:
Rule Change (if approp.)
Statutory Change
Consensual Negot.
     Description of Possible Revision: Consider allowing
     generators to use 30-day extension without EPA/state
     approval.  Perhaps require notification to EPA/state, or
     limit use of the extension to prevent abuse.
V.  Environmental Benefit:
     Reduction of Burden:
VI. Currently Funded or Planned?
No Change
Small-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction

Yes
No
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate): NA

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities:  How to craft regulation
to prevent generators from abusing flexibility and to make the
provision enforceable.

-------
                OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

I.   Part 262 (Standards Applicable to Generators of Hazardous
     Waste),  Subpart C (Pre-Transport Requirements), 40 CFR
     262.34fcl-fel;  Accumulation Time

II.  Purpose of CFR Reference: These provisions set forth
     management requirements for large quantity generators
     accumulating hazardous waste at satellite accumulation
     points,  and on-site accumulation requirements for generators
     who generate between 100 and 1,000 kg of hazardous waste per
     month (small quantity generators).

III. Recommended Review Category (Check One):

          	 No action
          	 Obsolete
          	 Revise Rule(s) or Statute
           X   Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
    Rule Change
    Statutory Change
         (possibly)
    Consensual Negot.
Description of Revision:  Examine the relationship between large
quantity generator requirements and small businesses. At issue is
the costs and benefits of applying large quantity generator
requirements to small businesses.
V.  Environmental Benefit:
    No Change
    Small-Moderate Improve.
    Significant Improvement
    Need more  information
     Reduction of Burden:
VI. Currently Funded or Planned?
	 None
	 Small-Moderate Reduction
_X	 Significant Reduction
          (possibly)
	 Yes
 X	 No
VII. Planned Milestones  (if appropriate): NA

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: Do small businesses obtain
same amount of environmental benefits as large businesses for the
amount of their environmental control investment?

-------
                  OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

 I.   Part 262  (Standards Applicable to Generators of Hazardous
      Waste), Subpart D  (Recordkeeping and Reporting), 40 CFR
      262.40~44.

 II.  Purpose of CFR Reference:  These provisions set forth
      reporting and recordkeeping requirements for generators of
      hazardous waste.  They include keeping a copy of records
      (262.40); biennial reporting (262.41); exception reporting
      (262.43); additional reporting (262.43); and reduced
      recordkeeping requirements for generators of between 100 and
      1000 kg/mo (262.44) .

 III.  Recommended Review Category (Check One):

           	 No action
           	 Obsolete
           	 Revise Rule(s)  or Statute
           —X_ Possibly Revise Rules,  but further study  necessary
 IV.  Revision Approach:
Rule Change
Statutory .Change
Consensual Negotiations
      Description  of  Possible Revision:  Eliminate any unnecessary
      and duplicative recordkeeping and reporting.  An internal
      Agency  study is being  conducted to analyze existing
      recordkeeping and  reporting requirements and will make
      recommendations this fall on changes to be made.
V.   Environmental Benefit:
     Reduction of Burden:
VI.  Currently Funded or Planned?
No Change
Small-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction

Yes (internal study)
No
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate):  An on-going study
     (Waste Information Needs (WIN) study) is assessing
     information needs and overlaps in information collection.
     Recommendations will be made in the fall of 1095.

VIII.Key Questions/Issues/Activities:  Coordination required with
     other EPA program offices and States.  Integration of needs
     of all users of information necessary.  Identification of
     the minimum level of recordkeeping and reporting that will
     still enable EPA/State to carry out their mission
     effectively.

-------
                OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

I. 40 CFR Part 262. Subpart E.  "Exports of Hazardous Waste". 40 CFR
262.50-57.
II. Purpose of CFR Reference: Describe requirements to ensure that
the U.S.  government and the government of the importing country are
aware of exports, and that the  receiving  country  consents to the
shipment.

III. Recommended Review Category (Check One):

          	 No action
          	 Obsolete
          	 Revise Rule(s)  or Statute(s)
          X  Possibly Revise Rule(s), but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
     (check all that apply)
Rule Change
Statutory Change
Consensual Negotiations
Description  of  Revision:   The prior  approval  process might  be
streamlined while still ensuring the governments  involved are aware
of the shipments.   Most likely, this  streamlining  would  only be
attempted with the major U.S. trading partners (OECD) .
V.  Expected Impact:

  A.  Environmental Benefit:




  B.  Reduction of Burden:




VI.   Currently Funded or Planned?
No Change
Sma11-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction
Need More Information

Yes
No
VII. Planned Milestones  (if appropriate): NA

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities:  NA

-------
                  OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

 *• 40 CFR Part 262. Subpart F. "Imports of Hazardous Waste".
 40CFR 262.60	

 II. Purpose of CFR Reference:  Establish requirements for persons
 importing hazardous waste into the U.S.

 III.  Recommended Review Category (Check One):

           	 No action
           	 Obsolete
           	 Revise Rule(s)  or Statute(s)
           X_ Possibly Revise Rule(s),  but further study necessary
 IV.  Revision Approach:
      (check all  that apply)
 Rule  Change
 Statutory Change
 Consensual Negotiations
 Description  of  Revision:    Clarify  terms  (e.g.  definition  of
 "importer")  and make  the  regulations  simpler.
V.  Expected  Impact:

  A.  Environmental Benefit:




  B.  Reduction of Burden:




VI.   Currently Funded or Planned?
No Change
Small-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction
Need More Information

Yes
No
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate):  NA

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Actiyities: NA

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

I.   Part 262 (Standards Applicable to Generators of Hazardous
     Waste), Subpart G (Fanners),  40 CFR 262.70; Farmers.

II.  Purpose of CFR Reference:  This provision allows farmers to
     dispose of waste pesticides from their own use on their
     farms as long as they triple rin*e their containers and
     comply with the pesticide label instructions.

III. Recommended Review Category (Check One):

            X  No action
          	 Obsolete
          	 Revise Rule(s) or Statute
          	 Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV.  Revision Approach:



     Description of Revision:  NA

V.   Environmental Benefit:




     Reduction of Burden:



VI.  Currently Funded or Planned?
Rule Change
Statutory Change
Consensual Negot.
No Change
Sma11-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Sma11-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction

Yes
No
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate): NA

VIII.Key Questions/Issues/Activities: NA

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

 I.   Part 262 (Standards Applicable to Transporters of Hazardous
      Waste),  Subpart A (General),  40 CFR 263.10;  Scope.

 II.   Purpose  of CFR Reference:   This provision describes the
      overall  scope and applicability of regulations governing
      transporters  of hazardous  waste.

 III.  Recommended Review Category (Check One):

            X  No  action
           	 Obsolete
           	 Revise Rule(s) or Statute
           	 Possibly  Revise  Rules,  but  further  study necessary
IV. Revision Approach;
Description of Revision: NA

V. Environmental Benefit:
   Reduction of Burden:
VI. Currently Funded or Planned?
Rule Change
Statutory Change
Consensual Negotiations
No Change
Small-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction

Yes
No
VII. Planned Milestones  (if appropriate): NA

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: NA

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

I.   Part 263  (Standards Applicable to Transporters of Hazardous
     Waste), Subpart A  (General), 40 CFR 263.11; EPA
     Identification Number

II.  Purpose of CFR Reference:  This provision requires
     transporters of hazardous waste to obtain an EPA
     identification number from the Administrator using the
     notification form.

III. Recommended Review Category  (Check One):

          	 No action
          	 Obsolete
          	 Revise Rule(s) or Statute
            X  Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV.  Revision Approach:
     Rule Change
     Statutory Change
     Consensual Negotiations
     Description of Possible Revision:  Modify the notification
     form to reduce: 1) any  redundancy with other notification
     or reporting requirements (e.g., other EPA program reporting
     requirements, DOT requirements), 2) requests for any
     unnecessary information, and 3) requests for any
     unnecessarily detailed information.
V.   Environmental Benefit:
     Reduction of Burden:
VI.  Currently Funded or Planned?
  X  No Change
	__ Small-Moderate Improve.
  •   Significant Improvement
	 Need more information

. • . .'  None
  X  Small-Moderate Reduction
	 Significant Reduction

	. Yes (internal study)
  X  No
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate):  An on-going study
     (Waste Information Needs (WIN) study) is assessing
     information needs and overlaps in information collection.
     Recommendations will be made in the fall of 1995.

VIII.Key Questions/Issues/Activities:  Coordination required with
     other EPA program offices, the States and DOT.  Integration
     of needs of all users of information necessary.

-------
                  OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

 I.   Part 263 (Standards Applicable to Transporters of Hazardous
      Waste),  Subpart A (General),  40 CFR 263.12; Transfer
      Facilities.

 II.  Purpose of CFR Reference:  This provision allows
      transporters to store hazardous waste for up to ten days at
      a transfer facility without obtaining a permit.

 III.  Recommended Review Category (Check One):

           	 No action
           	 Obsolete
           	. Revise Rule(s)  or Statute
            X  Possibly Revise Rules,  but  further  study necessary
 IV.  Revision  Approach:
    Rule Change
    Statutory Change
    Consensual Negot.
     Description  of  (Possible) Revision:  Revise the transfer
     facility provision to  specify what activities may and may
     not be conducted at a  transfer  facility, and what
     requirements are applicable to  those activities.  Resolving
     the existing confusion and disagreement over this issue
     would make the  requirements clear to state implementing
     agencies and the regulated community, thus reducing
     confusion and time spent debating the issue.
V.   Environmental Benefit:
     Reduction of Burden:
VI.  Currently Funded or Planned?
	 No  Change  Projected
	 Small-Moderate  Improve.
	 Significant  Improvement
_X_ Need  more  information
    None
    Small-Moderate Reduction
    Significant Reduction
VII. Planned Milestones  (if appropriate): NA

VIII.Key Questions/Issues/Activities:  Coordination with DOT and
     state agencies required.  Environmental impacts of various
     transfer facility activities need to be evaluated.

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

 I.   Part  263  (Standards Applicable to Transporters of Hazardous
     Waste), Subpart B  (Compliance with the Manifest System and
     Recordkeeping), 40 CFR 263.20 (The Manifest System). 40 CFR
     263.21  (Compliance With the Manifest), and 40 CFR 263.22
     (Recordkeeping)

 II.  Purpose of CFR Reference:  These provisions describe the
     manifest tracking system that transporters must use when
     transporting hazardous waste.

 III. Recommended Review Category (Check One):

          	 No action
          	 Obsolete
            X  Revise Rule(s)  or Statute
          	 Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
V.
IV.  Revision Approach:
                              X(1&2) Rule Change
                              	 Statutory Change
                              X(2) Consensual Negot.
     1.  Description of Revision 1:  As part of the Agency's
     Definition of Solid Waste rulemaking, possible alternatives
     to the existing manifest system to be used for tracking
     shipments of recycled hazardous waste are being analyzed.
     The goal is to develop an alternative manifest system that
     is less burdensome for generators, transporters, and
     implementing agencies but that ensures accountability for
     the waste and meets other needs of users of the manifest
     system.

     2. Description of Revision 2:  As agreed with a regulatory
     negotiation committee, revise the manifest form to minimize
     variation from state to state, allowing the use of a more
     consistent form for all hazardous waste transportation.
     Also standardize procedures for use of the form in certain
     unusual situations to eliminate confusion and inconsistency.
Environmental Benefit:
     Reduction of Burden:
VI.  Currently Funded, or Planned?
  X  No Change Projected
	 Small-Moderate Improve.
	 Significant Improvement
	 Need more information

  '   None
X(2) Small-Moderate Reduction
X(l) Significant Reduction

  X  Yes
	 No
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate):

-------
     Revision 1: Definition of Solid Waste rule proposal—
     Spring 1996.

     Revision 2: Proposed rule summer 1995, final rule spring
     1996.

VIII.Key Questions/Issues/Activities:

     Revision 1: Ability to ensure accountability for waste;
     consistency with DOT rules and impact on interstate
     transport issues; impact on current State information
     management systems and State user-fee systems; possibility
     of expanding revised system to cover all wastes, not just
     recycled wastes.

     Revision 2: Federal burden reduction small or none because
     the revised form would require more information than the
     current federal form.  The additional information, however,
     has been required by states in the past,  thus the overall
     burden (state plus federal)  is likely to remain roughly the
     same.  There should be some reduction in the overall burden
     due to increased consistency among states.

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

I.   Part 263  (Standards Applicable to Transporters of Hazardous
     Waste), Subpart C  (Hazardous Waste Discharges), 40 CFR
     263.30  (Immediate Action! and 40 CFR 263.31  (Discharge Clean
     UP) .

II.  Purpose of.CFR Reference:  These provisions set forth
     actions transporters must take to respond to a discharge
     during transportation.  Most requirements are references to
     DOT regulations.

III. Recommended Review Category (Check One):

            X  No action
          	 Obsolete
            .   Revise Rule(s) or Statute
          	 Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:



Description of Revision: NA

V. Environmental Benefit:




   Reduction of Burden:



VI. Currently Funded or Planned?
Rule Change
Statutory Change
Consensual Negotiations
No Change
Small-Moderate Improve.
S ign i f i cant Improvement
Need more information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction

Yes
No
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate): NA

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: NA

-------
I
                OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

I. Part 264. Subpart A.  40 CFR 264. - General
                II.  Purpose  of  CFR Reference:  Subpart A establishes the purpose.
                scope  and  applicability  of  the technical permitting standards.

                III. Recommended Review  Category  (Check One):

                          X  No action
                          — Obsolete
                          — Revise Rule(s) or Statute
                          — Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
               IV. Revision Approach:
               Description of Revision: NA

               V.    Environmental Benefit:
                     Reduction of Burden!
               VI.   Currently Funded or Planned?
                                        Rule Change
                                        Statutory Change
                                        No Change
                                        Small-Moderate Improve.
                                        Significant Improvement
                                        Need more information

                                        None
                                        Small-Moderate Reduction
                                        Significant Reduction

                                        Yes
                                        No
               VII. Planned Milestones  (if appropriate):NA
               VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: NA

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

 I•  Parts 264.  Subpart B.  40  CFR 264  - General  Facility  Standards
 II.  Purpose  of CFR Reference:  Subpart  B sets  forth general
 standards  that apply  to  all  RCRA  facilities such as security.
 training,  and  safe management  of  ignitable, corrosive and
 reactive wastes.

 III. Recommended Review  Category  (Check One):

             No action
           — Obsolete
           — Revise Rule(s)  or Statute
           X  Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
Rule Change
Statutory Change
Description of Revision:  (1) Investigate the feasibility .of
referencing OSHA regulations to reduce potential redundancy with
RCRA regulations pertaining to security, training and safe
management of hazardous wastes; or (2) investigate feasibility of
modifying 40 CFR 264.12 (b) and (c) (Required Notices); 40 CFR
264.15  (General inspection requirements); 40 CFR 264.16
(Personnel training) to reduce regulatory burden on
owner/operator.
V.    Environmental Benefit:
      Reduction of Burden:
VI.   Currently Funded or Planned?
No Change
Small-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction
  (possibly)

Yes
No
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate):  NA

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: Does sufficient overlap in
OSHA and RCRA regulations exist to eliminate redundancy? ;If
specific citations in Subpart B modified,  will environmental
protection or enforceability be jeopardized?

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

I. Part 264 Subpart C - Preparedness and Prevention

II. Purpose of CFR Reference: These regulations apply to owners
and operators of hazardous waste facilities.  Subpart C
regulations state that facilities must be designed, constructed,
maintained, and operated to minimize the possibility of a fire,
explosion, or any unplanned sudden or non-sudden release of
hazardous waste.  The regulations address required equipment,
testing and maintenance of equipment, access to communications or
an alarm system, required aisle space, and arrangements with
local authorities.
III. Recommended Review Category (Check One):

          	 No action .                            ,       ,
          	 Obsolete
          	 Revise Rule(s) or Statute
           X Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
Rule Change
Statutory Change
Description of Change: OSWER/CEPPO is currently developing Risk
Management Programs for the Chemical Accidental Release
Prevention rule.  A proposal was published in the federal
register on October 20, 1993, and a supplemental notice was
recently signed by the Administrator on February 28, 1995.  The
risk management programs  (RMPs) rule is more comprehensive than
RCRA regulations and will require facilities to prepare and
implement RMPs that include a hazard assessment, a prevention
program, and an emergency response program.  OSW is working with
CEPPO to ensure that RCRA facilities "get credit" for their RCRA
requirements, and do not have to duplicate effort.  After the
RMPs rule becomes effective, the possibility exists to eliminate
Subpart C under Parts 264 & 265, and instead state that RCRA
facilities must be in compliance with the RMPs requiremer.ts.

-------
V.    Environmental Benefit:
      Reduction of Burden:
VI.   Currently Funded or Planned?
No Change
Small-Moderate Improve.
Significant.Improvement
Need more information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction

Yes
No
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate): Date rule revision is
planned to be proposed/promulgated, or study completed to
determine possible rule revisions.

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: NA

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

 I.  Part  264,  Subpart  D -  Contingency Plan and Emergency
 Procedures.

 II.  Purpose of  CFR Reference: Subpart D regulations state that
 owners or operators must  have a contingency plan for their
 facility, which is designed to minimize hazards to human health
 or  the environment from fires, explosions, or any unplanned
 sudden or non-sudden  release of hazardous waste.  The regulations
 address  the content of contingency plans, submitting copies of
 contingency plans, amending contingency plans, designating an
 emergency coordinator,  and emergency procedures.

 III. Recommended Review Category  (Check One):

          	 No action
          	 Obsolete
          	 Revise Rule(s) or Statute
           X Possibly  Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
Rule Change
Statutory Change
Description of Revision: OSWER/CEPPO is currently developing the
Risk Management Programs for Chemical Accidental Release
Prevention rule.  A proposal was published in the federal
register on October 20, 1993, and a supplemental notice was
recently signed by the administrator on February 28, 1995.  The
risk management programs (RMPs) rule is more comprehensive than
the RCRA regulations and will require facilities to prepare and
implement RMPs that include a hazard assessment, a prevention
program, and an emergency response program.  OSW is working with
CEPPO to ensure that RCRA facilities "get credit" for their RCRA
requirements, and do not have to duplicate effort.  After the
RMPs rule becomes effective, the possibility exists to eliminate
Subparts D under Parts 264 & 265, and instead state that RCRA
facilities must be in compliance with the RMPs. requirements.

-------
      Environmental Benefit:
      Reduction of Burden:
VI.   Currently Funded or Planned?
  X  No Change
	 Small-Moderate Improve.
	 Significant Improvement
	 Need more information

	 None
  X  Small-Moderate Reduction
	 Significant Reduction
     Yes
      No
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate): Date rule revision is
planned to be proposed/promulgated, or study completed to
determine possible rule revisions.

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: NA_

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

 I.    Part 264 (Standards for Owners and Operators of Hazardous
      Waste Treatment,  Storage,  and Disposal  Facilities),  Subpart
      E (Manifest System, Recordkeeping,  and  Reporting). 40  CFR
      264.70;  Applicability.                             "•—

 II.   Purpose  of CFR Reference:   This provision  describes  the
      applicability of  manifest  system and  recordkeeping
      requirements to treatment,  storage, and disposal facilities.

 III.  Recommended Review  Category (Check One):

            X  No action
           	  Obsolete
           	  Revise Rule(s) or Statute
           	  Possibly  Revise Rules,  but  further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:



Description of Revision: NA

V. Environmental Benefit:




   Reduction of Burden:



VI. Currently Funded or Planned?
Rule Change
Statutory Change
Consensual Negotiations
No Change
Small-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction

Yes
No
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate): NA

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: NA

-------
                OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

I.   Part 264 (Standards for Owners and Operators of Hazardous
     Waste Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities), Subpart
     E (Manifest System, Recordkeeping, and Reporting)  40 CFR
     264.71: Use of Manifest System. 40 CFR 264.72; Manifest
     Discrepancies. 40 CFR 264.76;  Unmanifested Waste Report.

II.  Purpose of CFR Reference:  These provisions describe the
     manifest tracking system that treatment, storage and
     disposal facilities must use to document receipt of
     hazardous wastes at the facility.

III. Recommended Review Category (Check One):

          	 No action
          	 Obsolete
            X  Revise Rule(s)  or Statute
        .	_ Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV.  Revision Approach:
Xfi&2) Rule Change
	 Statutory Change
X(2.) Consensual Negot.
     1.  Description of Revision 1:   As part of the Agency's
     Definition of Solid Waste rulemaking, alternatives to the
     existing manifest system to be used for tracking shipments
     of recycled hazardous waste are being analyzed.  The goal is
     to develop an alternative manifest system that is less
     burdensome for generators, transporters, receiving
     facilities, and implementing agencies but that ensures
     accountability for the waste and meets other needs of users
     of the manifest system.

     2. Description of Revision 2:  As agreed with a regulatory
     negotiation committee, revise the manifest form to minimize
     variation from state to state,  allowing the use of a more
     consistent form for all hazardous waste transportation.
     Also standardize procedures for use of the form in certain
     unusual situations to eliminate confusion and inconsistency.
     Environmental Benefit:
     Reduction of Burden:
VI.  Currently Funded or Planned?
  X  No Change Projected
	 Small-Moderate Improve.
	 Significant Improvement
	 Need more information

	 None
X(2) Small-Moderate Reduction
X (1) Significant Reduction
VII. Planned Milestones  (if appropriate):

-------
     Revision 1: Definition of Solid Waste rule proposal —
     Spring 1996.

     Revision 2: Proposed rule summer 1995. final rule sprina
     1996.

VIII.Key Questions/Issues/Activities:

     Revision 1: Ability to ensure accountability for waster-
     consistency with DOT rules and impact on interstate
     transport issues; impact on current State information
     management systems and State user-fee systems;  possibility
     of expanding revised system to cover all wastes,  not just
     recycled wastes.

     Revision 2: Federal burden reduction small or none because
     the revised form would require more information than the
     current  federal form.   The additional information,  however,
     has been required by states in the  past,  thus the overall
     burden (state  plus federal)  is likely to remain roughly the
     same.  There should be some reduction in the  overall burden
     due to increased consistency among  states.

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

I.   Part 264  (Standards for Owners and Operators of Hazardous
     Waste Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities), Subpart
     E  (Manifest System, Recordkeeping, and Reporting) 40 CFR
     264.73: Operating Record. 264.74; Availability. Retention.
     and Disposition of Records. 40 CFR 264.75: Biennial Report.
     and 40 CFR 264.77. Additional Reports.

II.  Purpose of CFR Reference:  These provisions require the
     owner or operator of a treatment, storage, and disposal
     facility to keep records documenting compliance with various
     part 264 requirements and retain those records.  Also
     references other part 264 reporting requirements.

III. Recommended Review Category (Check One):

          	 No action
          	 Obsolete
          	 Revise Rule(s) or Statute
            X  Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV.  Revision Approach:
                                   Rule Change
                                   Statutory Change
                                   Consensual Negot.
     Description of Possible Revision:  Eliminate any unnecessary
     and duplicative recordkeeping and reporting.  An internal
     Agency study is being conducted to analyze existing
     recordkeeping and reporting requirements and will make
     recommendations this fall on changes to be made.
V.
Environmental Benefit:
     Reduction of Burden:
VI.  Currently Funded or Planned?
No Change
Small-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction

Yes (internal study)
No
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate):  An on-going study
     (Waste Information Needs (WIN) study) is assessing
     information needs and overlaps in information collection.
     Recommendations will be made in the fall of 1995.

VIII.Key Questions/Issues/Activities:  Integration of needs of
     all users of information necessary.  Identification of the
     minimum level of recordkeeping and reporting that will still
     enable £,^A/State to carry out their mission effectively.

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

 I. Part 264, Subparts F (RCRA Ground Water Monitoring
 Requirements)  and Subpart H (Closure Requirements  for Hazardous
 Waste Land Disposal Units)


 II.  Purpose of CPR Reference:  These regulations  for closure/post
 closure and ground water monitoring of "regulated"  hazardous
 waste land disposal units were originally  designed  primarily  as
 prevention-oriented standards  applicable to all  such units.   As
 such,  the regulations specified very stringent design and
 operating standards intended to minimize the likelihood of
 "failure" and  consequent releases of wastes into the environment.
 These  regulations  were not  designed to address pre-existing units
 that have already  contaminated ground water or other
 environmental  media.


 III. Recommended Review  Category (Check One):

           — No action
           — Obsolete
           X  Revise Rule(s) or Statute
           X  Possibly Revise Rules, but further  study necessary


 IV.  Revision Approach/Description of Change:

           X  Rule  Change
             Statutory Change

 Description  of Revision: Applying the stringent,  prevention
 oriented RCRA standards of Subparts F and G to units with pre-
 existing contamination problems can often lead to overregulation
 unnecessary  costs, and can actually frustrate cleanup efforts.   '
 In addition, these units often contain similar or identical
wastes, and  in many cases are  located in close proximity to each
 other such that ground water contamination plumes are co-mingled.
 It makes little sense to retain this purely administrative
distinction, and rigidly apply stringent national standards to
regulated hazardous waste units, while for other types of units
regulators can specify more flexible, common sense cleanup
solutions based on actual site conditions.   The proposed rule
change will allow regulators,  on a case-by-case basis, to address
cleanup of regulated units using the more flexible corrective
action regulations for solid waste management units  (see Subnart
S of 40 CFR Part 264).                                      P

     A possible revision is the requirement in 40 CFR 264.112(a)
to submit a written closure plan for review by EPA at the time
the Part B permit is called. At issue is whether such a detailed
plan is necessary at the time the permit is called and more

-------
appropriate when the facility is preparing to close.  One
alternative to investigate is the submission of a general closure
plan initially.

     Similarly, 40 CFR 264.115 requires the owner/operator to
submit to the Regional Administrator a certification that the
unit has been closed in accordance with the specifications in the
closure plan. The certification must be performed by a
independent registered engineer. The issue of consistency arises
between this citation and other similar citations where the
certification can be accomplished by a certified engineer — or
someone possibly in-house.
V.    Environmental Benefit:
      Reduction of Burden:
VI.   Currently Funded or Planned?
No Change
Small-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate): This regulatory change
was outlined (in preamble language) in the proposed "Post Closure
Rule".  Barring unforseen legal problems, these proposed reforms
could be finalized by the end of this fiscal year.
VIII.  Key Questions/Issues/Activities: To what extent would
these rule changes need to be proposed prior to finalizing?

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

 I. Part 264, Subpart H,  Financial Requirements,  40 CFR 264.143(f)
 Financial Test and Corporate Guarantee for Closure,  40 CFR
 264.145(f) Post Closure Care, and 40CFR 264.147(f)  Liability
 Requirements.

 II.  Purpose of CFR Reference: Allows owners and  operators of
 hazardous waste treatment,  storage and disposal  facilities to
 demonstrate compliance  with financial responsibility requirements
 through passing a  financial test rather than using more expensive
 mechanisms such as surety bonds or letters of credit.

 III. Recommended Review  Category (Check One):

           — No action
           — Obsolete
           X Revise Rule(s)  or Statute
           — Possibly Revise Rules,  but further  study  necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
                                        Rule Change
                                        Statutory Change
Description of Revision: Revising the current financial tests
specified in the regulations could increase the availability of
the test to firms which currently do not qualify, yet would be
able to pay for their environmental liabilities without requiring
alternative third party mechanisms.  A revised rule would also be
a better predictor of bankruptcy and disallow its use by firms to
which it should not be available.
V.    Environmental Benefit:
      Reduction of Burden:
                                        No Change
                                        Small-Moderate Improve.
                                        Significant Improvement
                                        Need more information
                                   	 None
                                   _X	 Small-Moderate Reduction
                                   	 Significant Reduction
VI.   Currently Funded or Planned?  X   Yes
                                   	 No

VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate):  Promulgation in May,
1996.

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: Coordination with
rulemaking for a similar corporate financial test for owners and
operators of municipal solid waste landfills.

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

 I.  Part  264  (Standards  for Owners and Operators of Hazardous
 Waste Treatment, Storage and Disposal Facilities; Subpart J (Tank
 Systemsn; 40 CFR 264.190-199.

 II. Purpose  of CFR Reference: Subpart J of 40 CFR 264 describes
 the management requirements for owners and operators of all
 permitted hazardous waste .facilities that use tank systems to
 store or treat their hazardous waste. These citations address,
 among other  requirements: assessment of existing tank system's
 integrity (264.191); design and installation of new tank systems
 and components (264.192) ,-containment and detection of releases
 (264.193);   inspections (264.195); response to leaks or spills
 and disposition of leaking or unfit-for-use tank systems
 (264.196); closure and post-closure care (264.197).

 III. Recommended Review Category (Check One):

          — No action
          — Obsolete
             Revise Rule(s) or Statute
          X  Possibly Revise Rules,  but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
Rule Change (if approp.)
Statutory Change
Consensual Negot.
Description of Revision(s): A number of citations in Subpart J
have the potential to be revised to reduce the burden on the
regulated community, clarify requirements, or obtain consistency
with other regulations while still protecting human health and
the environment.

     EPA is currently considering revisions for wastes being
recycled in the context of the Definition of Solid Waste project.
EPA could also consider changes for wastes bound for treatment
and disposal. Such changes could include:

     - 40 CFR 264.191. Need for a independent, qualified,
registered professional engineer as compared to simply the need
for a qualified, registered professional engineer allowing
facilities to use their own engineers if possible. Other parts of
our rules allow use of such engineers.

     - 40 CFR 264.192. Same comment as in 40 CFR 264.191. Also,
rules are very prescriptive. Possibly exists that rules could
include performance criteria with guidance incorporating
areas/factors to examine in order to meet performance measures.

     - 40 CFR 264.193(g). Possibly simplify owner/operator
petition process for allowing equivalent tank system design by
incorporating self-implementing provision. Owner/operator would

-------
notify EPA/State who could request applicable information if
desired. Also consider moving to performance standards with
design and operating criteria used as guidance in meeting
standards.

     - 40 CFR 264.195. While daily inspections appear
appropriate, must result of inspections be logged in operating
log daily? Can facility not log daily results weekly?

     - 40 CFR 264.196(b). Current rules require owner/operator to
demonstrate that it is not possible to remove as much of the
waste from a leaking tank as is necessary to prevent further
release to the environment within 24 hours and to submit such
evidence to the Regional Administrator. Possibly consider making
rule self-implementing by requiring the waste to be removed
within 24 hours or as soon as practicable.

     - 40 CFR 264.196(d). This provision requires any release to
the environment to be reported to the RA within 24 hours unless
the spill is less than one pound and is immediately contained and
cleaned-up. Possibly consider making reporting requirements
consistent with reportable quantity (RQ)  spill requirements under
Superfund which allow only larger spills requirements to be
reported to EPA.

     - 40 CFR 264.196(f). Same comment as 40 CFR 264.191.
V.  Environmental Benefit:
     Reduction of Burden:
VI. Currently Funded or Planned?
    No  Change
	 Small-Moderate  Improve.
    Significant  Improvement
 X   Need more  information

	 None
   Small-Moderate Reduction
     Significant Reduction
         (possibly)
    Yes
    No
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate): NA

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: Will environmental
protection be jeopardized by revising the above citations? Will
enforceability be jeopardized?

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

 I.  Part  264, Subpart K  (Surface Impoundments), 40 CFR 264.220-231


 II. Purpose of CFR Reference: This Subpart describes the
 management requirements for owners and operators of hazardous
 waste treatment, storage and disposal facilities that use surface
 impoundments. Specific requirements include: design and operating
 requirements; action leakage rate; response actions; monitoring
 and inspections; emergency repairs; contingency plans; closure
 and post-closure care; and special requirements for ignitable or
 reactive waste.
III. Recommended Review Category (Check One):

          X- No action
          — Obsolete     '
          — Revise Rule(s) or Statute
          — Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:



Description of Revision: NA

V.  Environmental Benefit:




     Reduction of Burden:



VI. Currently Funded or Planned?
Rule Change
Statutory Change
Consensual Negot.
No Change
Small-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction

Yes
No
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate): NA

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities:

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

I. Part  264,  Subpart  L  (Waste Piles), 40 CFR 264.250-259.
II. Purpose of CFR Reference: Subpart L describes the management
requirements  for owners and operators of hazardous waste
treatment, storage and disposal facilities that use waste piles.
Specific citations address design and operating requirements,
action leakage rate, response actions,monitoring and inspections,
special requirements for ignitable, reactive, and incompatible
waste, and closure and post-closure requirements.
III. Recommended Review Category  (Check One):

          X  No action
          — Obsolete
             Revise Rule(s) or Statute
             Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
Description of Revision: NA

V.  Environmental Benefit:
     Reduction of Burden:
VI. Currently Funded or Planned?
Rule Change
Statutory Change
Consensual Negot.
No Change
Small-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction

Yes
No
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate): NA

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities:NA

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

 I.  Part 264,  Subpart M (Land Treatment),  40 CFR 264.270-283.
 II.  Purpose of CFR Reference:  Subpart M describes  the  management
 requirements for owners  and  operators of hazardous waste
 treatment,  storage and disposal  facilities  that use  land
 treatment.  Specific citations  address treatment program,
 treatment demonstration, design  and operating  requirements,  food-
 chain crops,  unsaturated zone  monitoring, recordkeeping, closure
 and  post-closure care and special requirements for ignitable or
 reactive waste.
III. Recommended Review Category  (Check One):

          X  No action
          — Obsolete
          — Revise Rule(s) or Statute
          — Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:



Description of Revision:

V.  Environmental Benefit:




     Reduction of Burden:



VI. Currently Funded or Planned?
Rule Change
Statutory Change
Consensual Negot,
No Change
Small-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction

Yes
No
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate): NA

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: NA

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

I. Part 264, Subpart N (Landfills), 40 CFR 264.300-317,
40 CFR 264.314 (e) which is addressed separately).
                (except
II. Purpose of CFR Reference: Subpart N describes the management
requirements for owners and operators of hazardous waste
treatment, storage and disposal facilities that use landfills.
Specific citations address design and operating requirements,
action leakage rate, monitoring and inspection, response actions,
surveying and recordkeeping, closure and post-closure careand
special requirements for ignitable, reactive and incompatible
waste, and containers.
III. Recommended Review Category (Check One):

          X  No action                             -
          — Obsolete
          — Revise Rule(s) or Statute
          — Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:



Description of Revision: NA

V.  Environmental Benefit:




     Reduction of Burden:



VI. Currently Funded or Planned?
Rule Change
Statutory Change
Consensual Negot.
No Change
Small-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction

Yes
No
VII. Planned Milestones  (if appropriate): NA

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: NA

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

I. Part 264, Subpart N  (Landfills), 40 CFR 264.314  (e) Liquids in
Landfills -  Biodegradability of Sorbents

II. Purpose of CFR Reference:  To prohibit the disposal of
liquids in landfills that have been absorbed in materials that
biodegrade.

III. Recommended Review Category (Check One):

          — No action
          — Obsolete
          X  Revise Rule(s) or Statute
          — Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
Rule Change
Statutory Change
Description of Revision: Revise Section 3004(c)(2), and therefore
264.314(e).  This provision unnecessarily limits the use of some
sorbents since the conditions in a landfill are anaerobic and,
therefore, sorbents are highly unlikely to biodegrade regardless
of their composition.  Currently companies must petition the
Agency for a regulatory change if their sorbent doesn't meet
existing test protocols.
V.    Environmental Benefit:
      Reduction of Burden:
VI.   Currently Funded or Planned?
                                    X
No Change
Sma11-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction

Yes
No
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate):  NA

VIII. Key Questi^ns/Issues/Activities: NA

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

I. Part 264, Subpart O  (Incineration)
II. Purpose of CFR Reference: Describes existing emissions
 standards and controls for hazardous waste burning combustion
devices  (e.g. , incinerators, cement kilns) .

III. Recommended Review Category  (Check One):
          	  No action
          	  Obsolete
           x  Revise Rule(s) or Statute(s)
          	  Possibly Revise Rule(s), but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
      (check all that apply)
   Rule Change
   Statutory Change
   Consensual Negotiations
Description of Revision: Negotiate emissions
standards and controls for hazardous waste burning combustion
devices  (e.g., incinerators, cement kilns).
V.  Expected Impact:

  A.  Environmental Benefit:
  B.  Reduction of Burden:
VI.   Currently Funded or Planned?
	 No  Change
	 Small-Moderate  Improve.
 x  Significant  Improvement
   Need more  information
   None
   Small-Moderate Reduction
   Significant Reduction
   Need More  Information

   Yes
   No
VII. Planned Milestones  (if appropriate):Rule must be proposed by
September 20,  1995, and  finalized by December 15, 1996.
(Settlement Agreement)

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: Workgroup closure meeting
scheduled for  May  31,  1995.

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

I. Part 264, Subpart S (Corrective Action at Solid Waste
Management Units and management of contaminated media)

II. Original Purpose of Regulations: A situation exists in which
gaps in the current regulatory framework under RCRA have created
problems that need reform.  The corrective action program for
RCRA facilities is currently being operated using proposed rules
(Subpart S proposal, July 27, 1990), and guidance.  The proposed
Subpart S rule and the guidance that has been prepared by EPA for
implementing the program was largely patterned after the CERCLA
program; as a result, the program is plagued with cumbersome
procedures, a highly intrusive government oversight role, and in
general, conservative (i.e., very  stringent) cleanup decisions.

     In addition, cleanup actions under RCRA, CERCLA and other
laws often generate contaminated media and other hazardous wastes
that are subject to regulation under RCRA Subtitle C.  Since the
Subtitle C regulations were primarily designed to prevent future
releases rather than cleaning up existing contamination problems,
applying those stringent regulations to cleanups often amounts to
regulatory overkill and unnecessarily costly cleanups.  For some
time the Agency has recognized the need for an overhaul of the
regulations that govern management of cleanup wastes, so that
management requirements for those wastes more accurately reflect
their actual environmental risks.

III. Recommended Review Category (Check One):

          — No action
          — Obsolete
          x  Revise Rule(s) or Statute
          — .Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary

IV. Revision Approach/Description of Change: The regulations
described above will "reinvent" the corrective action program by
making it less procedural and bureaucratic, and less expensive
for government and industry to implement.  They will replace the
current system that over-regulates cleanup activities and creates
obstacles to voluntary cleanups by property owners.  More
specifically, the HWIR-Media rule will remove large volumes of
cleanup wastes from Subtitle C regulations altogether, and will
create a more common-sense regulatory structure for those
hazardous cleanup wastes that will remain regulated under
Subtitle C.  The Subpart S rule will be the primary vehicle for
overhauling the current program, with a primary objective being
to refocus cleanup efforts toward meeting performance standards,
rather than requiring government approval of technical plans and
reports.  In addition, the Agency will reexamine its traditional
policies on numerous "how-clean-is-clean" issues, with the intent
of creating a regulatory framework that is protective while
allowing regulators to make more pragmatic and cost-effective
cleanup decisions.

-------
V.    Environmental Benefit:
      Reduction of Burden:
VI.   Currently Funded or Planned?
No Change
Small-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction

Yes
No
VII. Planned Milestones  (if appropriate)
VIII.  Key Questions/Issues/Activities:

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

I. Part 264 (Standards for Owners and Operators of Hazardous
Waste Treatment, Storage and Disposal Facilities;  Subpart W (Drip
Pads). 40 CFR 254.570-575.

II. Purpose of CFR Reference: Subpart W of 40 CFR 264 describes
the management requirements for owners and operators that use new
or existing drip pads to convey treated wood drippage,
precipitation, and/or surface water run-off to an associated
collection system. Specific citations address assessment of
existing drip pad integrity (264.571); design and operation of
new drip pads (264.572); design and operating requirements
(264.573); inspections (264.574); and closure (264.575).

III. Recommended Review Category (Check One):

          — No action
          — Obsolete
             Revise Rule(s) or Statute
          X  Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
Rule Change (if approp.)
Statutory Change
Consensual Negot.
Description of Revision: A number of provisions have the
possibility of being modified to reduce burden on the regulated
community, clarify requirements, or be consistent with other
regulations. They include:

     - 40 CFR 264.571.  Need for a independent, qualified,
registered professional engineer as compared to simply the need
for a qualified, registered professional engineer allowing
facilities to use their own engineers if possible. Other parts of
our rules allow use of such engineers.

     - Similarly, in 40 CFR 264.571, must the assessment of the
existing drip pad be reviewed, updated and re-certified annually?
Can the owner/operator, instead, conduct an initial assessment
and develop a plan as to what needs to be done and establish a
general time-table for completing the work? Instead of submitting
the assessment to the RA, c~uld not the owner/operator submit a
notice to the RA indicating that an assessment was conducted?
Must the owner/operator submit to the RA the as-built drawings
upon completion of allrepairs and modifications to the drip pad?
Why not a simple certification statement by the engineer that the
drip pad meets the design rules?

     - 40 CFR 264.573. Same comments as in 40 CFR 264.571
pertaining to the certification by an independent engineer and
annual recertification. Also, would not the identification of
performance standards provide the owner/operator more flexibility
in meeting the overall goals of conveying treasted wood drippage,

-------
 precipitation,  and/or surface  water  run-off to an associated
 collection system?  Specific design and operating criteria could
 be  used as guidance by the owner/operator. How important is it to
 document in the operating  record the date and time of each
 cleaning of the drip pad  (264.573(i))?, the need to document in
 the record that all treated wood is  held on the drip pad
 following treatment until  the  drippage has ceased (264.573(k))?


 V.   Environmental Benefit:         	 No Change
                                   	 Small-Moderate Improve.
                                        Significant Improvement
                                     X   Need more information

     Reduction  of Burden:          	 None
                                     X   Small-Moderate Reduction
                                   	 Significant Reduction

VI.  Currently Funded or Planned?   	 Yes
                                     X  No

VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate):  NA

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities:  Further analysis must be
conducted to ascertain the importance of maintaining specific
aspects of current citations, particularly with respect to the
enforceability of the rules.

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

I. Part 264, Subpart X; arid Part 265 Subpart P.  Standards
Applicable to Owners and Operators of Miscellaneous Units.

II. Purpose of CFR Reference:  Sets standards for "miscellaneous"
units—those hazardous waste treatment, storage and disposal
units that are not captured by the unit-specific standards in
Part 264  (e.g., Subparts I-O).  This regulation requires that
such units meet environmental performance standards that are
protective of human health and the environment.

III. Recommended Review Category (Check One):

Standards currently provide sufficient flexibility.

          X  No action
          — Obsolete
          — Revise Rule(s)  or Statute
          — Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
Rule Change
Statutory Change
Description of Change:  NA (No issues/problems identified.
Standards currently provide sufficient flexibility.)
V.    Environmental Benefit:
      Reduction of Burden:
VI.   Currently Funded or Planned?
No Change
Small-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction

Yes
No
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate): NA

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: NA

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

 X.  Part 264t Subpart AA (Air Emission Standards for Process
 Vents); Subpart BB (Air Emission Standards for Equipment Leaks)
 and Subpart CC (Air Emission Standards from Hazardous Waste
 Treatment,  Storage and DisposalFacilities)


 II.  Purpose of CFR Reference:  Section 3004(h)  of RCRA requires
 EPA to  promulgate  standards for monitoring and control of air
 emissions from RCRA facilities,  "...as may  be  necessary to
 protect human health and the environment."   Under  this authority,
 EPA developed the  air emission regulations  for process vents
 (Subpart AA) ,  equipment  leaks  (Subpart BB),  and tanks,  containers
 and  surface impoundments (Subpart CC).  The final  Subpart CC
 rules were  promulgated on December  6,  1994.

     The RCRA air  emission regulations, particularly  the Subpart
 CC rules, have been very controversial.  Many  have questioned the
 need for the  regulations,  arguing that the  environmental and
 human health  problem that  the  rules address  are hypothetical  and
 unrealistic.   Others have  argued that  these  rules  overlap and in
 some ways contradict the regulations that have  been and  are being
 developed for organic emissions under  the Clean Air Act  (CAA).
 Many commenters on the proposed rule further argued that as
 drafted, ,the  rules are unnecessarily stringent  and costly to  the
 regulated community,  and will  be exceptionally  challenging for
 EPA  and  the States to enforce.

 III. Recommended Review  Category (Check One):

          — No action
          — Obsolete
             Revise Rule(s) or Statute
          X  Possibly Revise Rules,  but further  study necessary
IV. Description of Revision:  Investigate feasibility of
utilizing Clean Air Act rules in lieu of RCRA where clear
redundancy exists. Determine whether such redundancy also exists
for incinerators or boilers and industrial furnaces.
V.    Environmental Benefit:
      Reduction of Burden:
	 No  Change
	 Small-Moderate  Improve.
	 Significant  Improvement
_X	 Need more  information
     None
     Small-Moderate  Reduction
     Significant  Reduction
         (possibly)

-------
VI.   Currently Funded or Planned?
Yes
No
VIZ. Planned Milestones (if appropriate): KA
VIII.  Key Questions/Issues/Activities: How to address situations
where redundancy exists between CAA and RCRA, but nrt 100 percent
redundancy.

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

I. Part 264  (Standards for Owners and Operators of Hazardous
Waste Treatment, Storage and Disposal Facilities; Subpart DP
(Containment Buildings!; 40 CFR 264.1100-1102.

II. Purpose of CFR Reference: Subpart DD of 40 CFR 264 describes
the management requirements for owners and operators that store
hazardous waste in containment buildings.  Specific citations
address design and operating standards  (264.1101), and closure
and post-closure care  (264.1102).

III. Recommended Review Category  (Check One):

          — No action
          — Obsolete
             Revise Rule(s) or Statute
          X  Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
Rule Change (if approp.)
Statutory Change
Consensual Negot.
Description of Revision: A number of citations have the
possibility of being revised to eliminate language no longer
needed and reduce burden on the regulated community while still
protecting human health and the environment. EPA is currently
considering revisions for wastes being recycled in the context of
the Definition of Solid Waste project. EPA could also consider
changes for wastes bound for treatment and disposal. Such changes
could include:

     - 40 CFR 264.1101(b)(4). This provision allowed and
owner/operator to delay the secondary containment requirement in
containment buildings for 2 years if a request was made by
February 18, 1993. This time-period has elapsed.

     - 40 CFR 264.1101  (c)(3)(ii). What is the appropriate role
for the RA? Should he/she make a determination regarding whether
the containment building must be removed from service or can the
owner/operator?

     - 40 CFR 264.1101  (c)(4). What information should be
included in the operating rec. rd? Should the results of weekly
data gathered from monitoring equipment and leak detection
equipment?
V.  Environmental Benefit:
     Reduction of Burden:
No Change
Small-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None

-------
                                        Small-Moderate Reduction
                                        Significant Reduction
VI, .Currently Funded or Planned?
Yes
No
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate): NA

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: Further analysis must be
conducted to ascertain the importance of maintaining specific
aspects of current citations, particularly with respect to the
enforceability of the rules.

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

I. Part 265  (Standards  for Owners and Operc-tors of Hazardous
Waste Treatment, Storage and Disposal Facilities; Subpart I (Use
and Management of Containers); 40 CFR 264.170-177.

II. Purpose  of CFR Reference: Subpart I of 40 CFR 265 describes
the management requirements for owners and operators that store
containers of hazardous waste. Specific citations address the
condition of containers (265.171); compatibility of waste with
container (265.172); management of containers (265.173);
inspections  (265.174); special requirements for ignitable and
reactive waste (265.176); and special requirements for
incompatible waste (265.177).

III. Recommended Review Category (Check One):

             No action
             Obsolete
          X  Revise Rule(s) or Statute
             Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
Rule Change
Statutory Change
Consensual Negot.
Description of Revision: This revision would incorporate 40 CFR
264.175 pertaining to the containment of waste managed in
containers thereby resolving the inconsistency that currently
exists between interim status (Part 265) and permitted facilities
(Part 264).
V.  Environmental Benefit:
     Reduction of Burden:
VI. Currently Funded or Planned?
No Change
Small-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction

Yes
No
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate): NA

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: This change will increase
the burden for any interim status storage facilities managing
waste in containers without secondary containment, but should
also prevent releases to soil and water which ultimately have to
be cleaned up.

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

 I.  Part 265 (Interim Status Standards for Owners and Operators of
 Hazardous Waste Treatment,  Storage  and Disposal  Facilities),
 Subparts A through DD

 II.  Purpose of CFR Reference:  Subparts A  through DD of  40  CFR
 Part 265 establish the minimum national standards that  define
 acceptable management of  hazardous  waste  during  the period of
 interim status and until  certification of final  closure or, if
 the  facility is subject to  post-closure requirements, until post-
 closure responsibilities  are fulfilled.

 III.  Recommended Review Category  (Check One):

              No action
           X  Obsolete
           X  Revise  Rule(s)  or  Statute
           —  Possibly Revise Rules, but further  study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
Rule Change
Statutory Change
Description of Revision: Delete relevant Part 265, Subparts A-DD
that duplicate (verbatim in many cases) the equivalent Part 264,
Subpart A-DD regulatory citations; incorporate the relevant Part
264 requirements by reference.
V.    Environmental Benefit:
      Reduction of Burden:
VI.   Currently Funded or Planned?
No Change
Sma 11-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Sma11-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate):NA

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: NA

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

I.   Part 266,  40  CFR  266.100  (Light-Weight Aggregate Kilns)


I. Purpose of CFR  Reference: Existing emissions standards and
controls for hazardous waste burning combustion devices  (e.g.,
incinerators, cement kilns).

III. Recommended Review Category  (Check One):

          	 No action
          	 Obsolete
           x Revise Rule(s) or Statute(s)
          	 Possibly  Revise Rule(s), but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
     (check all that apply)
                                  Rule Change
                                  Statutory Change
                                  Consensual Negotiations
Description of Revision:   Upgrade existing emissions standards
and controls for hazardous waste burning combustion devices
(e.g., incinerators, cement kilns).
V.  Expected Impact:

  A.  Environmental Benefit:
  B.
Reduction of Burden:
VI.   Currently Funded or Planned?
No Change
Sma11-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction
Need More Information

Yes
No
VII. Planned Milestones  (if appropriate): Rule must be proposed
by September 20, 1995, and finalized by December 15, 1996.
(Settlement Agreement)

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: Workgroup closure meeting
scheduled for May 31, 1995.

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

I. Part 267  (Interim Standards  for Owners and Operators of New
Hazardous Waste  Land Disposal Facilities), Subparts A through G

II. Purpose  of CFR Reference: This part establishes minimum
national standards that define  the acceptable management of
hazardous waste  for new land disposal facilities. These
management standards include landfills, surface impoundments,
land treatment,  groud-water monitoring and underground injection.

III. Recommended Review Category  (Check One):

             No  action
          X  Obsolete
          X  Revise Rule(s) or  Statute
          — Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
Rule Change
Statutory Change
Description of Revision: Eliminate  Part 267, Subparts A-G since
they have been superceded by Part 264 management standards.
V.    Environmental Benefit:
      Reduction of Burden:
VI.   Currently Funded or Planned?
No Change
Small-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
.Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction

Yes
No
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate):NA

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: NA

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

I. CFR Reference  (Part, Subpart, Regulatory citation(s) and
   Title: Title 40 Part 268  Land Disposal Restrictions	
II. Purpose of CFR Reference:Establishes treatment standards for
all listed and characteristic hazardous wastes destined for land
disposal according to a strict schedule.	'.	
III. Recommended Review Category  (Check One):

          	 No action
          	 Obsolete
           X Revise Rule(s) or Statute (s)
          	 Possibly Revise Rule(s), but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
     (check all that apply)
Rule Change
Statutory Change
Consensual Negotiations
Description of Revision: EPA is proposing to  "clean up" existing
regulatory language in Part 268 that is outdated, confusing, or
unnecessary.  A number of sections have been identified;
specific changes within the section will potentially reduce
burden on the regulated community, clarify requirements, or
obtain consistency with other sections and regulations while
still maintaining protection to human and the environment.  The
examples include the following;

- 40 CFR 268.4.  Section 268.4(a)(2)(iv) is changed to read,
"[Note;  the recordkeeping provisions of §§ 264.13 and 265.13
apply]," being that the provision in 268.4 is already included in
264.13.  In cross-referencing the 264.13 requirement in 268.4, it
averts the need to repeat the entire provision.

- 40 CFR 268.7.  EPA is proposing to change in 268.7 references
to treatment standards found in tables § 268.41, 268.42, and
268.43; references will now be directed to the consolidated tahle
in § 268.40 - Treatment Standards for Hazardous Wastes.  The
treatment standards that previously appeared in these three
tables has been consolidated into one consolidated table  (268.40)
which was promulgated in Phase II LDR.

- 40 CFR 268.7.  EPA is deleting the requirement in
268.7(a)(4)(ii) that a generator submit a waste analysis plan to
the EPA/State.  Because the facility is treating the same waste
and utilizing the same disposal facility, a one-time notification
placed in the facility's file is all that is required,

- 40 CFR 268.32. All citations to § 268.32, California List
Waste, are removed, being that the treatment standards for the
these wastes have been superseded by subsequent treatment
standards, except for nickel and thallium. Other sections that

-------
                 QSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

I. Part 268, Subpart C, 40 CFR 268.6 — Petition to allow land
disposal of prohibited waste

II. Purpose of CFR Reference: This provision allows for disposal
of restricted waste when it can be shown that there will be no-
migration of hazardous constituents for as long as the waste
remains hazardous.


III. Recommended Review Category  (Check One):

          — No action
          — Obsolete
             Revise Rule(s) or Statute
          X  Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
    Rule Change
    Statutory Change
Description of Change: Examine the feasibility of removing the
phrase "...but not limited to...11 from 268.6(b)(5), and delete
268.6(b)(3).  Deletion of the phrase in 268.6(b)(5) could reduce
the need to consider certain future highly speculative human
induced events.  Deletion of 268.6(b)(3) could eliminate the need
to verify simulation model accuracy with actual measurements;
this is prudent since the long-term models used in no-migration
variances are not able to be verified for the long term.

     As part of this effort, the relationship of 40 CFR 268.6 to
Definition of Hazardous Waste efforts Would be investigated.
V.    Environmental Benefit:
      Reductioi of Burden:
VI.   Currently Funded or Planned?
   No  Change
   Sma11-Moderate  Improve.
   Significant  Improvement
   Need more  information
	 None
 X  Sma11-Moderate  Reduction
	 Significant Reduction
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate):  NA

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: Relationship with
Definition of Hazardous Waste efforts; possible adverse public
reaction.

-------
are outdated in the rule, including §§ 268.8 and 268.30-37, are
being removed;  references to these outdated sections are also
being removed.
V.  Expected Impact:

  A.  Environmental Benefit:
  B.
Reduction of Burden:
                                     X
VI.   Currently Funded or Planned?  X
No Change
Small-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction
Need More Information

Yes
No
VII. Planned Milestones  (if appropriate);Changes will be in Phase
IV Rulemaking. proposed July 30, 1995.  finalized July 30. 1996
VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities;Workgroup closure 4/13/95.

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis
I. CFR Reference  (Part, Subpart, Regulatory citation(s) and
   Title: Land Disposal Restrictions--Phase IV;  Issues
          associated with Clean Water Act Equivalency... .	
II. Purpose of CFR Reference:Rule proposes new standards to
assure certain wastes in CWA units are managed in manner
equivalent to RCRA management.	'		
III. Recommended Review Category  (Check One):
          	 No action
          	 Obsolete
          	 Revise Rule(s) or Statute(s)
          X  Possibly Revise Rule(s), but
                                    further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
      (check all that apply)
                                  Rule Change
                                  Statutory Change
                                  Consensual Negotiations
Description of Revision;  Proposed approach could be discussed
with stakeholders during an extended  (i.e.. 120 day) comment
period because issues are very complex and lend themselves to
extensive discussion.   It is suggested that one or more
Roundtable meetings be  held during a  120-day comment period to
gather information and  hear stakeholder concerns.   (Note;,
promulgation of a_final rule would not depend upon consensus from
the group.) This would, however, require an extension from EDF on
the settlement agreement date for the final rule;
V.  Expected Impact:
  A.  Environmental Benefit:
                              	 No Change
                              	 Small-Moderate Improve.
                              	 Significant Improvement
                               X  Need more information
  B
 VI .
Reduction of Burden:
None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction
                               X  Need More Information

Currently Funded or Planned?  X   Yes
                                  No
 VII.  Planned Milestones (if appropriate) ;Rule proposed July 30.—
 1995.   Finalized July 30.  1996.

 VIII.  Key Quftstiions/Issues/ActivitiestKey question is whether to
 request additional time from EDF to allow for time to hold
 Roundtable meetings^

-------
                  OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

 I.Part  268,  40  CFR 268.7,  268.41, 268.42, 268.43  (Land Disposal
 Restrictions)

 II. Purpose  of  CFR Reference: Establishes treatment standards for
  all listed  and characteristic hazardous wastes destined for land
  disposal according to a strict schedule.

 III. Recommended Review Category (Check One):

           	 No action
           	 Obsolete
           _Jf Revise Rule(s) or Statute(s)
           — Possibly Revise Rule(s), but further study necessary
 IV; Revision Approach:
      (check all that apply)
      Rule Change
      Statutory Change
      Consensual Negotiations
 Description of Revision: EPA is proposing to change  in 268.7
 references to treatment standards found in tables  S  268.41,
 268.42,  and 268.43; references will now be directed  to the
 consolidated table in § 268.40 - Treatment Standards for
 Hazardous Wastes.   The treatment standards that previously
 appeared in these  three tables has been consolidated into  one
 consolidated table (268.40)  which was promulgated  in Phase II
 LDR.
 V.  Expected Impact:
  A.   Environmental Benefit:
  B.  Reduction  of  Burden:
VI.   Currently Funded or Planned?
	 No Change
  X  Small-Moderate Improve.
	 Significant Improvement
	 Need more information

	 None
  .   Small-Moderate Reduction
	 Significant Reduction
  X  Need More Information

_X	 Yes
	 No
VII. Planned Milestones  (if appropriate):Changes will be in Phase
IV Rulemaking, proposed July 30, 1995,  finalized July 30, 1996

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities:Workgroup closure 4/13/95.

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

I. CFR Reference (Part,  Subpart, Regulatory citation(s) and
   Title: Part 270 - EPA Administered Permit Program:	The
Hazardous Waste Permit Program.


II. Purpose of CFR p<*f«>T-g.ne*>i   The purpose of this Part of the
RCRA Regulations is to meet the statutory requirement that a
permit is necessary to treatment,  storage, or disposal of
hazardous waste.

III. Recommended r view Category 'Check One):

          — No accion
          — Obsolete
             Revise Rule(s) or Statute
          XX Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
XX	 Rule Change
	 Statutory Change
Description of Change:  The Agency and the Office of Solid^Waste
(OSW) is looking at opportunities to improve the RCRA Permitting
Program.  OSW staff are participating on the Agency's Permit
Improvement Team (PIT).  Many of the areas that the PIT is
examining for improvement might be beneficial to the RCRA
program.  For example, a streamlined class permitting.process for
RCRA tanks could significantly reduce burden whild maintaining
equivalent standards.  Similarly, a streamlined RCRA permit
renewal process could bring significnat savings to thousands of
RCRA facilities.  Over the next few months the PIT will be making
recommendations on what specific steps are needed to improve the
permitting process.  OSW will look at the requirements in Part
270 to determine changes that are needed to reflect the
recommendations of the PIT.

     Additionally, the potential exists that information provided
in the Part A oermit application is redundant with that provided
in the Part B application. However, further analysis is required
with the States to ascertain the need for any duplicative data -
where such situations exist.
V.    Environmental Benefit:
      Reduction of  Burden:
	 No Change
	 Small-Moderate  Improve.
	 Significant  Improvement
XX   Need more  information
     None
     Small-Moderate  Reduction
     Significant Reduction
                                   XX

-------
VI.   Currently Funded or Planned? 	 yes
                                   XX	 No

VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate):  Depends on
recommendations - which are scheduled for June. 1995.

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities (if appropriate):

-------
                                                       Page 2

I.   Part 271, Subpart A - Requirements for Final Authorization,
     Sections 271.1-.20, .22-.26.

II. Purpose of CFR Reference: These provisions set forth the
requirements and procedures for States to obtain and retain
authorization to operate the RCRA Subtitle G program in lieu of
EPA.  The provisions also provide a benchmark for EPA. States.
and the public to evaluate how State programs'are operating.  The
provisions also include procedures for withdrawal of State
programs, and for HSWA interim authorization.

III. Recommended Review Category (Check One):

          X  No action
          — Obsolete
          — Revise Rule(s) or Statute
          — Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
No change
Rule Change
Statutory Change
Reasons for no change:  No serious problems with these
regulations have been identified.  The vast majority of States
have already obtained final authorization.
V.    Environmental Benefit:
      Reduction of Burden:
VI -    Currently Funded or Planned?
No Change
Small-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction

Yes
No
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate): None
VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: None

-------
                                                        Page 3

 I. Part 271, 40 CFR 271.21 - Procedures for revisions of State
 programs.

 II. Purpose of CFR Reference: This citation sets forth procedures
 for States to revise their authorized program when they adopt new
 EPA rules, or make other significant changes to their programs.
 This section also contains the requirements for the documents
 that must be in the authorization revision application and
 deadlines for application submissions.

 III.  Recommended Review Category (Check One):

           — No action
           — Obsolete
           — Revise Rule(s)  or Statute
           X  Possibly Revise Rules,  but further study necessary
 IV.  Revision Approach:
 Rule  Change
 Statutory  Change
 Description  of Possible Revision:   Several  significant
 rulemakings  (ex.  HWIR)  have  contemplated new expedited
 authorization  procedures.  EPA  is  also pursuing policies that
 clarify existing  regulations to reduce what must be contained in
 the  revision application.  EPA  staff have contemplated revising
 this section for  all EPA rules.  The deadlines for application
 submissions  for many rules have passed and  may be obsolete.  The
 current deadlines are also generally not complied with by States.
V.    Environmental Benefit:
      Reduction of Burden:
VI.   Currently Funded or Planned?
No Change
Small-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction

Yes
No
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate): Not yet planned.
VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: States would welcome
changes to what they see as burdensome regulations.  Enviros may
not like the reduction in EPA oversight of the authorization
process.  More emphasis may need to be placed onto EPA oversight
of State program implementation as a result.  This may create
some adverse reaction by States.

-------
                OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis
                         40 CFR Part 271
                                                       Page 1
I.   Part 271, Subpart B - Requirements for Interim
     Authorization, Sections 271.121-.138; Sections 271.3(c),(e),
     and .20(e).

II. Purpose of CFR Reference: These interim authorization
provisions apply to the pre-HSWA provisions and were provided by
Congress to enable States to operate the RCRA program while they
developed stronger or more comprehensive programs.  States
obtaining interim authorization were not required to have a
program fully equivalent to the Federal program.

III. Recommended Review Category (Check One):

          — No action
          X  Obsolete
          — Revise Rule(s) or Statute
          — Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
Rule Change
Statutory Change
Reason for change:  Interim authorization for the pre-HSWA
provisions expired on January 31, 1986.  States can neither have
nor obtain interim authorization for these provisions.  Interim
authorization for HSWA provisions is established and granted
under other provisions that will not be affected.  Therefore,
these pre-HSWA interim authorization provisions have no use and
are unnecessary.
V.    Environmental Benefit:
      Reduction of Burden:
VT.   Currently Funded or Plcnned?
No Change
Small-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need ir.ore information

None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction
VII. Planned Milestones  (if appropriate): No revisions currently
planned.

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: These provisions place no
burden  on the  States  because they are not used, but may be
confusing to State  agencies or  the public.

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

 I.  CFR Reference (Part,  Subpart,  Regulatory citation(s)  and
    Title;  40 CFR Part 279.  Standards for Management  of Used Oil

 II.  Purpose of  CFR  Reference:    To provide special,  streamlined
 standards  for used oil generators, transporters, and recyclers that
 are  protective  of   human   health   and  the  environment,  while
 minimizing adverse impacts  on used  oil recycling.	

 III.  Recommended Review  Category  (Check  One):

           	 No action
           	 Obsolete
           	 Revise  Rule(s)  or Statute(s)
           _X_Possibly Revise Rule(s), but further study  necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
      (check all that apply)
Rule Change
Statutory Change
  Consensual
                                                            Neg
Description of Revision: (1)Currently,  confusion exists concerning
how  the  Land Disposal Restrictions  (40 CFR  Part  268)  applies to
mixtures  of  used oil and hazardous  waste.   The proposed changes
would clarify the situation by requiring compliance with Part 268,
but streamlined options would be explored.(2)Secondary containment
standards currently apply to rail  transporter transfer facilities;
this is essentially impossible to comply with, and  the change would
drop  this requirement;  (3)media  contaminated  with  oil  must be
strictly managed under the current rules; more flexible options can
be developed to allow for more efficient clean ups.
V.  Expected Impact:
  A.  Environmental Benefit:
  B.  Reduction of Burden:
VI.   Currently Funded or Planned?
No Change
Small-Moderate Improve.
Significant Improvement
Need more information
None
Small-Moderate Reduction
Significant Reduction
Need More Information
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate); Proposed Rule 10/95

VIII. Key  Questions/Issues/Activities:  Parties will be  split on
whether the Part  268  requirements  should  apply.   Some will argue
that application of these requirements discourages mixing hazardous
waste into used oil, providing waste minimization and environmental
benefits, while others will argue that Applying these requirements
would  be  costly  without  significant  benefit to  environmental
protection. The other two  provisions should be noncontroversial.

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

I. CFR Reference  (Part, Subpart, Regulatory citation(s) and
   Title: 40 CFR 300.510(e), Capacity Assurance Planning
II4 Purpose of GFR Reference: This rule requires States to assure
that adequate capacity exists to manage hazardous wastes
generated in their States for 20 years before EPA can expend
Superfund Remedial Action Trust funds in the States.  Under a
program that EPA has implemented to help States fulfill this
statutory mandate. States submit Capacity Assurance Plans as the
basis of their assurance.
III. Recommended Review Category  (Check One):

          	 No action
           X  Obsolete
          	 Revise Rule(s) or Statute(s)
          	 Possibly Revise Rule(s), but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
     (check all that apply)
                                  Rule Change
                                   Statutory Change
                                  Consensual Negotiations
     The Agency and the States believe that the CAP program has
reached the en'd of its usefulness.  The regional planning
efforts, the waste minimization programs, and the upgrading of
State databases will continue through other mechanisms.  It is
recommended that 40 CFR 300.510 (e) be eliminated.	
V.  Expected Impact:

  A.  Environmental Benefit:
                              X
   No Change
                                       Small-Moderate Improve.
                                        Significant Improvement
                                        Need more information
  B
Reduction of Burden:
  None
X  Small-Moderate Reduction
                                    (70,000 reporting hours,
                                   substantial State resources,
                                   51 States reporting in most
                                   recent ICR)
VI.   Currently Funded or Planned?
                                  Significant Reduction
                                  Need More Information

                                  _ Yes
                                  No

-------
VII. Planned Milestones  (if appropriate):The Agency has mentioned
to the States on  several occasions the possibility of a new CAP
submittal  four years after the  1994 CAP, or as the national
capacity situation warranted.	

VIII. Key  Questions/Issues/Activities:_

     The Agency received three  sets of Capacity Assurance Plans
from the States,  in 1989. 1992, and 1994.  The Agency's analysis
of each these submittals showed that there was adequate capacity.
allowing States to receive their cleanup funds.	
     The Agency and the States believe that the CAP process has
been successful because it has given the States an unprecendented
opportunity to exchange information with other States and to
explore, and in the case of the Western States, implement
regional hazardous waste planning efforts.  The CAP process has
also been instrumental in prompting States to develop waste
minimization planning, develop hazardous waste planning reports.
and to undertake improvements to their hazardous waste databases,

-------
                 OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

I. Section 3004(1) of RCRA -  Ban on Dust Suppression

II. Purpose of CFR Reference: Intended to prohibit the use of
waste or used oil, contaminated with dioxin or any other
hazardous waste, for use as road treatment or for dust
suppression.

III. Recommended Review Category (Check One):

          — No action
          — Obsolete
          X  Revise Rule(s) or Statute
          — Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
    Rule Change
    Statutory Change
Description of Revision: The original purpose of 3004(1) was to
preclude another Times Beach, but that section arguably precludes
the use of leachate from a hazardous waste landfill for required
dust suppression on that same operating landfill.  A statutory
revision or regulatory interpretation allowing such use would
correct three problems: (1) transporting leachate hundreds of
miles; (2) disposal of low-level hazardous waste leachate, and
(3) buying potable water for dust suppression. The use of
leachate for dust suppression would need to be undertaken
consistent with the RCRA land disposal restrictions which may
necessitate a statutory change or regulatory revision of Part
268.
V.    Environmental Benefit:
      Reduction of Burden:
VI.   Currently Funded or Planned?
   No  Change
   Small-Moderate  Improve.
   Significant  Improvement
   Need more  information
	 None
 X  Small-Moderate  Reduction
	 Significant  Reduction
VII. Planned Milestones (if appropriate) :  NA

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: NA

-------
I.
            OSWER Regulatory Reform Analysis

CERCLA 108  (b)
II. Purpose of CFR Reference: CERCLA 108 (b) requires EPA to,
"promulgate requirements for facilities in addition to those
under Subtitle C of the Solid Waste Disposal Act and other
Federal law that classes of facilities establish and maintain
evidence of financial responsibility consistent with the degree
and duration of risk associated with the production,
transportation, treatment, storage or disposal of hazardous
substances."

III. Recommended Review Category (Check One):

          — No action
          — Obsolete
          X  Revise Rule(s) or Statute
          — Possibly Revise Rules, but further study necessary
IV. Revision Approach:
                                   Rule Change
                                   Statutory Change
Description of Revision: Seeks statutory change removing this
requirement. This provision would require EPA to make several
difficult determinations about the risks of various classes of
facilities.  It also implies additional financial responsibility
requirements for operations which already are under other
environmental planning or technical requirements and so could
effectively duplicate other regulatory requirements.  Because of
the difficulty of the regulatory determinations and the lack of
any state implementation of prospective requirements, the
implementation would be inconsistent with most other statutes
which EPA administers.
V.    Environmental Benefit:
      Reduction of Burden:
VI.   Currently Funded or Planned?
                                   No Change
                                   Sma11-Modelate Improve.
                                   Significant Improvement
                                   Need more information

                                   None
                                   Small-Moderate Reduction
                                   Significant Reduction

                                   Yes
                                   No
VII. Planned Milestones  (if appropriate): NA

VIII. Key Questions/Issues/Activities: Since EPA has never
proposed any regulations under this provision, many are unaware
of it.  However, it remains a responsibility which we have not
implemented.

-------

-------

-------