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.
-------
-------
------- |