8^
Monday
December 13, 1932
Part VI
Protection Agency
Hazardous Waste Management System;
Proposed Rule
-------
55880
Federal Register / Vol. 47, No. 239 / Monday, December 13.1982 / Proposed Rules
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Ch. I
[SWH-FRL 2158-1]
Hazardous Waste Management
System
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Notice of regulatory reform
actions; request for comments.
SUMMARY: In response to Executive
Qrder 12291 and the President's Task
Fdrse on Regulatory Relief, the
Environmental Protection Agency is
reviewing and reassessing the
hazardous waste regulations developed
under the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA). A variety of
activities are underway that will
simplify procedures and reduce
paperwork, modify existing regulations
to make them more workable and cost
effective, and control new wastes and
new processes. The purpose of this
notice is to inform the public of these
activities and invite comments on the
general approaches being taken.
DATES: Comments will be accepted until
February 11,1983.
ADDRESS: Comments may be mailed to
Docket Clerk (Docket: Regulatory
Reform). Office of Solid Waste (WH-
562), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 401M Street, SW.i Washington,
D.C. 20460.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Eileen Claussen, Director, Office of
Management, Information and Analysis,
Office o.f Solid Waste (WH-582), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 401M
Street. S.W.. Washington, D.C., (202)
382-4837.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Notice Outline
I. Background
II. Actions To Simplify Procedures and
Reduce Paperwork
A. Uniform National Manifest
B. Class Permits
III. Regulatory Impact Analyses (RIAs)
A. Analytical Approach
B. Existing Rules and Regulations
C. Regulation on New Wastes and
Processes
IV. Evaluation of Specific Provisions
A. Reuse, Recycling, and Reclamation
B. Small Quantity Generators
V. Request for Comments
VI. Compliance With Executive Order 12291
I. Background
Pursuant to Subtitle C of the Solid
Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act of 1976, as amended (RCRA). 42
U.S.C. 6901 et seq., EPA has, over the
last 2 years, promulgated regulations
that establish standards for generators
and transporters of hazardous waste,
and for owners and operators of
hazardous waste treatment, storage, and
disposal facilities (TSD's). In response to
many comments and suggestions made
by the public, regulated industries, and
State and local governments, EPA has
made a number of specific changes to
these regulations resulting in more cost-
effective requirements. Also, in response
to Executive Order 12291 and the
President's Task Force on Regulatory
Relief, EPA is exploring several basic
and fundamental changes to the RCRA
hazardous waste management program.
This notice describes the status of EPA's
work in this area and sets forth some of
the Agency's future plans.
Throughout this regulatory analysis
process, EPA will be evaluating the
application of a degree-of-hazard
approach where waste management
standards are based upon the inherent
degree-of-hazard of the waste, the
management technique being used to
handle the waste, and the
environmental setting. The Agency is
taking this opportunity to notify the
public of these efforts and to ask for
comment on both the general
approaches it is considering, and on the
specific analytical and regulatory
activities planned or underway.
Section II of this Notice describes
activities that will reduce and simplify
paperwork and procedural
requirements. This will be accomplished
through a uniform national hazardous
waste manifest and class permits for
TSD's.
Section III describes the development
of regulatory impact analyses (RIAs) for
a number of existing standards,
including those for hazardous waste
storage, incineration, land disposal,
seismic areas, floodplains and financial
responsibility. Section III also describes
work that EPA has initiated that will
result in new regulations that will bring
under RCRA control certain wastes and
practices that are not currently covered
by the existing regulatory structure.
These include waste oil, boilers burning
hazardous wastes, and additional
organic chemical wastes,
Section IV describes the Agency's
plans for re-examining two specific
provisions in the regulations: the small
quantity generator exclusion and the
requirements for the reuse, recycling,
and reclamation of hazardous waste.
II. Actions to Simplify Procedures and
Reduce Paperwork
A. Uniform National Manifest
On March 4,1982, in a joint
rulemaking with the Department of
Transportation (DOT), EPA proposed a .
regulation that would require the use of
a nationally uniform manifest form for
transportation of hazardous waste. The
goal of the uniform manifest is to
standardize and simplify State and
Federal regulations governing the
transportation of hazardous waste.
Currently, industries operating in certain
States must prepare multiple State
manifest forms and a DOT shipping
paper for each hazardous waste
shipment. The uniform national manifest
will incorporate all Federal and State
information requirements for the
transportation of hazardous waste on a
single form. Under the proposed
amendments, transporters would no
longer be required to carry multiple
forms with similar information,
Standardization of information should
also simplify and facilitate inspection
and enforcement actions.
Two comment periods were provided
on this proposed rule, the second ending
on July 20,1982. Therefore, the Agency
is not now seeking additional comments
on this proposal. EPA intends to issue a
final rule on the uniform national
manifest in early 1983.
B. Development of Class Permits
EPA is developing a new set of
procedures that would allow the Agency
to issue standardized permits to entire
classes of hazardous waste management
facilities that share common design,
operating, and management features.
The class permit process would be used
primarily for facilities whose operating
requirements are not substantially
affected by location or other site-
specific features. These facilities could
include those treating or storing
hazardous waste in tanks or containers.
The class permit approach would
work as follows: EPA would identify a
class of facilities that should be subject
to similar design, operating, and
management requirements. After notice
and opportunity for public hearing, EPA
would promulgate regulations describing
application procedures and permit
conditions applicable to this class of
facilities. The Agency would (hen be
able to issue a permit containing the
standard terms and conditions to the
owner or operator of any facility in the
identified class.
Since most of the terms and
conditions of a class permit would be
established by a national regulation,
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 47, No. 239 / Monday,, December 13. 1982 f Proposed Rules
there should be a limited number and
type of issues raised at individual permit
proceedings. Matters at issue in the
permit processing should be limited to
(1) Whether the facility is a member of
the identified class and (2) Whether the
facility meets the requirements and
conditions promulgated for that class. If
there are any terms and conditions of a
class permit that need to be developed
on a site-specific basis, the permit.
proceedings would also have to consider
these. However, by narrowing the focus
of these proceedings, the issuance of
class permits should be expedited.
The use of class permits should allow
EPA t^ decelerate the issuance of
permits to storage and treatment
facilities. It should also reduce the time
and paperwork necessary to prepare
permit applications and should thereby
result in cost savings to both the Agency
and permit applicants. EPA intends to
propose rulemaking for the first group of
class permits in 1983.
III. Regulatory Impact Analyses (RIAs)
A. Analytical Approach
As required by Executive Order 12291,
EPA is currently undertaking regulatory
impact analyses (RIAs) on planned and
existing hazardous waste regulations.
Each RIA will include: developing a data
base to profile existing management
practices, costs, and potential health
and environmental effects; defining the
problem to be addressed by the
regulation; identifying and selecting
alternatives for dealing with the
problem; assessing those alternatives;
and analyzing costs, risks, benefits, and
impacts.
In order to carry out the RIA's the
Agency has developed and is now
refining an analytical model which is
designed to assess and compare the
costs and risks of different waste
management strategies. The model will
assist EPA in continuing to revise its
existing regulations and develop new
regulations on a degree-of-hazard basis.
The model will be used as a screening
tool to identify those combinations of
wastes, environmental settings and
technologies that either pose a greater or
lesser risk than the majority of
combinations.
The degree-of-hazard model has a
number of components. The first
component is the inherent hazard of the
wastes themselves. Eighty-three waste
streams are scored on the basis of the
inherent hazard of the constituents
typically found in them. It should be
pointed out that these waste stream
scores are based in part on best
scientific judgment and are useful
primarily for comparative analytical
purposes.
The environmental settings in which
the hazardous constituents could be
released are a second critical part of the
model. Thirteen environmental settings
are defined. The mechanisms by which
the constituents move through or are.
affected by the environment, such as
hydrolysis, biodegradation, and
adsorption, are also accounted for in the
model. This allows the waste streams to
be assessed in terms of the likelihood of
human exposure to their hazardous
constituents and the severity of risk if
such exposure occurs.
The third component of the model is
the technologies commonly used to
transport, treat, and dispose of
hazardous wastes. Three types of :
transportation, 21 treatment
technologies (e.g., filters presses,
chemical precipitation, incineration at
99.99% destruction and removal
efficiency), there types of landfills and
surface impoundments (double-lined,
single-lined, and unlined), and deep well
injection are covered. Costs and release
rates are determined for each of these
technologies. Current availability of the
technologies, their capacity and their
proximity to sources of wastes are also
considered.
The model could be used, for example,
to identify those wastes that pose the
greatest hazard when disposed of in
landfills (the technologies) in areas with
high potential for ground-water and
surface-water contamination (the
environmental setting). It could also be
used to estimate the risk and costs of
treating or disposing of these wastes
through different technologies or in
different environmental settings. If less
risky and less costly technology and
environmental combinations could be
identified, a restriction on disposing of
these wastes in landfills could be
considered.
EPA recognizes that there are
limitations in the methodology used in
the degree-of-hazard model. We intend
to use the model to guide more detailed
analysis and not as the sole analytic
effort supporting regulatory changes.
While we recognize the limitations of
the model, we feel that it will be useful
in evaluating both regulations and new
regulatory efforts.
The degree-of-hazard model has now
been designed and completed, and a
draft report describing the model is
undergoing review "by the Agency's
Science Advisory Board. Copies of the
draft report are available from the
RCRA Hotline, (800) 424-9346 (toll free)
or (202) 382-3000. The model is being
refined, and the data to be entered into
it are now undergoing extensive review.
Initial results from the model are •
expected in the near future.
B. Existing Rules and Regulations
Regulatory impact analyses are being
conducted for the following existing
standards: land disposal, storage in
tanks and containers, incineration,
seismic areas and floodplains, and
financial responsibility. Improving the •
Agency's existing data base through
data collection is one of the most
important tasks in the RCRA regulatory
impact analysis process. The results of
these data collection efforts will be
analyzed in considerable detail, and will
assist the Agency both in developing a
more sophisticated understanding of the
nature and scope of the hazardous
waste problem, and in attempting to
develop more cost-effective rules. To
better assess existing practices, health
and environmental effects, and costs for
the analysis of existing rules, the
Agency is conducting 238 site visits and
mailing questionnaires to over 13,000
handlers of hazardous wastes.
The following discussions summarize .
the Agency's RIA efforts for existing
regulations.
1. Land Disposal Standards. On July
26,1982, EPA issued technical standards
for landfills, surface impoundments,
waste piles, and land treatment
facilities. In the preamble to that rule,
the Agency stated that it would continue
to explore means of tailoring these .
standards to better suit specific waste
management situations. To help identify
opportunities for tailoring these
standards, EPA is performing a study to
assess the risks associated with
alternative stringency levels for various
classes of land disposal facilities. This
analysis would differentiate facilities by
type (landfill, surface impoundment), the
hazards posed by the waste stream, .
location and size. Evaluating- the costs
and risks of various requirements in this
framework will help the Agency identify
changes that could yield a more cost
effective regulation of land disposal
facilities. The Agency has already
identified several areas where
refinement of its current standards
would reduce regulatory burdens while
assuring adequate protection of human
health and the environment.
One area of refinement is the tailoring
of standards for situations which pose
either a lesser or greater risk of ground-
water contamination. The Agency has
identified two types of facilities,
monofills and neutralization surface
-------
S58S2 Federal Register / Vol. 47, No. 239 / Monday, Decemberl3,1^2/^posed
V***^W** »J _ ------- --------- i . i I. -i 1. - - . imi-rT"Tn«-r-i — -i " ' nn -TyirrTTiT TJI'i^^'-l**'CTg;'''*^'lil**M^-iulj'iH'**IBla™*^"^^^
m^ssesmesy^r,
^^^
impoundments,1 from which the
potential for migration of significant
concentrations of hazardous
constituents to ground water appears to
be extremely low. The Agency believes
that some of the existing land disposal
standards may not be necessary for
these fatalities. The Agency expects to
propose special standards for monofills
and neutralization surface
impoundments in 1983.
Study is also underway to identify
specific wastes which, based on their
potential hazard, should not be disposed
of in landfills, or should only be
disposed in landfills under specific
conditions. The Agency anticipates
publishing an advance notice of
proposed rulemaklng on this subject in
1983 identifying wastes which could be
subject to such restrictions. Potential
candidates are wastes that are highly
persistent, mobile, or toxic in the
environment
Tailoring of standards based on
locatlonal characteristics is also being
studied. As part of this effort, the
Agency will determine the risks of
locating land disposal facilities in
particular hydrogeologic settings. This
analysis should help determine whether
the disposal of certain wastes in certain
hydrogeological settings should be
restricted, or whether design and
operating standards should be relaxed
for facilities in certain favorable
locations.
The Agency is also evaluating the
relative performance of clay vs.
synthetic liners at land disposal
fatalities. The goal hers is to identify
whether there are specific situations in
which the use of different types of liners
will provide protection of human health
and the environment in the most cost-
effective manner.
2. Storage in Tanks and Containers.
On January 12,1981, EPA published
regulations governing the storage of
hazardous waste in tanks and
containers. The tank storage1
requirements contain general operating
standards and requirements for design
of tanks, waste analysis, inspections, .
closure, and handling of reactive,
Ignitable, and incompatible wastes. The
container requirements include general
operating procedures and specific
standards for containment,
compatibility, and closure as well as a
general performance standard for the
condition of containers.
The first task in the RIA for storage in
tanks and containers, profiling the
existing universe, has largely been •
'ThciS facilities are described in greater detail in
the preamble to tho July 28 land disposal standards.
Sec 47 FR 32280 (July 28.1982).
completed. The Agency has found that
the majority of these facilities are
operated by generators and are small in
size.
The Agency is also evaluating the
risks to human health and the
environment from facilities of various
configurations and waste types. Through
the study of damage cases the Agency
has discovered that the majority of spills
are caused by ancillary equipment
(pipes, valves, pumps, etc.) arid operator
error.
In evaluating the impact of waste
type, the Agency has found that
handling hazards (e.g., fires and
explosions) can be distinguished from
contamination hazards. For example,
corrosive, ignitable, and reactive wastes
present the greatest risks in handling,
while the major risk from toxic wastes is
the potential for ground-water
contamination if a spill occurs. These
findings will be used in determining the
feasibility of tailoring standards on the
basis of waste type. Revised regulations
for storage and treatment facilities will
be proposed in 1983, probably in the
form of class permit, standards for
certain storage and treatment
operations.
3. Incineration Standards. The
incineration standards j>romulga ted on
January 23,1981 and June 24,1982
require all incinerators to meet a
performance standard of 99.99%
destruction and removal efficiency
(DRE) for designated hazardous
constituents, and establish performance
limits for HC1 and particulates.
Incineration RIA efforts to date have
focused on profiling the universe of
existing facilities and verifying the
achievability and cost of the current
DRE standard for existing facilities. The
findings of the first task indicate that
most incineration facilities are small.
Initial dispersion modeling suggests that
the potential for adverse environmental
impact from these small facilities is less
than that for larger facilities, which
represent most of the existing
incinerator capacity. Test burns and
case studies are now being conducted as
part of the second task.
The Agency is also evaluating the '
costs and risks associated with alternate
DRE levels, using dispersion models and
health effects data for substances
emitted from stacks. The Agency will
use these findings to determine whether
the current standards should be further
tailored to reduce regulatory burdens
while assuring adequate protection to
human health and die environment.
EPA proposed a variance procedure
as a part of the January 23,1981 rule (45
FR 7634) because the DRE performance
standard does not account for site-
specific factors such as waste
characteristics, incinerator design, and
location. As a result, the DRE
performance standard may be either
more or less stringent than necessary for
protecting human health and the
environment. In its June 24,1982 notice (
47 FR 27518), EPA stated that it
expected its RIA to provide valuable
information on the extent to which its
current performance standard is over
protective or under protective. EPA
intends to use this information to tailor
the standards or"to develop a variance
procedure to provide appropriate levels
of performance for different classes of
facilities.
4. Seismic Areas and Floodplains. On
January 12,1981, EPA published
regulations that addressed location of
hazardous wastes in 100-year.
floodplains snd in holocene fault seismic
areas. The seismic regulation specifies
that new hazardous waste facilities
must not be located within 200 feet of
designated faults. Under the floodplain
standard, new and existing facilities
located in a 100-year floodplain must be
.designed, constructed and operated to
prevent washout by a 100-year flood.
As a result of its RIA efforts, the
Agency has found that less than 3
percent of all hazardous waste facilities
are located with 200 feet of holocene
fault; however, a significant percentage
of facilities are located within a 100-year
floodplain. Through the RIA for
floodplains, the Agency will determine
whether it is feasible to further tailor the
floodplain standard to account for
different waste types, facility sizes, and
waste management configurations.
As part of the RIA for seismic areas,
the Agency is evaluating whether
ground shaking and ground failure
events, which are not currently
addressed by the seismic area standard,
could damage hazardous waste
management facilities, and if so, what
are the associated risks to human health
and the environment. To this end, the
Agency is currently conducting analyses
of damage probabilities, to be followed
by a determination of exposure
pathways and risks. The Agency will
consider amending the seismic area
standard to cover these events if the
findings of this study indicate such
control is necessary.
5. Financial Responsibility
Regulations. The current regulations
require owners and operators of
hazardous waste management facilities
to submit evidence of financial
responsibility for the proper closure and
post-closure care of the facility. They
also require owners or operators to
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 47, No'. 233 /"Monday! Ifecember 13, 1982 / ProBPSed Rules 55883
submit evidence of liability coverage for
sudden accidental occurrences. Owners
or operators may choose from a variety
of methods to demonstrate compliance
with these requirements.
The Agency is evaluating several
changes to the financial responsibility
regulations to make them more flexible.
The options under investigation include:
• Average vs. Maximum Closure Cost
Estimate: Under the present
regulations, estimated closure costs
(for which financial responsibility
must be shown) must be based on
the cost of closure at the "maximum
extent of active operations" at the
facility. Study is underway to .
determine the risks and benefits of
allowing assurances based on
"average extent of active
operations."
• Financial Test for Small Owners and
Operators: The current regulations
include a financial test which is
useable only by large companies.
Firms which pass the financial test
are not required to obtain one of the
other financial instruments (e.g.,
trust funds, surety loans, letters of
credit) in order to demonstrate
financial responsibility. The Agency
is examining the feasibility of
devising an effective financial test
for smaller companies.
" Computer Financial Test Data
Systems: In an effort to reduce the
amount of information owners or
operators must submit to use the
financial test, the Agency is
considering use of a computerized
system that draws on data
submitted by the owner or operator
to the Securities and Exchange
Commission. Use of such a system
could provide the Agency with more
current information and enable it to
monitor compliance with the
financial regulations more
efficiently.
» De Minimis Exemption from Closure
Financial Assurance: Some facilities
may have such low closure cost
estimates and may pose such a low
risk if closure is delayed that the
costs for these facilities of financial
assurances for closure may be
disproportionately high. The
Agency is undertaking a study
which will analyze the range of cost
estimates and evaluate whether a
category of facilities with cost
estimates below a cut-off point can
be identified as posing a de minimis
risk.
• Risk Retention Groups: Some trade
associations and other groups form
insurance pools to cover risks. The
Agency is examining the obstacles
to and advantages and
disadvantages of formation of such
pools by owners and operators to
cover third'party and other
liabilities. Such risk retention pools
may jbnwQlve^ojnsiderable savings,
particularly for smaller operators.
In addition to these possible areas of
reform of existing financial
responsibility regulations, the Agency is
also considering the need, to establish
financial instalments to a.ssure funds for
any corrective action required to be
taken to comply with the ground-water
protection-standards promulgated on
July 26,1982, as part of the land disposal
standards. The Agency has previously
requested comments on this issue. (47
FR 32274, July 26,1982.)
C. Regulation of New Wastes and
Processes '
In addition to its review of existing
hazardous waste regulations, the
Agency is also conducting RIA's in a
number of areas which may lead to the
regulation of several new wastes and
processes not currently covered by the
hazardous waste standards. These new
areas include the burning of hazardous
waste in boilers, control of waste oil.
and listing and control of additional
organic chemical and other wastes.
As with the RIA's for the existing
rules, one of the major tasks associated
with the RIA's for new wastes and
processes will be the collection of data
to aid the Agency in defining existing
practices and identifying areas where
regulation is appropriate. This data
collection effort will include site visits
and questionnaires. -
The Agency anticipates that, as a
result of the RIA's for these new areas,
additional regulatory controls will be
proposed. Where possible, these
controls will be tailored to specific
waste management situations. The
major focuses of the RIA's for new
wastes and processes are discussed
below.
1. Waste Oil. Nationwide, waste oil is
generated by thousands of sources, and
is collected, processed, and sold or used
by at least 1000 firms, many of which
are small businesses. Under the Used
Oil Recycling Act, EPA is required to
promulgate regulations for the control of
waste oil. EPA is conducting a
regulatory impact analysis in order to
investigate the risks posed by waste oil
management, evaluate the need for
waste oil regulations, and consider
various regulatory approaches tailored
to deal with specific problems. The
Agency expects to complete this
analysis by the end of 1983.
Specifically, EPA is evaluating the
following waste oil management
methods:
• Burning for fuel, particularly in small
boilers such as those found in
apartment and office buildings, EPA
is sponsoring a series of test burns
in these types of boilers to
charcterize the resulting emissions
and their impact on air quality
when waste oil is used as fuel.
« Use as a dust suppressant (e.g., road
oiling). Some adulterants found in
waste oil are ignitable, and may
pose a fire hazard during road
oiling; others are volatile and toxic
and may present health risks. As
part of the RIA effort, the Agency is
gathering additional information on
road oiling practices, existing State
laws and regulations, and past
damage incidents.
* Improper storage, transportation, and
disposal. EPA is performing risk
analyses on the environmental
problem associated with improper.
handling of waste oil and the
potential for ground-water and
surface-water contamination.
2. Boilers.' Although hazardous waste
is exempt from RCRA regulation when
being legitimately recycled for energy
recovery purposes, the burning of some
hazardous wastes in certain boilers
could result in unacceptable levels of
hazardous emissions.
The RIA for boilers will define the
waste types (or constituents) and boiler
types (by size, design, etc.) that require
regulatory control, and the most
appropriate type of control. As part of
the RIA process, the Agency is testing a
variety of boiler and waste
combinations to determine the actual
performance (degree of waste
destruction) of boilers burning
hazardous waste. The Agency expects
to find significant variation based on
differences in temperature, residence
time, and turbulence.
After the testing of stack emissions is
completed, dispersion models and
health effects data will be used to define
the relative risks posed by various
boilers burning hazardous wastes. This
will lead to comparison of the costs and
benefits of possible alternative tailored
regulatory approaches. The Agency
expects to complete the RIA for boilers
by early 1984.
3. Listing and Control of Organic
Chemical and Other Wastes. EPA is
conducting a program of detailed
industry analyses aimed at identifying
hazardous wastes that are currently not
regulated. The first industries to be
analyzed are primarily components of
-------
55884
Federal Register / Vol. 47, No, 239 / Monday. Dacptpher V.), 1982 / Proposed Rules
JU!ff"?rr*'r??Pl!i?'"" !-••"••» ••'•• * •t-'^vmnaPinM'f • •iiiinii|l*li»l • r . iriiiii T i r in" n ''"UN " * in miniiiiniHr nn 'rr MM iirnnpii-rr ' in — "— I-T — ni < — nrmm en mr-mpTr F- 'irtr TPI'H -rnirrnrrTii — mm riium-
the organic chemicals industry, the
source of roughly 60 percent of the
Nation's hazardous waste. Specific
industry components under study are:
pesticide production; dyes and pigments
production; chlorinated organics
production; other organic chemicals
production; and, outside the organic
chemicals industry, lead acid battery
production.
The industry studies effort consists of
a waste characterization component and
a waste management assessment
component. Waste characterization
involves the sampling and analysis of
waste streams from particular industries
or industry segments to determine
whether additional wastes should be
Ksted as hazardous was'es. Currently,
only a portion of organic chemical
industry wastes that may be hazardous
are listed. The second component—
waste management—is directed toward
compiling and analyzing waste
management alternatives for wastes
studied under the waste
characterization effort This work will
include anMysis of the risks and
benefits of particular control strategies
for the wastes in question. This wiil
allow the Agency to determine how
these new wastes should be controlled.
The Agency also hopes to identify
treatment options that will reduce the
hazards posed by management of these
wastes.
The Agency has completed waste
characterization for chlorinated organics
and expects to complete pesticide
characterization early in 1983.
Characterization is underway on a
number of other segments, and will
continue, at least through 1984. The
waste management assessment for
chlorinated organics will be completed
during 1983.
4, Volatile Emissions From Hazardous
Waste Disposal Units. The Agency has
not yet promulgated RCRA standards
for volatile air emissions from
hazardous waste disposal facilities.
However, in the preamble to the July 26,
1982 land disposal standards, the
Agency stated that it is exploring the
need for volatile emissions standards.
As part of this effort the Agency will be
reviewing past damage incidents,
conducting field sampling, and using
dispersion modeling techniques to
determine the circumstances in which
volatile emissions from hazardous waste
disposal units pose a threat to human
' health or the environment. The results of
these studies wiil be used in determining
the need for additional regulaic~y acsion
to control air emissions from such
facilities.
IV. Evaluation of Specific Provisions
A. Reuse, Recycling, and Reclamation
The present regulations divide
"recycled hazardous wastes" into two
classes. Those which are listed in the
regulations (40 CFR 261.31 and 261.32) or
are sludges are regulated for storage and
transportation only. Those which are
neither sludges nor listed wastes are
currently excluded from regulation.
The definition of solid waste and the
management standards for recycled
hazardous waste are being revised to
overcome some of the gaps and
ambiguities in the existing regulations.
In general, the revised solid waste
definition will include those materials
(and waste management activities)
which fall within EPA's authority under
RCRA. The new solid waste definition
will also encompass, and thus regulate,
recycling activities where the materials
will be:
• Used in a manner constituting
disposal;
• Used as a component of, or as fuel;
• Reclaimed off-site;
• Accumulated in large quantities
without sufficient amounts being
recycled; or
• Accumulated in speculation of future
recycling.
Waste management standards will be
proposed for some recycled hazardous
wastes. Other recycling activities will be
excluded; however, these may be
subject to future regulatory action.
Specific management standards will be
developed for particular recycling
activities, including those involving use
constituting disposal. EPA plans to issue
a proposed rule revising the definition of
solid waste as it pertains to recycling by
early 1983. •
B. Small Quantity Generators
In May 1980, EPA promulgated a
regulation exempting small quantity
generators (generating less than 1000
kilograms per month) of hazardous
waste from certain parts of the RCRA
program. At that time, the Agency
expressed its intention to examine this
issue in greater detail. The Agency is
now initiating a study which will lead to
the identification of alternative schemes
for regulating small generators' wastes.
The Agency will begin by studying
selected industries which are
representative of small quantity
generators, evaluating the type and
quantity of waste produced and number
of generators. The Agency will then
profile selected industries to identify
current waste management practices
(including treatment and use, re-use,
recycling, and recovery practices), and
waste management costs. These profiles
will also indicate the extent to which
small quantity generators are already
complying with full RCRA controls. The
next step will be to assess the hazards
posed by management of waste
generated by small quantity generators
within certain industries, focusing on
what types of risks are associated with
which wastes.
The Agency will also examine the
experiences of States that have reduced
their exemption level for small
generators below the 1000 kilograms per
month level now in force in the Federal
RCRA program. Specifically, the Agency
will look at the administrative feasibility
of monitoring and enforcing a lower
exemption level and whether the small
generator program in these Sta-tes
reduces the effectiveness of efforts to
control larger generators.
The information collected through
these tasks will be used to identify a
range of regulatory options for
controlling small generators' wastes and
assessing the risks and benefits of these
options.
V. Request for Comments
Except where indicated, EPA invites
comments on all aspects of the activities
described in this Notice.
VI. Compliance with Executive Order
12291
This notice was submitted to the
Office of Management and Budget for
review as required by Executive Order
12291.
Dated: December 7,1982.
John W. Hernandez Jr.,
Acting Administrator.
, [PR Doc. 82-33845 Filed 12-10-82; 8*5 am] • ,
BILLING CODE S560-50-M
------- |