Bevond RCRA
Waste and Materials Management in the Year 2020
",SO^>S
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
-------
Acknowledgments
and Disclaimer
The RCRA Vision Paper was written by the RCRA
Vision workgroup:
• Dave Pagan, Office of Solid Waste, EPA
• Angle Leith, Office of Solid Waste, EPA
• Peggy Harris, California EPA, Department of
Toxic Substances Control
• Jennifer Kaduck, Georgia Environmental
Protection Division
• John McCarroll, EPA Region 9
• Wayne Naylor, EPA Region 3
• Jeff Scott, EPA Region 9
• Shiela Sevenstar, Cherokee Nation
• Karen Ueno, EPA Region 9
This paper is intended to provoke discussion and
facilitate a public dialogue to explore possible
directions for the mid- to long-term future of the
RCRA program. Even as the ideas presented in
this paper remain open to honest reflection, the
desired dialogue has already begun. Based on
comments received on an earlier draft of the paper,
EPA, with its co-regulators in the states and
tribal governments, has already identified a num-
ber of short-term opportunities to explore in more
detail some of the ideas and issues raised here.This
dialogue will continue as EPA works with all
stakeholders to continue to craft a vision for the
RCRA program of the 21 st century.
This paper could not have been completed without
the assistance of the many individuals who kindly
volunteered their time and expertise. In particular,
the work group wishes to express its appreciation
to those who participated in the September 1999
roundtable meeting in Washington, DC that laid
much of the groundwork for this project:
• Braden Allenby,AT&T
• Earl Beaver, Practical Sustainability
• Fred Hansen, Portland Tri-Met
• Amy Kyle, University of California, Berkeley
• Reid Lifset,Yale University
• Kay Martin, County of Ventura, California
• Emily Matthews, World Resources Institute
• Vernice Miller-Travis, Partnership for Sustainable
Brownfields Development
• Bruce Nordman, Lawrence Berkeley National
Labs
• Lorenz Rhomberg, Gradient Corporation
• Robert Socolow, Princeton University
• Jane Williams, California Communities Against
Toxics
The work group also wishes to thank Bill Ross,
Megan Duffy, and Elizabeth McManus of Ross &
Associates Environmental Consulting, Ltd.,for their
invaluable assistance to this project.
-------
Waste and Materials Management
In the Year 2020
"Looking into the future is a fool's occupation,
but it is the bigger fool who dares not to."
—Voltaire
-------
A Vision of
the :uture
» The year is 2020, and America's wasteful
ways are a thing of the past. New technologies
and a changed economic climate, combined with
enlightened government policies and a pro-
nounced shift in societal and corporate attitudes
have resulted in dramatic decreases in the vol-
umes and toxicity of industrial wastes generated
by the country's industries. Materials that were
once considered wastes suitable only for landfill-
ing are now continually reused and recycled, and
"industrial ecology" has become the mantra of
corporate executives across the nation. Landfills
are becoming obsolete—the small volumes of
wastes that actually need disposal are carefully
managed under an efficient and environmentally
protective system that features a mix of economic
incentives, voluntary measures,and regulatory
controls. Cleanup of most contaminated sites has
been largely completed, and thousands of areas
once known as brownfields have been put back
into productive use.
Generating and managing post-consumer
household wastes has undergone a similar trans-
formation. Concern for environmental sustain-
ability has become ingrained as a societal value,
as individuals have become much more aware of
the environmental consequences of their con-
sumptive choices.These changes in consumer
values have prompted shifts in manufacturing
techniques and choices, so that manufacturing
processes are based on managing resources effi-
ciently, closing the loop of material flows, and
designing for the environment. Products contain
fewer toxic materials and are designed to last
longer. Much less—and less toxic—waste is gen-
erated during manufacturing. Manufacturers
now take responsibility for their products
throughout the product life cycle, and product
stewardship,—involving all members of the
product chain,—is a standard operating proce-
dure. Household recycling, as well as advances in
packaging, product design,and other market-
based measures, have reduced household waste
generation rates to a small fraction of what they
were in the late twentieth century. Virtually all
organic wastes, construction and demolition
wastes, and other materials formerly managed as
part of the municipal solid waste stream are now
diverted to beneficial reuse, dramatically reduc-
ing the amount of landfill space needed. Far
fewer raw materials and fewer toxic chemicals
-------
are used to manufacture consumer products,
and consumers are far better informed of the
potential risks from toxins in the goods and serv-
ices that they use.
By the year 2020, a chemically safe environ-
ment has also become established legally and
culturally as a basic human right. Advancements
in telecommunications and information manage-
ment have created much closer linkages
between government agencies, citizens, and
businesses, and the resulting flows of informa-
tion have enabled a more participatory approach
to making environmental decisions.These devel-
opments have prompted pollution abatement
measures that ensure lower income communi-
ties no longer bear disproportionately high risks
from exposure to industrial chemical emissions.
These gains in waste and materials manage-
ment have not, of course, been confined to the
United States. Heightened concerns over the
health of the global environment, combined with
an increasingly globalized economic system,
have created new institutions and policies to
promote environmental sustainability and
ensure that wastes and materials are managed
wisely worldwide.
What kind of world will we actually inhabit
in 2020? Some predict that it will be better than
the present—where products and materials will
be less toxic and reusable, and where resources
will be used more efficiently so that far less
waste is produced. Others predict we will experi-
ence a bleaker future—where harmful chemicals
will be more prevalent throughout our environ-
ment and may seriously affect groundwater,
drinking water,and food supplies.While we can't
know which of these scenarios—or others—will
exist in 20 years, considering the future now
makes sense if we want a chance to shape it
positively.This paper is intended to stimulate a
dialogue around this important issue.
-------
Introduction
» At the turn of the new century, the
United States has completed two decades of
managing wastes under the federal Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). In these
past 20 years, waste management practices have
improved tremendously. Uncontrolled dumping
of hazardous industrial wastes has decreased
dramatically, and the number of facilities that
handle hazardous wastes has shrunk by half.
Municipal solid waste landfills have been
upgraded across the country,and unlined haz-
ardous waste landfills and lagoons have almost
disappeared from our landscape.Thousands of
contaminated sites across the country are being
cleaned up to restore land to productive uses
and protect ground-water resources. Post-con-
sumer recycling rates have risen dramatically,
and many industries have made impressive gains
in pollution prevention by reducing the amount
and toxicity of wastes they generate.
Despite these impressive achievements, the
RCRA program also receives its share of criticism.
Critics point to the way the RCRA program identi-
fies materials, particularly byproducts of manu-
facturing, as "waste," which they argue has a
chilling effect on recycling, reuse, reclamation,
and energy recovery. Others state that the pro-
gram continues to focus too much on "end of the
pipe"controls,and not enough on earlier inter-
ventions targeted at upstream pollution preven-
tion measures. In contrast, some believe that the
program has not done enough to require safe
management of industrial, municipal, and haz-
ardous wastes.
This paper is not an attempt to document or
analyze the strengths and weaknesses of the
RCRA program as we know it today. Rather, after
two decades of experience with the current sys-
tem, it is time to look forward to the next 20
years, to begin to examine how the program
could and should evolve to meet the challenges
and opportunities of the new century. In 1999,
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),
in concert with state and tribal environmental
agencies,formed a small work group to begin to
explore the RCRA program's longer-term future.
In September 1999, a roundtable meeting of
experts from academia, industry, and public
interest organizations was convened in
Washington, DC to lay the groundwork for this
-------
effort.That meeting provided a number of
important insights into future technological,
societal, environmental, and economic trends,
and how they might affect the future of waste
management in this country.The proceedings of
the roundtable meeting have been summarized
in a separate paper.1
In the Fall of 2001, a draft of "Beyond RCRA,"
also referred to as the RCRA Vision Paper, was
made available for public review and comment.
Public meetings were held in Washington, DC and
in San Francisco, California, and the public was
invited to submit written comments.Overall, those
who commented expressed support for the RCRA
Vision Paper and the value of examining the
future shape of the program without being con-
strained by current legislative and regulatory
approaches. At the same time, some individuals
made specific suggestions for improvement to
the paper or offered their views on the trends and
factors that will (or should) shape the RCRA pro-
gram of the future.These comments have been
valuable to the work group in shaping the final
version of the Vision Paper and will continue to
be important as dialogue on the future of the
program continues.2
The primary focus of the RCRA Vision Paper is
to suggest broad outlines for what the program
of the future might look like, and the forces that
might shape it unconstrained by the current legal
and institutional structure.The work group is not
advocating or recommending any particular poli-
cies or directions, nor is the paper intended to
1 Copies of the "RCRA Vision Roundtable Meeting Summary "can be obtained by contacting the RCRA Docket at
RCRA-Docket@epa.gov or by calling (703) 603-9230; reference RCRA Vision No. F-2001 -BRVP-FFFF.
2 Copies of comments received on the draft RCRA Vision Paper are available from the RCRA Docket (see above).
advance any particular administrative or legisla-
tive action.
The work group has not attempted to quan-
tify how effective any of the measures discussed
in the paper might be, nor to calculate their
political feasibility—these are issues for future
debate.
The scope of this paper is confined to
exploring the future of waste and materials man-
agement in the United States, although the work
group believes that much of the paper's sub-
stance could be relevant to other nations with
relatively affluent, industrial economies. In fact, as
noted elsewhere in this paper, it is unrealistic in
this era of increasing globalization to consider
these issues in purely American terms. Many
countries have already made great strides in
moving forward with some of the ideas outlined
in the RCRA Vision Paper; the United States can
certainly learn from their experiences.The work
group acknowledges, however, that the prob-
lems associated with waste and inefficient use of
resources in the United States do not receive the
same level of attention in those parts of the
world where poverty and resource scarcities
often overwhelm such concerns.
-------
cure directions
» In developing a vision for the future of
RCRA (or whatever its successor program might
be called), it was necessary to make certain pro-
jections and assumptions as to the future "land-
scape"—that is, the economic, technological, and
societal setting—in which the program might
operate in the year 2020.These projections and
assumptions have been organized into six broad
categories: Resources, Health and Risk, Industry,
Information, Globalization, and Society and
Governance.The work group recognizes that
there is uncertainty about these trends and
future directions and that the future will also be
shaped by trends we did not recognize, break-
throughs in science and other future events that
we cannot predict, and other factors that are cur-
rently unknown. However, we do not believe this
uncertainty, which is natural and unavoidable,
should argue for inaction. Rather, since change is
certain, the United States must begin now to
anticipate changes and prepare to respond to
them. In that context, we believe the RCRA pro-
gram of the future will be influenced by the fol-
lowing trends and directions:
Resources
• Pressures on natural resources will continue
to increase. It is relatively safe to assume that
worldwide demand for basic resources (e.g.,
fresh water, minerals,energy sources,fibers,
agricultural land) will continue to increase over
the next 20 years, as the world's population
increases and the global economy continues
to expand. It is also likely that a number of areas
of the world that now have relatively low living
standards will become more prosperous, which
will tend to increase demand for goods and
services and the basic resources that are used
to supply them. It is not assumed that there will
be wide-scale shortages of basic resources or
commodities in the year 2020. However, it is
expected that as worldwide demand for
resources mounts, some specific resources
might become less abundant and/or more diffi-
cult to exploit in the future, which could increase
their economic value. Some of these variations
in supplies and costs of commodities/materials
will likely vary geographically. Increased costs of
commodities would likely result in some
changes in consumptive behavior, but should
also create market pressures to develop substi-
tute materials and/or products.
-------
New technologies will change how
resources are used and wasted.
Technological advancements will also affect
the availability of resources and the way we
use them. It is entirely possible,for instance,
that a dramatic technological breakthrough
could alter—in a positive way—the current
balance between resource supplies and
demands, and the efficiency with which
resources are used. For example, a revolution-
ary new energy source could realize extraordi-
nary environmental, economic, and social
benefits by substantially reducing the use of
fossil fuels; however, it seems unwise, at this
point, to assume that technological advances
will somehow rescue us from having to worry
about resource scarcity in the future. It is more
likely that the effects of technological change
on economic and ecological sustainability over
the next few decades will be more mixed,
though nevertheless profound.
The future could bring a variety of changes in
resource use—not only in terms of how
resources are extracted and used, but also in
terms of what materials are considered
"waste." For example, new technologies could
enable extractive industries (e.g., minerals,
petroleum) to become more efficient, and thus
less wasteful.This change is already being
seen in a number of manufacturing industries,
with the prospect of important future
advances in energy efficiency, efficient use of
materials, and materials substitution.
Technology improvements may open new
doors to reuse, reclamation, and recycling of
materials that are now viewed as wastes, and
could increase the safety of disposal practices
for wastes that remain. Life spans of some
products will likely increase, which could
decrease waste volumes. On the other hand,
technological innovations could create
demands on different types of resources and
create new types of wastes, or could produce
new consumer products that are popular but
resource-intensive.The sheer rate of techno-
logical change could result in many products
that quickly become obsolete, which could
also increase waste generation rates.
There will be a need for more sustainable
use of resources. Most people believe that
the current trend is toward greater demands
on, and consumption of, material resources in
this country and elsewhere. While the econom-
ic value of some of these resources might
increase, the more important (but often hid-
den) price to be paid may well be an environ-
mental one. Extracting, producing,and using
ever-increasing volumes of material
resources—most of which are finite—will
inevitably have important environmental con-
sequences. Some recent studies have project-
ed that the current global economy cannot be
sustained over the long term without severe
environmental consequences.The challenge at
hand, therefore, is to create a system that
enables economic prosperity to co-exist with a
healthy global environment, by using less and
making more efficient use of the material
resources that are consumed.
-------
Health and Risk
• More chemicals will bring new risks. The
number and amount of human-made chemi-
cals that are produced, used, and eventually
disposed of has dramatically increased over
the past several decades.This trend is expect-
ed to continue, and it is likely that by the year
2020, advances in chemistry, biology, and other
fields will have created tens of thousands of
new chemical compounds, many of which will
be derived from genetically engineered organ-
isms. While many of these products may repre-
sent important improvements, undoubtedly,
some of these new substances may have the
potential to cause harm to human health and
ecological systems. Knowledge of risks posed
by new chemicals will likely not keep pace
with their development.
• Health effects of chemicals will be better
understood. It is expected that scientific
advances over the next few decades will yield
a much deeper understanding of how various
chemicals affect humans and other living
organisms. It is likely that we will learn some
chemicals are more harmful than we now
think, while others may be found to be less
harmful than is now understood. We will also
likely better understand the health effects of
chemicals among sub-populations, such as
children and the elderly, people with geneti-
cally predisposed chemical sensitivities, and
people who have had chronic or multiple
exposures to chemicals. In addition, much
more should be understood about cumulative
and synergistic risks to people who are
exposed to multiple chemicals over time
because of where they live or work. As this
information becomes available, communities
with particularly high risk burdens will expect
government and industry to take action to
reduce those risks.
Methods for measuring and managing
chemical risks will improve. Techniques for
estimating the fate and transport of chemicals
in the environment should advance greatly in
the next few decades, with corresponding
advances in technologies used to detect and
analyze (and perhaps characterize the risks of)
chemicals in the environment.There will be
better understanding of life-cycle risks of some,
but not all, chemicals as they are produced,
used/reused and disposed of, and it is likely
that more examples of potentially harmful
chemicals in common consumer goods and
services will be identified (recent examples
would include lead in gasoline, and mercury in
home thermometers). As the public becomes
more aware of risks, it might demand more
comprehensive and pro-active measures from
industry and government to mitigate them,
including potential bans on some chemicals.
Industry
Industry will consume and waste different
types of materials. Over the next 20 to 30
years, a wide range of new products and mate-
rials will be produced by the U.S. economy that
-------
will have important effects on the profile of
manufacturing residuals (e.g., wastes, by-prod-
ucts) generated by industry. For instance, there
are already many examples of products and
industries in which potentially harmful chemi-
cals have been phased out in favor of more
benign materials.This trend, which the work
group expects will continue, will have many
positive environmental effects, including
wastes with lower hazard potential. On the
other hand, production of some new chemi-
cals and products may result in new, relatively
high-risk waste streams. As the industrial base
continues to age, as some existing industries
evolve over time, and as new industries
emerge, the volumes and characteristics of
industrial wastes can also be expected to
change, for better or for worse.The geographic
distribution of waste-generating facilities in
this country can also be expected to change in
response to a number of different factors.
Industry will be more efficient and less
wasteful. Given the assumption that the eco-
nomic value of certain basic materials and
resources may broadly increase over the next
few decades (as discussed above), it seems
safe to assume that market forces will create
greater incentives to use such materials more
efficiently.This trend might be manifested in
products that contain less expensive substi-
tute materials, or that use less material per unit
of production. More valuable materials will
also create new incentives to reuse or recycle
many products, as well as many wastes and
by-products from various manufacturing
processes.Technologies for reuse and recy-
cling of materials should also advance in many
areas, which could lower the rate at which
many such materials are wasted.
As a general matter, therefore, the capabilities
and incentives for U.S. industry to use material
resources more efficiently (i.e., less wastefully)
will likely increase over time. Many materials
now considered wastes will instead be used to
produce new materials and products. As this
happens, it is likely that current distinctions
between wastes and materials (which are in
large part regulatory in nature) will become less
meaningful.This change could warrant govern-
ment policies that more effectively promote
safe management of wastes. Reducing unneces-
sary regulatory constraints on more efficient
use of materials, might also be necessary.
Wastes will still be with us. Wastes will not dis-
appear by the year 2020.Though industry
might become more efficient (i.e. much less
wasteful) in producing goods and services, it
seems logical to assume that some industrial
residuals will continue to have very low poten-
tial for productive reuse or recycling and will
thus need to be managed as wastes.The work
group anticipates, therefore, a continuing need
to ensure that wastes are managed safely under
some system of controls and/or incentives that
is at least analogous to today's hazardous waste
regulatory framework.
Given that wastes (and the need to manage
them safely) will exist in the future, the work
-------
group anticipates that waste treatment and dis-
posal technologies will evolve in important
ways. Such future technologies could include
the use of chemical markers, sensing and moni-
toring devices, and/or advanced telecommuni-
cations systems to allow industry, government,
and other interested people to more closely
track generation, composition, movement, and
ultimate disposition of wastes. Waste treatment
technologies should also improve, as should the
performance of landfills and other disposal
techniques.The concept of disposal as we now
know it (i.e., permanent entombment) might
also change over time if,for example, new tech-
nologies or economic forces emerge that
enable recovery of materials from previously
landfilled wastes.
Information
• The information revolution will continue.
Over the next few decades, we will almost cer-
tainly continue to see dramatic increases in the
amounts of information available to nearly
everyone on the planet, and their ability to
access and share it. At this point, it hardly
seems possible to overestimate the effects that
this will have on virtually every aspect of
today's society and economy.
• Industry, individuals,and the environment
will benefit from the information revolution.
Advances in information and communications
technologies have already begun to transform
the way business is conducted in this country,
and many of these advances should be environ-
mentally beneficial with respect to waste and
materials management. For instance, more effi-
cient information exchange should stimulate
the business of buying and trading recyclable
materials between companies and industry sec-
tors, which could create much more sophisticat-
ed markets for such materials, similar to the
commodity markets of today. Mo re information
should enhance the ability of consumers to
make more environmentally friendly choices for
products and services. As a general matter, the
workgroup believes that in the year 2020,faster
and more efficient information flows will result
in greater awareness and knowledge of envi-
ronmental issues and concerns on the part of
individuals, businesses,and other institutions.
Globalization
• The global economy will be more highly inte-
grated. The trend toward an increasingly global-
ized economic system is also likely to have
important effects on the future of waste and
materials management. Freer movement of
money and materials could result, as many now
predict, in a much more integrated world eco-
nomic system, as well as higher levels of prosperi-
ty and consumption in many countries. Increased
global demand for material goods and services
would create the need for more capacity in man-
ufacturing and extractive industries, which are
likely to become more globally dispersed.The
environmental impacts of these industrial activi-
ties worldwide also, presumably, would increase,
though this could have both positive and nega-
tive environmental consequences for the United
States and other parts of the world.
-------
Environmental protections will need to be
more internationalized. The worldwide envi-
ronmental consequences of freer trade and
international monetary policies have recently
become the focus of a highly visible public
debate, particularly in the United States and
Europe.This debate may go on for many years.
In any case, this issue may be particularly rele-
vant to environmental concerns regarding
waste and materials management, in part
because potentially hazardous materials and
wastes can be easily moved between those
countries that have strict environmental pro-
tections and those that do not.Therefore, if
new approaches to waste and materials man-
agement in the United States are to be suc-
cessful, they will likely need to be harmonized
with, if not integrated into, a more global sys-
tem for instituting and maintaining environ-
mental protections.
Society and Government
• People will have more influence in environ-
mental decisions. Recent years have seen
important changes in the relationships
between individuals, industry, and government
regarding waste management issues, particular-
ly at the local level. Much of this has been driv-
en by increased awareness and environmental
activism on the part of individuals and grass-
roots community groups; as people become
more aware of chemical risks, they naturally
demand further protections. By the year 2020, it
is expected that continued developments in
information and telecommunications technolo-
gies will have created much stronger links
between people and the government institu-
tions that serve them. One result of this trend
may be that individuals will be empowered to
more directly and effectively influence govern-
ment decisions on environmental issues that
are local, regional, or even global in nature.
One result of greater public involvement in
environmental decisions would hopefully be
to focus increased attention and resources on
environmental problems that to date have not
been adequately addressed by government or
industry. One example might be a concerted
effort to upgrade waste management prac-
tices on Native American lands and at remote
settlements in Alaska, where the environmen-
tal realities of waste disposal are still often
harsh. Another example could be actions to
further reduce exposure to harmful chemicals
in communities that bear disproportionate
risks from nearby sources of pollutants.
The size and cultural diversity of the United
States population will continue to increase
and will affect environmental decision-
making. The environmental justice movement
has framed environmental protection, including
patterns of impacts, as a civil rights issue. Others
have framed environmental health more broad-
ly as a human rights issue.These efforts will like-
ly continue, and the right to live in a relatively
clean environment will continue to gain curren-
cy in this country as a basic civil right and a
human right, through both laws and societal
attitudes.This trend will likely influence the
siting and operation of future manufacturing
and waste management facilities.
-------
Goals
» As originally conceived, RCRA was
designed primarily as a system of controls over
the management of wastes in this country, with
two fundamental mandates: protect human
health and the environment, and conserve
resources.To achieve these mandates, EPA and
the states (and to a lesser extent, tribes) were
provided with two primary tools: broad authority
to regulate management of wastes, and broad
authority to enforce RCRA's regulatory and statu-
tory provisions.The statute, however, limited the
scope of the regulatory program to certain types
of wastes and certain types of regulatory mecha-
nisms (e.g., permits, land disposal restrictions).
RCRA was also designed to fit within the existing
framework of media-specific environmental laws
(e.g., Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act).Thus,
Congress by design limited the scope of the pro-
gram and its goals, and provided EPA and the
states with a set of specific tools for implement-
ing the program.
The work group believes that the original
broad mandates of RCRA remain valid, and will
be valid in the year 2020. However, we now have
two decades of experience with federal, state
and tribal regulation of waste management in
this country, and the work group can see that the
"landscape"of waste management will change
dramatically over the next 20 years. It therefore
makes sense at this time to examine how waste
and materials management should evolve in this
country to meet future challenges and opportu-
nities, while building on the elements of the cur-
rent program that have been most successful. In
doing so, it is necessary to redefine the specific
goals that will guide such a future program, and
examine new tools and strategies to achieve
those goals.
The following discussion describes three
goals that could form the foundation of a new
system for waste and materials management in
the year 2020. For each goal, the work group also
suggests some tools and strategies that might be
effective in making such a new system work.
Ultimately, of course, decisions regarding the
specific shape and scope of a future system, and
its legal underpinnings, will likely need to be
made through the legislative process.
-------
Goal #1: Reduce waste and
increase the efficient and
sustainable use of
resources.
As discussed previously, over the next few
decades it is likely that the human population of
the planet will continue to rise, as will the materi-
al aspirations of large numbers of people in many
parts of the world. Many believe that the result-
ing increased demand for resources cannot be
sustained3 without wide-scale degradation of the
global environment, unless those resources are
used with much greater efficiency than they are
today.This goal is centered around two objectives
that call for using resources more efficiently.
The first objective is to reduce the overall
volumes of all wastes that need to be disposed
of in this country, regardless of source or compo-
sition.This includes wastes currently captured by
municipal solid waste programs and hazardous
waste programs, whether produced by individu-
als or industry. Some would argue, in fact, that
"zero waste" should be the goal. Even today,
some companies and local governments have
adopted a zero waste goal, with impressive
results. While zero waste is not realistic in a literal
sense, the work group believes a future waste
reduction program could achieve more than it
would otherwise by setting its aspirations high,
and explicitly focusing on reducing waste as
much as possible, even approaching zero.
The second objective is to reduce the
amounts of materials used to make products or
perform services. Increasing the useful life of
products would contribute to this objective,
as would increasing rates of reuse/recycling of
materials and products. A key aspect of achiev-
ing this objective would be production process-
es that gear their design, use, and reuse
capabilities to minimize raw material inputs,
extend product life spans, and maximize the
ease and frequency of subsequent product dis-
assembly, recycling, and/or transformation for
further productive use. Such continuous utiliza-
tion processes (from "cradle-to-cradle") are criti-
cal both to reducing waste and increasing the
sustainable use of resources. Important tech-
niques are already emerging and being imple-
mented in selected instances, such as designing
for the environment, life cycle planning/design/
assessment, product-stewardship and product
take-back campaigns, and other industrial
ecology initiatives.
Creating a system truly oriented towards
efficient use of resources could also require fun-
damental changes in the waste versus non-waste
regulatory construct embedded in the current
RCRA system so that materials now considered
wastes would be seen, whenever possible, as
commodities with potential uses. One approach
to making such a system work would be to iden-
tify materials as "wastes" only when they are
clearly destined for disposal; until then, all poten-
tially hazardous materials would be subject to
similar management controls/incentives based
on their risk potential rather than on designation
3 The concept of sustainability addresses many issues, such as land use and species protection, which may only indirectly relate
to waste or materials management.This goal would address the issue of sustainability only as it relates to material resources
that potentially may be discarded as wastes.
-------
as a waste—that is "materials management"
rather than "waste management." Reducing dis-
tinctions between wastes and materials could
dramatically improve recycling and reuse rates
and, therefore, make great contributions towards
conservation of resources. A materials manage-
ment system rather than a "wait until it has been
designated as waste" management system
implies a revamping of RCRA Subtitles C and D.
However, any effort to diminish the distinctions
between what are now considered "wastes" (par-
ticularly wastes now identified as hazardous) and
"materials" must not ignore legitimate needs to
protect humans and the environment from risks
posed by hazardous chemicals.
An important concern, for example, would
be ensuring that reused and recycled materials
and products are safe, and do not contain unac-
ceptable amounts of potentially harmful sub-
stances ("toxics along for the ride"). With respect
to materials currently classified as wastes but
destined for reuse or recycling, this has been and
remains one of the most difficult challenges of
the current RCRA program; making it work more
effectively in a future materials management sys-
tem would likely require development of more
sophisticated risk assessment techniques than
are currently available, and/or establishing con-
taminant limits on a product-by-product, or
industry-by-industry, basis.
Tools and Strategies:
• Economic tools may be most effective. In a
market economy, decisions involving which
resources are used, what they are used for, how
efficiently they are used, and ultimately how
they become waste, are primarily driven by
economic forces.Thus,the most effective tools
for achieving this goal are likely to be those
that use economic incentives to promote more
efficient resource use and thus minimize waste
generation. Specific tools could include waste
generation fees or surcharges on consumption
of certain resources, or credits or rebates to
reward resource use efficiencies or purchase of
goods and services that rely on recycled mate-
rials. With many of these tools, revenues could
be generated and invested in specific ways
that might help achieve this goal, such as
developing more efficient design techniques,
better recycling technologies, and/or develop-
ing markets for recycled products or materials.
Achieving this goal might also include imple-
menting measures to reduce current economic
incentives and subsidies that encourage the
use of virgin raw materials; taking steps to cre-
ate economic incentives for recycling and
reuse; and using renewable resources.
Government might also play a role through
government purchasing programs that
increase demand for goods, services, and prod-
ucts that are produced sustainably.
Informational and technical innovations
may also be effective. Informational tools,
such as investments in public education to
enhance awareness of resource use/sustain-
ability issues, could be an important part of
meeting this goal.This trend could involve
labeling of consumer products (e.g., some type
of sustainability rating), media-based public
-------
service campaigns, Internet resources, and
other approaches. In addition, development
and investment in more resource-efficient
technologies could be stimulated by govern-
ment policies; these might be developed
through NASA-style direct investments in
hardware, or other targeted, government-
funded research and development initiatives.
New regulatory strategies might be needed.
Many traditional environmental regulatory
mechanisms (e.g., pollutant emission limits)
would likely be less effective than other tools
in helping to meet this goal, since such con-
trols would only marginally affect the econom-
ics of resource use/reuse. Regulatory
mechanisms that could more directly affect
resource use/reuse would likely be necessary.
Many of these mechanisms are already being
explored as part of current pollution preven-
tion programs. For example, one such
approach might be a system of "extended
product responsibility," under which proper
stewardship of products at the end of their life
cycles would be the responsibility of the man-
ufacturers, retailers, local governments, and/or
other appropriate entities, analogous to the
producer responsibility programs already in
place in several European countries. Other reg-
ulatory approaches could include prohibitions
on disposal or mandated recycling of certain
types of post-consumer and/or industrial
wastes. In addition, quasi-regulatory approach-
es that might be effective could include
greater reliance on corporate environmental
management systems (e.g., ISO 14001), third-
party certification systems, industry-specific
standard practices or methods, local govern-
ment or community-based oversight, perform-
ance standards, or other approaches.
Goal #2: Prevent exposures
to humans and ecosystems
from the use of hazardous
chemicals.
Hazardous chemicals are and will continue
to be features of our everyday lives. While some
of these chemicals have resulted in significant
benefits for society, exposures to materials that
contain hazardous chemicals can present risks to
people and the environment.These risks can
occur at any point in a chemical's life cycle,
regardless of whether it is considered a product,
raw material, or waste. If distinctions between
wastes and materials become less important in
the future (as suggested by Goal #1),the need to
control risks from hazardous chemicals and
materials throughout their life cycles could
become a critical feature of the future program.
A truly integrated waste/materials management
system would therefore need to appropriately
address risks from chemicals as they are pro-
duced, transported, and used in product manu-
facture, as those products are used and reused,
and if and when the products ultimately become
wastes with unwanted harmful properties.The
system would also need to address production
and manufacturing wastes and byproducts.
-------
Hazardous chemicals (such as dioxins) that do
not have commercial uses, but that can be creat-
ed as an unintended byproduct of other manu-
facturing or production processes (or waste
treatment processes), also must be addressed. As
discussed below, a regulatory program similar to
the current RCRA Subtitle C system would almost
certainly be unworkable for the purpose of the
type of integrated waste/materials management
system that would be necessary to address all
these elements in a seamless way.
At the present time, managing risks from
potentially harmful chemicals in the United
States is accomplished through a patchwork of
federal, state and local regulatory controls, volun-
tary industry standards, liability incentives, public
education efforts, and emergency response serv-
ices. In many respects, this current system works
reasonably well.There are, however, inherent
gaps and inconsistencies regarding which chemi-
cals and which types of exposures a re addressed,
under what circumstances, and what types of risk
mitigation measures are employed. We believe
that a more coherent and consistent system for
identifying, reducing, and controlling chemical
risks could benefit human and environmental
health, and could be advantageous to industry in
many ways as well.
An integrated waste/materials management
system would need to address both wastes and
materials, and products that are potentially haz-
ardous but clearly are not wastes. Currently,
potentially hazardous materials and products
that are not wastes are subject to regulation
under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).
An integrated waste/materials management sys-
tem, therefore, could require integrating the func-
tions of what are now two separate and distinct
Congressionally mandated programs. A new,
broader system of incentives, controls, and func-
tions would likely need to assume a new legal
and programmatic identity, rather than being
grafted onto either RCRA or TSCA. Such consoli-
dation (which might not necessarily be limited to
RCRA and TSCA) could also have the advantage of
greater consistency and administrative efficiency
for both industry and government.
Tools and Strategies:
• More information could be a powerful tool.
Informational tools (perhaps combined with
other tools) might be the most effective way
to reduce risks from chemicals in consumer
products and other commonly used materials.
More information on potential risks could
influence the consumptive choices and behav-
iors of individuals, which could create powerful
market incentives to make lower-risk products,
in much the same way that nutritional labels
on food packaging have greatly enhanced our
ability to make informed dietary choices.
Better tracking and communication of material
life cycles could allow governments and con-
sumers to more easily examine the long-term
implications of their choices and account for
true life-cycle costs.
-------
Utilize the potential of economic incentives
and technical innovations. Economic incen-
tives and/or disincentives might be effective in
furthering this goal, by,for example, making it
more costly for manufacturers to use certain
high-risk chemicals, or encouraging develop-
ment and use of less harmful materials.
Liability schemes are another type of tool that
could provide strong incentives for industry to
manage chemicals safely, as could certain
types of insurance instruments. Risks from the
use of hazardous chemicals could also be miti-
gated by technological advances, such as
through development of less hazardous sub-
stitute chemicals or improved chemical han-
dling techniques and equipment, or the use of
alternative, renewable resources. Public/private
partnerships that focus on product design and
technology development and transfer could
contribute to this evolution.
Some regulatory controls would be needed.
Some traditional environmental regulatory
controls would almost certainly be necessary
to ensure safe products and safe handling of
hazardous chemicals by industry. Such con-
trols might address siting of facilities, trans-
portation and storage of hazardous materials,
limits on hazardous chemical content of cer-
tain products, or outright bans on very high-
risk chemicals.The work group believes,
however, that any such system of regulatory
controls would need to be less complex and
more performance-based than the current
hazardous waste regulatory system.
Goal #3: Manage wastes
and clean up chemical
releases in a safe, environ-
mentally sound manner
As discussed under Goals 1 and 2, a fully
realized transition from a RCRA-style waste man-
agement program to a broader waste/materials
management system has the potential for sub-
stantially reducing the volumes and toxicity of
wastes generated by the nation's businesses and
households. Even so, as discussed previously, it is
almost certain that two to three decades from
now some wastes will still be with us. Ideally, of
course, all wastes would be used and reused in a
continuous cycle, in much the same way natural
ecological systems work. Unfortunately, U.S.
industry and consumers are not yet as efficient
as nature at materials use and are unlikely to
become so fully within the next few decades.
Although the types, volumes, and composition of
wastes will change over the next few decades,
we must assume a continued need for waste dis-
posal capacity, as well as some type of waste
management system that ensures adequate pro-
tections for human and ecological health.
In fashioning an effective waste manage-
ment program as part of a broader waste pre-
vention and materials management system,one
of the important issues that would need to be
addressed is how and at what point in a materi-
al's life cycle would the material be considered a
waste. As discussed previously, one approach
-------
could be to classify a material as a waste at the
point where it is clearly destined for disposal,
such as when it is shipped to a facility to be land-
filled. Because, under an integrated materials
management system, all hazardous materials
would be subject to essentially the same con-
trols/incentives, the concept of waste manage-
ment would be reduced (from the current RCRA
program) to controls over the transportation,
landfill design, operation and monitoring, and
any required treatment of wastes prior to dispos-
al in landfills.
Under an integrated waste/materials man-
agement system, the current "cradle-to-grave"
approach to waste management would be sup-
planted by programs under which materials that
are now considered wastes would instead be
presumed to be valuable materials, unless and
until their useful life is expended (however that
may be determined), resulting in a "retirement-
to-grave" rather than "cradle-to-grave"system.The
main features of a future waste management
program, particularly for high-risk wastes, would
likely evolve from the more successful elements
of the current RCRA program.
A major emphasis of the current RCRA pro-
gram involves protection of ground water and
other environmental media from contamination,
by both prevention measures (e.g., unit design
standards and monitoring requirements) and
cleanup of past releases. Preventing future
releases would obviously remain a key objective
of a future waste management program. By the
year 2020, cleanup of existing contamination
problems at RCRA-regulated facilities will hope-
fully largely be complete, though some long-
term remediation work may still be ongoing, and
some mechanism for addressing releases that
may occur in the future will presumably be need-
ed. Opportunities may also remain to further
revitalize idled or under used properties, current-
ly called brownfields,and therefore to increase
conservation of open spaces and greenfields.
This cleanup function of the current RCRA pro-
gram could be retained in a future waste man-
agement system, or could become the
responsibility of one or more other federal or
state cleanup programs.
Tools and Strategies:
• Some regulatory controls would likely be
necessary. Under an integrated waste/materi-
als management system, the materials that
would be considered wastes would primarily
be those that are lowest in value and least
amenable to reuse/recycling. Because these
"wastes" would have negative value to those
who generate them, there would be a clear
incentive to dispose of them as inexpensively
as possible.This at least implies the need for a
system of government-administered controls
to ensure protective management, disposal,
and long-term care, particularly for those
wastes which have the highest relative risk
potential. As stated previously, a future regula-
tory system should be able to effectively
protect public health and prevent mismanage-
ment of wastes, while being less complex and
-------
more performance-based than the current
RCRA Subtitle C system.
Regulatory controls will also likely continue to
be necessary to ensure cleanup. Even if in 20
years remedies are in place at most contami-
nated sites, it is unlikely that these remedies
will have resulted in complete destruction or
removal of all contamination. Even now, many
of the remedies put in place during cleanups
rely at least in part on forms of containment to
reduce opportunities for exposure to contami-
nants. Provisions will be needed to ensure con-
tinued protection from residual contamination
through operation and maintenance of reme-
dial systems and institutional controls.
Contingencies will be needed to ensure dis-
covery and cleanup of releases of hazardous
materials that may occur in the future—
including the inevitable releases that will
occur from present-day landfills and other
waste management facilities, especially when
opportunities exist to redevelop properties
through cleanup.
Other tools could lessen the need for regu-
lation. Economic incentives such as sur-
charges on waste generation or disposal
might be used to encourage waste minimiza-
tion, and resulting revenues could be used to
develop waste treatment and recycling tech-
nologies. Other fiscal policies, such as tax cred-
its for companies that reduce waste
generation, incentives to cleanup and redevel-
op idled or under used contaminated proper-
ties, or a requirement that companies maintain
certain types of insurance, could also be effec-
tive incentives.
Information tools could also work. For exam-
ple, public disclosure (e.g., on the Internet) of
facilities'waste generation and management
practices could create pressure on companies
to manage wastes safely. Advanced informa-
tion and communications tools could also
enhance government oversight capabilities
over waste management activities.
It is also entirely possible that future technolo-
gies could make waste treatment much more
effective and/or less expensive than today. In
the next 20 years, we will also presumably
have much more information on the long-
term performance of landfill containment sys-
tems, which could lead to significant
improvements in waste disposal techniques.
-------
» It is certain that in 2020 waste and mate-
rials management will have changed consider-
ably from today, no doubt in many ways that are
impossible to anticipate at this time.The work
group believes that the current system for waste
management in the United States, and perhaps
other environmental regulatory programs that
were developed in the 1970s, will also need to
change in important ways if we are to meet the
environmental challenges of the coming
decades.
The work group acknowledges the likeli-
hood that some of the trends and directions
articulated in this paper will ultimately be proved
wrong, and that the future of waste and materi-
als management two decades from now will be
influenced by many forces that the work group
has not anticipated.This uncertainty is expected
and does not argue for inaction.The United
States must begin to move towards the future
now—and the work group believes that the fun-
damental goals of a future waste and materials
management system, as described in the preced-
ing section of this paper, will likely remain valid
20 years from now, despite uncertainties.
The work group believes that sustainability
is a critical environmental, economic, and quality
of life issue that this country and others will need
to confront over the next decades. Since the
United States is by far the world's largest con-
sumer of goods and services, it has the responsi-
bility to act with serious purpose to use
resources more efficiently and work toward a
more sustainable national and global economy.
The work group believes that developing new
approaches for conserving resources, reducing
the amount of toxic materials in society and the
toxicity of materials that remain, and managing
wastes properly can and should be an important
part of responding to this challenge of making a
more sustainable world. Promoting resource con-
servation along with economic growth will need
the full range of innovative tools we can collec-
tively devise.
Many of the ideas presented in this paper
suggest the need to create a more comprehen-
sive system for waste and materials manage-
ment, in ways that go well beyond the scope of
the current RCRA program. For example, control-
ling risks of chemicals throughout their life cycles
-------
(e.g., before and after they become wastes)
under a single, unified system would obviously
be a major departure from how the RCRA and
TSCA programs currently operate. It might also
require integrating other programs and authori-
ties, including some that are not currently
administered by EPA.The workgroup recognizes
that creating such a comprehensive or "holistic"
system for wastes and materials would be a com-
plex undertaking.The work group is certain,
though, that these are ideas well worth explor-
ing. It might be that this effort could eventually
become part of an even larger effort to create a
single, unified program for all environmental
media that the federal government, states, and
tribes now implement under various statutes.
Those who commented on the draft RCRA
Vision Paper generally supported the goal of
reducing the amount of waste generated and
changing the ways in which society identifies
materials as wastes; however, comments were
mixed over the idea of an integrated
waste/materials management system. Some
commentary expressed strong concern over the
paper's examination of such a system.These
comments tended to advocate for reform of par-
ticular elements of the current RCRA program
and the ways in which it identifies and regulates
"wastes"destined for reclamation, recycling,or
other reuse, rather than consideration of a new
system, arguing that these reforms alone would
accomplish increased rates of recycling and
reuse and that "materials management" was not
appropriate or needed under RCRA. In contrast,
some of those who provided comments asserted
that the paper does not adequately emphasize
the issues and benefits associated with materials
management approaches.These comments
tended to emphasize the need for initiatives to
reduce the amounts of raw materials (especially
toxic chemicals) used to produce goods and
services, and increase consumer knowledge
about manufacturing processes and product
composition to inform consumptive choices.
Some also discussed the need for life-cycle
analysis, the benefits of increased product
responsibility through product stewardship and
related initiatives, and other non-waste-oriented
techniques that might be used to encourage
more sustainable behaviors.
The work group recognizes that these are
controversial issues. However, the work group
also recognizes that potentially harmful chemi-
cals can enter the environment throughout the
materials life cycle:from the extraction of raw
materials, to the production of goods, to the use
of those goods, to the management of the result-
ing waste. At this point in time, waste disposal
probably represents only a small part of the
source of exposure to harmful chemicals. If we
want to reduce the volume of materials used in
creating a sustainable lifestyle and reduce the
amount of toxic chemicals in the environment,
the work group believes that society needs to
focus on materials management, as well as prop-
er waste disposal. How to create the proper set
of economic incentives, share accurate informa-
tion to inform choices, control and restrict
improper practices, and measure the environ-
mental benefits of such a system will be the
-------
major challenges facing those who are interested
in pursuing the goals outlined in this paper.
The work group encourages readers to join
the dialogue surrounding the primary question
this paper has explored: how can appropriate
policies regarding resource conservation, materi-
als management, and the proper disposal of
wastes (which will hopefully be smaller in vol-
ume and less potentially harmful) emerge to
meet the challenges of the next quarter century?
-------
£
LU
cd
Dnmental Protection Agency
w
fif
x
B-£
-*<
Avenue, NW.
Washingto
siness
EPA530-R
------- |