Regional Public Meetings

on the

Resource Conservation and  Recovery Act of 1976


February 15 and 16, 1977
Kansas City, Missouri
EPA Region VII

-------
REGIONAL  PUBLIC MEETINGS ON RCRA
Meeting
Date
Feb 15,16

Feb 17,18
Feb 23


Feb 23,24


Feb 25

Feb 26

Feb 28,
March 1
March 3

March 4


Mar 8,9


Mar 10,11


Mar 17,18

Mar 21,22


Meeting
Place
Kansas City,
Missouri
Richmond,
New York,
City

Atlanta,
Georgia

Worcester,
Massachusetts
Concord,
New Hampshire
Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania
Denver,
Colorado
Salt Lake City,
Utah

Dallas, Texas


San Francisco,
California

Seattle,
Washington
Chicago,
Illinois


Facility
Hilton Inn Plaza
45th & Main
Colony House
American City
Squire,
52nd & 7th Av
Sheraton-Biltmore
Hotel, 817 W.
Peachtree N.E.
Sheraton-
Lincoln Inn
Ramada Inn

William Penn
Hotel
Main Library
1357 Broadway
Hilton Hotel
150 W. South
Fifth Street
First Int'l Bldg
(29th Floor)
1201 Elm St
Holiday Inn
Union Square
480 Sutter
Seattle Center

O'Hare Holiday
Inn (Kennedy
Expressway)

Time
Evening Feb 15,
morning Feb 16
Evening Feb 17,
Day, 9 am-3 pm
evening 4-7 pm

Evening Feb 23,
8:30 am Feb 24

1 pm

1 pm

Evening Feb 28,
morning Mar 1
8:30 am-
12:30 noon
8:30 am-
12:30 noon

Evening Mar 8,
morning Mar 9

Evening Mar 10,
8 am Mar 11,

Evening Mar 17,
All day Mar 18
Evening Mar 21,
all day Mar 22

Sponsoring
EPA Office
Region VII
(Kansas City)
Region III
Region II
(New York City)

Region IV
(Atlanta)

Region I
(Boston)
Region I
(Boston)
Region HI
(Philadelphia)
Region VIII
(Denver)
Region VIII
(Denver)

Region VI
(Dallas)

Region IX
(San Francisco)

Region X
(Seattle)
Region V
(Chicago)


-------
                        TRANSCRIPT


                  REGIONAL PUBLIC MEETINGS ON THE

          RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT of 1976

            February 15 and 16, 1977, Kansas City, Mo.
         These meetings were sponsored by EPA Region VII,
and the proceedings (SW-llp) are reproduced entirely as transcribed
      by the official  reporter, with handwritten corrections
                   by the Office of Solid Waste
               U.S.  ENVIRONMENTAL  PROTECTION  AGENCY

                               1977

-------
An environmental protection publication (SW-llp) in the solid waste management series.

-------
   1


   2


   3


   4


   5


   6


   7


   8


   9


  10


  11


  12


  13

  14


  15


  16

  17


 18


 19


 20


 21


 22


 23


 24


25
PUBLIC DISCUSSION SESSION


          ON THE

 RESOURCE CONSERVATION

            &

     RECOVERY ACT


  *Public Law 94-580*
    Evening Session

  February 15, 1977
   Hilton Plaza  Inn
 45th & Main  Street
Kansas City,  Missouri

-------
 1


 2


 3


 4


 5


 6


 7


 8


 9


 10


 11
,2  PUBLIC QUESTIONERS:
13


u


15


16


17





19


20


21


22


23


24


25
PANEL MEMBERS:                                             PAGE

    Morri s G. Tucker	     3

    Charles V. Wright	     5

    Donald A. Townley	    10

    H. Lanier Hickman	    13

    Walter W. Kovalick	    28

    H. Lanier Hickman	    51

    Stephen A. Lingle	    66

    H. Lanier Hickman	    85
    Esther Woodward	    23
          -TJ..,., „,
          ^J*V/Mr
    Dee Jotrieir-	    25

    J. C. Wright	    38

    Bill  Shteitte	    44

    Joe Elsen	    46

    Woodrow 6«HH«	    62
             i>  jj,
    Woodrow el*2e	    78

    J. C. Wright	    79

    Elsie Rose	    83

    Dee -Joiner	    96

    Esther Woodward	    99

    Woodrow Curse.	    102

    Be«i  Rochester	    106

-------
                                                                  2A





 1                              I N D JE X  (cont'd.)




 2    PUBLIC QUESTIONERS:                                          PAGE




 3        J. C. Wright	   110




 4        Debbie Smith	   Ill




 5        Gene Fairchild	   117




 6        Elsie Rose	   122
 7       Mrs.  Edward Shialeyv. <.	   128




         Woo drow-&&?*«•	   133




 9




 10




 11





 12




 13




 14





 15




 16




 17




 18




 19




 20




 21




 22




 23




 24




25

-------

-------
 1                         PROCEEDINGS,



 2                         MR. TUCKER:   I would like to call this



 3          public discussion meeting on Resource Conservation



 4          and Recovery Act to order.



 5                         My name is Morris Tucker.  I head up



 6          the Waste Management Section for EPA Region VII.



 7                         I would first like to introduce the



 8          speakers on our program tonight.  To my far left is



 '          Lannie Hickman.  He is Director of our Management and



1°          Information Staff, Office Solid Waste, Washington,



'1          D.C.    Next to him is Walt Kovalick who is Chief of our

                                faWlr&Hj
12          Guidelines Branch, Hood of thio Waste Division,



13          Washington, D.C., Office of Solid Waste.



14                         To my immediate right is Don Townley,



15          and Don is our Acting Deputy Regional Administrator



16          for EPA Region VII.  Next to Don is Chuck Wright our



17          Acting Regional Administrator, EPA Region VII.  On my



'8          far right is Steve Lingle.   Steve is Chief of the



1'          Technology and Marketing Branch, Resource Recovery



20          Division, Office of Solid Waste, Washington, D.C.



21                         We have some state personnel in the



22          audience tonight that I would like to introduce if we



23          can find them.  Bill .Jhieldj is here from the State



24          of  Nebraska.  Bill.  From the State of Missouri is


                &Mli
"          Joe Schilling.  Joe is over there.  Are there any more

-------
 1          state people  here tonight?



 2                         (No response.)



 3                         MR. TUCKER:   O.K.   There will be some



 4          additional people coming for the  meeting tomorrow



 5          morning.




 6                         Back at our  registration desk, the



 7          lovely ladies that helped us out  is our Division



 8          Secretary Jean Lee and Grace Ancona.  If you need any




 9          help on anything, please let them know.



10                         I hope that  everyone has either pre-



11          submitted or filled out a registration card when you



12          came in.   This tells us who would like to make a



13          statement at the meeting or submit a written statement



14          for the official transcript.  Also, this will comprise



15          our mailing list for those  to receive copies of the



16          transcript.



17                         Now we have  a court reporter and the



18          proceedings are being recorded verbatim.  To assist us



19          in this effort, I ask that  anyone with a question to



20          ask please step to the floor microphone and clearly




2i          give your name and your organization or affiliation.



22                         Now we will permit questions during the




23          individual presentations that are pertinent to that



24          very subject, but if you will--if you do have prepared



25          comments or a statement that you would like to make,

-------
  1          please hold that to the end session, which was on the




  2          program as open discussion.



  3                         With those few housekeeping remarks,



  4          I would like to turn the program over to Charles



  5          Wright, our Acting Regional Administrator who will




  6          give us a welcome amongst other things.  Chuck.



  7                         MR. WRIGHT:  Thanks, Morris.  Good



  8          evening, ladies and gentlemen.  It is my pleasure to




  9          welcome you.  They said that you can be suspicious of



 10          a person when they say one of three things; either




 11          the check is in the mail, or your car will be ready



 12          tomorrow or I am here from the Government to help you.



 13                         When I walked up in front of the




 14          building like many of you, I saw a sign out there that



 15          said.  "Welcome ESPA."  I came down here and walked



 16          over to the registration desk and there was ESPA, sure



 17          enough,  and I said,  "What does ESPA mean?"  I was




 18          thinking,  you know,  that they would catch on that they



 19          had made a mistake.   They said, "That is the Exhaust



 20          Systems  Professional Association."



 21                         I walked over here like you did and




 22          then Morris introduced me as Acting RA and Don as




 23         Acting Deputy,  and I am sure you are thoroughly




 24          confused about  where you are and who you are talking




25          to.

-------
1                         We didn't have that as our purpose,



2          though,  this evening,  believe me.   We had two:   The




3          first will be to try to explain at least the high-



4          lights of the Resource Conservation Recovery Act.



5          And Don and the others will explain this, at Least



6          the major points tonight.




1                         I only want to say that this is the



8          first comprehensive Federal legislation for residual




9          waste management that  we have had.  Technically, this




10          is an amendment to the 1965 Act; but, in fact,  it is



11          a complete replacement of the provision of the Act




12          and it does include hazardous waste management, a



13          badly needed authority, and it does have enforcement



14          authority.



15                         The second purpose that we have, though,



16          and perhaps the most important one to us, is that we



17          are actively soliciting public participation in the



18          rule making process.  The Act actually requires this



19          in Section 7004.  So do most other environmental acts




20          at this time.



21                         In brief what this means is that those




22          who pay for it are those who, in fact, have a right




23          to have something to say about how the rule making is




24          carried on and what rules are to be prepared.  All




25          comers are welcome on this.

-------
 1                         We have depended  increasingly on  this



 2          public participation in our  rule making process  as



 3          we have matured  into an agency,and we find that  it has




 4          paid off.  It has helped us  a great deal to sort out



 5          many of the conflicts and we believe it has helped



 6          us to get support which we badly need in the environ-




 7          mental programs  and will continue to need.




 8                         All environmental law is controversial,



 9          by its very nature; but it impacts nearly every  person,



10          every group and  every business interest in the country.




11          As taxpayers you pay the bills and you also gain




12          protection from  these regulations that result from



13          environmental protection.  It is your right to express



14          yourself of any  concerns you may have and any




15          recommendations  you have as  to what should be covered



16          and how it should be covered in  drafting and perfecting



17          these regulations and guidelines.



18                         Some of you have  indicated that you



19          wanted to make statements and/or you wanted to submit



20          written papers.  We will welcome these and they  will



21          be entered into  the transcript of this meeting.



22                         Perhaps after our quick and dirty




23          review here this afternoon of the major provisions of



24          the Act, more of you will feel like making statements




25          and we hope that you do this.

-------
 1                         This  will not be your only opportunity



 2          to have an input  into  the rule making under this law.



 3          It is just the  first.   There will be many others as



 4          all of the regulatory  starts are mandated by this



 5          act,  and there  are quite a number with the exception




 6          of some of the  minor and technical amendments,  and



 7          we will solicit comment through the public participat-



 8          ion process.




 9                         These will include things  like



10          regulations,  criteria,  guidelines, standards, things



'l          of this sort, with some few exceptions of a minor



12          nature.




13                         Most, if not all of these, will  be



14          published in  the  Federal Register and there will be



15          a  request for comment  through the Federal Register and



16          there will be a comment period of 30 to 60 days or



17          longer under very controversial provisions.



19                         I  assure you that these comments are



19          reviewed and  they are  seriously considered.  The public



20          comments have been responsible for some substantial




21          revisions of  regulatory preparation in the recent past



22          in other laws.  The  process may seem burdensome, but




23          it does offer the best  way that we have to consider



24          all aspects, good and bad,  of proposals that affect




25          so many different segments of the American society.

-------
 1                         This  is really one of  the principal


 2          reasons why we are having one of our  meetings  in  the


 3          evening and one  in the daytime; so that people do have


 4          an opportunity to attend regardless of their working


 5          hours.


 6                         We are looking forward with a great


 7          deal of interest to  your responses during the open


 8          discussion  period and I hope that we will have a


 9          chance to talk to you personally, also, after the


10          meeting.  Thank you.


11                         MR. TUCKER:  Thank you, Chuck.  I


12          notice one additional state person just entered the

                          E%f*ff
13          room, Dr. Joe^Agficr, State of Missouri.  Will you


14          stand, Joe?


15                         Next on the program is we have asked


16          for an overview of our new Resource Conservation  and


17          Recovery Act.  And we thought it only appropriate to


18          present this overview that we call on a person that


19          for many years was the Chief Garbage Man for EPA


20          Region VII.  Don Townley has not always had an exalted


21          title of Acting Deputy RA.  Prior to  that he was  our


22          Division Director for the program that included our


23          solid waste program.  And even prior  to that, dating


24          back a number of years, he was the Regional Solid


25          Waste Representative.  So he has a long history in this

-------
                                                            10
1         area, and we will ask him for a few words now.  Don.




2                        MR. TOWNLEY:  I don't know whether to



3         thank you or not, Morris.



4                        It is certainly good, though, to be




5         back in  the garbage and  trash business after being



6         gone a number of years.



7                        If I could go off  the record, I would




8         like to  say hello to a lot  of old garbage buddies




9         that I have run into this evening for the first time



10         in quite a while.  Bud and  Marie  and Jack,  Paul, Ed,



11         feels good to be back  with you again.



12                        As has been  previously mentioned, the



13         first serious Federal attempt to  get into the  solid



14         waste business was by the Act passed in  1965.  Early



15         in 1966, the Public Health  Service and the  state



16         departments of health began implementing that  Act.



17         Of course, in 1970,  the  Federal  part went to EPA,  and




18         subsequently  the  state health departments were reorgan-



19         ized, but  the implementation of  this Solid  Waste Act



20         went along real rapidly  until, at the  present  time,




21         the four states of Region VII, Nebraska, Iowa,  Kansas




22         and Missouri, have very  fine  solid waste programs.



23                        But early in this implementation period




24         we learned that  the Act  had a big gap  in it,  as every-



25         body knows.  Many of  the serious solid waste  problems

-------
                                                           11
 1          were not  covered  by  the Act.   Let me  give  you three



 2          or  four examples.




 3                         A  guy called me one  day  and he said,



 4          "Hey, Don,  I know where there  are 2,000 gallons  of



 5         -. inetic liquid waste  being disposed  of along  the  river




 6          banks.  Something ought to be  done  about that."   In



 7          this metropolitan area—another example--a private




 8          individual  developed an approved hazardous waste




 9          material  disposal facility, properly  designed,



 10          engineered.  The  plan was approved.   The construction



 11          was approved.  The guy said, "Well, I am ready for




 12          that hazardous material."  About a month or  so later




 13          he called us and he  said, "Hey, where is the  hazardous



 14          material that is produced in this metro  area?"   It




 15          wasn't getting to that facility.



 '*                         Another example—one of  the major



 17          industries in the eastern part of the Region  contracted




 18          with a company to dispose of its liquid waste, an



 19          out-of-town company.  That company came  in faithfully



 20          each week with a tank truck, picked up  the material,




 21          hauled it a few miles out of town, pulled off the main



 22          road onto a side road and unceremoniously dumped this




 23          stuff right there on the ground.  Why didn't  somebody




 24          do something about it?   I am very happy to tell you




25          that this new act, the Resource Conservation and

-------
                                                           12
1          Recovery Act, Public Law 94-580, closes the gap.



2                         This ts the Act that we have been




3          waiting for, you and me.  A word of caution of here,



4          though; a few years ago one of our state agencies




5          was working hard to pass the Air Pollution Act.




6          A representative of a number of home owner associations




7          was working very hard to get this Act passed.   The



8          day the Governor signed the Act, he called me~-I was




9          working with him.  He called me and said, "Hey, Don,



10          we got this Air Pollution Act passed and the air



11          pollution problems solved."




12                         I said, "What do you mean?"  He said,



13          "The Act is passed."  I said, "Brother, the work has



14          just begun."  The easy part was over.  Now we have



15          a new Act which I believe will do what we know should



16          be done.  I hope that by the end of this evening's



17          discussion that you people are as enthusiastic about




18          this new Act as I am.



19                         But don't forget, the big job is before




20          you.  If this law is to be properly implemented, you




21          must participate in developing feasible, reasonable,




22          workable regulations.  You must provide the support




23          necessary for your state agencies to develop a program.



24          I say the challenge lies before us.



25                         MR. TUCKER:  Thank you, Don.  I can't

-------
                                                         13






 1         believe that both Don Townley and Chuck Wright have




 2         kept us on schedule.  I think this should be in the



 3         transcript.




 4                        Well, as I indicated, Don is the



 5         father of garbage in Region VII, but our next speaker



 6         is probably one of the godfathers of the overall



 7         Federal program in solid waste management.  He was




 8         involved from its—the first day of implementation,




 9         back in 1965, and was responsible for hiring the




 10         first staff members--five people, 10 people, whatever



 11         it was--that started the program in that year.



 ^2                        So we had him with us on the program



 13         as it turns out three times tonight.  We are all



 14         going to get tired of him, but let's ask Lannie Hickman




 '5         to give his first presentation, which is on training,




 16         public information and the public participation



 17         aspects of the law.  Lannie?



 18                        MR. HICKMAN:  Ibis law, RCRA, as we



 19         refer to it in Washington--there are all sorts of



 20         acronyms and letters and it is a trademark of being




 21          a bureaucrat, being able to use those letters.



 22                        RCRA, as Don said, does offer this




 23          opportunity for those of us who are concerned with




 24          solid waste management to start to attack some of the




25          major problems that we have to deal with.

-------
                                                            14
 1                         This law has two basic purposes; one,



 2          to help the environment and two,  to reserve as many



 3          natural resources as we can through Resource Conservat-




 4          ion and Recovery Measures.  The law has some unique



 5          characteristics.  As we go through them tonight we



 6          are going to give you an awful lot of information in



 7          a very short period of time.  We  have provided some



 8          handouts and seme materials for you.  There is no way




 9          that you are going to get all of  this tonight.



10                         Everytime we do this we learn some-




11          thing.  Everytime I talk about the law I learn some-



12          thing new.



13                         Now, how is this going to be achieved?



'4          Well, it provides a variety of mechanisms within the



15          law to help meet the objectives of helping environmenta



16          protection and resource conservation.  Technical and



17          financial assistance, manpower—it prohibits future



18          open dumping.  It sets a frontier of October, 1983,



19          when the practice of open dumping of solid waste will




20          cease.



21                         Now this is a unique characteristic of




22          this law.  One of the key provisions is written into




23          parts of the law.  Now it doesn't mean the Feds will



24          do this.  A contraire.  It is exactly the opposite.




25          It is designed to help state and  local governments put

-------
                                                            15
 1          together programs that will be directed  toward meeting



 2          their needs of  solid waste management  through three



 3          major thrusts:   improper  land disposal,  improper



 4          hazardous waste  management, and a  lack of aggressive



 5          resource conservation through Resource Recovery Pro-




 6          grams.



 7                          This is the major thrust  of this law.



 8          It provides many ways for us to develop  guidelines




 9          which can be used by state and local governments to



10          improve their practices.  It provides  us in Resource



11          and Development  Authorities to assist  in developing



12          new systems, new technology for state  and local




13          governments and  industry to use.   It provides Federal,



14          state, local and industry partnership  in the materials



15          needed for recovery.



16                         Probably this area more than any other



17          area is where industry has to be intimately involved



18          because of the complexities of the institutional



19          and financial arrangements necessary to build these



20          blind boxes to make garbage go away.



21                         It has provisions to educate the




22          public, and part of what we are doing  tonight is to



23          educate the public so that you can help us implement



24          your law.  This  is the whole thrust of this public




25          participation thing, a big neutral ground to overcome

-------
                                                           16
1          some of the criticisms of the past environmental



2          laws which has enacted and implemented little or no




3          consideration as to the impact at the state and local



4          level.




5                         This law is designed to serve you and



6          it is mandated to have you involved in its implementa-



7          tion.



8                         Now let's talk about public participat-




9          ion and some of the provisions related to this.  Why




10          is there such a big deal on the intent of providing



11          information and disseminating information to the



12          public?  It is very simple.  Only through an under-



13          standing of the problems to promote the understanding



14          of the public can you support those things that are



15          necessary for your state law or government to solve



16          their problems.



17                         You ultimately have to vote the bond




18          issues.  You ultimately have to support the enforcement



19          of regulations.  Unless the public understands the



20          problems and the alternatives available to solve the



21          problems—until then, decisions will not be made.



22          You will be the loser through your own pocketbooks.




23          We as taxpayers will be losers.  So be informed is



24          the first step in order to support new and improved




25          solid waste management.

-------
                                                            17





 1                         The law provides for mechanisms for



 2          us  to involve you through a variety of procedures.



 3          It  provides  a way for us  to coordinate with the



 4          states in the dissemination of the information and



 5          data.   It allows  us  to develop a data  base by which



 6          we  can measure change and measure environmental health



 7          effects from improper practices and from improved



 8          practices.



 9                         It provides a mechanism for us to



 10          disseminate  information in a rapid manner.   To these



 11          issues,  state and local government and individuals,



 12          in  the Public Participation Provisions 8003,  we have



 13          identified major  categories which represent the public.



 14         What  is  the  public?   We don't  really know what the



 15         public is.



 16                         In Washington,  the public  is represented



 17         by a variety of organized interest groups,  public



 18         interest  groups referred  to in the Washington vernaculai



 19         as pigs.  Public  Interest,  they don't  mind  being



 20         called that,  either,  as long as we smile  when we say



 21          it.



 22                        As  in  a  consumer environmental and



 23          neighborhood  groups,  these  represent the  public;  trade,



 24          manufacturing and  labor residents—Washington is floodec



25          with representatives  from  the  various  manufacturing

-------
                                                            18
 1          organizations, public health, scientific and profession



 2          al societies and other governmental and university




 3          associations.  All these are represented usually in




 4          some sort of a formal way through organizations, but




 5          the public itself is not.  That is why we are meeting



 6          at night rather than in the middle of the day, so the



 7          private citizen can come.  We want you to communicate




 8          with us on the implementation of this law.




 9                         Section 7004 provides a mechanism for



10          public participation to petition for change in any




11          rules and regulations.  Our procedure that the agency



12          has promulgated or is developing and allows the public



13          to file, and we have to write our set of regulations



14          for you to do this.  It tells you how you cart come



15          into the system and say, "I don't like your regulations



16          on some particular aspect of hazardous waste. I think



17          it ought to be changed."  Then we have to meet and



18          show cause why we should or should not change it,



19          you know, before judicial review procedures.



20                         It provides for participation, as Chuck




21          has mentioned, in writing the regulations and guide-




22          lines; but more significant, perhaps, it also requires




23          us to sit with you before we develop our plans to




24          carry on the programs.that the law requires.  How



25          this will be done we don't know yet.

-------
                                                           19
 1                         The regulatory setting procedure Is




 2          relatively simple to get Involvement of the public



 3          sector.  How we get you involved in the planning




 4          sector to develop where we are going to go we don't




 5          quite understand yet, but we are going to find a way




 6          to do it.



 7                         It provides in the law for us to get




 8          you involved in various ways.  O.K.




 9                         Section 7004 provides for a variety




10          of other provisions for the public to be involved,




11          published guidelines for how you can participate with



12          us.  We will tell you how you can get involved in




13          planning and implementation of the law.  These will



14          be coming out.  To have any real value they have got




IS          to come out in the next six or nine months, and we



16          are going to hold public hearings on these guidelines



17          and get feedback and find out the best way that the




18          public can get involved.



19                         To be involved is going to cost you time



20          and money.  There is no way you can avoid that because




21          there is no mechanism by which we can provide meaning-



22          ful dialogue unless it is sometimes eyeball to eyeball,




23          such as this.  It took your time tonight.  It also




24          took your money because we all flew out here from




25          Washington and we rented this room.  It is not cheap.

-------
                                                            20
 1                         Protecting the environment is not



 2          cheap.  It is going to cost money.  It is going to



 3          cost time.  It is going to cost committment on the



 4          parts of everybody that is involved.  But the law is




 5          designed to give you an avenue to the agency, both




 5          in the regional offices and at headquarters, to see



 7          that the law is implemented the way you want it.




 8                         Now we are going to use meetings such




 9          as this, which is sort of a briefing.  We are going



10          to have formal public hearings on our regulations and



11          guidelines.  The law requires it--to hold public




12          hearings.  We will have a variety of workshops with



13          emphasis on ways to try to communicate with the public.



14                         We will have review groups, formal



15          review groups, that will sit with us all during the



16          development of our regulations and guidelines to give



17          us advice and guidance on the nature on how those




18          regulations should be written.  We will have a variety




19          of public education programs.



20                         Our office since the beginning in




2i          1965 has been strongly committed towards the dissemina-




22          tion of information through the media.  We have




23          probably the last 10 years published some 800 publicat-



24          ions on a variety of different solid waste management



25          problems.  To some degree it is sort of self-supporting

-------
                                                            21
 1          You know,  you  can generate a.  lot  of  reports.   Some



 2          of  it  gets used.   Some of It  gets thrown away.  And




 3          that is  solid  waste,  you know.  It is  self-supporting,



 4          and that is all right.




 5                         I  threw something  every day  away to



 6          protect  my job, so it is O.K.   I  used  to be in the



 7          water  pollution business and  it was  a  lot more easy



 8          to  do  it then.




 9                         We also have a variety  of interest



10          group  programs with organizations on—they  represent




11          various  interest  groups—to provide  a  variety of



           training grants.   I am tired  tonight.




13                         It goes on.  International City



           Managers Association  has programs with us.  American



           Public Works Associations has programs with us.  This



16          is  just  some.  The American Society  of Civil  Engineers



17          has  programs with us.  Some universities.   We can



           communicate and get feedback  from those various



19          interests  and groups.



20                         Now we have a  manpower  development




           provision  in this law which tells us to do  two things,



22          essentially:  One to  go  out and assess the  needs of



23          manpower for solid waste management  to meet the




24          requirements of the law; and  two,  to develop  training



25          programs through  the  grant mechanism to help  develop

-------
                                                             22
1          that manpower at the state and local level.   These




2          are the basic provisions of the manpower development.



3                         This portion of the law is probably



4          the one that has received the least attention by our




5          office up until this time.  The 1970 amendments



6          required the same sort of manpower study except the



7          1970 amendments did not place great stress on local




8          and state government to respond.  This law does




9          because on some of the mandated provisions it is going



10          to take more man--that is probably the key,  the key



11          ingredient in implementing this law, the human



12          resources to do it.  I don't know where they are going



13          to come from.



14                         Because of the current policies on



15          manpower development at the Federal level, the program



1$          to develop human resources is not up to what it used



17          to be 10 years ago, four or five years ago, when there



18          was a great amount of money being invested in develop-



19          ing professional manpower for environmental programs.




20          Where  the human resources are going to come from,




21          I just don't know at this point in time.




22                         Now that covers the public participation



23          very quickly, the information and manpower divisions.




24          I would entertain some questions at this time; because




25          we are going to get so much tonight, I think: it is good

-------
                                                              23
 1           for us  to  cut it into segments  and handle a few



 2           questions  as  we  go  along.   We are  probably going to



 3           finish  well up on time.   The other guy's  got a lot



 4           longer  presentation than  this,  so  if  you  have any



 5           questions  on  this particular portion—do  you have



 6           questions?  There is a woman.   Yes?   You  might come



 7           up  and  state  your name, rank and serial number so



 8           that we will  have it for  the public records.



 9                         MS.  WOODWARD:  You  just mentioned--



 10           oh,  I am Esther  Woodward  and I  am  the water person



 11           on  the  Environmental Quality Committee of the League



 12           of Women Voters,  State of Kansas.   I  also administered



 13           EPA  funds  for the Water Pollution  Public  Participation



 14           Program here  in  the metropolitan area.



 15                         I  wanted to  ask  you about  the  human



 16           resources problem that you  just mentioned.   I under-



 17           stand President Carter has  reduced funding for the



 18           EPA, and at the same time there is a  great move  toward



 19           employment.  Do you--are there any appropriations  on



 20           the books now or  are you asking for appropriations



 21           for  this training program that you sought  as  necessary?



 22          Does it have to come  through the state,  Federal,  or a



 23          combination of both?



 24                         MR. HICKMAN:  First of all, I  am not



25          aware that the EPA's budget has been reduced  by the

-------
                                                          24
 l          President.  I am not aware of that number.  I know




 2          our particular budget on the solid waste program at



 3          the headquarters and regional level has not been




 4          reduced.  Now other portions of the agency's budget




 5          may have.  I am not aware of that.  We did request



 6          funds to implement all sections of the law.




 7                         The law authorizes about 180 million




           dollars in fiscal year 1978.  If you add up all those




 9          numbers in all those different sections, that is about




10          what it adds up to.  We requested appropriations at



11          the authorization level.  It will not be our budget




12          at the present time.




13                         The President's budget request now--



14          former President Ford's budget request, because we



           don't have President Carter's budget request yet--



           did not provide for that level of funding.  It does



           provide for an increase in the solid waste program



IB          budget level, but not to the level we asked, far less




           than what we asked.




20                         Included in our request was dollars




21          for doing the study.  We can't provide manpower




22          development grant programs until we know what our




23          manpower development needs are, and that can only be



24          done based on some measure of what is needed to




           implement the law.

-------
                                                            25
 1                          The funds  that will flow from the




 2           Federal  government to  the state government to help




 3           states respond to the  law will be used to hire and




 4           develop  more  human resources  at the state level,



 5           regardless  of any sort of manpower development program




 6           we may develop In the  long term to fill other needs.




 7                          Did that answer your question?



 8           Or was that sort of random, off the wall?




 9                          Basically, the bottom line Is there




10           is very  little we are  going to do In 1978 in manpower




11           development.   That Is  the bottom line, because we



12           don't have  the money to do It.  And If we had the




13           money, we would do the study  first.  We do have




'4           somebody working on it right  now, though, to sort of



15           see what we really have to do.



16                          As I mentioned, we have not focused



17           on this  section as much as some of the others, but




18           there are training programs now available to do a lot



19           of training of human resources for solid waste



20           management.   There are a  variety of training programs



21           offered  through these  various interest groups that




22           we have  supported.  APWA  has  a training program.



23           ICMA has some seminars at times to communicate




24           information to solid waste managers.  And the states




25           carry on some training at the local level.

-------
                                                           26



 j                         We have  several  package  training


 2          courses  that can be used  to  Improve  safety and  collect-


 3          ion practices and land  disposal operations practices.

 4          These are available canned training  programs, but we


 5          would do very little  in 1978 in manpower development

 6          just because of a limited amount of  money.

 7                         Any other  questions?  Yes, please?
                              JToydBK.                 JS/>icr
 8                         MS. JOlfafl:   My  name  is  Dee -Jofri«y and


 9          I am with the East-West Gateway Coordinating Council

]0          from St. Louis.


n                         You mentioned in your presentation

12          that really the state and local governments are going

13          to have  the responsibility for  implementing the act,

14          however, as we all know,  money  has not  been appropria-

15          ted yet  and you have no idea as to how  much will be

1$          appropriated.

17                         What responsibilities are the state


13          and local governments going  to  have  if, in fact, the

19          appropriations are much less than you anticipate or


20          if Congress doesn't appropriate money period?   Are


2i          they still going to be  responsible for  carrying out

22          the provisions of the act and to what extent?

23                         MR. TUCKER: Lannle, if I might inter-


24          ject:  Dee, there is a  separate presentation with

25          focus specifically on the state program of development.

-------
                                                             27
 1           Would you like to hold that?
                               oaywae.
 2                          MS. jeSNBR:  O.K.

 3                          MR. HICKMAN:   Would you mind?  We could

 4           cover it  then.
                               ToyMe^
 5                          MS. jeSBR:  That  is fine.

 6                          MR. HICKMAN:   That is one we will turn

 7           off the tape recorder and talk about.

 8                          MR. TUCKER:  But it will be covered

 9           specifically a little later.

10                          MR. HICKMAN:   Am I done? Have I used

11           up all my time?

12                          MR. TUCKER:  Any more questions?

13                          (No response.)

14                          MR. TUCKER:  All right.   Was there

15           any more  questions on the section just completed?

16                          (No response.)

17                          MR. TUCKER:  I would like to ask—is

18           the audience having difficulty hearing from a speaker

19           on the floor because of background rumble  or whatever?

20           Is there  any problem?  How about  the court reporter?

21           Are you able to pick up with  your mikes?

22                          COURT REPORTER:  Yes, sir.

23                          MR. TUCKER:  O.K.   We will  then proceed

24           with the  next item on the program.   And now we will

25           get into  the topic that everyone  has been  waiting for,

-------
                                                            28
1          a very substantial part of the new act.  That is



2          dealing with hazardous waste.




3                         To discuss this with us tonight we



4          have Walt Kovalick, who is with our Hazardous Waste



5          Division, Solid Waste Program, Washington.  Walt.



6                         MR. KOVALICK: Lannie has been telling




7          you about how you can participate in the process and




8          my job is to tell you one of the major topics that




9          we need jour help in the most, which is the subject




10          of writing rules and regulations.  I am talking



11          specifically about Subtitle C in the Resource Conser-



12          vation and Recovery Act, the Hazardous Waste



13          Regulatory Provisions.  I would like to talk about a



l4          few philosophical points first and then I have about



15          eight lines covering one each on the sections in the



16          law to try and give you a little more background.



17                         I hope you will stop me as we go along



18          as I find the subjects that I cover usually generate



19          some interest.  It is hard to hold a question to the




20          last line.



21                         First of all, the key to the whole




22          Subtitle C that I am going to be discussing is  the




23          first section, which is defining what a hazardous



24          waste is.  In all of the other sections that  I  am



25          going to be talking about, they set up a  structure  for

-------
                                                           29
 1          managing and controlling  those wastes once they are




 2          defined in Section 3001.  So you can see that  that




 3          is a very crucial linchpin in the whole process of




 4          regulating hazardous waste, and it is a process that




 5          will ultimately see that  the waste that Don Townley




 6          was discussing do in fact get carried by that  trans-



 7          porter to the ultimate destination that the generator



 8          intended; and secondly, to make sure that the  ultimate




 9          destination is indeed a permanent disposal facility.




 10                         So that is what we are calling  in the




 "          vernacular of the trade cradle to grave management




 12          of hazardous waste, from their generation to their



 13          ultimate disposal.  So you can see that by what we



 14          define as a hazardous waste how big that net is or



 15          how small it is, it very critically affects those



 16          wastes that will be in the total system.



 17                         The second major overview point I




 18          wanted to make is that in the sections that I am



 19          discussing we speak about national standards; national



 20          standards that affect the transporters of wastes;



 21          national standards that affect those that generate



 22          wastes?-largely in our case we are talking about




 23          industrial wastes, but some others;  and national




 24          standards that affect storage and treatment and




25          disposal of those wastes.

-------
                                                           30
 1                         So in that sense we are talking about



 2          the provisional kind of environmental regulations



 3          that those who are regulated view as a negative



 4          incentive for the requirements they have to meet to



 5          be in the business of transporting, storing, treating



 6          and disposing.



 7                         But the law also has in it in this



 8          Subtitle C a permit system, which we like to view as



 9          a positive kind of incentive as an insurance to the



10          community where a building might be located that if



11          the state or local government gives a permit to that



12          facility, that the nearby residents can be assured



13          and the user, the manufacturer who uses that inciner-



14          ator or land disposal facility, that it is, in fact,



15          protecting the environment generally, and more



16          specifically, if you live near it it is providing



17          positive protection for you there.



18                         So we like to think that the national



19          standards are in one sense negatives—that is they



20          are like speed limit signs that they put up for all



21          of us.  At the same time, the permit system that



22          enforces them gives us all assurance that the facilitiei



23          are, in fact, well founded.



24                         One point I mentioned in that discussion



25          of national standards, which is also critical, and why

-------
                                                          31
           it is important that you meet and are aware of who

           the state officials are in your half of  the state
3
           is that not only  the testimony and the Congressional
4
           reports that are  behind the law, but also our

           philospphy has been stated in the law, and what we

           are trying to implement is to have states take this

           program so that they are, in fact, the ones who are
8
           regulatory that you deal with.
9
                          The law is structured in such & way
10
           that it is a Federal program unless the states choose
11
           to request it.  And we are working—as a matter of
12
           fact, one of the  gentlemen you met earlier from the
13
           state is working  with us on how we are going to
14
           design the state  takeover of this program so, in
is
           fact, EPA is not  regulating transporters or treaters,
16
           generators of any hazardous waste, but Jefferson
17
           City is, or Lincoln, or other state capitols are.
18
                          The last point I want to make in the
19
           overview was that this law is not retroactive.  You
20
           have a special place in your hearts for some special
21
           site that you know of that may be causing a problem
22
           because of wastes that were dumped there two months
23
           ago or 10 years ago.  Hie law does not specifically
24
           give us--or the state hopefully when it takes the
25
           progranr-the authority to go back at that problem.

-------
                                                         32
 1          It has an imminent hazard provision in it, which is



 2          a very common provision in the Air Pollution and




 3          Water Pollution Acts so that you can get at urgent



           environmental problems.




 5                         But we are talking about regulations



 6          to be developed over the next 18 months.  We need




 7          help from you and others across the country where we



           are having these meetings, and then implementing




 9          them in the subsequent 18 months.




10                         So with that as an overview, let me



11          show you the seven or eight slides I have.  I have




12          one on each section, and hopefully, we can get into



13          some of the meat of what we are talking about.



                          As I mentioned earlier, the keystone



15          of what we are doing is defining a hazardous waste.




           Congress tells us that we should have this definition



           worked out, proposed in the Federal Register, which



18          is the daily newspaper of the Federal Government



19          where we have to speak officially, anyway, so that




20          you know what is going on.  And that basically the




21          section, if you look at the law in your packet



22          afterwards, it calls for several things.  One is for



23          us to pick criteria by which waste should be defined




           as hazardous.  Some are suggested in there.  Congress




25          has put in there, things like flammability and

-------
                                                         33






 !          explosivity, corrosivity, toxicity of the wastes.



 2          Those are kinds of criteria that we can choose among



 3          to define the hazardous wastes.




 4                         And then we use those criteria in the



 5          number two phase to identify them.  And just to pick




 6          an example, flanmability is something you measure by



 7          standard tests for flash point.  So we would be



 8          choosing a degree Fahrenheit in which we put a waste




 9          to a certain kind of test and that waste would flash.




10          And that would give us a flanmability level for that



n          particular waste.




]2                         So the criteria that we would be



13          choosing--promulgate criteria--would be the temperature




14          at which that waste would flash, and then those




]5          wastes that fail the test could become a hazardous



16          waste.



17                         An example I have picked is an easy



]8          one.  There is a general consensus among industry



19          and fire officials and others how you define flammabi-



20          lity.  It gets progressively harder.when you talk




2i          about toxicity; that is, the toxicity of the things



22          we breathe, things that affect fish immediately.



23          And then it is even more difficult for things we



24          call chronic.  Toxicity is normally associated with




2s          those things that cause cancer or causing eugenic

-------
                                                           34
1          changes.   So our job  gets--all  those  factors are  to



2          be  considered  over  the  18 month period In  developing



3          the regulations.




4                        And  finally, we  are  Instructed  to  Issue



5          a list  of  hazardous wastes, but that  does  not  neces-




6          sarily  mean that the  list is  completely inclusive of



7          all the wastes that would,  if you will, flunk  the




8          test.   We  have—well, we don't  know which  way  we  are




9          going to go with the  listing  input.  And we will  be



10          asking  for it  informally in the Federal Register



11          shortly and we will be  happy  to talk  to you about



12          it  here.




13                        The  list can be  used for a  variety of



14          reasons.   It can be used to list the  things for which



15          we  can't think of a test or don*t have sufficient



16          time in the 18 months to develop a  test.  So  there are



17          some critical  things  we might want  to put  on  the  list.



18          I think as there  is a general consensus worldwide,




19          if  not  in  this country, that  PCB's  are a problem  and



20          that waste containing PCB's might conceivably be




21          something  that we are concerned about.



22                        But  PCB's as a compound are ones that




23          are not puberullc  toxic, probably because  they




24          accumulate.  So  there might be  an occasion to put



25          things  on  this list for which we don't have a. test,

-------
                                                           35
 1          but about which there is general consensus  or need



 2          for putting these things down as being hazardous.




 3                         So you see, if you draw a very large




 4          net around those things that might be hazardous




 5          wastes, many people—one point has been brought up




 6          in a similar meeting to this, or some of our discuss-




 7          ions.  It is that we might indeed be—there is no




 8          such thing as an empty pesticide container.  That is,




 9          there is always something left inside a container




10          used, whether it is a five-gallon pail on up to &



11          55-gallon drum containing pesticides.




12                         So unless that container is appropriate-



13          ly rinsed, drained and the rinse is disposed of, you



u          can conceivably have a problem with those containers.




15          And I see one state official nodding his head in



16          recognition that it is indeed a problem in many states



17          where there is much agriculture.



18                         So, as I said, I am trying to picture



19          for you things that might end up or might not end up



20          in this definition and how we draw the line.  It




21          becomes very important to those of our generators.




22                         If there are no specific questions




23          on that,  I will move on to the other topics.  In




24          context,  what that means now that we have some wastes




25          via these regulations which are conceeded to be

-------
                                                          36
 1          hazardous, it leads us to a set of regulations for



 2          generators.  And Congress has very specifically given




 3          us three topics, three subject areas where the,



 4          usually the manufacturer produces the waste that will



 5          be affected.




 6                         In these regulations there are things--



 7          these are the only three things about which we can




 8          write regulations, and those do not have anything to




 9          do with the manufacturing process itself.  These



10          generator standards, these initial standards, will




11          not affect the process, per se.  Perhaps the cost of



12          disposal now will affect the manufacturer indirectly,




13          but neither the Environmental Protection Agency nor



14          the states are going to be affecting the way products



15          are produced.



16                         We are talking about promulgating



'7          regulations in 18 months for record keeping and



18          reporting relating to the hazardous wastes that are




19          produced, and for appropriate labeling of containers




20          of these wastes, and for the so-called manifest




21          system.



22                         Let me take a moment to discuss that.




25          To use Don Townley's example, the reason we donft



24          know the wastes that are shipped from a manufacturer,




25          say to an acceptable disposal site, is that there is

-------
                                                            37
 1          no way to track wastes from their generation point



 2          to ultimate disposal point.  So Congress has included



 3          what they call a manifest system in the law so the



 4          generator signs off, if you will, that he has delivered




 5          the waste to the transporter.  The transporter takes




 6          it to the site designated on the manifest.  And the



           disposer or the incinerator operator or the landfill




 8          operator signs off that he received it.  And then we




 9          have to work out the mechanism to--for the states to



10          be aware that that transaction did take place.



                          So these regulations really are revolv-




           ing primarily around what is that manifest going to




13          be like.  How does it relate to current requirements



14          that the Department of Transportation has.  Anyone




15          who ships materials in commerce these days has



           requirements to fill out a shipping paper or bill of



17          lading, whether it is by rail car or by truck.  So




           that is one of our major issues is to make sure that



"          we don't make it any more difficult than possible to



20          do this.




21                         The generator of waste, when he ships




22          waste, that he doesn't have any more additional burden




23          that he has to have for environmental reasons.  And




24          we are meeting with Department of Transportation




25          officials.  We are getting quite a bit of input.  In

-------
                                                          38
1          fact,  the smaller the trucking firm, the more input



2          we seem to be getting, which makes sense to me because




3          they are the ones who are going to be primarily



4          affected by this kind of regulation.



5                         Yes,,sir?



6                         MR. WRIGHT:  Just a general question



           in relation to the one you had up there previously,



8          the last slide.  You have a listing and then you had




9          the other one.  I think where are you going to make




'0          your listing, by chemical compound or by brand name?



11          Let me give you an example.



12                         MR. KOVALICK:  Could you state your




13          name?



                          MR. WRIGHT:  J. C. Wright, Southeastern



           Nebraska Council of Governments.  According to your




           reference, pesticide--O.K., now we know we can list



17          the chemical compound for the pesticide, what makes



18          it up, by taking your criteria.  It might not meet



           the list as hazardous material.  Next year make one



20          additive in that particular substance and then it



21          meets  the criteria.



22                         O.K.  The general public here might




23          not understand chemistry.  The makeup, the manufacturer




24          probably puts it on a label, but you can give me a




           name here that has 33 letters in it.  By the time I

-------
                                                            39
 1          decipher it I am lost.  Could you give me a general




 2          brand name that I go and buy on the market, be it as



 3          a farmer or anybody else.  In this particular case a




 4          pesticide or a herbicide, will you immediately identify




 5          with that brand and say, you know, it does the job or



 6          doesn't.  Is all I am asking is consideration in



 7          putting the brand on--the brand name on there along



 8          with the compound.




 9                         MR. KOVALICK:  I am glad you asked



10          that because what I was trying--the answer to your




11          question is we are wide open on what the list is




12          going to be.  And that was the reason I was trying to



13          explain the right of ways, the list--the way it will




14          be constructed.  It will be possible for a list to



15          be--to have the name of a manufacturing category.



16          And any waste coming from that manufacturing category



17          could be called a hazardous waste.  That is one kind




18          of llst--a list of, say, asbestos brake lining



19          manufacturing wastes.  That would be one kind of list.



20                         Another kind of list would be waste



21          contaminated with chemicals.  So we have not.  And



22          one of the reasons is we are just getting started



23          trying to decide what might be the best way we can




24          find this list of hazardous waste.  As I said, I am




25          quite sure it won't be comprehensive.  We won't get

-------
                                                            40
1          them all on a list.   That  Is  why we are trying to


2          have criteria that primarily  industrial generators


3          can  use  to decide  on an equitable basis, whether they


4          are  in the paint  industry  or  the steel industry or


           whatever, what is  a  hazardous waste.
6
                          Now,  on the farmer.   At the sane time
 7          I am saying that  about a list,  I think you are raising


 8          the issue which we hope to hear more about, about

 o
           whether there should be some exemptions, say,  from


10          this manifest requirement that  I mentioned here.  I


11          mean, it is not logical to someone like me that some-


12          one who has went  through a five-gallon pail every


13          growing season alone, one five-pound bag, should be


           filling out a manifest to send  back to a special


           portion of the landfill.


16                         So we are both trying to find a list


17          that makes sense, and also how far down it should go


18          in terms of coverage.  Most of  the waste 1 am talking


19          about, I think, fall in the area of those that are


20          in substantial quantities that are industrially based.


21          However, the law does talk about radioactive waste.


22          To some extent it talks about—it opens up the door


23          for ideological waste.  The hospital clinic, the


24          veterinarian clinic kinds of waste could well be


25          hazardous, as well.

-------
                                                         41
 1                         It is possible the cut-off will be a




 2          generation rate rather than an amount, because once




 3          you start taking an amount of waste, then you discuss




 4          the concentration.  If I put, you know, one pound of




 5          arsenic on this plot of ground here and bury it, that



 6          might not be so bad.  And then I put another 9,996,




 7          it could very well affect the ground water underneath



 8          this spot.  So then I am affecting the environment.




 9                         So we are trying to work out some of




10          the standard tests that I mentioned before.  It might




11          be able to give us an indication of leeching of waste,



12          how they might give off these hazardous materials.




13                         Morris says I have 10 minutes left.



14          I mentioned national standards for transporters.




15          That is the second link in this chain after the



16          generator.  18 months, again, we have to write



17          regulations.   Again, they will be similar regulations



18          for record keeping, labeling, and the fact that the



19          transporter will also sign off on that manifest when



20          it passes through his hands with waste and he delivers



21          it to the designated disposer.



22                         Now the DOT regulations are down there




23          to let you know that we know you have regulations that




24          affect shipping papers,  and we  want to make sure ours




25          mesh with theirs.   As a matter  of fact, our law says

-------
           our regulations should be consistent with their



 2          regulations.



 3                         These are the regulations, the national



           standards that affect owners and operators of treat-



 5          ment, storage and disposal facilities.  That: is



 6          incinerators, land disposal sites, chemical treat-



           ment facilities, perhaps even landspray facilities


 P

           that take hazardous waste--the ones that are in this



           category that we defined in the first section--and



10          provide requirements that assure us that those



11          facilities are run properly.  Those requirements
12
21
           range from record keeping authority—and, in fact,
13          they fill out this manifest system that I am talking



14          about—to the fact that they have to monitor their



15          facility, the ground, the air, the other environment



16          around it.



17                         We have inspection requirements, or


18
           the state will; location of construction requirements




           will be prescribed; maintenance and operation will




20          be possibly covered.  Here is a list of things that
           are in the law that the Congress said we should look
           at in designing these regulations.



23                         These are the permits for the facilities



           that I just mentioned.  Those that are involved in



           storing, treating or disposing will have to get a

-------
                                                           43
 1           permit,  hopefully from the state government,  to




 2           operate  those facilities.   And so this is a set of




 3           regulations to set up the  procedural side, not the



 4           environmental side of those,  what kind of administra-




 5           tive procedures you go through to get that permit;




 6           how will it be issued; what is the term on it; what




 7           is the fixed term.  Will it go on indefinitely; what



 8           kind of  public hearings are required, and so forth.




 9                          There is a  provision in the law that



 10           for interim permits that this is a way a business can



 11           stay in  business while the government, both state and




 12           Federal, are examining permits.  This says basically




 13           that if  a business was in  business when the law was



 14           passed,  which is the 21st  of  October of last  year,




 15           and if they sent a notification, which is their



 16           application to EPA or the  state or whoever is running



 17           the program at that time--I am sorry.  They have




 18           applied  for a permit and also notified us, then they



 19           have a permit.  In other words, they can continue



 20           operating while the facts  of  their permanent  permit




 21           are being examined.



 22                          The work goes  smoothly for the state



 23           and for  us and it lets business continue in business




 24           while they are being responsive by applying for a




25           permit,  for those who are  in  the business of  storing,

-------
                                                             44
1          treating or disposing of hazardous wastes.  This

2          basically Is the section where we have put out the

3          guidelines to let the state know what the rules of

4          the game are.  Yes, sir?
                              SjtglL.              Ste/J
5                         MR. OHlMiiDa;  I am Bill ShieleU-f rom

6          the State of Nebraska—

7                         MR. TUCKER:  Bill, once again,  would

8          you please come to the mike.  You and all subsequent

9          people please come to the mike so we can get it on

10          the record properly.   Once again, if each person

11          would please give their name and affiliation or

12          organization.
                              SHEtt-         Ster'l
13                         MR. SHIELDO;  Bill Shields from the

14          State of Nebraska.  How can you apply for this permit

15          when you don't even have a definition for a hazardous

16          waste and know what you are applying for on this

17          interim permit bit?

18                         MR. KOVALICK:  Now this is after what--

19          after all the regs up to this point are promulgated.

20          You see, it is 18 months for each one of them.  In

21          other words, the regs of the law hopefully will be

22          out by 18 months.  Actually, they will be proposed

23          before then and they will be taken into effect.  They

24          will be final at 18 months.  And then the law also

25          says six more months we are supposed to wait until

-------
                                                            45
 1          they are actually affected.  So  there  Is a  time  from




 2          about three months  to about  1-15 to  1-24 when  you can



 3          apply.




                          MR.  SHIBIiDE;  Sometime  in about 1979




 5          is when you would make that  first application  then,



 6          18 months from the  21st of October?



 7                         MR.  KOVALICK:  18 months in  1978.   That




           is when the final reg will be in effect.  Then six




 '          more months would be 10-78 the regs  would be effective.



10          So, during that period those who are in business  and




           have notified us get a permit.



12                         These are primarily for the  benefit



           of the states.  We  are going to  spend  some  time  with



           them tomorrow, but  this basically tells us  how to



           write the guidelines for an authorized state program,



           the fact that they  should be equivalent with the



17          Federal program.



18                         You may be aware  wastes of this kind



           are shipped interstate.  At  least, the survey  in  Ohio



20          indicates that wastes are shipped to 13 states from



21          Ohio for disposal.  And so the consistency  between



22          and among the programs is rather important.  And




23          finally that there be adequate enforcement  for these




24          hazardous waste divisions.




25                         Let me just finish with the  notification

-------
                                                           46
1          section,  which is the one I mentioned just  a minute


           ago.   The generators, transporters,  treaters, disposers



           and storers of hazardous wastes should notify EPA



           and/or the state the fact that they are in  this



           business.  That puts us all on notice that  they  are



           potential candidates for a permit.   And this takes
6


           place within three months after we  define what a



           hazardous waste is.  So it will be  sometime in about
o


„          July of 1978 when there will be notification process,



           between April, July and August of 1978.



                          I think my time is up.  Are  there



           other questions?



13                         MR. TUCKER:  We do have a few additional



           minutes.   We can use it on this session if  you have
14



           t0'


                          MR. KOVALICK:  All right, my time is
16


           not up.  Joe?

17                             £/**££.

...                         MR. BIOEtT;  My name  is Joseph
lo


           Missouri Department of Natural Resources.  My assign-



           ment is to establish a state hazardous waste program



           for Missouri.  As you all know at the head table, we



           have been working since last May with a very large



           citizen's group drafting a piece of enabling



           legislation which will allow us to begin this type



25          of program.

-------
                                                             47
 1                          This btll is House Bill 318 and it




 2           is now in the legislature.   But we started developing




 3           this before your bill was passed and we—being from




 4           Missouri, we took some peculiar approaches.   We think



 5           our program adds up to something that is basically



 6           equivalent in almost every way with what you have.




 7                          There are however some important




 8           differences.   Regarding storage and the size of our




 9           civil penalties and a few other details like this,




 10           for example,  there are differences.   But the real




 11           intent,  and we have good backing in the legislature,



 12           is we don't want to go through the experience that




 13           has been occuring with the  water programs and some




 14           of the other  Federally mandated programs in  which




 is           there is,  first,  implementation by the Federal govern-



 16           ment,  and then it is transferred to the state and




 17           everybody affected has to go  through the painful



 13           process  of learning a new set of faces and a new  set



 19           of rules and  regulations.



 20                          We thought we  could avoid that by  the




 21           timely action we  have taken,  but there are some



 22           provisions in black and white in this  bill--particular-




 23           ly the last one you are talking about, 3010—'which I




 24           think  are  going  to make it  very,  very  difficult for




25          us  to  pick up  the  show from the  beginning at the  state

-------
 1          level using whatever resources we can get, which most




 2          people have to come from the Federal government, and




 3          achieve primary contact with people affected by the



 4          bill from the very beginning, instead of a program




 5          that concentrates on the worst problems first and




 6          to the extent of our staff capability dealing with



 7          secondary problems later.




 8                         And 3010 is one that we are particularly



 9          concerned about because what it says is that 21




10          months, which is only three months after the promulgat-




11          ion of the guidelines for states, everyone who




12          generates, transports, treats or stores or disposes



13          must notify EPA of that activity.  And if they don't



14          do that, they are subjected to severe penalty and



is          they can't generate, transport, treat or store or



16          dispose.



17                         Now the problem is that we can't



18          possibly get our program authorized by you before




19          that date because your guidelines aren't coming out




20          for 18 months and you have three--another three months




21          before you give us any indication whether we will




22          get authorization.  So we see this as a tremendous




23          problem that our industry is going to be, first,



24          contacted by you, and they are going to be very confuse




25          and are not going to know really what a hazardous waste

-------
                                                             49
 1          really  is.  And  I don't think  you are  going  to have




 2          the staff or we  will have  the  staff at that  point  to



 3          really  work with them and  explain it.




 4                         I think we  are  just really going to




 5          get off on the wrong foot  and  I am very concerned  about



 6          it.  Is there any possible way you can delay that




 7          date or speed up the state authorizations so that  we




 8          can handle it.   We would certainly appreciate it.




 9          We see  this as a very severe issue because that 3010



10          is going to affect more people and stir up more



11          opposition within Missouri to  the implementation of



12          this bill.




13                         Our main problem dealing with our




14          legislature is just a bad  experience with other




15          programs that have gone in too fast with premature




16          implementation dates, inadequate funding so  the things



17          can be  done on time.  And  if there is  any way we can




18          avoid it, please do.



19                         I think getting the state guidelines



20          out substantially earlier  than 18 months would help.




21          If you  could speed up the  process by which we could




22          get authorized so we could get to carrying out 3010,



23          that would help.   And I am also very concerned that




24          when we do different details—for example, we don't



25          think that most storage should require a permit.  We

-------
                                                             50






 1           don't--we  think we  will  be  burled In paperwork if




 2           we  define  storage too  narrowly.   Every generator  has



 3           to  store his waste  for a period  of time before he has




 4           enough  to  justify calling the  truck to pick, it up.



 5                          If we define storage too narrowly,



 6           almost  every generator will require a permit.   We will



 7           be  buried  in paperwork.  We have taken a different



 8           approach in Missouri and we say  on site storage.   We




 9           are not talking about  long  term  indefinite  storage,



10           which  is really disposal.   It  does not require a



11           permit.  It just has to  meet safety rules and




12           regulations.  We think we can  enforce that  and save



13           ourselves  a lot of  paperwork for everybody  concerned.



14                          So I hope that  that kind of  difference



15           with the Federal bill  will  not cause us grief  and



16           prevent us from become an authorized state  program.



17           Thank you.



18                          MR.  KOVALICK:   Thank you,  Joseph,



19           for your comments on the record.   He and I  have dis-




20           cussed  that before  and I guess that  is somewhat a




21           testimonial to  public  process  by virtue of  having




22           the State  of Missouri  involved in the writing  of  the



23           state program guidelines.   We  surfaced these very



24           problems in the last two weeks or so.   Hopefully  we




25           can work out a  way.

-------
                                                           51
 1                         As a matter of fact, the state guide-



 2          lines are to be out to the best of our ability way




 3          ahead of the April, 1978 schedule, which might



 4          alleviate some of the problems.  And so I at this




 5          point can assure you that—as we did Joe last week




 6          in Washington--that we are aware of this possible




 7          penalty, which is states who are taking leave.  That




 8          certainly is not within the purview of the Act.




 9                         The Act calls on us to have the states



10          take up the--so we have to, with this kind of



11          opportunity, figure out a way to accomodate that if



12          we can, possibly can.




13                         Are there any more questions?



14                         (No response.)




15                         MR. TUCKER:  Any more questions for



16          Walt on this section?



17                         (No response.)




18                         MR. TUCKER:  O.K.  If not, we will



"          proceed to the next item on the program and this



2"          subject is indicated on the program as the broad




21          topic of Land Disposal.  I don't know what all that




22          is supposed to entail for purposes of this meeting,




23          but Lanny Hickman is going to tell us.




24                         MR. HICKMAN:  3011 provides program




25          grants for states having this waste program.  It

-------
                                                         52






 1          authorizes for 1978 and 1979 25 million per year



 2          authorized locally.  We have covered one of the key--




 3          as I mentioned at the beginning of this meeting--key




 4          thrusts of RECRA, and that is dealing with the



 5          environmental health threats of improper hazardous




 6          waste management.




 7                         We are going to talk about a second



 3          major thrust now, and this is dealing with the




 9          elimination of improper land disposal practices of




10          solid waste.  We will then talk about the Resource



11          Conservation and then we will talk about the institu-



12          tional structures that the law has provided to allow




13          the opportunity to meet these three major thrusts of



14          the law; and that is the insitutional building at



15          the state and local level.



16                         O.K.  I think in order for us to under-



17          stand what this law means now--what it means in the




18          hazardous, resource conservation and land disposal--



19          we ought to look at four key definitions in the law.




20          I am going to try to read them, sort of scan them, to




2i          make sure 1 hit some of the key ones, the key points



22          in the definitions because this law changes from the




23          old law the definition of disposal which is more or




24          less generic in the case of solid waste management




25          collection through ultimate disposal.

-------
                                                              53
 1                          It  now focuses,  the  definition of




 2           disposal,  indeed on  the  placing of  the  solid waste  on



 3           the  land.   In  turn,  disposal means  that discharge,




 4           deposit, ejection, dumping, spilling  or leaking or




 5           placing of any solid waste or hazardous waste into




 6           or on any  land or  water,  so that  such solid  waste or




 7           hazardous  waste or any constituent  thereof in any




 8           byproduct  that might result from  that waste  being




 9           in the disposal site,  so  that any constituent thereof



 10           may  enter  the  environment or be admitted  to  the air




 11           or discharged  in any water, including ground water.




 12                          Now this  is the  first  time the Federal



 13           Government has  entered into some  sort of a policy




 14           position on the issue  of ground water protection in




 15          a big way.  The Safe Drinking Water Act addresses



 16           the  issue  of ground  water, also.  But this law address-



 17          es the issue of impact on ground  water  with  improper



 18          waste management practices.




 19                         O.K.  Now I am going to  give  you.



 20          The next two definitions are sort of  mumbo-jumbo




 21          bureaucratic Congressional language,  but it  ties in




 22          with the section I am  talking about,  the procedure




 23          for development of the state and  local  plan.




 24                         The term open dump means a site  for




25          the disposal of solid waste which is not a sanitary

-------
                                                            54
 1          landfill within the meaning of Section 4004, which is




 2          part of Subtitle B.  Now that implies that there is



 3          nothing in between.  It is either sanitary landfill



 4          or it is an open dump.




 5                         The term sanitary landfill means the



 6          facility for the disposal of solid waste, which




 7          meets the criteria published in Section 4004.  We




 8          are going to talk about what is required in that




 '          section.




'"                         And now the key definition under the




"          law, the definition for solid waste.   Congress has



12          now said that a solid can be solid or liquid or



13          anything in between.  And only Congress can make those



14          sorts of judgements.  The term solid waste means any



'5          garbage, refuse, sludge--now this is the key new



16          addition to the definition--sludge from a waste water



17          treatment plant, water supply treatment plant or air




18          pollution control facility.



19                         O.K.  Now for the first time there is




20          a law addressing itself to those wastes that have




21          lain in limbo between liquid and solid.  You know,




22          the super goos.  Super goos now includes solid hazard-



23          ous waste.  This is a special constituent of the total




24          waste treatment we are worrying about now.  Air




25          pollution control or any other discarded material,

-------
                                                           55
 1          including solid, liquid, semi-solid or containing



 2          gaseous material, whatever that means, resulting



 3          from Industrial, commercial, mining and agricultural




 4          operations or from community activities.  It does



 5          include dissolved materials and irrigation returns



 6          and dissolved solids and domestic sewage, and those




 7          things that are permitted under the Federal Water Law.



 8                         Then it says the term solid waste means




 9          all these things.  So this is a very key definition,




10          and these definitions establish the full umbrella




11          of what this law is supposed to achieve through state



12          and local program action.




13                         Now let's talk about the land disposal



14          provision, Subtitle D.  The law requires in Section



15          4004 that within 12 months from the enactment of the



16          law, which was October 21, 1976, that the administrator



17          shall issue criteria for classifying sanitary land-




18          fills and open dumps.  And in this process of issuing



19          such criteria, he should consider a reasonable possi-



20          bility of adverse affects from these land disposal



21          operations to make his judgement whether it is a



22          sanitary landfill or an open dump.




23                         And then the law requires disposal of




24          solid wastes in sanitary landfills through the planning




25          process of state governments to develop on the state

-------
                                                             56
 1          plan.  We are going to talk about state plans later



 2          on.




 3                         So just remember now somewhere down



 4          the pike we are going to talk about what this means




 5          as far as building state and local government institu-



 6          t ions.



 7                         So within a year of October 21, 1976,



 8          October 21, 1977--we have got eight months left to




 9          get something out on the books.  The key is that this



10          is done in some timely manner because other actions




11          begin when this criteria is promulgated.



12                         Section 4005 requires the administrator



13          as far as EPA to conduct an inventory of all the



14          disposal sites deemed to be open dumps based upon the



15          criteria he promulgates in 4004 within 12 months after



16          he has established the criteria for these disposal



17          sites.  So that is two years from the initial enact-




18          ment of the law, or October 21, 1978.



19                         Then the states must provide for the



20          upgrading and the closing of all those sites that are




21          published on a list.  The administrator must publish



22          a list of all those sites that he finds that meet the




23          criteria of open dumps.  Now the hooker is that that



24          site, once it is on the list, is in violation of




25          Federal law because the law says open dumps will not

-------
                                                            57
 1          be tolerated after this period of time.  They will be



 2          eliminated and the—from solid waste management




 3          practice.




 4                         The state must provide a schedule for



 5          the conversion and elimination of these open dumps



 6          by five years after the inventory is published, or



 7          seven years after the law is passed, October 21, 1983.



 8          That is seven years.  So that site is in violation of



 9          Federal law unless there is a planning process pro-




10          ceeding for the development of a state plan that



11          provides the mechanism for that site to be converted



12          or closed.



13                         So these are the two real key steps




U          in the issue of criteria and inventories conducted.



15          The site goes on the list and the state must be in a



16          planning process to see that that site is converted



17          or closed.




18                         Now, Section 1008--if you read this



19          law,  this law represents a variety of pieces of



20          legislation agreed upon in the absence of conference




21          committees, meetings between the two houses of the



22          Congress.  The Senate passed one version and the House



23          was trailing behind them.  They passed on another




24          version.  Before they passed a contingent agreement




25          that  they would not go to conference.  Now what the

-------
                                                            58
1         House  finally  kicked  out  will  go  back to the Senate




2         and  see  if  they  can go  out  without  going through



3         conference.




4                        So  you see some ambiguities in the



5         language.   And there  seems  to  be  some redundancy.



6         Section  1008,  which is  the  guideline section, requires



7         the  EPA  to  issue guidelines for solid waste manage-




8         ment within 12 months and from time to time thereafter.



9         And  the  ones that  come  out  in  12  months you are



1°         going  to consider  technically  and economically




11         descriptive at the level  of performance necessary to



12         achieve  public health detection and environmental



13         quality.



14                        Now within 24 months these guidelines



IS         have to  improve  level of  performance and level of



16         control  of  protection of  ground and surface waters.



17         It must  consider such things as the Clean Air Act,



18         the  Federal Water  Pollution Control Act and other




19         acts as  well.



20                        Now within this section it is required




21         that we  issue  criteria  for  open dumping, criteria for




22         sanitary landfill  within  this  section of the law so



23         that these  two sections,  1008  and the Land Disposal



24         Provision under  Subtitle  D  before we get basically



25         into one thrust  of the  Act.  That is to write criteria

-------
                                                             59






 1           for open dumps and sanitary landfills.   The guidelines




 2          issued under 1008 will support the criteria established




 3          under Subtitle D and guide us in the best way and




 4          the need to have a sanitary landfill.




 5                         We also plan--the guideline provision



 6          is  a particular discretion on the part  of the




 7          administrator on what he  should do in arriving at the




 8          guidelines.  The guidelines we have in  the plan are




 9          the sanitary landfill guidelines to support the




 10          criteria on the inventory.   There is one on sludge




 11           control  which is moving into the inbetween portion of



 12           solid waste that we  have  not dealt with before, which




 13           by  definition now is a solid waste.




 14                          I think that is the last one.   O.K.



 15           I just want to review again basically what the law




 16           says.  The  law says  an open dump is  going to  cease



 17           in  seven years.   The law  says that an open dump is




 18           that which  is  not a  sanitary landfill.   There is no



 19           indication  that  there  is  something in between,  although



 20           the law  does  talk about various  types of sanitary




 21           landfills.  There are  some  states  that  have various



 22           plans  for sanitary landfills  that  are allowed to




 23           receive certain  types  of wastes.   California  is a




 24           Class  1 Site and is  basically a  closed  system that




25           carries even hazardous wastes, liquid wastes  as well

-------
                                                            60
 1          as other types of wastes.    Class 2 and Class 3—there




 2          are those sorts of classifications present in the



 3          country.




 4                         The law implies that we can write



 5          criteria that might consider various types of sanitary




 6          landfills.   We don't quite know what they mean and




 7          how we would go about doing that.  The problem in




 8          writing these criteria is  supposed to be nationally




 9          scoped.  Now what is good  for Maine is not necessarily



10          good for Omaha or Southern California, because of all




11          the geological, soil, precipitation, different condi-



12          tions that  exist.




13                         So we rest  on the horns of a dilemma



14          in how to write criteria that will meet the intent



15          of trying to upgrade landfill and disposal practices



16          and at the  same time recognize regional differences



17          that exist  in the country, as well as the different




18          types of waste that go into the sites.



19                         The writing of the sanitary landfill



20          guidelines  and criteria must be closely linked with




21          the establishment of the criteria for hazardous




22          wastes and  the standards and regulations for storage,




23          treatment and disposal facilities of hazardous wastes.




24          The law is  basically intended to get all those wastes



25          into one or two places, into a hazardous waste facility

-------
                                                             61






 1          or Into a sanitary landfill.  So we have to make sure




 2          that the net we cast over hazardous waste is such




 3          we get those wastes that offer major threats and at



 4          the same time we have got to write criteria for




 5          sanitary landfills that would take those wastes that




 ^          do not fit closely regulated provisions of the



 7          hazardous waste law and put them in some sort of



 8          satisfactory land disposal site.




 9                         And all this has to be done with the




10          whole concept of the state program accepting the




11          responsibility.  So the law is very carefully—there



12          are a lot of nuances between these two positions of




13          the law.  We have to issue this criteria.  The strategy



14          is to have the state conduct the inventory.  That is




15          our concept now.




16                         It makes a lot of logic to have the



17          state do the inventory.  They are the ones, in



18          effect, that had to pick up the law and administrate



19          it.  They are the ones who know where the disposal



20          sites are.  They are the ones that can best judge



2|          the quality of those sites.  And they are the ones




22          who will have to be working with those sites in the




23          future for either converting them or planning to close




24          them.  So the strategy is to have the state do the




25          inventory within Federal criterion guidelines.

-------
                                                            62
 1                         O.K.   Now I will entertain questions


 2          on this.   Yes,  sir?

                             X««rH-                      &r-fc
 3                         MR. jCWBgi  My name is Woodrow CWNMK


 4          I am a peon.   I am beginning to feel more and more as


 5          though I don't  belong here.  I am the mayor of the


 6          City of Concordia.


 7                         I gather that this is an exercise in


 8          bureaucracy defending itself because the speaker


 9          before from Missouri apparently has indicated that


10          we are so far ahead  of you that we don't know where


11          you are at.  We have a little town out here and they


12          told us to close the dump five years ago.  We closed


13          the dump.


14                         Two years ago somebody came along--


15          I don*t know who it  was—and said we had to do some-


16          thing about our water treatment plant.  Well, we had


17          a settlement basin,  but it was not adequate so we


18          built another one, $15,000, all that stuff.  Now we


19          got another deal going and the Step 1 Project, they


20          tell us that the lagoon we built a couple of years


21          ago isn't adequate.   So now we have another $350,000


22          looking at us in the face and nobody tells us where


23          the money comes from because we are limited by state


24          what we can do.


25                         So we have all kinds of weird things

-------
                                                            63
 1          that keep coining at us and I am about to go stark



 2          raving mad,  together with the rest of the citizens




 3          of Concordia,  with various things that tell us what



 4          to do, how to  clean up the place—which we think is




 5          clean in the first place--at a cost that is way beyond



 6          anything that  a city—merely the extension of state



 7          government--can do.




 8                         What can you do with $1 a 100?  Oh,




 9          the state tells us we can pass sales tax if we would




 10          like.  Try it  sometime.  So I am real disturbed.  I




 11          wonder whether all these are professionals that are



 12          here or whether I am just a fish out of water.  I am




 13          beginning to wonder why I am here because you are



 14          talking about  something that--well, these whole



 15          public hearings are a laugh anyway.



 16                         We have to have public hearings on



 17          revenue sharing and everything else,  the only ones



 18          that show there are the people that have to be there,



 19          like me.  I  get paid all of 50 cents every day, you



 20          know.  And I am working for the city so I am so well-



 21          paid.  But I am real upset about so many of these



 22          nice directives that come from Washington or elsewhere,




 23          and nobody ever tells us what point there is.  Why




 24          have a public  hearing on revenue sharing?  Who cares




25           what we do with it?

-------
 1                         The people In Concordia don't care.




 2          They elected us and they say if you haven't got sense



 3          enough to handle it, let somebody else do it.




 4                         MR. HICKMAN:  Well, I guess the reason



 5          we are here is to try to first inform you about this




 6          new law.  Secondly, we are trying to get some guidance.



 7          Secondly, I guess, to try to give you some insight




 8          into some of the problems we see with implementing




 9          the law and try to do something about the problems



10          you have just discussed for your community of



11          Concordia.




12                         Thirdly, to try to get some feedback




13          through some mechanism, whatever it might be, as  to



14          what you think we should do about some of these pro-



15          visions of the law which was passed by Congress and



16          signed by the President.  We can develop it in such



17          a way to be most beneficial without impacting in  a



18          way to take away the rights of local government to




19          deal with the problems as it sees fit.



20                         l think we all recognize that there are




21          many, many laws that are passed that come down through



22          state and local government that seem to have little




23          or no relevance as to what the local problem is.



24          I mentioned the fact we are on the horns of a dilemma




25          trying to writer criteria for disposal sites for
                                                    I

-------
                                                             65
  1          sanitary  landfills  that  can  accomodate  the problems




  2          of  Concordia  as  well  as  Augusta,  Maine,  and San Jose,




  3          California, all  dealing  with different  wastes  and



  4          different climates  and geological aspects,  soils and




  5          everything else.




  6                        And  what  we want to know from you all




  7          is  what can we do.  We can't ignore  the  law.   One has




  8          to  assume that the  law was passed because  it is




  9          reflective of some  sense of  need  on  the  part of




 10          Congress.  I  guarantee you the law was passed  without




 !'          any support from EPA, although we would  have loved



 '2          to  have done  something.




 '3                        You  know, 1 think—this law represents




 14          four years of Congressional  study, a series of hear-




 '5          ings, not  only in Washington but  in a variety  of



 16          sites around  the country.  It represents the compromise




 17          on  the part of both houses of Congress.  It is



 18          attempting to deal  with  an extremely complex issue,



 "         which is  reflected  in the affluent society  of  our



 20         country now,  although the energy  crisis and other




 21          things come into. this.   Our  assets are less desirable.




 22                        Our  intent was to  try.  There are




 23         professionals here  and non-professionals and citizens,




 24         and we are trying to explain this  in the problem that




25         we  ses in  trying to make it work  for you.   I am glad

-------
                                                           66
 1          that you are ahead of us.  Maybe you will not. have




 2          to deal with this law.  There are other communities,




 3          let me assure you, sir, that are not.  And they will




 4          in time in concert with their states have to deal




 5          with some of the provisions of this law.




 6                         Other questions?




 7                         (No response.)



 8                         MR. HICKMAN:  Thank you.




 9                         MR. TUCKER:  Thank you, Lannie.



10                         How about a 10-minute break?  It will




11          give our reporter a rest, also.




12                         (Short recess.)



13                         MR. TUCKER:  Back on the record.  Let's



14          proceed with the program.  Next on the program is



15          a discussion on the Resource Conservation and Recovery



16          and what we classify and—as Technical Assistance,




17          meaning that in the broadest sense.  And to present



18          this to us we have Steve Lingle with our Washington




19          office.  Steve?




20                         MR. LINGLE:  Thank you, Morris.




21                         I am going to talk about the Resource




22          Conservation and Recovery provisions of the Act.  I



23          might just remind you that the name of the Act is



24          the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, and actuall




25          resource, recovery and conservation type activities are

-------
                                                          67
 1          really appropriately directed as both being the major




 2          objectives of the Act.  That is, the conservation of



 3          resources and the protection of the environment and




 4          of health.



 5                         The first of those two objectives is




 6          usually fairly easily recognized.  I think sometimes




 7          you forget that resource recovery is an activity which




 8          provides an alternative to land disposal.  And therefore




 9          in essence, that is the meaning of meeting the




10          Environmental Protection's objective of the Act.




11                         And I think it is important that we



12          realize the integrated nature of all the activities




13          of the Act; that the research, recovery and conservat-



'4          ion provisions are really very intimately tied in



15          with land disposal and other provisions of the Act



16          that are directed toward environmental protection.



'7                         But I think that despite the fact that



18          this is called the Research Conservation and Recovery



19          Act, the provisions in the Act for resource  recovery



20          and conservation are not as easy to sink your teeth




21          into.  They are not as easy to identify as some of




22          the provisions for land disposal.  There are no




23          specific regulations to be written.  There is no one




24          specific identifiable section related to resource,




25          recovery and conservation.

-------
                                                           68
 1                         Rather, the provisions tend to be



 2          spread out through a number of different authorities



 3          and provisions of the Act.  Well, let me begin here




 4          by briefly reviewing some of the sections of the Act



 5          that resource, recovery and conservation are included




 6          in but which are not specifically directed only at



 7          resource, recovery and conservation.  After that I




 8          will talk about some of the provisions which are




 9          specifically resource  recovery and conservation only.



10                         First is the guidelines, and Lannie



11          Hickman just discussed the guidelines.  The point 1



12          want to make here is that one of the reasons that the



13          guidelines provisions is significant is in another



14          section of the Act, Section 6004, which requires



15          Federal agencies to comply with guidelines written



16          under 1008.  Now in the resource recovery area we



17          have already written guidelines under the existing



18          Act and are implementing them and Federal agencies




19          are required to comply with those guidelines as the




20          authority is continued in this Act.



21                         And those are guidelines on separation




22          of paper, on utilization of full-scale resource



23          recovery facilities, and on placing deposits on



24          beverage containers at Federal facilities so they




25          will be returned for disposal.

-------
                                                            69
                          So the implementation of those gulde-



 2          lines is actually an important provision which we are



           continuing to carry out.



                          The next area is resource, recovery




           and conservation panels.   And the title is Resource,



 6          Recovery and Conservation and this is a specific




 7          provision for resource recovery.  But in essence,



 8          these panels are broad-based.  They are technical




           assistance panels and this is the Technical Assistance



           Authority.  But they include not only resource recovery



11          and conservation, but Technical Assistance on other



12          kinds of solid waste management as well.




13                         I will be  discussing the resource



           recovery provisions of these panels in a few minutes.
15
                          The next section is the development
16          of state  and local programs,  Subtitle D.   There will



17          be more discussion on that,  and we have already heard



           about some of the provisions of that.



19                         I think the  important thing to realize



20          here is that there is a particular technical assistance



21          authority given there, and  it is the--it is related




22          back to these panels.  The Act basically says you




23          should assist the state in  developing and implementing




24          the plan  through these resource recovery and conser-




           vation panels.

-------
                                                             70
                          Information disseminated in develop-


2          ment is an activity that is just basic and important


           to everything under the Act,  all types of activities.


4          And it is very important for resource recovery because


5          disseminating information is one of the things we


6          want to try to do.


                          Finally, demonstrations; there is a


           broad demonstration authority under 8004 of the Act.

o
           There is also a specific demonstration authority for


           resource recovery facilities which I will mention in


11          a few minutes.


12                         There is one authority under Section


13          8004 which is the evaluation authority, authority


14          to evaluate the existing facilities.  And this comes


15          inr-we feel it is a very significant role for resource


           recovery, because we feel that we can evaluate existing


           commercial resource recovery facilities and disseminate


           information on those.  In essence, there is an alter-


19          native to actually spending money to build or
20
           construct those facilities.  So we view this as an
21          important authority under the Act.


22                         Now let me talk about some of the very


23          specific authorities of resource recovery and


24          conservation.  First is the Federal Procurement


           Authority.  And in essence, the Act directs Federal aid

-------
                                                              71
 1         to do certain  things regarding procurement.   In




 2         essence, it says  that within  two years Federal agencies



 3         are required to procure  items containing the  highest




 4         percentage of  recoverable material as practicable.




 5         And then it goes  on with several words about  when is




 6         practicable and when it isn't.




 7                        And basically  it relates to cost,




 8         availability and  performance.  But it is very vaguely




 9         stated in terms of those requirements.




 10                        It also states the same sort of thing



 11          regarding the use of solid waste as an energy resource.




 12         In essence, it says Federal agencies that use fossil




 13          fuels must use solid waste as an energy resource to




 14          the extent practicable.



 15                        The Act says that vendors must certify



 16         the percentage of recycled material in the product



 17         sold to the Federal government.   Within 18 months of



 18         the passage of the Act, it says the Federal government



 19         must examine the recovered specifications and, in



 20         essence,  remove any determination against recycled




 21          material.




 22                         And then there is another provision




 23          that deals  with solid waste management services,




 24          maximizing energy and resource recovery.   That is




25          difficult  to interpret as a provision.

-------
                                                            72
 1                         And then finally there is a requirement
2
           that EPA promulgate guidelines.   And the purpose of
3          the  guidelines is to assist Federal agencies in




4          implementing these requirements regarding procurement.




5          The  guidelines themselves are not mandatory.  They



6          are  recommended procedure, but they are probably very




7          important given the words in the Act about things



8          being practical or not practical.




9                         And the guidelines in essence help



10          define what is practical and not practical for Federal




11          agencies to procure by just testing availability of



12          products made from recovered materials and that sort




13          of thing.



14                         I think that this Federal procurement



15          section is something that—it has always been a pet



16          peeve of a lot of people that the Federal government



17          couldn't get its house in order in terms of procuring



18          products containing recycled materials.  And this




19          provision is one which I think a lot of us have been




20          waiting for.  Probably it is most significant in the




21          aspect that it is not Federal procurement itself, but




22          it is state and local adoption of similar procurement




23          practices.



24                         Federal procurement alone does not



25          really account for very much in the way of products.

-------
                                                             73
 1          In fact, it is less than 2 per cent for almost any



 2          product that you can think of.  So this is something




 3          that is very important for the state and local govern-



 4          ments to consider, adopting this same sort of activity.




 5                         O.K.  Another specific section of the




 6          Act on Resource Recovery and Conservation is another



 7          special study.  I am not really going to dwell on



 8          these because in essence most of these are studies




 '          which are—issues which have been studied in the past




10          to a greater or lesser extent.  So these are not major



11          new studies.  However, I do want to point out that



12          a few of these studies—one is a study on small scale




13          low technology systems and another one on front end




           separation.




                          in essence, the study says look at



           the impact of separation on the economic large scale



           recovery system.  I think it is important to point out



18          that I believe Congress recognized in this Act the



           importance of research recovery for small and rural



20          communities, and not just larger communities.  And




21          these two studies reflect that concern.  There are




22          other provisions in the Act where separation and




23          small scale systems are mentioned.  I think it is




24          very important.




25                         The next area I want to talk about is

-------
                                                           74
 l          special committee on resource recovery and conservat-



 2          ion.  And this is a Cabinet level committee and the




 3          purpose of the committee is to study a variety of




 4          incentives and disincentives for encouraging markets



 5          for secondary materials and energy.




 6                         It also requires a study of an important



 7          new concept or new incentives, which is called a



 8          product charge.  And that is a charge on the materials




 9          levied at the time of manufacture with a subsequent



10          credit for materials that are manufactured from




11          recycled resources.  And the charge--the concept of



12          the charge is that it reflects the cost of disposal




13          of the product in the product.




14                         This is a very important committee



15          because its members are Cabinet level members of the



16          Federal government; Secretaries of Treasury, Commerce,



17          Labor and other departments within the Federal govern-




18          ment.  And it is chaired by EPA.



19                         I think that this provision reflects




20          the interest of Congress in incentives for resource




21          recovery and conservation.   A report to Congress with



22          recommendations is required within two years, and



23          there are intermediate reports required every six months




24          This is a major opportunity, I think, for the Federal




25          government to present to Congress specific recommendat-

-------
                                                            75
 l           Ions that will correct some of the marked inequities



 2          that have long been recognized as major barriers to



 3          resource recovery.



 4                         O.K.  Another specific provision is



 5          contained in Section 8005.   Actually, Section 8005




 6          restates authorities on research recovery and



 7          conservation that are also  mentioned in other parts




 8          of  the  Act.   For example, it maintains in there




 9          authority to study incentives on public policies and



 10          disposal charges.  These are the same kinds of



 11           authorities  that are required of the resource




 12           conservation committee that I just discussed.




 13                          Other kinds  of study authority are



 14           generally allowed in other  parts of the Act, but this




 15          sort of sums it all up for  resource recovery and




 16           conservation.



 17                          Now there is one section which we




 18           don't have listed here on this slide and that is



 19           Section 8006.   8006 is the  Demonstration Authority.



 20           It  in essence  provides authority to provide



 21           demonstration  grants for resource—for full scale




 22           resource recovery at a maximum 75 per cent funding.



 23                          Those of you who are familiar with



 24           the  previous law,  this is a similar authority to




25           what was there listed under Section 208.

-------
                                                           76
1                         O.K.  In the final provision which I



2          WD uld like to discuss Is the resource recovery and



3          conservation panel.  Now this Is In essence a




4          technical assistance authority.  Why are they called



5          panels?  Well, they are probably called panels because



6          Congress wanted to  emphasize the need for Federal




7          technical assistance of solid waste.



8                         And to do that, they gave it a special



'          name, panel, and then they gave It a special funding




10          authority.  It is required that a minimum of 20 per



11          cent of the general authorizations be utilized for



12          these panels.  The panels are broad in their coverage,




I3          even though they are called resource recovery and



14          conservation panels.  They are broad in covering other



15          kinds of solid waste management activities.  Their



16          purposes are broad as stated here on this slide.



17                         The teams are supposed to be sort of



18          Inter-disclpllnary.  They include technical expertise,



19          marketing, financial, institutional.  Again, It




20          doesn't necessarily mean that there is a team of




2'          people sitting there with one guy of each type on



22          it who suddenly goes out; but It does mean the



23          technical assistance Is to be provided on this broad




24          range of areas of expertise.



25                         The team can be composed of EPA or

-------
                                                             77
 1          Federal  government personnel,  state  and  local



 2          personnel.  Here  is  In essence a way of  saying  take




 3          people who have experiences   in solid waste management




 4          and  let  them go tell other people about  it.  And let




 ^          them contract to  consultants  to provide  technical




 6          assistance.



 7                         I  think I should flip this slide.




 8          The  last point on the panels  is that these panels




 9          relate to the authorities on Subtitle D  concerning



10          state plans.  Subtitle D in essence  authorizes  EPA




11          to provide technical assistance to states for




12          implementation on development  and implementation of



13          plans through these technical  assistance panels.



14                         O.K.  That is in essence  a brief




15          summary of the Research Recovery and Conservation



'*          provisions.  We are very interested  in getting  feed-




17          back from the states and from  the cities in terms of



18          how you feel about the need for the  kinds of activities



19          outlined in the Act.  There aren't any specific dead-




20          lines in most cases.  In most  cases  there aren't.



21                         There are no regulations  to write




22          because this is a different type of  activity from the




23          other type of activity.  There are probably good




24          opportunities here for activities at the state  and




25          local level, and we are interested in knowing about

-------
                                                            78




 1          the kinds of things  along these  lines  that  you are


 2          doing,  how you feel  about Federal level activities


 3          in these areas.


 4                         So with that  I will open it  up  for


 5          questions.

                             &«ew-              &&
 6                         MR. .jCBMBB: 1 am  Woodrow AHM«-again.


 7          I don't want to condemn you  or be negative  this time.


 8          I think this is the  reason I am  here because when I


 9          saw this recovery deal 1 was very much interested.


10          I have  been following some of the things that  have


11          been happening in Oregon and I was especially  delighted


12          when I  read about what happened  in the National Park.


13          And that thing actually paid for itself.


14                         And if it will pay for  itself there,


15          I think we can make  it pay on a  community level.  We


16          can solve a lot of our solid waste programs and at


17          the same time recover some of these materials  which


18          are going to go out  of date.


19                         1 would like  to see some other  things


20          being done.  I don't know whether I have the answers.


21          I understand that plastic is a petroleum based product.


22          Why do  we make everything out of plastic now?   If


23          sand is plentiful on the seashore, let's make  it out


24          of glass  and pay a  high enough  price  so we can bring


25          it back and reuse it.  Why throw it away?

-------
                                                           79
 1                         And the same thing with cans.  Those




 2          things can be recovered, apparently successfully.




 3          At least the National Park Service has made it pay.




 4          And I don't know why we can't make it pay on a national



 5          level.  And then, finally, we pay for the recovery of




 6          an automobile when we buy it now.  Let's recover what



 7          is in it.




 8                         If you pay eight or nine thousand for




 9          an automobile, you certainly ought to be able to




 10          recover some of that material later on instead of




 11          scattering it all over the landscape.  That is one of



 12          the most hideous things in our country.  And it seems




 13          to me we ought to be able to recover some of those




 14          materials.



 15                         But 1 would hope that this program




 16          really becomes significant because that is really why



 17          I came here.  I didn't realize this other crud was



 18          on it.  Thank you.



 "                         MR. WRIGHT:  I am J. C. Wright with



 20          the Southeast Nebraska Council of Governments and I



 21          cover four counties of which we have 28 incorporated




 22          communities.  With the exception of six of those



 23          communities, they are all under 1,000 in population




 24          so I can sympathize with the good man back here and




25          his problems.

-------
                                                           80
 1                         What my people are interested in out

 2          there is hardware.   Is there a provision in this

 3          Act for crawlers, compactors, buying some land for


 4          the sites,  test boring, fencing, shelter belts,

           roads from the county roads or the state highway
 6
 8
15
           back to the landfill site,  because these people out
 7          here are operating units of government on $25,000 to
           $30,000 a year.   And that is for everything;  road
 o
           repair,  sewer systems,  water systems,  city employees,


10          right down the line,  the recreation program and


11          everything.


12                         And as the mayor mentioned, we are


13          now looking at a new product out here; in this case,


           open dumps that have  to be closed primarily in the
           rural areas.   I went out to one of my landfill sites
16          just last week.   It was cold,  15 below zero.   That

17          landfill is open two-and-a-half days a week.   It


           serves three communities.

19                         I went out  with the guy that runs the


20          bulldozer and it was 27 inches of frost on his cover

21          material.   That  is a little deep for a cat.  He

22          couldn't even hardly break the cover material.  Now


23          this is the kinds of problems  that we are facing in


24          a rural area with small dumps  that you want to close.

           We could go to a larger operation--and I have material

-------
                                                         81
 1          on my desk--I can tell you how many housing units




 2          in every community, how many business establishments



 3          and how many tons of solid waste is generated.



 4                         We can pick a potential site and say




 5          how far it is from town x to that site.  And if we



 6          take tests or can't meet the criteria to prevent



 7          ground water pollution, something like that, we have



 8          to haul it farther.  And the transportation cost




 9          goes up.



10                         So when I go back out, the people are




11          going to say, "Well, we can write a plan."  Well I




12          worked in another state where I covered 10 counties



13          and we wrote nine plans.  And they are real good.  And



14          I think Bill will agree with me.  We can write a lot




15          of plans, but what we have got to do is implement



16          these plans.  And when we get ready to implement them,



17          we need the hardware, we need the landfill sites, we




18          need some way of fencing it, we need an all-weather



19          road to get back to the sites, and we need some method



20          to control these sites, such as shoulder belts, some



21          type of landscaping, or something like that.



22                         And this is just one more item that



23          we are concerned with out there.  And this is what our




24          people want to know, is there money in there for




25          hardware, land fencing, this type of thing.

-------
                                                           82
 1                         I think we can get some plans written.



 2          Our problem is getting them implemented after the



 3          plan is written.  Now we can say we have got a plan



 4          for six months or a year from now, depending on the



 5          area covered or the size of the community.  And in the



 6          meantime we can create ground water pollution problems



 7          or bills in some state legislatures on the recovery




 8          of bottles, cans or paper or whatever.  This has



 9          come down the line.  It is not new.  It is being



10          implemented a lot of places.




11                         We have a lot of the documents on



12          there.  We have copies made.  But it is not economical-



13          ly feasible to do this in a rural area, even if you



14          have got 20 towns out there with populations under



15          1,000.  And there when you are talking some areas



16          that are maybe 2,500 square miles, and you have got



17          eight or 10 towns with population under 1,000, you




18          have got an economic problem.  But you have still



19          got to dispose of that solid waste.  So this is what




20          we are faced with, gentlemen.



21                         And I think if we can find some method



22          of hardware out there and some landfill sites and




23          the money to acquire them, we can solve a lot of



24          those problems, especially in the rural areas.  I



25          know that the larger communities are faced with the

-------
                                                           83
 1          problem of just finding a site.  Most of the  time




 2          out there, we can find a site, but the problem  is




 3          after we get the site we don't have the equipment  to




 4          operate it.  Thank you.




 5                         MR. LINGLE:  I think that Congress



 6          recognizes the problems of rural communities  in




 7          complying with the elimination of open dumping, and



 8          therefore they did put a provision in the Act for




 9          financial assistance to rural communities.  Whether




10          or not there will be very much funding available




11          under that section is another matter, but there is the




'2          authority in the Act.



13                         Anybody have any other comments or




14          questions?




15                         MS. ROSE:  I am Elsie Rose and I am



"          here representing the Kansas City League,of Women



17          Voters and Nature Conservancy.




18                         I may not have a question at all, if



19          my initial question gets a certain answer.  Is the



20          Interstate Commerce Commission still responsible for



21          higher shipping costs for recyclable materials, as




22          compared to virgin materials?   Has that regulation




23          changed at all in the last three or four or five years?




24                         MR. LINGLE:   Well, the Interstate




25          Commerce Commission,  as a result of some railroad

-------
                                                            84
           legislation that was passed a year or so ago, is




 2          required to review its rate structure and to eliminate




           any discrimination against recycled material.  Now,




           that sounds very noble, but in effect the method by




           which transportation rates are established is very




 6          complex and it is very difficult to sort out in many




           cases whether there really is discrimination or not.




 8                         And so the actual effect that the




           study will have is, I would say, uncertain.  In



           other words, whether there will be any major changes




11          in transportation rates for recycled versus virgin




12          materials or not is uncertain.
13
                          I would say, however, that the. issue
14          of inequitable freight rates has been misunderstood



           by a lot of people.  We conducted a study about three



           years ago on freight rates and found that for many




17          materials, while the rates were different for secondary



           materials such as virgin materials, they didn't



19          necessarily discriminate.  In other words, it actually




20          did cost more to ship secondary materials in certain




21          cases because they were shipped to more diverse




22          locations.  They were in smaller quantities.  They




23          had different characteristics than virgin, and that



24          sort of thing.  There was some discrimination in




25          certain cases.  Hopefully, the ICC review will

-------
                                                         85
 1          eliminate that, but the problem Is not nearly as



 2          widespread nor as significant as most people think.




 3                         MS. ROSE:  O.K.  That probably pretty



 4          well settles the question, because in relation to



 5          Section 6002 the procurement, they are going to have



 6          a difficult time procuring secondary recycled materials




 7          if they are going to be more costly because of ICC



 8          regulations.




 9                         So the one thing is kind of a domino




10          effect, dependent upon other things.




11                         MR. LINGLE:  That would impact on that




12          to some degree, but--



13                         MS. ROSE:  O.K.  I just wondered where



14          that ICC regulation was at.  Thank you.




15                         MR. LINGLE:  Anything else?



16                         (No response.)




17                         MR. TUCKER:  Any additional questions



18          for Steve Lingle on this topic?



19                         (No response.)



20                         MR. TUCKER:  Thank you, Steve.  O.K.



21          The last formal section of the program tonight before



22          we get into open discussion is on the overall topic




23          of state program development.  And once again to




24          present this we have Lannie Hickman.




25                         MR. HICKMAN:  Actually we are going to

-------
                                                           86
 1          talk about state and local program development,



 2          rather than just state program development because



 3          the law is designed in a unique way to provide



 4          assistance, both technical and financial, for partner-




 5          ship between state and local government to develop




 6          and implement state solid waste management plans.




 7                         O.K.  Two subtitles of the law provide



 8          for some authorities related to state solid waste




 9          management programs.  Subtitle C is a hazardous waste



10          provision of the law.  Subtitle D is called state and



11          local plans.



12                         RCRA  provides a mechanism for the



13          states to assume a dominant role in assuring proper



14          solid waste management.  There is no doubt about it,



15          but the law recognizes the state to be the keystone



16          to effective solid waste management programs as far



17          as establishing and obtaining acceptable levels of



18          environmental protection and resource and conservation.



19                         RCRA  provides a mechanism for local




20          government to meet planning and implementation needs




21          through a variety of planning, financial and technical




22          assistance efforts.  The law requires EPA issue within



23          six months of the enactment of the law, which would




24          be April of 1977, guidelines for what are regional




25          planning areas.

-------
                                                           87
 1                         In this section of the law It discusses



 2          the interrelationships between solid waste regional




 3          planning areas and a 208 regional planning area that



 4          is provided for under the Federal Water Pollution



 5          Control Act.




 6                         There are some concerns here by many




 7          about solid waste management that regional solid



 8          waste planning practices of the past for the future




 9          are going to be forced into the 208 planning mold.



10          That Is not the case.  While the law says' wherever



11          practicable, utilize what is provided for under 208,



12          there is no requirement that regional planning areas




13          of solid waste management be the same.



'4                         There has been a good deal of concern




15          about all the planning that has been done in the past



16          being thrown out the window.  I would hope not.  I



17          would hope that--we would hope that the amount of



18          planning that has been done for the provisions under



I9          the law would be minimal; that in order to get states



20          and local government ready to meet the requirements




21          of the law and to receive money--what money is




22          available—to deal with the requirements of the law.




23                         Once the regional guidelines are




24          prepared, then within a year from the enactment of




25          the law we have to issue guidelines for the state solid

-------
                                                           88
1          waste management program.  This wtll establish the



2          mechanism by which approval of state solid waste




3          management plans will occur under the law and a flow



4          of money for implementation of those plans.




5                         Now In the law, the law lays out




6          minimum requirements for what is acceptable as a state



7          program.  First it requires that state and local




8          government, local elected officials, must get together



9          and agree on the relative roles of state and local



10          government in the development and implementation of



11          the state plan.




12                         Now what that is saying is that a



13          state plan does not necessarily have to be developed



14          by state government.  It can be developed mutually,



15          cooperatively or in other arrangements that the



16          state government and local elected officials represent-



17          Ing local government can agree on.  Now the law does



'8          not say what constitutes agreement between state and




19          local government.  We think there Is going to be very




20          Interesting interplay in some areas to see how that




21          comes about.



22                         What if state and local government




23          cannot agree on how a state plan will be developed



24          and implemented?  Then the Governor will designate




25          how it will be done.  So the first requirement will

-------
                                                            89






  I         be  for  the state and  local government  to  come  to some




  2         agreement on planning and implementation.



  3                         The plan must provide for  the eliminat-



  4         ion of  open dumps, the banning of  future  open  dumps,




  5         conversion and  closing of existing open dumps, and




  6         the establishment of  only sanitary landfills in  the




  7         future.  It must provide for the regulatory authorities




  3         necessary to carry out the objectives  of  the state




  9         plan.



 10                         It must provide for freedom of  local



 11         government to make contractural arrangements with




 12         resource recovery facilities for the provision of



 13         solid waste.  In other words, they are saying that




 14         Congress recognizes that some states and  local govern-




 15         ments cannot make long term contractural commitments



 16         of or beyond a certain period of time.  This hinders



 17         financing of large capital projects, such as resource




 18         recovery facilities because of the high cost and the



 19         long amortization pay offs of these facilities.



 20         Therefore,  this was used by Congress as a hindrance




 2i         to implementation of resource recovery plans.




 22                        But they are saying if you have got



 23         these sort  of restrictions in your constitution or in




 24         your local  municipal legislation, then you must provide




25         a  mechanism through the normal procedures of your state

-------
                                                            90
 1          legislature to eventually remove those restrictions




 2          so the opportunity for resource recovery can be better.




 3                         The final minimum requirement of the



 4          state plan is that all the solid waste must be




 5          included in the plan and must either go to sanitary




 6          landfills or be recovered—reduced through resource




 7          conservation recovery procedures.



 8                         Now those are the minimum requirements




 9          of the state plan.  Now we have been in the state plan-




10          ning business.  We meaning states and several solid



11          waste programs since 1966.  The first planning grants



12          to state governments were awarded in 1966.  Most states




13          developed and have published a plan which was accepted



14          by the Governor--approved by the Governor and accepted



15          by EPA sometime in the 1970, 1971, 1972 period.



16                         About two years ago financial assistance



17          for planning areas to states were directed toward



18          developing three strategies; basically they were to




19          implement their plan.  One of those strategies was



20          get a handle on hazardous waste and prepare to establish




21          an adequate waste program which will see to the




22          guaranteeing having it handled from cradle to grave.




23                         You notice how nice that request to




24          the states two or three years ago fits in with the




25          new hazardous waste provisions of  RCRA.

-------
                                                          91
 1                         The second strategy was establish a



 2          strategy to deal with Improper land disposal and



 3          proper land disposal of solid waste.  Now notice how




 4          that fits in very nicely with the land disposal



 5          provisions of  .RCRA.



 6                         And the third strategy was establish



 7          trying to deal with the resource conservation needs



 8          of your state.  Again, it fits very nicely into the




 9          provisions of  RCRA.




10                         So all those laws that have already




11          been passed gave us a taste of what were going to be



12          major needs to deal with solid waste management.  So



13          we don't see a big tooling up period of time and a lot



14          of new plans and a lot of exercises that are going to



15          have to go on before much of this law can proceed.



16                         Now this section of the law has a lot



'7          of financial assistance with it.  We have already



18          talked about Section 3011, which provides money to



19          the states for the support of state hazardous waste



20          programs authorized for fiscal years 1978 and 1979,



21          25 million dollars each year.



22                         Now this money is based on problems.




23          In other words, the money is supposed to go where the




24          big hazardous waste problems are or the big hazardous




25          waste generation areas are.   It is 25 million dollars.

-------
                                                            92
 1          And that is specifically for state hazardous waste



 2          programs.




 3                         The current funding of state solid



 4          waste management programs is about 25 million dollars



 5          nationally.  That is not much money.  Three million



 6          dollars of that is Federal money.  The rest is state



 7          money.  So 25 million dollars represents 100 per cent



 8          increase as to the funding at the state level.




 9                         We recognize there has been a lot of



10          work done to get ready to be at the point where we are



11          today.




12                         In Section 4008, it provides for funding



13          for the development and implementation of the state



14          plan.  I have talked about the state plan.  We recognize



15          that this plan is to cover all solid waste, including



16          solid wastes which are liquid and those solid wastes



17          which are sludges and those solid wastes which are




18          hazardous.  So it provides funding in 1978.  It



19          authorizes 30 million dollars for the fiscal year of




20          1978; and in 1979, 40 million.dollars.




21                         Now this is based on a population



22          formula basis and it goes to the states to be allocated



23          between state government and local government for




24          the purposes of developing and implementing the state



25          plan.

-------
                                                           93






 1                         It is  strictly on a population basis




 2          but  it  says  no  state  shall  receive less  than one-half



 3          of 1 per  cent of  any  funds  appropriated  under this



 4          section of the  law.



 5                         Now Section  4008(a)(2)  provides for




 6          implementation  of solid waste management programs



 7          effectively  at  the local level.   This  section of the



 8          law  recognizes  the bridging of the gap between




 9          development  of  plan and actual construction of a




 10          facility  or  the awarding of the  contract or the--



 11          to allow  the bridging of the gap to allow the selling




 12          of a plan that  has been developed by a community or



 13          a region.




 14                         That authorizes 50 million dollars each



 15          year for  the fiscal years 1978 and 1979  for such




 16          work as plan and  feasibility studies,  counsultation



 17          of a consulting service,  surveys,  market studies,



 18          economic  analysis investigations,  technology assistance



 19          It is principally to  assist communities  to meet the



 20          land disposal requirements  and they must meet them



 21           according to the  guidelines issued by  the agency.




 22                         This has no  formula.  It  will be



 23          awarded to local  governments on  a. direct basis for




 24           specific  problem  oriented needs.   Section 4008(e) is




25           a real  strange  little section of the law which is

-------
                                                           94
 1         dealing with special communities and authorizes



 2         two-and-a-half million dollars each for the fiscal




 3         years 1978 and 1979 for communities with populations



 4         less than 25,000 with 75 per cent of the solid waste



 5         coming into the community for disposal and treatment




 6         from the outside and that these represent serious



 7         environmental problems.




 8                        This section of the law obviously was




 '         written for one or two communities that have particular



10         interest by some party in the Congressional delegation.



11         Again, this is on no formula.



12                        Section 4009, rural community




13         assistance, authorizes that for each year, the fiscal



14         years 1978 and 1979, 25 million dollars.  These are



15         grants to states to assist communities, rural communi-



16         ties and rural counties which have populations of



17         less than 5,000; county populations of 10,000 or less;



18         or  less than 20 persons per square mile; and another



19         factor built in on whether or not they are within




20         125 per cent of the poverty level--established poverty




21         level of income.



22                        This is targeted at rural communities




23         such as has been discussed, trying to meet some of



24         the requirements of the law or  trying  to do  this to



25         improve practices of solid waste management.  It is

-------
                                                           95
  l          primarily to  meet the open  dumping requirements of




  2          HCBft,,,  clean  air  amendments that might  be  required




  3          such  as the elimination  of  open burning for a  disposal




  4          site, any requirements of FWPCA where there is a




  5          problem getting rid of the  sludge  from  a sewage




  6          treatment plant,  or such inferior  irrigation.



  7                        This money is only  available to a




  8          rural community if no regional system is available,




  9          and there is  no existing or planned system available




 10          to tie  it to  on a regional  basis.   Now  here again




 11          it has  an allotment on the  limit as to  states  based




 12          on rural  population formula with 75 per cent of the



 13          cost to be--of any particular project can  be funded




 14          under this authority.  You  cannot  buy land.  It



 15          excludes  the  purchase  of land.  I  am not quite sure




 16          why.



 17                        In effect there are several financial




 18          assistance programs to help state  and local  governments



 19          plan and  implement plans.   There is  25 million dollars



 20          for hazardous waste state programs.  There  is  30




 21         million dollars to develop  and implement plans.  There




 22          is another 15 million  dollars on implementation of




 23         plans to  local government that bridges  the gap  between




 24         planning and implementation.  There  is  25 million dollars




25         to the rural communities to respond  to  the principle

-------
                                                             96
 1          of the open dumping provisions of the law.  All  this


 2          adds up to about 100 million dollars for the fiscal


 3          year starting in 1978.  Our fiscal year starts October


 4          1 of this year for 1978.


 5                         Now that is basically covering the--


 6          sorry about that.  Now we had some questions.  Someone


 7          asked--are we at the place now where we can talk


 8          about that question?  Do you want to restate it  or


 9          did I answer it somewhere in this presentation?

                              J"«V-V«.      JSw*»"
1°                         MS. jegffBK:  Dee Jatner- with East


H          West Gateway in St. Louis.  The question is:  Will


12          the Act be implemented as you have outlined it here


13          tonight, whether or not Congress appropriates money


14          to fund these various provisions, or, you know,


15          depending on the level at which the appropriation


16          might be?


17                         MR. HICKMAN:  The Act will be tmplemente


18          maybe not all of it.  The budget for 1978, as it is


19          now in the President's budget, is 24.8 million dollars.


20          In addition to the 24.8 million dollars, there is


21          12 million dollars in financial assistance to state


22          and local governments.  Two mechanisms--seven million


23          dollars for states for development of plans and


24          implementation of plans, and five million dollars of


25          the 208 budget is designated for the purposes of

-------
                                                           97
 1          local and regional planning.  So you have a combination



 2          of 36.8 million dollars.




 3                         Compare this to 1977 budget level for




 4          solid waste management of some 16.5 million dollars.



 5          Compare that with the authorized level of. 1978 of



 6          about 181 million dollars.  So there is somewhat of




 7          a gap between what has been requested and what has




 8          been authorized.




 9                         Naturally with that level of funding,




10          certain programs are not going to get under way very




11          well.  Some of the things that will just not really



12          get under way is the manpower.  That is low priority




13          compared to other things.  It is not mandated on a



14          calendar basis.




15                         Things that will occur is the hazardous



16          waste regs will be written.  The guidelines that are



17          required for state and local planning will be written.




18          The criteria for the sanitary landfills and open dumps



"          will be written.  The inventory will be started.



2"          Now whether or not the entire inventory can be done




21          is questionable, because the way the law is now



22          written and the way the law defines disposal and




23          sanitary landfills and solid waste, any waste going




24          on the land to some sort of disposal facility must




25          be sometime be inventoried.

-------
                                                           98
 1                         Now one Immediately starts to raise



 2          all sorts of questions over whether or not the agency



 3          has a flexibility to phase the inventory.  So while



           we are experienced in dealing with municipal solid



 5          waste, the state and local government are experienced



 6          in dealing with municipal solid waste.  And we have




 7          begun to move the last several years into the problems



           of hazardous waste.




 9                         We have not really attacked the issue




10          of disposal sites such as ponds and lagoons that



           receive liquid and goo and things like this.  So



12          whether or not the inventory can be phased for



13          several years to--a legal interpretation of the law



           would say probably not, but the money that is there




           now is not enough to do the inventory.



16                         There is no implementation grants.



17          There is no rural community assistance grants in that



18          present law.  There is no special community, which



           is really not a very large section of the law.  There



20          is no hazardous waste state program for 1978,  So--




21          but there is money there to begin the implementation




22          of the law.  And much of the foundation for future




23          years will be done through the hazardous waste



24          regulatory guidelines that we have under way, and we




25          will continue to work and fund at the levels we can.

-------
                                                            99
 1                         And we will always share as much as



 2          we can of what we have with state government as we



 3          have in the past.  If you take out--look at our




 4          budget.  If you would analyze our budget and take



 5          out a lot of stuff, you know--you are looking at a




 6          15 million dollar budget.  If you take out payrolls,




 7          paper clips, pencils, erasers, paper, xerox machines



 8          and whatever and other commitments that you have,




 9          and if you take what goes to research, basically what




10          our office has to share with the state is about seven



11          million dollars in a 15 million dollar budget.  That




12          is about what we have to share.



13                         MS. WOODWARD:  Esther Woodward again




14          from the League of Women Voters, Kansas.  You just



15          were telling us about the funds for rural assistance



16          and you just said--and I need to be straightened out,



17          I am sorry.  You just said that there were no funds



18          in 1978 or were you talking about 1977?



19                         MR. HICKMAN:  All right.  The authori-



20          zation for the fiscal year 1978, that is when the



21          real funding authorizations of the law begin.  The




22          fiscal year 1977 only had general authorizations under




23          the—you know.




24                         MS. WOODWARD:  The 15 million you just




25          were talking about?

-------
                                                          100
 1                        MRo HICKMAN: That  is  fiscal year 1977,



          general authorization.  That is this year's money.

 3
          Now  through the end of September.



 4                        MS. WOODWARD:  Now there  is an author-



          ization but you don't have the appropriation from



          'Congress—for all these things that  you  have been



          mentioning, these special comnunities, and the rural--



 8                        MR. HICKMAN:  That is fiscal year 1978.

 9
          We are only now starting into the budget cycle for



          1978.  Hearings will start next week.  They will carry



          over for  a couple of months.  And then the Congress



          about May or June should give us  a line  on what the



13         Federal budget will be.


14
                         What we have now,  of  course, is the



          past administration's budget.  The incoming administra-



          tion has  about until the first, the  early part of



          March to  make any changes under the  budgeting law


18
          that the  country now functions under.  And if you have


19
          been reading the paper  the last few days, you will



2         see  where all of Carter's Cabinet members are telling



          him, "Boy, we don't have enough money  to get out


22
          pro grams  done."



                         And  so  there  is a  lot of  consideration,



          looking  at  the  current  budget  requests that are before


25
          this Congress.   But  I  am talking  about 1978 authorized

-------
                                                            101
 1           levels as opposed to what has been asked to Implement


 2           the law.                             -

                                               mt»\.W/y
 3                          MS.  WOODWARD:   Mrs. WilejrVas just


 4           saying with our experience with the Water Pollution


 5           Law that  if the appropriations could just be put to


 6           funding your panels or a group of technicians and


 7           professionals who could go around in this state and


 8           help the  local communities get organized instead of


 9           having it simply bureaucrats  in the state office,


 10           and not bother with criteria, which as you have said


 11           can't be  the same for Maine as they are for Kansas


 12           or  Nebraska.


 13                          Just get those people out into the


 14           different communities to solve their problems--


 15                          MR.  HICKMAN:   We will do both.   The

           TT/t
 !«          -Wtd-will  be  funded  in 1978.   They will be funded.


 17           They will receive their 20 per cent of the  budget,


 18          whatever  that  budget is.   That 24.8 million,  they will


 19          'receive their  20 per cent.


 20                          We recognize that every regulation


 21           guideline and  criteria we  have to do because  there


 22           is  a time in  the law that  says you shall promulgate


 23          by  such a date.   And otherwise we spend all of our


 24          time trying  to  rationalize why we have not  done what


25          the law says we have to.  Yes,  sir?

-------
                                                          102
 1                         MR. -6WWE:   **6-4«- panels?
 2                         MR. HICKMAN:  Yes, sir.
                              &L*nf            ftrtt
 3                         MR.  CUUCB:   Woodwrow Guggg again.
 4                         MR. HICKMAN:  I am glad you came.
 5                         MR.  OUR3B.   I may be sorry before I
 6          am through.
 7                         Well,  I am  trying to separate all these
 8          figures.   I believe  out of the 15 million you said
 9          three million came  from the Federal government.
10                         MR. HICKMAN:  To the states.  You see,
11          out of our current budget  of 15 million dollars, the
12          states get three million.
13                         MR.  obllCB;   And you indicated that was
14          negligible.  I agree, because on Sunday the 535
15          Congressmen pick up  seven  million dollars out of our
14          budget.  That is also negligible as far as they are
17          concerned, not as far as I am concerned because  they
18          get an increase in excess  of the median income of the
19          United States people.  But that is neither here  nor
20          there.
2i                         You  said that 95 million was authorized.
22          Now there is no assurance  that 95 million will be
23          funded?
24                         MR. HICKMAN:  That is correct.
25          Authorization levels  have  not--

-------
                                                            103
 1                         MR. 6UROB;  Doesn't mean a thing.

 2                         MR. HICKMAN:  It merely places a ceiling

 3          for the purposes of the Congress calculating cash

 4          flow.  That is what they tell me.

 5                         MR. eWft&E:  And so we probably aren't

 6          going to get anywhere near the 95 million for your

 7          program in 1978 and 1979?

 8                         MR. HICKMAN:  Well the budget request

 9          for 1978 is 25 million.

10                         MR. OimOH:  Well you have it in here

11          25 for this, 30 for another and 15 —

12                         MR. HICKMAN:  That is authorizations.
                               
-------
                                                             104
 1                         MR.  HICKMAN:   While  the  Congress  may


 2          indeed increase the request  that  the  administration


 3          has  asked  for,  it  is not  uncommon--

                              M*7tf
 4                         MR.  awfiQB;  Well I have  some  difficulty


 5          with their figures, but that is neither here nor there.


 d          They don't have to  balance their  budget.   I  do.


 7                         I don't come  from  New  York City,  and


 8          the  Federal government isn't going  to bail me out.


 9          So--well,  this  funding bit bothers  me a little.   You


10          mentioned  some  other things  that  also troubled me.


11                         One  was in regard  to the definition  of


12          these various wastes.  And that brings  me very closely


13          to home here.   We have a  lake that  was  funded with


14          Federal money--thank goodness for that.  The good


15          Democrats  got something for  us Republicans.   But,


16          you  know,  I am  really troubled with some of  these


17          regulations.


18                         Now  anybody who swims  in that lake,


19          they just  crucify  them.   But, you know, the  water


20          shed has all kinds  of crud running  into it,  and  I


21          have tried to see whether we can  do anything about  it.


22          No,  you can't do anything about that.  I mean, if the


23          farmer wants to drive his cattle  through and run all


24          the  manure through  our city  lake, and somebody wants


25          to dump their trash into  the water  shed, that is all

-------
                                                            105
 ^          fine.  But we are supposed to keep human betngs out.


 2          Now, see there is a little difference.


 3                         In one case it is pollution and in the


 4          other case it is fertilizer, I guess.  I don't know.


 5                         MR. HICKMAN:  Is that a Federal or a


 6          state requirement?

                              fyKTH
 7                         MR. OuMC:  I don't know.  See, I got


 8          all kinds of problems with these things because they


 '          keep on telling me that something is wrong with the


10          lake.  I have to do this.  I have to put some kind of


11          a poison in there to kill this.  In the lagoon I have


12          to do the other thing.  I am so confused with all the


13          regulations and all the tests that we perform.  So


14          I really have some trouble.


15                         But I was real interested in this when


16          you talked about some of the rural things, too, because


17          that really does concern us.  We haven't give a lot


18          of attention to that.  And so I suppose we ought to--


19          I think you have got 25 million in here, but that is


20          going to go to the hardware in Nebraska.  Thank you.


21                         MR. TUCKER:  Lannie, what section are


22          we on?


23                         MR. HICKMAN:  I don't know.  You want


24          me to sit down, is that what you are saying?


25                         MR. TUCKER:  No.  I just wondered if we

-------
                                                            106






 1         had moved  into  the  next  section.




 2                         MR.  HICKMAN:   Go ahead,  sir.



 3                         MR.  ROCHESTER:   I am Jloel' Rochester.



 4         I am  from  Nebraska.  I represent the  Nebraska Associat-



 5         ion of Regional Councils.




 6                         We have discussed this every  since



 7         the Act was  first signed into law,  and we feel that



 8         there are  several important  issues  here that should




 9         be addressed.   For  one,  we represent  local government.



10         I am  real  happy to  see the mayor who  is here tonight



11         from  Concordia.  I  wish  that,  in fact,  some  of our



12         elected officials felt that  strongly  about this Act



13         to come down here and do this presentation instead of



14         me.



15                         We have worked very diligently and



16         very  hard  and have  received the same  kind of cooperation



17         from  our Department of Environmental  Control that we




18         would hope that they receive from you, that  is the



19         State of Nebraska.   And  we are very happy to see that




20         the 208 Water Quality Planning distttcts are not going




21         to get this  particular program.



22                         MR.  HICKMAN:   They may get some of it.



23                         MR.  ROCHESTER:  They may get  some of




24          it, but we hope they don't get any of it.  If they




25         make  the farce  out  of the1solid waste plan that they

-------
                                                           107
  1         have already made out of  the  208,  I  can  only  wish  us



  2         luck.




  3                        COGS  In Nebraska at  the  present  time




  4         represent approximately 80 per cent  of the population.




  5         We have 26 planning regions in the state and  we  feel




  6         that we are quite responsive  to our  local officials.




  1         And, in fact, we are very happy to see this program



  8         being turned to local government.  We hope that  in




  '         Nebraska that this will go on to our county governments,




 10         regardless of the fact of whether they have COGS in




 11         their particular counties or not.



 '2                        i know that you discussed the  rules




 13         and regulations.  One of the questions that I have




 14         is how would you hope to implement these rules and




 !5         regulations if there are no funds?  It is a question



 '6         that I have a hope that Mr. gUiaida will find out the



 17         answers to.




 18                        Again, I point to your citizen input



 19         Into the program; and,  again, I would point out that



 20         COGS are probably your very best input into this type




 21         of thing,  in as much as we represent the small rural



 22         communities all the way from 47 in population on up and




 23         in the state of Nebraska,  we on a person to person




 24         basis  with these people.   We have already discussed




25         the new law with them and  our people are very responsive

-------
                                                           108


                                                    DSC.
 1          to us, and I think that should our state -BHB€ take


 2          this over, that they will get all the input as is


 3          absolutely necessary from just meeting with COGS if


 4          not the local and elected officials.


 5                         And I could go on to state that I think


 6          this is possibly true nationwide.  Our Council of


 7          Governments movement has been filtered down through


 8          each one of the states.  Fortunately Nebraska is one


 9          of those where it is not mandated.  So we can feel


10          free to discuss with our state departments those things


11          that are near and dear to us and also tell them off


12          when they have it coming to them.


13                         Thank you.


14                         MR.TUCKER:  I believe the time has come


15          to move into the last session indicated on the program.


16          As a matter of fact, I think we have already moved into


17          it, we just don't know when.  So we will start the


18          open discussion session indicated on the program and


19          this will be for just anything remaining that you would


20          like to discuss.

                                                  3»Vh*r
21                         I would like to ask Dee Jaine* if she


22          got a responsive answer out of Lannie Hickman while


23          I was out of the room.  Did you, Dee?


24                         MS. jonnar- Yes.


25                         MR. HICKMAN:  Please.

-------
                                                             109




 1                         MR.  TUCKER:  We  did have  some  people


 2          indicate  that  they  would  like to  make  a  short state-


 3          merit at the meeting, and  they may have already


 4          inserted  and I didn't catch the name.  Is William


 5          Riffle with us tonight  from Overland Park?


 6                         MR.  RIFFLE:  I have no  statement.


 7                         MR.  TUCKER:  No  statement to make


 8          tonight.  O.K.,  sir.


 9                         Dave Makings from  Colby,  Kansas?


10          Is he with us?


11                         (No  response.)


'2                         MR.  TUCKER:  I guess he is not here.

                                     AWt«l
13                         And  Norman Jaipotiid?  I  haven't seen


14          Norman tonight.  So I assume he's not  planning to


15          make a statement tonight  since  he is not here.  He


16          will probably be here tomorrow  morning.


17                         With that, once  again,  I  would like


18          to open the meeting wide  up, wide open,  anything  that


19          you would like to ask of  any of the panel members


20          up here,  or as far  as that goes,  the state people


21          in the audience.  Since we have started, Robbie Robin-


22          son, the  Director of the  Missouri State  Solid Waste


23          Program, has joined us.   Robbie,  raise your hand.


24                         And  I don't believe any other  state


25          people have come in since we started.  So any questions

-------
                                                              110
 1          Yes,  sir.   Can you come to the mike, please,  so the



 2          other people can hear.




 3                         MR. WRIGHT:  This question is  addressed



 4          to Lannie.   You mentioned that 75 per cent--are we



 5          to assume  that 25 per cent has to be made up  locally,



 6          city, county or state.   Can that be matched by another



 7          program,  i.e., a Federal program?  Is there a



 8          restriction on that?




 '                         You know, I will give you an example.




10          When general revenue  sharing first come out you could



11          not mesh general revenue sharing money with other




12          Federal programs.  Under the new--



13                         MR. TUCKER:  You can now.



14                         MR. WRIGHT:  You can?  So this is



'5          a similar  type question.  In other words, the metro-



16          politan areas through,  say, the community block



17          grant program may say,  "Look, we are under criteria




18          to establish our solid waste program."  They  may run



19          it through there.  Or the rural areas may go  to some




20          organization like Farmer's Home Administration or



21          something  like this for the other 25 per cent?



22                         Primarily, because like the mayor says,




23          they don't have it in their local budget and  they




24          can't put  out GO Bonds.  They are to their limit on



25          revenue bonds.  Their mill levy is at its maximum,

-------
                                                            Ill
 1          this type of thing.



 2                         MR. HICKMAN:  I don't know.  But




 3          there is nothing in this section that says yes or no.



 4          It is a good question.  That is one we will have to




 5          look up.



 6                         MR. WRIGHT:  I imagine we are going to




 7          get that question out in the field.



 8                         MR. TUCKER:  All right.  We just don't



 9          have a definition on that point as yet.  And that is



10          one of many, many things to be developed over the




11          next few months.  Any additional questions?



12                         (No response.)




13                         MR. TUCKER:  Is the lady back in the



14          room with AP?  Yes, did you find out if someone was




15          to make a statement about the situation with Wichita?



16                         MS. SMITH:  I am Debbie Smith and I



17          am from Associated Press.  I am interested in knowing



18          how the proposed regulations will affect the proposed



19          dump outside Wichita?  And I want to know whether or



20          not the state permit that has been granted to the



21          site will be taken back, or forced to be brought up




22          to new standards because of the new law?



23                         MR. TUCKER:  I will attempt to answer




24          that.   I spoke with you out in the hall briefly a




25          while ago.  I don't believe anyone is here from the

-------
                                                         112






1          state agency of Kansas as yet.   I know they will be



2          here tomorrow.




3                         But this is a new industrial waste



           landfill site close to Wichita,  or if you want to



5          call it a hazardous landfill site.  It has had the




6          engineering plans completed, both for design and



7          operation, and obtained a permit from the Kansas



           Department of Health and Environment.




9                         Since then, within the last, I guess,




10          week to two weeks, this has been challenged in the



11          courts because of some technicality in the material



'2          submitted to the state.  As to the effect our law,




13          this new law will have on this state action, I believe



           it was pointed out in the program earlier that our law



15          would not be retroactive.  And in that sense I don't



           see that we would have any way where we would inter-



           fere with the current' situation where Kansas has




18          given this permit.



19                         Now, when the guidelines, rules and




20          regulations are developed under this section of our




21          law on hazardous waste, I think if there is something



22          in there of significant difference in these requirement




23          versus the present state requirements, there may be



           a point of requiring some factor to be upgraded in




25          connection with this faeility.

-------
                                                             113
  l                         Walt, would you assist me on this?



  2                         MR. KOVALICK:  You are right.  What



  3          I said was there was no retroactive coverage of




  4          waste.  In other words, what I meant is if there is




  5          a stockpile of waste existing now on some manufacturer



  6          property,  that would not necessarily be covered until




  7          he goes to move it.   And if he would move that waste,




  8          and if it  were hazardous, then it would require




  9          manifest,  and so forth.  But if it were not moved,



 10          it may not.




 11                         Now with regard to the site, let's




 12          assume that in 18 to 24 months the State of Kansas



 13          wants  to take over the hazardous waste program.  So



 14          they would apply for it, and they would have to have



 15          a permit program for facilities that was—actually,



 16          there  are  three words that  I used in the slide that



 17          I showed you.   The state program would have to be




 18          equivalent to the Federal program, and that is the



 19          word we are trying to define right now,  and not--



 20          it  would have to also be consistent with programs in




 21          neighboring states.




 22                         So it  is hard to say at this point,




 23          not  knowing what the  Federal permit guidelines or




 24          regs would be  for land disposal facilities,  to know




25          whether or not  it would meet them.

-------
                                                            114






 1                         MS. SMITH:   O.K.   Excuse my ignorance.




 2          Does  this mean that  these  plants  are  now  under the




 3          operation of  the  state  but the new law makes  them




 4          under the operation  of  the Federal government?



 5                         MR. KOVALICK:  Unless  the  State of



 6          Kansas--




 1                         MS. SMITH:   Applies its standards to



 8          match your—in other words, once  the  law  was  signed




 9          into  action in 1976, despite  the  fact that these



10          regulations have  not been  set forth specifically,




11          it  is now your responsibility to  take care of this



12          site?  No, it still  belongs to the State  of Kansas?




13                         MR. KOVALICK:  Right.   18  months--



14          you missed the--each slide said 18 months from now



IS          we  are going  to write regs.  So in 18 months, unless



16          the state wants to take over  the  program, then and



17          only  then would Federal requirements  be applicable.




18                         MS. SMITH:   O.K.   18 months from October




19          of  1976?



20                         MR. KOVALICK:  Right.   That is when




21          the regs were published and in six months it  would




22          take  effect.  So  before anything  could happen, it




23          would be a minimum of 24 months,  assuming everything




24          was on time from  October of 1976.



25                         MS. SMITH:   O.K.   So the point is that

-------
                                                           115
 1          in two years or 24 months this is going to become




 2          the Federal responsibility for taking care of this



 3          site?




 4                         MR. KOVAL1CK:  I don't know that.



 5          I don't know what the State of Kansas is--




 6                         MS. SMITH:  Oh, I see.  In other words,



 7          the State of Kansas could maintain control?




 8                         MR. KOVALICK:  Yes.




 9                         MR. TUCKER:  I think maybe the point




10          here that needs a little bit of clarification is




11          that we will develop these regs, but the states will




12          then have the option of having their own regs that




13          are essentially comparable to the Federal regs, and



14          so forth.




15                         And indicate the desire to maintain



16          this program at the state level.  This is a permit



17          and enforcement program.  And only if they should



18          choose not to maintain this program do we do it at




19          the Federal level.



20                         MR. HICKMAN:  Now the intent is not



21          to prempt state law.




22                         MR. TUCKER:  Right.




23                         MR. HICKMAN:  But to provide a mechanism




24          to maximize state involvement in the function of these




25          programs.

-------
                                                           116
 1                         MS. SMITH:  Let me ask you a general



 2          question.  Suppose as a state I were going broke.



 3          I am real poor and 1 didn't want to take care of my




 4          landfill responsibilities anymore.  In two years can



 5          I just advocate and you can do it?




 6                         MR. HICKMAN:  Well you got to sort



 7          out between the hazardous waste provisions of the law




 8          and the rest.  It is only in the hazardous waste




 9          provision that the Feds would come in and exercise




10          regulatory authority.  And the rest of it, although




11          we write a criteria for disposal sites, and if that



12          site is an open dump under that criteria, it is in



13          violation of Federal law.  It is not enforceable by



14          Federal programs.



15                         But the site is subject to suit by



16          any individual out there in the Federal court system



17          for being in violation; but it is not a Federal



18          regulatory program.  And even in a hazardous waste



"          site, it is only when the state refuses to or is unable




20          to or cannot assume the program that the Feds have to




21          pick up the responsibility for permitting and then




22          enforcement on a case by case basis.



23                         Only the hazardous waste site is




24          there Federal regulatory stroke.



25                         MS. SMITH:  Thank you.

-------
                                                          117
 1                         MR. KOVALICK:  I wanted to point out



 2          also that all industrial wastes will not be hazardous



 3          wastes.  There Is about 260 or so million tons dry



 4          waste as industrial waste, processed waste, sludges



 5          and so forth.  And only about 10 per cent of those are




 $          hazardous.  So I am blissfully Ignorant of this site



 7          at the moment, but the fact that it is industrial




 8          waste does not mean it is going to fall into the




 9          hazardous waste category.




10                         MS. SMITH:  Thank you.



11                         MR. TUCKER:  I was trying to tell her



12          a little bit earlier that even though this site may




13          have been called a hazardous waste disposal site, the



14          great bulk of the material that will actually be



IS          handled will be from Industry in the area; and much



16          of this waste is very common waste acids, waste caustic



17          and waste solvents that may go there.  I don't know.



18          I haven't reviewed the plan.



19                         But it depends on what—how broad a



20          definition of hazardous we are going to be using here.



21                         Any further questions?.  Yes, sir?




22                         MR. FAIRCHILD:  I am Gene Fairchild,



23          Pittsburg, Kansas.  One question I have, and I guess




24          it would be this gentleman on the end, Steven Lingle;




25          this is a public discussion of resource conservation

-------
                                                           118
 1          and recovery,  and it seems Itke we buried a lot of



 2          stuff and we didn't recycle or recover much.  And I



 3          ain wondering if there could be more of the Federal



 4          agency's insights into how are we going to recover.



 5          How are we going to recycle in light of the fact that,



 6          what, 50 per cent of our municipal solid waste is




 7          paper and paper products?



 8                         We have a ratio of tires in this country




 9          of 110 million cars and, what, four times the 110 is



10          a bunch of tires.  We have a lot of plastics, which



11          are basically non-biodegradeable.  And it would seem



12          to me that if we could get into the recovery and the



13          recycling more, we would cut down the volume.  We



14          would get into energy savings, resource savings, and



15          so forth.



16                         So I would perhaps ask Mr. Lingle to



17          address that.  And then I have another question when




18          he finishes.



19                         MR. UNGLE:  O.K.  Let me just say




20          that this is a public discussion of the Resource




21          Recovery and Conservation Act, and that Act does



22          contain a number of other provisions that don't relate




23          directly to resource recovery and conservation.



24          Specifically, many of the regulatory provisions and




25          state planning provisions have been discussed here.

-------
                                                        119
 1          Resource recovery and conservation is a part of that



 2          whole activity




 3                         It is, as we said, not only a means of




 4          conserving resources but it provides an alternative



 5          to disposal for at least a significant portion of




 6          the waste, and that is very good.  There are authori-




 7          ties in the Act for addressing these problems.



 8          Basically those authorities are technical assistance




 9          type of authorities, research and development,




10          demonstration authorities, and some type of guideline




11          authority.



12                         So, well—and one other major authority




13          which is a Cabinet level panel to study and recommend




'4          incentives for increasing the demand for recovery



15          of energy materials and incentives for conservation



16          of resources.  These kinds of provisions simply have



17          to be integrated into the overall context of the Act,




18          which is an overall solid waste management Act, not



1'          resource recovery and conservation.



20                         MR. KOVALICK:  Let me make one addition




21          to that.  I think that even though I spent all my time




22          reciting about sections related to regulations, the




23          net effect of a lot of those regulations has shut off



24          a  lot of disposal practices which are cheap; that is,




25          they are inexpensive to people right now.   And when you

-------
                                                            120
 1          do that, you change the economics, which is the



 2          essence of getting more recycling recovery for, in




 3          my case, largely industrial wastes.



 4                         And you have a very good example here




 5          in Missouri.  You may know about the St. Louis




 6          Industrial Waste Exchange.  It has operated now quite




 7          successfully for almost a year.  And they are finding




 8          ways to exchange wastes; that is, one man's waste




 9          becomes another person's raw material, in lieu of



10          having to dump it somewhere or dispose of it properly



11          somewhere.



12                         So we like to think these more responsi-



13          ble and obviously more expensive disposal practices



14          for these tough wastes, hazardous wastes, will cause



15          more recycling just by the very nature of making it



16          more attractive to look at these other what are right



17          now more expensive alternatives.  So we like to think



18          the regulations are helping from that point of view,




19          too.




20                         MR. LINGLE:  And I would like to make



21          one more comment.  I think it is important to get




22          the kind of feedback from the public that you are




23          giving, because, to put it bluntly, you have an Act



24          that sets up specific mandates and dates for regulations



25          to be met.  And if there is furthermore limited resources

-------
                                                             121
 1          available, It may be that the emphasis is placed on




 2          writing those regulations rather than in doing some




 3          of the other kinds of activities that you were discus-




 4          sing, which do not have specific mandates; you shall



 5          do this by this date.




 6                         And so it is important to get feedback



 7          on the public's feelings about the relative importance




 8          of the various provisions of the Act.




 9                         MR. FAIRCHILD:  I am glad I am here,




10          too.  The other question that I have has to do with




11          the redefinition or new definition of solid waste,



'2          which include super goos and sludges, so forth.  It



13          seems to me that there is going to be some competition



14          between the solid waste people and the water pollution



15          people because they are fighting over the same thing.



'*          Or has this been worked out, or is there a provision



17          that this might ultimately be worked out?



18                         MR. HICKMAN:  I don't think in a word



19          in the area of liquid waste that we have any problem



20          at all.  You know, if they are having to meet the



2!          requirements of non-point sources and point sources



22          of permitting and the extreme standard requirements,




23          it is not a problem at all.  You know, they are going




24          to be handled under FWPCA.  And then if you take it




25          out of the water and start looking for some place to

-------
                                                           122
 1          put it down, then the state solid waste guides and



 2          the Fed solid waste guides are going to be a lot more



 3          interested than they were in the past.




 4                         See, that was a part of the loop that



 5          was not closed.  And so--but there was some of that



 6          who is responsible for sludges.  And there still is




 7          going to have to be something negotiated and worked



 8          out between us and the water program because some




 9          places they are going to  take care of it and some



10          places somebody else will take care of it.



11                         But basically once they take it out



12          of the water and the air and start to find a place




'3          to put it down, now the solid waste program has a



14          stronger voice in how that is done.



15                         MR. TUCKER:  Any further questions?



16          It is open season.



17                         MS. ROSE:   I am Elsie Rose, and 1 think



18          rather than speak for the Nature Conservancy of the



19          League of Women Voters, I will speak for myself.



20                         I would like to agree with the gentle-




21          man from Pittsburg, Kansas, and the man from Concordia,




22          Missouri, and that is that 1 guess I am  disappointed




23          with some of this because I am worried about the phrase




24          solid waste management.  I conjure up huge machines



25          in which we can Just continue to dump all of our garbage

-------
                                                             123
 1          and tt will divide up all of our garbage and do every-



 2          thing for us.




 3                         And not enough of these rules and




 4          regulations make individuals responsible for doing



 5          something about their trash, which is part of what



 6          it comes down to, perhaps not in the industrial area



 7          but certainly in the household area.  I would like to




 8          see a continuation of the experiment in the national




 9          parks.  I would like to see more obvious support of



10          state and national bottle bills.  I would like to




11          project to the gentleman from Nebraska that maybe one



12          way to solve some of their solid waste problems would



13          be to set up local recycling programs.




14                         There just doesn't seem to me to have




15          been enough emphasis on what local people really can



16          do.  Having been instrumental in setting up the program



17          and being active with it for four years in Nebraska,




18          I know a lot can be done that way.  But when we needed



19          support for a bottle bill in the state, I didn't hear



20          from the Council of Governments, and I didn't hear



21          from anybody else.  I just heard from the people that



22          said you can't do it.




23                         And, you know, is technology going to




24          be the answer here, or are we going to get it back down




25          to the nitty-gritty people in the street with all the

-------
                                                             124
1          litter  about  them trying to  do  something about  it.



2          And there is  just that feeling  of frustration about--




3          a  disappointment to a certain extent.   You know,  are




4          you all going to take care of it, or is the state



5          going to take care of it, rather than the individual




6          human beings  who are responsible for creating the



7          mess in the first place.  They  should help to take



8          care of it.




9                         Cardboard hasn't been brought up.



10          I  have  been working parttime in a department store



11          and I hadn't  realized until  then how much cardboard




12          is created and dumped.  And, you know, will this




13          particular resource recovery law even be able to  get



14          down to some  of those things, or will it take amend-



15          ments to the  law to try to get  more at the actual



16          source of some of the waste  that is created in the



17          first place?



18                         So it is both a  statement and a question




19          as far as reducing at the source.




20                         MR. HICKMAN:   Congress stayed away--



21          very carefully stayed away from regulating the issues




22          related to waste reduction.   Congress stayed away.




23          Earlier provisions, earlier forms of amendments to



24          the law,were  perhaps more specific in view of your



25          question, but they very carefully stayed away from it.

-------
                                                            125
                           They went  through  others,  I  guess,




 2         through the Resource Conservation Committee,  as  a




 3         mechanism.  The committees are  to give  them insights



 4         into  the sort of  laws  that might  have to  be written




 5         later on to deal  with  that sort of thing.




 6                        You know,  that is  a pretty dramatic




 7         thing that you are talking about,  because you are




           asking the Congress--you  are asking for legislation




           to change the American way of life.  And, you know,



           it is.  Contrary  to what  you may  do in  your neighbor-




           hood, it is the nature of the American  people to



12         throw things away.



13                        MS. ROSE:  But people in Oregon have




           learned differently.




15                        MR. HICKMAN:  Yes.



16                        MS. ROSE:  At least  some of  them  respond




]7         differently.



18                        MR. HICKMAN:  But apparently the



19         Congress did not  feel  that it was  time  yet  for national




20         legislation.




2]                         MS. ROSE:  It is just a  matter of being




22         patient for a while longer?



23                         MR. HICKMAN:  The  law has to be amended.




24          There is no regulatory function in  the  Resource  Recovery



25          and Conservation  law now.  They very carefully stayed

-------
                                                           126






 1          away from it.




 2                         MS. ROSE:  And the last question would



 3          be to whom would we address written statements, if




 4          we don't have them ready for tonight and we would




 5          like to have them be part of the public record?




 6                         MR. TUCKER:  I was going to cover that



 7          in just a minute.  1 would like to add one further



 8          point to the experiment that you mentioned that has




 9          been carried out at Yosemite National Park on the



10          recycling program for bottles and cans.




n                         There are currently guidelines that



12          make this mandatory for Federal facilities, so we




13          are going to be moving into some of the largest Federal



14          facilities with this very same program in the very



15          near future, in just the next few months.  So that



15          is an expansion of that.



17                         And if that works reasonably well,




18          then it will be expanded to the entire Federal system




19          and from there, who knows.




20                         Steve, do you have a comment on that




2i          same point?



22                         MR. LINGLE:  Yes, I would like to



23          follow up on that same subject.  The Act does not



24          provide for regulatory kinds of activities regarding



25          either deposit systems, such as the one you mentioned,

-------
                                                            127
 1          or for citizen Involvement In activities like—for



 2          separation of wastes.  In the latter it is particularly




 3          difficult.  How do you regulate that?



 4                         But the Act does provide clearly for




 5          activities in source separation.  There is recognition




 6          throughout the Act that is important to this activity.




 7          EPA is already carrying out activities in this area.




 8          A lot of them are technical assistance in nature.




           Some of them are demonstrations.  You have a demonstrat




10          ion of multi-materials separation going on now.  Some



11          of them are guidelines, and you have Federal guide-



12          lines that require all Federal agencies to separate



13          their papers, newspapers, office papers, corrugated




14          containers for recycling.




15                         We are working now to try to implement



16          those guidelines, but it is somewhat of a problem



17          when you have an Act that says we are now going to



18          regulate hazardous waste and land disposal it is very



19          easy for people to get the exact impression you got,



20          that we are not going after these other things any




21          more.  It becomes an issue of where the emphasis is




22          placed.




23                         That is the reason we are holding




24          these public discussions.  We need to hear from you.



25          We need to know how you feel about those authorities

-------
                                                          128
 1          In the Act.

 2                        MR. HICKMAN:  I started out and I said,

 3          really, this law has got three points to it.  It is

 4          got  the hazardous waste regulations, the land disposal

 5          regulations, and then the framework for resource

 6          conservation practices and initiatives for the future.

 7          This  is the way the Congress viewed where we were in

 8          the various stages of development of improving solid

 9          waste management practices.

10                        MR. TUCKER:  The lady, yes?
                              Hmtwu*
11                        MRS. OTHLDTf. ' I am Mrs. Edward

12          from  the Kansas League of Women Voters.  All the way

13          through on your outlines and your plans, you list

14          public participation.  We have found in working with

15          208 that although you write guidelines and yovi say

16         what  is minimum for public participation, we have no

17         way because we have no funds to really get public

18         participation.

19                        Let me give you an example:  In 208

20         you have marvelous regulations that state that at a

21         minimum, a public information center should have

22         Xerox machines, should record what public input was,

23         should write basin plans which can be viewed by the

24         public.  When the League members go to these information

25         centers, there is no Xerox machine, there is no record

-------
                                                          129
 1          of public comment In any of the Information centers,




 1          there are no basin plans, except for one copy.  So




 3          we are unable to do any of this.




 4                         And I would strongly suggest that




 5          in any of these plans that list public information,




 6          you think of ways in which to get funds to the public




 7          and not through state agencies.  If you think that




 8          public information groups are called PIGS, I wish you




 9          could hear what some of our state officials call




10          Federal regulatory agencies.




11                         They do not want to participate in




12          these programs.  They present them in a- negative way,




13          and when we try to indicate what we are supposed to




14          get through the regs, we are told that they were




15          used up, the funds.  This is what happened with the




16          basin plan.  Look what tt cost us to print just one




17          basin plan for each of these information centers.




18          We can't give you any.




19                         There was one copy for the whole state




20          on what public information had been--the input of




21          public information at all the different informational




22          hearings.  The gentleman said I could have his copy




23          for two minutes.   Then it had to go back in the folder.




24          Well, when you ask if they can't make copies they




25          say they are sorry but they have used up their public

-------
                                                            130
1          Information funds.   Now we don't know whether they



2          have or they haven't.  There is no way for us to check



3          on it.



4                         I really wish you would think of ways




5          in which to let public groups at least pay their



6          transportation if they are going to testify, because



7          these meetings are almost empty.  And the public



8          officials who do come usually have an expense account.




'          If the mayor comes, the city is paying for the mayor's



10          hotel room, his meals, his car expenses.  And that




11          is why these meetings are empty.



12                         And I really do make a plea that you




13          think of some other way if you want public participat-



14          ion.  Let us have some funds.



15                         MR. TUCKER:  Lannie, do you care to



16          respond to that?



17                         MR. HICKMAN:  No.  You know, I sympathiz



18          with what you are saying.  I think there are ways




19          that we can deliver to you, you know, copies of what



20          we have in various stages where you don't have to come




21          to an information center.  I don't even know what that




22          ts.



23                         You know, we have had a grant with the



24          League, funded the League now for about the last four




25          years to try to build better lines of communication

-------
                                                         131
 1          between us and the membership of  the League.   Now


 2          we may be able to funnel to  local League  chapters


 3          and state League chapters through your national


 4          headquarters more information and better  ways  to


 5          communicate with you.


 6                         But, you know, we  are going  to  hold—


 7          you know, between now and the end of this year we are


 8          going to have 79 meetings on the  hazardous  waste  regs.


 9          They are going to be held all over the country.


10          There is going to be somebody in  that city  where  it


11          is held that doesn't have to come a long  way.  I  just


12          don't know what we can do about giving you  travel funds.


13          We don't have enough travel funds to do our own


14          traveling.


15                         MR. WRIGHT:  There is that proposal,


16          as you possibly know.  At the present time  there  is


17          a proposal that public interest groups who  are


18          identified as such--and they have some very, very


19          undefinable regs--be provided funds for travel expenses.


20          And it is under active consideration.  As far as  1


21          know there is no negative response to it, not in EPA.


22          This would be primarily out of 208.


23                         Morris asked if I might respond to you,

                Moi*uJ/y
24          Mrs. .Hmileyif  I know what you are talking about.   We


25          have  corresponded on this.   My answer to this is that

-------
                                                           132
 1          on documents produced with Federal funds, as these



 2          are, they do come to our office, as you know, for




 3          review.  When it is convenient, and this is rather




 4          specific to you because you are convenient to us, to



 5          our offices, there are mechanisms, of course, to do




 6          this through our office.




 7                         Freedom of Information requests, of



 8          course, are one.  It really doesn't have to go this




 9          formal route in every instance.  You are always



10          welcome to come and review the Kansas statewide 208




11          plan in our office, or the Water Quality Basin Plans.




12          And if you need copies up to some kind of a limit,




13          because our budget is limited, we will provide you



14          copies.



15                         If you will contact me on any of these,



16          we will see that you at least get an opportunity to



17          review these.  We are serious about this public




18          participation in this review process.  It is provided



19          in law and you can, in fact, at least our office,




20          demand it.  Now you don't have to demand it, but it




21          is your right.



22                         So I will hear from you on these, per-




23          haps?  O.K.



24                         MR. TUCKER:  Any additional questions?




25          Yes, sir?

-------
                                                           133


                               KURTH
 l                         MR. -eUROE:   Gentlemen,  I really expected


 2          to be  ruled out of  order but I will give it one more


 3          go.   I was a little bit  perturbed about what the


 4          young  lady from the Associated Press said a while ago.


 5          You know,  we touched on  this local state cooperation


 6          but we got a runaround.


 7                         I think we  have to recognize that we


 8          have got only two levels of government, and I am not


 9          sure that  everybody is conscious of that, certainly


 10          not the people in Washington or in the great state of


 11          Missouri,  either, for that matter.


 12                         See,  we don't have city governments,


 13          county governments,  fire districts, school districts,


 14          townships,  all the  rest  of the crud, you know,  counties


 15          and such.   We are only extensions of state government


 16          and we can only do  what  they permit us to do.


 17          For example,  in the state  of Missouri  we are allowed


 18          to levy one dollar  per 100 property evaluation  for


 19          a  property tax.   That is really the only tax the city


 20          has.


 21                          In the great city of Concordia there


 22          is a total  of $33,000.  That is for our police  depart-


 23          ment.   Where  do you get  the rest?  Real nice questions,


 24           and  the State of Missouri  consn't answer all those


25           questions.   If they were real nice and polite they

-------
                                                         134
 1          would not say you may levy a sales tax.  They would



 2          say we because it is our responsibility we will levy



 3          a four cent sales tax, or four-and-a-half tax, or



 4          whatever is necessary, and we will give you a penny



 5          of it.  See?




 6                         Because it is their responsibility.



 7          I get hung up with these things.  Now we do have the




 8          tight to float bond issues, both general obligation



 9          bonds, revenue bonds, and the like.  And we do.




10          And 1 also found out just recently that we get revenue



11          sharing funds on the basis of what we do ourselves.



12          And so if we don't vote ourselves a whole pile of




13          taxes, why then New York City gets our revenue sharing



14          funds to use.



15                         But I think that we need to rethink



16          these things.  You know, she opened that whole can



17          of worms.  Now if you don't do it, then we will step



18          in.  Well, I realize that it is a state obligation.




19          I am all for state government, but I don't know where




20          the responsibility of local government is because we




21          can't really put in a whole lot.  1 write more letters




22          than anybody, Randall, Skelton, Eagleton, Danforth,



23          and the whole bag.  They get lots of letters from me



24          because I have something to say and I figure those




25          are the guys to tell.

-------
                                                            135
 1                          I  didn't  know you people.   You will




 2           hear  from me,  too.   But  I  think these are some things



 3           that  need to  be thought  about.   I was interested in



 4           this  because  the  last  speaker here,  Mr. Hickman,



 5           again mentioned this local state cooperation.   Well,




 $           it just  isn't  possible.  There  is no way  that we



 7           can really  get significant input.




 8                          1  have  gone down to Jeff City and




 9           visited  with  those  boys.   Well,  they are  real polite




10           to you.   They show  you the way  around the Capitol,



11           but,  you know,  they sit  around  and they don't do any-




12           thing, not  while  I  am there at  least.  I  think probably




13           they  start  on  Tuesdays,  though,  and  they  adjourn on



14           Thursday noon,  back home again  and make their money,




15           I guess.  I don't know.  I have never been there.



16                          But  we  really need to rethink this



17           whole thing when  we are  talking about state and local



18           cooperation.   And you  people always  put the onus on



19           us.   And  I  don't  know  how  to handle  it.   And maybe




20           that  is  because I am stupid, but that is  no problem




21           for my students,  either.   They  know  it and you might




22           as well  know  it,  too.



23                          But  I think these are some real issues




24           that  we have to handle when we  talk  about state and



25           local cooperation.   And  so when she  mentions this thing

-------
                                                          136





 1          In Wichita, she is opening a whole new bag of worms



 2         that we are going to have to deal with.



 3                        MR. TUCKER:  Right.  As far as the




 4         Wichita situation, we didn't attempt  to address  that



 5         specifically until—well, number one, we weren't




 6         prepared  to and number  two, it wasn't our position




 7         to do  so  since we weren't the permitting agency.



 8         She was requested as a  local representative  of the




 9         Associated Press to be  here to see  if this subject




 10         did come  up by someone  from the Wichita area.



 '1                         And I didn't know if  they would be




 12          here or not, but they did not show up.  So we didn't



 13          give a definitive answer on that situation because




 14          we don't  have one.



 15                         Any further questions?



 16                          (No response.)



 17                         MR. TUCKER:  The  lady who asked where



 18          she could submit additional written  statements concern-



 19          ing this  subject,  if you like just  refer it  to me




 20          and I  am  on the  top of  the program.   And all you need




 21          to go  with that  after my name, Morris Tucker,  is our




 22          address,  1735 Baltimore, Kansas  City, Missouri,  64108.



 23          And we will make certain that  it  gets into  the  record.




 24                          i would  like the  record  to  indicate



25          that  there were  49 people  in attendance by  actual

-------
                                                            137
 1           head count tonight.  This is the first session.  And




 2           if there are no further questions or business,  this




 3           session is adjourned.




 4                          (Whereupon, at 10:27 o'clock p.m.,




 5           February 15, 1977, the hearing in the above-entitled




 6           matter was adjourned until February 16, 1977, at




 7           8:30 o'clock a.m.)




 8




 9




 10




 11




 12




 13




 14




 15




 16




 17




 18




 19




 20




 21




 22




 23




 24




25

-------
                                                              138
 1

 2

 3

 4

 5

 6

 7

                           CERTIFICATE

 9
                     I, DAVID L. ARGIE, do certify that I  appear-
10
          ed at the time and place first hereinbefore  set  forth,
11
          that I took down in stenomask the entire proceedings
12
          had at said time and place, and that the foregoing
13
          one hundred thirty-seven pages constitute  a  true,
u
          correct and complete transcript of my  said stenomask
15
          notes.
16

17

18

19                                    ->
                                  >:
20
                                         REPORTER
21

22

23

24

25

-------
                                        139
PUBLIC DISCUSSION SESSION

          ON THE

  RESOURCE CONSERVATION

             &

       RECOVERY ACT

   *Public Law 94-580*
      Morning Session

     February 16, 1977
     Hilton Plaza Inn
    45th & Main Street
   Kansas City, Missouri

-------
 1



 2



 3



 4



 5



 6



 7



 8



 9



10



11



12



13



U



15



16



17



18



19



20



21



22



23



24



25
                                                               140
PANEL MEMBERS :                                             PAGE
    Morris G . Tucker ......................................  141



    Charles V. Wright .....................................  143



    Morris G. Tucker ......................................  147



    Donald A . Townley .....................................  148


    Morris G. Tucker ......................................  151



    H. Lanier Hickman .....................................  152



    Morris G. Tucker ......................................  167


    Walter W. Kovalick ....................................  168



    Morris G. Tucker ......................................  191



    H. Lanier Hickman .....................................  192



    Morris G. Tucker ......................................  211



    H. Lanier Hickman .....................................  212



    Efftd1*  fe&£                                       214


    H. Lanier Hickman .....................................  214



    Morris G. Tucker ......................................  215



    Stephen A. Lingle .....................................  215
    H. Lanier Hickman ..................................... 229

     My yifr+lM'
    Bouald A. -TuiiLiUiy ..................................... 231


    Stephen A . Lingle ..................................... 232


    Morris G. Tucker ...................................... 232


    H. Lanier Hickman ..................................... 232


    Morris G. Tucker ...................................... 246

-------
 1




 2




 3




 4




 5





 6




 7




 8




 9




10




11





12




13




U





15




16




17




18




19




20




21




22




23




24




25
                                                          140A






                        INDEX  (confd.)






PANEL MEMBERS (cont'd.):                                    PAGE
    H. Lanier Hickman	  248



                         	  248
    Morris G. Tucker	  250




    fl.< Lauitu IIlEKmmi.	  252




    Morris G. Tucker	  253




                        	  256
    H. Lanier Hickman	  258




    Morris G. Tucker	  258




    Stephen A. Lingle	  271




    H. Lanier Hickman	  275




    Morris G. Tucker	  277




                          	  277
    Morris G. Tucker	  277






PUBLIC QUESTIONERS:                                         PAGE
    Eileen Chase	  184




    Norman Hjersted	  186




    Joseph jJig«W	  188




    Jerry Copeland	  205




    Nick £*fe< f}™r	  206




    Diane Gardner	  210




    Chuck Welch	  211




    Walt Studjfcaker	  213

-------
3





4





5





6





7





8





9





10





11





12





13




U





15




16





17





18





19





20





21





22





23





24





25
                                                              140B






                          I N D E. X (cont'd.)





   PUBLIC QUESTIONERS  (cont'd.):                               PAGE
Betty Wilson	  242




Kay Roberts	  247




Tom CleVenger	  247
       n



Betty Wilson	  251




Victor Gray	  253




Norman Hjersted	  258




Steve Iteifife.?..-	  260




Kay Roberti?	  266
          A


Robert Robinson	  268




Joe Jig^frT^r.	  274




Richard Perkins	  277

-------
                                                              141
                           IE2CEED.INGS
                           MR.  TUCKER:   I will call the meeting
            to order.
 4
                           This is the  second public discussion
            session on the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act,
 6          Public Law 94-580.   I am Morris  Tucker, Chief of
            Waste  Management Section for EPA, Region VII.
 8
                           I would like to introduce the speakers
 9
            currently  up here with me.   To my far left  is H.
10
            Lanier Hickman, better known as  Lannie Hickman.  •*«*•
            Lannie is  the  Director of the Management and Informa-
12          tion Staff, Office  of Solid Waste,  EPA, Washington,
            D.C.
14
                           To my immediate left is Walt Kovalick.
            Walt is  Chief  of the Guidelines  Branch for  the
            Hazardous Materials  Division,  Office of Solid Waste,
            EPA, Washington,  D.C.
18
                           To my immediate right is Steve Lingle.
19
            Steve  is Chief  of our Technology and Marketing Branch,
            in our Resource Recovery Division,  Office of Solid
21          Waste, EPA, Washington, D.C.
22
                           The next person to his  right  is Don
            Townley.  Don is  our Acting Deputy  Regional  Administra-
24
            tor for EPA.  That is  Region VII, Kansas City,
           Missouri.

-------
                                                            142
 1                         To my  far  right  Is Charles Wright,



 2          who  is our Acting Regional Administrator, Region



 3          VII, EPA.




 4                         I would also  like to  introduce  the




 5          state program directors that are in  the  room.   I



 6          don't know if I caught them  all here this morning,




 7          but  I do see Robbie Robinson, head of the Missouri




 8          Solid Waste Program.  Robbie, would  you  stand?  Is




 9          Bill Shield in the room as yet, director of  the



10          Nebraska program?  Bill will be here a little  bit




11          later.




12                         And as well the  representatives  from



13          Kansas and Iowa.  I don't believe they are in  the



14          room as yet.



15                         Helping us with  registration  at  the



16          table by the front door are  two of our very  Eine



17          secretaries, Jean Lee and Grace Ancona.  And if you



18          need any help this morning,  please get in touch with




19          them and they will do what they can  for  you.



20                         I failed to mention one of our  staff




21          that is here from Washington; Bill Aids.  Bill, where




22          are you?  Back over here.  Bill is also  with our




23          Resource Recovery Division.



24                         we need to insure that we jSef* a



25          complete registration for this  meeting,  so if  you did

-------
                                                           143
 1          not  submit a  pre-registration card by mail,  this




 2          little  green  card,  or  fill  one out at the  door,  please




 3          do so.   This  will be the  only official record we have




 4          of the  attendees, and  will  be our mailing  list for




 5          sending out copies  of  the transcript  of this meeting.




 6                          Now  we  do  have a court reporter present




 7          for  this session^yfind the  proceedings are being




 8          recorded verbatim.  Now to  assist the reporter and




 '          the  rest of us  in this effort, I request that anyone




1°          wishing to speak use the  floor microphone  and clearly




11          give your name  and  your organization  or affiliation.




12                          We hope that those of  you making verbal




'3          statements will keep them relatively  short because




'4          we are  on a fairly  strict time schedule here; but,




15          additionally,  if you have written comments that you




1*          would like submitted to become part of the official




17          transcript, those will be welcome.




18                          With those few housekeeping chores out




19          of the  way, I would like  to call on our first speaker




20          this morning.   That is Charles Wright, our Acting




21          Regional Administrator.   Chuck?




22                          MR.  WRIGHT:   Thank you, Morris.  I




23          will be brief because  w e do want to  hear  back from




24          many of you.  It is a  pleasure to welcome  you,




25          particularly  since  I have met so many of you in the

-------
                                                         144
 1          past and have worked with you and I know we have a




 2          high quality attendance with this group.  We did last




 3          night, also, and I guess we continued the discussion



 4          until close to 11 o'clock.  I think we will find a




 5          lot of interest to talk about, many questions, many



 $          observations from your point of view.



 7                         We started out on an odd note.  I




 8          don't know what the odds would be to get an organiza-




 9          tion with the initials ESPA and one with EPA across




10          the hall from each other on the same day in the same



l]          hotel.  I thought ESP might be helpful in our



12          communications at times.  But their registration fee



13          is a lot more than ours, anyway, but so was their



14          social hour a lot better last night, too.



15                         But at any rate it is quite coincidental



16          and did result in a little confusion last night.  And



17          1 hope it didn't to you this morning.



13                         We have said many times that you want




19          to immediately distrust anybody who says they put the



20          check in the mailjor they will have your car ready




2i          by the time you go home from work^or they are from




22          the Federal government and they are here to help you.




23          We are a little bit in that position, but we are doing



24          more than that.  We have two purposes here.  We are




2s          asking for your help, too.

-------
                                                         145
 1                         We are here to in very quick and very




 2          good form to  go over this  new piece of legislation,



 3          and this  will be done in the next hour or so by




 4          the speakers  that follow.   This is a very comprehensive



 5          piece of  Federal environmental legislation and the



 6          first in  its  field,  although it is technically an




 7          amendment to  the 1965 Act.   It pretty effectively



 8          gutted the old Act and replaced it.




 9                         It included hazardous waste* which



10          are a national problem.  It included an enforcement




11          authority,  which was never in force before in this



12          type of Federal legislation.   So it is brand new.



'3          It  impacts everybody.  And because of this, our second



14          purpose is that we are soliciting publi.- participation




'5          in  what is called the rule  making process,  which



16          includes  all  of the  rules  including criteria, standards,



17          regulations.



18                         Many  of the  regulations will include



"          technology.   These will  follow later and they will



20          be  out in somewhat of a  similar manner by publication



21          in  the Federal Register, in many cases hearings.   And




22          we  will actively solicit input from those people  who



23          are impacted  by these regulations,  or who are protected




24          by  them.   EPA is depending  increasingly on the public




2^          participation process, as we  have matured into an agency

-------
                                                           146
 1                         We  believe that  It pays  off.   This




 2          environmental  program and environmental law  Is




 3          extremely controversial by the  nature of the laws,




 4          and what we are trying to protect.   It  Impacts




 5          business and It Impacts private lives In many cases,




 6          and just about every segment of American economy and




 7          society.




 8                         You are protected by It.  You also




 9          pay for It.  So you have a right to express  your




^          concerns and to submit your observations and your




11          recommendations In how to form rules and how to deal




12          with this In a programatlc way.  That Is generally




13          the purpose of doing this.




14                         This is not your last opportunity to




'5          submit your input  on the rule making that will  progress




16          particularly over  the next 18 months.  You will see




17          as we go through the bill, we will be actively  engaged




 18          constantly in obtaining the deadlines set by the law.




 19                         Many of these, the most  important




20          perhaps, all seem to come together about 18 months




21          after October of 1976, with some implementation periods




22          we generally expect to be In the implementation period




23          by October of 1978.  So you can see this is a short tim




24          to really prepare for such a new, all encompassing



25

-------
                                                            147
 1           type  of  program.



 2                          The process  may seem quite burdensome,




 3           and it is  to  the Agency.  But it does offer the best




 4           way that we know to consider all of the  aspects, both




 ^           the good and  the bad,  of  the proposals that are being



 6           made  to administer and implement this type of an Act.




 7                          So  I am not  going to take any more



 8           time  with  this.  I do  want  to tell  you that we are




 '           sincerely  interested in receiving your comments. We




10           have  a number of you that have  already indicated that



11           you either have written comments or you  want to make




12           a verbal statement.  If you have not done this, this




13           should not ffiintatrr you if you find  some  of the



14           presentations do stimulate  either recommendations or




'5           observations as to  the impact of this  particular law



16          as we go through this.



17                         I want  to assure  you that these



18           comments are reviewed.in their entirety.   In many



19           cases in the not too distant  past there  has  been some



20           fairly substantial  revision  to propose rule  making



21          as a result of public  comment.   So  they  are  taken




22          seriously and we are looking  forward  to  hearing from




23          you later on this morning.  Thank you.




24                         MR. TUCKER:  Thank you, Chuck.   The




           next item on our agenda this morning  is  the  discussion

-------
                                                            148
 1          of the overview of the Resource Conservation and




 2          Recovery Act.  We think we have an excellent person



 3          to do this.  This person is now filling the exalted




 4          capacity in what we call the green carpet area; however



 5          many of you know him as the former director of our




 6          division that contained the Solid Waste Management




 7          Program, and even prior to that, dating back 10 years



 8          or so, as being the original Mr. Garbage for EPA




 '          Region VII.




10                         So I will call on Don Townley to give




11          us a few remarks on this.



12                         MR. TOWNLEY:  Thanks, Morris.  It is




13          real good to have an opportunity to get back and



I4          work a little bit in the garbage business and meet



15          several of the people with whom I have worked in the



16          past, and who I last saw at a garbage meeting.  I see



17          Bill, Betty, Carl, and there are several others.




18                         You know, several of my colleagues



"          are here from the regional office and they will verify




20          the statement I am about to make.  This Acting Deputy




21          business doesn't get you much these days.



22                         The first serious Federal solid waste




23          legislation was passed in 1965, and the Public Health



24          Service and the state health departments began to




25          implement that Act early in 1966.  Then with the

-------
                                                            149
 1           formation  of EPA  in 1970,  EPA  took the Federal law,


 2           and  subseqent  reorganizations  of  the  state  health


 3           departments continued the  implementation of this


 4           first  Solid Waste Act.


 5                          By this  time, today, we have in our


 6           four states of Region VII, Nebraska,  Iowa,  Kansas


 7           and  Missouri,  very  good solid  waste programs.   But


 8           early  in this  implementation phase, we learned that


 9           there  were big areas  of solid  waste that couldn't be


10           touched.


11                          A  few  examples  of  this type  of  problem:


12           A friend of mine  called me one time and he  said, "Hey,

                                                          **i£vi*t*
13           I know where there  are  two thousand gallons of e*a*fce


14           liquid wastes  being disposed of along the river banks.


15           Somebody should do  something about that."  Well, you


16           couldn't disagree with  that.


17                          In this  metropolitan area, a private


18           individual developed  a  hazardous  disposal facility.


19           It was properly designed, engineered, the plans were


20           approved,  and  the final construction  was approved by


21           the  stage  agency  and  our office.   Well,  we  had a


22           dedication of  this  facility.   We  had  here a facility


23           that could properly dispose of the jjcottr wastes that


24           couldn't go to  the  normal sanitary landfills.   About


25           a month later  the guy called and  he said, "I am not

-------
                                                        150
 1          getting anything to dispose of.  What is happening


 2          here?"


 3                         Another example of the problems we

                             <*f-*f«&_
 4          ran into:  In the inetrme part of our region, a large


 5          industry contracted with an out-of-state disposal


 6          company to come in and pick up and properly dispose

                    "XS/oc,
 7          of their mini If liquid wastes.  This hauler picked


 8          up the stuff faithfully each week, hauled it a short


 9          distance out of the city, turned off on a side road


10          and dumped it.  This went on for months.


n                         Somebody should do something about


12          it.  The passage of this new Act, the Resource


13          Conservation and Recovery Act, Public Law 94-580,


14          closes this gap.   It does contain the provisions for


15          handling the type of wastes that I have been mention-


16          ing.  And I think it effectively covers most of the


17          remaining environmental problems.


18                         But a word of caution at this point;


19          a few years ago one of our state agencies was hard


20          at work passing Air Pollution Control legislation.


2i          I was working closely with the representatives of


22          home owner associations, helping to pass this law.


23          The guy called me very excited one evening and said,


24          "We got the air pollution problem whipped."  I said,


25          "What do you mean?"  He said, "The Governor signed the

-------
                                                           151
 1          law today.  Now we can  go back  to our normal  work.



 2          Air pollution  is  taken  care of."  I  said,  ''Friend,




 3          the problem, the  work has just  begun."   The problem



 4          of implementing an act  is a lot tougher  than  getting



 5          one passed.




 6                         I  am very enthusiastic about this new



 7          waste disposal act, the RCRA.   I hope that by the



 8          end of this meeting you share this enthusiasm.  But




 9          I tell you that your state agency and our agency must




 10          have your support.  We must have public  participation



 11          in developing reasonable, implementable  regulations.



 12                         And above all, the state  agencies have




 13          got to have legislative support to obtain the



 14          resources to implement  the Act.  And to  pass  their




 15          own legislation,  also.  I hope  that you  take  up this



 16          task when you leave here, and I say that the  challenge



 17          lies before us.



 18                         MR,, TUCKER:  Thank you, Don.   We now



 19          enter into the portion of the agenda on  the technical



 20          presentation of sections of the new law.  One thing I



 21          should mention is that we will  entertain questions  as




 22          we go along during each discussion, if it is  pertinent



 23          to that topic being discussed.  However, if you do




 24          have a statement  that you wish  to present of  a general




25          nature, I request that you hold those statements

-------
                                                           152
 1          until the last segment of the program, the open



 2          discussion.




 3                         Our first presentation will be on the



 4          portion of the new law dealing with Training, Public



 5          Information and Public Participation.  To present




 6          this, we have Lannie Hickman.  And Lannie, I think,




 7          has probably the greatest history of anyone in the




 8          country in being with the Federal Solid Waste Program.




 9                         The initial legislation, as indicated



10          by Don Townley, was passed in 1965.  And that is when



11          Lannie went with the Solid Waste Program and started



12          immediately building up his vast staff of professionals



13          in Cincinnatti, which I think included six people,



14          something of that nature.  But anyway, he has seen



15          it all and is up to date on our new legislation, so



16          he is on the program about three times this morning.



17          He is going to give us this first speech right now.



18          Lannie?



19                         MR. HICKMAN:  Thank you, Morris.



20                         MR. TUCKER:  By the way, Lannie hopes




21          to work from the floor and if there  is trouble hearing




22          him toward the back of the room, please let us know




23          and we will make some adjustments on  the mike system.



24                         MR. HICKMAN:  Yes, we  feel that the



25          podium arrangement is nice for you folks  down here in

-------
                                                            153
  1         Kansas City but we are not used  to  such  fancy arrange-




  2         ments in Washington,  so we feel  more  comfortable  down



  3         here on the floor.  We will  let  the regional  people




  4         work from there.




  5                        If you can't  hear me we will make  some



  6         accomodations because I think working off of  a slide




  7         projector, it is more effective  to  be down here.




  8                        We are going  to cover  an  awful lot




  9         of information, a considerable amount of information




 10         this morning.  We have a series  of  slides that goes




 11         through a lot of the  nitty-gritty of  the law.   I  just



 12         don't think that—no  matter  how  hard  we  work  at it,




 '3         we will^^wrbe able to cover all of it.




 '4                        There  are copies  of  the Act back there




 15         for your use.  We suggest you read  that  at your own



 '6         leisure after we have sort of^J^ertf you through some



 17         of the key provisions.  And  then if you have  additional




 '8         questions, certainly put those questions in to the



 19         regional office and the agency will answer them as



 20         best as we can.



 21                        Sometimes we may have  to  tell  you  we




 22         don't know,  because there is much of  this law still




 23         open to interpretation.   There is much in this  law




 24         that still remains to be determined what the  policy




25         directions are.   Our intent today is  to familiarzie

-------
                                                          154
 1          you with the Act.  It is a new major piece of




 2          legislation directed at a reasonably severe environ-




 3          mental problem, the problem of solid waste management.




 4                         Now this law is not like some of the




 5          other laws that EPA administers in that this does not




 6          establish a Federal regulatory program over solid




 7          waste management.  You are going to hear us talk about




 8          regulations and guidelines today, but don't view this




 9          discussion and those documents that we are developing




10          as a new Federal program for the regulation of solid




11          waste management.




12                         The law is designed to establish state




13          and local governments in the head roles for planning




14          and implementing solid waste management programs,




15          including the regulation and enforcement of the solid




16          waste management standards.




17                         Now, in one provision of the law that




18          Walt Kovalick will discuss, the Hazardous Waste




19          Provision, that should state governments so choose




20          not to assume that responsibility, it indeed becomes




21          the Federal responsibility.  All the other portions




22          of the law, the guidelines, the functions, the land




23          disposal functions, they rest with the state and




24          local governments.  Our desire and our intent in this




25          law is to maximize state and local functions for the

-------
                                                            155
 1          responsibility of  this  law.   There  is not a Federal



 2          regulatory program.




 3                         We  had this confusion last night  and



 4          only in the last few minutes  of  the discussion last




 5          night did it dawn  on us  that  people were not clear



 6          enough on the difference  in this  law so we could make



 7          sure the audience  went away with  a better under-




 8          standing of the partnership between the Feds, state



 9          and local, and industry  that this  law is designed to



1°          build.




11                         And if you want to stop me anywhere



12          along, just feel free to  do so.   We are going to try




13          to keep to the schedule,  but  I think there is plenty




14          of time allotted.  All of the presentations are  shorter




15          than the time allotted,  so we do  have time.  And there



"          is a period at the end of the day for a more generalize!



17          discussion on any  subject.




18                         If  we don't get to you, write down



19          your ideas and your questions and then let's talk about




20          it at the end of the session.



21                         A11 right.  RCRA, as we are called now,



22          is designed to achieve some of the objectives.   These




23          objectives sound nice:  protect environmental quality;




24          protect public health; conserve valuable material




25          resources; and conserve valuable  energy resources.

-------
                                                         156
 1                         Now this will be achieved basically


 2          through somewhat of a trinity or triangular approach


 3          to the major areas of concern In solid waste manage-


 4          ment:  Improper land disposal, Improper management


 5          of hazardous wastes and the lack of Institutional


 6          arrangements necessary to achieve resource conservat-


 7          Ion objectives.


 8                         These are the three major thrusts of


 9          RCRA.  These—when these problems are dealt with,


10          these objectives can be met.  And the law provides


11          a variety of tools for us to meet these objectives.


12          It provides a mechanism for the law to deliver


13          technical and financial assistance to the state and


'4          local governments.


15                         It provides a mechanism for the agency


16          to assist in the development of manpower to meet the


17          requirements of this law.  This Is probably the


18          biggest single problem In state and local government,


19          acquiring manpower to do the job they have to do with


20          the budget constrains we all face and all the demands
                              \

21          for the limited budget that local and state govern-


22          ments have.  And the Federal government--we also


23          have limitations on our budget, even with our 50


24          billion dollar deficit.


25                         it provides for the provision of closing

-------
                                                            157
 1          of existing dumps and the prohibitton of future open



 2          dumps.  The law says that by October, 1983, the practic




 3          of open dumping In this country will cease.  And  it



 4          provides mechanisms to do that.




 5                         It provides for the regulation of



 6          hazardous wastes, that fraction of the total solid



 7          waste stream which presents a unique environmental




 8          and health threat.  It provides a mechanism for




 9          state or Federal regulations of this portion of the




10          waste stream.




11                         It provides a mechanism for the agency



12          to develop solid waste management guidelines on all



13          aspects of solid waste and it provides guidance and




14          assistance to state and local governments to improve



15          practices of solid waste management.



16                         A guideline is merely a statement  of



17          policy which establishes the direction you have to go




18          to solve a problem.  It is not like a regulation,



19          except when it relates to the Federal government.



20          The guidelines that we issue are regulations that the



21          Federal government must follow.  That authority from



22          the old law was recommended by RCRA.




23                         It provides for research and develop-




24          ment to develop a variety of systems of technology



25          to deal with solid waste management.  This, of course,

-------
                                                             158
1          was in the old law and has continued.  It provides



2          for the demonstrations of new and improved technology



3          systems to eliminate the risk, or try to eliminate,




4          some of the risk taking that local government and




5          state government is faced with.  The technology is




6          there, but it has not been proven at the operating



7          level.  It provides for that authority.




8                         It provides for a mechanism to set



9          up Federal, state and local-industrial partnership




10          in materials and in recovery.  It recognizes the




11          increased complexities of trying to go into this



12          advanced technology given financial, institutional




13          and contractural arragements that are necessary.



14                         It provides a mechanism for long term



15          for us to overcome some of these institutional




16          constraints.  And it provides a variety of ways for



17          us to educate the public.  Who is the public and



18          what is education?  This is a very difficult question




19          to deal with, and how we go about doing this provides,




20          hopefully, in meetings such as this a way for us to




21          communicate with the program.



22                         We have a lot of opportunity to talk



23          with interest groups because they are usually repre-




24          sented in Washington by some organization.  But the



25          individual citizen has a difficult time talking with

-------
                                                          159
 1           and to the Federal government.   This meeting and



 2           a series of meetings we will be having around the



 3           country--which I am going to talk about now in our




 4           public participation program—what we will accomplish




 5           with these meetings.




 6                          Let's talk about the information



 7           program a little bit.   Our agency, particularly the




 8           Solid Waste Program, has the historic tradition of




 9           collection and dissemination of information on solid



 10           waste management.   In  the 10 or 11 years of our




 11           existence as a Federal program, we have probably




 12           prepared and distributed some 1,800 publications in



 13           multi-million dollars  of individual copies.




 '4                          Now some of that information in some




 15           of  the publications is good,  some  is just solid waste



 '6           like  a lot of other stuff that  is  printed.   But the



 '7           whole intent was to provide information to  the public




 18           and the  technical  and  lay communities to help  deal



 19           with  the problems  of solid waste management.



 20                          Why is  it important for this law to




 21           focus  on public  information,  technical information?




 22           Well,  it promotes  a better public  interest  and under-




 23           standing of  what the Solid Waste Program problems  are.




 24          And when they have  a better understanding of what  the




25          problems are,  they  can  be  more  supportive of solutions

-------
                                                            160
 1           that  state and  local  governments  present.  And  when



 2           It  comes  time to vote on a bond issue  or vote on an




 3           increased budget for  the solid waste system, or what-




 4           ever,  it  provides a way of making intelligent



 5           decisions on key programs that have to be  carried out.




 6                          To get the public  involved  in making



 ^           these  decisions, we have to have  an availability of



 8           information.  It allows a. mechanism for us to




 9           cooperate with  the state, to  build up  their expertise




10           and their knowledge of problems,  and provides them



11           with  tools that they  can in turn  deliver to local




12           government as they deal with  solid waste management




13           issues.



14                          It allows us to describe the slgnifi-



!5           cance  of  the data base of solid waste  management,




16           what  the  problems are and the impact of these problems,



17           and the various options that  are  open  to us as  a




18           community or as a solid waste management field  to




"           deal  with these problems.



20                          Another provision  provides  the mechanism




21           for us to disseminate this information as  rapidly as




22           possible, both  through the library system—we have a




23           library system  now that is tied in with the Inter-




24           Library Loan System throughout the country.  And you




25           can probably go to almost any public library to get

-------
                                                            161
 1          a publication, and if you know the publication on




 2          solid waste management that you want, we probably



 3          have it in our library in Washington.  You can borrow




 4          that through your own library, or at least through




 5          the university system that is tied in with the National



 6          Inter-Library Loan System.




 7                         O.K.  Now the law says find out who




 8          the people are who represent the public and, you know,




 9          start to work with them so that they can participate




10          in implementing this law, long term and short term.




11          Well, as I mentioned, there is a variety of public




12          groups that represent all of us who make up the public.



13          You have consumer, environmental and neighborhood groups




14          of all types.




15                         So your consumer, environmental and



16          neighborhood groups are the groups that are probably



17          least represented in Washington, because they have



18          not—they don't really represent a single driving



19          force like other sectors of the public.  You have



20          trade, labor and manufacturing representatives that




21          we deal with and communicate with all the time in




22          Washington through a variety of mediums.  Industry is



23          very well represented in Washington.




24                         You have public health, scientific and




25          professional societies.  These groups are really well

-------
                                                            162
 1          represented in Washington all the time.  You have

 2          governmental organizations that—from the state

 3          government and local government.  Those organizations

 4          represent various segments of public government,

 5          ICMA, National Association of Counties, National

 6          Governor's Conference.

 7                         All of these organizations have a

 8          window in Washington that we are able to work with.

 9          Also university associations, although they are less

10          of a force in Washington than soms of the others in

11          this solid waste management program.

12                         All right.  So the whole framework

13          of the law, information and public participation, is

14          provided to get you information and then it says you
                ^
IS          have .gjS* structure it so the citizen has a chance to

16          wire into the system and have some impact on what you

17          are doing.

18                         Section 7004 requires the administrator

19          of EPA to issue regulations which will allow any

20          individual citizen to petition for change in any

21          regulation or guideline that we have prepared.  It

22          allows the citizen to file for a new regulation or

23          guideline that we have not yet prepared.  These

24          regulations will be developed in time and it will

25          provide you a mechanism by which you can impact an

-------
                                                           163
 1          official legal way on what the agency  is doing in



 2          solid waste management.




 3                         Now the law 7004 also requires  us  to



 4          provide for public participation  in the planning,



 5          development and in the implementation  of the law.



 6          And this is in our regulations, in our guideline




 7          set of procedures.  The law requires public hearings




 8          to be held on these various proposed regulations.



 9                         It provides us with a kind of way  to




10          have you tell us what kind of information you  are



11          looking for.  What are the questions that you  have



12          that you need answers for, so that we  can try  to  gqjrf



13          out in some way and develop that  information for  you.



14                         And in the whole development of our




15          program, from the very beginning, planning—and this




16          is what these recent hearings will help us with,



17          planning our program over the next few fiscal  years.



18          Now we have to publish guidelines to tell the  public



19          how to participate with us, and a mechanism by which--



20          how you can get into the system to participate in



21          these various activities we have.  Those will  be




22          published sometime in the next four to six months.



23                         And then we have to provide a mechanism




24          for you to sue us.  And other regulations and  guideline




25          and regulations have provisions for citizen suits.  Thi

-------
                                                         164
 1          ts reasonably consistent language with other



 2          environmental laws of the agency.




 3                         Now—but the way we are going to have



 4          people be involved in our public participation is




 5          primarily through a series of different sort of



 6          interactions with you.  As I mentioned, public hear-



 7          ings are very formalized, a mechanism to allow input




 8          on a regular basis.  This is not a public hearing,



 9          although we are taking the record.




10                         Someone last night was talking about



11          the fact this was our first public hearing.  This is



12          not a public hearing.  This is--you know, we do this



13          more in the context of a workshop or a conference,



14          a meeting where we are communicating and exchanging



15          information and getting feedback from you.



16                         But the formalized public hearing



17          procedure is where you have a hearing judge and all



18          this, and it involves formal statements on a particular



19          regulation or guideline,



20                         We will also have review groups, which




21          are smaller groups of people representing the  sector




22          or the public that is out there.  They sit with us



23          and help us develop and write our various regulations




24          and guidelines and reports.  These will be met in



25          Washington as well as around the country.  We  will  go

-------
                                                            165
           out and sit with various members of  the government,


 2          local and state, and talk about the  work that we


 3          are doing.


 4                         Another way  is as much  feedback as


 5          possible from  the people most affected by the


           law when it is implemented.  And then a variety of


           public education programs that will  be allowed or


           will be provided to help you become  more involved.


 9          Publication^ as I mentioned; slide shows; packaged
                     A

10          slide shows that can be made available to local


           groups to use to educate themselves  on the issues of


12          solid waste management; films which  we make avail-


13          able.


                          We exhibited a good number of conference


15          around the country from the headquarters and from the


16          regional offices to make you better  informed about
17
           what is going on.  We are very active in the various
           media programs; newspapers, technical journals, lay


19          journals.  If you take Reader's Digest, there is a


           series of articles about the beverage container issue


21          here within the last year.  All those articles are


22          based on material from our office and on interviews


           with people in our office about solid waste management.


                          And then we have a variety of grant
           programs we introduced, such asT"the League of Women

-------
                                                           166






 1          which has had a grant with us nationally for some




 2          years to educate the public; the Missouri League




 3          has a small grant to the hazardous waste conference




 4          in Missouri; the National Association of Counties




 5          has had a grant; the American Public Works Association.




 6          A variety of public interest groups have received



 7          support from us as a mechanism to better communicate




 8          with the constituents that they represent and to



 9          give us feedback.




10                         That basically covers the public




11          information provisions of the Act.




12                         The last section I want  to cover is



13          the manpower development provisions of  RCRA.  The




14          law authorizes the administrator to give grants to



15          contract to train personnel to develop  manpower



16          development programs for the purposes of developing



17          manpower to meet the demands of RCRA.   And it requires




18          the administrator in preparation to make these  grants



19          to conduct a national manpower study with a report



20          to the President and the Congress on what additional




2i          personnel RCRA will need to meet the demands of the




22          law.



23                         What do we have now that can do  this




24          and what else is needed to provide this sort of man-




25          power?  When this law is implemented fully, it  will

-------
                                                           167
 1          require quite an Increase in manpower, particularly




 2          at the state level.  And certain segments of the  local



 3          level and industry will need to provide  the necessary




 4          technology and plans to deal with the aspects of  the



 5          law.




 6                         All right.  That covers the first  part



 7          of the show, and I think we have time for questions.




 8                         MR. TUCKER:  Questions from the  floor?




 9                         (No response.)



10                         MR. TUCKER:  I can't believe you



11          explained it that clearly.




12                         MR. HICKMAN:  Right.




13                         MR. TUCKER:  O.K.  If not, we will



14          proceed, and if you think of any questions you  would




15          like to bring up on this, we would like  to do it



16          later in the program.



17                         The next item on the program is  a




18          discussion on hazardous wastes.  Hazardous waste  is



19          a very substantial part of this new legislation.  As



20          a matter of fact, the title of the Act itself,  Resource




2i          Conservation and Recovery Act, may be somewhat  mis-




22          leading lirrnnr jTn'*i • TIMTJ—fhr Act is very broad




23          in scope.  For the first time in Federal legislation,



24          a strong emphasis is on hazardous waste management.




25          To present this this morning we have Walt Kovalick

-------
                                                          168
1          from our Hazardous Waste Division in Washington.



2          Walt?




3                         MR. KOVALICK:  My job this morning is



4          to talk with you briefly about the Subtitle C portion




5          of the new law which is the 3000 Series in your packet.



6          I am going to be dealing with the first substantive



7          and regulatory part of the law.



8                         Lannie has discussed with you the




9          way you can participate in the process and my job is



10          to tell you one of the major topics that we need your



11          help in the most, which is the subject of writing




12          the rules and regulations.



13                         I would like to take a couple of minutes



14          to run through some slides on this section of the law.



15          We had a question last night on what is a hazardous



16          waste.  And I would like to point out that that



17          definition is the keystone to the rest of the section,



18          Subtitle C.  Once we decide how big or how small the



19          net is that describes the hazardous wastes, then the




20          other systems that are in the law are functioning to




21          carry out the control of those wastes.



22                         So that section is particularly




23          important.  And the question we had last night



24          related to how these wastes relate to a larger set,




25          say, industrial wastes.  And our current figures are

-------
                                                          169
 1
            there are about 260 million tons dry waste of
 2
            Industrial wastes, industrial process wastes and
 3
            sludges.  About 10 per cent of those, depending on
 4
            how you count, are said to be hazardous.
 5
                           But what I am talking about this
 6
            morning is a regulatory program, hopefully operated
 7
            by the states, that will control the storage,
 8
            treatment, disposal and to some extent the trans-
 9
            portation of this 10 per cent of this larger amount
 10
            of waste.

                           The sections that follow the definition

            of hazardous waste set up a structure for their

            control.  Basically, there are sets of national
 14
            standards that affect the generators of wastes,

            people who transport those wastes,  and then national
 16
            standards that affect those who operate storage
 17
            facilities,  tanks and so forth, treatment facilities
 18
            like incinerators, chemical fixations kinds of
 19
            processes, and more traditional disposal facilities
 20
            that we normally know of in the terminology of a
 21
            chemical waste landfill.
 22
                           So these national standards are in
 23
            the traditional sense regulatory or negative incentives
 24
            so that those facilities have some  requirements and
25
            on those operators on the way they  do business.

-------
                                                          170






 1                         On the other hand, the law also has




 2          a permit program in it which takes those standards




 3          and uses them in the design of permits and hopefully




 4          we can give you those anyway as a more positive state-



 5          ment than a negative regulation.




 6                         If I can make an analogy, the national



 7          standards are not unlike speed limit signs that we




 8          set out around to control the general speeds at which




 9          we travel on the road.  But the permitting program




10          is a more positive statement and can assure members



11          of a community that live near a facility or--and the




12          state that is handling the permit, hopefully, that



13          this facility is operated in accordance with the



14          best environmental principles that we know at the time.



IS                         So we think the law has both aspects



16          in it in the sections that are contained there.



17                         The third major point which you will



18          hear over and over is--especially in this section--



19          is that the Congressional intent, as stated in the




20          law, the testimony that was given in the course of




21          this law over the last four years that  it has been



22          developing, calls for the state to operate this program



23                         As a matter of fact, you have one




24          state that is on the leading edge among five or six




25          or 10 in the country that are wanting to take up  the

-------
                                                           171






 1           hazardous waste program,  even tn advance of our




 2          having written our regulations, which we are trying



 3          to encourage.




 4                         So this is,  as Lannie.mentioned, our




 5          intent, that states take  up the program.  And if they




 6          do not, then the Federal  government must, in terms




 7          of controlling these subsets of a larger set of what




 8          I  am calling industrial wastes.




 9                         The final  point I want to make is



 10          that this law does not have retroactive authority.




 11           That is,  when we do publish the regulations we are



 12           not able  to g>  back at  wastes that were generated



 13           during this  time that  we  are developing regulations,




 14           or before that,  we or  the state.   It would only be




 IS           if those  wastes  entered commerce, that is, they were




 16           suddenly  shipped from  where they were to a point of



 17          disposal  that  the principles of the Act would get




 18           involved.



 19                        We have had  the question of someone



 20          who had waste  stored now, they would not be controljed




 2i           by the  law.  But if they  moved them out of storage




 22           after  the  regulations  were  published and transported




 23           them for  disposal,  then some of the provisions would




 24           take effect.



2s                         Let  me  run through section by section

-------
                                                           172






 1          for you briefly and then we can discuss one at a




 2          time or at the end of the presentation.




 3                         Section 3001--in all of these sections



 4          it gets rather monotonous.  They all require us to



 5          write regulations within 18 months.  So that is a




 6          charter date S«Mma*p*»K>-from October, 1976.  Our



 7          target date is April of 1978 to have a final regulation



 8          that has used the public involvement that Lannie




 9          mentioned over this period that we are in now.




10                         So we are at the beginning point in



11          these February and March meetings, and will have much




12          more intensive discussions over the next few months.




13                         This section calls for three things,



14          basically.  One is to--for us to pick some criteria



IS          for defining what a hazardous waste is.  And then



16          using those criteria to identify hazardous waste,



17          which we interpret to mean after we fix the criteria




18          we have to name some tests, some standardized tests



19          which will be available, hopefully inexpensive, that



20          can be used by waste generators to see that their




2i          wastes do meet these criteria.



22                         And then finally we are also instructed




23          in the law to issue a list of wastes.  And that list




24          does not necessarily--at this point we have not--we




25          have no preconceptions.  This could be a variety of

-------
                                                           173
 1          lists.  This question came up  last night.  And  I




 2          will turn to that  in a moment.




 3                         Let me give you an example of what we




 4          mean.  In the law  it suggests  some criteria that we




 5          must look at, like flammability, corrosivity,




 6          explosivity, toxicity.  Those  are kinds of criteria




 7          that we should look at.  Now,  taking  flammability




 8          for a moment, in order to test for flammability you




 9          have to pick a flash point for materials to see whether




10          or not they are indeed flammable, that is they  flash




11          at a certain number of degrees Fahrenheit or not.




12                         In picking the  criteria, we would




13          be picking the degrees Fahrenheit for flammability




14          about which we were concerned.  And then the identifi-




15          cation of the waste would be performing that flamma-




16          bility test using that degree  Fahrenheit on wastes,




17          and specifying the standardized test  you would  use.




18          So that is one way--I have given you  an easy example




19          because of the general--not only industrial but




20          governmental—consensus about  the kinds of tests there




21          are for flammability.




22                         As I move beyond that  into toxicity




23          and so forth, then the area gets much more murky,




24          even though those subjects like toxicity and the others




25          are to be addressed in the law; that  is, we are to be

-------
                                                         174
 1          concerned about acute effects, both toxic effects


 2          like Inhalation type of toxicity as well as prime


 3          effects.


 4                         So this—as I mentioned earlier, this


 5          is one of the hardest parts of designing the regulat-


 6          ions so that they do have the--call it the size of


 7          the net is appropriately large to take in the wastes


 8          that we are concerned about, and yet not so small that


 9          it ignores the principal concerns.


10                         Turning a moment to the issue of


11          listing,  usually when I put that up there those of


12          you who have some experience with our agency think


13          immediately of the lists of 311 substances that


14          people, that are on the spill*Blist that EPA has


15          published.  That is a list of substances—and, as you


16          know,  we  are talking about wastes,  which tend to be

                                     
-------
                                                           175
 1          PCBs.  So my list might well say waste containing




 2          PCBs, rather than listing PCBs.  And then you get




 3          into obvious discussion, and you would, about what




 4          kind of list we are going to have, about how much




 5          PCBs, and what kind.  That is one way of making a




 6          list.




 7                         Another way of making a list is to




 8          make a list of things for which you don't have tests




 9          but about which we are concerned.  In other words, I




10          could--! am sure we could come to immediate agreement




11          on tests for flammability and--perhaps not so




12          immediate, but fairly soon on corrosivity.  But a




13          test for things like PCBs which are not harmful on




14          an acute basis.  If you drank them--if you are exposed




15          to them on an acute basis — if you had chronic exposure




16          and we didn't have a way to test that, we may want




17          to put things on the list for which we don't have




18          tests.




19                         So this section might have a set of




20          tests for flammability and corrosivity, and then it




21          may have a list of things for which we did not have




22          tests but about which there was consensus on the




23          problem.  In other words, another way to look at the




24          list is a list of categories of industrial wastes, or




25          wastes--! don't mean to exclude hospital wastes from

-------
                                                          176
1          this  discussion,  clinical wastes,  and so forth.   For




2          example,  if there were general agreement as there is




3          in some European  countries that wastes containing




4          asbestos  are indeed In this category that we are




5          calling hazardous wastes, then we  might list asbestos




6          brake lining manufacturing wastes  on our list,  as a




7          general category.




8                         So all I am trying  to do Is talk out




'          ideas about the way the list should be, rather  than




1°          have  you  focus in immediately as 45&M9>n0^>a*i  your




'I          past  experience of a list of substances under other




12          EPA authorities.




I3                         So I will let you mull on that a minute




14          and show  you what that means once  we have defined those




15          things that are hazardous.  You will probably want to




16          discuss that a little bit more then.




I7                         The next section--two sections,  3002




I8          and 3003  relate to, again, writing regulations on




'9          a national basis  for the generator of waste.  And when




20          you look  at the law there are only three things about




21          which we  can write regulations affecting the generator:




22          HOW he keeps records and reports of hazardous wastes,




23          once  we have defined what they are; the labeling of




24          the containers that he is going to ship them in; and




25          his use of a manifest system, which Is  the name that

-------
                                                          177
 l           the Act gives to a system of paperwork that allows us




 2           to solve the problem downtown of waste being picked




 3           up regularly once a week from the manufacturer, and




 4           regularly once a week ending up down the road in a




 5           ditch.




 6                          The way we prevent that is having a




 7           mechanism to track the waste,  meaning the state




 8           tracking the waste, from the generator.   He signs off




 9           that he has  given the waste  to a transporter who




 10           signs off that he has given  the waste to a licensed



 11           disposal facility who signs  off that he  disposed of




 12           it.   Probably there would be .^rmonitoring to see that




 13           waste leaving point a did indeed reach point c.



 14           That is generally what is meant by the term manifest




 15           system,  although obviously the details of it are much




 16           more difficult.



 17                         As I mentioned  last night,  our research




 18           in Ohio indicates that they  ship wastes—manufacturers



 19           in Ohio ship wastes to 13 other states.   So, obviously,



 20           filling out  a manifest to send it to another state



 21          means some kind  of  coordination between  and  among those




 22           states  to determine whether  the waste actually arrived,




 23           or they  arrived  dowi  the  street again.




 24                         One  point  I want to make  for  those of




25           you  who  represent companies  here is that  this list of

-------
                                                           178
 1          three things  about which we can write regulations


 2          is limited.   You can't write regulations affecting


 3          the way you manufacture your products, or the process


 4          that creates  the waste.  After they are created,


 5          these regulations take effect.   This is the only


 6          section worded that way.   The other sections I will


 7          run through describe—have words like including but

                         y
 8          not limited to.  And then it lists some items that


 9          we should regulate.


10                         These are the second people in the


11          chain,  people who transport wastes.  There are a


12          number  of waste haulers in the country, the ones  who


13          do this exclusively as well as a number of firms  who


14          are in  the business as an adjunct to their normal


15          business of hauling hazardous materials.  Transporters,


16          again,  the standards have to promulgate within 18


17          months.


18                         There are some record keeping and


19          labeling requirements and compliance with the manifest


20          system  that I mentioned earlier in the previous section.


21          He would be part of that chain of events leading  to


22          environmentally acceptable disposal.


23                         For those of you who are here in this


24          business, the law is careful to point out that we should


25          consult with  and make our regulations consistent  with

-------
                                                           179
 1          those that already apply in the Department of Trans-




 2          portation.  We have already started discussions with




 3          them.  They are very eager for us to jointly make




 4          sense to those who are regulated, so that hazardous




 5          wastes, if at all possible, can fall within their




 6          current structure of hazardous materials regulations.




 7          However, they do not currently, and that is a problem




 8          that we will have to solve over the next 18 months.




 9                         We can follow that with finding out




 '0          what the hazardous wastes are.  The generator has sent




 11          them to the manifest.  The transporter has delivered




 '2          them responsibly to the people who are going to




 '3          dispose of them.  So the owners, operators and treaters




 14          at the disposal facilities will have some standards




 '5          for the operation of those facilities.  This is a more




 16          normal kind of section in EPA environmental legislation;




 17          for those of you who are familiar with some of the air




 18          and water statutes, we are talking about controls on




 19          the incinerator or the land disposal facility or on




 20          the chemical fixation facility.




 21                         And these are some of the subjects that




 22          are listed in the Act about which we could draft




 23          regulations.  Our record keeping, reporting, and,




 24          again, the manifest system throughout the disposer




25          complies with the spirit and the intent of the manifest

-------
                                                            180
 1          system, monitoring inspection capabilities; that is,




 2          he does his own monitoring as well as state inspections




 3          on this; location, design and construction kinds of




 4          criteria of such facilities; maintenance and operation;




 5          contingency plans and ownership is listed to respond




 6          to the problem of accumulations of these kinds of




 7          wastes.




 8                         As a matter of fact, we are aware of




 '          at least one incident where wastes were accumulated




'°          in the receiving area of a disposal facility, and then




11          for a variety of reasons they were forced to declare




12          bankruptcy.  And all those wastes were out in the yard




13          ready to be processed and so these are the kinds of




14          provisions that will make walking away from accumulat-




15          ions of waste after you have collected all the funds




16          for receiving them hard to do.  And we are going to




'7          have to delve into that subject along with several




18          of the others.




19                         Maintenance and operation is also a




20          problem in terms of the care, the long term care for




21          facilities.  Presuming someone that runs one of these




22          facilities, a land disposal facility, in a responsible




23          way, wastes are buried over a period of 10 to 15 years,




24          that is the kind of disposal you have, what provisions




2^          are we making to make sure there are no leaks to the

-------
                                                         181
 1           environment and there is monitoring over the longer




 2           term?   Some states have dealt successfully with this,



 3           more than just one, and there are mechanisms in terms



 4           of  bonding or fees as provisions for the long term



 5           care.



 6                          So  now we followed the waste through



 7           generation, transport and disposal.   Now we move



 8           into the  two sections,  Section 3005  and—that is the




 9           mechanism by which the  state  or if necessary EPA will




10           assure  that the receiving facilities are defined with



11           the national standards.   There is a  permit program.




12           The regulations require that  you have a permit to be



13           in  the  storage, treatment or  disposal departments.



14           You do  not have to have a permit to  be in the trans-



15           porting business.   You  do not have to have a permit




16           to  be a generator.   These are the receivers of the



17           waste that have to have  a permit.



18                          The requirements of the permit regulat-



19           ion relate to the  data  you have to provide and the



20           site that  is receiving  the waste must—this is a very



21           important  provision that I think is  carefully drafted



22           to  get  us  around the problem--our problem and the



23           bureaucracy of a peak loading of permit applications.




24           We  write  the regulations.   Responsible businesses




25           apply.  We have to be able to provide.

-------
                                                           182
1                          There is a provision for an interim



2          permit.  It basically says that those firms who are




3          in business when the law passed last October who have



4          notified the state or the EPA via the next section



5          that I will discuss of their interest, and if they



'          have applied for a permit, they are deemed to have a



7          permit.




8                         So from our point of view this is a



           workload smoother nationally for those places where



10          we do have to run the program.  We don't have to have



11          an onerous time requirement of 90 days to respond, and




12          that puts us into conflict with the person applying



13          because he can't operate while we are doing the



14          application, or reviewing and issuing the application.



15                         The idea is if you have applied for a



16          permit and you were in business at the time of the



17          passage of the law, then there is time to analyze



18          the permit and there is also time for the operator's



19          continuance of business.



20                         The last—next to the last section--




21          relating largely to what Lannie will discuss later,  is




22          a program--there is a section of guidelines which we



23          have several states on the working group helping us



           to devise these.  We have 18 months to provide guide-




25          lines on the structure of state programs.

-------
                                                          183
  1                         There are  three  requirements  for us




  2         to authorize  the  programs  of  the  state,  and  the whole




  3         discussion of  these guidelines  development is  what is




  4         the meanings of the words;  that is  the program shall




  5         be equivalent  to  the Federal  program;  it shall be




  6         consistent with other  state programs,  if you recall




  7         my program on  interstate  shipment of wastes; and




  8         that there should be adequate enforcement authority,




  9         which is a traditional requirement, you  know,  for




 10         these kinds of  state authorizations.




 11                         There is also  a  provision for interim




 12         authorization  for the  time that it may take  to get




 13         up the speed to meet the criteria equivalency  and




 14         consistency and still give them the opportunity to




 15         operate the program.




 16                         The last section I am going to  discuss,




 17         because it was  somewhat of a  surprise to  us when it




 18         was included and we understand  the reason for  it,  but




 19         it is surely the source of some discussion, and  that




 20         is Section 3010, the notification section.  If you




 21         remember I mentioned we could smooth our  workload




 22         without analyzing permits.  This is the  section  that




 23         allows us to do it.




 24                        This says notification by  generators,




25         transporters,  treaters, storers and disposers  must

-------
                                                          184
 1          be made to EPA--and should say or the state because




 2          the law says that—that they are in the business of




 3          handling or generating or transporting hazardous




 4          waste, and the kinds that are generated and transported




 5          and so forth.  So this is a notification that would




 6          either come to EPA or to the state, depending on the




 7          stage of development, that they are in this business




 8          and it is required fairly soon after the regulations




 9          are final.




'0                         And the reason, again, for this section,




11          as we understand it, was to try to give us the




12          opportunity to try to analyze permits in a more work-




13          load consistent way rather than trying to race through




14          a number of them that might not make sense.




15                         That completes my slide discussion.




16          I have time to try and answer questions, if you have




17          any, about this hazardous waste section.  Yes, come




18          to the microphone.




19                         MS. CHASE:  My name is Eileen Chase.




20          I am a geologist forJfl^conservation Chemical company.




21          I want to ask you if there is anything in the definition




22          of toxicity or in the guidelines that will protect




23          the infant in the uterus in the early stages of




24          pregnancy from congenital-damage caused by chemicals.




25          This is the most vulnerable stage of human life.

-------
                                                        185
 1                         MR. KOVALICK:  Well, our--first of

 2          all, we havenJt written them yet.  We are just

 3          starting, so I don't have an answer for what they will

 4          be.  As Lannie mentioned, the intent of the law is

 5          to protect public health and the environment, and some

 6          of the factors that we have to take into account are

 7          those segments, eugenic *nfl
-------
                                                            186
 1          National Institute of Environmental Health Statistics,




 2          which are people who are concerned about the




 3          epidemiology        of such a problem.  And plus




 4          EPA, but not in our office, we have a toxocology




 5          count and we are going to be us ing--




 6                         MS. CHASE:  How many women are on the




 7          panel?




 8                         MR. KOVALICK:  How many women?  There




 9          isn't a panel.  It is a working group.  There is one




10          from our office that I know of, but I don't know who




11          the other groups have.




12                         MS. CHASE:  O.K.  Thank you.




13                         MR. KOVALICK:  Any other questions?




14          Yes.




15                         MR. TUCKER:  Please step to the




16          microphone and give your full name and if it is




17          somewhat difficult to spell, please spell it for us.




18          Also give us your organization.




19                         MR. HJERSTED:  I am Norman Hjersted,




20          H-j-e-r-s-t-e-d, with Conservation Chemical.




21                         I wonder if there is anything in the




22          law or you are developing regulations which will allow




23          the states or encourage the states or even force the




24          states for free trade in--that there will not be




25          barriers on the transfer of wastes between states.

-------
                                                         187
 1          This is for recycling or ultimate disposal.




 2                         MR. KOVALICK:  That is a very important




 3          question because--and it relates to my statement about




 4          defining consistent with other state programs and




 5          equivalent to Federal programs.




 6                         The law per se does not contain a




 7          requirement, a statutory requirement that there be




 8          no inhibitions to interstate shipment of wastes.  And




 9          as you may know there is a Supreme Court case pending




10          on that very subject.  It doesn't have to be hazardous




11          waste; it has to be municipal wastes.  But I think




12          we are going to look very hard in any state's




13          application with regard to that question, because




14          the idea of building a wall between states—which are




IS          not economic, I might add, as you probably know--to




16          the movement of wastes just doesn't make good sense.




17                         And so I hope--I am sure, because we




18          have several state people on the development of those




19          guidelines for state programs, plus ourselves, that




20          we are going to get into that question.




21                         And as an office we have a view on that




22          as a policy matter and we will see whether we can't




23          do that.  The problem you are referring to is that




24          there have been cases when states either by statute




25          or by executives administrative edicts within the state

-------
                                                            188





1          bureaucracy have prevented the movement of wastes



2          interstate.  As a matter of fact, there are wastes



3          sitting in Missouri right now which, for lack of



4          being able to get across the state line to what we



5          believe is adequate disposal, can't move.



6                         So that is a very serious problem,



1          and I am sure the state officials here realize it.



8          And the open boundaries are--would appear to be a



9          necessity within the context of the new program and



10          equivalent to the Federal program.



]j                         Anyone else?


                               fassPf
12                         MR. glSER:  My name is Joseph



!3          Missouri Department of Natural Resources, the Solid



j4          Waste Management Program.  I am in charge of the



15          development of a Missouri program to implement the



16          hazardous waste provisions of the Federal Law.



17                         In Missouri we have been working since



18          May with a very large citizen's committee, some of



19          whom are in this room, to develop a state implementatio



20          law.  And we have very good support from EPA in



2]          developing this.  With EPA funding we carried out a



22          statewide survey, so we think we know where most of



23          the problems are in our state.



24                         The problem we have  in trying to obtain



25          passage of this bill in the legislature--House Bill

-------
                                                         189
  1          318—is basically the following:  There is quite a




  2          bit of hostility in the Missouri Legislature to




  3          new Federally amended programs for several reasons.




  4          One is  that the extent of the program is often




  5          extremely broad and the feeling is that many




  6          communities, industries and individuals are affected,



  1          unnecessarily so, and that the state agency which is




  8          usually underfunded is tied up in paperwork even with




  '          minor problems.




 1°                         Now secondly they pretty much resent



 11          the situation where one agency—we will say EPA or




 12          the Corps of Engineers—begins to administer a




 '3          regulatory program and then later on it is taken over




 '4          by the  state or some other organization and a great



 15          deal of unnecessary confusion of paperwork results.



 1*                         So we have drafted our bill somewhat--



 17          we were in the process before the Federal  bill was



 18          passed, so we do have some significant differences .



 "          in detail,  though we think our program adds up to a



 20          very good regulatory program.   But we are  concerned




 21          with on this bill,  particularly 301 or other provisions




 22          that you referred to,  are we going to be forced to




 23          deal with minor problems at the very beginning,  rather




 24          than later on as we develop the staff and  acquire the




25          budget  to deal with them.

-------
                                                            190
 1                         If we are tied up in dealing with



 2          those, we are not going to be able to deal with




 3          the major problems at the very beginning.  And I would




 4          just like to make a plea that as you implement this,




 5          can you develop some way in which we are not faced




 6          with that kind of a problem, because our legislature




 7          doesn't want it to be repeated.




 8                         I don't think there is any reason



 9          there should be.  1 think this is an extremely good




10          bill, and we are very concerned, of course, with our



11          funds.  If we don't get some substantial funding,



12          where will we be, really.  And in that case, maybe




13          we are better off to turn it over to you, but I don't



14          think you are going to get that funding early on



15          either.



16                         So what I am pleading for is to give




17          us, as we assume--receive authorization to implement



18          this bill, that you give us the flexibility to deal



19          with the major problems first with whatever resources




20          we have, and not bury us in paperwork dealing with




21          minor problems.  We want to deal with the elephants




22          and not with the gnats.  Thank you.



23                         MR. KOVALICK:  I appreciate Joe making



24          that statement on the record, as he did last night.



25          The State of Missouri is both a supplicant, in the

-------
                                                          191
 1          sense you made a plea, but it is also a partner.  In




 2          fact, Joe is helping us develop the regulations and




 3          guidelines under the state programs, which I discussed




 4          briefly.  Joe was at a meeting in Washington last




 5          week where we surfaced these early problems of oossible




 6          timing conflicts, as well as emphasis conflict between




 7          our schedule as mandated in the law and what the




 8          Missouri House Bill contains.




 9                         So I think that has been a testimonial




10          at this point, the fact that you have already started




'I          on the problem and he wanted you to know about the




12          problem.  Missouri is not the only state that is going




'3          to have this problem, as some of you know.  There are




'4          four or five or six other states that already have--




15          operating hazardous waste facilities and programs that




'*          are funded.




'7                         We also are going to have to deal with




18          those states' differences, both major and minor,




19          between what they are doing now as being a cutting




20          edge in the program, and what they—what the Federal




21          law calls for.




22                         Any other questions or comments?




23                         (No response.)




24                         MR. TUCKER:  Thank you, Walt.  I am




25          sure there are some other thoughts floating around

-------
                                                         192
 1          the room, but maybe they will formalize their thoughts



 2          or statements and we will pick them at the latter



 3          session.




 4                         The next item on the agenda is a




 5          presentation dealing with the very broad subject of




 6          land disposal, and as you, of course, are aware that



 7          is the third sink.  And when you eliminate the air



 8          sink, the water sink, you only have one left.  That




 9          is the land.  So once again, Lannie Hickman will give



10          us this presentation.




11                         MR. HICKMAN:  I mentioned when we first



12          started talking about the fact that the law has three



13          major thrusts, Walt discussed one of them which is



14          the hazardous waste problem.  The second major focus



15          of the law relates to land disposal.  Before we talk



16          about what the law says we have to do, I think we



17          ought to review a few definitions because Congress



18          is writing this new law and there are some dramatic



19          changes in definitions from what solid waste management




20          is normally involved with.




21                         The old law disposal was more a genetic



22          terms for management which covered the management of



23          solid waste from generation to ultimate treatment and




24          disposal.  And there was some confusion over that.




25          Well Congress is rewriting the law and amending the

-------
                                                         193
 '          law and trying to focus on some of the major



 2          environmental health and resource problems, one of



 3          which is land disposal.



 4                         Redefine disposal and all those deadly




 5          to read things, I want to make sure that you under-



 6          stand the definition.  The term disposal means a




 7          discharge, deposit, injection, dumping, spilling or



 8          leaking or placing of any solid waste or any hazardous




 9          waste into or on any land or water so that such



10          solid waste or hazardous waste or any constituent




11          thereof—that means any by-product from the degredation



'2          or the change in character of that waste—may—




13          thereof may enter the environment or be admitted into




14          the air or discharged into any waters, including



15          ground waters.



16                         Now up until this time the Federal



17          government's interest in ground water problems was



18          a little bit superficial, although FWPCA, the Federal



"          Water Program Control Act, and the Safe Drinking



20          Water Act both are concerned with water quality of



21          both surface and ground water.  They have not been




22          really legitimate mechanisms to deal with the impact




23          of ground water practices, other than those related




24          directly to point sources.  So this law broadens their



25          definition of disposal from the water management and

-------
                                                           194
           focuses its  impact on air and water quality regardless

           of what--in  other words,  if it goes on the land  then

           you have got a problem.

4
                          O.K.   Now  the next two definitions,  and-

           I will read  them and once we move into the discussion

           of the land  disposal provisions and we talk about the

           state and local government implementation of the law,

           you will see how these tie together as a package.


                          The term open dump means a site for

           the disposal of solid waste which is not a sanitary

"          landfill within the meaning of one of the sections of

12          the law where we have to  define what a sanitary  land-

           fill is.  But what we are saying is that it is either

           an open dump or a sanitary landfill, some gradation

15          of a sanitary landfill.   And there is nothing in

           between, effectively, is  what the law is saying.

17                         And it defines sanitary landfill as

1 ft
           meaning a facility for the disposal of the solid

19          wastes as defined in Section 4004 of the law.  And
20
           we will talk about that on the next slide.
ft 1
                          Now, the final two terms for the


           definition of solid waste—now Congress by law defines

f\r\
           a solid to be liquid or solid or anything in between


24          including gas.  So today when we talk about solid

25
           waste, as this law addresses the issue of solid waste,

-------
                                                           195






  1          we are talking about liquid, solid, semi-solid,




  2          sludges, super goos, wastes in air that represent




  3          environmental health threat, and hazardous wastes




  4          included in the definition of solid waste.




  5                         It means any normal municipal type




  d          garbage or refuse, sludge from waste water treatment




  7          plants, sludge from oil supply treatment plants,




  8          sludge from air pollution control facilities,  any




  9          discarded materials including solid, liquid, semi-




 10          solid or containing gaseous material from industrial,




 11          commercial,  agriculture,  mining,  municipal and




 12          individual activity.




 13                         So the term solid  waste  now is  a long




 14          broadly defined term.   If you tie it in with the




 15          hazardous waste provisions and the land disposal




 16          provisions of the law,  you start  to see the linkage




 17          between the  hazardous waste control at  the state  level




 18          and  the land disposal control at  tihe state level.




 19                         Section  4004 requires the administrator




 20          within  12  months  of the passage of the  Act to  issue




 21          criteria  for classifying  sanitary landfills and




 22          classifying  open  dumps.   And in establishing that




 23          criteria,  he must determine whether there  is reasonable




 24          probability  of  adverse  effects from these  various




25          practices  in order to lay this criteria out.

-------
                                                           196
 1                         Now  the  law  does not  define  what  Is  a




 2          reasonable probability  of adverse  effects.   This will




 3          be one of the key decisions that has to  be  made  in




 4          the next few months  in  order to set  up the  criteria.




 5                         And  then it  requires  the  state  plans



 6          focus on developing  procedures for all of these



 7          disposals and sanitary  landfills.  We will  talk  more




 8          about that when we get  into the last section of  the




 9          presentation.




10                         Now the  problems here include that



11          fact that this criteria must be national in scope.



12          All states are supposed to  embrace and work into the




13          parts, the requirements of  the criteria.  We have the



14          problem of writing criteria that satisfies  Maine,



15          Iowa and Southern California, which  has  different



16          soil conditions, different  rainfall  conditions,



17          different geological conditions.   And it is a  real




18          problem to try to write such a criteria.



19                         Here  again is one of  the  major  problems




20          that we will be addressing  and discussing in various




21          parts of the country.   We will hold  public  meetings




22          and public hearings  on  this;  after the criteria  is




23          established, allowing flexibility  for state and  local




24          governments to recognize their regional  differences.




25          This  is  the way  it  has  to be done.

-------
                                                           197
 1                          Now within 12 months of the passage



 2           of the law,  the administrator must Issue criteria



 3           for sanitary landfills and open dumps.  He then must




 4           conduct an inventory within 12 months after that on




 5           all those facilities and sites that fall within the




 6           classification of the criteria of an open dump.




 7           And he must  publish that list.




 8                          Now the minute that list is published,



 9           and it will  be a national list—whatever it is, 35,000




 10           or 200,000,  whatever the number of sites are out there-




 11           and we are not talking only about municipal solid



 12           waste disposal sites, we are talking about industrial




 13           waste sites,  pits, ponds, and lagoons.  I mean, by



 14           definition,  it covers all these land disposal practices




 15           I guess dogpiles are out there, mining practices.



 16           It can cover all of them.



 17                          The question becomes immediate:  Must




 18           we do it all--can we do it all.  Is there enough



 19           manpower resources in the country to do it all?  Do



 20           we have enough  smart people to go out and look at



 21           a site and determine whether it is a dump or a



 22           sanitary landfill?  It is a little difficult to walk




 23           across land  and tell that.  It can become a real




 24           problem.




25                          That pit, pond or lagoon can reach in

-------
                                                           198
 1           to  the  ground water and  change  its  character.  And




 2           if  so,  does  it  do  it  to  such  a  degree  that  it  goes




 3           outside the  perameter, the  framework of  our criteria.




 4                          Now it  is a  significant fact that  the




 5           Feds  don't have any control--regulatory  control over




 6           this.   The law  does not  allow that.  What happens is




 7           that  this list  becomes,  in  effect,  a list that any




 8           citizen, any organization,  anyone  interested in land




 9           disposal practices can use  in the Federal court system




10           to  sue  for violation  of  a Federal  law.




11                          A dump, by definition,  will  be  in




12           violation of a  Federal law, subject  to suit in a




'3           Federal court system  by  anyone  who  wishes to do so.




14           And if  found in the plaintiff's behalf,  he  can recover




15           the costs for that court case.




16                          Now what  this  means,  of course, is




17           that  there are  a whole lot  of lawyers  busy.  And  one




18           way that can be protected and be kept  out of the  court




"           system  is for the  state  to  establish umbrella  protect-




20           ion through  their  planning  procedure,  which we will




21           talk  about under Subtitle D,  the last  section  of  the




22           law.  Yes, sir?




23                          QUESTION:  Did you  say  mining?




24                          MR. H1CKMAN:   Mining wastes  are included




25           in  this definition of solid waste.

-------
                                                           199
  1                         QUESTION:  What about from, say, your



  2          shaft, where you pile overburden?



  3                         MR. HICKMAN:  If that disposal, if




  4          that waste material--! am not really sure it is waste--



  ^          one might pursue it as far as saying you dug it up




  6          out of the mine.  You stack it up there on the side



  7          of the hill.  Now I have watched it and there is a



  8          leak, there is something going into the ground surface




  '          waters that may be polluting that water, sedimentation,



 10          a runoff.




 11                         That in principle would have to come



 12          under this law, under this definition of an open dump.




 13          It would be included by definition.




 14                         QUESTION:  Would that same reasoning



 15          apply to, say, any contractor who is building a high-




 16          way who is going through a hill?



 17                         MR. HICKMAN:  Here again, I think we



 18          run into the problem of deciding whether that material



 "          is waste material or not.  If we can determine that



 20          it is not a waste material, then I think we are all



 21          right.  We will stay away from it, which is really




 22          what we want to do.  It is silly to be dealing with



 23          that kind of material.




 24                         So I think perhaps we have to have some




2^          flexibility in allowing state and local governments

-------
                                                         200






 1          to m^ke a judgement on whether that Is waste or not.



 2          When you reach the definition of solid waste and a




 3          definition of disposal, you can see—you know, I am



 4          from Maryland.  You don't make any excavation there



 5          unless you put some sort of a catch basin  in to make



 6          sure that you don't get sedimentation in the streams



 7          and water.



 8                         Now I am sure there are other places



 9          in the country that follow the same practice.  So I




10          think we would have to guard against trying to make



11          everything that is turned over out there a waste.  We



12          have got to be careful on how we write the criteria.



13          We can't prevent some operations, nothing  prevents



14          them.  We are going to be challenged in the courts



15          no matter what we do.



16                         If we exempt it, the environmental



17          people are going to challenge us.  If we include  it,




18          the industrial people are going to challenge us.



19          So 1 guess, you know, a lot of the decisions on  this




20          law will probably be made in the courts over the next




21          few years.  We don't want to include that  in the  law,




22          you know, in  the definition.



23                         Now, Section 4005 requires  the closing




24          of all open dumps or the upgrading of open dumps.




25          The state plan has to provide for  that.  They have  got

-------
                                                           201
  1          to set a schedule for these open dumps to have been



  2          identified.   No new sites can be initiated that would




  3          have fallen  into the classification of open dumps.




  4          And five years after the list of open dumps, all those




  5          dumps must be either closed or upgraded--converted to




  6          the requirements for sanitary landfills.




  7                         That is seven years from the enactment



  8          of the law,  October, 1983.




  9                         Now Section  1008 provides for authority




 10          for the administrator to issue two types of guidelines.




 11          This says within 12 months  after the enactment of




 12          the law,  he  must issue--and from time to time there-




 13          after—issue guidelines that basically provide a




 14          technical description and an economic description and



 15          a  level of performance that might be expected to



 16          protect public health and environment from solid



 17          waste management practices.




 18                         That gives the agency flexibility to



 19          write a variety of guidelines,  and it carries over



 20          the old authorities from the old act,  but  amends them.



 21          We have,  in  effect,  now about nine guidelines—eight




 22          or nine guidelines written  under the old law, including




 23          the ones  for  sanitary landfills.




 24                         Now we view  this  section of  the law




25          as  a  mechanism to  help and  support any criteria or

-------
                                                          202
 1           regulation  that  we  might write that is supposed to be




 2           adopted by  state government.   You know,  the regulation



 3           in the  criteria  says here is  what you have to do,




 4           and the guideline can be used as a mechanism that  says




 5           here is how you  can do it,  meet the requirements of



 6           the regulation.




 7                         Now  within 24  months,  we  have to issue




 8           guidelines  that  include the basic levels of performance




 9           and the technical and economical description.  We




10           also have to include in it  levels of  control which




11           will achieve the protection of ground and surface




12           waters,  take into account the variety of factors



13           that have to be  taken.  You have to say  what level



14           of health benefits  can be achieved by this level of



15           operation and this  aspect of  solid waste management?



16                         You  have to  consider disease factors,



17           safety  factors,  and other Federal laws,  and how this



18           guideline might  interact with that portion of the  law.



19                         Now  there is some redundancy in this




20           section.  When RCRA was passed, the first piece of




21           it was  passed in the Senate,  S-2150.   And they were




22           running up  against  adjournment last fall and they




23           were all going off  to their homes to get ready for



24           the November elections.  They knew they  did not have



25           time to go  to conference with the bill,  if the bills

-------
                                                          203
 1          were dramatically different.  Both sides were




 2          coiranited to getting a bill out.  Now they had had




 3          It for five years.  This bill represents five years




            of Congressional study.




                           Most of the proceedings from the




 6          different changes in the bill could fill this room.




 7          And in order not to have to go through conference,




 8          they negotiated the final form of the bill.  And




            because of the haste of the adjournment of the last--




 10          of the 94th Congress, pieces were left in that should




            technically have been scrubbed out.  And some of the




            redundancy is here in this where they ask us to write




 13          criteria again for open dumping.  Well they also asked




            us to do that over in 4004.  Although there is




 15          redundancy, there is no conflict between these two




            provisions.




                           Now we plan to write two guidelines




 18          at the present time, one for land disposal, which will




 19          help support the criteria for open dumping and




 20          sanitary landfills.  And then we plan to write one




 21           on sludge disposal.




 22                         The one for land disposal of other




 23           wastes will be ready this fiscal year, 1978, in time




 24           for the inventory and for the planning process.  The




25           one on sludge will not be ready until fiscal year 1979.

-------
                                                         204
 1                         But that covers the basic land disposal



 2          provisions of the law.  Recognizing the intent of




 3          this provision of the law is to move solid waste into



 4          acceptable land disposal practices, the term santtary



 5          landfill as you think of it in the profession may not



 6          be the same as what we are talking about in the future.



 7                         There are some languages--there is




 8          language in different pieces of this law that talks




 9          about types of sanitary landfills.  For those of you




10          who are familiar with the California law, they have



11          classes of sanitary landfills based on the types of




12          waste that those sites receive.  There is every reason



13          to believe that our criteria and our guidelines can



14          accomodate that kind of flexibility, which may give



15          us a way to deal with the regional differences that



16          we are facing and the various wastes that are going



17          to be coming into these various disposal sites.



18                         But basically what the Congress wants



19          is land disposal sites that you--within a reasonable



20          expectation of environmental protection will not




21          degredate land, air or surface or ground waters.  That



22          is the intent of the law, making the land disposal




23          practices reasonable but to protect those three mediums



24                         Now I can entertain questions and answer




25          you if I can.  Yes, sir.

-------
                                                            205
 1                         MR. COPELAND:   I am Jerry Copeland,



 2          Director of Public Works  for North Kansas  City.



 3                         My concern, as  I am sure yours  is, is




 4          with  the administration within the intent  of the law.



           And as we are  talking about criteria,  I think  that




 6          regulations, definitions  and standards and limitations



 7          should be adopted very carefully.  Minutae of  technical




 8          requirements administered rigidly can  delay the



 '          implementation of these items  indefinitely and can



10          increase the cost tremendously.




11                         My experience,  and I am sure the



12          experience of  a number of other people here, is that




13          you can take an intelligent, industrious,  dedicated




14          individual administering  regulations to a  minute



15          detail and you can make compliance a nightmare.  If




           the dedication to detail  and to the law exceeds the



           dedication to  the intent, then we have got problems.



18                         I know in  my own business I can take



1'          a building inspector or any type of inspector  and



20          with  the combination of codes  and laws that we have



21          available, I can make any almost 18 year old building




22          in town illegal.




23                         And 1 feel many times that  this is



           what  we are faced with when we try to  comply with the




25          various laws that we are  all having to deal with now.

-------
                                                         206
 1          Individually I don't think it would be a great problem.


 2          But in the last few years we have come to where we


 3          are dealing with the Clean Water Law, Safe Drinking


 4          Water, Flood Control, and Solid Waste.


 5                         And as we become involved and will


 6          become involved with more and more controls of this


 7          sort, I think the problem of the way the laws are


 8          administered is increasing the work.  Thank you.

                              AKfe-            Arffc,
 9                         MR. £!*?:  I am Nick A^Kswith Mid-


10          America Regional Council.  I had a couple of questions,


11          one of which you may have partially answered already.


12                         How do you anticipate the criteria


13          for determining what is and what isn't a sanitary


14          landfill will vary from previously published sanitary


15          landfill guidelines?  Secondly, af,ter these criteria


1*          have been developed, who do you anticipate will conduct


17          the inventories to determine what are and what aren't


^          open dumps?


19                         MR. HICKMAN:  The existing land disposal


20          guidelines that have been published almost three years


21          now effectively look at the criteria that I think are


22          important when you start to define good and bad land


23          disposal practices.  And they are designed in a way


24          to allow great deal of flexibility for making judge-


25          ments on the adversity of that site.

-------
                                                           207
 1                          The gentleman who just spoke before




 2           talked about  the  fact  that  if you really want to




 3           enforce the law,  you can put anybody out there.




            Coming from Oklahoma,  I remember when I was in college




 5           the  state  was dry; only by  the law,  not by any




 6           practice.   And we could have booze delivered into our




 7           room at school because the  bootleggers were mighty



            accomodating  to the people  who liked to drink.




 9                          Then we had  a governor who came in




 10           and  said by god,  if you are going to have a dry state,




 11           you  are going to  have  a dry state.   And he continued



 12           to enforce the law until the next referendum they




 13           voted wet.




 U                          And so  you can put a  law—if we put



 IS           too  much interpretation on  any law,  you know,  first




            people are  going  to revolt  and then  Congress is  going



 17           to revoke  the  law.   Somehow it will  destroy all  the




            good work  that we  have been doing over the last  year.



 19           So we  have  to  be  lenient.



 20                          The  guidelines  cover  the criteria



 21           such as, you  know,  does  it  or  does it  not pollute




 22           the  surface or ground  water.   I think  the criteria




 23           that are in that guideline  will be the foundation for




 24           the  criteria  that we will write.  And  that will  allow



25           for  flexibility of  the Omahas  and the  Alburquerques

-------
                                                          208
 1          to make judgements on whether or not  that site  is




 2          ruining their environment, because the environment



 3          is different here than  somewhere else.




 4                         So that  covers factors for dust




 5          control, a  lot of those sort of things that are health




 6          related and environment related.  So  I think we will



 7          follow very much that sort of procedure.




 8                         Now as far as how this inventory is



 9          going to be done, our concept is that the state govern-




10          ment can do the inventory.  We will try  to provide




11          financial assistance for them to do it,  back up support




12          on both technical aspects and processing of the data.



13                         We visualize a common  data system,




14          similar to  what we did  in 1966 to 1970 when we  did



15          a community survey on solid waste management practices,



16          where the data is collected on a standard form  and



17          we process  the data and provide feedback to the states




18          on the survey so that it stays uniform.  This allows



19          the states  to compare notes and allows us to compare




20          notes between states and between regions.




21                         Now we visualize the states doing  it.




22          First of all, they know where most of the sites are.




23          Second, they have a working relationship with most




24          local and county governments and operators of the



25          disposal facilities.  Third, they are best able to

-------
                                                           209
 1          make  the  judgement  on whether that site within a




 2          criteria  is  acceptable.   Fourth,  they are  the  ones




 3          who are going to have to  write the plans and eventually




 4          carry out the enforcement of  the  plans necessary to



 5          convert a disposal  site to compliance.




 6                          So our thinking is that the states



 7          can do the inventory with our support both financially




 8          and technically.  And I think most states  that I have




 9          talked with  agree that this makes a lot of common




10          sense in  doing it that way, because they are the ones




11          who are going to have to--here again, the  law  is



12          designed  for maximum assumptions  of the functions of




13          that  law  by  state and local governments.   So that



14          logic just prevails there.




15                          It would be dumb for us to  try  to do



16          it when the  state can do  a far better job  than we



17          could ever hope  to  do.




18                          Now  if a   state chooses not to  play,



19          we are going to  have to do it.  That presents  a real




20          problem for  us,  because we  don't  know where the sites



21          are.   The Federal people  are  not  going to  be received




22          too warmly by a  lot of places.  And I think we will




23          have  difficulty meeting the intent of the  law  if we




24          have  to do it.   The states  can do this far better than




25          we can.

-------
                                                         210
 1                         Now there  is a  legal question:   If



 2          the  state does it, we have to  publish  a  list.   Then




 3          who  is responsible for arguing the accuracy  of  that



 4          list if  it  is challenged.  If  a site operator challenge




 5          that list,  and his site is on  the list and he



 6          challenges  that he is not really an open dump.   That



 7          he is really a sanitary landfill and he  has  read the



 8          criteria en d he can interpret  it just  as well as we




 9          can.




10                         Who has to defend that?   Do the  Feds




11          or does the state defend  it?   That is  a  real interesting



12          legal question that we MMpose now for our attorneys




13          to set up where we stand on that.  It  is a very



14          interesting problem.



15                         Yes?



16                         MS. GARDNER:  I am Diane  Gardner with



17          the  Missouri Municipal League.




18                         You just said that there  is going to



19          be financial and technical assistance  available to




20          states.  My concern is the cities.  They have to bear




21          the  burden of both the preparing, operating, developing



22          manpower and equipment and et  cetera.  They  have to




23          come up with this funding.  We did a recent  survey




24          and  we find that most sanitary landfills in  the State




25          of Missouri are losing quite a bit of  money.

-------
                                                        211
 '                         And  I was wondering  if there were




 2          going to be some  funds available  for them?




 3                         MR.  H1CKMAN:  I would like to defer




 4          answering  that until the last presentation of  this




 ^          meeting.   In  that we talk about state and local




 6          program development, and we talk  about the financial




 7          assistance programs that are available.  Will  it be




 8          all right  if  I wait until then?




 9                         MS.  GARDNER:  Yes.




10                         MR.  HICKMAN:  O.K.




11                         MR.  TUCKER:  Any further questions,




12          please?




13                         MR.  WELCH:  My name  is Chuck Welch.




14          1 am the Controller of Conservation Chemicals.




15                         And  reading several  state laws  and




16          listening  to  the comments here, we  have talked about




17          site protection in  the event of closure; we have




18          also talked about--! have also read about minimum




"          insurance  requirements with regards to the liability.




2"                         To paraphrase a comment, our insurance




21          agent, over two years ago, he said  that product and




22          contractor's  liability was going  to make malpractice




23          look like peanuts.  And I want to address the  state




24          and Federal government in indicating that the  industry
25
           may need some assistance in—with insurance.  And there

-------
                                                          212
1          may be a need for minimum insurability, something




2          similar to the assigned risk with Workmen's Compensat-



3          ion because as landfill and other operators in this



4          room, I am sure, are having the same types of problems,



5          the cost of insurance.  It Is skyrocketing If you can



6          obtain it.



7                         MR. HICKMAN:  Well, that is a real



8          problem.  And it is a problem whether you are a private




9          operator or a public operator.  Long term liability




10          is high, not only during this operating time, but once



11          it is closed and abandoned and some environmental



12          effect occurs later on after the site Is closed up



13          and everybody walked away from It.




14                         The hazardous waste force has looked



15          at this from a hazardous waste standpoint, the



16          liability and the long term insurability.  We have



17          had a lot of discussions with insurance companies




18          about it.  And the gentleman is quite right in the



19          fact that they don't want to touch it.  And the cost



20          is really prohibitive in many instances.



21                         So some creative schemes are going to




22          have to be developed to assure long term liability




23          protection for sites that have been closed up.  One



24          approach that has been considered in some places, and




25          I think It is being pursued to some degree In New

-------
                                                             213
 1          Jersey,  is the fact that sites, In effect, provides


            a surcharge.   And that surcharge goes into a trust


            for the  strict purpose of providing corrective

 4
            measures or assurance for the long term for those


            sites that may at some later time for some reason


            cause an environmental health problem.


                           This may be one approach.   This will

 8
            take legislative changes in state governments if

 9
            it occurs that way.   It is a problem and  it is some-

 10
            thing we are  going to have to deal with in the next

 11
            seven years.


                           MR.  TUCKER:  Please identify yourself

 13
            for the  official record.


                           MR.  STUDKfeAKER:   I am Walt  Studebaker,


            Environmental Engineer for the  Eastern  Lines of

 16
            the Sante Fe  Railroad.


                           And  to further that question,  this

 18
            law that  you  have got now, 94-580, does not have a

 19
            provision in  it for  the  long term affect of landfilling

 20
            and the  legal obligation  for the  individual and/or


            owner, or the state  or the Federal government to take

 22
            over.

 23
                           MR. HICKMAN:   It has  no provision

 24
            whatsoever in that area.   That  does  not say,  hey,  you

25
            know, we  are  going to permit  lots  of  these  sites becaus«

-------
                                                          214
 1          we are the permitting agency, be it federal, state


 2          or whatever.  And that site at some later time


 3          causes an environmental threat, that does not mean


           that we are going to see that it is corrected, that


           we are financially going to see that the problem is


           handled.  That provision is not included.

                               /r«l^c/C
                          MR. JOlOTLCrr   If I may elaborate,


           though, with regard to hazardous wastes, I mentioned


 9          that there has to be some--we have to examine that


10          point of maintenance of operation so permits for


           hazardous waste facilities will have to address that


12          subject.  And as the gentleman from Conservation


13          pointed out, it is a very knotty one.


14                         MR. HICKMAN:  No matter how we identify,


15          we have no mechanism to provide financial insurance


           that some later time if a problem occurs we will--it


17          is not in the law.


13                         MR. STUDJEBAKER:  O.K.


19                         MR. TUCKER:  Any further questions at


           this time?


                          (No response.)


22                         MR. TUCKER:  If not, this seems like


23          an excellent opportunity to call a 10-minute break,


24          one reason being that our next speaker went to take


25          a phone call, plus some people would like to get up

-------
                                                         215
 '          and move  around,  I  am sure.   So  let's  take  10 minutes,




 2          please.




 3                          (Short recess.)




 4                          MR.  TUCKER: Let's  reconvene.  Walt,




 5          will  you  shut  that  door,  please?




 6                          I  would Itke  to move  along to the  next




           section of  the program.   This section  deals with




           resource  conservation and recovery and what we  call




 9          overall technical assistance programs.




10                          To present this,  we have  Steve Lingle




11          with  our  Resource Recovery Division  in our Washington




'2          office.   So, Steve,  if you would, please.




13                          MR.  LINGLE:   Thank you, Morris.




14          Apparently  some people weren't hearing too well,  so




           I am  going  to  speak into  this lousy  thing here.




                           MR.  TUCKER:   Steve, you can  still




           float around,  but if you  would just  kind of stay  in




           the neighborhood, I think they would appreciate it.




"                          MR.  LINGLE:   O.K.  Before I  get  into




20          the slides, I  want  to make a couple  of observations,




2'          overall observations about the Resource  Recovery  and




22          Conservation Provisions of the Act.




23                          Obviously, the name of  the Act is




24          the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; yet,  as




25          you have  seen  here  today, the provisions of the Act

-------
                                                         216
 1          clearly go well beyond resource recovery and conser-



 2          vatlon provisions.  And, in fact, I think that some




 3          people feel that perhaps the major emphasis of this



 4          Act is really on regulation and control of waste



 5          disposal, particularly waste disposal sites.




 6                         I think that we should realize that



 7          resource recovery can be thought of as an environmental




 8          control technique as well as a conservation technique.




 9          And that resource recovery provides an alternative to



10          waste disposal.




11                         Similarly, regulation of land disposal



12          provides a major incentive for resource recovery and



13          conservation.  In fact, one of the best incentives



14          that you can devise because it eliminates the chief



15          environmentally unacceptable disposal alternatives;



16          therefore, it makes resource recovery a more viable



17          alternative.



18                         So in essence resource recovery and



19          waste reduction do address both of the major objectives




20          of the Act.  that is, protection of public health




21          and the environment and conservation of resources.




22          Yet, the provisions in the Act for resource recovery



23          and conservation are somewhat more difficult to iden-




24          tify and sink your teeth into.  For example, in



25          hazardous waste areas, there is a very discreet section

-------
                                                           217






 1           of the Act,  Subtitle C,  which clearly lays out all




 2           of the requirements for  hazardous wastes,  sets dates




 3           and deadlines by which certain regulations have to be




 4           promulgated.




 5                          In contrast,  the Resource Recovery and




 6           Conservation Provisions  tend to be somewhat spread




 7           throughout the Act.  There seem to be portions of the




 8           resource recovery and conservation in a whole number




 9           of different  sections of the Act.  There are then a




10           few other sections which do  relate specifically to




11           resource recovery, but the authorities tend to be




12           not mandates  with specific dates tied in,  but rather




13           authorities  the administrator is authorized to.  So




14           they seem to  be not as much  of a squeaky wheel, in




15           essence.




16                          O.K.   Let me  begin by just  briefly




17           reviewing some of the provisions and sections of the




18           Act that contain resource recovery and conservation




19           provisions, but which are not exclusively directed




20           toward resource recovery and conservation.




21                          I am just going to make a couple of




22           points about  these.   Some of them have already been




23           discussed.  The second item  there,  the resource recover;




24           and conservation panels,  I am going to discuss later




25           because this  is viewed,  actually, as one of the major

-------
                                                           218
           new authorities in the Act for resource recovery and



           conservation, but it is listed here because in essence


 o
           these technical assistance panels are broad in nature.



           They apply to technical assistance for a wide range



           of waste management issues, not only resource recovery



           and conservation.



 7                         The guidelines section of the Act,



           I think it is significant because of the fact that



           Federal agencies are required to comply with these



           guidelines that are promulgated under this section.



           And approximately one year ago, under our previous


19
           Act, which had a similar authority in it, we promulgate



           guidelines on three major areas of resource recovery
           and conservation.
15
                          One of the areas is separation of
           paper by Federal agencies; newspaper, corrugated



           containers and high-grade office paper.  Another of


1 ft
           the guidelines requires Federal agencies to utilize



19         large scale resource recovery facilities for recovery



           of materials and energy from waste when they have a


91
           sufficient quantity of waste.  And the third one of



           the guidelines requires Federal agencies to establish


91
           deposits on all containers solely within Fed agencies.



                          Now these guidelines have already been


25
           promulgated and we don't anticipate any new promulgatio

-------
                                                             219
 1           activities.   However,  we will be working with Federal




 2           agencies on  implementation of these guidelines;  sort




            of an encouragement, hand-holding type of exercise




 4           to see that  they are  implemented fully.  And this is




            a pretty important activity for us under the new




 6           Act.




 '                          The development of state and local




 "           programs,  Subtitle D,  which you have already heard




            about to some extent and will hear more about later,




10           is a  good  example of the section that is really  not




11           thought about at all as  resource recovery and




 2           conservation  section.   It is thought of in terms of




13           the criteria  for open  dumps and sanitary landfills,




14           and it is  thought of in  terms of the state plans that




^           have  to be approved and  the financial assistance to




16           the states.




17                          But, in fact,  when you read the object-




18           ive of this section, it  says  it  is  to assist  in




            developing and  encouraging  methods  for disposal  of




20           solid wastes, which are  environmentally sound and




            which maximize  utilization  of valuable resources and




22           encourage  resource  conservation.




23                         And  in  another section of the  Act the




            requirements  for  approval of  state  plans under




            Subtitle D, in  essence,  boil  down to it  either goes

-------
                                                           220
           into an approved sanitary landfill or it is recovered.



           And so throughout the section  it suggests that states



           should look at resource recovery and conservation


 4
           provisions as alternatives to  land disposal.



                          So it is an example of how the resource



           recovery ethic is sort of woven in there, but without



           any really hard provisions to  the administrator saying

 g

           do this or do that.



 9                         O.K.  With that, I think I will move



           on and talk about some of the  sections of the Act



           which are somewhat more specific than general resource


12
           recovery.



                          Federal procurement; in essence, the


14
           Act requires Federal agencies  within two years to



           purchase materials containing  the highest percentage



           of recyclable materials practicable.  And the same



           is true for energy.  Utilize solid waste as an energy


18
           source to the extent practicable.


19
                          Furthermore, within 18 months it says


on
           they must eliminate any discrimination in specification


21
           which prohibit and include secondary materials and


22
           products which they purchase.  These are provisions


23
           which I think have been long desired for Federal


24
           agencies, to act as sort of an example and try to



           create a market for recycled materials.

-------
                                                             221
 1                          Now EPA is required to write guidelines




 2           under Section 6002.  The guidelines are not mandatory.




 3           In fact,  the stated purpose is for them to assist



 4           Federal agencies in complying with the requirements




 5           of this section.  In essence, the guidelines are



 6           supposed  to identify supply—issues concerning



 7           supply products containing recyclable materials when




 8           it is practical or not practical to do so.  So they




 9           should have a significant influence on how this




10           section of  the Act is implemented.




11                          But I think the biggest—the major




12           significance of this Federal procurement section is




13           not  in the  Federal government at all.  I think the




14           significance will come in the adoption of similar




15           practices by state and local governments and private




16           industries.



17                          Federal government procurement alone




18           is not going to have that much of an impact on over-



19           all  demand,  because the total demand for—the total



20           consumption of products in this country, the Federal



21           government  does not purchase more than about 2 per




22           cent of any particular product.  And most manufacturers



23           aren't going to drastically alter their inputs for




24           that.   So 1 am basically offering you a challenge.




25           I  think this is a major opportunity for states and

-------
                                                          222
 1           local  governments and  some--some have done  this




 2           already.   They are ahead  of  the Federal  government




            and have adopted a similar type of  practice,,



 4                         O.K.  There are a number  of  special



 5           studies in Section 8002 of the Act  that  relate



 6           specifically  to resource  recovery and conservation.




            I am not going to dwell on these.   We have  done a lot




            of studies in the past and some of  these are, frankly,




 9           a little bit  redundant.



10                         They do require recommendations be




            reported to Congress,  but I  think that we are well
12
15
19
20
21
           along  in our understanding, you know, on most of
           these issues.




                          I do want to call your attention to
           two of the studies; one on small scale and low
           technology systems and the other one on finance source



17         separation.  I bring these to your attention to high-




18         light the fact that I believe the Act reflects a
growing recognition by Congress of the needs of smaller



communities and rural communities in the area of resource




recovery and conservation.  It is not just a big
           systems approach.  They are trying to focus attention



23          on che needs of small communities and we think  it




24          is very appropriate and think that these are signifi-




25          cant authorities within the Act.

-------
                                                         223
                          Now the last item listed up there on


 2          the resource conservation committee is very different


 3          from any of the other studies.   It is much more


 4          significant and we will talk about that a little more


 5          specifically.


 6                         I think for a long time a lot of


 7          people have said that the real  hangup in terms of


           recovery of wastes and conservation is markets.  And


 9          also the overall Federal policy issues, the fact that
10
           there are subsidies and encouragement for use of
11          virgin resources,  but not for use of recycled resources.


12                         And EPA has done studies on this in


13          the past,  bills have been approached to Congress,  and


           so forth.   Congress fell short of putting any specific


           subsidy or incentive or disincentive types of provisions


16          in this Act,  but they did create a Cabinet-level


           committee  called the Resource Conservation Committee.

in
           And it is  composed of Secretaries of agencies,  like


19          Treasury,  Commerce, Labor,  shared by EPA.


20                         And they are required to do very


21          comprehensive studies of incentives and disincentives,


22          looking at existing public  policies, such as  existing


23          subsidies. They are asked to look at the issue of


24          the possible  regulations on the manufacture or use


           of certain kinds of materials in products.  You know,

-------
                                                         224
           should a container be made  out  of plastic,  versus



           steel  and so  forth.




                          They are  asked to look at  a  new  concept



           called a product  charge.  Product charge  is a concept



           where  a charge  is placed on a product at  the time  of



 6          manufacture,  which is the charge being equal to the



           charge of disposal of that  product.   And  that inter-



           nalizes the cost  of waste management right  into the


 9

           product, and  also provides  encouragement  for resource



           recovery because  you provide credits if the product



           contains recycled materials.



                          I  think this is  an important committee.



           A report to Congress is  required within two years,



           recommendations.   I think Congress will look seriously



15      '    at these recommendations and in terms of  passing



           specific legislation,  it would  provide many major



           encouragements  for resource recovery and  conservation


18
           through incentives or disincentives.



19                         O.K.  8005 of the Act is sort of a
20
           summation of some of the authorities that are provided
2'          for resource recovery.  Many of the authorities given



           in this section are mentioned elsewhere.  For example,



           you can see Federal procurement incentives and public



           policies and disposal charges are listed here.  As we



25          said, they are already covered in that other committee.

-------
                                                          225

 1                          So 8005  sort of sums things up,
 2          but  frankly, most of the authorities are given else-
           where.
                           I do want to call attention to Section
           8006, which isn't mentioned anywhere on these slides.
           This gives authority to carry out full-scale resource
 7          recovery demonstrations.  And this is similar to the
 g          old 208 authority in the previous Act.  And the
           authority is for 75 per cent funding of full-scale
 )0          resource recovery systems.
                          Also I want to call your attention to
 12          provisions of Section 8004 which allows EPA to
           evaluate existing resource recovery systems.  And this,
           we feel, is a major opportunity to provide information
           on the performance of resource recovery systems that
           are being implemented to the public, and thereby
           advance the status, technology and understanding of
 18
                          The final area that I would like to
 2Q          discuss is the resource recovery and conservation
 2]          panels.  I think this may be the most important new
 22          provision of the Act, perhaps along with the resource
 23          recovery and conservation committee; the most important
 24          provision relevant to resource recovery.  This is a
25          technical assistance provision.   That is what the

-------
                                                        226
 1          authority amounts to, in essence.  I think the rational




 2          for this provision and the reason it was called into




 3          the Act is that Congress wanted to emphasize the need




 4          for Federal technical assistance and did it by giving




 5          it a special name and by requiring that 20 per cent of




 6          the authorizations--the general authorizations under




 7          the Act be allocated to this particular provision.




 8                         This is a provision that EPA had




 9          wanted in the act and in the Congressional testimony




10          many of the people who testified said that they thought




11          it was important.  What it reflects is given the




12          intent and the need to encourage and promote resource




13          recovery and the implementation of it, what is the




14          best way for the Federal government to do it?




15                         I think a lot of people felt that the




16          best way was not a subsidy program, but with a




17          technical assistance program.  The idea is that




18          resource recovery systems and approaches are in many




19          cases technically and economically advisable, but




20          they are complicated.  They are not well-understood




21          and therefore there are often many delays in getting




22          them implemented.




23                         By providing technical assistance,




24          this problem can be overcome.  The TA can be provided




25          for a number of purposes and to solve a number of

-------
                                                          227
 1         problems, as  indicated here.   The  terms  include a




 2         variety of  types  of expertise,  technical marketing,




 3         financial,institutional.  They can be composed of EPA




 4         personnel at  either headquarters or  the  regions; by




 5         consultants simply contracting with  private consultants




 6         to provide  expert assistance at no charge  to  local




 7         governments;  and  something called  peer matching, which




 8         is actually state or local officials who have had




 9         experiences with  resource recovery who go  out and tell




 10         somebody else about it.




 11                        So this is viewed as  a major new




 12         provision.  Now this relates to Subtitle D, as shown




 13         here, which states that the panels may be  used to




 14         help states in implementing this state plan required




 IS         under Subtitle D.  So there is  an  inter-relationship




 '6         between these two provisions.




 17                        Let me just summarize briefly.  I think




 18         the major new programs under this  act for  resource




 19         recovery and  conservation are;  one,  technical assistance




 20         panels program; two, the resource  conservation




 21         committees to look at incentives and disincentives;




 22         three, the broad  research development in the evaluation




 23         provisions or authorities provided;  four,  possibly




 24         the procurement provision, depending on  the reaction




25          of state and  local governments.

-------
                                                        228
 1                         And any questions?  I would be glad to

 2          try to answer them.  Yes?

 3                         MR. STUD1BAKER:  Walt Studebaker, with

 4          same thing.   Is this technical assistance program going

 5          to be available for industry?

 6                         MR. LINGLE:   Yes, probably.
                                  A
 7                         MR. STUD1BAKER:  And do you have a

 8          methodology available as to how we will get--

 9                         MR. LINGLE:   Well, the scope of the

'°          technical assistance program is just now being

'I          developed.  The panels program is being developed, and

12          one of the purposes of these meetings is to get public

13          input on how that program can be developed.

14                         I think at  the present time the needs

15          to give this to industry is recognized.

16                         MR. STUD1BAKER:  Do you have a time-

17          table that you have got in  mind to get this panel

18          program together where it  could begin to be utilized?

'9                         MR. LINGLE:   Yes.  The program will

20          probably start functioning  fully in fiscal 1978,

21          because that is when the financial appropriations for

22          tt are for.   We are hearing of some technical

23          assistance activities now which are similar in nature

24          to this panel program; probably not nearly as

25          extensive.

-------
                                                       229
                          MR. STUMJBAKER:  Well then to find



 2         additional information on this, would we come--



 3         contact the Regional Administrator?
 4                        MR. tOWiMHf"; " If I may answer you,



 5         if we are talking about industrial, particularly



 6         hazardous wastes, we have some capability now.  We



 7         are going to make it more elaborate and have more



 8         resources for it.




                          If you have a problem, you call Morris



10         and he decides whether his staff can deal with it



11         or if he has to call in other of our people who are



12         experts on the subject.  So feel free to call now.



13                        MR. STUDIBAKER:  That is one problem



14         I can see as an industrial representative, that we



15         get into with limited engineering staffs.  And I think



           you will find it even more on small industries, that



17         the only alternative that we have got to just going


in

           ahead and disposing of wastes through a contract form



19         and having somebody just come in and haul it off and



20         then dispose of it would be to look at our own



21         processes and what we might reuse.



22                        But then we talking about consulting



           fees, and we begin to look at quite a large budget.



24                        MR_ HICKMAH:  Let me deal with that.


25
           Our technical assistance program is not in competition

-------
                                                         230
1         with  the  product  consulting  industry.  We  are;  not




2         going to  supplant what  is  normally consultation




3         services  provided by the consulting industry.




4                        MR. STUDEBAKER:   Can you  elaborate




^         then  on just  what this  technical assistance  in detail




6         will  be?




7                        MR. HICKMAN:   Basically the work  that




8         we  are involved  in is--technical assistance  is not




'         new to us.  We have been doing  it since  1966.  And it




10         is  within this law provisions for four or  five




11         different places  for the provision of  assistance.




12                        It is basically  to sit  with an




13         organization  or  city or local government or  state




14         government  or an  industry  and discuss  what their




15         problems  are  and  try to guide them in  the  direction




16         in  which  they should go to make intelligent  decisions,




17         which leads ultimately  probably to the use of  a




18         consultant  to make use  of--to do this.




19                        There is real analytical  work necessary




20         to  make capital  investments  and make use of  the




21         information received from  these sittings to  make




22         product and/or project  changes.  In the  resource




23         recovery  area we work with cities, helping them




24         prepare to go out and solicit for resource recovery




25         facilities.  We  provide consultations  frequently to




          what  the  problems are and give  them a window  on what

-------
                                                          231
  1          the best way is to go and to give them the kind of

  2          advice they need.


  3                         We  are not in competition  with the


  4          consulting engineering field.   And we  don't intend


  5          to provide assistance just because somebody wants  to

  6          avoid  paying the fee  for  legitimate consulting purposes

  7                         MR.  STUDEBAKER:   Do you anticipate,


  8          though,  the development of such things as the


  9          technology transfer documents--

 10                         MR.  HICKMAN:   You know, we are up to


 11          our ears  in publication of literature.
                              Kowt/c/c
 12                         tflti  (MHfHtay;   For example,  we are just


 13          finishing an incinerator  evaluation program for


 14          hazardous  wastes where  we have  elected  about three


 15          dozen  different kinds  of  classes of hazardous  wastes

 16          and carefully and painstakingly incinerated them--

 17          using  that  term very  broadly—in about  eight or nine


 18          different  kinds of  incineration facilities.

 19                         So you will be able,  meeting with our

 20          staff  and/or  Morris's  staff, depending  on  the  problem--


 21          to  sit down and discuss the  kind of waste  you  have,

 22          assuming we are talking about an organic when  we are


 23          talking about incineration,  and  we  would be  able to


 24          discuss with  you the results and dates  of  those kinds


25          of operations.  And you would then  have some more

-------
                                                            232
 1          direction about the kind of help you wanted to get.




 2          You know, we have directories of facilities around




 3          the country.  There are about 100 or so firms that



 4          are in the business of treating and disposing of



 5          hazardous wastes.




 6                         Some of them are better than others.




 7          State officials can tell you about them.  So that Is



 8          the kind of--




 9                         MR. STUDEBAKER:  That Is the idea that



10          this section has on the technical assistance panel?




11                         MR. HICKMAN:  That is right.  We do



12          that every day.  Say right now we are talking about



13          having more resources recovered.




14                         MR. STUDEBAKER:  All right.



IS                         MR. LINGLE:  Any other questions?



16                         (No response.)



17                         MR. TUCKER:  Speaking of literature




18          I have just discovered--we missed it last night—that



19          we brought great piles of a new little flyer on current



20          views on solid waste management.  And this is a listing




21          of selected publications from the 800 or so that we




22          have total.  And we meant to get these in the folders,



23          but we didn't do it.  So I will try to get people to




24          pass these out to you so you can add them to your




25          folders.

-------
                                                           233




 1                         O.K.  The next and final formal




 2          session on the program was indicated as state program



 3          development.  Now that more properly should have been




 4          called state and local program development.  And once




 5          again, we will ask Lannie Hickman to present this to



 6          us.



 7                         MR. HICKMAN:  We have been talking



 8          about hazardous waste control, land disposal, resource




 9          conservation as the major thrusts of the law.  Now




10          we are going to talk about institution building.




11          Steve talked about part of it within the framework



12          of providing technical assistance, which helps build




13          the institutions necessary to deliver solid waste




14          management practices.



15                         All right.  Within the law, Subtitle




16          C and Subtitle D--Subtitle C being the hazardous



17          waste enforcement of the law—Subtitle D is a portion



18          called state and local programs--these are mechanisms




19          by which we are able to provide the kind of assistance



20          which will allow the states to assume a dominant role



21          in assuring proper solid waste management.



22                         This is the intent of the law.  The




23          intent of the law is to put the major thrust of




24          carrying out the umbrella of regulations control into




25          the state government's hands.  And then it provides a

-------
 1          mechanism  so that local governments can meet the




 2          planning and implementation needs required under the




 3          law.




 4                         Within Subtitle D within six months




 5          of the enactment of the law, we are supposed to issue




 6          guidelines for what are regional planning areas for




 7          purposes of solid waste management.  This law says




 8          you have got to recognize 208, which is the regional




 '          planning mechanism set up by the Federal Water




10          Pollution Control Law.




11                         And wherever possible, 208 planning




12          mechanisms should be used—the areas of regional




13          planning established by 208 should be used, but not




'4          to the extent that it would obviate intelligent,




15          normal, reasonable planning areas for solid waste




16          management because water runs by gravity and solid




17          waste travels by man.  And so they do not necessarily




18          always go in the same direction.




!'                         The law recognizes that and allows




20          a flexibility for us to establish regional solid




21          waste planning areas.




22                         it also requires us to issue guidelines




23          for state solid waste management programs.  And it




24          requires us to do that primarily for the purpose




25          of allowing a state or local government to develop a

-------
 1          state plan.   Now what are the minimum requirements of




 2          an acceptable state program.   The law says the follow-




 3          ing:   first,  you have to develop a plan, a state plan.




 4          A state plan  does not necessarily have to be developed




 5          strictly by  state government.




 6                         It requires the fact that state




 7          government and local elected  officials shall get




 8          together and  come to an agreement on the relative




 9          roles and responsibilities in the development and




10          implementation of a state solid waste management plan.




11          That  says effectively that state plans can be developed




'2          by local government and tied  together in a bundle when




13          it says state plan on it, and that can be the state




14          plan; or the  state can develop it; or it can be a




IS          mutual sharing of regional areas.




"                         But it requires the state government




17          and local elected officials to come together and reach




'8          an agreement  on responsibilities and roles with the




19          various actions of the solid  waste management plan.




20          The law does  not say what constitutes agreement between




21          state government and local elected officials.  And




22          that  is going to be an interesting exercise in the




23          next  year or  so to try to find out how state government




24          and local elected officials are going to agree on solid




           waste management.

-------
                                                         «**•
15
                          Now in  the  absence  of  that agreement,




2          the governor must  designate  the  relative responsibili-




           ties and  roles  as  far  as the implementation  of  the




           plan.   So they  have to come  to a shared agreement on




5          what they are going to do.




6                         It  says that  plans  must consider all




           dumps and all sanitary landfills,  the purposes  of


Q

           eliminating or  converting  all those dumps into




9          sanitary  landfills, and that all new  sites that




10          would be  started would meet  the  criteria of  sanitary
11          landfill.



12
                          The  state  programs  must have  necessary
           regulatory authority to carry out  the purposes  of the



           law for purposes  of their program.  They have got to
           be able to regulate the  disposal practices.   Now this
           planning covers all solid waste including hazardous




           waste.   We will talk about the  funding of the program



18
           once the plan is developed.




                          We have been in  the planning business




20         for a long time.  We started in 1966,  May of 1966.




21         That is when the first few states got  planning grants




22         from the Federal solid waste program.   The states have




           been doing this for a long time.  For  the last couple




           of years since most of them completed  their plans,




25         they have been working on three basic  thrusts.

-------
                                                          JHf
  1                         They have been  developing a  strategy




  2         to develop hazardous wastes cradle  to  grave.  You



  3         notice how close  that strategy fits what the  law  now




  4         says.  They have  also been working  on  a strategy  to



  5         regulate land disposal practices.   That fits  very




  6         nicely into the law.  They have been working  on ways



  7         to provide a  catylization for resource recovery  at




  8         the state level within the state.  That fits  very




  9         nicely into the law.




 10                        So we don't anticipate a great big




 11         exercise going on at the state level to do  this new




 12         planning.  We don't anticipate a great deal of new




 13         work at the local and regional level, because there




 14         has been a lot of planning done and there is no reason




 15         to start all over again.  The  law is not designed to



 16         reinvent the wheel.



 17                        Now we would rather get on with solving



 18         the problems rather than planning, and I think we all



 1'         know what the problem is.



 20                        Now it also provides that the state



 21         must  eliminate any provision or provide a mechanism




 22         to do away with' those provisions in their constitution



 23         or in their laws that prohibits communities from making




 24         long  term contractural arrangements for the provision




25         of waste  to a  resource recovery facility.

-------
 1                         Now some states have permissive



 2          legislation that limits the contractural time that




 3          a city can make arrangements for, five years.  They




           cannot contract for, say, beyond five years.  Well,



           this is prohibitive when you start to regionalize and



 6          do a large scale resource recovery facility which are



 7          capital intensive.  You are just not going to finance




 8          them on a five year contract.




 9                         So the state plan has to find a




10          mechanism if that sort of constraint exists to get




11          rid of it.



12                         Finally, it says the plan must: deal




13          with all the solid waste in that state and they must



14          either go to sanitary landfills or must be recovered.



           One of the basic provisions of the plan is this one.



                          O.K.  So financial assistance, therefore



           is that there are a variety of financial assistance




I8          packages in the law.  First, Section 3011, which is



           a hazardous waste section of the law, provides for



20          financial assistance to fund state hazardous waste




21          programs.  The funding level for each year is:  1978




22          and 1979 fiscal years is 25 million dollars.  That




23          money flows to the states based upon the problems



24          related to hazardous waste.  It is not a formula




25          grant

-------
                                                           **?



 1                         The agency is to issue regulations on



 2          how this money will be allocated to the states based



 3          upon a variety of conditions for the hazardous wastes



 4          that are generated or the current practices, and a lot



 5          of other factors that would help it determine where



 6          the problem is.  So it is not a formula grant.



 7                         Now Section 4008(a)(1), there is



 8          authorization for financial assistance to states and



 9          local government to develop and implement the state



10          plan.  As you remember, earlier I said the state and



11          locals have to get together and figure out a way to



12          develop and implement the plan.  The money flows to



13          the states then on a formula basis and it gets divided



14          based upon the responsibilities that the state and



15          local government have come to an agreement on.



16                         According to some financial plans that



17          the state has submitted to the agency, there are many



18          to be approved.  The funding levels for that in 1978



19          are authorized levels of 30 million dollars; and in



20          1979 it is 40 million dollars.



21                         Now the current funding level, funding



22          expenditures for state government solid waste management



23          is approximately 20 plus million dollars.  Three million



24          dollars of that is currently Federal money coming from



25          our office to the regions and the state governments.

-------
 1                         We contribute about 20 per cent, 15



 2          to 20 per cent of the total investment by state




 3          government.  Compare that to some of the other environ-



 4          mental programs at the state level.  A small program




 5          now.  You know, that doesn't look like a lot of money,



 6          but when there is only 20 plus million being spent,



 7          30 million is a hell of a count.




 8                         This is the level that is authorized.




 9          That doesn't mean appropriated.  It is authorized.



10                         O.K.  It is also provided that — in



11          Section 4008, implementation grants for solid waste



12          management programs.  These grants are directed to



13          local governments for the purposes of bridging that



14          gap between planning development and the actual



15          construction or the actual award of a contract for



16          a project.  It provides for plan and feasibility



17          studies, marketing studies, technology assessments



18          when a city has planned that they want to go to




19          resource recovery and they need to go look at black




20          boxes or they need to talk to people about how the




21          different black boxes work.  This provides a mechanism




22          for them to bridge that gap.



23                         It has no formula.  And any of those




24          projects that would be funded would have to meet



25          guidelines that we issue as well as the land disposal

-------
                                                          -*«>•
  1          requirements in Subtitle D.   This is 15 million dollars



  2          each year for fiscal years 1978 and 1979.




  3                         Here is a special little kinky provision



  4          in the law called special communities,  which authorizes




  5          two-and-a-half million dollars each in  the years 1978




  6          and 1979 for communities who have a population of



  7          less than 25,000, if 75 per  cent of the waste they




  8          are disposing of comes in from the outside and it




  '          presents a serious environmental problem.  We don't




 10          know the genesis of this section of the law, but it



 11          was obviously written for special interests somewhere




 12          that some member of the Congressional delegation had




 13          a problem on.



 14                         We have a couple more provisions like



 15          that in the law.  There is one for a site in Delaware



 16          that has had a lot of problems .  There  is one for



 17          doing a survey in Alaska on  what the Federal govern-



 l8          ment is doing with their solid waste.  And really



 19          they are little kinky sections in the midnight hours



 20          of the law.   This is really  not a very  significant



 21          section of the law.



 22                         Now there is  a provision for assistance




 23          to rural communities.   And by definition the law




 24          defines what a rural community is; populations of




25          5,000 or less;  county populations of 10,000 or less;

-------
1          or less than 20,000 per square mile.  The purpose of




2          the assistance is to help rural communities and rural




3          counties meet the open dumping restrictions of the




4          new law and the impacts of the Clean Air Act and




5          the Federal Water Pollution Control Act as it relates




6          basically to sludges and residuals.




7                         It is only available if no regional




8          system is presently an option for a rural community




9          to get into and there is no existing or planned




10          system available that they can make the long term




11          arrangements with.  It is 25 million per year for




12          fiscal years 1978 and 1979.




13                         Now this is an allotment limit.  It




14          is allocated on the basis, the formula basis of these




15          population--rural populations and it will flow through




16          the state to the rural communities.  It is not a




17          direct grant from the Feds, but it goes through the




18          states.  You cannot buy land under the provisions of




19          this law.  This specifically restricts the purchase




20          of land.




21                         So in effect you have then four parts




22          of a financial assistance program that when you total




23          them up they come in round numbers to around 90 to




24          100 million dollars for the fiscal years 1978 and




25          1979 for the purposes of developing and implementing

-------
  1         state plans and for funding hazardous waste programs




  2         and providing assistance to rural communities and



  3         providing assistance to communities in implementing



  4         their plans.




  5                        And that is basically the financial



  6         assistance portion of the law that is directed toward




  7         state and local government.  That is the authorized




  8         level, around 100 million dollars.




  9                        Now I will answer questions.  Who asked




 10         the deal about the financing?  Did she leave before



 11         she got her answer?




 12                        (No response.)




 13                        MR. HICKMAN:  Yes?




 14                        MS. WILSON:   I am Betty Wilson of the



 '5         League of Women Voters of Missouri.




 16                        I want to comment on the financing



 17         because we are now, as you know, in the midst of



 '"         passing, hopefully passing, the solid waste law in



 19         Missouri.  And they find continuously the objection



 20         particularly on the Senate  side to financial help



 2'         from the Federal government starting large programs




 22         and then cutting them off.   So I noticed this




 23         authorization is for two years.




 24                        Also,  we have been working in the



25         Clean Water program to prolong the term of authorizations

-------
 l          so that the state and local communities can know for




 2          some time at least in the future what they can really




 3          count on.  Now I don't know whether this is the proper




 4          group to make this plea to, but I know there are



 5          citizens here as well as officials.  And it seems to



 6          me that this is a real problem that we should address




 7          ourselves to which would make the total Federal program




 8          more acceptable to the state and local communities.




 9                         MR. HICKMAN:  I agree with you




10          completely.  There are a lot of things that the




11          Federal law comes down on such as if you have got a




12          permit program and now it looks like maybe another



13          permit program.  You start to think about one-stop



14          permitting.



15                         You start to think about how many



16          grant applications the state agency has to fill out




17          in order to get Federal money.  If I were setting the




'8          budget hearings for the state legislative areas and



19          I was told, "Gee, we want money now for this solid



20          waste program, but the Feds are only going to fund it




21          for two years and..."  If I were looking at the




22          bottom line of the state financial capabilities, I




23          wouldn't play either.



24                         we asked this specific question to the




25          staff of the Congress as to—raised this same problem,

-------
 1          where basically you had funding for two years.  The


 2          law goes on further saying that you cannot drop below--


 3          the state Investment can't drop below what you are


 4          spending in 1976, you know.  And to take that money


 5          and move it over somewhere else and use Federal money,


 ^          it says that you can't make use of this money for


 7          salaries after December of 1979, somewhere in there.


 8                         You know, you wonder why.  So we asked


 9          the Congressional staff why.  Well, of course, there

                                                           4>AB
10          was strong opposition to this law, you know, in .0W


11          for a variety of reasons.  A lot of it is basically


12          you look at the Federal budget and you look at the


13          deficit that we are working with and what that is


14          costing the taxpayer.


15                         So a mechanism that the Congress


15          developed to accomodate this concern was to place a


17          limit on the length of the funding authorizations.


18          The staff tells us that there is no intention on their


19          part to ignore that and not try to do something about


20          it in the 95th Congress, but that does not guarantee


2i          it.  And you still have the problem of state legislature


22          looking at this and trying to make a decision.


23                         We are trying, again, to get the


24          problem of how much money is going to be available


25          in any year and trying to make some commitment to state

-------
 1          government on a long term basis.  And it is very




 2          difficult to do within our own budgeting cycle because




 3          each year the money sort of floats up and down.




                          And I think only through considered




 5          action by state government and local government can




 *          these sorts of programs be designed in an intelligent




 7          way so that you guarantee some bottom line dollar for




 8          as long as it is necessary for you to get state




 9          programs under way.




10                         I don't think that it is particularly




11          desirable to continue to seek Federal funding forever.




12          I think a state program is far better off if it can




13          be self-supporting.  And if we write the guidelines




14          and structure the program in such a way that it




15          recognizes the flexibility of state government to




16          deal with their problems within some national frame-




17          work so that there is some consistency between




18          neighboring states, I think it is far better for the




19          states to eventually over a period of time to fund




20          their program as much as they can on their own.




21                         That has always been our position on




22          the funding of state programs is to gradually with-




23          draw Federal dollars as the state funding capabilities




24          grow, and only pay for those things that we are




           placing demands on the state to do.

-------
 1                        MS. WILSON:   I  agree  with  that but  the




 2          state  does have  to worry  about the funds  eventually




 3          being  withdrawn.




 4                        MR, HICKMAN:  Well, you  know,  if  we




 5          could  sit down and negotiate a funding  program for




 6          states over an eight-year period  or  a five-year




 7          period and say that  this  is what  we  think is  needed




 8          over five years  for  them  to carry out this program--




 9          here is what we  can  give  each  year and  our curve will




 10          go down and your curve  goes up, and  our demands




 11          become less strong and  your needs and demands become




 '2          stronger, eventually we would  have a baseline where




 '3          we may be funding and you have grown in your  own




 14          funding capabilities to take it over.




 !5                        That  is  an intelligent way to  do  that.




 16          But I  think only through  state and local  action  is




 17          that sort of change  going to occur in the grant




 1"          programs that the Federal program has.




 19                        MR. TUCKER:  Any more questions on




 20          that particular  presentation?




 21                         (No response,)




 22                        MR. TUCKER:  If not,  we  will move into




 23           the final session indicated on the program which we




 24           have listed as open  discussion, but  let's just call




25           it open season.  We  have  a number of people with us

-------
 1          on  the  panel  here  that  have been working with this


 2          new law daily and  working it within great detail.   So


 3          let's take  every opportunity we can to question them


 4          while they  are here.


 5                         I would  like to go through the


 6          registration  cards that I have of people that indicated


 7          that they would like  to make a statement, and/or


 8          submit  a written statement for the transcript.  Is


 9          Kay Roberts with us this morning, University of


10          Missouri?


11                         MS. ROBERTS:  Yes.


12                         MR. TUCKER:  Did you have a further


13          statement or--


14                         MS. ROBERTS:  I do have a question.


15          Are you ready for  it  now?


16                         MR. TUCKER:  Yes.


17                         MR. CLEVENGER:  My name is Tom
                                A
             Ot»
18          Cle-venger with the University of Missouri.


19                         We  are presently doing some work


20          looking at  the possibility of the effects of the land


21          application municipal wastewater sludges.  And we are


22          wondering what affect this act will have on the current


23          work being  done in that area.  Will this whole research


24          area now being done come under this act, or what will


25          be  the  status of that?

-------
 1                         MR. HICKMAN:  Probably not.  There is

 2          a discussion now in the agency on whether or not if

 3          waste put on the land for beneficial purposes is

 4          disposal.  And if it isn't disposal, then it would not

 5          fall under the umbrella of the disposal requirements

 6          of RCRA.

 7                         As far as any work that you are doing

 8          on land spreading of wastes, that is going to continue

 9          to be done under the care and feeding of water programs

10          of EPA.  And within whatever state program is currently

11          concerned with that, also.  We see no shift of that

12          because of this new law.
                                 A
13                         MR. CLEVENGER:  O.K.  Along the same
                                A
14          line, will these wastes then be covered under possible

15          hazardous materials?
                              tofAMeJC
16                         MR. JOHULDy.  As I mentioned during
17          the break, we don't know yet, but we are aware of

18          communities where upwards of 90 per cent of the waste

19          entering municipal wastewater treatment plants come

20          from industrial sources.  And when you perform what-

21          ever tests we decide collectively to use to find and

22          define hazardous wastes, it is quite possible that

23          some of what we all call sewage sludges will flunk the

24          test.  Therefore, they will be subject to the require-

25          ments in terms of tracking where they go, as we

-------
 1          discussed for the more traditional hazardous wastes.


 2          So it is possible is the answer we arrived at in the


 3          break and it is the same answer now.

                                 A
 4                         MR. CLE^NGER:  Well, certain indications


 5          we have had in our research is that there may be a


 6          possibility that there can be hazardous effects.  And


 7          you are probably aware of the effect — like you were


 8          saying, that certain municipalities can have very


 9          large levels of trace metals in this.

                               KMMCK
10                         MR. SaMBK:  Could I have an elaboration


11          on that?  Does that mean that you are finding some


12          plant or crop uptake as a result of those--


13                         MR. CLEVENGER:  Right.  Basically we
                                n

14          have been looking at vegetables.  And the work we


IS          have done so far has collaborated with the work done


16          by Dowdy and Larsen up in Minnesota.  And the one


17          that we have found--we have been working with


18          Columbia's sewage--and--whic h happens to be about


19          four times what you want to call a small town sewage


20          level.  And the major thing we are having right now

                       C«jdv»l»W
21          is with oabJLum.


22                         And we are finding agreement with


23          tests previously done, that in certain vegetables


24          or in gardens treated with this sludge, that we are

                                                         ««c/)»l'H>^.
25          seeing an increase of a factor of four in the aahluffi


           levels.  And now we are not talking about any kind  of

-------
                                                         -250-
 1          acute  problem,  but we may be talking about a chronic




 2          problem.   And this is what our major concern right now




 3          is.




 4                         MR. TUCKER:  We are seeing this same




 5          factor in some  other limited studies that have been




 6          done that we are aware of on sludges.  A recent




 7          example is a town in Missouri which wanted to work




 8          a  deal with the nearby wildlife refuge to put their




 9          sludge on that  land, which is grazing land both for




10          livestock and for water fowl.




11                         But we found some levels of pesticides,




12          chloradine, in  this sewage sludge that we couldn't




13          hardly believe, and we are doing some follow-up




14          testing.   But this is an example of a material that




15          when applied to the land can be taken up by the crops




16          and  by the animals on that land.




17                         A cow, it passes on through the milk




18          to people.   So  this is one big question where I don't




19          think  we  have nearly enough information on it, the




20          contaminants in the sludge.   And it needs to have a




21          great  deal more study.




22                         O.K.   I also had a card from Chuck




23          Welch.   Chuck had one question earlier.  Is he still




24          in the room or  does he have a further question?  He




25          is gone?   O.K.

-------
                          Another card from Lowell Rochester
 2
           of the Region 18 Council of Governments In Nebraska.
 3
           Did he pose his question or does he have a further
 4
           question?
 5
                          (No response.)
 6
           _   ..         MR. TUCKER:  Apparently not.  George
 7         &»*•""
           B-QgfH-, did you hare  a further statement?
 8                            JACfrfiTT
                          MR. MQaOf.  No statement.
 9
                          MR. TUCKER:  No further statement?  O.K.
10
                          Betty Wilson, we heard from you once.
11
           Do you have any further statement that you would like
12
           to make?
13
                          MS. WILSON:  I think I have already
14
           said the main thing I wanted to say, but a correlary
15
           to this is the fact that citizens are supposed to
16
           participate in this total program which, to the League
17
           of Women Voters Is a very acceptable idea, as you know.
18
                          But I would like to point out that
19
           citizens are not always able to bring themselves to
20
           Kansas City for such an excellent program as this is.
21
           And I am wondering if It is possible that you could
22
           have the same type of program in some of the other
23
           metropolitan areas or else provide some citizen help
24
           in bringing them to another central spot.  Because I
25
           do believe if we want more sensible authorization of

-------
 1          funds and a continuing program is extremely important



 2          it is necessary that citizens can understand it and



 3          get behind it.  Thank you.




 4                         MR. HICKMAN:  We have every intention



 5          to hold meetings a lot of places outside the regional




 6          office locations.  I think Walt has 79 meetings planned




 7          between now and the end of the calendar year just on



 8          the hazardous waste portion of the law.  Those will be




 9          held in a lot of cities.




10                         Can you--you know, this same issue




11          about getting people to a meeting came up last night.



^2          Have you conceptualized any other way that we might




13          communicate with the citizens, if at least not



14          personally, but where he can be instrumental with



15          what is in the proposed various regulations so he



           can somehow react back to us, at least by mail if no



17          other way.  Have you all thought any way about how



18          that might be done?



19                         MS. WILSON:  Only by the ordinary



20          League procedure of discussion groups and carrying it



2'          out with the community.  But League members themselves



22          have to be pretty well-educated before they can do




23          that.  So it is necessary, I think, for the League




           members as well as other community and civic organizat-




           ions members to be pretty well informed on the program

-------
1         before  they  can  go  speak  in  the  community  or  show




2         slides  or  go to  the media or something of  this  sort,



3         to  encourage more public  participation.




4                        MR.  HICKMAN:   Well  how much information,



5         to  your knowledge,  has  the,  let's  say the  Missouri




6         League  received  from  EPA  about  this  law up until now?



7         Little  if  any, or a reasonable  amount or what?




8                        MS.  WILSON:  It  happens that we  have




'         received quite a bit.  Now it may  be because  we have




'"         had a conference recently which this law relates to,




"         so  I do think that  we have had  quite an amount  of



12         information. But I think that  people don't read it



13         unless  they  have somebody to discuss it with  or



14         some real  viable reason,  because--well, we all  know



15         how overwhelmed  we  are  with reading  material  anyway.



16                        Somehow  the EPA  and their guidelines



17         and standards isn't very  exciting  reading  unless you




18         really  need  to know about that.



19                        MR.  HICKMAN:   It is not very exciting




20         when you write  it,  either.



21                        MR.  TUCKER:  Thank you, Betty.



22                        Let's  see, we also  had a card  indicating




23         he  would like to make a statement, Victor  Gray,




24         Missouri Farm Bureau  Federation.



25                        MR.  GRAY:   I would like to  comment on

-------
  1          two  areas  and then make  a little statement  later.




  2          As I look  through the  bill,  particularly that  that




  3          relates  to dumps  and the definition  of  dumps—under




  4          our  solid  waste law in Missouri  we have an  exemption




            for  those  people  who live on farms,  which says  that




  6          they can put  their solid waste on their own premises




            as long as it  doesn't  affect somebody else.




                          Now what  that simply  means is that if




            the  guy that  owns the  farm has got a gulley or  place




 10          back on the farm  that  he  wants to take  his  tin  cans




            and  material back there  to,  why  he can  do that.  There




 12          is very little garbage waste on  a farm.   They have  got




            some garbage disposal  units  around to take  care of




 14          that, so there is no real problem there.




 15                        Nor under  our burning laws are farmers




            prohibited from burning  some trash and  material on




            their own  premises, as long  as it located so far from




 18          another premises  and so forth.




 19                        And I was  wondering if a  statement on




 20          dumps—and it says all dumps, I  believe--if  that




            statement would affect Missouri  law  from  that aspect?




 22         Would anybody care to comment to  that?  Now  I might




 23          say  that there is.about 137,000  farms in  the state  of




           Missouri and who  is going  to  go  out and  look at them




25          if it does?

-------
 1                         MR.  HICKMAN:   No one I think is probably




 2          the answer.




 3                         MR.  GRAY:  O.K.




 4                         MR.  HICKMAN:   I don't think the law




 5          precludes us when we write the criteria,  whether it




 '          is an open dump or  a sanitary landfill.   Here again,




 7          I talked about the  subject of common sense about all




 8          of this, you know.




 9                         MR.  GRAY:   Well, we had hoped that was




10          the thinking of it.




11                         MR.  HICKMAN:   We do show  common sense




12          a lot of times, don't we?




13                         MR.  GRAY:   Now, the other  area and it




14          has been alluded to here  before is the fact that




15          Missouri now has in the legislature under consideration




16          the Hazardous Waste Act.   And yet, this  bill says, this




17          law says that you will come  up with rules and regulation|s




           within 18 months.  And it  has been our experience in




"          the state in past measures that where we  pass laws




20          prior to final conclusive  acts, and so forth, that




21          we get the agency—and this  has come from EPA as much




22          as any other place, too--we  get the agency coming




23          back and saying the laws  that we have got will not




24          be acceptable.  We  have got  to change it.  Right now




25          we are in the third revision of our pesticide act, which

-------
 1         we passed early hoping that by passing that law we

 2         could get some inputs into the Federal law, which

 3         didn't work.


 4                        We run into the Massachusetts Mafia,


 5         as I call it.  And it just didn't work.  And so should


 6         we go on with our hazardous waste act or should we

 7         just let it linger until we see the rules and


 8         regulations and then comply accordingly?  I doubt if


 9         you want to comment on that.

                              AiWLlUC
 10                        MR.-awniLE'iT  I do want to comment on


 11         that.  Despite the comment earlier that there are


 12         some discrepancies, as Lannie points out there aren't


 13         enough resources to go around and the Federal govern-

 14         ment is not going to be able to do this program on

 15         hazardous wastes nationally.  And so the reason we


 16         have people like a representative from Missouri on

 17         the guideline writing committee, or the work group


 18         for this regulation is to make sure that we try and

 19         learn from some of those mistakes on water and air

 20         and pesticides in the past.

 21                        Now, so that is where we are at the


 22         moment.  We are just getting started, of course.  But


 23         we are trying to have as many states as possible take


 24         this program from the beginning.  Some are way out


25 '         ahead.   As I mentioned, California has an operating

-------
 1          program.  They address the pesticide container problem




 2          in their program.  They address industrial wastes,




 3          and so there is a spectrum of states—Missouri isn't




 4          all alone here.  We don't have to accomodate a single




           state.  We have to accomodate half a dozen who are




           on the cutting edge, and we intend to accomodate them.




                          MR. GRAY:  I would make this comment




           on the pesticide containers.  It is our feeling that




           that is probably our number one problem in the




10          agriculture area, some—developing some procedure




11          for the disposal of those containers.




12                         Now, the final comment that I mentioned




13          at first.  This is a provision that is made in other




14          acts of EPA--well, yeah, administered by EPA.   This




15          is a provision of funds for people to—all people,




           I guess, to participate in this kind of an educational




17          procedure and so forth.  Even in some instances--and




18          I don't think this is EPA—where the Federal govern-




19          ment through grants and so forth supplies funds which




20          will pay attorneys to file suits against the Federal




           government, which we think this is kind of screwy.




22                         We also think that if we need to be




23          educated on this EPA act that our people will be there.




24          We represent, oh, 62,000 farmers in the state of




           Missouri and we get the educational material to them.

-------
 1          They pay their dues and they think it is our




 2          responsibility to get this  information back to them.




 3                         I don't think we will be asking the




 4          Federal  government for a bus system to transport us




 5          to meetings  or anything of  that nature.  And we don't




 6          really appreciate it being  dished out to other people.




 7                         MR. HICKMAN:   That is really carrying




 8          bussing  to the extreme, isn't it?




 9                         MR. GRAY: Well, it would be.  I got




 10          the  impression just a moment ago that that might be




 11          a good way to  get all the people in here,  have EPA




 12          set  up a statewide bus system that would transport




 13          them all in.




 14                         MR. HICKMAN:   What about the individual




 IS          citizen  who  doesn't have an  organization like  the




 '6          Farm Bureau  to represent them?   How do they get--




 17                         MR. GRAY:  Then  he ought to join.




 '8                         MR. TUCKER:   Do  you sign up non-farmers?




 19          Do garden people  qualify?




 20                         MR. GRAY:  Who needs the help worse?




 2!                         MR. TUCKER:   O.K.   I have one more




 22          person who indicated they would like to make a short




 23          statement, and submit a prepared statement for the




 24          transcript.  Norman Hjersted.




25                          MR.  HJERSTED:  1 will submit a  prepared

-------
 1          statement  by mall  this  week.   Due to the  shortness




 2          of  time  I  will make  my  comments  brief.




 3                        Our company has been 17  years  in this




 4          area  and it  is my  opinion  that this law has been




           sorely needed and  will  be  a great advance in  the




           regulation and control  of  these  wastes.




                         I might--perhaps  you know  about it,




           but I will impress it upon you--there will be aspects




 9          of  this  law  that require administration similar to,




10          perhaps, liquor  laws or laws on  drugs,  where  wherever




11          there is a profit  to get rid of  these wastes  and--in




12          an  inappropriate manner, you almost have  to use




13          strongarm  methods  to discourage  it.




                         This  is  still going on in  certain




15          areas of the  country.  The encouragement  of recycling,




           of  course, is very valid.   It is interesting  to note




17          that  probably  in the whole Midwest there  aren't any




18          significant  recyclers in service in the oil industry.




1'          Nor are  there any  significant incineration of organics,




20          which leaves  one to  conclude that it is still going




21          into unregulated landfills.




22                         So  in substance the law is needed and




23          i think it is a  big  advance.  Thank you.




24                        MR. TUCKER:  Thank you,  Norman.  If you




25          would--let me follow up on this  point.   Norman, if you

-------
 1          would, try to have the written document to me within

 2          10 days to be included in the transcript.  And  that

 3          goes for anyone else in the audience, also, that would

 4          like to present follow-up written statements to be

 5          included in the transcript.  You can just address

 6          that to me.  If you have your copy of the program

 7          handy, my name and title is there.  Just send it to

 8          1735 Baltimore, Kansas City, Missouri, 64108.  Yes?
                              UULTS
 9                         MR. MaiiTH-!  My name is Steve Holtz.

10          I am an Environmental Review Officer for the City of

11          Kansas City, Kansas.

12                         I would like to make a comment referring

13          to the interest that cities have in this sort of

14          legislation.  Seemingly the way their coordination

15          and their participation in later pieces of EPA

16          legislation have been overlooked.  I think there is

17          lip service in this legislation for coordination and

18          participation of cities,  but I think that is probably

19          merely that.

20                         We have various state plans that my

21          city coordinated with.   BOR has one.   Water Management

22          has a state plan.   But the participation that local

23          cities  have in those state plans is minimal at best.

24          The chronic problem that  I think HUD has recognized

25          is that in  problems dealing with poverty and racial

-------
 1         discrimination, you have to encourage cities and you




 2         have to give them the means to anticipate their




 3         problems and study them.




 4                        EPA has blessed us with legislation




 5         and programs that identify the problems that cities




 6         have, but seemingly fail to give the cities the means




 7         to cope with them.  HUD is an example that I gave and




 8         they have provided for a long time  the 701 Planning




 9         Assistance Program.  It helps the city meet the needs




10         of poverty, racial discrimination and unemployment and




11         it helps us look at these problems  and try to service




12         them.




13                        It is now under EPA  a mixture of




14         environmental programs, but there is no similar 701




IS         Planning Assistance program by which the cities can




16         invest themselves with trained personnel to come and




17         talk with state officials about state management




18         plans that are capable of talking to the Federal level.




19                        If the people that are involved in




20         the disposal and the transport of solid waste don't




21         tell the state that they exist, then my observation




22         is that the state won't know.  And  at that same point,




23         cities and counties won't have the  expertise to tell




24         the states that there are grave dangers being created




25         by disposal or treaters of wastes.

-------
 1                         Unless you come up with some sort of



 2          a 701 Program that helps cities investigate their



 3          problems and plan for those problems, no one is going



 4          to be there to ring the bell when there is a dump



           made, a burial of noxious materials, and you are going



 6          to be sitting there finding out that your waters are



 7          polluted, no grass will grow on various sites where



 8          disposals have been, and that the cities will merely



           stand by and wonder why nothing has happened.



10                         You see, on our level we take what is



11          known as political heat.  You guys do from up above,



12          but we take it from the citizen who either has the



           waste, wants to transport it, or wants to dispose of



14          it.  And when that situation arises, we set there with



15          the meager capabilities we have poring through your



           literature that is very technical and still doesn't


17          give us satisfactory answers to a man who comes in


1ft
           and knows much more than we do and is seeking to pull



           the wool over our eyes, or whatever.


2"                         Unless you give cities and counties



21          real participation in the creation of your state plans,



22          give them some assistance in developing the expertise



23          at the local level to blow the whistle, most of this



24          sort of legislation is going to have no effect at all,



           believe me.

-------
 1                         MR. TUCKER:  Do you feel that Kansas




 2          City, Kansas, itself, has been slighted on this type


 *j

           of assistance?
15
 4                        MR. -HOLTE:  I really can't speak for



           the city administration, but I can say that it has



           been my experience in the five years I have been with



           the city that the various state plans really haven't



 8         had an impact at the local level.  And that we really



           haven't been given the opportunity to respond to our



10         real needs.



11                        MR. TUCKER:  O.K.  Well, one thing I



12         was thinking about, Kansas City, Kansas, that is also



13         Wyandotte County, is part of MARC, the Mid-America



           Regional Council here, which is a recognized regional
           planning agency headed up by elected officials.  Now,
16         to my knowledge, MARC and their people they serve have



           been involved in planning efforts in solid waste


1R
           management, and more currently in resource recovery



           and hazardous waste management.



                          And this dates back approximately six



21         years or so to the earlier efforts.  So if there has



           not been consideration and representation on the part



23         of Kansas City, Kansas, I don't quite understand it.



24         And further, a MARC mechanism, in addition to the



25         direct mechanism of the city and the county, I don't

-------
 1           see why you didn't have full  input  into the Kansas
 2         plan that was developed.
 \S
 3                        MR. XQIOS:  I guess my response in that




            regard would deal with the local  level and the kinds




            of things that respective agencies in my city have




 6          on a day-to-day basis.




 7                        First of all, if we have problems of




 8          a nature—and we will speak directly to solid waste--


 Q

            if we have problems with a particular individual or




            a particular site or someone with trucks capable of




 11          hauling from hither to thither, we are not going to




 12          go to MARC and discuss our own dirty wash.  Nor are




 13          we going to embarrass any private individual or




            commercial firm in our area.  Nor are we going to ask
           the people that are very proficient at MARC what we
           should do about this, because our public officials--



 17                        MR. TUCKER:  That is what they are



 8         there for.  That is what we are here for in the



 19         regional office.



 20                        MR. libLTgf  Oh, well, we understand



 21         that Federal agencies are available to us when we



 22         talk about--



 23                        MR. TUCKER:  Technical assistance and
24         so forth.



IS
    waor
MR. IWfeW:  Right.  But the enforcement

-------
1          capacities of EPA with regard to solid waste are very




2         minimal, even with this legislation, to enforcement,




3         I mean.  And what I am speaking to is the--for instance,




4         when we are talking about a gentleman coming into our




5         city and he wants to obtain a permit for a solid




6         waste disposal site or a sanitary landfill or whatever,




7         and we sit there wondering what in the devil that sort




8         of facility is.




'                        And we wonder how long it will be before




10         we can get a state rep down from the Kansas Departments




11         to take a look at the site.  And we wonder, you know,




12         in that situation how it is that the cities and the




13         counties are supposed to take the political heat from




14         that  individual who wants  it, the permit,  and wants




15         it right now and who tells us we don't want to wait.




16         We are here and tomorrow we want to start  dumping.




17                        MR. TUCKER:  Well, I am afraid that




18         individual is not being very  realistic, and this does




19         take  time and we all recognize that everyone has limite




20         staff.  Chuck Lynn is here  this morning who heads up




21         the Kansas Solid Waste Program.  And he does have




22         staff that works on this,  but very naturally it  takes




23         time.




24                         I don't know.  We are chasing this




25         around  in circles.

-------
                                                         ^Wo
 1                         MR. JMLTE.'  Right.  Well, what I was



           doing was essentially making a bid for a type of



           701 Program or whatever, where cities really get a



           chance to do some planning on their own specific area,



           not the abstraction of a state management plan where



           everybody gets together and says this is how the



           generalities will be or how the permit system should

 Q

           operate in the state.


 9
                          What I am saying is when we are talking



           about the needs down at our levels, survey work for



           a disposal site or whatever, we simply don't have it.



           Yet the legislation and eventually the regulations



           are going to imply that there is a substantive amount



           of coordination between the Federal, state and local



           level when, in fact, what I am trying to say, Morris,



           is that we simply don't have the expertise to be a



           party to that coordination.  And it is laughable to



18          think that we do.



19                         MR. TUCKER:   Point well taken.  Yes?



                          MS. ROBERTS:  My name is Kay Roberts


21
           and I will try to be brief.  I am sure we all are


22
           hungry and this statement,  in fact, relates to that



23          fact.



                          As you know, Mr. Clevenger has already


25
           indicated that he and I are involved in research

-------
 1          relating to sludge application to the land.  Now




 2          this land does not necessarily mean just garden



 3          vegetables.  As you are probably well aware, the




 4          acceptance of the policy that a farmer can, In fact,




 5          go to the sewage treatment facility and pick up a



 6          load of sludge and therefore apply It to his farm is



 7          an accepted policy which is not just here in the Mid-




 8          west but is being practiced In other areas.




 '                         Our research has shown that this Is,




10          indeed, a misconception.  You did mention that: the




11          Industry sludge presents a problem.  And I would like




12          to tell you that we have seen sludges that do not




13          actually have "industry" in that area, however, they




14          are showing some 1,000 parts per million-of nickel



15          and chromium.  Yet, luckily, the farmers in that area



16          have said if you want me to use this sludge, you tell




17          me what is In it.



18                         And the municipalities, individuals



19          had to come get this sludge, test it, and you can




20          see the obvious problem.  He now has tons and tons




21          of sludge which the farmers will not accept, thank



22          God.  And this is going to be a very definite problem




23          for the State of Missouri because now we have in law




24          the fact that all municipalities are going to have



25          to have a second treatment facility which will produce

-------
 1          sludge.  So as our brothers from Kansas will, I am




 2          sure, agree, Missouri is going to be full of sludge




 3          and we are going to have a problem.




 4                         I don't want it to be put on Missouri




 5          farmlands, if you will.  Thank you.




 6                         MR. TUCKER:  Thank you.  I think there




 7          is still the possibility of some types of land




 8          application or land farming for some of these sludges.




 9          But here again, we still have to know what we are




10          dealing with.  Robbie?




11                         MR. ROBINSON:  My name is Robert




12          Robinson and I am Director of the Missouri Solid




13          Waste Program.




14                         First, I want to express my appreciation




15          for all the people here from the state of Missouri




16          that have come and participated in this meeting.  I




17          think relatively speaking we have a fine turn out from




18          the State of Missouri and 1 want to express my




19          appreciation for that.




20                         The Missouri Solid Waste Management




21          Program sees no basic conflict between RCRA and the




22          existing state solid waste management law or the




23          proposed hazardous waste legislation now being consider




24          ed by the Missouri legislators.  However, of course,




25          being from the Show Me State, we are naturally

-------
 1          concerned about the ability of the guidelines to be




 2          flexible enough to recognize the differences in the




 3          state.  I think that EPA is making an honest attempt




 4          to recognize that as they have indicated here today.




 ^                         The--our state is attempting to gear




 6          up to have an impact upon these regulations, to review




 7          them as they are being made.  We, as EPA, are very




 8          much interested in seeing that there is adequate




 9          public participation and our program hopes to carry




10          this further throughout our state and we hope to hold




11          several meetings in the State of Missouri during this




12          calendar year to further carry the information about




13          this Act and the guidelines that are being directed




14          to help the people of the state determine whether the




'5          State of Missouri wants to play the game.




16                         I do have a--that is basically my




17          comment.  I do have--! wasn't in the room when Steve




^8          was talking about resource conservation, and I heard




19          his presentation last night.  I do know that my basic




20          concept is we are really not going to make a real




2^          impact upon resource recovery and conservation of our




22          resources until we do something about the markets.




23                         And I don't think that EPA basically




24          disagrees with that.  Unfortunately, this legislation




2'          does not go very far in that area.  We had some

-------
                                                          -27TT
 1          implications that it will move with the Cabinet  level




 1          committee.  I hope that committee does do something.




 3          I have the feeling, though, that that is a  long  time




 4          coming.




 5                         There is the Federal procurement, of




 6          course, which will have somewhat of an impact and




 7          possibly some domino effect if the states and local




 8          governments will also utilize those types of guide-




 9          lines.  But yet--and, of course, I think Steve




 10          mentioned that the Congress did not respond when they




 11          were considering changing our tax structure and




 12          elimination of the depletion of allowances and things




 13          like this.  They backed off from that this past year.




 14                         And I think we need to make it clear




 IS          to them that we have got to be- -we can't compete




 16          against somebody that is getting a tax break.  Waste




 17          materials must be able to compete with the raw materials




 18          and so I think that  this may not be directly germane




 19          to this discussion here today, but I think that is an




 20          area that we need to relay to EPA and to Congress that




 21          something needs to be done in that area.




 22                         I frankly do not quite understand why




 23          EPA --and maybe you are not pushing the product charge --




 24          but I don't really understand how that is going to be




25          of a great benefit in generating markets.  It may

-------
'          conserve  some--and  keep  us  from generating  some  waste,




2          but  it  is not  going to help the markets  as  I  evaluate




3          it.




4                         I will let you answer that question in




5          just a  minute.   I have one  other comment.   It has




6          already been made.   Of course,  that is  that we are




7          quite concerned about the  inadequacy of  the funding




8          level if  the Federal government expects  us, the  state




9          and  local governments, to  carry out the  intent and




10          purpose of this Act, which  is certainly clearly




11          mandated  in the legislation, that we are expected  to




12          play the  game.   So, Steve,  I don't know whether  you




13          fully understood my question about the  markets,  but




14          I would appreciate  your  comments on that.




15                         MR.  LINGLE:   Fine, thank you.   I  will




16          comment briefly on  that.  First of all,  I would  just




17          like to say I  appreciate having that comment on  the




18          record.  And we very much agree with you and recognize




19          the  problem of the  overall economic framework in which




20          resource  recovery has had to compete over the last




21          several years.  And it  is because of that that




22          recycling waste materials has declined.




23                         There have been a lot of proposals




24          before  Congress for various ways of correcting this.




25          But  there is a dilemma  and the dilemma is  that some

-------
 1          of the solutions aren't so good, either.  We are all




 2          taxpayers and we have to realize that we don't want




 3          to come up with a solution that doesn't really increase



 4          the recycling rather significantly for a lot of



 5          materials but which costs us a lot of money.




 6          We don't want a give away program.




 7                         Frankly, it has been very difficult for




 8          anybody to design a really good incentive program.




 9          And on the other side of the coin, it has been very



 10          difficult for Congress to be convinced that they ought




 11          to remove some of the incentives that exist for



 12          utilization of virgin material.



 13                         So there has been a dilemma.  I think




 14          that the resource conservation committee is a pretty




 IS          good response to that, the fact that it sets a high



 16          level and has such a broad charter and it should be



 17          a committee that Congress will take its recommendations




 18          very seriously and hopefully will lead to some



 19          legislation in this very important area.



 20                         Regarding the product charge, 1 will



 21          just make--it is.a very complicated concept and I will




 22          make only one brief comment about it.  The reason that




 23          it provides a market incentive is that any material




 24          which is made from--any product which is made from



25          recycled material would not have a charge placed on it.

-------
 1                         Well if that charge were,  say,  $25 a




 2          ton,  which might be roughly equal to some national



 '          average for disposal costs, you in essence have an




 4          incentive differential of $25 a ton between a  virgin



           raw material and a secondary type material. And




 6          that  should be  very influential in manufacturing.



 7          That  is the concept and the reason that it influences




 8          the choice of input.




 9                         MR. ROBINSON:  I would like to  respond




10          very  briefly.  Of course, I think I agree with you




"          very  much that  what we do,  of course, creates  another




12          bureaucracy. And that would certainly do that.




13          And there is sort of a carrot there that  some  of this



14          money may get back to local governments,  but it would



15          be  a  heck of a  lot better if we never sent it  to



16          Washington and  tried to get it back.



'7                         Where--and Congress can't  be all things




18          to  all people.   And they try to generate  the,  you know,




"          in  the past the use of our natural resources and get




2"          the people to spend money to develop them.  And I



21          think it is high time that they did away  with  that.




22          It  is affecting our economy and it is putting  it out




23          of  balance in so many other areas.  And here we are



24          going to have to come along with a product charge




2^          and create a completely new bureaucracy to manage that.

-------
 1                         The Treasury would, I  suppdse, be


 2         handling that.  It Is just boggling my mind to  think


 3         that that is a solution.


 4                        MR. LINGLE:  Well I will say only


 5         that the product charge  is not the only kind of


 6         incentive that is going  to be looked  at.   It is one


 7         of several that will be  looked at.

                              £/&*/«.     &^r
 8                        MD  t-T/Mr^  Joe Kjftai*, state of



 '         Missouri, Department of  Natural Resources.


 '"                        I want to follow up on one  comment Mr.


 11          Robinson just made.  Last night in the discussion


 12          there was considerable talk about the actual funding


 13          levels that are in the administrative budget now.


 14          And as I recall Mr. Hickman saying, there  was no money


 '5          for the state hazardous  waste programs in  that  budget


 16          and the prospect of the  new administration changing


 17          that didn't look terribly good.


 18                         I know that EPA is legally  in a  position


 19         where they cannot lobby  to raise their own budget.


 20          I think we here can.  I  think there are many excellent


 21          provisions in this new law that will become dead


 22          letters unless the funding level is substantially


 23          better than what we seem to be heading towards.  So


 24          I would like to urge everyone in this room to contact


25          the administration or their Congressional  representative

-------
 1          to impress upon them that this is a good bill.  We



 2          need it.   We intend to do as much as we can in Missouri




 3          to implement it,  but without Federal funding there



 4          is very little we can do.  Thank you.




 5                         MR. HICKMAN:   Well, let me clarify



 6          the budget.   The  budget request has been submitted




 7          to the Congress which is the only budget request of



 8          record right now, the Ford's administration budget




 9          request.   It is 24.8 million dollars for the solid



10          waste program in  EPA, to carry it out.




11                         In addition to that 24.8, there is



12          seven million dollars for state programs.  And there




'3          is five million dollars identified in the 208 budget



14          for purposes of local and regional planning.  Now



'5          the seven million dollars for state government is



16          principally for the development of state plans, which



17          as I mentioned earlier, covers all solid waste.



18                         Where a state might be beyond the




19          planning  stage and their plans have been found to be




20          acceptable to the regional administrator, and where--




21          when the  hazardous waste guidelines come out for




22          the hazardous waste program, you recognize that is



23          18 months down the pike.  There is a period of time




24          beyond that  for some adjustments.  You know, what one




25          might call program grants to state solid waste agencies,

-------
 1          probably are not very realistic In fiscal year 1978,



 2          when one of the major purposes of the money that we




 3          are going to give to the states is for doing the



 4          inventory.




 5                         Now we estimate that the inventory



 6          may cost in excess of six million dollars to do.  So




 7          if you look at a seven million dollar funding level,



 8          and you divide that by population, which is the




 '          forumla population basis, and no state can receive



10          less than 1/2 of 1 per cent, there are 20 states that




11          fall within that category.  You can see that there is



'2          not a lot of money there to do very much.



13                         And so there could be money for a



14          hazardous waste program if a program could be "found



15          to be equivalent--consistent with other states within




16          some guidelines which have not yet been issued."  And



17          so I guess we are conceptualizing that in fiscal year



18          1978 what financial support will be made available to



"          the states will be primarily to finish up their plans.



2"                         So in 1979 we can begin to fund the



2'          programs and the implementation of the plans below




22          the state level and at the state level.  That is




23          unless the budget picture changes.  But there is an



24          authorized level of about 180 million dollars for




25          1978 in the law.  The budget request is 24.8 million

-------
 1         dollars, plus another 12 million dollars from other


 2         grant programs that EPA has the responsibility for.


 3                        MR. TUCKER:  Any additional questions?


 4         Yes, sir?


 5                        MR. PERKINS:  I am Richard Perkins


 6         from the University of Kansas.


 7                        I would like to know  if radioactive


 8         wastes are  specifically exempt from  the Act?

 o                             frMMc/c.
 ¥                        MR. JeHHHflrt  Some yes and some no is


'°         the answer.  Those wastes, when you  read the definition


11         of hazardous wastes in the front of  the law, they


'2         exempt wastes that are defined in the Atomic Energy


13         Act of 1954, and those highlevel wastes are to be


14         continued  to be managed by ERDA and  the Nuclear


!5         Regulatory Commission.  But there are some radioactive


16         wastes, those that are manufactured  artifically, the


17         lowlevel ones, isotopes that are used for medical


'"         purposes which are not controled by  those two agencies.


19         Therefore,  those are  certainly possible candidates


20         for this Act, the listing or criteria system that  I


21         discussed  earlier.  So yes and no.


22                        MR.  TUCKER:  Any additional questions?


23                         (No  response.)


24                        MR.  TUCKER:  Last call.


25                         (No  response.)

-------
 1                         MR. TUCKER:  If not, I would like to

 2          add on to Robbie's statement whereby he thanked the

 3          Missouri people for coming here.  I think we have had

           good representation from the four states.  Of course,

 5          those with a greater distance to travel had more trouble

 6          getting here.

 7                         For the record I would like to indicate

 8          that the head count at this morning's session was 112

 '          people.  And if there are no further questions or

'0          comments, this session is closed.

                          (Whereupon, at /£fJO o'clock p.m.,
12          February 16, 1977, the hearing in the above-entitled

13          matter was closed.)
14

                           CERTIFICATE
16
17                I, KAY~L. ARGIE, do certify that I appeared

18         at the time and place first hereinbefore set forth;

19         that I took down in stenomask the entire proceedings

          had at said time and place, and that the foregoing

2]         Pages 139 through  278 constitute a true, correct

22         and complete transcript of my said stenomask notes.


23
24
                                      -ir
                                      /l
                                          ^REPORTER  7
25

-------
                      CONSERVATION  CHEMICAL COMPANY

                                                          215 W. PERSHING RD., SUITE 703
                                                                KANSAS CITY, MO. 64108
MarCh 7>  1977                                                     Area Code 816-421-8494

Mr.  Morris  G. Tucker
Chief,  Waste Management Section
Environmental Protection Agency
1735 Baltimore
Kansas  City, Missouri  64108

Dear Mr.  Tucker:
        like  to comment on the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act as  a  citizen
and then as a aeologist.  As a citizen, I  am concerned that Americans be  protected
from harm caused  by drinking, breathing or ingesting harmful substances in  any
way.  Public  Law  94-580 requires that the  Administrator of the EPA shall:

                 1.  List hazardous wastes (Sec  3001) and
                 2.  Investigate adverse health  effects of their
                    release into the environment  (Sec 8001).

Everyone must keep in mind that the most vulnerable stage in human life is  the
early months  of development in the womb, during  which the foetus is susceptible
to damage caused  by exposure to chemicals.  The  thalidomide and DES tragedies
are heart-breaking examples of this fact,  and no one knows how many less  dramatic
instances of  harm to human beings have been caused by other chemicals in  this
fashion.  The problem of genetic damage is related, but I have read less  about it.

Therefore, (and this is the rub) the list  of hazardous materials and the  study
of adverse effects mentioned above ought to cover  all chemicals capable of  damaging
a foetus and  ought to determine safe concentration levels in water for each chemical.

Now, a 1966 book  I read recently mentioned that  some 4,000,000 organic chemicals
were known at that time, and that most were virtually untraceable.  When  I  consider
that (1) perhaps  all of these substances plus some inorganic substances might  damage
a foetus and  (2)  nobody much is working on the problem, I am forced to conclude  that
Congress has  set  a task which cannot be solved with the time and money allotted.

There are two ways of coping with this problem:

           (1) Control of production and distribution of hazardous
              substances before they reach the  disposal stage.  I
              understand that this is the intent  of the Toxic
              Substances Control Act.

           (2) Disposal of waste in sites  where  chemicals will not
              reach drinking water.  This alternative leads to
              the comments below, which I offer as a geologist
              who has tried to do research on the best locations
              for land disposal of waste.

-------
                                    -2-
2/17/77


There are at least two kinds of information which ought to be  made more
widely available if land disposal  is to  be carried out with minimum damage
to health and the environment.  The first is piezometric maps; the other  is
information on soil-leachate interactions.

Piezometric maps show the height of the  water table or height  to  which
water will rise in an artesian system.   They are necessary for predicting .
the direction of flow of water into and  away from a proposed landfill.
Unfortunately many areas of the nation  have never been mapped  piezometrically,
while maps that have been made are in scattered sources and are hard
to obtain, particularly in non-urban areas.  The work of Canadian hydrologists
such as J. Toth and others demonstrates  that the flow of water underground,
especially near rivers, is more complex  and unpredictable than had been
thought.  There is no point in saying that this work is unnecessary because
the Environmental Protection Agency is  going to issue a regulation
banning pollution of qroundwater.   Leaks, breaks, earthquakes, mass movement,
dishonesty, incompetence, and the activities of the future generations will
provide many opportunities for movement  of leachate of water.   Furthermore,
anyone planning to develop a land disposal site ought to know  where the
water beneath his site comes from and who, if anyone, is polluting it
already.

What is needed is the preparation of more maps, the establishment of a
hydrologic map index, and the acquisition of the maps by many  libraries.*
Instructions for use of the maps should  also be provided for non-geologists.

A second area that needs investigation  is soil-leachate interactions.   It
seems that many engineers and technicians know little or nothing  about  the
soil they build on.  The tern "clay" is  tossed around carelessly  and may
cover anything from bentonite to quartz.  The importance of grain size  and
packing may be overlooked.  It is assumed that a few passes with  a roller
will approximate 20,000 years of settling and that permeability won't
change as grains readjust.  Are these assumptions safe?

The chemical reactions between leachate  and minerals in the soil  require
study.  Which ions and molecules will be adsorbed by clay minerals in
different chemical environements?  What  will be the concentrations of
the leachate before and after adsorption?  How do these chemical  changes
affect the physical behavior of the soil — will it flocculate,  yield,
swell or crack?  What will happen to one soil-leachate system  if  a new
and different material is added to the  site?  These are important questions,
but my recent request for a SHIRS search on this topic yielded only one
pertinent abstract.

I realize that people are working on these questions, but the  information
is needed now.  I suggest that some of the funding for technical  assistance
be used to prepare piezometric maps and  to study soild-leachate interactions
then the results should be clearly explained and widely disseminated.
* On a visit to Kansas City, Missouri's main library, I  was informed that
  the library was "...getting out of the map business."   This antipathy
  to maps is not uncommon, and is no help to geologists  and other planners.
  Orders for purchase may take weeks to arrive, another>eal  problem.

-------
                                   -3-
Some people might think that these are bizarre  and trivial  activities,
they are not.  If Americans of all ages are to  be  protected from
hazardous wastes, we must know these things --  where  our water is  and
where it is going and what will happen to soil  when hazardous  waste
interacts with it.
Very truly yours,
Eileen Chase
Geologist
EC/dg
Shelf No. 5B8

-------
u
z
w
o
<
z
o
HH
H
u

z
o
Z
W

CO

D

      (L)
                                        D (O O
                                                          <0
                                                                               g 8
          o £^_  o
3 COCO
?!«
3S<2.
                                               0)5 = •«*•  a>c
                                               0) csj ro ^  
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

-------