TRANSCRIPT
REGIONAL PUBLIC MEETINGS ON THE
RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT of 1976
March 8 and 9, 1977, Dallas, Tex.
These meetings were sponsored by EPA Region VI,
and the proceedings (SW-18p) 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-18p) 1n the solid waste management series.
-------
•V-;
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION VI
THE RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT OF 1976
PUBLIC MEETING
March 8,
i, 197.T
PANEL MEMBERS:
MR. RAY LOZANO
MR. WILLIAM SANJOUR
MR. HERBERT C. CROWE
DR. NORMAN DYER
MR. H. LANIER HICKMAN
MR. TOM CANFIELD
EPA Conference Room
First International Building
DalIds , Texas
Director, Air and
Hazardous Materials,
Region VI, Dallas, Texas
Chief, Assessment and
Technology, Hazardous
Waste Division, Office
of Solid Waste,
Washington, D.C.
Chief, Hazardous Waste
Management, EPA, Region
Chief, Pesticide and
Hazardous Waste Management
Branch, Region VI, EPA
Director, Management and
Information Staff, Offices
of Solid Waste,
Washington, D.C.
Chief, Waste Reduction
Branch, Office of Solid
Waste, Washington, D.C.
REPORTER: JOY JACKSON
4306 Purdue
Dallas - 368-2506
/I
-------
INDEX
Page
Mr. Ray Lozano - Introduction
and welcome 4
3
Mr. Norman Dyer 6
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Mr. H. Lanier Hickman 8
Mr. William Sanjour 18
Mr. H. Lanier Hickman 47
Mr. Tom Canfield 59
Mr. Herbert Crowe 73
-------
2 MR. LOZANOi Good evening. It is seven
3 o'clock, en the button. My name is Ray Lozano
4 and I am Director of the Air and Hazardous
5 Materials Division of EPA, Region VI, here in
6 Dallas.
7 I am subbing for Mr. John White this
3 evening. Our Regional Administrator was
9 called away to Washington this morning. But
10 I am pleased to welcome you to Region VI and
11 this public meeting on the Resource Conservation
12 and Recovery Act of 1976.
13 This Act is a comprehensive effort at
14 summarizing various hearings on the subject
15 which have been conducted over the past three
16 years.
17 We in Region VI are especially aware of
18 the many solid wastes management problems
19 that confront each of us. Each of us has
20 observed examples of solid waste management
21 practices that have adversely impacted our
22 environment.
23 Improper management of municipal wastes
24 through open burning dumps and the dumping
25 of industrial wastes in our streams and lakes
-------
are a few of the episodes that have resulted
in the passage of this Act.
Many of you will have specific issues to
4 address in this meeting. But equally
5 important, we feel this meeting represents an
6 opportunity for you to acquire an overview of
7 what is expected from each of us.
8 You as citizens will be able to develop
9 an understanding of the major issues in the
Act and see the necessity for establishing
11 priorities to address these issues .
12 We in turn will see the need for
13 determining the emphasis to be assigned for
each priority and its impact upon the state
15 and local governments.
14 This meeting will offer a two-way street
17 in which we will have a free exchange of
18 information and ideas.
19 These meetings are essential in the
development of a federal solid wastes
management program. Public participation,
mandated in the Act, remains a key factor in
23
establishing a strong federal-state
24
partnership necessary for the protection of
the land. I am sure this meeting will be
-------
1 informative and profitable for each of us.
2 A little bit about the format and then
3 I would like to introduce the people at the
4 table here.
5 First of all, Mr. -- to my extreme right
6 over there is Mr. Bill Sanjour, Chief of the
7 Assessment and Technology Branch, Hazardous
8 Waste Division, Office of Solid Waste, in
' Washington.
10 Next to him is Herbert C. Crowe, Chief of
11 Hazardous Waste Management Section, EPA,
12 Region VI.
13 Dr. Norm Dyer who is Chief of the
14 Pesticide and Hazardous Waste Management
15 Branch in the Region VI office here in Dallas.
16 Next to him is Mr. Lanny Hickman,
17 Director of the Management and Information
'8 Staff, Office of Solid Waste, in Washington.
" And over to my left Mr. Tom Canfield who
20 is chief of the Waste Reduction Branch, Office
21 of Solid Waste, in Washington.
22 The format that we would like to follow
23 this evening isi We would like to have each
24 of the people who are going to make this
^ presentation complete their presentation in
-------
1 about half of the time that is allotted in the
2 program, leaving some fifteen, twenty minutes
3 for questions and answers that you may have —
4 questions that you may have.
5 There is a mike in the center of the room
6 if you would like to ask your questions from
7 that position,or if you would to come up and
8 make a statement, feel free to come up and
9 use the podium.
10 Right after the presentation, or at the
11 end of all of the presentations, there will
12 be a chance for a more complete statement if
13 anybody wants to make one.
14 we understand that there are two people
15 who would like to make a presentation who
16 have indicated this on the registration card.
17 And I will call on these people at the end if
18 they still feel like they would like to.
19 TO present an overview of the Resource
20 Conservation and Recovery Act I would like to
21 ask first of all Dr. Norman Dyer, Chief of
22 the Pesticide and Hazardous Waste Management
23 Branch of Region VI, EPA.
24 DR. DYERi Good Evening. As has been
25 stated earlier this new law amends the Solid Waste
-------
Disposal Act to provide for a hazardous waste regulatory
program, a program to eliminate open dumping, to provide
financial and technical assistance for planning, enhance
solid waste management programs, grants to rural
communities to improve solid waste management systems,
and authority for research, demonstration, and studies
I will briefly run through the major
provisions of the Act. The speakers that follow me will
go into the provisions in more detail. And after the
10 speakers have completed their statements on the various
provisions, we welcome your comments.
12 The major oojectives of the Act - as
13 many of you can see on this slide - I don't know if you
14 in the back can see those but I will run through those
15 in case you cannot.
16 First, to protect health, protect the
17 environment, to conserve valuable material resources,
18 conserve valuable energy resources.
19 As Mr. Lozano indicated, in the past
20 years we have realized that there was something needed
21 on either the national or the state level to address
22 these problems.
23 The objectives are to be achieved through
24 technical and financial assistance to state and local
25 governments, through manpower development, through
-------
prohibition of future open dumping, through conversion
or closing of existing open dumps, and through
regulation of hazardous wastes.
Further, the objectives are to be
achieved through guidelines for solid waste management,
research and development, demonstration, federal-state-
local government-industry partnership, and materials
and energy recovery as well as through public education.
9 Tonight we are attempting to get public
10 imput on the Agency's implementation of these various
11 provisions of the act. And as I stated earlier the
12 speakers that follow will go into great detail into
13 each of these provisions that are -- the major
14 provisions of the Act.
15 Thank you.
16 MR. LOZANOi The next speaker is Mr
17 Lanny Hickman, Director, Management and
18 Information Staff, Office of Solid Waste, in
Washington,who will present a talk on trainin
20 public information, public participation.
21 MR. HICKMANi Can you see those slides
22 in the back? are they legible? All right.
23 What?
24 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Raise it higher.
25 MR. HICKMANs Raise it higher? Okay.
-------
20
21
22
23
24
25
How is that? is that better? Good.
There are a couple of things that we
TfeffQ
should understand about Roegu" (phonetic-}' before we
start in to discussing some of the details of the major
provisions of the low.
This amendment to the Federal Solid
Waste Disposal Act does not establish d federal
regulatory program. That is not the basic intent of
the law. Unlike the air and water law and other
10
EPA, Jt'oern- - the acronym that we use for the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act - is not a federal
regulatory program.
The intent of the law, the primary
purpose, is to construct strong state and local programs
for the purposes of eliminating improper land disposal
practices, for controlling hazardous waste from the
cradle to the grave, and for initiating necessary steps
toward improving an increasing amount of resource
conservation practices in this country.
Inherent in R*-c-s-a, and some unique
OUJZ
characteristics of the law, is •*-»- intent to have heavy
public participation in all phases of the law. This is
achieved through a variety of mechanisms both directly
and indirectly which I will discuss in the next few
-------
10
minutes.
One of the major intentions of the law is
to try to transmit information to those people deeply
involved in solid waste management.
Section 8003 provides authorization for
coordination, collection and dissemination of informatio
The intent of this provision is to promote public
understanding of solid waste management problems} to
involve the public in the total decision-making process
of solid waste management at the _federal, jstate, and
11 local level; to provide the mechanism for the public to
12 cooperate with states; to have a stronger awareness of
13 what the problems are in solid waste management; and
14 the approach that is necessary, that are open to the
15 solution of solid waste management problems.
16 To provide a mechanism to describe the
17 significance of the data base, what impact improper
18 solid waste management practices have on health and
19 the environment, solutions that are open for those
20 problems.
21
Andvto provide the mechanism for rapid
22 dissemination of information it requires the EPA to
establish a library of solid waste management literature
One of the major forces that play JM the
public is the need to be involved in the whole process
-------
11
1 of solid waste management.
2 We have identified major sectors of the
3 public that the public information program will be
4 focused on to try to create a stronger and greater
understanding, the information and participation program.
There are consumer and evironmental
neighborhood groups that are involved in a variety of
ways both in Washington through activists as well as at
9 the local and state level through a variety of different
10 organizations. You have the various trade and
11 manufacturing representatives which, that force out
12 there, all of these are very actively involved in solid
13 waste. This is very unique in the fact that a little
over half of the solid waste collected and disposed of
15 in this country is done so by private industry either
16 on a contract basis with local government or with
17 industry, or many industries on their own collect and
dispose of their own solid waste. So industry is
19 heavily involved in the solid waste management field.
20 And we have the public health, scientific
21 and professional societies which have an interest and
who are aware of the problems of solid waste and the
23
solutions for it and they must have tools to deal with
the problem as they try to provide services to state
and local governments and industry.
-------
12
I We have governmental groups. Bo e ra- is
2 designed in a way that the federal government has to
3 participate actively in meeting the requirements of the
4 law just like jtate and local government and industry.
5 And government has strong forces at play within the
6 economic structure of our country which create problems
7 for the whole field of resource conservation. So
8 governmental units have to be involved.
9 And of course^ university associations
10 because from the universities come the professionals
11 that have to work in the solid waste management field.
J?CF/)
12 He era also provides the mechanism for
13 the public to petition and be involved in making changa
'4 in how EPA proceeds to establish regulations and
15 guidelines. And it requires EPA to issue regulations
16 that tells the public citizen how they can ping in upon
17 EPA, to eayi Hey, I think you should write a regulation
18 on this, or a guideline on this. Or, I don't agree with
" what you have written in that guideline or regulation.
20 I think you should change it. And the Administrator of
21 EPA must show cause why he should or should not through
22 a variety o£ public hearings and interchanges between
23 the petitioner and the federal government.
24 We also have to issue public participation
guidelines. The law is very clear that not only should
-------
13
1 the public be involved in the regulatory-setting process
2 which is by nature a mechanism that through the
3 administrative procedures in the federal government
4 citizens can participate in the decision-making process
of the rega, but in the planning and the development of
6 the concept of how the law should be implemented, how
7 it should move forward, what we should do each fiscal
8 year, what is the reasonable distribution of our
' resources on different program areas that we are working
10 on.
11 This meeting tonight is an example of
the sort of involvements that we are starting early on,
13 before decisions that have to be made by the law are
set in concrete so that the public can be involved and
be a factor in helping to make these decisions.
16 We are not only having a series in the
I7 Region but we have had some other meetings. During this
18 calendar year, OSW alone is to hold one hundred — at
the present time we have a hundred and forty-five meetings
20 on our calendar, public meetings of various types, such
21 as this, as well as formal public hearings for
22 regulations and guidelines for the purpose of trying to
23 factor in public involvement in the decision-making
process of the Agency.
25 This means we will have to publish
-------
1 guidelines to tell the public how to participate with
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
us. These are under development now.
We have to provide a mechanism which is
for citizens' suits where the citizens can be involved
in suing us or someone in violation of the requirements
Of nGC ITS •
We have a variety of public participation
techniques which I have mentioned, meetings such as
this which — although a record is kept, this record
is basically for our benefit, to help guide us in our
decisions as we move along.
Public hearings, of course, which is
a more formalized procedure for regulations—setting and
prepared statements on RCRA and these of course have to
be factored in. And we have to show in a public hearing
with the regulatory-setting process why we did or did
not consider the comments that were made at the hearing.
And then we will hold a variety of
conferences. We had a big conference over this last
£.HVI&Ofjtf(£HTJ>l-
week-end with the^a.ction aoalition in Washington to
discuss resource and conservation issues as well as
hazardous waste issues and disposal issues.
We have a variety of financial assistance
to interest groups such as the League of Women Voters,
several union groups, to build a bridge with these
14
-------
6
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
15
various interest groups to better communicate with them.
We hold conferences with these people.
In addition, we have established formal
review groups. We have proposed a formal advisory group
to advise the Agency on formal implementation of the law
This is an involved process of setting up such a formal
group to try to represent the various interests that are
interested in solid waste management.
On an interim basis, for the next four
to six months we will establish several ad hoc study
groups to represent the various sectors of solid waste
management and the public, to have them come in and sit
with us as we proceed in a smaller type of forum where
we have stronger interchange.
And of course as we start to — this
meeting, of course, is more of a dog and pony show on
our part to try to advise you on what is in the law.
And at this time we are not indicating what direction
we are going because we haven't made those decisions yet
But as we start to write regulations, anc
as we start to draw lines on what we think should be the
requirements, then the involvement will be more intense
because you have something to shoot at. Mow you have
very little to shoot at because we really haven't starteji
to describe the standards for the regulations or
-------
16
1 guidelines which the state and local governments have
2 to adopt.
-RLR.R
3 flecra* also provides for some mechanisms
4 to try and develop manpower to meet the requirements of
5 the law. The old law -- the 1970 amendments to the
6 Solid Waste Disposal Act required EPA to do a study on
7 manpower needs in solid waste management and report to
8 Congress their findings. This report was submitted to
9 Congress about three years ago.
10 Basically that report said: Well, unless
11 there are some dramatic changes that take place in solid
12 waste management or state and local government gets
13 more actively involved in requiring approved practices,
14 unless there are a lot of institutional changes that
15 take place to increase the opportunity for resource
16 recovery, there isn't a real big career ladder or
17 career opportunities or any big manpower demands for
18 new personnel in solid waste management.
19 And from those studies we started to
20 turn down manpower development programs. Of course,
21 Kflcra now gives the opportunity for increased involvemenjt
22 of §_tate government and increased involvement of local
23 government to improve and change practices. And there
24 are mechanisms built into the law that hopefully in the
25 long term will make dramatic changes in resource
-------
17
conservation opportunities.
And so we will probably create a need for
increased and different types of manpower than has been
used in the past on solid waste management.
So the law requires us to do a study
again and report to Congress on what types of manpower,
what sectors, and in what part of the solid waste
management field will manpower be needed in order to
meet the demands of -Re-era.
10 And the law also provides grant programs
to state and local government and non-profit groups —
12 all the grant provisions in this law are restricted to
13 non-profit groups. There is no granting program under
Recra for profit-making ventures. In other words, grant
15 go to state and local government and other non-profit
16 groups, research foundations, universities, for support
17 in developing the programs.
18 That's the last of those. Okay. That
" covers the public participation and the manpower
20 development portions of the program tonight.
21 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKERi Ray, can we have
22 questions now?
23 MR. LOZANOs I can entertain questions
24 now if there are any. If not we will move on
ahead to the next part.
-------
18
1 Questions? statements? continents?
2 observations?
3 MR. HICKMAN: I am glad we stimulated
4 you on the first opening session. And here's Ray.
5 MR. L.OZANO: We are way ahead of schedule
6 We are supposed to take a break at this time
1 but why don't we keep moving and see if we
8 can perhaps take a break later on.
9 The next presentation is by Mr. Bill
10 Sanjour, Chief, Assessment and Technology
11 Branch, Hazardous Waste Division, Office of
'2 Solid Waste. Bill?
13 MR. SANJOUR: I will see what I can do
14 about getting us behind schedule.
15 X am going to tell you about Subtitle C
16 which deals with hazardous wastes. And this is a
17 regulatory section of the Act. It is the only regulatorjy
section. And Lanny Hickiuan was correct in saying that
19 there are no regulatory portions, federal regulatory
2" portions, in the sense that Congress intended that this
21 portion of the Act would be written by the federal
22 government but administered by the state governments.
However, whether or not the Act is
24 administered by the state government is optional by the
2S states. And the Act requires that if the states do not
-------
19
1 pick up Subtitle C then that would be administered by
2 the federal government.
3 we are talking about hazardous waste.
4 we are not talking about trash and garbage. we are
5 talking about, chiefly, industrial wastes. I would say
6 some small per cent of industrial waste - it has been
7 estimated at five, ten, fifteen per cent - would be
8 considered hazardous, depending upon how you define
9 hazardous.
10 And the first section of the Act, Section
11 3001, deals with the definition of hazardous waste.
12 I think we can leave the lights on. Can
13 you see these? can you read them without turning the
14 lights off? can you read them better with the light on
15 or off?
16 The Act requires that we define hazardous
17 waste within eighteen months. And that we first define
'8 criteria for hazardousness.
19 And then the Act gives us two different
20 options for defining hazardous wastes: One is by listing
21 wastes. And the other is by identifying characteristics
22 And we can do one, or the other, or both. When I say
23 "we" I mean the Administrator of EPA.
24 Let me just read to you what the Act
25
requires in terms of this definition. It requires that
the
-------
20
1 Act take into account! toxicity, persistence, and
2 degradability in nature, potential for accumulation in
3 tissue, and other related factors such as flammability,
4 corrosiveness, and other hazardous characteristics.
5 That is a rather broad area of definition
6 Section 3002 of the Act, also to be
7 promulgated in eighteen months, eighteen months from
8 last October, requires the promulgation of regulations
' for people who generate hazardous waste. This would for
10 the most part be manufacturing concerns: Chemical
1' concerns largely, but most manufacturing concerns would
'2 at least qualify for consideration.
13 And the Act requires that we promulgate
14 regulations for record keeping, reporting, and labeling,
15 and for a manifest system which I will describe to you
16 in a moment.
17 You will notice that there are no permit
1® requirements for generators, per se.
19 Section 3003 deals with people who
2" transport hazardous waste. And here the requirements
21 are very similar. Also, no permitting requirements.
22 And here is where we hava the largest burden of the
manifest system.
Congress intended that hazardous wastes
should be treated as a commodity in the sense that they
-------
are kept track of. That records are kept—starting
at the point of origin, when it first becomes a waste,
records should be kept track of its movement and final
4 disposition.
This was because Congress found that the
principal problem of hazardous wastes were the haphazard
and illicit disposal: disposals in unauthorized ways
and where people didn't know where they were going to
largely due to unscrupulous persons just throwing them
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
21
into other people's back yards.
And by keeping records Congress felt that
the bulk of the problem of handling hazardous wastes
would be solved.
Section 3004 are standards for owners
and operators of treatment, storage, and disposal
facilities of hazardous wastes. Now theso could very
well be the people who generate the wastes.
If they treat, store, dispose of it on
their own site they would fall under this provision of
the Act also. And this might apply also to a great
many industrial manufacturers.
The function of these standards is —
according to Section 3005, which is what I an talking
about, is to permit such facilities. These facilities
will be permitted. And Section 3004 are the standards
-------
22
under which these permits will be issued.
These standards specifically call for
record-keeping, reporting, compliance with the manifest
system, monitoring, standards on location, design, and
construction, maintenance and operation, contingency
plans for operation, ownership responsibility - that is,
posting bonds for safe operation and the like - those
8 are explicitly called for by the Act, in the Act.
9 In addition, there is a more general
10 statement, which I will read to you and that isi
11 The Administrator•shall write standards
12 as may be necessary to protect human health and the
13 environment. Now, unlike these explicit requirements,
14 that is a very broad statement which can be interpreted
15 to include such things as protecting ground water from
16 leachate, protecting surface water from run-off,
17 protecting air emissions, perhaps even things like odor
18 and noise could conceivably be covered under this sectio^i
19 of the Act.
20 And unlike the explicit provisions there
21 is,of course^ a lot of discussion and debate within EPA
22 and among all the people who are acquainted with this
23 Act just what exactly that provision should cover
2"1 These standards also must be promulgated
25 in eighteen months.
-------
23
1 Section 3005 of the Act is for permits
2 for people who treat, store, and dispose of hazardous
3 wastes. And these permits then are to be issued with
4 the standards that were promulgated under Section 3004
5 so that facilities who meet those standards can receive
6 a permit.
7 The law has provision for interim permits
8 while the program gets started. So that anyone who is
9 in existence, if he simply writes a letter to EPA -
10 don't write it now because now is not the time -
11 informing EPA of his existence, he has an interim permit
12 under the law until EPA gets around to issuing these
13 permits.
14 I say EPA. If the jjtates assume the
15 program, the states will issue these permits, not EPA.
16 EPA will only issue permits for those states that do
17 not assume the program.
18 Section 3006 is to authorize jtate
19 programs. And this is where EPA will be promulgating
20 guidelines for what constitutes state programs. And
21 there are several different kinds of authorization.
22 There is the permanent authorization.
23 And there is also an interim authorization where Congress
24 allows, for several years after — while the program
25 is getting started up, recognizing that many states
-------
24
have hazardous waste or solid waste laws that are not
2 too much like the federal law, these states could,
3 nevertheless, receive interim authorization while the
4 details of getting the laws into line are worked out.
So that almost any _state, I would say -
I think that was the intent of Congress - that almost
any state that did have a hazardous waste act in existen
when this Act came on would receive interim authorization
9 to continue to handle the program if they chose to do
10
11 For the ultimate authorization Congress
12 requires that the state program be equivalent to the
13 federal program, consistent with other state programs,
and adequate enforcement of Subtitle C.
15 Now you have to recognize that
words are not too precise. So there is some latitude
17 and discretion on the part of the Administrator as to
18 what these words mean. And I suggest that if you have
19 any strong feelings about what they mean that you write
20 to us and let us know what you think they should mean.
2i Section 3010 does not, strictly speaking,
22 require any act on the part of EPA. This requires that
23 anyone who generates, transports, treats, stores, or
24 disposes of hazardous wastes, after a certain date, must
25 inform EPA of its existence or be in violation of the lair.
-------
And that date would be after the date of the promulgatiop
of regulations under Section 3001. Which, in theory,
should be eighteen months from the passage of the law.
However, EPA has taken upon itself to --
under this section, to try to notify everyone who could
possibly come under this provision of the Act, to
acquaint them of the jeopardy they suffer by not
informing EPA of their existence. They could be subject
to fines and closing of their operation.
10 So we will attempt to notify the
11 affected parties of this provision of the Act before
12 they are in jeopardy.
13 Section 3011 calls for assistance to
I4 the states in implementing the state programs. This
does not include construction grants or grants to build
facilities and the like. But this is basically grants
17 to hire professionals and train them for the program.
18 And Congress requires a complicated allocation formula
19 for allocating these funds
And I think that about wraps up Section
21 3000, Subtitle c. Do we have time for questions?
22 Mould you step up to the microphone,
23 pleaae? And I think you had better give your name and
24 affiliation for the record.
25 MR. RISKERi My name is Fred Risker. I
25
-------
26
1 an an attorney for Exxon. I have several
2 questions to ask you.
3 In the December '75 issue of the Federal
4 Register^ the EPA propagated a list of
5 hazardous substances and some -- I guess some
6 concepts that are similar to Section 3001 on
7 characterization of hazardous substances.
8 Can we expect to see this type of list
9 under 3001 or activation of that proposed list?
10 MR. SrtNJOURs Well, as I said, the Act
11 authorizes two different ways to define a
12 hazardous waste. One is by criteria. And
13 the other is by a list of wastes.
14 And it gives the Administrator discretion
15 to use one or both of those methods. Now if
16 he chooses to use the criteria approach which
17 would mean a series of tests fo.r various
18 attributes of wastes including toxicity then
19 he would no doubt have to list those specific
20 chemicals which we are testing for, if we are
21 testing for chemicals.
22 So if we go the criteria route then no
23 doubt chemicals will have to be listed. If
24 we go the list of hazardous wastes route then
25 no doabt chemicals will have to be listed
-------
27
1 there, or industries, or some combination of
2 the two.
3 MR. RISKER: One problem is that a lot of
4 companies are compiling lists of toxic substan
5 to control. And then also with this notifica-
6 tion requirement under 3010, it is going to ta
7 a while to gear up and find out what you are
8 handling so you can notify EPA.
9 If there is going to be an immediate
10 notification requirement as soon as the list
11 is published, you know, at least we can get
12 tipped off as to what is coming.
13 MR. SANJOUR: I am aware of that problem.
14 Too, two points» In general if you have any
15 doubt about whether you generate a hazardous
16 waste or not under Section 3010, you might as
17 well send in a notification. You have nothing
18 to lose.
19 If you don't have a hazardous waste and
20 you send in a notification nothing is lost.
21 If you do hove a hazardous waste and do not
22 send in a notification then you are subject to
23 some severe penalties.
24 So we recognize that fact. In fact, the
25 form we are designing says: Do you have
:es
-------
28
hazardous wastes? Yes. No. Not sure.
2 And I expect we are going to have some
3 come in: Not sure.
In that case we will send you a big thick
5 package telling you what you have to do to
6 ascertain whether or not you have a hazardous
7 waste.
8 MR. RISKERi Okay. That is interesting.
9 Because what about land farming type of
10 operations? Some people, you know, are saying
things like tank bottoms, you know, things
12 like that have hazardous aspects to them. We
'3 don ' t know.
14 MR. SANJOURi we will define the hazardous
'5 wastes in time for the notification system.
MR. RISKBRj Okay.
17 MR. SANJOURs That will be defined. We
certainly will not require anyone to determine
19 whether he has a hazardous waste before we
20 define what we mean by hazardous waste.
21 MR. RISKERi Thank you.
22 MR. SANJOURs Any more questions? I
23 noticed when I walked in here I saw some very
well-thumbed copies of the Act.
25 MR. STANFORDs I am Geoffrey Stanford.
-------
29
You held a hearing in Houston last fall which
2 was very well attended
3 I prepared a careful paper for
4 presentation and time ran out and I handed it
5 to the stenographer and I have heard nothing
6 since. And I am wondering if anything happen*3
to paper or whether 1 should have heard or
8 wha t.
' MR. SANJOUHi Do you have a copy of the
proceedings of that meeting?
'I MR. STANFORD: No, I wasn't sent one.
'2 MK. SANJDUR: Well, you have to buy it
13 if you want one. They are for sale. You
can write to me in fact.
15 MR. STANFORD: I wasn't notified they
were available.
'7 MR. SANJOUR: I think it was announced
18 at the beginning of the meeting that the
" transcript would be available for sale. That
20 was announced at the beginning of this meeting
21 I didn't attend the Houston meeting but I
22 have attended several others where that
91
announcement was made.
AS to what happened to your testimony,
well, we certainly didn't get back to everyone
-------
30
1 and tell them what happened to their testimony
2 We are not going to do that for this meeting
3 either.
4 But I can tell you that, that testimony
5 has been poured through, cited, quoted, clipped
g out, and pasted in a dozen different documents
7 which have greatly influenced -- those series
8 of hearings have greatly influenced the
9 directions we have taken and have influenced
10 the legislation that was passed.
"FCK0
11 ._R»e-t«-, the legislation that was just
12 passed, has this waste portion which was very
13 largely influenced by that testimony.
14 And the kinds of things that we heard at
15 those meetings were brought up with Congress
16 when they were considering drafting this
17 legislation. Right now it did have a tremendo
18 impact and will continue to have a tremendous
19 impact even if you have not been personally
20 acknowledged. The rest of us never get
21 personally acknowledged either.
22 Any more questions? Yes, sir.
23 MR. BRYAN: I am Keith Bryan with
24 International Paper Company. Have you gone
25 very far in defining what constitutes a
-------
generator of a hazardous material? I am
thinking at this moment of the proposed
3
regulations on the pretreatment on the water
A
side where they theoretically at least in this
very building because of the cooling tower
are a generator of hazardous wastes. Because
if that program follows through they are going
o
to have to take the chromium and that sort of
9
thing out of the cooling tower blowdown as
required under the pretreatment guideline.
So that is going to be maybe a gallon of
stuff once a week. Is this building a
generator of hazardous waste as you perceive
14 its definition under this Act?
15 MR. SANJOURj No. The Act — if you go
through it, and perhaps you have to be a lawyer
or a bureaucrat to do it, a hazardous waste
18
has to be a solid waste.
19
A solid waste is defined in the Act as
20
any solid, liquid, or gas that is not
21
discharged, not discharged, to a river or a
22
stream, that is not discharged to a sewer.
MH. BRYANi That is my point. You can't
24
discharge it without —
MR. SANJOURj If you bring it to a
-------
32
1 landfill, then it is a solid waste. If you
2 send it down the sewer then it is not a solid
3 waste. All right?
4 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Then it's a
5 violation.
6 MR. BRYAN: If you can't send it down
7 the sewer.
8 MR. SANJOUR: Then it is a solid waste.
9 MR. BRYAN: Then is this building a
10 generator of solid waste?
11 MR. SANJOUR: All right. Now then, if
'2 the waste that you are generating — yes, you
13 are right. You a re a generator of solid waste
14 Now are you a generator of a hazardous
15 waste, that depends upon the definition of
16 hazardous waste because you haven't defined
17 it. You may or may not be.
18 if you are a generator of hazardous
19 waste, you may still be exempt because we are
20 no doubt reasonable people in spite of what
21 you may think of us in Washington. We will
22 no doubt have to put in some kind of an
23 exemption for small generators. There has to
24 be some kind of system where every person in
25 America is not a generator of hazardous waste
-------
33
1 because he throws out a ballast from a
2 florescent light. There has to be some kind
3 of a provision for a small generator and
4 perhaps you would not be a generator of
5 hazardous waste even if the waste were
d hazardous under such a provision. We will
7 have to wait and see.
8 But if you have a specific comment I
9 suggest you put it in writing and mail it to
10 us. Because we can better define these
11 borderline cases if we have a large number of
12 examples of borderline cases in front of us.
13 If we Know what the realm of stupid thing
14 to do are, like people sending us examples on
15 paper, then we can better thread our way
16 through it. The more information we have the
17 better regulations can be written.
18 Yes, sir.
19 MR. RISKER: The Texas Water Quality
20 Board is currently using a three-way trip
21 ticket system for disposal of hazardous waste,
22 I gues's the waste generator to the disposal
23 contractor.
24 is this manifest system that you are
25 proposing going to be similar to that?
-------
34
1 MR. S4NJOUR: Precisely. It was copied
2 after -- Congress had in mind when it wrote
3 that section the system used in Texas and
4 California.
5 MR. RISKER: Okay. I got the impression
6 also that you are looking at the producer of
7 potential hazardous waste, of keeping a record
8 of this item before final disposal.
9 MR. SANJOUR: Well, at a minimum the
10 producer has to fill out that part of the trip
11 ticket that defines the waste and the quantity
12 All right?
13 MR. RISKER: You mean at production?
14 MR. S/iNJOUR: Yes.
15 MR. RISKER: Okay.
16 MR. SANJOUR: He has to say what the
17 waste is. You can't expect the collector to
18 know what it is he is picking up. The
19 generator has to tell him what it is so he has
20 to describe it to some extent.
21 MR. RISKER: Okay. I —
22 MR. SaNJOUR: Now what record-keeping
23 he has to do oeyond that is really not defined
24 in the Act. It is a questioned what gets
25 worKed out in the regulations.
-------
35
1 MR. RISKER: Okay. The real thing I am
2 getting at is: At the.point of determining
3 where the record-keeping is started.
4 Should it be at the point where the
5 hazardous suostance is set for disposal? Is
6 it going to be at the point the item is
7 included in some other product? A lot of
8 substances are going to be by-products.
9 MR. SANJOUR: I see your point. It is at
10 the point of generation that it is going to
11 have to be tracked. Now I recognize that ther
12 is ambiguity in what you mean by generation
13 and what you mean by waste. Is it something
14 you occasionally sell? Is it a waste? or is
15 it a oy-product?
16 This is one of the fine points that we
17 are going to have to thread our way through
18 and define when it is a waste at the point
19 of generation. For example, in the case of
20 a sewerage treatment plant you get a sludge.
21 What is the point of generation of that sludge
22 When do you start considering it a waste and
23 keeping track of it?
24 These things will have to be defined in
25 the regulations. They have not been done so
-------
36
1 yet. And this again is an area where if you
2 feel you have some problems, write us a letter
3 The more examples we have in front of us of
4 the kind of problems we will run into when we
5 issue permits, of people coming back to us and
6 saying: is this a waste or isn't it? The
7 more familiar we are with those kinds of
8 problems in advance the better we can write
9 our regulations so we don't have to solve them
10 after the fact.
11 MR. RISKER: I guess there is another
12 problem I was having too with the — well, I
13 guess it is this whole thing, the paper work
14 problem. Will we have any review process of
15 the characterization of substances? You know,
16 because in one situation, you know, it might,
17 you know, prove leachate -- it might have
18 leachate characteristics which would be toxic
19 or hazardous where in another situation
20 because of the topography of the land or what
21 have you it would — you know, it might be
22 biodegradable or something of this nature.
23 ^versus, you know, just characterizing
24 something across the board and not looking at
25 the unique circumstances.
-------
37
MR. SANJOUR: The definition of hazardous
2 wastes logically cannot depend upon what you
3 du with it. The reason for that is the law
4 only gives regulatory authority over hazardous
5 wastes.
$ The obverse of that is that there is no
7 regulatory authority for non-hazardous wastes.
8 So that if the law says a waste is non-hazardcjus
9 then the law has no say in how that waste is
10 disposed.
1] MR. HICKMAN: Sometimes Subtitle C does.
12 MR. SANJOUR: No. Well, we can debate
13 that point. In any event, the only way — so
14 therefore in defining a hazardous waste you
15 cannot consider how it will be disposed,
16 specifically. Because you have no guaranty
17 it will be disposed of in that way. Do you
18 follow me?
19 MR. RISKER: Okay. I can see your
20 argument.
21 MR. SANJOUR: I mean, you can sit there
22 — anybody can sit there and say: I am going
23 to dispose of this in an excellent way. Okay,
24 your waste is non-hazardous, fine. Then we
25 have no legal -- there is no legal recourse it
-------
I 38
1 you don't do that because it is not a hazardous
2 waste. Do you follow me?
3 MR. RISKER: Okay.
4 MR. SANJOURj So it has to be defined,
5 and our current thinking is that we will try
6 try to define hazardous waste in this way:
7 We will sort of ask ourselves the questio^i:
8 What kinds of things could happen to this
9 waste if it didn't come under this system that
10 are among the normal things that do happen
11 to wastes and is that tolerable.
12 If the answer is yes then the waste is
13 not hazardous. If it is no then the waste is
14 hazardous. That is a philosophical approach.
15 MR. RISKERi Okay. One of the things I
16 have been looking at recently is the Texas
17 Water Uuality Board's characterizations of
18 classes of dumping sites and/or disposal sites.
19 You know, are you going to use that type
20 of system? You know, a substance type might
21 be classified as class one?
22 MR. SANJOUR: Very likely. But that
23 determination would be made only after the
24 determination of the waste as hazardous.
25 MR. RISKER: Okay.
-------
39
1 MR. SANJOUR: And if the waste is
2 hazardous then there is the determination to
3 be made of how it is to be disposed.
4 MR. RISKER: Okay.
5 MR. SANJOUR: And yes, that kind of
4 consideration will no doubt come into play
7 when you dispose of it.
8 MR. RISKER: But the real problem is that
9 maybe a new disposal site, you know, or a
10 technique or something might not make a
11 characterization of something a class one or
12 something of this nature practical.
13 What I am saying is there should be some
14 type of appeal procedure set up. You know,
15 if a new -- technological advance for the
16 disposing of something or the handling of
17 something. For instance -- how are you sure
18^ that it will be used?
19 MR. SANJOUR: If you have the technology
20 you can't be sure that it will be used.
21 MR. RISKER: well, you will through your
22 trip ticket.
23 MR. SANJOUR: Well, but if you don't
24 declare a waste hazardous it doesn't require a
25 trip ticket. So how can you be assured -- if
-------
40
1
you be assured it will be disposed of in that
way?
4
MR. RISKER: The problem is a substance
might be hazardous — you know, you might have
a terminal exposure problem with it but if you
dispose of it in a certain way or store it in
8
a certain way it won't pose a problem.
MR. SANJOUR: But if I don't classify
that waste as being legally hazardous, how
can I assure that you will dispose of it in
12
the proper way?
MR. RISKBR: Well — yeah, I can see that
type of argument which is always thinking of
the worse. But at the same time for a
16
responsible company that have —
MR. SANJOUR: How do we determine the
18
responsible companies from the irresponsible
19
companies? Hre we going to write guidelines
20
on that?
MR. RISKER: Well, I don't know.
22
MR. SANJOUR: I don't know either.
23
MR. RISKER: Seriously this is going to
24
be a problem. The companies are going to come
25
back and say: Hey, we have been doing this.
-------
41
we have been monitoring it this way.
2 MR. SANJOUR: That's fine. There's no
3 problem. That means you just fill out some
papers. If the way you are disposing of your
waste presently even if it is a hazardous
waste is perfectly adequate you will keep on
doing it. It just means you are going to have
to keep some records of what you are doing
and send some of those records into the Agency
that is administering the program. But that
11 doesn't stop you from doing what you are
12 doing.
For example, if you are incinerating
' your waste. Under this program you will go
15
on doing it. Or if you have a landfill that
is impervious. Okay? You will get a permit
for that landfill and you will continue to
18 use it. But now you have to file some papers
19 on this.
20 MR. RISKERs Okay. And unlike a lot of
21 current states that exempt private facilities
22
this Act will cover private facilities?
23 MR. SANJOUR: Yes.
24 MR. KIRKMAN: I am Mike Kirkman with
Dow Industries. We are in the business of
-------
42
1 disposing of waste material that we are
2 talking about.
3 The permitting, does the federal government
4 permit the sites?
5 MR. SANJOUR: The agency that is running
6 the program will permit the sites, yes. If
7 the state governments assume the program —
8 MR. KIRKMAN: You will leave it with the
g
T state governments?
10 MR. SANJOUR: If they want it. We can't
11 make them take it.
12 MR. KIRKMAN: Take for instance the —
13 MR. SANJOUR: I hope they take it. I
14 sure don't want it.
15 MR. KIRKMAN: The State of Texas, they
16 will continue according to your guidelines
operating and do the permitting of those types
18 of disposal sites?
19 MR. SANJOUR: Right, yes.
20 MR. KIRKMAN: What about the transportati|on
21 of that material?
22 MR. SANJOUR: The transportation will
not be permitted. Transporters would have to
24
register with the agency that is running the
program. And they would have to keep records
-------
43
1 on their wastes. And they would have to
2 comply with certain record-keeping regulations
3 MR. KIRKMANi Presently in the State of
4 Texas to be permitted to haul any type of
5 commodity which earlier you mentioned that
6 waste was a marketable item, or an item that
7 had a value to it, the Railroad Commission is
8 the agency that permits any type of
9 transportation of anything on the state
10 highways. Right?
11 MR. SANJOURi If you say so. I am not
12 familiar with Texas.
13 MR. KIRKMAN: I mean, there is an
14 overlap there: the water Uuality Control Board,
15 the regulation of wastes, and the transportation
16 of it.
17 MR. SANJOUR: Well, on the federal level
18 we intend to coordinate the paper work
19 requirements with the Department of Transportation
20 so that we don't duplicate -- we use existing
21 paper work if it can be done. Okay. We are
22 working towards that.
23 On the jjtate level, we are talking about
24 state documents now, state agencies, that
25 would have to be worked out with the state
-------
44
governments, not by the federal government.
I doubt very much if the federal government
ran the program in the state -- I doubt very
much if the federal government would be too
z*-
concerned about wonting in with the s^tate
6 paper work. Correct me if I am wrong.
7 MR. KING: My name is Bob King and I
8 work for the Governor's Energy Advisory
' Council. I also used to work for the Railroad
Commission.
11 What the Railroad Commission does in
12 essence is gives permits or certificates of
convenience and necessity after a public
14 hearing.
15 If a transporter can show that his
service is needed all that is necessary in
17 those cases is to show that he has customers
18 that require his service. Then he gets that
19 certificate.
The Rjilroad Commission will also set
21 rates for moving that waste similar to what
the Department of Transportation does. So I
23 don't see that any of that conflicts with the
24 Department of — the Water Quality Board in
25
the case of industrial wastes, regulating and
-------
45
1 tracking the waste across the state.
2 MR. KIRKMAN: In comment to that, for
3 instance, two years ago we were contacted by
4 the State to move some barrels of hazardous
5 waste material that was stored illegally from
6 one site to a legal disposal site.
7 The Railroad Commission came in and said
8 you do not have a permit to haul this waste
9 material. This was two years ago.
10 We filed for a permit to haul waste
11 material of this nature. The permit as of
12 two weeks ago was denied. So we spent time,
13 energy, a lot of money in attorney's fees
14 in applying for this permit.
IS The hearing examiner suggested or they
16 recommended that the permit be granted in
17 its entirety. Then it got to the person --
18 I guess the Railroad Commission, they denied
19 the permit.
20 In Dallas, Texas, for instance, the
21 closest company that is permitted to haul
22 that type of waste is four hundred miles from
23 here.
24 if only one company requested it, in
25 other words, if you have some waste material
-------
46
j that you want moved legally you have to call
2 somebody in Houston, Texas, to come to Dallas
3 to pick it up.
4 MR. SANJOURj You are saying most of the
5 waste in Texas is being hauled illegally?
6 MR. KIRKMANj Yes, they are.
7 MR. KING: If the hazardous material is a
8 oil and gas by-product or a by-product of
9 an oil and gas production then the Railroad
10 Commission is charged with pollution and
H protecting the environment in that area.
12 Is that the kind of thing you are talking
13 about?
14 MR. KIRKMANi No. Paints, paint thinners
15 acids, caustics, inks, any kind of waste
16 material either in a specialized container
17 or bulk form. There is not a permitted
18 carrier in North Texas to haul this waste
19 material whether it is one gallon or five
20 thousand gallons.
21 MR. KINGi You can —
22 MR. SANJOURj You can pass beautiful laws
23 MR. KIRKMAN: Run that by again.
24 MR. SANJOURi You can pass beautiful
25 laws but if they are not enforced you don't
-------
47
1 have much.
2 Thank you.
3 MR. LOZANOt Let's go ahead and take our
4 fifteen minute break now. There is a snack
5 bar on the 23th floor. Please take the
6 elevator down one floor, go around the
7 hallway. It is in that part of the building.
8 Please take the elevator because I an not sure
9 the stairwells haven't been locked. Please
10 come back in fifteen minutes.
11 (After a short recess the following
12 proceedings were hadi)
13 MR. LOZANOi Could we get back together
14 now, please?
15 Our next presentation will be made by
16 Mr. Lanny Hickman subbing for Dr. John Skinner
17 who will speak on land disposal.
18 MR. HICKMAN« There are some neat
19 characteristics about the way various parts of this law
20 tie together. This first section, 3001, we are required
21 to define criteria for what is a hazardous waste. And
22 as Bill said, those things which do not fit that
23 criteria are not hazardous wastes.
24 And Subtitle D in the land disposal
25 provisions. Subtitle D, and Section 3008 on guidelines
-------
1
2 We ought to review four definitions
3 because these four definitions are very important when
you start to understand the land disposal provisions of
5 the law, how they interrelate with the hazardous waste
6
7 of the state and local programs for solid waste
8 management.
Now under the old law 'disposal" was
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
48
basically addresses how those wastes must be managed.
provisions, and how they interrelate with the development
more used as a generic term of solid waste management
and covered from soup to nuts in solid waste management.
This new law, the amendments of 1976,
disposal is redefined basically to really focus on the
placing of wastes: on, in,around, and through the land
And so now it reflects actually the term disposal rather
than the generic term management. There is a definition
ft
of solid waste management now in
It also defines open dump. And it says:
All those sites which do not fit the criteria for
sanitary landfill are open dumps. And then it defines
sanitary landfill by saying a sanitary landfill is those
which EPA will describe within the criteria
required under another provision of the law which I will
review in just a second.
And the last, as Bill mentioned, solid wa
ste
-------
3
4
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
49
now - only Congress could do this - solid wastes can
now be liquid and gas and everything in between. You
might think that federal bureaucrats might try to do
that. But we have never tried to do that since we have
been in business since 1966. But Congress did. They
include sludges, semi-sludges, semi-solids, super goo,
red mud, liquids, anything that is not covered by JTPDES
and I am sure there is a twist here with the Clean Air
Act.
So the intention of the law as it relates
to waste materials on the land whether hazardous or
non-hazardous is to put them under some management
scheme. Either a very closely managed scheme under the
hazardous waste provision or a broader management
scheme under the land disposal state programmed resource
conservation provisions. So let's have a look at what
these things mean.
Okay. Within one year of the enactment
of the law - that is now some six months away - EPA,
under Section 4004, must issue criteria for classifying
sanitary landfills, open dumps. And in that classification
and in the criteria for those two types of disposal
sites, you must consider the reasonable probability of
adverse effects in order to make the judgement on what
is a sanitary landfill and what is an open dump.
-------
50
And it says that state plans must require
- state solid waste plans - must require disposal in
sanitary landfills. Now we are going to talk about
Subtitle D. We of course are going to talk about that
on state development.
Under Subtitle D the states must develop
— states can develop, in cooperation with local
government - comprehensive solid waste management plans
to cover all aspects of solid waste, hazardous and non-
10 hazardous and all those other things that the law now
11 defines as solid waste.
12 Now twelve months after EPA issues this
'3 criteria for sanitary landfill and open dumps, by the
14 end of twelve months they must have conducted an
15 inventory of all the open dumps covered by that criteria
16 and publish that list. Publish a list of all those
disposal sites found to meet the criteria for open dumps
Now this list then becomes, in effect,
1' violation of federal law. Because those sites are not
20 in compliance with the criteria for sanitary landfill.
21 The law says that all wastes will go to sanitary landfil
22 unless they are handled under a regulatory program under
23 the provisions for handling of hazardous wastes sections
24 of the law.
25 So in effect, those sites — that list
-------
51
1 becomes a hit list. And anybody can sue the owner or
2 operator of that site in the federal court system
3 for violation of _f edera 1 law. The federal government
^ ^"
4 cannot do that. The federal government does not have
5 the regulatory authority to go in and regulate against
6 improper disposal sites.
7 The only way that these sites can be
8 protected from being subject to suit in the federal
9 court system is for the states to proceed to set up some
10 sort of umbrella planning through the state planning
11 process authorized under Subtitle D to either convert
12 or to close those sites, convert them to bring them into
13 compliance with the sanitary landfill criteria.
14 And the jstates have five years — the
15 owners and operators of those sites have five years
16 after this is published to either convert or close those
17 sites.
18 Section 1008 requires EPA to issue
19 guidelines on solid waste management practices. And
20 the first ones must be issued within twelve months and
21 from time to time thereafter.
22 The concept, of course, that we are
23 proceeding on is the guidelines is a set of guidances
24 that establishes a course of direction for someone to
25 try and reach the purpose — to try and go somewhere.
-------
' It is descriptive as opposed to
2 prescriptive. And the way the Office is now proceeding
3 with the guidelines section of the law and the criteria
sections of the law for open dumps and sanitary landfill
is to lay down a criteria and then to write guidelines
* for acceptable ways to meet the intent of the criteria
7 under the sanitary landfill-open dump provisions.
8 And in these guidelines we have to
g
consider the technical-economic aspect and the level of
10 performance that can be achieved to protect public
11 health and environment. Now that is the first twelve
12 months.
13 Then within twenty-four months of
enactment of the law the guidelines have to include
15 level of performance, levels of control, protect ground
and surface waters, public health and environment,
comply with the provisions of the Clean Air Act, comply
18
with all the provisions of the Federal Water Pollution
19
Control Act, and consider and take care of the disease
20
and vector and safety and aesthetic problems related to
improper practices.
22
The two guidelines that the Office has
under development now, the land disposal guidelines which
24
will support the criteria for sanitary landfills and
25
open dumps, and one for the deposition of sludge on the
52
-------
53
land.
The guidelines for land disposal will be
ready at the same time that the criteria will be
published for open dumps and sanitary landfills which
will be by October 21, 1977. And the sludge disposal
guidelines will be ready a year after that.
There are a lot of questions that one
immediately raises. Now with the law being as broad as
it is with land disposal and wastes and the fact that
10 this inventory has to be done, can one effectively phase
11 this inventory or must one do all of it because it does
12 not include municipal solid waste disposal sites. It
13 includes pitch ponds and lagoons which might receive
liquid waste which do not fall under the hazardous waste
15 provisions of the law
16 it in effect covers such things as
17 agricultural waste disposal sites, mining wastes, other
'8 industrial waste sites, any land disposal site receiving
" a waste not covered under that hazardous waste provision
20 of the law will have to be covered in this inventory.
21 So you immediately start to ask all sorts
22 of questions about how far can this inventory go, what
is reasonable, what can the states do because in effect
24 the states are the ones who should do the inventory
25 because they are the ones who must establish programs
-------
54
to get these sites converted or closed and see that only
sanitary landfills are open afterward. There are a lot
of questions relating to the land disposal provisions.
4
But in effect, between the hazardous
waste regs and provisions of Reera and the land disposal
6 provisions under Subtitle D and the resource conservatio|n
provisions under Subtitle D, the state planning and
P
development aspects of the law, all these things tie
9
together so there is only three ways that solid waste
by this definition can got through the hazardous waste
program provisions, through the land, or through the
resource conservation mechanisms.
So that covers the land disposal aspects,
I believe. Do you have questions? Yes, sir.
MR. BRYAN: My name is Keith Bryan, agair
16
for the record, with International Paper
Company. In the handout under Item 2 you
18
cite 40 CFR, Part 241 entitled Guidelines for
19
the Land Disposal of Solid Waste.
20
At the time these guidelines were published
21
I chose not to comment on them - I am sure
22
a lot of other people did - because they were
23
voluntary guidelines to federal facilities
24
and did not have the force of regulation
25
against those federal facilities or to any
-------
55
1 other person. Any other person, for that
2 matter.
3 And if the Agency proposes to present
4 these voluntary guidelines of the federal
5 government to the state as the model for
6 sanitary landfills, I submit that, that is an
7 illegal act on the part of this Agency and
8 that the Agency is required to publish those
' guidelines for public comment before they can
'0 be used by any state agency as a guide.
11 MR. HICKMAN: First, let me make it clear
12 that those are not voluntary guidelines to the
13 federal government. The federal government,
'4 under the 1970 amendments of the law. Section
15 209, required £PA to issue guidelines for
16 solid waste management and required that the
'7 Jederif.l government, federal agencies, comply
18 with those guidelines. They were not voluntary
" for the federal government. They were
20 recommendatory lor state and local governments
21 for their use as they see fit.
22 MR. BRYAN: I think we are talking about
a different set of guidelines. Because I
24 checked at the break to determine if this wer
the case. Are we now talking about —
-------
56
! MR. HICKMAN: I am talking about
2 MR. BRYAN: — the guidelines —
3 MR. HICKMAN: I am talking here about
4 issuing land disposal guidelines under Section
5 1008 of the new law. And the law requires tha
6 we go through the public hearing and public
7 participation exercise before these guidelines,
3 are issued. The law requires it and we will
9 meet the requirements of the law.
10 MR. BRYAN: The guidelines that are
11 referred to in the handout document are not
12 the same thing that you now refer to.
13 Is that correct?
14 MR. HICKMAN: That is correct. I am
15 referring to those issued under the old law,
16 the Solid Waste Disposal Act as amended by the
17 Resource Recovery Act of 1970, Section 209
18 guideline.
19 MR. BRYAN: And that is not 40 CFR 241?
20 MR. HICKMAN: It could be. I don't know.
21 Let me see what you have got.
22 MR. BRYAN: I have your handout.
23 MR. CANFIBLD: Well, I see a lot of
24 handouts.
25 MR. HICKMAN: All it says here iss
-------
57
l RCRA's new and more comprehensive definit
2 and the continuing prevalent use of land for
3 the disposal of solid waste indicate that the
4 current "Guidelines for the Land Disposal of
5 Solid tfaste" - 40 CFR, Part 241 - be expanded
6 or otherwise revised.
1 And that is just what I said. This was
8 issued under the old law prior to the 1976
9 amendments and they will be reconstituted
10 under Section 1008 and will meet all the
11 requirement of Recra for public participation
12 and hearing.
13 MR. BRYAN: In other words, before they
14 will be utilized by this Agency as a guideline
15 by any state they will be republished for
16 public comment. Is that correct?
17 MR. CANFIELDj Yes.
18 MR. HICKMAN: They were published for
19 public comment before.
20 MR. BRYAN: They were not.
21 MR. HICKMAN: Sir, you are incorrect.
22 They were. They were published in the Federaj.
23 Register for public comment.
24 MR. BRYAN: As they affect federal
25 facilities.
ions
-------
58
l MR. HICKMANi That's right.
2 MR. BRYAN« That is correct.
3 HR. HICKMANi But they will be published
4 again.
5 MR. BRYANi Thank you very much. Before
6 they are used toy the Agency --
7 MR. HICKMANi The law requires us to
8 publish them in proposed fora for public
9 comment oefora they can be promulgated in finajl
10 form.
11 MR. BRYANi That wasn't my question.
l2 My question wast Whether or not they will
13 be used as guidelines by any state prior to
14 an opportunity for the public to comment on
15 them?
16 MR. HXCKMANi No, they will not.
I7 MR. BRYAN: Thank you.
18 MR. LOZANOi Other questions?
19 (No response)
20 MR. HICKMANi Well, I guess we will go
2' on then, huh?
22 MR. LOZANOi Our next speaker is Mr. Tom
23 Canfield who is Chief, Waste #*&duction Brand
24 Office of Solid Waste, talking about resource
25 conservation and recovery and overall technics
-------
59
1 assistance.
2 MR. CANFIELDs We have not talked about
3 resource conservation and recovery yet. And yet this is
4 the name of the Act, the Resource Conservation and
5 Recovery Act, and we think Congress named it that
6 because they do feel that this is the focus of the long
7 term federal action.
I feel that they wrestled with a concrete
9 way to bring about resource conservation and recovery
10 and have settled righc now for a major land disposal
11 program and hazardous waste program to bring about
12 resource recovery and conservation in the long term.
13 Before I go into the slides I would like
14 to make a couple of points about resource conservation
IS and recovery. The first point is we don't feel that
16 resource conservation and recovery will replace the need
17 for land disposal.
'8 Over the next decade even under our most
19 optimistic assumptions of resource recovery the waste
20 destined for land will increase. But we feel that
resource recovery and conservation can have a significant
22 impact on land disposal at the local level.
23 Resource recovery and resource conservation
24 can divert a significant portion of waste away from
25 disposal and thus lessen the pressure to use land for
-------
1 disposal sites.
2 Resource conservation and recovery are
3 increasing. The rate of new plants that are being
4 built for resource recovery and the number of systems,
5 other kinds of resource recovery systems, since 1970 far
6 exceeds that of the 1960's.
7 There is much more interest in comnunitie
8 We continue to do status reports that show increasing
9 interest and efforts by communities and planning for
10 resource recovery.
!' Over the long term we think that resource
'2 recovery and resource conservation will continue to
'3 increase. Just the sheer problems of scarcity of
14 materials, of some materials, scarcity of some forms of
15 energy, and the problems of finding more and more land
^ for disposal works to increase resource recovery.
17 This Act, we feel, will accelerate the
18 pace of resource recovery and resource conservation and
19 the major way is through improving land disposal sites.
20 These will shut off the unacceptable
21 cheap option for land disposal and make the economics of
22 resource recovery more favorable to many more communities
23 We think the Act really reinforces many o
24 the things that EPA has been doing. And the major thingjs
25 we have been doing is evaluations of recovery systems
60
-------
61
both large scale plants and what people would consider
low technology systems, separation of the waste at the
3 home followed by separate collections for materials
4 recovery.
5 The second thing that we have been doing
is to give aid to local and state governments to try to
7 overcome the non-technical, non-economic barriers to
o
recovery! such things as how to prepare an RFP, how to
p
obtain financing for resource recovery systems.
And the third thing we have been doing
are policy studies on ways to reduce wastes.
12
IS
I would like to go into the slides and
13 cover the specific sections that address resource
14 conservation and recovery and cover a little bit about
overall technical assistance.
The major point I would like to make abou
resource recovery and resource conservation is that it
18
is not in a nice, neat subtitle in this Act, as is
19
hazardous wastes or as is land disposal. It is spread
20 throughout the Act.
This is a mere listing of the areas where
22
we think resource recovery and resource conservation cut
across the Act. And I will go through some slides which
24
discuss all of these sections except two: Section 1008,
guidelines, and Section 6004, the fact that federal
-------
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
IS
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
62
1 agencies must comply with guidelines issued under this
Act.
So the first one I would like to start
with is technical assistance. Section 2003 authorizes
5 technical assistance by EPA and is titled: Resource
Conservation and Recovery Panels for assistance. But
it is really much broader than that. It is meant to cut
across all the kinds of assistance the Agency can give.
The efforts in technical assistance are not meant to be
merely federal officials giving assistance to local
communities. But it is to be composed of people from
states, consultants, various interest groups, a wide
range of people tying together to give assistance to a
local or state government upon request.
The Act cites that twenty per cent of
the general appropriation for this Act is to go for thes
kinds of technical assistance, this kind of technical
assistance.
Well, we have touched a little bit on
Subtitle D and the four thousand series which are a part
of Subtitle D and we will cover these points a little
bit again. But I do want to highlight: EPA must give
guidance to the states in their planning programs and
implementation programs. And that the state plans must
reflect resource recovery, resource conservation, and
-------
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
63
consider markets for recovered material.
The law mandates that one requirement of
the state plan is that it removes restrictions against
a community having long term contracts to supply wastes
to a resource recovery system.
Section 4008 is another section that we
will cover. This section authorizes financial aid for
public agencies. And its emphasis is on implementation
programs. Again, these cut across all of the Act, not
just resource recovery but includes resource conservation
services and hazardous waste management.
It covers all of the things that can
lead up to construction but does not include any funds
for construction.
Section 6002 is a section discussing
federal procurement. Requires EPA guidelines of
recommended practices to alter federal procurement. And
in two years procuring agencies of the federal governmen
must procure products with the highest percentage of
recovered materials for purchases individually over ten
thousand dollars or in total over ten thousand dollars
a year.
It also mandates that within two years
users of fossil fuel -- that is, federal boilers that
^
use fossil fuel must use refused derived fuel to the
-------
64
1 highest amount practical..
2 It also states that contracting officers
3 of the federal government must insure that vendors,
•^
4 people who sell to the federal government, must certify
$-
5 the recovered content — recycled-material content of
6 the products they sell to the federal government. This
7 can have leverage beyond that of applicable to the
8 federal government if states and local communities do
9 follow similar practices as will the federal government
'0 in their procurement.
11 Section 8002 calls for a series of eleven
12 special studies. Seven of these studies are two-year
13 studies that we have listed here. These, again, cover
14 a number of topics other than resource recovery.
'5 Four of the studies in this section are
16 three-year studies. We feel the most important of the
17 eleven studies is a study called -- included and the
18 title of it is A Resource Conservation Committee. And
" this is a cabinet level committee. It is composed of
20 EPA, the Administrator of EPA-chairs an interagency
21 committee with heads of six other federal agencies.
22 and this committee is to conduct a two-
23 year study with a separate authorization of two million
24 dollars and must submit reports to Congress every six
25 months. This is to oe a comprehensive study on ways to
-------
65
1 increase resource conservation and recovery. I would
2 like to go into the scope of this effort in a little
3 more detail.
4 Basically the comprehensive study will be
5 looking at the effect of existing policies on resource
, conservation and recovery. And I included some examples
1 of the existing policies that might be examined such as
8 the depletion allowances on certain virgin material uses
9 capital gains treatment for certain materials.
)0 It will also examine new subsidies or
1] taxes or bounties to increase resource conservation and
12 recovery. Some of the ideas that have been discussed
13 and some that have been specifically called out in the
14 Act are a — one would be a subsidy for each additional
15 ton of material that is recycled by industry.
16 Money to subsidize or help stimulate new
17 investment in equipment for recycled material.
18 And one that is specifically called out
19 in the Act are charges for excise taxes on products, on
20 the category of products to reflect solid waste management
2i costs to internalize those costs in the decisions that
22 manufacturers of those products make.
23 A third area that the study asks us to
24 examine are product regulations, individual product-by-
25 product regulations to encourage resource conservation
-------
66
' and recovery.
2 Finally there are a number of sections
3 that discuss demonstrations and evaluations of resource
4 recovery systems. Our emphasis has been on evaluations
" of resource recovery systems. This slide really
6 highlights differences in this law compared to our old
7 law if you are familiar with it.
8 It does allow for demonstrations, as did
our old law. And these demonstrations, as with our old
10 law, are for new and improved practices. But this law
11 allows demonstrations to be granted to private as well
12 as public agencies. The previous law only allowed grant|s
13 to public agencies.
4 And similar to our old Law, it allows a
15
seventy-five per cent federal share for these demonstrations
16 So I have run through — tried to get a
quick view by running through section-by-section of the
18 Act of the things that pertain to resource conservation
19 and recovery. I will be glad to answer any questions
90
that you may have or take any comments that you would
like to make for the record.
Are there any questions or comments?
23 MR. STANFORD» Geoffrey Stanford again.
Lanny told us, just before you, there were
25
only three routes that solid wastes would take
-------
67
1 And I waa waiting for your contribution before
2 asking Lanny.
3 Is the fourth one development of new
ideas? or is that somehow in one of your
three routes?
6 MR. HICKMANi It is in all of them.
7 MR. STANFORD! It is in all of them.
8 MR. HICKMANi That is a tool to help
o
reach the goal of good hazardous waste manage-
10 raent and resource conservation practices.
11 That is a tool to support that kind of a
12 thrust.
13 MR. STANFORD: So we still have full
facility to do new things?
15 MR. HICKMAN: Yes.
" MR. STANFORDs Good. The second thing
7 I was going to ask: Since under this Act
18
federal monies can become available one way or
19
another for landfill practices and other such
things, will they automatically require
environmental impact statements?
2 MR. HICKMANi In the past in our
23
demonstration projects we have never done a
24
full environmental impact statement. We have
done an environmental impact assessment. I —
-------
68
1 he did for the Minnesota — Bill, have we
2 done a full SIS for the Minnesota land disposa
3 MR. SANJOURs We will have to. we haven'
4 done — the State of Minnesota will have to do
5 it when they select the site.
6 MR. HICKMAN: As far as grant monies flow
7 — the way the grant structure is designed,
8 if we make a research grant, if we make a
9 demonstration grant directly we would have to
10 fit the same requirements as anyone else.
11 We have not in the past done full EiS's
12 on demonstration projects. We have done
13 environmental impact assessments, you know,
14 that's where you get to the pointi either go
15 or no go through the Eis process.
16 if you make an assessment, it is almost
17 like a full environmental impact statement for
18 'us. You get to the point of whether there is
19 or is not an environmental impact. And if it
20 is the negative then you make a negative
21 declaration.
22 If you determine there is environmental
23 impact then you proceed through the full,
24 formal environmental impact statement process
25
We have never run our demonstration proje
:ts
-------
69
1 which are supposed to provide new and improved
2 techniques for solid waste management and
3 therefore certainly are environmentally
4 acceptable in most instances in the past and
5 we have never come up with the judgment that
6 we should go EIS.
7 It is a good question, though. It is one
8 that we have discussed in the office as to
9 what it means in the future for these funding
10 programs.
11 This is similar to the permitting program
12 under hazardous wastes, whether EIS would have
13 to be considered in this.
14 Now in all our regulations — the major
15 regulations we are now writing under the
16 hazardous waste provisions and the land disposal
17 guidelines criteria, we are writing full
18 environmental impact statements on those.
19 we will be requiring environmental impact
20 statements for those.
21 As it relates to financial assistance
22 programs, I don't know yet. That's a good
23 question and one we will have to discuss.
24 what do you think?
25 MR. STANFORDj I wanted to ask you a
-------
70
1 second tier for that question. If the award
2 or grant, whether it be for demonstrations
3 as such or for operation, improved operation,
4 is dependent upon an BIS having been accepted
5 then many grant applicants simply have not got
6 the funding to set in motion EIS preparation.
7 And so you may find that if ElS's are
8 required, grants cannot be applied for. And
9 you may have to look at some kind o£ machinery
10 besides your funding system whereby reasonable
11 requests for grants can be funded to get the
12 EIS approved before they --
13 MR. HICKMANt We paid for that.
14 MR. CANFIELDx It also depends on the
IS type of grant and the type of project. You
16 are talking of something where you are
17 constructing. There is a whole set of grants,
18 research grants for certain kinds of projects
19 even up to certain steps in projects that do
20 not require an EIS.
21 MR. SANJOUR: You have a grant to build
22 something, say. You don't need an environmental
23 impact statement when you apply for the grant
24 you need it when you build or when you start
25 your building, whenever that is. In other
-------
71
1 words, even if you do require an environmental
2 impact statement it wouldn't be required until
3 after you got the grant and the grant money
4 would have to cover it.
5 MR. HICKMANs That's under our law. You
6 are talking about --
^ MR. STANFORDi That hasn't been my
8 experience. But I think. I have alerted you to
9 the point.
10 MR. CANFIELDj Thank you very much. Any
11 other comments or questions?
'2 MR. fiBYs My name is George Eby. I am
13 representing myself. Under full scale
14 demonstration facilities I haven't found any
15 reference to intergovernmental relations
16 between the federal government and the states
17 if this is a state program.
18 I am wondering if the federal government
19 will help fund demonstration projects that
2" are going to the states?
21 MR. CANFIELDz There are three suctions
22 there that are very confusing and overlapping
23 3004, 3005, and 3006. And I believe one of
24 those does require that it has to be consistent
25 with the state plan and state planning process
-------
72
1 So there would be a review and coordination
2 with the states on any demonstrations with
3 these funds.
4 MR. EBYs Okay. Thank you very much.
5 MR. HICKMAHi There is also the 895 plans
6 which have to be done on any of our projects
7 factors into the state.
8 We have never made an award for demonstra
9 projects in the state that the state was not
10 involved in considering that project. Never,
11 in ten years of our existence.
12 MR. CANFIELDi if yOU have questions or
13 comments just feel free to line up behind the
14 speaker.
15 MR. RISKERi Fred Risker. About the tire
16 shredder problem. I was really amazed when
they said five pex cent. Is this a typo-
18 graphical error?
19 MR. CANFIELD: No. No, we think it is
20
a rebate on the sales tax. That's about all
21 we can figure out it is. To my knowledge ther|e
22 is no legislative background: Why they want
a grant program for tire shredders of five
per cent and what they think will be accomplished
25
by a grant program of five per cent for
-------
73
1 tire shredders.
2 MR. RlSKERt Yeah, any kind of credit.
3 Maybe it is what it says, you know.
4 MR. CrtNFIELDi Any other comments?
5 (NO response)
6 MR. LOZANOi Our next speaker is Mr.
7 Herb Crowe, Chief, Hazardous Waste Management
8 Section, EPA, Region VI who will talk to us
9 about state program development.
10 MR. CROWE: As in most good things, the
11 last -- the important things come up last, it seems.
12 Somewhat of a pun and somewhat to make sure everybody
'3 is awake out there.
14 It is important — the development of a
15 state program is an important step. It is the crux of
16 this whole thing. If the Public Law Number 94-580 is
'7 going to get off the ground, achieve its objective, it
18 is going to have to be a concentrated effort by the
19 states and by EPA.
20 And this is probably one of the first
21 occasions that we will be forced, if you will excuse
22 the expression, to work as a team.
23 There are certain things that we must do
24
25
The states, if they assume this, are going to be obliga
-^
to achieve certain goals. We in turn are going to have
ed
-------
74
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
to be there if we are going to provide the necessary
funding and necessary guidance.
This doesn't make any of us experts. An
expert is someone who is fifty feet away from his own
wife. And I qualify now/ I guess.
But we have seen what will work and what
won't work. We have also been able to identify those
things that need to be done first.
If we look at this Act w« see that it is
a comprehensive act. It covers everything. And every-
thing tends to focus upon the j^tates. And so the
development of a state program is indeed a most importan
step.
The one thing I would like to point out
is that as we flash the type of things that we are going
to be doing - I say "We." EPA and the sjbates - we are
going to look between those lines. Look at where we are
going to be in 1983, say. And then atart looking at
those steps backward that we need to identify.
So between each of these items here we
are going to have to get some idea as to what it means
that we are going to be doing. So let's take a look her
The _state and local program development
provisions, Subtitle C and D. And again, it is a focus
of Subtitle C and D. If you are looking you will see
-------
75
' Subtitle A in there. Subtitle H, all of those things
2 coining to A focus.
3 RCRA provides the device for states to
4 assume the dominant role in assuring proper solid waste.
5 RCRA provides the -- again, the device
6 for local government to meet planning and implementation
7 needs. We are looking at target dates.
8 And again -- and at this point is where
' we begin to start looking between those lines as to what
10 needs to be done: The minimum requirements for acceptable
11 state programs, shared state and local planning and
12 implementation, dumps and sanitary landfills, regulatory
'3 authority.
14 Now there is a real kicker. When do you
15 start into an enforcement mode. There is so much
16 homework that you have to do first before you get into
17 it. Otherwise, you can kill the program before it ever
18 gets airborne.
" And many states are going to have to
20 re-examine their state codes to look at the ability to
21 give the contractual freedom to locals so that they can
contract over a period of more than one year to achieve
hazardous waste management, solid waste management,
recycling, all of these various things are going to
impact on that.
-------
Section 3001, the hazardous waste prograit
is going to — looks like will be funded or is authorized,
which is considerably different, twenty-five million
4 dollars each year for FY '78 and '79.
And again, it is going to be based upon
the severity of the problem in that state. And the
emphasis that are going to be placed upon the hazardous
8 waste program is going to vary with each state, depending
o
again upon what the problems really are.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
76
Suction 40U8, the development and
implementation of a £tate plan. The kinds of money we
are talking about -- and it is going to be awarded on a
population approach to states for state and local use.
Section 4008, again, implementation of
solid waste management programs; assistance for
feasibility studies, consultations, surveys, market
studies, economic investigations.
Technology, assessments to meet land
disposal requirements and guidelines, there is no foruml
set up for those kinds of grants, at the present time.
Section 4008(e), and again, where a _stat
has a problem area and in our five states I can think
of probably fifteen or twenty where there is no way you
can do it.
The fund approach that I heard mentioned
-------
77
1 was to award everyone in the little town an air mail
2 package so that they could air mail their garbage out.
3 I am not sure whether that would be funded or not under
4 EPA.
5 And again, we are targeting in on the
6 special area and the rural areas. And I think thejjtate[s
7 and we, here, often hear of a dump site occurring over
8 a period of a month, say. Somebody doesn't want to go
9 all the way into town or somebody drives down the road
10 a bit, rolls the window down, throws it out the window.
11 The minute that first garbage bag hits the ground then
12 there is about two thousand follow it in the next split
13 second.
So we have got to approach that type of
15 thing. What we are inferring here, again, is reading
into the Act, we are looking at designing a system and
doing it on a regional basis, whatever a region happens
18 to be. Whatever is economically feasible, whatever the
waste stream talks to, those are the kinds of things
20 that are going to help us to define what a region really
is. There will be some standard guidelines put forth
22 that will help us to at least get some criteria on what
23 to look for.
24 So that any of these special areas that
25 we are going to be addressing again is going to be done
-------
78
on a cooperative basis, a joint effort of state and fed.
And assistance to the rural areas, we
are going to be looking at restriction on open dumps.
You don't restrict open dumps until you have got a
system developed in that area to make sure that people
6 have a system to pick up their waste, transport it, and
7 dispose of it in an environmentally acceptable fashion.
We are going to be looking at the Clean
Air Act. We are going to be looking at the water act.
10 we are going to be looking at all of these things. And
11 all of these things are going to be impacting upon the
12 rural areas.
13 This is the kind of criteria that we are
going to be looking at in awarding some of these grants
15 to the rural areas. In effect it is saying that no
regional system is available.
How can you assist them to do something
18 and yet get their waste management in an environmentally
19 acceptable fashion. No existing plan system presently
20 available to states on a rural population approach.
2' Seventy-five per cent of the cost. And we cannot buy
22 land, again.
23 And again, the thing that we must recognise
24 here is the fact that this is a planning grant basically.
25 That's about it. So again, what I am
-------
79
1 saying is that probably this is where the whole Act comes
2 to a sharp focus. Here is where we are going to have
3 to start looking at the steps we are going to have to
4 take in the next six months and begin to really get
5 moving on it.
6 Anybody have any questions?
7 MR. DRlNKWATERj Al Drinkwater, Arkansas
8 Pollution Control. In reading through the Act,
9 especially Section 4002, I haven't been able
'0 to ascertain any part here that is saying the
11 guidelines for the identification of the
12 region will take into consideration local
'3 political boundaries as they are currently
14 drawn.
'5 This is something that I would like to
" make a suggestion here is that these guidelinejs
17 for the identification of a region take this
18 into consideration when they are promulgated
19 because of course if you have to create anothejr
20 level of government completely outside every
21 local boundary then this is going to create
22 more chaos.
23 And as much as possible, if we can keep
24
those regional boundaries co-terminus with
25 local political boundaries we are going to be
-------
1 that much better off.
2 MR. CROWEi Anybody else like to make
3 a comment?
4 MR. CARTER: Jim Carter, Oklahoma City.
5 I notice a fair amount of emphasis in the Act
6 of the 208 planning agencies are at least to
7 be considered.
8 How strict is that consideration? Is
9 the 208 planning agency the de facto agency
10 under this Act?
11 MR. CROWE: No, I don't think so. This is
12 going to have to be something that is going
13 to have to be worked out for that area.
14 MR. CARTER: State decisions or state
15 decisions in conjunction with EPA?
16 MR. CROWE: Right. It will be the _state
17 — I am trying to recall how this Act reads.
18 I think it will be up to the ^tates.
19 MR. CARTER: So the consideration
20 mentioned in 4005 falls beneath the state
21 designation of the planning agency.
22 MR. CROWE: Right.
23 MR. CARTER: So basically it is the
24 jjtate government's decision?
f'
25 MR. CROWE: Right. Anybody else?
80
-------
1 MR. BUTTON: Bill Button with Diamond-
2 Shamrock. Have you had any discussions with
3 the Texas Water Quality Board? and how does
4 their plan track with what the requirement of
5 the federal act is?
6 MR. CROWE: The Texas Water Quality Board
7 would come under Subtitle C. And the kind of
8 things that they are doing is going to fall
9 in line very well with what we ultimately have
10 In fact, we have been asking for the
11 Texas Water Quality Board, some of them, to
12 appear on our task force that is doing some of
13 the work on it.
14 MR. CARTER: Do you have at this time
IS any major differences?
CgOujj?'.
16 MR. CARTERi The Texas Water Quality Boarjd
17 rules and regs have a couple of areas that I
18 suspect that the Texas government will probabl
19 shape up, sharpen up.
20 MR. CARTERi What areas?
21 MR. CROWE: One of the main areas I
22 think is probably the existing reg to the
23 effect that any industry can maintain its on
24 site up to within fifty miles and it does not
25 require a permit.
81
-------
1 Under the — under our — what is proposed
2 and being talked about now and again I would
3 say that our rules and regs are not out yet.
4 But we are going to be looking at the fact
5 that all solid waste disposal sites will have
$ to apply for and receive a permit.
7 Anybody else?
8 MR. STANWICK: Is this open for discussion
9 yet?
10 MR. CROWEt I suppose so.
11 MR. STANWICKs My name is Kerry Stanwick
12 and I have a question for Mr. Sanjour, mostly.
13 If the Act is dealing mostly with
14 hazardous waste management, why has tha EPA
15 selected to decrease the regulations for
16 transporters of this hazardous waste?
17 MR. CROWEj Would you run that by again?
18 MR. STANWICK: Okay. You are not
19 requiring a permit for transporters yet you
20 require one for the treatment and disposal of
21 it.
22 MR. CROWE: That is part of the Act, sir
23 MR. STANWICK: Why? la it not considere
24 a part of the disposal?
25 MR. CROWE: Why did Congress write it
82
-------
83
that way?
2 MR. STANWICKl Yes.
3 MR. CROWE: Well, I guess the best person
4 to ask that would be a Congressman.
5 I think what happened is that during the
hearings — I know for example why generators
7 are not included. Probably transporters are
8 not included in the permits for the same
9 reason.
10 I suspect the generators were not includejd
because there was some testimony on the part
12 of generators of hazardous wastes that a
13 permitting requirement would force — would be
14 used to force generators to change their
15 processes which means the processes by which
16 they generate their wastes.
17 And it was not the intent of Congress or
18 of the committee that wrote the Act to get
" in there and influence how companies went aboujt
20 how they manufactured their goods. Rather,
21
only to influence what they did with their
22 wastes.
So as the result they changed -- they had
24
it to require a permit for generators and they
25
took it out because of that reason. And in
-------
84
1 fact as I recall EPA agreed with that position
2 I suspect — I am not sure what happened
3 to transporters but X suspect it is pretty
4 much the same sort of thing.
5 MR. STANWICKs So they considered it
6 affected the method they transported it?
7 MR. CROWE: Yeah, perhaps. I am not
8 familiar with the legislative history of that
9 particular aspect. I am going just by analogy
10 on what happened.
11 Why do you raise the point?
12 MR. STANWICK: Well, it seems to be kind
13 of a slacking off of the whole intent of the
14 law to protect the health and welfare of the
15 public.
16 MR. CROWE: No, I don't think so.
17 MR. STAHWICK: If you are transporting
18 hazardous material, it is as hazardous in
19 transportation as it is in disposal.
20 MR. CROWEi Transporters are subject to
21 certain standards.
22 MR. HICKMAN: The Department of Transpor-
23 tation will take care of that.
24 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: The manifest
25 system under the DOT requirement — they may
-------
85
have thought transporters were adequately
covered under that.
MR. CROWE: There are standards that
transporters have to meet. If they don't meet
s those standards they are in violation of the
, law regardless of this Act.
7 MR. STANWICK: Okay. That is the reason
8 I brought it up. Because of the Railroad
9 Commission giving permits to transporters here
10 And it sounds like if they can regulate who
transports things their regulations may not be
based upon what is needed for hazardous
,3 materials.
MR. CROWE: Well, you know the word
15 "permit" has a bad taste in people's mouth.
It means the government is giving you permissj
17 to do business. And many people resent that
13 they need permission from the government to
do business.
20 Now I personally think that it is largely
2i a semantic discussion because if the governmen
22 writes standards and you can be put in jail
23 if you don't follow the standards, what's the
24 difference if you have a permit or not?
25 MR. STANWICK: Then why have a permit for
-------
86
1 treatment?
2 MR. CROWEs Why, indeed?
3 MR. LOZANO: There are three people who
have indicated that they would like to make
5 a statement and would like to do that at this
6 time before we get into open discussion.
7 First of all, in the order that they were
8 received, Mr. Mike K. Kirkman, Dai-North.
9 MR. KIRKMANi We discussed that on the
10 transportation.
11 MR. LOZANO: Okay. Mr. Howard Saxion,
12 Lone Star Chapter, Sierra Club.
MR. SAXION: I have a copy of the statemenjt
for the Reporter. My name is Howard Saxion. X serve as
15 chairman of the Lone Star Chapter of the Sierra Club,
'6 which chapter encompasses the State of Texas.
I wish to thank the Environmental
Protection Agency for the opportunity to comment on the
'9 provisions of Public Law 94-580.
20 Although the regulations on solid waste
21 and hazardous materials have not been promulgated we
22 are encouraged that the EPA will solicit input from the
23 public as evidenced by this hearing.
24 My comments are rather brief and general
25 We are pleased with this legislation and its provisions
-------
The RCRA will only meet its goals and objectives if it
is properly implemented and enforced. I hope that EPA
will make a strong commitment to achieving the goals and
objectives of the Act. After this discussion I am sure
they have made this commitment.
We feel that the public has been exposed
to hazardous wastes that have been improperly disposed
of for too long. This Act, if properly implemented,
will go a long way toward alleviating this situation.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
87
Strong regulations should be promulgated
to insure the protection of public health as well as the
environment in which we live.
We are very concerned about the surface
transportation of hazardous waste materials through
populated areas. This Act, if properly implemented,
will go a long way toward alleviating this situation.
Strict regulation of such movement of hazardous materials
through such regions should be implemented quickly so as
to minimize this situation.
I think the public as a whole is rather
unaware of what is going through the community and some
of these materials are indeed very dangerous and
hazardous.
The recovery of solid waste materials
should be a priority. We must begin the task of
-------
88
1
recovering and recycling waste materials. We must do th
2 not only because we are running out of areas to dispose
3 of society's waste but perhaps more importantly because
4 of dwindling natural resources and energy and the
tremendous impacts that are being placed upon the land
for extraction and exploitation of natural resources.
Through recovery and recycling of waste
8 materials we can lessen this impact.
9 The EPA, through coordination and
10 cooperation with other federal agencies and state
11 governments should strive to eliminate barriers that
12 hinders the recovery and recycling of waste materials.
Interstate commerce of scrap metals and
other waste materials that could be recycled are not
15
because of regulations that favor the transportation of
new or raw materials.
17 The fact sheet is a thorough delineation
of the objectives and goals of the Act. The task of
19 the Office of Solid Waste will be great.
20 We will closely monitor the promulgation
of the regulations and the implementation of the Act.
22
We look forward to the opportunity to give our views
on the regulations that will be promulgated in the futui
and to cooperate with EPA. Thank you.
25 MR. SANJOURj May I comment on that?
is
-------
89
1 MR. LOZAHOl Yea.
2 MR. SANJGURi I have never beard it
3
suggested before that the standards for
transporting hazardous wastes should include
standards on routing. I have never heard that
6 before. And I don't think anybody in EPA
has even been considering it. And while you
P
put it into the transcript and it ia a part
9
of the public record, X suggest that if you
really mean that you send a letter. It is a
11 new idea.
12 MR. LOZANOj Mrs. Howard S. Kittel, Fort
Worth, president, National Council of State
14
3arden Clubs.
15 MRS. KlTTSLt we would like to thank you
vary/much for the opportunity for speaking and for the
opportunity of backing you up on anything you can do
18
to help recycle all of our wastes.
19
Because until we do return everything
20
to the bio from which it cane we are merely putting our
21
finger in the hole in the dike.
And we feel that this is a very progressive
23
thing and if the government gets behind it and we are
24
able to make it financially feasible we will be able
25
to solve the solid waste problem without contaminating
-------
90
1 our whole country and without contaminating our --
2 without ruining our health.
3 We just wish to thank you. We think the
4 things that have come out of here -- you answered a grea
5 many questions that I was going to ask without having
6 to ask them.
7 Thank you very much for allowing us to
8 come. And thank you for your forward looking at things.
' We think you need to go further than you are going now.
10 Thank you
11 MR. LOZANOi Thank you very much, Mrs.
12 Kittel. Those are the kind of statements that
13 keeps a guy like me going.
'* Are there any more comments that anyone
15
17
would like to make at this time? questions
16 of the panel?
Because I would like to proceed on into
18 open discussion of any kind before we adjourn.
19 Okay. If not, then, I would like to
20 thank everyone who participated here this
21 evening. This is an experiment for us here
22 in Region VI of EPA because we never have held
a night hearing. And from the looks of it,
it was very successful. There was a good
25
turn out, a lot of good comments and questions
-------
91
1
made. I would like to particularly thank the
2
people who have come down from Washington to
give us an overview of the Act and what is
4
going on these days in Recra. We appreciate
5
it very much.
6
The meeting is adjourned.
7
(Whereupon, the proceedings were
8
terminated.)
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-------
92
1 CERTIFICATE
2
3 This is to certify that I, Joy Jackson,
reported in shorthand the proceedings had at the time
and place set forth in the caption hereof, and that the
above and foregoing 91 pages contain a full, true and
7 correct transcript of said proceedings.
8
9
10
Court/
6-' v
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-------
1 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
2 REGION VI
3
4 PUBLIC DISCUSSION SESSIONS
on the
5 RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT
6
PANEL MEMBERSi
7
MR. RAY LOZANO
8 Director, Air and Hazardous Materials Division
Region VI, Dallas, Texas
9
MR. J. PAUL CORONA
10 Assistant to Regional Administrator
Congressional and Intergovernmental Relations
11 Region VI, Dallas, Texas
12 DR. NORMAN DYER
Chief, Pesticides and Hazardous Materials Brand
13 Region VI, Dallas, Texas
14 MR. H. LANIER HICKMAN
Director, Management and Information Staff
15 Office of Solid Waste, Washington, D. C.
16 MR. WILLIAM SANJOUR
Chief, Assessment and Technology Branch
\7 Hazardous Waste Division, Office of Solid Waste
Washington, D. C.
18
MR. TOM CANFIELD
19 Chief, Waste Production Branch
Office of Solid Waste, Washington, D. C.
20
MR. HERBERT CROWE
21 Chief, Hazardous Waste Management Section
Region VI, Dallas, Texas
22
EPA Conference Room
23 29th Floor First International Building
Dallas, Texas
24 March 9, 1977
25
REPORTER! JOY JACKSON
4308 Purdue
75225 214-368-2506
-------
1 INDEX
2 Page
MR. RAY LOZANO, Presiding 3
3 Welcome
4 MR. J. PAUL CORONA
Introduction 3
5
DR. NORMAN DYER
6 Overview 8
7 MR. H. LANIER HICKMAN
Public Participation 10
8
MR. WILLIAM SANJOUR
9 Hazardous Waste 39
10 MR. H. LANIER HICKMAN
Land Disposal 55
11
MR. TOM CANFIELD
12 Resource Conservation
and Recovery 76
13
MR. HERBERT CROWE
14 State Programs 93
IS MR. MARK HANDELMAN
Texas State Chemical
'6 Council 107
17 MRS. PEARL L. WINCONR
League of Women Voters 115
18
MR. JAMES A. BANNEROT
1' Conservation Services 121
20 MR. CHARLES L. ROBERTSON
Arkansas Federation of
21 Air and Water Users 124
22 MR. C. L. JORDAN
NCTCOQ 126
23
24 _ _ _
25
-------
2 MR. LOZANO: Good morning. My name is
3 Ray Jjo^ano. I urn Director o£ the Air and
Hazardous Materials Division here in the
5 Regional office in Dallas and am here to provide
6 the welcome for this meeting. Unfortunately
7 Mr. White could not be with as. The Regional
8 .idminis trd toi was called away to Washington
9 yesterdjy.
10 But here to welcome you is his assistant
11 ior Congressional and intergovernmental relatiois
12 is Mr. J. Paul Corona.
13 MR. CORONA: Thank you, Kay. I am
pleased to welcome all of you to this public
15 meeting on the Resource Conservation and
'6 Recovery ^ct of 1976.
17 This -*ct is the culmination of a three-
year legislative effort begun in the 93rd
19 Congress with the establishment of a panel on
20 material policy.
The forerunner of this bill was first
22 drafted and introduced in 1974 and extensive
23 hearings were held that year.
The committee, the Senate Committee on
25 Public Works, held preliminary meetings to mark
-------
1 up the legislation in late 1974.
2 On July 21st, 1975, Senators Randolph
3 and Hart introduced Senate Bill 2150, <± bill
4 which incorporated the Committee's earlier
5 tentative decisions and refinements recommended
d from many interested parties.
7 This bill was reported out of the Senate
8 Committee on May 13, 1976, and approved by the
9 fall Senate on June 30th, 1976, ay a vote of
10 88 to 3.
11 The final version of the bill was
12 prepared during the last week of the second
13 session and cleared the Congress on September
14 the 30th, becoming Public Law 94-580 on
15 Octooer 22nd.
16 The oill in its final form was the result
17 of a merger of the Senate bill and the one
18 reported oy the House Committee on Interstate
19 and Foreign Commerce, a bill that was itself
20 drafted as a refinement to the Senate Bill 2150
21 We in Region VI are especially aware of
22 the many solid waste management problems that
23 confront each of us. Each of us has observed
24 examples
-------
' Improper management of industrial wastes
2 in open burning dumps and the dumping of
3 industrial wastes in our streams and lakes are
4 but a few of the episodes that have resulted
in passage of the act.
Many of you will have specific issues
to address at this meeting &ut equally
important this meeting presents an opportunity
' to you to acquire an overview of what is
10 expected of each of us.
You as citizens will oe able to develop
12 an understanding of the major issues in the Act
And see the necessity for estaolishing priorities
to address these issue.
We in turn will see the need for
determining the emphasis to be assigned to each
17 priority and its impact on the state and local
10
governments.
" This meeting will offer a two-way street
20 in which we will have a free exchange of
21 information and ideas.
2 These meetings are essential in the
23 development of the federal solid waste management
24 program. Public participation, which is
nf
mandated in the act, remains a key factor in
-------
' establishing a strong federal-state partnership
2 necessary for the protection of the land.
3 I am sure this meeting will be informative
and profitable for each of us. Thank you.
5 MR. LOZANO: As to the format of the
6 meeting this morning we are -- I am sure every-
7 one has a program. But what we intend to do is
to follow as closely as we can the presentations
as they are listed.
But there will be orief periods between
11 presentations for questions, comments, et cetera
'2 There are approximately six or seven
'3 people who have indicated they would like to
make a statement. And will do so at the end
of all of the presentations this morning.
I hope we can get through the schedule
17 before 12:00 o'clock such thjt we can break at
the noon hour.
However, I would lika to continue
2" through until we hear everyone even if that
21 means going perhaps until 12:30 or so.
22 Let me introduce -- and by the way, the
23 whole meeting is being transcribed. We have a
Court Reporter up front here who is taking the
25 statements word for word. JCf there are questioh
-------
1 or comments, please use the microphone in the
2 center of the room, state your name and your
3 affiliation so that, that may oe included in
4 the record.
5 The transcript will oe available, as I
6 understand it, from the Office of Solid Waste
7 in Washington in approximately two months.
8 Let me introduce the members of the
9 head table here. Over to my tar right Mr. Bill
10 Sanjour from the office of Solid Waste in
11 Washington.
12 Mr. Tom Canfield from office of Solid
13 Waste in Washington.
14 Mr. Hero Crowe from our Regional Office
15 here in Dallas .
16 Dr. Norman 0yer from our Regional Office
17 here in Dallas.
'8 And Mr. Lanny Hickman, over on my left,
19 from the Office of Solid Waste in Washington.
20 First, let's get an overview of the
21 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act from --
22 just the general provisions of it so you can
23 see what we are talking anout this morning from
2* Dr. Noritian .Dyer who is our Chief of the Pesticides
25 and Hazardous Materials Branch here in Region VI
-------
1 DR. DYER: Good morning. I will briefly
2 go through the major provisions of the Resource
3 Conservation and Recovery Act after which several
speakers will go into greater aeatxl into each of those
5 major provisions
6 Congress intended that this Act would
7 address those problems created by the ever increasing
8 amounts of waste material be iny generated by our
growing national economy and population as well as to
'0 address those problems created by the upen dumping of
'1 waste material which pollutes the environment needlessly
12 as well as the increasing Amount of pollution resulting
'3 from the implementation of other Acts such as the
Clean Air Act, the water act, and other federal and
15 state acts .
All of these efforts luve resulted in
17 increasing the amount or solid and hazardous wastes
that we must deal with. Recognizing these facts and
" the need for a national effort to deal with these
20 problems Congress passed this act, the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act.
'fne major oojectives of the Act, first,
is to promote the protection of health and the
environment as well as to conserve the valuable
resources and our energy resources.
-------
] Recognizing the problems that we are
2 experiencing with the shortage of petroleum products
3 and our dependence on foreign sources for these energy
4 products, energy sources, Congress attempted to
5 address these through the passage of this Act.
£ These objectives are to be accomplished
7 through providing technical and financial assistance
8 to state and local governments, through providing
9 opportunities for development of new manpower in the
15 area of resource, conservation and recovery, through
11 the prohibition of open dumping requiring a conversion
12 or the closing of open dumps, as well as the regulatiors
J3 that apply particularly to the hazardous wastes.
14 AS in most other acts there are
]5 provisions for research and development, for
16 demonstration grants t»s well as enhancing the
17 cooperative effort between state, local, and federal
18 governments as well as private enterprise.
19 This Act hopefully will close the gap
20 in our environmental legislation and will address the
21 handling of hazardous jncJ solid wastes from cradle to
22 grave.
23 AS I inaicated earlier the speakers that
24 follow will go into greater detail on each of the major
25 provisions of the Act. Thank you.
-------
10
1 MR. LOZANOi Next, to talk to us about
2 training, puolic information, and public
3 participation is Mr. H. Lanier Hickman, Directoi
4 Management and Information Staff, Office of
5 Solid Waste in n'asnington .
5 HA. HICKMAN: Good morning. Can you all
7 see the slides in the back okay? are they legible in
8 the back?
1RC.T5.fi
9 I think we should understand that HoerJ
10 -(phonotic)-r- the new amendments to the Federal Solid
11 Waste Disposal act, is somewhat different from what
12 other pieces of environmental legislation that EPA
T?CR.ft
13 administers in that the purpose of -tie-era is not to
14 establish federal government regulatory enforcement
15 dominance over solid waste management.
16 "he concept behind the law is to build
17 a partnership between the ^ideral, state, and local
18 governments to provide some sort of assistance, both
19 financial and technical to ^tate and local governments
20 for them to meet the basic objectives of the law which
21 is protection of pablic health, environment quality,
22 and recovery of materials out of our waste stream.
23 The mechanism 'oy which this is supposed
24 to be achieved is really sort of a three-cornered
25 approach in that those wastes that are the most
-------
11
j hazardous and that represent significant public health
2 and environmental threats must be regulated and
3 controlled in a more precise manner than other waste
4 materials. And the law sets up a structure to do that
5 designed to try to bring state governments into a very
6 strong regulatory role from crddle to grave in hazardoi^
7 waste.
8 Now in the absence of such state
9 involvement, the federal government must assume certaii
10 responsibilities for hazardous waste management.
11 The second of the three-cornered approacl
12 that the law is taking is to eliminate improper land
13 disposal practices for all wastes. We will talk about
14 that in some detail here later on. And how the changilig
15 of definitions of portions of the law bring this about
16 Here again, though, the purpose behind
17 this part is for the federal government to provide the
18 sort of assistance necessary for the state government
19 to assume a role most of them already have in assuring
20 proper land disposal practices.
21 But unlike hazardous wastes there is no
22 mechanism by which the federal government can become
23 involved directly in the regulation of improper land
24 disposal practices.
25 But oecause of the criteria that will be
-------
12
1 established for land disposal practices, sites that do
2 not meet the criteria are in violation of federal law
3 and subject to suit by anyone who files a petition.
4 The third point of it is — the third
5 corner of the triangle approach is the conservation
5 provisions. And the law says basically either regulate
7 it as a hazardous waste, put it in a qualified and
8 acceptable land disposal site, or recovery mechanism.
9 There is nothing in between. That is the long range
10 objective for the conservation portion of it and we
11 will hear about that in detail.
12 I think if you understand that in the
13 context of what we are trying to say this is a -- all
"RCRPi
14 right. JW-erra is one of the new generations of federal
15 laws that recognizes that whatever happens as a result
16 of a piece of federal legislation basical'ly impacts on
17 the public, whatever that public is represents the
18 segments out here in the country that are affected by
19 any piece of legislation that comes out of Washington.
20 So there are very strong provisions buiH
21 into the law to require EPA and other agencies that
22 share some of the responsibilities of Recra to get the
23 public involved in the total process of planning and
24 implementing the law.
25 Intensive provisions for participation b
-------
13
the public are to promote an understanding of the
2 public exactly what the problems are and what the impact
3 of those problems are on health ana environment and on
OUJL natural resources, to yet them involved in helping
5 make the decisions, not at the federal level but at
6 the state and local levels, to provide a mechanism
7 based on the theory thut if people understand the problem
8 they are going to be far more receptive to cooperating.
9 supporting decisions that will have to oe made to corre
10 those problems.
11 To provide a mechanism for the public
12 to cooperate and help sj:a te government because this
13 law is designed for a strong state involvement now,
a strong state involvement and higher level of investment
15 than they are presently making in solid waste management
practices.
17 Current investment by jstate government
18 is probably around twenty-five million dollars a year
total throughout the country in which three million
20 dollars is federal money,
2' and we start to see some of the
22 proposed, authorized,levels that can be used to
23 support jitate and local government to meet the
24 requirements of the law. And we see that Congress
fully intends or perceives that there has to be a
ct
-------
14
1 great deal of increase in investment. And the public
2 understanding the problems and the approach that is
3 necessary to solve the problems will be far more
4 supportive of the budgetary changes that will have to
5 be made.
6 It provides a mechanism so that the
7 federal government, the state government, local
8 government, can describe and develop a data base, what
9 the significance of that data base is, and the problem:
'0 and the impact, and the solutions that have to be
11 dealt with.
Developing that data base is far more
13 than describing this data base. We will be in a much
I4 better position to develop the sort of informed suppor
15 that we will need.
And the law also requires EPA to develop
the mechanism for rapid dissemination of information
18 when we get it. rtt the federal government level we do
have an unique opportunity bacause we do cross state
lines and we do have a window to all facets of any
21
25
particular problem to collect a great deal of informat
22 GUJ: office has always been actively
23 involved in information development and dissemination
24
since the Beginning of the office in early 1966 and
we have a very strong program in publishing and probably
.on.
-------
15
have published over the last ten or eleven years some
eight or nine hundred publications. Not all of them by
us but by a variety of people around the country who
work in the field. And we have made this available
at basically a low cost.
And the law als<~ requires us to establish
a liorary from which the public, all segments, technica
and general public, can get information on solid waste
management. We have such a library now. And it is
10 tied in on an inter1ibrary loan throughout the country
11 so that you can go to almost any library that is a part
12 o£ this national network and tap in and get a copy of
13 some publication or some document that you want.
14 We also have a computerized system that
IS you can tap in and abstracts on a particular subject
16 area in solid waste management.
17 This law requires us to expand that
18 capability and service to best that we can.
19 Now there are a variety of publics out
20 here that we want to communicate with to develop this
21 partnership that w« have to develop in order to
22 implement the law.
23 we have the consumer, environmental,
and neighborhood groups. These are the groups that
prooably -- usually represent the public more than any
-------
16
other types of organizations that we have. And this is
the group that is the most difficult to reach because
they are not organized and don't have the sort of
funding or financial cdpaoilities to interact with the
federal government and the j^tate government that the
other groups here do such as the trade, manufacturing,
and labor representatives.
These organizations are funded particular
well. Most of them have a window in Washington with
10 some national organization and are well represented.
11 When you come out to the field and hold
12 meetings such as this they have the opportunity to come
13 during the day while the citizen who is working on the
14 job or the housewife who is running a taxi service for
15 their kids has a more difficult time to get into this
sort of meeting.
17 That is why in this series of meetings
18 we are holding throughout the country we specifically
19 hold one in the evening also. We had one here last
20 night. And although there were laoor,industry
21 representatives, one man stood up last night and said:
22 I'm so and so and I am representing myself.
23 And so obviously at least in one instance
24 here we know that what we are trying to do to get to
25 th>s real public, the lay public, at least we achieve
-------
17
1 that now and then.
2 And then we have the public health,
3 scientific, ana professional groups that naturally are
involved in solid waste management, the engineering anc
5 other scientific and industrial organizations. And we
6 have a mechanism for communicating with them.
7 The last, governmental organizations.
8 And Uticxa is designed to involve governmental people
9 in the federal government particularly because there
10 are some provisions in the law, the guideline provisiors
11 and some of the resource conservations provisions that
'2 once E5?A develops certain documents the f_ederal
13 government must comply with those. This is a carryovei
14 from the previous act, the 1970 solid waste disposal
15 act which also requires us to write guidelines. And
16 those guidelines in fact became mandatory regulations
'7 and standards — standards for the ^federal government
18 that continues into this new law.
19 Now there are some other mechanisms
20 that are provided within the law to allow the public
21 to ping in on bureaucracy to try to make change, try
22 to influence what is going on.
23 One course is a petition for change of
24 regulations that are being proposed that are promulgat
by the Agency. We have to provide a mechanism by whicl
-------
18
1 a citizen or organization or group of people can
2 petition the Administrator of EPA to either write a
3 regulation or d guideline that we have not written yet
or to make changes in those that are already in exister
5 The Administrator must hold hearings and
6 make judgements and show cause of why he will or will
7 not respond to that petition.
8 The law requires for us to provide a
9 mechanism for the public to cooperate with us in
10 planning and development and implementation of the law.
11 And this is only one of the first steps that we will
12 be doing over the time to try talk about, those things
'3 that we perceive should be done and how the people
think that — what they think about that. And alao
what do they think we ought to do that we, are not doinc
now or what we should stop that we are doing now.
nnd we will go into a series of meetings
this coming summer around the country where we will
discuss in a preliminary way our plans for fiscal year
20 '79. We are in '77 now. We are going to be discussinc
21 '78 plans in the spring. And we will oe here in the
22 summer again to — it is sort of like going on the old
23 Chdtauqua circuit. But it is very useful, a. very
24 valuable way to get feedback on what we are doing.
25 It requires us to hold -- to have you
-------
19
1 involved, the public involved, in the writing of
2 regulations and guidelines.
3 vie have to publish guidelines on how the
public can participate with us. How we can wire in?
5 what mechanisms are available; where the money comes
6 in to do that. There is really no way now that we can
pay the public to come sit with us and participate in
8 our planning and implementation of the law.
' The citizens who come tu meetings like
10 this and the citizen who came — the citizens who came
11 to the meeting last night pay for that out of their owi
12 pocket and use their own time. And that means that,
that part of the public is very much concerned and
involved. And we try to get those people.
15
We have to publish guidelines for public
16 participation. The law also requires us to issue
17 guidelines for citizens to participate. And that
10
section of the law says basically that any citizen,
organization, or group out there can file suit against
any party that they perceive to be in violation of
91
any regulation, guideline, or standard issued by EPA
under h'oerJ. And they file in the federal court systei
and then the plaintiff must show cause and all that
stuff like they normally have to do. This is -- this
boiler plates to the extent it is in the other federal
-------
20
1 laws also. But it does provide a mechanism to add or
2 issue regulations and how this can be done to challenge
3 any individual who is -- could be in violation. It
4 is being done around the country. There are environmental
5 groups that do this routinely. The Sierra Club has
6 some. The Environmental Defense has some. All of thea|e
7 organizations which basically represent environmental
8 interest uses citizen's suits provisions in the various
9 environmental laws to challenge sites or facilities or
10 practices that may be in violation of federal law.
I' And the techniques we will be following
12 to try to get the puolic involved through other than a
13 vast number of communications, the techniques of the
'4 printed word, the spoken word, and visual presentations
15 of information, and try to stimulate state programs
16 through our regional offices, build into their mechanism
17 the same sort of public participation and involvement
18 through the financial assistance programs that we have,
19 we will try to provide financial assistance to state
20 governments to sell such a mechanism and to communicate
21 with their public that they deal so much closer with
22 than we do.
2-* We have to hold a variety of formal publi|c
24 hearings. The law requires us to hold public hearings
25 on regulations and guidelines issued under the various
-------
sections of the law. These are formalized hearings.
2 Testimony is taken and that testimony and the
' recommendations and comments in that testimony must
be dealt with in a formal and legal way by the Agency
5 and we must show what we have done with the comments
' received.
7 Now that is different from this public
meeting here today. nfe are taking a transcript for
the primary purpose of helping us once we get into the
feedback process which we have today to give us guidance
11 on things that we need to be doing. We will, not
12 publish any of those documents that rationalizes how
13
we have dealt with the comments that we have received
at these public meetings.
As Ray mentioned, a copy of this transcr:pt
16 will be available for anyone who wishes it. And it
will be available to anyone who attends here at no cost
18
It will t3ke a couple of months for us to grind this
19
out and make them available. But we will not respond
back in a formal manner to anyone who is making a
statement hare today because we can't do it all. We
will do this with the formal mechanism. When we go
23
into the public hearing process on the regulations and
guidelines we will have to deal with the input in a
25
formal way.
-------
22
1 There are a variety of conferences around
2 the country that we are holding with various organizations
3 national and local, that sponsor responsible solid
waste management, the regional offices, the headquarters
5 staff in solid waste programs participate in this sort
6 of activity.
And we will hold a lot of workshops
around the country or small public meetings that provice
' a one-to-one relationship, almost, to better discuss
10 the problems and how we should deal with them.
11 We have also established in our regulatory
12 and guideline forming process formal review groups
13 that will be sitting with us in a variety of ways to
14 participate, comment, in the writing of these documents
15 as they progress rather than to wait until some day
a proposed regulation shows up in the Federal Register
17 and by that time it is almost set in concrete and can1
be changed. We hope to have input well before we go
19 into the register where it is proposed so that there
20 is a great deal of input by the public in advance of
21 actually developing the regulation or the guideline.
22 We have a variety of public education
23 programs. Through our training grant program we have
been giving financial assistance to a variety of forma
25 organizations such as National Association of Counties
-------
23
1 American Public Works Association, National Solid
2 Waste Management Association, League of Women Voters,
3 for them to develop an educational program among their
membership where they can discuss the problems of
5 solid waste management.
6 We will continue this mechanism to
7 educate the public and get feedback from the public on
8 what is going on in solid waste management.
9 The last provision I will cover is the
10 manpower development provision of Rfre-ra'. In the old
11 law, the previous amendments, the 1970 amendments to
12 the Solid Waste Disposal Act, we were required to do a
13 manpower study on the needs for solid waste management
That report was done and submitted to the Congress aboi^t
15 three years ago. it basically said: Well, gee,
unless there is dramatic change in how we do our
17 practices and far stronger effort by state government
18 to manage, regulate, and enforce the disposal of solid
'9 waste management practices there doesn't seem to be a
20 big demand for new manpower in solid waste management.
21 There is not much of a career ladder. There seems to
22 be always a willing hand out there to come to work
behind a truck and toss cans.
24 And consequently we started to turn down
25
as most environment programs did our manpower developmi
nt
-------
,24
efforts.
2 With Wecxa', the new amendments do —
2 does set forth pathways that start the demand for more
manpower at every level of government to carry out the
5 requirements of the law.
6 So ifecIM- requires us again to do another
manpower study in light of the provisions of Recra to
determine what types of manpower and what level will
be needed around the country to implement the law:
state, local level, and at the industry level.
1, And this report is required and we have
12 to submit it to Congress and the President. There is
13 no deadline when this has to be done.
14 In addition, there is the same provision
15 for training grants to help the training of solid
waste manpower to meet the requirements of the new law,
That basically covers the public
18 participation and the manpower development provisions
19 of the law.
We will take some time now to answer
2i any questions that might have come up during this
22 presentation. If not we will have time at the end
23 also. So do I have any questions?
24 Yes, sir. Would you please state your
25 name, rank, and serial number, so we will have
-------
25
1 it for the record?
2 MR. GRAHAM! Jack 3raham, Public Works
3 Director for the City of Fort Worth.
What provisions are made to inhibit at
5 least frivolous lawsuits from being filed?
6 MR. HICKMAN: I don't believe there is
7 any wording in the law that says: Thou shalt
8 not file frivolous lawsuits.
9 And I am sure we will have frivolous
'0 lawsuits. Hopefully the data development and
11 the dissemination of valid data, the structuring
12 of strong state government, as solid waste
'3 programs come to pass as the law anticipates
the sort of data that will be available and the
15 sort of quality of manpower that will be
16 available at state level to field these
problems should if not stop the frivolous
18 lawsuits should give them very short shift in
the court system.
20 There is nothing in there -- the whole
key to this is the state agencies. The law is
basically designed to build strong state agencie
and to pass through the state agencies to
24 information and assistance to state and local
25 government. And if we don't achieve that we
-------
26
1 will all be In a lot of trouble. It will be a
2 long, hot summer.
3 The gentleman back here. Yes, sir.
4 MR. KIKER: Ersa Kiker, sanitation
5 superintendent. City of Altus. My question is«
6 Why was the Section 7002 in the law
7 providing for citizen's suits? Has that an
8 effort to have every public citizen potentially
9 enforce for you folks — I mean, do your work
10 for you so that everyone is going to be out
11 there looking around and filing lawsuits or
12 why is there a provision for citizen's suits?
'3 MR. HICKMANi I can't tell you why the
14 Congress felt — why the citizen's suit provisi
15 was built into the law. It does exist in other
16 environmental laws.
17 Perhaps the Congress recognizes this one
'8 because of the fact that we at the ^federal leva
19 do not have regulatory enforcement authority
20 under this law.
21 it is basically designed to pass it to
22 state government within the framework of some
23 broad national objectives. And perhaps the
24 Congress perceives that indeed as you suggest
25 — the Congress believes that the one who shoul
-------
27
1 be enforcing this law is the citizen, the one
2 who is most directly affected by the law, by
3 improper practices that might occur.
4 The law sets up a structure providing
5 technical and financial assistance for state and
6 local government hopefully to minimize the
7 practices that could occur that would be impropejr
8 and be in violation to certain portions of the
9 law.
10 That is the only way I can understand it
11 is that the citizen does have a right, if there
12 are improper practices out there, to be involvec
13 in trying to change those practices.
14 Now perhaps the court system is not the
15 best way. But it is there. And I don't know
16 -- the citizen supervision in the past has
17 been primarily used to sue EPA than the state
18 and local level. We know of several suits withi|n
19 our old law for not meeting the requirements
20 of implementing sections of the 1970 amendments.
21 It made a dramatic change in what we
22 were doing. We weren't writing any guidelines
23 before. And after the suit was filed we wrote
24 several guidelines. It is amazing what happens,
25 sometimes.
-------
28
The gentleman here. We will get you all
MR. KINSEYi A. V. Kinaey, Champion
, Building Products. You mentioned in your
comments there this morning that there are
grants being awarded to determine the need
for added manpower in the operation of these
6
7 facilities.
„ How is this being done to be reflective
9 of all plants, all industries?
1Q MR. HICKMAN: Well, let me point out tha
of course there is no money yet.
MR. KINSEY: How is it to be done?
)3 MR. HICKMAN: The law has not been funde
yet. Basically they are authorizing -- funding
provisions start fiscal year '78 which is
,6 October 1 of this year.
17
And our current budget -- there is no mo
18 in our current proposed budget for manpower
,9 development. Because of the amount of money
2Q available to the Agency to implement the law
we had to make certain priority judgments on
22 where the money would go. In fiscal year '78
23 there is no money for training, manpower develop
24 merit grants. And there is no money to do
25 manpower studies. And we do have a person on
ey
-------
29
our staff right now working full time starting
. to develop a manpower plan and program so that
3 we can do whJt is required by Congress but ther<
are no funds for it yet.
5 What will happen eventually of course
will ce that -- we have hud training grant
K.eQ
programs before. -He-era doesn't allow us to
make grants to profit-making groups. It provid«
mechanisms for us to give grants to non-profit
groups such as ^states, local governments,
universities, research foundations.
12 And our training grant programs in the
13 past have gone to organizations that are involv*d
in developing public education such as the
League of Women Voters, as I mentioned, to
universities to develop manpower.
17 And we have used some of that money to
18 develop training courses that can oe used at
19 the operating level. We have developed a
20 safety training course which is a package coursf
which any director of sanitation can get for
22 sixty-five dollars which has slides, manuals,
23 the whole bit on sanitary landfill operation
24 And we will continue to do this sort of
25 work in the future as funds become availaole.
-------
30
1 MR. KINSEY: So there really may not be
2 a determination of how much added manpower will
3 be required --
4 MR. HICKMAN: Thdt is correct. Just
5 because the law says we have to do it, the
things that are mandated under a certain time
7 frame will oe done first.
8 And as we see in the record here the
9 hazardous waste, land disposal, jitate program
10 and local program development, there are clearli
11 mandated calendar times that we have to do
12 certain things. And those demand the first bud
13 Like your own budget at home, you know, the
14 things that -- the rent gets paid first and the:
15 if you have got some left you go out and have
16 a steak dinner.
17 Yes , ma 'am.
18 MS. HfiADRICK: Lucindd Headrick of the
19 League of tfomen Voters of Texas. And how will
20 this particular section about public participat
21 help the states to be more productive in public
22 participation. We are not seeing this complete
23 with the water pollution control act. Will
24 .JtiriTs be any different?
25 MR. HICKMAN: rfell, I certainly hope so,
y
-------
1 I like to always think that the programs that I
2 have been involved with for the last ten, elevei
3 years have done better than the other parts of
* environmental work. If we didn't we would"stilJ
5 be here working.
6 I think that because &*e-ra recognizes —
7 this is a new generation of federal law and I
8 think it recognizes that there have been a whole
9 lot of rip-offs of the public in the past by
10 federal action.
11 And the law, you know, the law spends a
12 lot of time describing ways and mechanisms for
13 us to try to get the public more involved.
14 I think we are going to try to build thai;
15 same sort of awareness and sensitivity in the
16 guidelines that we have to issue for state
'7 governments, what is a jsta te program, to try to
18 build into their programs the same sort of
1' public involvement.
20 of course, they are much closer to the
21 firing line than we are. A lot of j»_ta tes have
22 been actively involved anyway, hearings and
" procedures for site acquisition.
2* I think what has been missing in all
aspects of public participation is getting the
-------
.32
1 people involved early, during the planning
2 process and daring the decisions that are going
3 to be made on how the money is going to be spent
4 rather than after you have made the decision
5 and the only point you ever get together on is
6 on the punitive side of it in a regulation
7 hearing that you are trying to plan in somewhere
8 So we are going to try to build that same
9 sort of awareness when the money is available
10 to state governments fron the law to try to
11 create that same sort of sensitivity at the
12 front end rather than just at the back end of
13 the environmental regulation. We will try.
14 MS. HEADRICK: But the water pollution
15 act said the same thing in several sections.
16 MR. HICKMAN: I am not sure what the
17 nuances and differences are between the two;
18 you have probably looked at them and can compar
19 them much better than I can.
20 But we are going to try. We are going
21 to build it into our guidelines, we are going
22 to try to provide financial assistance and
23 technical guidance and through our own informat
24 program try to give the states the sort of tool
25 they need to do what — precisely what you are
-------
33
1 suggesting. There is no guaranty.
2 And even if we work our heart out half
3 of the states are going to do a superior job and
4 another portion are going to do a good job and
5 some are never going to do a good job, just like
6 we, the feds, sometimes we do a good job and
7 sometimes we don't. We are still dealing with
8 people.
9 And no matter how much you try to devise
10 guidance it gets down essentially to the people
11 who are trying to carry out the program or these
12 sort of things.
13 Are there any other questions? Yes, ma'
14 MS. HANSBfiRRY: I am Betsy Hansberry
15 with Browning-Ferris Industries. And what
16 method are you going to use to inform the public
17 of all of these public hearings you are having
!8 and public meetings? Are you going to publish
" it in the Federal Register? How can we stay
20 informed of your activity? and do you have some
21 method devised for additional input from private
22 industry?
23 MR. HICKMAN: Yes. We will always
24 publish the hearings, the formal hearings on
25 regulations and guidelines, will be published
-------
1 in the Federal Register. That is probably about
2 the worst way in the world to communicate if
3 you want to advise people you are going to have
4 a meeting. If you want to make sure nobody shovs
5 up, publish it in the Federal Register. As
6 long as only one shows up the people in Washington
7 have a window to read the material.
8 We will serve notice in newspapers, you
9 know, in the locale of the hearing. Our regions 1
10 office people, the regional office staffs of th«
11 Agency will work with _s_tate agencies and the
12 local areas to try to bring an awareness of the
13 fact that we are going to hold a meeting.
14 We will use every mechanism we can in
IS order to try and get it known well in advance
16 the notice that meetings a re going to be held.
17 I have a chart on my wall in my office
18 that we are just now working on that shows that
19 between now and the end of this calendar year
20 we are going to hold well in excess of a hundred
21 public meetings of different typea around the
22 country. We are moving out of Washington
23 because that is not where the problem is. Ther-s
24 is another problem in Washington but we will
25 talk about that later on. But we will try to
34
-------
35
1 communicate as best we can.
2 Now as far as the industry's side, we
3 are setting up a couple of mechanisms to provide
4 us input from a lot of different interest groups
5 We have requested the formation of a
<, formal advisory gr^up. It is going to take awhifle
7 through the governmental process, setting up a
8 couple of ad hoc study groups which will represent
9 the different industry groups. NSWMA will be in
10 on that as well as will APWA because they
11 represent the two operating sides of solid
12 waste management.
13 And the policy side will also be represented
14 by such groups such as the National Governors
15 Conference and ICMA and places like that.
16 And the environmental side will be
17 represented too. And through that mechanism,
18 that formal -- sort of ad hoc formal mechanism
19 industry will be represented.
20 In addition each of our regulations and
21 guidelines — we are going to have some twenty
22 to thirty individuals identified who will be
23 representing all of the segments that are out
24 there in the solid waste management field.
25 They will receive drafts of every document
-------
36
1
we are working on for feedback. And from time
to time hold meetings with them to discuss wher<
3 we are.
t MS. HANSBERRY: How will you use those
individuals?
MR. HICKMANj rtell, we have a big table,
6
again -- you have got to start with something,
. you know. Of all the different sorts of
o
„ interest groups, you know, from the left to
.. the right and all the way across. And I can
never remember from a political standpoint
]2 which is left and which is right. It surely is
,3 not important.
14 So when I say left to right I am not
., speaking in terms of political but my left and
16 right arm, from industry groups such as MCA.,
17 et cetera.all the way over to the other side
,8 with professional organizations and governmental
]„ organizations, environmental organizations and
2Q citizen organizations.
21 And over a period of time we will try
22 to make sure that all of those groups get
23 involved somehow in some process. And if
24 possible those who particularly have a strong
25 interest, you know, a particular section of the
-------
37
1 law, a particular regulation, a particular
2 guideline.
3 And we will make the judgment of who we
4 ask. tfe just have to do that because we can
5 try to have -- frankly I think most of these who
6 work actually in the field of solid waste
1 management are going to be nauseous from talking
8 to us by the time this calendar year is over.
' I don't think yoa will be able to say
I" you didn't have a chance. If you do let us
11 know and we will sure change it because we want
'2 you to have that chance.
13 Nugent?
14 MR. MYRICK: Thank you, Lanny. I look
'5 forward to your coming to Houston. The only
16 concern I have here is we are going to be
17 creating a whole new industry that is not
" represented by any of these public sector groups
'" now that you have discussed, particularly the
2" service industry for preprocessing and preparing
21 industrial and concentrated residuals.
2 And there is I think you might call them
23 a whole sector of garbage truck operators who
are not even organized. And then there is a
25 whole new industry that is a void, that is yet
-------
33
1 to come about. And I believe that is the only
2 concern we envision. We are concerned about
3 who you are going to talk to and work with.
4 I think the major product is going to end up
5 coming from this new Act and the provisions
6 thereto.
7 MR. HICKMANs Well, Nugent, I certainly
8 hope that through the public meetings we hold
9 and I guess we were just asked about coming
10 down to Houston and putting this dog and pony
11 show on and in the Corpus area. This will give
12 some of the haulers a chance to come in.
13 Through this sort of meetings and througl
14 the public hearings and the other public
IS meetings that we have around the country --
16 no one represents the hauler but, you know,
17 maybe somebody does and somebody doesn't. I
18 don't know.
19 MR. MYRICKs The liquid slurry types are
20 the ones I am thinking of.
21 MR. HICKMANs I hope some of them can
22 find time to come to the night meeting if they
23 can't during the day and tell us about it.
24 That's why we are trying to hold night meetings
25 I too. You know, an afternoon matinee and an
-------
39
1 evening performance and you close up the trunk.
2 It's a one-night stand. We are off to San
3 Francisco in the morning for this same sort of
thing Thursday and Friday.
And we are trying. That's all — you
can't say we are not trying. We will do the best
we can.
I want to tell you something. This is
9 my fourth time to do the public participation
10 and the manpower development part and that is
11 kind of a ho-hum presentation. And this is the
12 first group that has ever asked me any questions
13 I am delighted.
14 MR. LOZANOs Thank you, Lanny. We are
15 just about on schedule. Let's take a fifteen
16 minute break right now.
17 (After a short recess the following
18 proceedings were had:)
19 MR. LOZANO: The next presentation is
20 on hazardous wastes. The hazardous waste
21 section of the Act will be given by Bill
22 Sanjour, Chief, Assessment and Technology
23 Branch, Hazardous Waste Division, Office of
24 Solid Waste in Washington. Bill?
25 MR. SANJOURj Thank you. Has everyone
-------
40
1 staggered in?
2 I am going to talk about Subtitle C in
3 the new Act which deals with hazardous waste. And in
this part of the Act we are dealing with, almost
5 exclusively with, industrial wastes. We are not
6 talking aoout trash and garbage.
And most hazardous wastes will be a
by-product of industrial manufacturing. That is not
9 to say all industrial wastes are hazardous. I imagine
10 a very small portion of it is, on the order of five or
11 ten per cent. But the chief parties affected will be
12 industry.
13 I am going to start with Section 3001,
14 which is the definition of a hazardous waste. And the
15 Administrator is required after eighteen months after
the passage of the Act which was last October to
17 promulgate criteria for hazardous wastes
18 And the Act provides two mechanisms for
actually identifying the waste and that is either
identifying the characteristics of the waste or by
21 listing specific wastes. And the Administrator can
use one method or the other or both.
Let me read to you the specific provisions
24 of the Act used for this definition. That is, it is
25 to take into account toxicity, persistence, and
-------
1 degradability in>nature, potential for accumulation in
2 tissue, and other related factors such as flammability,
3 corrosiveness, and other hazardous characteristics.
Section 3002 of the Act are for standards
on persons who generate hazardous wastes. These
6 standards are to include record keeping and labeling of
7 the waste. And to comply with a manifest system. This
8 is a system which Congress patterned after the system
9 that is used in Texas and California for keeping track
10 of hazardous wastes whereby the generator has to fill
11 out forms and the waste is treated essentially as a
commodity in that records are kept of its movements an
13 its ultimate disposal. And generators are required to
14 comply with that system.
15 Section 3003 of the Act are standards fo:
16 transporters of hazardous wastes. These are very
17 similar to the standards for the generators: record
10
keeping, labeling, compliance with the manifest system
19 In addition, in this section EPA is
going to try to coordinate its requirements on
21 transporters with the Department of Transportation
so that we don't duplicate or have too much paper work
for transporters of these wastes.
Section 3004 of the Act are for owners,
25
operators of treatment, storage, and disposal faciliti
41
-------
42
IUL iiazdtuuua
The Act here specifically calls for
3
standards on record keeping and reporting, monitoring
sections, location and design of facilities, maintenance
and operation of facilities, contingency plans in case
° of emergencies or spills. And requirements for owner-
ship in the case of posting bonds in case of
o
responsibility.
9
In addition to those specific provisions
of the Act there is a more general provision which
says that the Administrator must write standards as
may be necessary to protect human health and environment.
13
This is a rather broad, non-specific term which can
14
include such things as standards on ground water
protection, surface water protection, ai'r protection,
perhaps even things like odors and noise could come
under this provision. This is subject to the discretic
18
of the administrator.
19
This is a -- in general, any area which
20
gives you this broad discretionary authority, these
are the areas where it is most important for the
22
public to comment.
23
The Administrator has very little leeway
24
- you can comment up and down. It is not going to
25
make much difference. When he is required to do
-------
43
1 something he is going to do it - these are the areas
2 where he has discretion that public comments are
3 particularly useful and necessary. And in fact influen
* things the most.
5 Now the purpose of these regulations,
6 Section 3004, are for the issuance of permits which are
7 regulated under 3005.
8 Under the Act persons who treat, store,
9 and dispose of hazardous wastes are required to have
10 a permit to do so. Now this does not apply to generators
11 or transporters.
12 These permits would be issued by the
13 state government if the state government takes over the
14 hazardous waste program. If not they will be issued
15 by the federal government. In this sense it is similar
16 to NPDS purposes.
'7 There are several different provisions
18 for permits. One is for interim permits. And this
19 will be covered again in Section 3010 whereby after
20 the federal government defines hazardous wastes, persons
21 who treat, store, or dispose of such wastes are required
22 to notify the government. And they are then sent
23 the permit application. And when this application is
24 sent in they have an interim permit.
25 In other words, so long as they comply
-------
44
1 with the paper work and the federal government has
2 not gotten around - or whatever government is doing
3 that has not gotten around to issuing the formal permit
4 the interim permit therefore exists. So if anyone will
5 apply for a permit it is not in violation of the law.
6 But they are if they don't apply.
7 And there are provisions for ultimate
8 permits and the standards under 3004 are the standards
that would apply to the issuance of these permits.
10 Section 3006 of the Act are the guideline
11 for j_tate government laying out the conditions under
12 which the^states may assume the hazardous waste program
In general. Congress intended that the states would
14 assume this program. And the guidelines will reflect
15 that intent.
16 Congress provided for an interim
authorization of thejstate program in the case of
18 states which have existing, on-going, hazardous waste
programs which do not comply in all respects with the
90
federal guidelines then an interim authorization can
^
21 be given for the states to continue for several years
22
while the adjustments are made for the^federal program.
The law requires three things for the
authorization of a state programs That is, it is
equivalent to the federal 'program. It is consistent
-------
1 with other state programs. And there is adequate
2 enforcement under Subtitle C.
3 Now again, these are in the nature of
4 rather vague, discretionary authorities on the part of
5 the Administrators What does equivalent mean? what
6 does consistent mean? what does adequate mean? And
7 again, these are areas where the public can have
8 considerable influence because there is vague, discretijan-
9 ary authority.
10 Section 3010 of the Act is for notif icat i)on.
11 This is where persons who generate, transport, treat,
12 store, and dispose of hazardous wastes are required to
13 notify the federal government of their existence after
14 the ^federal government has promulgated the definition
15 of hazardous waste.
16 This is not actually a requirement on the
17 Jederal government at all or on the state governments.
® However, since we suspect a great many people out there
19 don't read the federal register and would not know
20 that they were in jeopardy when these regulations are
21 promulgated, we are going to develop a program of tryin|g
22 to notify all of the people who should notify us that
they should notify us.
We are going to need a lot of cooperation
25
in finding out who thesj people are that we should
45
-------
46
1 notify. They are required within three months after
2 promulgation of 3001 to notify that they are in the
3 system. We recognize that most people will not know
4 whether or not their waste is hazardous even after we
5 define hazardous wastes.
6 However, it is to their interest to
7 notify us if they are in doubt. They have nothing to
8 Ipse. But if they do not notify us and do come under
9 the Act then there will be a fine of twenty-five thousand
10 dollars a day or something like that.
11 So when in doubt, notify. That's the
12 approach to take.
13 Section 3011 of the Act is a grant program
14 for providing assistance to the state governments,
15 those jstate governments that assume the hazardous
16 waste program, there are provisions for providng grants
17 for the states to run their programs. And there is
18 an allocation scheme provided by Congress that depends
19 upon the extent of the hazardous waste program within
20 that state.
21 How much money will be available in that
22 program is yet to be determined. The maximum
23 authorization is, what, Lanny? Twenty-five —
24 MR. HICKMAN: Twenty-five million.
25 MR. SANJOUK: Twenty-five million was
-------
47
1 authorized. Whether it is actually appropriated we
2 have yet to see. There is nothing yet.
3 And that concludes my presentation.
4 Are there any questions?
5 MS. BRENCKLE: My name is Mary Brenckle.
6 I am with Exxon. My question is: Is it the
7 intent of the law to distinguish between
8 generators who dispose or treat hazardous wastes
9 on their own land like land farming or land
spreading and owners or operators of waste
11 treatment and disposal facilities?
12 MR. SANJOUR: No distinction is made in
13 the law. And intentionally so. Congress
considered that distinction. In Texas, as you
15 know, people are not required to comply with
the law if they dispose of it on their own
property.
18
This was considered by Congress and
rejected by Congress. And no distinction is
20 made.
21 MS. BRENCKLE: And so the same standards
would apply to both?
23 MR. SANJOUR: Yes.
24
Any other questions?
25 MR. MONTGOMERY: My name is John
-------
1 Montgomery. I am with the Ma lone Company. I
2 have a question about 3001, identification of
3 hazardous material. My interest here is in the
4 transportation. As we know, the DOT has clearly
5 defined what they considered to be hazardous
6 good material. They have it all listed out,
7 having to do with the transportation of hazardou
8 good material.
9 But they don't seem to have any criteria
10 for identification of hazardous wastes. DOT
11 and SPA will probably work together on the
12 federal level.
13 la it your feeling that the EPA will be
14 called upon to identify what wastes will be
15 hazardous and the DOT will accept those
16 definitions in their regulations for the
17 transportation of the material?
18 MR. SANJOUR: Yes. That is precisely it.
'9 Any other questions? Yes, sir.
20 MR. STURM: My name is Raymond Sturm. I
21 am an Austin attorney. In the handout materials
22 that were at the back, of the room there is a
23 statement on page 3« States may not provide for
24 penalties less than those provided under the
25 bill. And it references Sections 3008 and 3009.
48
-------
49
1 Do you agree with that statement?
2 MR. SANJOUR: No, I don't beat my wife.
3 Could you tell me where in the Act? what
4 section of the Act are we talking about?
5 3008? what paragraph?
6 MR. HICKMANi What handout is he reading?
7 MR. SANJOURj I haven't even seen the
8 handout.
9 The handout says: Criminal penalties may
10 be imposed on persons transporting hazardous
11 wastes without a permit. . . .
12 That is not correct as far as the
'3 federal law is concerned. It may be understate
I4 law. In the federal law persons transporting
15 hazardous wastes are not required to have a
16 permit. Only persons treating, storing, and
17 disposing of hazardous wastes are required to
I8 have a permit.
19 States may not provide for penalties
20 less than those provided under the bill.
21 Well, does the bill say that?
22 MR. STURM: That is my question. It
23 doesn't say that to me.
24 MR. HICKMAN: Well, the law does say
25 that the state program must be equivalent or
-------
1 better.
2 MR. SANJOUR: Not under Section 3008 it
3 doesn't. Hell, could I ask: Who wrote this
4 handout? Is he here?
5 MR. STURM: I withdraw the question.
6 MR. SANJOUR: Thank you. I appreciate
7 that. Any other questions? Yes, sir.
8 MR. MYRICK: Nugent Myrick, The Process
' Company in Houston. One of the concerns that
10 we see so often iss Public Law 94-850 creates
11 a substantial volume of material which may
12 possibly be industrial hazardous wastes. Okay.
13 We don't know what the definitions are yet but
14 we are evolving those definitions and defining
15 those materials. But in the meantime there is
" a major problem in trying to relate at the local
planning function of the local government how
1R
much of the concentrated residues are being
19 excluded from the sewers? what are they? where
20 are they going? and is there going to be any
21
planning funds at all to try to make sense out
of this problem. Local governments are very
concerned about this subject and there are
24
service industries who would like to respond to
it also. Now whether they are concentrated and
50
-------
51
1 are hazardous or whether they are just
2 concentrated and non-sewerable, that's another
3 issue. But we really need to see some planning
4 funds and are we going to see some come about?
5 Every city in the nation needs this badly.
6 MR. SANJOUR: Of Course, you put your
7 finger on one of the major reasons this Act
8 was passed in the first place. congress recogni
9 that — the logic was just shuffling things
'0 around, hazardous materials, and pollution —
11 not solving the problem, just spending a lot
!2 of money shifting it around from one place to
13 another.
14 And this Act was expected to put an end
15 to that practice and force, if you like, federal
^^
16 agencies responsible for different portions of
17 pollution to integrate their programs with one
18 another.
19 I believe that Congress intended that
20 Section 208 of the water act to provide the
21 integration function.
22 Do you have a problem with that?
23 MH. MYRICK: Unfortunately it didn't
*)A
really work that way. Because what happens is
208 really only relates to point source major
ed
-------
1 dischargers in the industrial sector. And
2 there is really no way for that kind of thing
3 to be really brought out and discussed and
4 really magnified with innercity major discharger
5 You are talking about anybody from servic<
6 industries that have got five gallons of materia
7 a month to two thousand a day.
8 And you are dealing with an innercity
9 industry as compared to a point source discharge
10 that goes direct.
11 MR. SANJOUR: Let me —
12 MR. MYRICKj The process industry is
13 not the real problem here. It is the innercity
14 industry that ie our real problem, I think.
15 MR. HICKMAN: All right. Under Subtitle
16 D there are planning provisions for the develop-
17 ment and implementation of state and local
18 plans. The development of jjtate plans. There
19 is also — and the law says that j^tate governmen
20 and local elected officials must come together
21 in an agreement as to what each level of
government will do in the development and
23 implementation of that plan and the law does not
24 say what is an agreement. Those are things we
will have to write into guidelines for that issub
-------
53
1 The law says wherever possible to
2 utilize those planning procedures that are now
3 place.
4 208 basically focuses on residuals after
5 it comes out the downside of the plant.
6 You can deal with non-point source but
7 here again this would be basically at the disposal
8 site and not in the innercity. The 208 mechanisn
9 would not be applied inside. That would be left
10 up to the operating agencies operating the
11 program within the jurisdiction of that
12 geographic area. They will do that sort of
13 planning within the authority of Recra Subtitle |D,
I4 not under 208.
15 Does that answer your question?
16 MR. MYRICK: In part.
17 MR. HICKMANs What is the rest of your
18 question?
1? MR. MYRICKs Are we going to get any
20 dollars? We have talked to _s,tata agencies all
2' across the United States. And they come to
22 that problem.
23 MR. HICKMAN: Ask me that question after
24
program development about the budget. Okay?
we finish the discussion on^state and local
25
-------
54
1 We will talk about that.
2 MR. SANJOURj Yea, sir.
3 MR. ROBERTSON: Charles Robertson,
4 Pollution Control Incorporated, El Dorado,
5 Arkansas.
6 Under 3004, in the last sentence concerni
7 the operation of a disposal facility, we talk
8 about the financial responsibility. What
9 efforts are being made on any basis as to the
10 Washington level to involve the insurance compan
11 of this country in the bonding requirements that
12 are going to be set forth for disposal site
13 operators?
14 MR. SANJOUR: We are talking to them.
15 MR. ROBERTSON: Better luck than we are
16 having, I hope.
17 MR. SANJOUR: I doubt it. Let me put
18 it this way: We are certainly aware of the
19 problem. We are checking it out. And we are
20 not going to require anyone to do something that
21 cannot be done that w^ know it can't.
22 We very often require people to do things
23 that cannot be done and that is because we don't
24 know it cannot be done.
25 Any more questions? Thank you.
-------
55
1 MR. LOZANO: There is a telephone message
2 for Mr. Charles Short of PDA. Call your office.
3 The next presentation is on land disposal
4 Subbing for Dr. Skinner will be Lanny Hickman.
5 MR. HICKMAN: I mentioned earlier that
6 the law is a three-cornered — has a three-cornered
7 foundation: hazardous waste, land disposal provisions,
8 and resource conservation provisions.
9 The land disposal provisions of the law
10 are basically in two portions: One, Subtitle D which
11 is called state and local solid waste management plan.
12 But that is really a misnomer. When you read that.
13 And then Section 1008 which requires
14 the Agency to issue guidelines.
15 Now I think tne first thing we ought
16 to do is to review four definitions. We need to review
17 these because it is very important to understand the
18 difference now that these amendments bring into solid
" waste management field.
20 in the old, prior, law, the Solid Waste
21 Disposal Act of '65 as amended in 1970, disposal really
22 was defined to reflect more generically the term solid
23 waste management and covered the movement, control, and
24 handling of solid waste from the original generation
25 to the ultimate treatment, recovery, and disposal.
-------
56
1 Now with the new definitions Congress has
2 defined disposal more in keeping with what we perceive
3 as placing any solid waste on land.
4 And it says basically that any solid
5 waste that is placed on, in, through, under, or around,
6 injected or whatever on the land, that is disposal. Any
7 solid waste.
8 And then it defines an open dump which
9 it did not do before and says that an open dump is any
10 disposal site that does not fit the criteria and definition
IcCISft
'1 of a sanitary landfill that will be defined by -Htoerar.
12 And then it defines a sanitary landfill
13 as a disposal site for disposal of solid waste in
I4 keeping with the practice issued under Subtitle D where
'5 we have to issue criteria for what is an open dump and
16 a sanitary landfill.
17 It does not imply that there are any
18 nuances in between open dumps and sanitary landfills.
19 Subtitle D does talk about types of sanitary landfills.
20 Those of you who are familiar with the State of
2' California, they have class one, two, and three disposa
22 sites for sanitary landfill based on conditions of the
23 site and judge what types of waste can and cannot be
24 accepted at that site.
25 And the really magic definition now in
-------
57
1 Recra that makes this whole law so different is that
2 now it defines solid wastes - and that includes hazardous
3 waste - any solid, liquid, setnisolid, or entrained
4 gaseous materials, sludges, or whatever.
5 And so basically now, through only the
6 whims of Congress, we now define a liquid aa a solid.
7 You have got to understand that because it is very
8 important. Because it is the intent of the law to make
9 sure that any waste that isn't being handled under
10 FWPCA or any products that come out of any act to
11 protect the air and water resources, that waste has to
12 be lined up and dealt with somewhere else. This law
13 is supposed to take care of it either as a hazardous
14 waste if it meets the criteria that Bill is going to
15 write and if not it has got to be handled through the
16 state program or land resource and conservation efforts
17 Anything that is liquid or solid, if you
'8 are going to put it on the land, this law haa to be
19 recognized and dealt with. That is a very important
20 and significant change. And it places those programs
21 that are involved with the management of waste and
22 land disposal operations in a role of equal partnership
23 with other parts of the environmental movement.
24 And so more and more intelligent decisions can be made,
25 Section 4004 which is under Subtitle D
-------
53
1 requires the Administrator to within one year of the
2 enactment of the Act which is October 21st, 1977,
3 must issue criteria for what is sanitary landfill.
4 He must issue criteria for classifying
5 sanitary landfills and open dumps giving strong
6 consideration to the reasonable probability of adverse
7 effects from disposal practices.
8 The law says that henceforth, after these
9 criteria are issued, certain other things are supposed
10 to happen, all disposal will be by sanitary landfill.
11 And that the state plans that have to be
12 developed must be based upon a foundation of sanitary
13 landfill disposal as well as hazardous waste regulation
14 from cradle to the grave.
15 Now Section 4005 talks about the upgrading
16 of open dumps. And that section says that the
'7 Administrator shall conduct an inventory of all those
'8 disposal sites that fall within the criteria for an
19 open dump. And shall within twelve months after the
20 criteria for open dumps have been issued, publish that
21 list of all sites across the country that fall within
22 the criteria of being an open dump.
23 what that means is that any site that
24 fits that criteria and are listed on the list are
25 immediately in violation of federal law. Not subject
-------
59
1 to EPA regulation and enforcement but subject to
2 regulation and enforcement by state government or by
3 anybody elae out there that sees it and thinks that,
4 that site is in violation.
5 So this creates a. real problem for the
6 operator of a site that maybe thought he was doing a
7 good job at least as far as some criteria the state
8 might have placed on him or his own and all of a sudden
9 finds that for some reason this facilities no longer,
10 by definition of the law, is in compliance.
11 And he is sort of subject to the action
12 of the court real quickly. And the law provides a
13 mechanism to give that operator of that land disposal
14 site to have protection for a period of time while he
15 is converting that site to meet the new requirements
16 of the new law for closing it and opening a sanitary
17 landfill.
18 This is done by the_^tate planning proces i
19 The law says that all disposal sites within five years
20 after the list is published must be either converted to
21 a sanitary landfill or closed. And that all new sites
22 that open must be sanitary landfills.
23 And meanwhile the state must develop a
24 schedule for such conversion or completion, or closing.
25 So tae planning umbrella protects the disposal site for
-------
60
1 a five year period. Not to exceed five years, while
2 changes are being made, alternatives found, better
3 solutions are being sought. So this is a very key
4 provision of the law as it relates to the state planninj.
5 And the state, just as in this hazardous
6 waste portion, the states don't have to play. And
7 neither does local government have to play. There is
8 financial assistance authorized for them to play and
9 the incentive for active participation by state and
10 local government in this provision of the law as well
11 as in the provision of the hazardous waste portion is
12 to protect the owner and operator of the facility while
13 they are making changes to meet th- new requirements of
14 the law.
15 And uecause of some of the financial
16 mechanisms available in the absence of state participat
17 local government cannot receive financial assistance.
18 So there is a strong incentive for the
" state and local government to join in a partnership
^^
20 which the law designs and requires them to do to
21 participate within the law.
22 Section 1008 requires the Administrator
23 within twelve months and from time to time thereafter
24 to issue guidelines on all aspects of solid waste
25 management. Now I am just going to talk about land
-------
61
1 disposal here and Tom Canfield will then talk about
2 resource conservation and talk about guidelines to be
3 issued in that area.
4 It says that those guidelines issued
5 within twelve months of the passage of the law must
6 consider and include a technical and economical
7 description of that process, technique, that the
8 guideline is written for, and the level of performance
9 that can be — that is reasonable for the purpose of
10 protecting public health and environment. These
11 guidelines are advisory in nature in that they are
12 recommended procedures for state and local government.
13 Ws plan to use the guideline mechanism
14 as a back-up to support the criteria for open dumps
15 and sanitary landfills, to get guidance to local,state
16 government on ways they can achieve the criteria by
17 various practices: design, operating, and construction]
18 practices. And these guidelines are mandatory on
19 the federal government ju^t like they were under the
20 old law.
21 The law says that within twenty-four
22 months of its enactment the Administrator should issue
23 guidelines that spring from the original guidelines I
24 which include levels of performance and levels of
25 control. So we must now include in there definitive
-------
62
1 information and guidance on a lot of other aspects:
2 protect ground and surface waters, protect public
3 health and environment, meeting the requirements of the
4 Clean Air Act.
5 It is interesting that under the Clean
6 Air Act, when they scrub down an air emission, a lot of
7 times they generate waste. There is no mechanism
8 within the Clean Air Act unless for some reason the
9 waste that was within that sludge could be re-entrained
,£?
10 once it went out on the disposal site, to guaranty
11 that, that sludge out of that scrubber would be dispose|d
12 of properly.
.
13 Now, of course, -Hocjia will assure that it
14 is disposed of properly because that is a solid waste
15 now, even though it is liquid.
16 We must recognize the Federal Water
17 Pollution Control Act and those provisions and deal
18 with the sludges that come out of those acts. And
19 again, putting it on the land and entering it into the
20 environment through improper land disposal sites or
21 other practices.
22 And then the guidelines have to consider
23 the public health aspect, the aesthetic aspects of
24 land disposal practices.
25 Now in Section 1008 there is a little bit
-------
63
1
of confusion. 1003 talks about issuing criteria for
2 open dumps. And they do the same thing over in
Subtitle D. They effect the same provisions. So it
4 really isn't, as far as we interpret the law, much of
a problem for us.
6 Now two guidelines we plan to issue, they
7 are on the books right now, funded by the law and
8 funded by our program, is to take the existing land
o
disposal guidelines which were issued in '74 and which
10 at that time were mandatory on the feds and advisory
to state and local governments, and revise these
,,
'* guidelines keeping them consistent with fteera and to
13 include other information that we now have and did not
have before such as bail fills, shredder fills, some
leachate collection and treatment techniques and
technology.
17 And the other guideline that we will
18
issue — this one will be issued by the end of '78 --
19
the end -- it should be out at the same time the
nn
criteria are which is the end of this fiscal year.
And the one for the disposal of sludges
2 will be issued the year after that. So these are the
two guidelines that are on the books now to develop as
24
related to the land disposal provisions of the law.
25
Okay. That covers the land disposal
-------
64
' provisions and I will entertain questions now on this.
2 Yes.
3 MR. LEDVINA: I am Joe Ledvina of Union
4 Carbide. There are several references in here
5 to sanitary landfills and otherwise — and
6 things that are otherwise disposed of in an
7 environmentally sound manner. What do you think
of land farms?
9 MR. HICKMAN: Well, we have had a lot of
10 discussion in the Agency about the use of a
11 waste material in a beneficial manner on the lanld
12 Is it actually disposal? or is that something els;?
13 is that resource conservation or whatever.
And we haven't really made up — made any
15
judgment. We don't even know what that provisioi
of the law means as far as the wording and
other acceptable environmental management.
18 We would interpret that in the line of
" if it is within our criteria of a sanitary
20 landfill. There are classes of sanitary landfil|ls
depending upon the waste stream.
And based on certain designs — site
selection, design, operating, and construction
procedures that, that land disposal practice
25
could indeed be satisfactory. Because we can
-------
.65
1 see us writing because of some wording in the
2 law about classes of sanitary landfills writing
3 a variety of disposal criteria for any type of
4 waste and any type of practice.
5 If you are asking what I think about
6 land farming, you are talking about putting
7 sludges on the land. There is a lot of debate
8 in the Agency about that. If that land could
9 be used afterward for useful purposes as opposed
10 to having that land lie fallow because of
11 heavy metals or whatever might be in there,
12 those are two different issues. And the Agency
13 has got some guidance out on it, on sludges on
14 the land right now.
15 And of course we are going to take that
16 guidance and expand it to include what information
17 that we have now.
!8 MR. liSDVINA: wnat about disposal wells?
19 MR. HICKMAN: Deep well injection?
20 MR. LEDVINA: Yes,
21 MR. HICKMAN: Well, deep well injection
22 is covered right now under the j.afe _water _drinki|ig
23 ^ct. And — by definition it is covered by that
24 now. The _s_tate governments that are in deep
25 well injection have a good number of regulations
-------
66
and controls too.
2 We don't see an objection. It is not
3 considered in our thinking so far in studying
the design and implementation of this law as an
5 area that we have cognizance or authority over
6 under «gljr^ since it is covered under other
^ authorities. rtnd we don't intend to duplicate
8 what is being done under the safe drinking water
' act which is just now also being implemented
It's about two years in implementation.
Do you want to respond to that?
'2 MR. SANJOUR: I want to say a word about
13 land farming of hazardous waste. If we are
14 talking about land farming of hazardous waste
then land farms will come under the same
16 provisions as any other disposal facility. They
17 will have to have permits. They will have to
18 meet these standards. And they would apply
to pollution getting into the environment
20 For example, if it gets into ground water
21 then land farming has to meet that.
22 MR. HICKMaN: We have a good deal of
23 discussion of sewer sludge that is put on the
24 land, whether that is disposal or not.
25 MR. SANJOUR: Well, in Texas when they
-------
67
] talk about land farming they are talking about
2 petroleum waste.
3 MR. HICKMAN: They are talking about
4 petroleum waste. I know they do that down on
5 the Gulf. That is not the practice -- they do
j it in a lot of places outside of this — you
7 know, the petroleum industry. And we really
g haven't been able yet to get -- we haven't made
9 a call on whether it is disposal or whether it
10 is -- there has bean a lot of contention in the
11 Agency on -- thoughts on that right now.
12 Do you have — whot is your opinion? Do
13 you consider it disposal or do you consider it
14 something else?
15 MR. LEDVINA: It is disposal.
16 MR. HICKMAN: Well, if it is disposal it
17 will have to meet -- some of the requirements,
18 either the hazardous waste part or the land
19 disposal part.
20 MR. LEDVINA: I am not questioning that.
21 MR. HICKMAN: YeJh.
22 MS. UEDVINA: I urn just questioning
23 whether you recognize that.
24 MR. HICKMAN: I rfould think that if you
25 do it in Keeping with tha criteria that will be
-------
68
1 issued for land disposal practices which the
2 state will try to make judgments on with you
3 in the inventory and in the long term control
4 of that site then we should be able to — we
5 recognize what you are saying and the problem.
6 And it is something that we are trying to factor
7 in how we design the criteria.
8 Yes, sir.
9 Do you feel -- just as a feedback on the
10 procedure of how we are running these meetings,
11 do you feel hampered by having to go to the
12 microphone and state your name, rank, and serial
13 number? Is that a hindrance on any of you? do
14 you feel
IS MR. EVANS: Charles Evans, with DuPont.
16 You mentioned, I believe, a minute ago, and I
17 am asking for clarification in this part, that
18 land disposal of non-hazardous wastes, you nor
19 the statesj under this law, do not necessarily
20 have jurisdiction or enforcement authority. I
21 believe that is a better word. Is that right?
22 MR. HICKMAN: What I told yoa was — you
23 are not quoting me right. I want the record to
24 be perfectly clear. The law is designed to put
25 the states in the saddle on running solid waste
-------
69
1 management programs. Okay? And it isn't first
2 the feds and then we pass it on to the states.
3 That is what has been, I guess, sort of built
4 into the water act. The design is:
5 The _s,tates assume the hazardous waste
6 portion. nnd if they don't assume that then the
7 feds have to take over certain provisions of tha
8 subtitle which is Subtitle C: permitting of
9 storage and treatment facilities, manifest
'0 system connected with disposal. It does not
provide the same authority for land disposal
12 provisions of non-hazardous wastes. That is a
'3 state function.
And it is designed very carefully, as I
'5 tried to explain, both through financial
incentives of the law and the impact of suits
on those sites that would fall within the
criteria of an open dump to stimulate a very
" strong, active state and local government
20 involvement in picking up provisions of Subtitle
2' The feds do not have the regulatory
provisions authority for non-hazardous waste
' land disposal sites under this law.
MR. £\MNS : Did I really understand you
to say then the if the state doesn't play then
-------
70
1 there will be no program?
2 MR. HICKMAN: That is the size of it.
3 MR. EVANS: Well, from your previous
4 discussion, did you say though that citizens --
5 that you could oring suit under those provisions?
d MR. HICKMaN: You can bring suit — if he
7 believed that the site was not meeting the
8 requirements, the criteria, for a sanitary
9 landfill, there is a mechanism in the citizen
10 suit provisions which I mentioned earlier that
11 he can file in the court system against any
12 operator who he believes is in violation of the
13 guidelines, regulations, and standards issued
14 under this law.
IS MR. EVANS: That clears it up. Thank you).
16 MR. BURK: I am John Burk, Texas
17 Department of Health Resources. Our definition
18 of a sanitary landfill is a landfill which
19 exercises compaction and coverage of solid
20 waste that is received and it requires a landfiljl
21 for a population of five thousand or more.
22 And for smaller landfills, serving a
23 lesser population we have a legal way they don't
24 have to—provide for daily compaction and
25 coverage of solid waste except under special
-------
' conditions. Do you offer the opportunity for
2 special leeway here in your regulations for a
sanitary landfill serving smaller areas or
smaller populations to give preferential
treatment?
MR. HICKKHN: Well, X don't think that
we are going to try and do it that way. I am
not really sure how we are going to do it yet
Q
because we haven't decided and that is why we
10 are holding these meetings.
" But we are going to try to write criteria
12
from an environmental and health standpoint as
' to -- that one can go and measure against to
make judgments as they go along whether that
'•* site for the amount of waste, for the type of
waste that site is receiving falls within those
criteria or does not fall within those criteria.
IS
And I would think that common sense is
19
going to have to prevail -- because we are
trying -- we have to write something that is
going to work in Maine as well as out there in
22
Odessa and as well it is going to work up in
23 Seattle.
And you are already in trouble when you
25
try to do that because of rainfall and the soils
-------
7?
1 and the geological conditions are so different.
2 So we are going to try to write the
3 criteria and regulations so that -- the state
4 government is who we want to run the inventory.
5 We want them to do the inventory. Not the feds.
j Because you are the ones who have got to
7 implement the program anyway. We will help
8 finance it.
9 You should be able to make the judgment
10 on that criteria, based on that criteria, as to
11 whether or not that site is an open dump or a
12 sanitary landfill. That is what we are going
13 to try to do, you know.
14 MR. EVANS: Okay.
15 MR. HICKMAN: Yes, sir.
16 MR. HUSTON: I am Bob Huston, with
17 Esprey, Huston & Associates. You mentioned
18 awhile ago that scrubber sludge would now be
19 clearly considered a solid waste under this Act.
20 Does tha t also hold for bottom ash or
21 fly ash from electric generating facilities?
22 And then secondly, do you have any
23 general comments about the impact of this Act
24 on surface mining operations?
25 MR.HICKMAN: Okay. First question:
-------
73
] Whether or not bottom ash or clinkers or whateve
2 fall -- out of a power plant would fall within
3 the definition.
4 If it is a solid waste or semi-solid --
5 let me read you the definition.
6 MR. SANJOUR: The answer is yes.
7 MR. HICKMAN: The answer is yes but I
8 don't think one should just answer yes. Because
9 this thing is not just all black and white,
10 you know. Common sense has got to prevail.
11 The term solid waste means any garbage,
12 refuse, sludge from a waste treatment plant,
13 water supply treatment plant, or air pollution
14 control facility and other discarded material,
15 including solid, liquid, semi-solid, or containe|d
16 gaseous material - I am not quite sure what
17 that is - resulting from industrial, commercial,
18 mining, and agricultural operations, and from
19 community activities, but does not include solid
20 or dissolved material in domestic sewage, or
21 solid or dissolved materials in irrigation return
22 flows or industrial discharges which are point
23 sources^subject to permits under FWPCA or a
24 source, special nuclear, or by-product material
25 as defined by the Atomic Energy Act.
-------
74
So the answer is yes, if it falls under
the definition of solid waste.
And the other was on: What does this
mean to surface mining?
Well, there is another provision of the
law that we are supposed to do a mining -- a
study on mining, you know. And what this means
to the solid waste management field.
' What we are asking the j_tates right now
10
11
is in theory spoil from a mining operation would
fall under this definition of solid waste and
would have to be, according to that, dealt with
13 in some way if we are going to try to put a big
umbrella over everything all at once.
But recognizing that the intent of the
law is to deal with those forces that represent
the major environmental health threats it gives
10
some guidance that we should prioritize what we
19 do, some things are more important than others.
The law does that also because of the
21
control of hazardous waste. And we are asking
the sjtates right now, you know, when we do this
23
inventory, we design the inventory, what do you
24
think we should cover in the inventory? Do you
think we should phase it? Should sometime you.
-------
75
] as a state, think you want to cover mining
2 materials, mining operations, if you think you
3 want to include that in the inventory, you probal
4 have a sound reason for that because it must
5 represent some health or environment threat, we
6 will probably go along with the state government
7 in wanting to do that,
8 I don't think we are going to demand that
9 the first time around, that we are going to take
10 on the mining industry and mining waste. Becaus
11 there is other waste rightnow that represents
12 strong interest to us to try to get the first
13 phase of this law implemented.
Eventually, some day, I would assume that
15 the mining studies tell us there is a big problem
16 out there we will have to do something about it.
17 But we are asking the states what they
think they want to do about it right now. That
" is the first steps we are going to do. It is
20 not factored into the first phase of the invento
21 at the moment.
22 Other questions? Well, thank you very
23 much.
24 MR. LOZANO: Our next presentation is on
25 resource conservation and recovery and overall
if
-------
technical assistance will oe made oy Tom
Canfield, Chief of the Waste Production Branch,
Office of Solid Waste, Washington.
MR. CANFIELD: Before I go into the slide
I want to make a couple of comments. We spent this
morning talking about the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act. And yet we haven't talked about resource
conservation and recovery. We have talked about
hazardous waste and land disposal. And after all, the
name of the Act is the Resource Conservation and
11 Recovs-ry Act,
12
We feel that, that is the long term goal
•* that Congress is trying to wrestle with, is to increase
resource conservation and recovery. And we think it
'^ is going to be an eventual reault of this Act anyway.
But I do want to make sure that everybody
is aware that this is an important part of this Act
ift
even though it comes last on our program,or at least
toward the end of our program.
2" A couple of points I do want to make
21 before we go on to the slides: First is we don't feel
that resource conservation and recovery will ever
23
replace the need for land disposal.
For instance, our studies show that over
25
the next decade the waste destined for land will increase
76
-------
77
even under our most optimistic estimations of the rate
of resource recovery starts.
M
15 But we do feel that resource conservation
and recovery can have a significant impact on an
' individual local area.
Resource recovery, for example, can
divert a significant portion of waste from land disposal
and thus lessen the problems associated with land
disposal.
Resource conservation and recovery are
increasing. The pace of new plants and systems that
12 are being implemented in the 1970' s is far faster than
the rate in the 1960's. We continue to document more
and more interest by local communities and serious
plans for resource recovery systems.
rfe think just natural forces will mean
that resource conservation and recovery will increase.
18
We see increasing scarcity for some materials,
1 9
increasing scarcity for some forms of fuel, and just
20 the general difficulty in finding land for disposal
will tend to increase resource recovery over a time.
But we do feel that this Act will increase
the pace of resource recovery and the major way is by
forcing proper use of land for disposal. we feel this
25
is going to rule out the cheap option, the unacceptable
-------
78
1 practice and tend to drive up the cost of disposal of
2 waste, land disposal of waste. This will make the
3 economics of resource recovery more attractive to
4 communities.
5 In general we think this Act reinforces
5 the things EPA has already been doing in resource
7 conservation ana recovery.
8 One of the major things that we do is to
9 evaluate resource recovery systems. These are both
10 large scale plants for large urban areas and low
11 technology approaches such as separation of wastes at
12 the home with separate collection and materials recover^.
13 A second thing that we do is to give aid
14 to states and local governments to try to overcome the
15 non-technical, non-economic barriers to recovery. An
16 example is to help a community to prepareKa request for
17 a proposal for a resource recovery facility to help
18 a community to obtain outside financing for resource
19 recovery.
20 And a third thing that we do is to do
21 conduct policy studies on ways to reduce waste at the
22 point of generation.
23 ' Okay. I would like to go into some
24 slides and run through sections of the Act that do
25 deal with resource conservation and recovery.
-------
79
1 The point of the first slide is to say
2 that resource conservation and recovery is spread
3 throughout the rict. The other speakers have talked
4 about nice, neat subtitles that address hazardous
5 waste and land disposal.
6 In this Act resource conservation and
7 recovery cut across a number of sections. I will go
8 through most of these sections very quickly. The only
9 two that I will not go through is Section 1008 which
10 allows guidelines for a wide range of practices including
11 resource conservation and recovery and the fact that
12 those guidelines under Section 6004 must be complied
'3 with by other federal agencies.
14 The first major section that deals with
15 resource conservation and recovery is Section 2003.
'6 This section is broader than just that topic though.
17 xt does cut across all of solid waste management. It
18 mentions that EPA must be aole to provide for aid for
" all of solid waste management.
20 The aid is not meant to be_federal
2' officials working with local communities but is to be
22 a framework of federal officials, state officials,
23 local officials, consultants, various people working
24 together to solve a specific problem. It is EPA's
25 charge to put together that framework.
-------
80
The Act focuses -- Congress focused on
this s€'Ction, highlighting its importance by mandating
that twenty per cent of the general appropriation to
4 this Act roust be used for this kind of assistance.
5 We have talked a little bit about
Subtitle D which is the Section 4000 series. And we
' will talk about them some more. But I do want to
highlight a couple of things.
g
EPA must give guidance to states to
consider resource recovery, resource conservation and
11 guidance that states must do some thinking about
markets for secondary materials.
One thing that the state plans must
provide, they must provide for the elimination of laws
or rules that prevent local communities having long
term contracts to supply wastes to a resource recovery
17 facility.
18
Section 4008 which we will go over in
19
some detail later, I just want to point out that this
does allow grants to public agencies for implemention
to lead to the planning -- all of the steps leading
22
up to construction. Some of the things that are
mentioned are resource recovery, resource conservation
24
and other specific topics too. But this in an implementa
25
grant program allowed for under this section.
ion
-------
ei
Section 6002 requires EPA to set
guidelines on recommended practices to implement certai
3 federal procurement processes. Within two yoars
procuring agencies of the ^federal government must
procure products with the highest per cent of recycled
6 materials as practical.
7 This applies to purchases individually
8
12
of ten thousand dollars or in total ten thousand
0
dollars a year.
Second, all federal users of fossil fuel
11 must use refuse-derived fuel or materials recovered
from solid wastes in those boilers to the maximum per
13 cent practical.
Finally, contracting officers for the
15 federal government must certify — must set up
procedures that sellers or vendors to the federal
government must certify and identify the amount of
18
recycled material in the products they are selling to
19
the government.
This section has fairly small impact
21
because the federal government purchases are relatively
22
small. But it does have impact on states and local
23
governments and even perhaps large companies or other
organizations to follow these procurement practices.
Section 8002 requires eleven special
-------
82
studies. Seven of these are two-year studies that are
listed on this slide.
I think a gentleman raised a question
about mining waste and Lanny Hickman pointed out that
we do have to do a major mining-waste study in a two-
year period.
o
Four of the studies under this section
are three years — have a three-year time deadline.
0
. These four studies are listed on this slide.
1Q One of the eleven that we feel is the
most imporant is a study listed as a resource
conservation committee. This is separate cabinet-level
committee made up -- chaired by the Administrator of
EPA with heads of six other agencies.
This committee must submit a final report
., to Congress in two years and interim reports every six
,, months. This is to oe a comprehensive study on ways
18 to encourage resource conservation and recovery.
.. Some of the things that are mentioned in
2Q the Act specifically or some of the things that will
21 undoubtedly oe studies are listed on this slide.
22 First Congress asks this committee to
23 look at the effect of existing public policies on
24 resource conservation and recovery. Some of the
25 things that would be looked at would be depletion
-------
83
1 allowances for virgin material, certain capital gains
2 treatment for virgin material, ask the committee to
3 look at subsidies and taxes, bounties or deposits to
4 increase resource conservation and recovery. Some of
5 them, the more debated topics that have been discussed
6 are listed here: a subsidy that gives money or tax
7 credit for each additional ton of recycled material,
8 a tax credit or a subsidy for new investments in
9 equipment to recycle material. And one that is
10 specifically called in the Act is a detailed study of
11 charges on products to reflect waste management costs
12 to internalize those costs to producers of products.
13 Finally, a third area is individual
14 product-by-product regulation to increase resource
15 conservation and recovery.
16 Finally there are a series of sections
17 that discuss evaluations and demonstrations of resource
18 recovery facilities. This is very similar to our
19 present — or the old legislation. The most significant
20 difference is that the old legislation allowed grants
21 for demonstrations only to public agencies.
22 This legislation allows contracts to
23 private agencies as well as grants to public agencies
24 for a demonstration of recovery facilities.
25 These slides conclude the sections in
-------
84
1 the Act that address resource conservation and recovery
2 So if you have any questions or comments that you would
3 like 1:o make, now is the time.
4 MR. MALLET: I am Jim Mallet of the
5 Texas Agricultural Extension Service. Would
$ you restate the provision for insuring or not
7 insuring long term contracting in the early
8 part of your discussion, please. I wasn't
9 entirely clear on that part.
10 MR. CANFIELDi Okay. It is in the
11 section that is cited. I am just paraphrasing.
12 It basically says that state plans must have in
13 them that there is no restriction on communities
14 having long term contracts to deliver solid
15 wastes to a facility for resource recovery.
16 The problem is that in some states in
17 some local areas there are restrictions on
18 bidding and procurement practices that do not
19 allow a community to enter into a long term
20 agreement with a resource recovery facility.
21 This is intended to eliminate that constraint.
22 MR. DRINKWATER: Al Drinkwater, Arkansas
23 Department of Pollution Control. Where the
24 mechanism of an authority is available for a
25 local government to set up and use long term
-------
85
1 contracts with an intermediary between themselve
2 and the solid waste resource recovery facility,
3 would thia be acceptable within a state plan
4 although the law has to be altered so that the
5 local government would have to be able to go
$ directly to contract with these resource
7 recovery facilities?
8 MR. CANFIELD: I would have to reread that
9 section in detail. But the point is, if it is
10 not a constraint I think, the state plan probably
11 could provide -- the fact that it is not a
12 constraint -- the state law is there is no law
13 that is a restraint with a community engaging
14 in long term contracts. Since it is not a
15 constraint the state plan has met the intent of
16 the law.
17 This might be up to some legal interpreta
18 of the detailed language in that section.
19 That's a good question.
20 KA. SHORTT: Charles Shortt, FEA. You
21 had some slides on the screen there, some
22 aspects of Section 6002. You mentioned somethin
23 about the use of -- highest use of fossil fuel
24 -- refuse. Would you illuminate a little on
25 what that section is going to represent in
tion
-------
86
1 these programs?
2 MR. CANFIELDs Well, EPA has to write a
3 guideline under that section to help federal
4 agencies implement the requirement. The
5 requirement is that within two years all users
6 of fossil fuel must use refuse-derived fuel to
7 the maximum extent practical.
8 I think we are going to have to wrestle
' with what "maximum extent practical" means with
10 the technological limits and what the impacts
11 on boilers are.
!2 Thie is a significant departure from the
'3 old legislation. We do have guidelines on
'4 _federal facilities to encourage the use of
15 solid waste as an energy source.
'6 These guidelines were applicable only
17 to certain classes of generators of wastes.
'8 This law switches it around and makes it
" applicable to all users of fossil fuel. That
20 is a significant difference and we do have to
21 write a guideline, go through the normal
22 development process to write that: input from
23 other federal agencies such a FEA and other
people to write that guideline.
25 MR. MYRICK: .Mr. Myrick, The Process
-------
87
1 Company, Houston. We find that a lot of the
2 basic power generating facilities that can burn
3 coal are already planning for RDF usage.
4 What we are finding is that there is no
5 leadership at the local level to provide that
j material to these people and Lanny was very kind
1 to tell us all about his training programs.
g And the realities of life is that we
9 still find that the little man, the little
10 fellow up here, he is a minority businessman.
11 He has got one garbage truck. He owns the
12 garbage facility. It is not the city's, not
13 anyone else's. And counties and other forms of
14 government have got to happen to bring the
15 leadership to the RDF processing part of the
16 product.
17 What mechanism are we going to see come
18 about so that we don't see a backfire of the
19 Union Electric type thing in every city in the
20 nation, sites depending on political decisions
21 and things of this nature?
22 This has got to come about in a very
23 powerful way. It has got to be public educatioi,
24 public training. We have seen too many false
25 starts. And what it all boils down to is no
-------
1 one is around who says: I own that material.
2 And it is in critical volume for ready processing.
3 What kind of leadership are you going to
bring in? It has got to be more than state
5 leadership.
6 MR. CANFIELD: I think you are right. We
7 do have to do public education and I do believe
8 that comments like that, if you have specific
9 things that we can do that would be good that
10 we are made aware of the things that we must do.
11 You mentioned that you don't think that
12 just state efforts -- I think we have looked at
13 who owns wastes and who controls wastes in the
local area and in the state and find that it
15 varies from local community to local community,
state to state.
And one of the things that we can and
18 should be doing is to give guidance to states
1' as to how they can try to overcome these barrieis
20 which you have described in their state planninc
21 process, change in state laws, hoping to make
22 uniform local laws such that those problems as
23 to who controls wastes, who owns wastes are
24 reduced.
If you have any great ideas we will be
88
-------
89
1 glad to hear them, more specific things that
2 can be done.
3 MA, CADDISi Ray Caddis with the Texas
4 Regional Planning Commission. I believe there
have been several demonstration projects on
6 resource recovery.
7 Can you tell me anything about the success
8 of these projects with respect tot la it
' successful from a technological process standpoint?
And also, from the standpoint of economic
10
MK. CANFIE'T: Of course, that is going
to vary from community to community. Many
systems -- fur instance, source separation and
14 separate collection of newsprints is applicable
to a wide range of communities. Low, very
16 low technological constraints. The constraint
here is the market for or acceptance for
18 newsprint.
19 Certain companies are offering a floor
20 price to communities to buy all of the newsprint
21 they can generate for them.
22 So those systems are low technology and
23 are successful. Of the large scale systems,
f\t
water wall incineration followed by steam
25 recovery is probably the technology that is the
8?
-------
90
1 furtherest along.
2 In certain parts of the country it is
3 economically feasible and economically attractive
4 The use of refuse-derived fuel is not so far
5 along technologically. Economically it is
6 attractive in certain areas but these are
7 generally large urban areas.
8 MR. GADDIS: Do you have any estimation
9 as to what the minimum population is to support
'0 a resource recovery type of facility where you
11 are taking municipal solid waste and running it
12 through a resource recovery facility?
13 MR. CANFIELD: In terms of — other than
'4 separate collection of say newsprint and
15 separate collection of materials which is
16 applicable to very small communities -- w^ll,
I7 I think there are a number of factors. We do
I8 have guides and guidances to lead one to a
1' decision on whether it is economic or not.
20 That is going to include what your
2' land disposal tipping fee is, your transportati<
22 systems to the land disposal site, where you an
23 going to locate your resource recovery facility
24 the markets you are going to find for the
products, other resource recovery.
-------
91
1 MR. 3ADDIS: I am just looking for a
2 ball park figure as to what type of population
3 in numbers is required to make it economic to
4 market, or to run a resource recovery facility.
5 In other words, not separating out
$ newspapers at the source but where you are
7 picking up garbage in a typical municipal
8 operation. You are hauling it to a landfill
9 now.
10 MR. CANFIELD: I don't think I can even
11 quote you one. Ames, Iowa,is the smallest. I
12 can't remember the population of Ames, Iowa.
13 Anything under a hundred thousand people.
14 MR. HICKMAN: I think it is in terms of
15 tons per day processing.
16 MR. 3ADDIS: Tons per day would be fine
17 if you have a figure.
18 MR. HICKMAN: Ames. I think, is operating
19 under a hundred tons a day.
20 MR. CANFIELD: Under a hundred tons a
21 day.
22 MR. HICKMAN: They are operating at about
23 thirty or forty per cent of capacity, too.
24 MR. CANFIELDj And they are not economica|l,
25 They are expensive. There is no rule of thumb.
-------
92
1 MR. HICKMAN: I think there is a real
2 sense of danger in trying to answer that question
because it is dependent on so many factors and
there is no such thing as a rule of thumb.
5 MR. CANFIELD: If I may make a comment,
we specifically got a lot of information and we
7 have a very good eight-part guide that leads
8 one through all of the steps that one must
g
consider to evaluate what kind of resource
10 recovery system you should have or whether it
11 even makes sense.
'2 Are there any other questions? or
comments ?
14 MS. HKADRICK: Lucinda Headrick with the
15 League of Women Voters.
16
Back to that source separation, perhaps
you can clarify the success of it. What about a
18
community which tries source separation like
1Q
the newspapers and so forth and then you have
20
your cost fluctuate up and down and drive them
21 out of the market?
22 MR. CANFIELD: The key to the operation
23
is to obtain a floor price or prices for the
newsprint before you are going to collect it.
Andl there are companies that will offer a floor
-------
93
1 price, guaranteed floor price for the recovery
2 of newsprint. And from that floor price the
3 community can work back and find out whether it
4 is going to be economic or not. But typically
5 newsprint prices do fluctuate and if you don't
6 have the markets lined up, communities can get
7 in trouole for the extra cost of collecting
8 something that has no value or very low value.
9 Okay?
10 MR. LOZANO: Thank you, Tom. The last
11 presentation is Mr. Herbert Crowe who will talk
12 to us about state programs.
13 MR. CROWE: Everything we have been
14 listening to this morning has been impacting, or
15 directed, to one of these real important areas. And
16 I think the reason that this topic is last is that it
17 tends to bring everything into focus.
18 By this I mean the ^tate program itself
19 is probably the key area in this Act. It is the key
20 area because I think it tends to bring about the effort
21 of the feds and the states.
22 in the past there has been a lot of talk
23 about f_ederal-s_tate partnership and this kind of thing.
24 This Act almost demands it. So I think from that point
25 of view, that we are out there trying to find a way
-------
1 to m sh things. And the state program is going to be
^
2 the key in this. But it is still going to require EPA
3 devising the various tools and getting them into the
states so that we can still mesh.
5 As we go through these slides what I
6 would like to do is to probably only talk about them in
7 a general point of view.
The important thing I would like to leave
' with you is» Start looking between these lines to the
'0 point that we start seeing some of the real areas
involved. It is so glib and so easy to sayt We have
12 got a regulation. We have got a rule. we have got a
13 guideline to do certain things
What does this mean in terms of manpower
15 and effort and really achieving the goals that are
16 spelled out in the Act itself.
'7 So as we go through this try to look
between the lines and try to envision those kind of
1' things that we have to be doing at the federal level
20 and at the state also.
21 And again I would say that most of the
22 monies you see ht;re are nothing more than what are
23 specified in the Act. That this does not mean that
24 we will be getting the funds that are specified in the
25 Act. So as we go on and the level of effort that we
94
-------
95
1 are going to be facing is going to be dependent almost
2 entirely on the funds that we do get.
3 we are talking acout the state program.
4 We are looking at Subtitle C. We are looking at
5 Subtitle D. But as you heard, we are looking at
6 Subtitle A. Wo are looking at Subtitle H as well.
7 we are looking at everything in the Act that tends to
8 come out as an impact upon the local people.
9 So the RCRA provides the ability for the
10 states to assume the dominant role in assuring the
1' proper solid waste management program.
'2 RCRa provides an approach for local
13 government to meet planning and implementation needs.
'4 The guidelines for regional planning areas are to be
15 due out in April of '77.
'* The guidelines for state solid waste
17 management programs are due out in April of '78.
'" And in that what we are going to be able to do is to
1' spell out those things that we feel that need to be
20 accomplished and begin to develop an emphasis point,
21 a priority effort: what comes first, what comes second
22 Subtitle C and Subtitle D. What we are
2^ saying here is at least come up with the minimum
requirement for acceptable state program effort. We
25 are also looking at shared state-local planning
-------
.96
1 and implementation. We are looking at dumps and
2 sanitary fills as well.
3 And at this point I think we need to look
again at the Act, knowing that somewhere,by 1983 we
are going to oe able to do away with all of the open
dumps.
What does that mean in terms of what we
can start doing now and what steps do we need to reach-|-
to actually reach the point where we will have the
dumps cleaned up, wiped out, and converted to a sanitaijy
11 fill by 1983.
'2 it means that we are going to have to
put a lot of emphasis on designs and systems. If we
start looking at a regional approach, it is the only
15 way that you can get good environmental management of
solid wastes. It is also the only way you can get a
system that is responsible and is also achievable from
" the point of dollars and cents-wise.
Something has got to DC reasonably price
20 has got to be set up so that the people can use it.
21 If it doesn't, meet the two criteria then it isn't goin
22 to work.
23 Again, we are looking at an enforcement
mode. When do you start the enforcement? What are
25 the types of homework that you need to do first? There
-------
is a time and a place for enforcement. There is a
time and a place to get into it and start laying out
some efforts that you are going to have to exert to
make everyone amenable so that when you do reach that
5 point all of your staff and all of your time is not
6 consumed in court. It is going to be not necessarily
a last ditch stand but you have to do so many things
first that enforcement is somewhat up the road a ways.
' In som* states not too far. In some
'" states it is right there. It is just a matter of getti
11 the Act together, getting the people aware, get the
training. And do these other few steps and then you
13 are right into it.
Are you going to be able to grant the
contractual freedom that we have talked about in the
past here to allow the locals to set up a long term
' arrangement to actually be aole to implement some of
18 these ideas.
" And one thing else: la it sanitary
landfill or is it resource conservation? It is both.
The sanitary landfill as a disposal means is going to
22 be with us £or^a long time. It is the only game in
town for ultimate disposal.
And my crystal call tells me - I am net
25
sure — how accurate it is or not - that we are not
97
ng
-------
98
1 going to be aaLe to conserve resources or recycle
2 every particle of waste stream. There is got to be
3 some that will have to be disposed of.
4 Now we are looking at probably the key
5 to this whole thing: the assistance to the state and
6 local government section, 3011: state hazardous waste
7 programs, are funded to be authorized - and again I
8 will emphasize the word "authorized" - to be funded
9 for FY'78-'79, twenty-five million dollars each year.
10 And again what we are going to be doing
11 is setting up up on a formula basis - but we are also
12 going to be looking at it from the standpoint of what
13 the problem areas are.
14 And again, key words: twenty-five million
15 dollars each year authorized.
16 Again, Section 4008, for the development
17 and implementation of a state plan. And again those
18 magic words: FY'78, thirty million authorized. FY'79,
19 forty authorized.
20 it is going to be based upon a populatior
21 --. to states for local and state use.
22 Section 4008(2) is implementation of
23 solid waste management programs. And again, we are
24 looking at an authorization for FY'78-'79 of fifteen
25 million dollars each year. This is going to be aimed,
-------
99
1 for the most part, at planning, feasibility studies,
2 consultations, surveys and studies, those types of
3 things and an assessment of what the technology is and
4 whether it is applicable to that area.
5 We are going to have to meet the land
$ disposal guidelines. And moving on, we see that
7 Section 4008(e) is geared to special areas: Those tha
8 cannot logically fit into the system that is already
9 designed, or already in operation, or that is already
10 on the drawing oo
-------
100
' rural areas. And we are looking at towns of five
2 thousand or less, county population of ten thousand or
3 less, or less than twenty persons per square mile. And
I know of four or five counties in our region that I
think runs along about one to two persons per square
6 mile under that. They shouldn't have any solid waste
' problems, do you suppose?
8 One of the ways that we have talked about
getting rid of that is to give everyone an air mail
10 package, stamped, and they can put their waste in it
and air mail it to Cuba, or someplace els^. That is
not a very good idea now. Cuoa is sort of coming back
13 to th« fold, I guess.
14 MR. SANJOUR: What about Panama?
15 MR. CROWE: Right. So Section 4009 is
16 again looking at the ways to get at the rural areas.
And we are looking at the assistance on the open
18
dumping restrictions. vis are looking at trying to
phase this in and make sure the interface is neat and
20 meshed with the Clean Air Act and the FWPCA.
21
And we are looking at some of the
22
criteria for those areas that there is no regional
system available now, no existing available plant
system that is going to be available. And we are looking
25
at probably -•- talking about the federal government
-------
101
1 supporting seventy-five per cent of the cost not
2 including the actual disposal site.
3 That's about it. But again, look at
4 those kinds of things and begin to try to look behind
5 the scenes and see what kind of action we are going to
6 have to be doing. Because everything in this Act tends
7 to point down to the state program efforts.
8 I will be glad to entertain anything you
9 have to say on it.
10 Yes, Mr. Myrick?
11 MK. MYRICK: You mentioned the question o
12 the regional planning criteria process being
13 developed this April.
14 are the planning guidelines going to be
15 mimicking COG districts? are they going to be
16 mimicking solid waste planning areas? are they
17 going to be mimicking some sort of grant areas
18 that will support recovery operations?
19 MR. CROWEs The criteria is going to be
20 reasonably broad, I believe. And it is going to
21 give the governors of each state the opportunity
22 to actually pick a region that is based upon
23 solid waste problems. It may be able to coincice
24 with an existing COG 208 planning area or those
25 kinds of things.
-------
102
1 But they are not going to be obligated
2 to fall on that. They can be set up as a
3 separate solid waste region.
A Anybody else?
5 MS. BRENCKLE: Mary Brenckle. with Exxon
6 You mentioned in your slide presentation that
7 the only game in town were resource conservatior
8 and recovery or sanitary landfill. And a
9 gentleman from Union Carbide asked a question if
10 EPA was considering land farming.
11 There is a great deal of difference
12 between a landfill and a land farm. A landfill
13 requires that the waste be compacted and
14 completely covered.
15 MR. CROWE: Right.
16 MS. BRENCKLE: A land farm depends upon
17 the waste being mixed with the soil and exposed
18 to the air and sunlight in order to allow
19 microbic deprivation.
20 MR. CROWE: Right.
21 MS. BRENCKLE,: Could you clarify a littl
22 bit EPA's stand on land farming?
23 MR. CROWE: Land farming, we are not
24 real sure of yet. There hasn't been that much
25 work done with it to really identify it. When
-------
103
1 I said that a sanitary landfill was the only
2 game in town I was looking at the Subtitle D
3 area which is the normal type of solid waste
4 that we have.
5 And in any process where we are talking
6 about recycling, incineration, or anything of
7 that matter is short term burn on some gases,
8 say.
9 we are looking at a residual. And the
10 residuals from any process, recycling or anything
11 else, is going to go to a sanitary fill.
12 Now the land farming I gather you are
13 thinking about is oriented more toward industrial
14 wastes.
15 MS. BRENCKLE: Not in the case of Odessa,
16 sir.
17 MR. CROWE: All right. But we are
18 talking about a research project that has been
19 done to see the feasibility of mixing sewage
20 sludge and shredded waste.
21 That is not a common practice yet. And
22 i think those kinds of things are going to have
23 to be considered when we start developing the
2* guidelines for this.
25 And in the same vein we are talking about
-------
104
developing guidelines for industrial wastes,
2 hazardous waste, those kinds of things that you
3 are talking about are going to have to be taken
into account as well.
But what I am saying is that the sanitary
6 landfill is going to be the only game in town
7 for a long time as the ultimate disposal of
8 household-type wastes.
9 MR. HICKMAN: May I comment on that?
MR. CROWE: Yes.
11 MR. HICKMAN: I think we are all going
12 to have to start understanding that under the
13 new law what you say about a sanitary landfill
14 — I mean solid waste being compacted and
15 completely covered daily, that is not the only
16 sanitary landfill that we are going to be
17 talking about in the future.
° There is some confusion about this.
19 What is the definition of a sanitary landfill?
20 A sanitary landfill means a facility for disposj
21
of solid wastes which meets the criteria publis
22 under Section 4004.
23 We again determine the definition of
disposal which means the placing of solid waste
25 oip the land, in the land, through the land, or
ed
-------
105
1 around the land.
2 The definition of a solid waste isi a
3 liquid, solid, and in between.
4 we are going to have to start to understand
5 that in the future when we talk about sanitary
6 landfills we are talking about environmentally
7 acceptable land disposal practices for solid
8 wastes.
9 MS. BRENCKLE: Okay. If that ia a definition
10 of sanitary landfill that would include land
11 farms.
12 MR. HICKMANj It could, yes.
13 MR. CROWE: We have just had white defined
14 as any of the following or all of the above.
15 Anybody else?
16 MR. GADDIS: Do you envision any areas
17 that would not be designated for solid waste
IB management?
" MR. CROWEs How do you mean that? As
20 a solid waste --
2' MR. GADDISs In other words, would you
22 envision any areas within this Region VI that
23 would not be included in a designated solid
2* waste management?
25 MR. CROWE: No. I think some of them
-------
106
1 will probably be so broad, large, that it may
2 be unwieldy, maybe the costs, too. But I see
3 everything that we have in the states now as
4 falling under some regional approach.
5 Anybody else?
6 Let me turn you back over to Ray.
7 MR. LOZANO: Thank you. Herb. At this
8 time let's get into the statements that people
9 would like to make.
10 I have eight cards. Let me read them
'1 off to you so you will know where you stand.
12 These are in the order of registration.
13 A. V. Kensey, Terry Kassabaum, Mark
14 Handelraan, Mrs. Pearl Wincorn, James A.
15 Bannerot, Don Stence, Charles L. Robertson,
1* and C. L. Jordan.
17 If you could, please keep the statement
1" to within five minutes and submit a written
19 comment for the record.
20 A. V. Kinsey. You are welcome to use
21 the podium if you have notes.
22 MR. KINSEY: I am going to pass on my
2^ comment. Mine was centered around the reason
24 for not permitting a transporter of solid waste,
25 I thought that, that should have been
-------
107
1 addressed. And that somebody is going to have
2 to be liable for a spill in transporting a
3 toxic chemical from your plant. Are you going
4 to be responsible for it or whether or not the
5 municipality receiving it will be responsible.
6 Nothing was given to that attention.
7 MR. LOZANO: Terry Kassabaum.
8 MR. KASSABAUM: Pass.
9 MR. LOZANOi Mark Handelman.
10 MR. HANDELMANs I am Mark Handelman.
11 This statement is presented on behalf of the Texas
12 State Chemical Council which is an association of
\3 seventy-two companies all having one or more plants in
14 Texas.
'5 These plants produce materials necessary
16 for the health and well-being of the State of Texas,
'7 the nation, and the world. Member companies employ
18 over sixty thousand Texans.
19 We in the chemical industry wish that
20 the laws of nature were such that we did not produce
21 any solid waste. But they aren't, and we do, so we
22 are keenly interested in the implementation of the
23 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976.
24 The Texas Chemical Council has and will
25 continue to support the safe disposal by reasonable
-------
loa
1 means of all solid wastes. Our comments are offered
2 to help better achieve this goal.
3 In developing regulations under this
4 Act w« recommend that these guidelines be followed:
5 First, keep them as simple and direct
6 as possible. The vast majority of us who will be
7 subject to these regulations will be cooperative so
8 that .Caster and more complete implementation will be
' achieved if they can be read and understood by those
'° affected without the need for legal interpretation.
11 Secondly, they should concentrate on
12 the intent of the law. That is, reasonable procedures
'3 to be used by solid waste disposers to insure safe
14 disposal. This means that administrative procedures
15 such as voluminous record-keeping requirements,
" involved mechanics of enforcement, et cetera, should b<
17 discouraged.
1A
Third, they should allow enough
19 flexibility to cover methods that may be safe and
20 acceptable in some circumstances and in some parts of
the country but not necessarily in others.
22 Fourth, and last, don't redo what has
already been done. In that connection, several states
have already develped workable plans and we urge the
25 EPA to build on thesa.
-------
109
1 The revised Texas Water Quality Board
2 regulations which became effective at the start of
3 '76 would seem to meet the purposes and intent of the
4 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. This is an
5 operating program that is working well. And we
6 recommend it for your consideration.
7 If our recommendations are followed we
8 would expect the resulting regulations to consider the
9 following specifics:
10 Deviations would be allowed for existing
11 installations which have or could demonstrate operation
12 meeting the objectives of the regulation.
13 Permits would be issued for an indefinite
14 period, contingent on the continued acceptable
15 operations to prevent the needless expense both to
16 the private and public sector of periodic re-permitting
17 without specific need.
18 Regulation of spills and discharges would
19 not duplicate those already existing or being planned
20 under other laws.
2? We urge that the following additional
22 comments be considered in developing regulations to
23 implement the Act:
24 An objective of the Act as stated in
25 Section 1003 is: Prohibiting future open dumping on
-------
no
1 the land and requiring the conversion of existing open
2 dumps to facilities which do not pose a danger to the
3 environment or to health.
4 Under Section 1004, quote, the term open
5 dump means a site for the disposal of solid waste which
6 is not a sanitary landfill within the meaning of
7 Section 4004. Close quote.
8 we would hope the criteria to be
9 developed for sanitary landfills under Section 4004
will include the environmentally sound containments
provided by waste ponds, drying beds, tailing areas,
and similar installations which are essential for the
'3 operations of many industrial plants throughout the
country.
15 These installations meet the requirement
of a sanitary landfill in Section 4004 of, quotes
No reasonable probaoility of adverse
18 effects on health or the environment from disposal of
19 solid waste at such facility.
These proven surface containments are
21 not and should in no circumstance be confused with
22 open dumps .
23 With proper facilities and operating
24 procedures, industrial solid waste can be safely
25
disposed of either on-site or off-site. We would like
to
-------
' emphasize certain desirable aspects of industrial
2 waste containment on plant property controlled by the
3 producer of the waste.
4 By the very nature of on-site disposal
5 operations, the following advantages generally exist:
6 Controlled transport to the disposal site
7 by the generator of the waste who is familiar with the
8 safeguards necessary for the proper disposal of these
9 wastes.
10 Financial responsibility of the disposal
11 site operator.
12 Perpetual care of the disposal facility.
13 Four, readily available records containing
identification and quantities of disposed material.
15 Five, control against synergistic effect:
of mixed chemicals.
Six, maximum pretreatment of wastes
18
before disposal.
19
Seven, stockpiling of wastes for
potential future reclamation.
21
Eight, maximum impoundment security
against loss into the environment.
Nine, recovery and re-use of resources
24
where economically feasible.
And ten, security measures discourage
-------
112
1 and severely limit public access to disposal sites.
2 we would hope that guidelines to be
3 promulgated by EPA will consider these obvious benefits
of on-site disposal and not discourage this type of
operation, referring in that to hazardous waste.
In Section 1003 of the Act, Objective (4)
calls for quote:
Regulating the treatment, storage,
9 transportation and disposal of hazardous wastes which
10 have adverse effects on health and the environment.
11 we support adequate containment measures
12 for all significant concentrations of hazardous wastes
13 as defined in Section 1004 of the Act.
14 We would hope that the type and levels
15 of materials to oe identified as hazardous wastes by
16 the Administrator per Section 3001 will be limited to
truly hazardous materials in environmentally dangerous
18
concentrations.
It should not include other wastes. If
the identification process becomes too inclusive,
achievement of desirable treatment, isolation and
containment of the relatively small amounts of truly
hazardous materials will be made more difficult.
The problem should not be diluted by
extending the application to irrelevant materials.
-------
113
1 we would recommend a rigid definition
2 of hazardous materials based on published toxicologies
3 and similar data. An oral mammalian LD5Q of less than
4 five milligrams per kilogram is used as a criterion in
5 IMCO/GESAMP guidelines for profiling hazardous
6 materials.
7 The definition of hazardous waste in
8 Section 1004 mandates consideration of both quantity
9 and concentration of the material. Generally,
10 materials which occur naturally in the environment
11 should not be classified as hazardous.
12 Solid waste represents an economic loss
13 to industry and to the maximum extent possible
14 materials are already recovered and re-used.
15 We are pleased that this Act recognizes
16 this by authorizing research to develop new techniques
17 to recover valuable materials.
18 Obviously, it is only through the
19 application of new techniques that significant increas
20 recovery of materials will be possible.
21 Anticipating that these techniques will
22 be developed, some industries are presently storing
23 their wastes which have the potential for future
24 recovery. Regulations should encourage this stock-
25 piling and not eliminate the potential for possible
-------
114
1 recoveries of valuable materials.
2 Some solid wastes with high heating
3 values are a potential source of energy as discussed
4 in Section 1002 (d). Unfortunately many solid wastes
5 have a low heating value and are not amenable to
6 incineration due to the high supplementary fuel
7 requirement. These low heating value wastes must be
3 disposed of by some other method.
9 We endorse expeditious implementation
10 of Section 3006 which authorizes state administration
11 of hazardous waste programs.
)2 Texas Water Quality Board Order Number
13 75-1125-1 includes the essential elements of this Act
14 and constitutes a successful solid waste management
15 program in the State.
1$ This program should not be disrupted and
17 we strongly recommend that the Texas Water Quality
18 Board be the implementing state agency.
19 I want to thank you for the opportunity
20 to make these remarks. It was a pleasure.
21 MR. LbZANO: Any comments?
22 MR. SANJOUR: I have some.
23 MR. LOZANO: Yes, sir.
24 MR. SANJOUR: You made several statement
25 about the security of lagoons and surface
-------
Us
1 impoundments. And I would like to know to what
^ extent you have data to support this.
3 MR. H«ND£LMAN: I think you will find
the regulations of the Texas Water Quality
5 Control Board absolutely require the full
* impoundment of wastes within these facilities.
7 In other words, they prohibit the
contamination of ground water or surface waters.
o
And there are many of the companies that mentionjed
that do ground water monitoring to be sure the
11 material is fully contained.
19
Thest are not -- as I say, these are not
just open dumps. These are usually engineered
disposal areas with well-constructed and
15 expensive dikes. Basically they are not open
dumps, of course.
17 MR. SANJOUR: Thank you.
18 MR. LOZANO: Thank you. Mrs. Pearl L.
19
Wincorn .
20 MRS. WINCORN: I am Mrs. Pearl L. Wincorn
21
Natural Resources Coordinator of the League of Women
22
Voters of Dallas. Ours is a volunteer citizen
23
educational and political organization with approximately
four hundred and fifty members in the City of Dallas
and environs. vie are pleased with this opportunity
-------
116
1 to express to you some of our views on the subject of
2 resource conservation and recovery.
3 The League of Women Voters has worked
4 for improvement in our environment for many years.
5 During 1976 the League followed the Congressional
6 debate on the resource conservation and recovery bills
7 and lobbied for passage of a strong bill. Wa were
" pleased that many good features were included in the
Q
law as finally passed.
10 Five years ago our members participated
in a broad-ranging study of solid waste management
12 problems and practices in the United States. The
League of Women Voters of Dallas also undertook an
analysis of solid waste management in the Dallas area.
15 Among other discoveries we found a
situation that still prevails! A widespread ignorance
and apathy with regard to this subject on the part of
both citizens and public officials. The general
19
attitude wast We want that garbage picked up but we
don't want to know where you put it down.
21 The stringent requirements of the Clean
22 Air Act of 1970 and the Federal Water Pollution Contro
23
Act of 1972 have forced a change in this careless
24
attitude. Slowly since then the most obvious abuses
of good solid waste management have been eliminated in
-------
117
1 the urban areas of our State, except for management
2 of hazardous wastes about which much needs to be done.
3 However, there is still no state legislation in Texas
that encourages recovery or recycling of any resources
5 The City of Dallas is moving toward a
6 resource recovery system. By 1980 some materials
7 separation capability will be onj line.
8 By 1985 saleable energy may be produced
9 from the waste stream by some system which by then wil
have demonstrated its success.
But Public Law 94-580 as passed offers
no possibility of accelerating this Dallas schedule.
13 Section 8006 provides grants for resource recovery
14 systems and improved solid waste disposal facilities
15 only if and I quotes
A state plan for solid waste disposal
17 has been adopted which applies to the area involved...
18
Close quote.
Texas biennial legislative sessions
tend to move such action very, ver.y slowly.
Resource recovery presents two big
22 interrelated problems for Dallas. These arej
First, absence of nearby markets for
most recoverables.
And second, discrimination in freight
-------
118
1 rates in favor of virgin over secondary materials.
2 Section 8005 of P.L. 94-580 mandates
3 studies to develop recommendations for administrative or
legislative action. This will postpone the controversiil
5 but obvious solutions for an additional year or two.
6 But we are hopeful that the Secretary of Commerce will
7 implement Subtitle E of the Act expeditiously.
8 While the City of Dallas has adequate
9 landfill area until the year 2000, many of our suburban
10 neighbors are not so fortunate. A recent study by the
11 North Central Texas Council of Governments analyzed
12 the solid waste situation in the eleven county area
13 which includes Dallas County and the City of Dallas.
14 The Council of Governments concluded
'5 that sanitary landfills are the practical choice for
this region. No suggestions are made in this report
17 for methods to reduce the waste load going to the
18 landfills.
While newspaper collection is done in
Dallas and perhaps elsewhere any other municipal effort
21
at waste separation at source or for storage in landfil
22 is regarded as totally impractical.
23 The League of Women Voters of Dallas
believes that solid waste could, in fact, should, be
managed on a regional basis. If resource recovery
Is
-------
119
1 is to be an objective the larger the scale of operation
2 the more successful it is likely to be.
3 The League is hopeful that the Act's
4 requirement for future federal procurement of items
5 containing substantial amounts of recovered materials
6 will promote their widespread availability and use.
7 We regret that the Act postpones resource
8 conservation until a full and complete investigation
9 and study of all aspects of the economic, social, and
10 environmental consequeces are evaluated. We recognize
1' that this part of Section 80U2 is truly a political
'2 hot potato.
t'3 It seems to us to be so vital to the
14 future economic, social, and environmental well-being
15 of the United States that its proper implementation
" is the most important part of this Act.
17 We have two more comments on Public Law
18 94-580. Also in Section 8002, part (g), labeled!
" Sludge. No mention is made of well-known methods
2" to deal with organic household wastes which could
substantially reduce the future production of sewage
ty\
sludge. Such systems as the clivua no-flush toilet
23 and the small scale Domestic Sewage-Methane Cycle
are in use in Europe, Africa, and Asia. They could
greatly improve water conservation, eliminate the need
-------
120
' for very expensive tertiary treatment, produce energy,
2 and provide a rich fertilizer at the end of the process
The costs of construction and changeover
of household bathroom and kitchen fixtures are
5 estimated to be far below those required for tertiary
6 water treatment.
7 The League of Women Voters of Dallas
8 suggests that this be included as part of the study of
' sludge to be undertaken by the solid waste Administrator.
10 Finally, the League of Women Voters of
11 Dallas urges that preparation of strategies for
12 resource conservation be preceded by a media barrage
3 to raise public awareness to the need.
14 Otherwise, we will see a counterpart
15 of the present energy scenario; namely, public
16 disbelief fed by advertising to buy cars that consume
17
interests.
more energy, in total disregard of the nation's best
18
" We would like you to understand that
a League study is not an academic exercise. Its
21
purpose is to provide the substantive underpinnings
22
for subsequent member action on public policy issues.
We have worked in our state and
community to establish state and local standards which
not only meet but exceed federal standards and then
-------
121
' to ensure enforcement of those standards.
2 Throughout these efforts League members
3 have expressed their willingness as consumers and
taxpayers to share the costs with business in paying
for pollution controls.
We want to assure the Environmental
Protection Agency that the public remains your greates
8 ally in continuing the strong effort to reduce
environmental pollution.
10 Thank you for giving us this opportunity
" to present our testimony.
12
15
MR. LOZANO: Thank you. Mr. James A.
13 Bannerot.
14 MR. BANNEROTs My name is Jim Bannerot
and I am with an Austin law firm which is representing
Conservations Services, Inc. a waste disposal firm
17 of industrial wastes in Jefferson County, by permit
IP
from the State of Texas.
19
In the presence of so many experts in
the field my comments will probably be elementary
and my conclusions obvious. But since this is for the
record and it has been my experience that the record
is where you put obvious comments and conclusions,
24
elementary comments that perhaps my comments are
25 . . , .
applicable.
-------
122
have found through the years that
2 industrial wastes and hazardous wastes have been a
3 dirty word in the mind of roost people. And we feel
4 that part of this problem is because it tends to deal \4ith
5 isolated substances rather than the end process of
6 industry which produces many useful and benefical
things} for the public.
We ask that the regulations that you
consider and adopt reflect the philosophy that solid
waste is a necessary product of a necessary part of
11 the industrial chain and treated as such.
12 We heard from Mr. canfield that there wil]
13 be pressures, probably economic pressures to get into
14 recycling and reclamation. I think this is all well
and good but we think the regulations ought to reflect
16 that solid waste disposal as of now is the best method
and ought to be encouraged and made better, if possibl
Conservation Services is a small firm
" in comparison Vith many of the national and international
20 disposal firms. And as such we have a great interest
in making sure that the regulations adopted are not
22 so cumbersome and not so complicated as to require
a window in Washington or more apparently for us a
battery of Philadelphia lawyers in order to decipher
25
or interpret the rules and- know how they apply.
-------
123
1 If th is company has enough to keep a three or four
2 man Texas firm busy that will be satisfactory.
3 We ask that you consider the particular
4 item D that all areas of the state and nation, since
5 our client operates in the Texas Gulf Coast area, we
6 ask that you consider as an example this area.
7 There are a great number of water courses),
8 rivers, bayous, not the least of which you are dealing
9 with the Gulf of Mexico itself, a great density of
10 persons in a large area, and a high concentration of
11 industry.
12 These factors all combine to make it
13 very difficult for us. It generates a great deal of
14 solid wastes and also increases the difficulty with
15 which it can be disposed of.
16 Arbitrary rules such as placement of
17 solid waste sites from water courses or from habitable
18 — habitations would certainly tend to restrict and
19 probably prohibit solid waste disposal in this area
20 even though they may have a better application in West
21 Texas where land is not so dear.
22 So we ask that your exuberance , well-founded
23 exuberance for safety, be tempered with the fact that
24 we don't want to destroy the industrial process.
25 in conjunction with this we would ask
-------
124
1 that there would be no prohibition at all on interstate
2 transportation of industrial wastes. And I assume
3 from the comments there is none contemplated or no
* legislation concerning transportation of industrial
5 wastes.
6 in conclusion we have been operating
7 under the Texas Water Quality Board industrial waste
8 regulations. we find them to be both strict and
9 meaningful and I think they are working. We ask you
10 to give them consideration in your regulations.
" Thank you.
12 MR. LOZANO: Mr. Don Stence.
13 MR. STENCE: I have provided my comment
14 for the record so I will pass.
15 MR. LOZANO: Thank you. Charles L.
" Robertson.
17 MR. ROBERTSON: Yes. I am presenting
18 this statement for the record for the Arkansas Federation
19 of Water and Air Users.
20 The Arkansas Federation of Water and
Air Users is pleased to have this opportunity to
express its views on the Resource Conservation and
23 Recovery Act, Public Law 94-580.
24 The Federation is a non-profit corporate
of educational, civic, and scientific nature and
-------
1 represents approximately one hundred seventy-five
2 industrial, municipal, and individual members throughout
3 the State of Arkansas.
4 The Federation is committed to the
5 objective of coordinating the efforts of the membership
6 to minimize the potentially detrimental effect that
7 each member's operation might have on the environment.
8 Our members have used state and federal
9 laws relative to the quality of the environment and
10 the use of natural resources as the minimum guideline
11 for decision making.
12 The law has been reviewed and after
13 careful consideration the Federation would like to
14 comment on two areas:
15 First, we believe that regulatory
16 authority and implementation of the Act should be
17 vested in the appropriate state governmental agency.
'8 In the case of Arkansas, the Arkansas Department of
19 Pollution Control and Ecology.
20 it is clia belief of the Federation
21 membership that state and local governments are best
22 attuned to the unique situations of their purview.
23 Second, we would ask that proper funds
24 be appropriated to allow the states to conduct surveys
25 and other tools of implementation.
-------
126
1 Thank you.
2 MR. LOZANO: C. L. Jordan.
3 MR. JORDAN: My name is C. L. Jordan.
4 I am the Regional Planner for transportation of solid
5 waste for the North Central Texas Council of Governments.
6 If my salary reflected anything that my title does I
7 would quit this chicken job. However, I can't because
8 my salary doesn't fit my title.
9 I would like to take this opportunity
10 to advise representatives of EPA that our organization
11 the North Central Texas Council of Governments has in
12 fact been in the solid waste, the regional solid waste
13 management field for some time.
14 With their assis'tance we conducted an
15 eleven county study that was referenced earlier. We
16 have, to a great extent, accomplished a great many of
17 the goals set out in Public Law 94-580. So maybe we
18 were a little bit in front of the federal organization1.
19 We have involved the locals in both the
20 public and private sectors. As a result of our work
21 in solid waste we have a standing committee, the
22 North Central Texas Council of Governments Advisory
23 Committee to the North Central Texas Council of
24 Governments Executive Board and they have in fact met,
25 discussed various aspects of the law.
-------
127
' We have had the opportunity to review
2 some of these draft guidelines. And in general I
3 believe that the Committee will be making recommendati<
4 to our Board to pass a resolution in support of the
5 Act itself and the process, if you will, that EPA is
' going through in developing guidelines.
7 I think that it is truly recognized by
8 the federal government that many of the things they
p
do will certainly affect us at the local level and are
'° now accepting input from us.
11 And I believe that as long as they want
to make it succeed I believe that we will-find that
our state government will want to make it succeed.
And I am quite sure that our locals want to make these
provisions of the Act succeed.
That's all of my statement. I appreciate
the opportunity.
18
MR. LOZANOi Is there anyone else who
19
would like to make a statement? This is the
90
chance for any open discussion. Any questions?
last minute questions that you might have of
22
members of the panel?
MS. HANSBERRYs I am Betsy Hansberry of
Browning-Ferris Industries. Do you find that
25
the New Jersey ban on importation of wastes
-------
128
1 into their state is inconsistent with the intent
2 of the new law?
3 MR. HICKMAN: Well, that law has been
* challenged. I don't know if you know the status
5 of it.
6 MS. HANS BERRY: It was remanded back
7 to New Jersey.
8 MR. HICKMAN: It was remanded back — it
9 was challenged all the way up to the Supreme
bi
10 Court a* the City of Philadelphia, et al. And
1' it has been remanded back from the Supreme
12 Court in the last two weeks saying that — the
'3 viewpoint of the Supreme Court, that the new
14 law and its intents and purposes for
15 regionalization in bringing the states together
'6 to cooperate in solid waste management — said
17 the State Supreme Court should reconsider their
"* determination in the past.
Trcea
19 I don't think that Reuia, if one of my
20 colleagues here can back me up on this, does
21 not address itself specifically to non-importat
22 bans of interstate movement of solid waste.
23 It was suggested from time to time as a
24 consideration but it was never tuned into the
25 Act. Am I right? or is there -- a specific
on
-------
129
1 ban terminology? Is that right, Bill?
2 MR. SANJOUR: I have to only partially
3 agree with you. A word or two about the legis-
4 lative history.
5 Congress was certainly aware of this
6 problem. EPA recommended to Congress that they
7 strike out thesa bans. Because we didn't feel
8 that we could have regionalization of solid
9 waste with such bans in effect.
10 i believe that some of the states came
11 back and said that we are not going to become
12 the dumps for other states that don't have
'3 adequate laws, or have laws that ban everything
'
-------
130
1 out if he thought it was appropriate. And I
2 think the discretionary authority exists under
3 Section 3006. We are talking about hazardous
waste now.
5 Which says that a state authorized
6 program must be equivalent to the federal
7 program, consistent with other state programs.
8 I think that is the phrase, "consistent with
9 other state programs."
10 In other words, if we had in place a
" system of hazardous waste management which took
12 care of the problem of one state throwing its
13 wastes across the state lines, when that
14 situation existed that the Administrator could
IS
strike out any state that put forward bans
16 because it was inconsistent with other state
17 programs,
18 I think the authority exists but it is
a discretionary authority.
20 MS. HANSBERRYj Is that in the hazardous
21
waste area?
22 MR. SANJOURs That particular authority
23
is in the hazardous waste area, yes~. I don't
think that Congres gives any authority to EPA
25
to strike out those bans for garbage,
-------
131
MR. HICKMANi Other solid wastes. We
2 have already established that, of course, sludges
3 and mining wastes and other liquids are solid
4 wastes. So it is a little more broad now.
5 Is Mr. Robertson still here? Could I
6 ask you a question about your second statement?
7 Which said something about funds. What was
your statement about.
9 You said: Gee, let's let the states
10 do it. And we totally agree with that and that
11 is the intent of the law. The thing was about
providing enough funds to get the job done?
13 MR. ROBERTSON! Yes. Just be certain tha
14 the funds that are mentioned in the law, use ali
15 of our efforts to see that the funds are
appropr iated.
17 MR. HICKMAN! Could I ask you what your
1ft
organization and your state is doing about tha
19
MR. ROBERTSON! We are in constant
20 contact with the Arkansas Department of Pollution
Control.and Ecology and with our state
22 legislature. One of the problems we have is
we don't meet but every two years and are juat
24
about ready to adjourn.
So that creates a problem. We feel very
-------
132
1 fortunate that we are — we are a rather small
2 state compared to Texas. I am a native Texan
3 transplanted to the Land of Opportunity.
4 MR. HICKMANs We don't hold that against
5 you. I, myself, am from Baja, Oklahoma, which
6 is what Texas is, of course.
7 MR. ROBERTSON: The thing, I think it
8 was brought up, Lanny, at the conference in
' Kansas City. The thoughts that were expressed
'0 there by the State of Missouri and the reservat;
'1 that the Senate had in passing the proposed
12 Missouri Bill and the fact that the funds might
13 be there for some few years, three or four yean
14 and then all of a sudden the states be left
'5 with large things to do and no funds- to help
'« us.
17 I would hope that the states would be
'" financially able once they have been assisted b;
19 the federal funds, the states be financially
20 able to implement their own program because
21 I think that is the way you cut the umbilical
22 cord from the federal government.
23 And I do think states must enforce their
24 own regulations. They can't be from Washington
25 MR. HICKMAN: Well, once again, its the
-------
133
1 region, not Washington. But I still agree with
2 you on that.
3 There is a provision of the law that
4 would preclude grant dollars, federal dollars,
5 to go into salaries after December 31st, 1979,
6 for state and local program implementation.
7 Senator Randolph recently published an
8 article which is the best and the most
9 authoritative discussion of what the intent of
Ece^
10 Re-e-ra is. And in that discussion he clearly
11 makes the point that it was not the intent of
12 the Congress to leave state and local governmen
13 hanging and waiting for the other shoe to drop
14 by this clause here which would indicate a
15 stoppage at the end of 1979 of federal support.
16 And that was indeed something that the
17 Congress would be looking at in the very near
18 term as far as — we are already talking about
19 the next set of amendments.
20 MR. ROBERTSON: Where was that published?
21 MR. HICKMAN: It's called Public Land
22 — it's- an organization, Environmental Land Use
23 — i tell you what. If you will give me your
24 card or something I have yerf. a copy back in my
25 office — over in my room. I didn't happen to
-------
134
1 bring it over here today. It is in some
2 publication that is put out by an environmental
3 group that talks about the law and has a couple
4 of _s_tate agencies writing about it. Sheldon
5 »$er>of EPA writes about it. Sheldon tfyer^and
6 Senator Randolph and some other people. And if
7 you give me your card I will get you a copy of
8 it.
9 And I left a question for me. Didn't
10 you ask a question about budget and I said let's
11 come back to that later on? What was your
12 question?
13 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKERS A major concern
14 is to make sure that we really need to look at
15 the question of developing regional plans to
16 handle those materials flushed out of the
17 sewers due to industrial wastes ordinances as
18 required by Public Law 92-500 implementation.
19 These funds need to be both at the
20 federal level — I mean at the state level and
21 at the regional level because as you point out,
22 208 deals strictly with residuals, ponds, centre
23 and regional treatment facilities and major
24 processing industry.
25 There is a big dichotomy because everybo
-------
135
1 thinks that industrial waste is only from the
2 process industry and it occurs first in service
3 industries and also in light manufacturing.
4 Because we see the plans put together
5 the underpinnings for such cities employment.
6 And when there is two thousand gallons of
7 surprises and every one is different that plan
8 has got to come and cope with that. That is
9 a true technology demand on solid technology
10 requirements.
11 MR. HICKMANi I would assume, of course,
12 that within the provisions of Recra for the
13 development of .s,tate and local plan and the
'4 subsequent implementation that those sort of
IS questions will have to be covered in that
16 planning process provided, you know, there is a
'7 mechanism to get those studies funded.
]8 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: The State of
!' Colorado has asked you for it. Some cities
20 have.
21 MR. HICKMANi We have a basic problem
22 with the amount of money that is available.
23 Everything is not going to get don^ at once.
24 You know, the law authorizes around a hundred
25 and eighty million dollars for FY '78. And the
-------
136
1 funding level we are looking at right now is
2 approximately thirty-six million dollars. And
3 of that only twelve million dollars is for gran
4 to state and local government.
5 So there is a problem there of trying
to get it all done at once.
7 MR. MYRICKi You can read about it and
8 write reports about it. Doing it is another
9 problem.
10 MR. HICKMAN: You have got a point
11 MR. LOZANOs i would like to thank you
12 all for coming out to our meeting today. And
13 also the panel members coming down from Washing'
14 to tell us what the status of Recra is.
15 We will be contacting you in the future
16 on hearings and so forth as regulations are
17 developed and guidelines. We will still need
18 new input in the future.
19 Thank you
20 (Whereupon, the proceedings were
21 terminated.)
22
23
24
25
on
-------
137
1 CERTIFICATE
2
This is to certify that I, Joy Jackson,
4 reported in shorthand the proceedings had at the time
5 and place set forth in the caption hereof, and that the
above and foregoing 136 pages contain a full, true
7 and correct transcript of said proceedings.
8
9
10
son
11
4308 Purdue'"'- 75225
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
2?
22
23
24
25
-------
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
ISalt 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 III
(Philadelphia)
Region VIII
(Denver)
Region Vffl
(Denver)
Region VI
(Dallas)
Region IX
(San Francisco)
Region X
(Seattle)
Region V
(Chicago)
Shelf No. 595
-------
u
z
w
o
H
U
gl
^
G
^ -2
C GO
Z :
CL Z i
_ a .* 4 = •
g,u_ 5 CM
£Sf~
UJ
z
> r o ,
c o
20
0)m M ;
3J -rt- *-
cc co < :
TO CO Co
c .co
g^ o~
Illl
-, go"--
-------
A
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
------- |