TRANSCRIPT

                          Public Meeting
            on EPA's Current Schedule for Promulgating
                  under the Resource Conservation
                         and Recovery Act
              September 15, 1978, Washington, D.C.
    This meeting was sponsored by EPA, Office of Solid Waste,
and the proceedings (SW-45p) are reproduced entirely as transcribed
    by the official reporter, with handwritten corrections.
               U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                               1978

-------

-------
emb-1
       1


       2


       3


       4


       5


       6


       7


       8


       9


      10


      11


      12


      13


      14


      15


      16


      17


      18


      19


      20


      21


      22


      23


      24


      25
            ENVIRONMENTAL, PROTECTION AGENCY

                 OFFICE OF SOLID WASTE
PUBLIC MEETING

EPA1B Current Schedule for
Promulgating Regulations
under the Resource Conser-
vation and Recovery Act
                           Environmental Protection Agency
                           Office of Solid Waste
                           401 M Street, S. W.
                           Washington, D. C.  20460

                           Friday, September 15, 1978

          The meeting in the .above-entitled matter convened,

pursuant to notice, at 1:05 p.m.

          BEFORE:

               STEFFEN W. PLEHN
               Presiding Panelist

          PANELISTS:

              STEFFEN W. PLEHN
              Deputy Assistant Administrator
               for Solid Wastes

              JOHN P. LEHMAN
              Director, Hazardous Waste
               Management Division

              LISA FRIEDMAN, Esq.
              Office of General Counsel
              Water & Solid Waste Division

              JOHN SKINNER
              Director of Systems Management
               Division

-------
emb-2
                               C 0 N T E N T S
          STATEMENT OF i
     10


     11


     12


     13


     14


     15


     16


     17


     18


     19


     20


     21


     22


     23


     24


     25
CURTIS BARTON, On Behalf of The Manufacturing
  Waste Committee of the American Paper Institute
  and the National Forest Products Association

RICHARD SOBEL, Chairman, MCA/RCRA Task Group,
  On Behalf of the Manufacturing Chemists
  Association (MCA)

ROBERT L. HARNESS, Manager, Regulatory Affairs,,
  Monsanto Company, On Behalf of Monsanto Company

EUGENE J. WINGERTER, Executive Director, National
  Solid Hastes Management Association, On Behalf
  of the National Solid Wastes Management
  Association

RICHARD HARDISON, Manager, Environmental Affairs,
  Carbon Products Division, Union Carbide Corpora-
  tion, On Behalf of Union Carbide Corporation
                                                                 PAGE
                                                                  22
                                                                  27
                                                                  31
                                                                  38
42

-------
emb-3
      6





      7





      8





      9





      10





      11





      12





      13





      14





      15





      16





      17





      18





      19





      20





      21





      22





      23





      24





      25
          MR, PLEHN*.  I'.m Staff an Plehn.  I'm the Deputy



Assistant Administrator for Solid Waste of EPA, and I'm



happy to welcome you to this meeting to discuss the question



of schedules for the proposal in some instances and promulgate >n



of regulations under the Resource Conservation and Recovery



Act.



          With me on the -- up here at the head table on my



left is Lisa Friedman, who is a lawyer from our Office of



General Counsel, who is — works with us on RCRA matters.



To her left is Jack Lehman, who is the Division Director of



the Hazardous Waste Management Division.  And to his left is



John Skinner who is the Division Director of the Systems



Management Division.



          I have a — some introductory remarks which I would



like to make and then I will be turning it over to Jack and



to John for presentation^ and I will get into the other ground



rules in just a moment.



          I wish to welcome you to this public meeting to



discuss EPA*s schedule for promulgation of regulations under



the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.  The purpose of



this meeting is to inform the public of our current schedule ajnd



to provide an opportunity for the public to comment on it.



If any of you have not obtained a copy of the schedule, copies



are available from our 'registration desk.

-------
emb-4
                    RCRA is of central importance in the efforts of



      2   EPA to protect public hcialth and the environment, as the



      3   recent events at Love C.inal and elsewhere in the nation have



      4   so tragically shown.  EI'A first recommended federal legisla-



      5   tion to regulate hazardous wastes to the Congress in 1973.



          We continued to develop information on the nature of the hazarf-



          dous waste problem and l:he damages resulting from improper



          management until the enactment of RCRA in October 1976.  Since



      9   then we have proceeded 1x> develop the regulations called for



     10   by the Act as rapidly an our resources and the complexity of



     11    the problem has allowed,.



     12              Through a growing program of grants we have assiste



     13    state governments in obliaining legislation and developing thei



     14    own programs for the effective anagement of hazardous wastes.



     15    We have made major progress since the enactment of RCRA but



     16    unfortunately we have not been able to meet many of the dead-



          lines set forth by the i^ongress in the Act.



                    To date, EPA lias received citizen suit: letters from



     19    six organizations notifying us of their intent to seek a



     20    court order compelling 12PA to promulgate regulations under



     21    Subtitles C and D of RC.RA:  the four public interest group



     22    citizen suit letters referenced in the Federal Register



     23    notice announcing this meeting, plus two similar letters



     24    from the National Solid Wastes Management Association and



     25    the Utility Solid Waste Activities Group which were  -    '

-------
 x   received after that notice went to press.  The Agency has met



 2   witii all these groups in an, effort to obtain a better



 3   understanding of their concerns and to see if those concerns



 4   could be resolved prior to the litigation.  No mutually



 5   satisfactory resolution has been achieved to date.



 6             On September 13, 1978, two of the citizen suit



 7   organizations, the Environmental Defense Fund and Environmental



 8   Action, filed suit in the U.S. District Court here in



 9   Washington to require EPA to promulgate certain Subtitle A,



10   C, and D regulations.  This filing followed fast on the heels



n    of a similar lawsuit which had been instituted less than a



12   week earlier by the State of Illinois, seeking to compel EPA



13   to issue regulations under Subtitles C and D.



14              The schedule before you today represents EPA's



15    current best estimate of the shortest amount of time in which



16    it can promulgate defensible regulations with adequate allowance



17    for public participation.  Please be assured we are concerned



]a    about that schedule.  If it were within our power, we would



19    want to have an operational hazardous and solid waste regula-



20    tory program in place immediately.  However, that is not



21    possible.



22              He are seeking today to obtain the comments of the




23    public on our schedule.  As the result of your comments and



24    our further experience we may conclude that the schedule can



25    be shortened.  Alternately, we may determine that more time

-------
 !    will be required in order to  assure  that well  conceived and
     fully defensible regulations  are  achieved.
               In light of the pending litigation againnt the
 •5
     Agency we will be somewhat constrained in responding to
     questions about the Agency's  proposed schedule during this
 O
     meeting.  Thus, although  we will  be  happy to answer
 b
     inquiries concerning, for axample, the availability of drafts
 „    of the regulations and schedules  for public hearings on the
 o
     regulations, we will not  be able  to  reply,  or  will  be able  to
     reply only in a limited way,  to questions related to the
     issues raised by the Environmental Defense  Fund ancl the
12    State of Illinois lawsuits.
               Now, I'd also like  to cover a few procedural steps
14    here as to how we would plan  to go ahead, to carry  out this
     meeting.  As I said, at the conclusion of my remarks. Jack
15
     Lehman and John Skinner will  be preventing  some information
ID
     about Subtitle C and Subtitle D regulation  development
     process.
lo
               Following their presentations, we will hear from
19
„    those individuals and organizations  which havw asked to make
21    oral statements.  We have ireceived five requeiits in advance
22    to make oral presentations..  So that we may keep to our
23    schedule, we are requesting each  speaker to limit his or her
24    comments to no more than  Id minutes  and to  confine  their
     remarks to the Agency's proposed  schedule,  the citizen suit

-------
                                                               7



 j    notices, and public participation in the RCRA Section 405



 2    rulemaking.  There will be  subsequent meetings and hearings



 3    at which you will be invited to present comments on the



 4    substantive  content of EEA's proposed regulations.



 5             We will hear from speakers in the order in which



 6    they registered.  Before beginning their presentations, the



 7    speakers should identify themselves and the organizations



 8    they represent, if any, and state whether they will respond



 9    to questions from the panel.



 10             Written statements from the speakers, as well as a



 n     verbatim transcript of their oral statements, will be include



 ]2     in the  record of this meeting.  To assist us in assuring  that



 13     this record  is  complete, we request that speakers submit  a



 14     copy of any  prepared statement to the reporter as well as the



 15     panel,  if they  have extra copies.



 15              If there are any  persons who have not registered



 17     to make a statement and would like to do so now, please give



 18     your name to the registration clerk.  After presentation  of



 19     oral statements, the meeting will be opened up for questions



20     from the audience.  To avoid repetition and to assist us  in



2i     providing some  organization to the question and answer



22     period, we are  requesting that the audience submit its



23     questions in writing to our registration clerk, who in turn



24     will give them  to the panel.



25              Could our registration clerk raise his or her hand

-------
                                                              8






 !   so everybody knows who you are?  Is that  frerril  is it  6«crr



 2   Gerri Wyer  is the registration clerk, and I think she's still



 3   working on registration. So she'll be in in a little bit.



 4             Questions may be submitted at any tine during the



 5   meeting and should include, in addition to the specific



 6   inquiry, the name and affiliation of the person asking the



 7   question.  Within the constraints which I discussed earlier,



 8   we will try to respond to all questions submitted.



 9             The record of this meeting will ba V*lck open for



10   one week, i.e., until Friday, September 22, 1978, for the



u    submission of additional written comments. Comments should be



12    sent to yer,  our public participationoff\c.9.ri  Office of



13    Solid Waste, WH-562, if you're sending us a letter, 401 M



14    Street, S. W., Washington, 0. C. 20460.



15              With these opening remarks I will now turn the



16    rostrum over to Jack Lehman.



17              Excuse me..-.Because this interest is so overwhelming,



18    we're making arrangements to put sound into a room that's



19    just down the hall so that those people who would like to



20    sit in there and follow this proceeding would be able to do



21    so.  It's going to take just a moment to hook that up.  So if,



22    with your permission, we'll :iust wait a second until that's



23    done.



24              This seat down hero — I think there'is either one



25    or two seats right there and if there are any other around —

-------
 1
     here's one over here, too.  So ~ and there's some more here.
 2   So cone on down and fill in and be comfortable.



 3             since we have so many people here, some of whom are



 4   not in the most comfortable circumstances, and I think that



 5   virtually everybody who is here is either in the room or



     standing in the back of the room, in order to not hold all of



     you up too long I think we'll go ahead here, and at the point



     that the other room is hitched up, we'll l«t ^oo  know and



     any of you in the back who would be more comfortable and woulc



]0   want to do that, could then move in there.



u             So I think at this point I'll turn this — turn it



12   over to Jack.



13             MR. LEHMAN:  Thank you, Stef.  Briefly, I'm going



14   to describe the subtitle C regulations, the status of those



15   regulations and run briefly through the schedule for



16   promulgation of these regulations as we now see it.



17             Subtitle C regulatory package consists of seven



18   different regulations which we are developing in parallel.



19   They are all in the 3000 series in the RCRA.  3001 is the



     basic definition of hazardous waste.



21              3002 are national standards for generators of



22   hazardous waste.



.,.,             3003 are national standards for transporters of



24    hazardous waste.



               3004 axe national standards for owners and operator)

-------
                                                              10

                                    1 ,    *. •   \
 l    of hazardous waste treatment,  storage and  disposal  facilities.

 2              3005 is the regulation defining  the permit system

 g    for such facility.

 4              3006 is the guideline, EPA guideline to states as

 5    to what constitutes an acceptable  State program that can be

 6    authorized to be carried out in lieu of the federal  program

 7    under Subtitle C.

 8              And last but not least is Section 3010, which

     concerns a one-time notification to EPA or authorized States

10    by all generators, transporters, storers,  treaters  or

n    disposers of wastes that are deemed hazardous by Section

12    3°01-
13              Of those three — excuse me, of  those seven

14    regulations, three have be*m proposed in the Federal Register

j.    and those are Section 3006,  the .State program guidelines

16    were proposed in February of this.year. Section 3003, the

17    transporter regulations were proposed in April, and Section

lg    3010, the notification regulations, were proposed in July.

ig    And we have held public hearings on each of those regulations

20              All of the other regulations are in development, but

21    you should know that drafts  of these proposed regulations havi

22    been widely circulated to interested parties for many months

23    now.  Each time we complete a  draft of —  that is a signifi-

24    cant change from previous drafts we have distributed that to

25    the public, whoever wishes to  get  on our mailing list.

-------
                                                              11
 1             At this time, we  see  the  following schedule for the
     completion  of this regulatory set.  Before I begin that, I
     would like  to say that our  original plan as you saw earlier
 3
     was to propose each of these seven  regulations in sequence.
     So that we  would not overload the system, if you will, with
 5
     public hearing type of work, commentary and this sort of
 b
 7    thing.
              As we have proceeded down  this path, we have found
 8
     that it is  almost impossible to consider this regulatory
     program except as a complete set and so we have abandoned the
     concept of  proposing the  regulations as independent regula-
     tions and are now going to  propose  the remaining four regula-
     tions as a  set, and five  of the seven regulations will be
lo
     promulgated in final form as a  set.  The two that will be
     promulgated independently are the State program guideline,
lu
     3006 and the notification regulations under section 3010.
lb
     The reasoa  for that is that those have to be promulgated
     before the  others for legal reasons under the Act.
lo
1Q             So basically from here on out we're going to be
iy
20    talking in  terms of the complete set of regulations going out,
     travelling  together, if you will.
              I'd like to run through with you, for those of you
„„    who are not familiar with it, EPA'8 internal administrative
<£0
     procedures.  What type of reviews take place, and this is
„    illustrated in the Subtitle C regulation schedule that was

-------
                                                              12






     distributed to you.



 2              For those  of you who are not familiar with the



 3    nomenclature, we are,  Mr. Jorling, our Assistant Administrator,



 4    has formed a special task  force called the  ITF, or the



 5    implementation task  force,  to put more emphasis on the



     Subtitle C regulatory package than what it  would ordinarily



     be given;and this implementation task force is made up of the



     Deputy Assistant Administrator levels and Office of Director



 9    levels of all of the Offices within  the Agency.



               And the purpose  of the ITF is to  explore in some



     depth the major issues yet to be resolved under Sub ltd. tie C



12    regulations, at a relatively high level of  the management of



13    this Agency.  So that we do not get  bogged  down in last minute



14    issues.  We're past  the first two items now.  The next



15    scheduled milestone  for Subtitle C is the second menting of



16    this implementation  task force at which time -- which takes



17    place next Tuesday,  on the 19th, at  which time we will review



18    the draft of the 3001 regulations, which was released last



19    week.



               Similarly, on the 26th —  I should back up and say




2I    last week, on the 12th we  did distribute revised — or rather



22    this week ~ we did  distribute the revised  draft 30ftl regula-



23    tions and those are  also in the process of  being reproduced



24    and will be sent to  all of you who are on our mailing list.



25              Similarly, on the 26th of  September we will be

-------
                                                              13
 j    completing a revised draft of the 3004 facility regulations
     which will be sent not only to the ITF but also to the
 2
     people on the mailing list.
 3
               On October 3 we will have the third meeting of
 4
     this ITF group which will review the facility regulations
 5
     of Section 3004.  On the 10th of October we anticipate
 6
     completing revised drafts of the generator standards, 3002,
 7
     the permit standards regulations 3005, and the final regula-
 8
     tions on 3006.
 9
               Now the — we will distribute drafts of section
10
     3002 and 3005 to, as I'venentioned earlier, to people that
     are on our mailing list, because they have r\dt yet been pro-
     posed.  However, our legal counsel advises us that we are not
     at liberty to mail out the drafts of the final proposed
14
     regulations under 3006.  And at the same time we will have
15
     completed a new draft of our Economic Impact Assessment work.
16
     There was a preliminary draft, which came in last spring,
     and we have been doing a lot of reassessment, new work on the
18
     economic impact area, and we will have a draft available
     about that time.
20
               Following that, onttie 17th of October, we'll have
     the fourth meeting of the ITF to consider all these regula-
     tions and the draft Economic Impact Assessment. We anticipate
     that each one of these meetings will consist of a presentation
24
     by our staff on the — on these regulations, followed by a

-------
10





11





12





13





14





15





16





17





18





19





20





21





22





23





24





25
                                                          14





 critique and discussion by the other Offices in the Agency.



 And by this process we hope to smoke ovf any last minute problem



 that we might have with these regulations.



           Following this,  we will go on the 7th of November



 to the Steering Committee.  Now,  here's another group 1:hat



 you may not be familiar with, but the Steering Committne is



 again made up of the same  folks,  the Deputy Assistant Adminis-



ftrator level of the Agency.  But this is — this is, rather



 than sort of an informal review of the draft, this is toe —



 this begins the formal process of getting the material si out



 of the Agency and into the Federal Register.



           The Steering Committee then meets and will resolve



 hopefully any unresolved issues.  We anticipate there may be



 some so we have scheduled  two ;neetings of the Steering



 Committee, one on the 7th, and one on the 14th.



           We have allowed  ourselves a week after that last



 meeting to revise any of the regulations and then we start



 what's called Red Border review.  Here again, if you're not



 familiar with this terminology, the Red Border review is the




 Assistant Administrator level of this Agency and before a



 regulation is sent forward to the Administrator, each Assistan



 Administrator is given an  opportunity to review and coimant on



 that regulation.



           So we anticipate that there will be discussions at



 the Assistant Administrator level of these regulations during

-------
                                                         15




that period and so we are assuming it will take at least three|



weeks for that Red Border review.  At which time it then



goes to the Administrator of the Agency and the Administrator'4



Office reviews the regulation one last time* assuming all is



in order he signs it, releases it to the Federal Register} it



then takes approximately four work days for the Federal Register



to print it and we arrive at our scheduled publication of



proposed regulations in the Federal Register on January 2,



1979.  Happy New Year.



          He anticipate then a 90-day comment period, following



the promulgation — or the proposal of these regulations.  We



had contemplated other times.  A 60-day comment period is



sometimes considered normal.  But in view of the fact that we



were going out with a substantial set of regulations here which)



are going to take, I know, some time for you to sort through,



we felt that a 90-day comment period was in order for a



regulatory proposal of this magnitude.



          During that period, we plan to hold five three-day



hearings around the country and we will take on comments on all]



of the proposed regulations during those three day hearings.



And tentatively, we — these are tentative locations, but I'll



mention them anyway.  We're thinking in terms of Washington,



D. C.; New York City; St. Louis; Denver and San Diego,



California.



          So start on the East Coast and work our way West, thej

-------
                                                             16



 j   way we currently see it.



 2             So, that brings uu to April 2.  We then feel that



 3   it's going to take us a minimum of 90 days to evaluate the




 4   comments we receive, to collect any additional information,



 5   analyze all of these comments that we anticipate, resolve any



 6   further issues that the comments bring up, and redraft the



 ,   regulations in accordance with the new directions as might be



 g   necessary.



 9             Now, you have .to bear in mind we're 'doing this



10   simultaneously for all of these regulations and so that, well,



tl   the calendar time is 90 days; that's 64 work days to do all of



12   that work, and I think that's rather conservative.  But anyway



13   we're going to try to do it.



)4             At that time, we enter into another cycle of review.



13   Basically, we go through- tho same process that I described



[6   earlier, except there are — we've already been through the



17   first two that you see theru and so it wasn't shown on the



18   first page. But basically the regulations are reviewed by



19   our Office of Solid Waste, by Stef Plehn, by the other Divisio;



20   Directors, to make sure that they are consistent with other



21   materials like Subtitle D rngulations that you'll hear about



22   in a few minutes.  It then goes the next step to Mr. Jorling's



2$   Office at the Assistant Administrative level and all of the



24   other Offices within the Waiaer and Waste Management Program



25   are given an opportunity to review and comment on the

-------
                                                              17



 j    regulations.  Then we go into again the Steering committee, th



 2    same group I mentioned earlier sees these regulations once



 3    again.  Similarly, Red Border Review. The Assistant



 4    Administrator level is given an opportunity to see these



 5    regulations another time and lastly they go to the



 6    Administrator and — for final sign-off and actual promulgatio^i



 7    in the Federal Register.



 8              For all of that effort and activity, bearing in



 g    mind that each step of the review here usually results in a



10    change to the regulations and that involves a redzaft,



n    retyping, so on.  And so it's — each level of review involves



12    going back and doing some more work.  So we anticipate then



13    promulgation of the Subtitle C package on January 25, 1980.



14    Based on this schedule.



15              John?



16              MR. PLEHN:  Thank you very much. Jack.  John will



17    discuss the remaining .regulations.



18              MR. SKINNER:  Yes.  I'd like to discuss the schedule



19    for remaining regulations.  The first one being the regulations



20    for classification of —



21              MR. PLEHN:  John, excuse me. Could I interrupt just



22    a moment?  There is a message here for Oscar Ackelsberg from



23    his secretary and he's asked to call his wife.  That name is



24    A-c-k-e-1-s-b-e-r-g.



25              Excuse me, John. Sorry.

-------
                                                             18



 j             MR.  SKINNER:   The  first one being the Criteria



 2    for Classification Of Solid ulaste disposal Facilities, which



 3    are authorized under Section 4004, and 1008 A-3 of the Act.



 4    A proposed version of these  regulations were published in the



 5    Federal  Register  February  6  of this year.  We had a public



 6    comment  period that lasted until June 12 of 1978 and during



 7    that period we had a very  extensive public participation



 8    process  where  we  had a number of public hearings and a number



 9    of public meetings nationwide.



10             At the  same time,  we issued a draft environmental



n    impact statement  on those  Criteria and held open the public



12    comment  period for the draft: environmental impact statement



13    as well. At the  end of  the  public comment period we had



14    received over  100 letters  from individuals and various groups



15    and those 100  letters that we received resulted in approxima-



16    tely 1500 separate issues  that were raised that needed to be



17    resolved in the development  of the final regulation.  These



18    were comments  both on the  regulation itself and on the



lg    environmental  and economic impact statement.



20             These comments are: going to require us to carry out



21    additinal analyses, also to  redraft various sections of the



22    Criteria, to revise the  draft environmental impact statement



23    and the  economic  analysis, and our current schedule  for that



24    is that  the Office of Solid  Waste would complete that



25    process  and have  a package which could be sent forward for

-------
                                                              19

     Agency decision-making by January 19 of 1979.
 2
               At that pointi in -ti»e, the regulation will move
 3
     through the decision-making process that Jack just described,

     going through first the review by the Office of Hater and
 5
     Waste Management, then review by the Steering Committee and
 6
     then finally Red Border review and publication in the Federal
 7
     Register.
 8
               The point that I would like to bring-out about that
 9
     process on a final regulation is that process does not only

     consider the regulation as it does when you are moving forward

     with a proposed regulation, but it also considers all of the
12
     public comments and the way in which the regulation was
13
     revised, based upon those comments*
14
               The schedule indicates that we hope to complete thai
15
     process by July 27 of 1979 and promulgate that criteria in
16
     final form in the Register at that time.
17
               The second regulation that I'd like to discuss is a
18
     regulation that is being issued both under the authorities of
19
     the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and under the
20
     Authority of the Clean Water Act.  The Clean Water Act,
21
     Section 405, calls for guidelines for the disposal and
22
     utilization of sewage sludge from publicly-owned waste water
23
     treatment works.  Part of that requirement was met by — or
24
     part of that requirement will be met by the Section 4004
25
     Criteria which I just discussed.  But the guidelines required

-------
                                                              20




     under Section 405 is much broader than just the coverage

 2
     provided by  the Section 4004  criteria.

 3
               At the same time that we're going through he process


     of finalizing the Section 4304  criteria,  we will be developing


     a proposed guideline to meet  the requirements of section 405
 6
     of th^. Water Act.  So both of those regulatory processes are


     going to be very closely related and are going to interact


     with each other and decisions that will be made on one

 9
     regulation will impact upon the scope and content of the other


     regulation.

n
               The schedule for proposal of the Section 405

12
     guideline as laid  out calls for a draft of that guideline

13
     to be completed by January 19, 1979. This guideline would


     then go  through the same inlaernal review process, in parallel


     with the Section 4004 criteria and the schedule would call


     for final — excuse me — proposed publication, publication


     as a proposed rulemaking by July 27 of 1979.

18
               We intend to hold a 90-day public comment period

19
     on the proposed regulation.  We anticipate considerable


     comments .  We anticipate need to revi/w£) and conduct additional

21
     analyses after we  review those comments and going through that

22
     process  and back through thci approval chain of the Agency, we

23
     project  an August  30, 1980 final promulgation date for the

24
     Section  405 sludge guideline*

OE

               The third regulation is a regulation for title

-------
emb-21

      1
      2
      3
      4
      5
      6
      7
      8

      9
     10
     11

     12
     13
     14

     15
     16
     17
     18
     19
     20
     21
     22
     23
     24
     25
                                                         21
development and implementation of state solid waste
management plans under Section 4002 of the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act and before I get into the
schedule on that, let me indicate that that section required
another guideline for the identification of regions under
Section 4002-A and that guideline was published in proposed,
in interim form, in May of 1977.
          Now, I'm talking about the guideline under Section
4002-B , which is for the development and implementation of
state plans.
          This guideline was pblished as proposed in the
Federal Register, August 11 of this year and we are now in thi
public comment period on that guideline.  There .are a number
of public meetings and a public hearing scheduled for public
input into that guideline and the schedule is available for
anyone who is interested in it.
          At the end of that process, we will revise the
guideline and move through the Agency clearance process again
and our schedule projects a June 18, 1979 date for final
promulgation of the state planning guidelines.
          The final regulation is a regulation required by
Section 1008 of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act,
which requires that we provide guidelines that provide
technical, economic and environmental information on various
solid waste management practices, and the first of these

-------
emb-22
                                                                   22
      1


      2


      3


      4


      5


      6


      7


      8


      9


     10


     11


     12


     13


     14


     15


     16


     17


     18


     19


     20


     21


     22


     23


     24


     25
guidelines that we havw scheduled is a guideline on the

practice of land filling. This guideline will suggest

techniques that could tie used to meet the 4004 criteria and

is therefore also being developed in parallel with that

criteria.

          We have a preliminary working draft of Ste 1008

landfill guidelines which has been sent out for comment by

a number of parties.  That draft is publicly available and

we can make it available to whoever is interested in a copy

of it.

          After that preliminary review, we will be making

revisions and we expect to have.-a draft guideline that Mr.

Plehn can send forward for Agency review ajad clearance by

December 15 of this year, we anticipate publicalbion of that

as proposed in the Federal Register by March of 1979,

followed again by a 90-day public comment period,, with

final promulgation January 30, 1980.

          MR. PLEHN:  Thank you, John.  We will now proceed

to take statements from those people who have anked to make

them, in the order in which we've received thoso requests.

The first person is Mr. Curtis Barton of the American Paper

Institute and the National Forest Products Association.

          STATEMENT OF CURTIS BARTON, ON BEHALF OF THE
          MANUFACTURING WASTE COMMITTEE OF THE AMERICAN
          PAPER INSTITUTE AND THE NATIONAL FOREST PRODUCTS
          ASSOCIATION

-------
emb-23












      i





      2





      3





      4





      5





      6





      7





      8





      9





     10





     11





     12





     13





     14





     15





     16





     17





     18





     19





     20





     21





     22





     23





     24





     25
                                                         23



          MR. BARTON:  Thank you, Mr. Chairperson.  My name



is Curtis Barton.  I am a Group Head in the Environmental



Control Department of the Procter and Gamble Company,



and currently serve as Chairman of the Manufacturing Waste



Committee of the American Paper Institute and the National



Forest Products Association. This statement is made on behalf



of that committee and the 200 member pulp and paper companies



of API, and the more than 2,000 forest products companies



represented by NFPA.



         Fos,jalraoat<,a^y«Mir- now, API and NFPA have been



closely following the development of the RCRA hazardous waste



regulations.  We have commented to the Agency on several of



the preliminary drafts and proposed regulations, and intend



to do so on all of the various drafts and proposals to be



issued in the future.



          While we believe the pulp and paper industry and



forest products industries themselves generate only a. very



limited type and quantity of waste which may be classified



as "hazardous", we believe the potential exists for EPA to



define"Hazardous Waste" so broadly that it could have a



severe impact on our industries, and may actually undermine



current environmentally acceptable disposal practices of non-



hazardous wastes.



          Too broad a definition of "Hazardous Waste" could



lead to a severe shortfall in disposal facilities for truly

-------
amb-24
       1





       2





       3





       4





       5





       6





       7





       8





       9





      10





      11





      12





      13





      14





      15





      16





      17





      18





      19





      20





      21





      22





      23





      24





      25
                                                         24



hazardous wastes since what facilities do exist would be oven-




burdened with wastes which are not truly hazardous.  It is of




utmost importance, thenafore, that the section 3001 regulation




in particular reflect a careful and balanced consideration of




all of the factors involved in determining which wastes are




to be treated as "hazardous."




          The August 8 KPA proposed schedule which is presents




just now for rulemaking under Subtitle C of RCRA contains a




realistic January 1980 
-------
                                                              25




               We were distressed to learn just last month that



 2 ||  EPA retained a contractor in May to study solid waste


 3 ||  disposal practices in the pulp and paper industry and plans



     to complete its study and report to EPA by November of this



     year.   There is no way an adequate study of the industry can



     be conducted in the remaining time allowed*.  Even if the con-



     tractor were intimately familiar with the pulp and paper



     industry (which it is not),  the study can only be based on a



     limited literature search and a random assessment of particula:



1() ||  operations within the industry.  Given the diverse nature of



u I,  the industry,  the results can only be general in nature and


]2 ||  may be very misleading.  If  the contractor had an additional



,., ,|  four to six months for the study, as suggested above, there
13 Jl


14 I,  would  be a much better opportunity for an adequate study to



,, ,.  be performed.
   1

16 ||            We are aware, of course, that EPA's proposed



17 ||  schedule adds  somewhat to the lateness of the hazardous waste



.„ ,,  regulations under the time tame set forth in the Act.  We


19 n  believe, however, that the additional time beyond that
20
     provided by Congress is fully justified,  given the magnitude
21 ||  of the  task and the nature of the problems being addressed.


22 ||  This  certainly is not the first time EPA has encountered a


  n  legitimate need to extend its regulation development activiti<

  II
  II  Deyond  the statutory deadlines to carry out adequately the


     mandate of the law.

-------
                                                              26

               In summary,  we support the Agency's proposed promul-
 2
     gation date of January 1980,  but strongly urge that the propo-
 3
     sal date be changed to Jun« or July of 1979.  This suggested

     schedule revision may  help to avoid unforeseen longer delays

     in the proper handling of titm Nation's hazardous waste which

     could result from inadequate  technical and economic assess-
 7
     ments in developing these regulations.
 Q
               Thank you. And I will answer any questions the

     panel has.

               MR. PLEHN:  Thank, you very much, Mr. Barton.  Are

     there any questions?

12              MR. LEHMAN:   Mr. Barton,  I understand your proposal

13    is to delay the proposed rags for roughly six months, but not

14    the final promulgation date.  The implication is that EPA

15    would be able to go from proposal to final regulations in

     six months.

17              MR. BARTONi   That, would be the implication.

18              MR. LEHMAN:   Yes.  Now, would you like to comment
19
     on the — for example, how — we just went thz-ough <» schedule

20    that says that that may take  as long as a year.  Coiold you

21    give us your thoughts  as •.to how one might accomplish what
22
     apparently is going to take a year and do it in six months?

23              MR. BARTON:   I think that the Agency at the current

24    tine is going through  an evolutionary process in developing
25
     these regulations.  3001 for example, every month there's a

-------
      1



      2



      3



      4



      5



      6



      7



      8



      9



      10


End 1A
      11
IB
     12



     13



     14



     15



     16



     17



     18



     19



     20



     21



     22



     23



     24



     25
                                                          27


different concept around, how the TOP is to be run and so


forth, and I think it's raore.; important that technology and so


forth be better established prior to the proposal, and if that


is done, I would think that you could — the second step,


going from proposal to promulgation would — could be


foreshortened, simply because you would have already done a


lot of the work required to make a sound regulation.


          MR. PLEHNt  Are there any other questions?


          Thank you very much, Mr. Barton.  The next speaker


is Mr. Richard Sobel, of the Manufacturing Chemists Associa-


tion.


          STATEMENT Of RICHARD SOBEL, CHAIRMAN, MCA/RCRA
          TASK GROUP, ON BEHALF OF THE MANUFACTURING
          CHEMISTS ASSOCIATION (MCA)


          MR. SOBEL:  Thank you, Mr. Chairman.  Good after-


noon.  My name is Richard Sobel.  My statement today is on


behalf of the Manufacturing Chemists Association  (MCA).   I am


Chairman of MCA's RCRA Task Group.


          The Manufacturing Chemists Association  (MCA) is a


non-profit trade association having 194 United States member


companies, representing more than 90 percent of the productior


capacity of basic industrial chemicals within this country.


MCA members operate about 1500 plants located in nearly every


state.  Many of the plants are generators of hazardous wastes,


Some members are transporters.  And many of the facilities


also include disposal sites for wastes which may be designatec

-------
                                                              28

     as hazardous.  Thus, our members have a direct and critical
     interest in hazardous waste guidelines and regulations.
 3              Our industry believes that EPA has done a
 4    commendable job in involving the public and in getting all
 5    the complex issues laid out.  However, the rules in their
 6    present state are too complex to be workable.  They need to
     be simplified while still reflecting the real world.  And
 8    they need to be expedited so that affected parties can
 g    proceed with their planning procedures knowing what they are
10    facing.
H              We do not believe that EPA has been dragging its

12
13              MCA believes that EPA has done an outstanding job
     in soliciting input and in involving the public and affected
15    parties in the regulatory development process through an
16    extensive program of hearings and meetings and by making
     readily available copies of preliminary drafts and drafts
     of the regulations.
               Also, EPA desk officers and others involved have
     been available for clarification of these matters generally.
     All this is part of an orderly and necessary process to
92    develop workable regulations in an area that is probably the
     most complex of the environmental areas, because it involves
23
24    not only air and surface water, but also groundwater, and
     must cover the complete spectrum of types of wastes (from

-------
                                                               29




 !    gases,  through  liquids,  semi-solids, and  solids), methods of




 2    disposal  (on, in, and under' the  land, incineration, and




 3    others),  and sources  of  wastes  (most commercial  and industria




 4    facilities  in the country).  Subtitle C,  which covers




 5    hazardous wastes, is  the roost complex part of the problem as




 6    far as  regulation development goes.  And  Sections 3001




 -    concerning  the  definition  and listing of  hazardous wastes




 8    and 3004  on the standards  for disposal  facilities are by  far




 9    the roost  technically  complex areas.




 10             It is difficult  to draft simple, practical and




 n     technically valid regulations in such a complex  area, but




 12     this is exactly what  is  needed.  The complexities of."




 13     establishing the 3001 criteria,  for example, might be reduced




 14     by restricting  the criteria  to those that are simply



 1S     determined  and  are of well-recognized concern.




 16              Many  of the problems encountered in early drafts




 17     of the  regulations have  been due to efforts to include




 |8     methodologies which have not been validated by the scientific




 lg     community.




 20              Section 3004 on  facilities standards covers a




 21     diverse set of  facilities  from incinerators to landfarms,




 29     from deepwells  to landfills, that require the application of




 03     expertise from  a variety of  technical disciplines.  For the




24     first time,  environmental  regulations will deal  in a major




25     way with  not only what is  to be  achieved, but also how it is

-------
 2
                                                              30



     to be achieved.



               MCA believes that these rules can be simplified by
     adhering to performance  standards only.   Tell us what results
 O



     are to be accomplished.   Most of the companies,,  by far in the



     chemical industry,  are responsible operators  and do not requip i
 5



 6   the specification of rigid procedures on development of




 7   operating plans,  training oi: people, preparation of contin-




     gency plans, the  proper  number of operators,  etc., etc.  Also,
 O



     it should not be  necessary t» include under RCRA facilities




     covered by other  Acts; for example, pits,.ponds,,  and lagoons



     that are part of  NPDES systcims are covered by the Clean




     Water Act, and we believe aare excluded from coverage by RCRA.




               National  Ambient Air Standards are  set by the Clean



     Air Act according to tried procedures, and we believe that



     additional standards, if needed, should be developed under
15


     that Act and not  under RCRA,.  Similarly, waste disposal
16


     wells are covered by the Safe Drinking Water  Act and, need




     not be covered under RCRA.
18


               We believe that sleeps in these directions will have




     benefits all around.  They would avoid duplication with other




     acts and would be based  on technically valid  tests.  They




     would greatly simplify the rule-making task and provide a




     more workable and practical set of rules.  Finally, they




     should reduce the time needed to develop rules under RCRA.




               MCA and its member companies support the objectives
25

-------
                                                               31


 j   of RCRA.  In this regard, we will continue to work toward

 2   development of workable regulations that are technically  and

 3   legally supportable.

 4             Thank you.

 5             MR. PLEHN:  Thank you very much, Mr. Sobel.  I'm

 6   sorry I mispronounced your name.

 7             MR. SOBEL:  Either way is okay.

 g             MR. PLEHN:  Are there any questions from the

 9   panel?

 10             MR. LEHMAN:  Mr. Sobel, I listened with great

 u    interest to your remarks.  You didn't address the schedule

 12    directly.  Do you have any remarks about the proposal —

 13              MR. SOBEL:  Mr. Lehman, we didn't analyze the

 14    schedule directly.  We just dealt with the general background

 !5    of the thing, rather thanthe schedule.  I didn't get the

 16    schedule 'till a week ago.  We think you need whatever time

 17    it takes to do it right.  But we're anxious to see the

 18    results, because we have capital plans and budgets to

 19    prepare, so we can tell what's coming.

 2Q              MR. PLEHN:  Thank you very much.

 21              The next speaker is Mr. Bob Harness of the

 22    Monsanto Company.

 23              STATEMENT OF ROBERT L. HARNESS, MANAGER,
               REGULATORY AFFAIRS, MONSANTO COMPANY, ON
24              BEHALF OF MONSANTO COMPANY

25              MR. HARNESS:  Thank you, Mr. Plehn, and members of

-------
                                                              32






     the  panel




 2             My  name  is  Robert L. Harness.   I am Manager,




 3    Regulatory Affairs for Monsanto Company.  I have been employed




 4    by Monsanto for  approximately 10 years, and have held various




 5    positions in  plant engineering, plant operations and




 6    environmental control.  I  am appearing today to present




 7    Monsanto*s comments and recommendations on EPA's proposed




     schedule for  implementation of the Resource Conservation  and




     Recovery Act.




10             The Monsanto Company is a  large corporation which



     operates more than 50 manufacturing  facilities in  the United




12    States, employing  approximately 62,000 persons worldwide.  Our




,,    plants produce a wide array of products and consequently  a
lo



     large range of solid  waste types are generated.  Wei have  a



     vital interest in  every aspect of RCRA regulations and  a
15



16    special concern  for the hazardous waste criteria and pre-




     liminary notification requirements.



.„             My  remarks  will  .address the document entitled
lo
19
21
     "Proposed Schedule  for  Rulamaking  under  the  Resource
2Q   Conservation Act and Recovery Act of  1976," dated August 8,
     1978, and will  focus on  th Hazardous



     Waste Management; and

-------
                                                               33






                Second,  the need for a reasonable time frame for



      development and promulgation of regulations,  so that EPA may




      adequately address and solve these problems.




                EPA's efforts to fulfill its mandates under RCRA




      have been characterized by public participation in  the




      rulemaking process.   This  is especially  true  in the




  ,    Hazardous Waste Management Program, where the Agency has




  8    distributed draft  regulations for review and  comment by




  9    interested parties.   These interchanges  have  led to progres-




 10    sive refinements in the draft regulations.  However,  the




 n    relatively simple  language in RCRA subtitle C masks a very




 12    complicated task.   To date,  no final  regulations for hazar-




 13    do us waste management have been promulgated,  and EPA is now




 |4    facing  lawsuits for  failure to fulfill its  responsibilities.




 15              Monsanto believes there are mitigating factors in




 16    this matter which  extend the critical issue beyond  the ques-




 ]?    tion of failure to act by  a specified date.  A  number of




 18    serious technical  and procedural problems have  been identi-




 ig    fied in EPA's emerging Hazardous Waste Management Program




 20    which have necessitated delays in the rulemaking process,  and




 2]    which must be resolved before promulgation  can  occur.  Among




 29    these are the following:




 23              1.  The  initial  drafts of the  Section 3001




 .,,    regulations propose  an unreasonably complicated and broadly




.,-     inclusive definition of hazardous waste.  If  promulgated,  man;

-------
                                                              34




 j    wastes generally considered innocous would be classified as




 2    "hazardous."  Moreover, many of the testing procedures




 3    specified in the March 24, L978 draft regulation arei at this




 4    time unproven, and, possibly, unworkable.  Of particular




 -    concern are the toxicity testing protocols and the "toxicant




 6    extraction procedure."  A considerable amount of technical




 „    interchange has taken place on this point, but it seems




 8    apparent that significant work remains to develop workable




 g    criteria that will regulate only those wastes which are




]()    significantly more hazardous than common municipal zefuse.




u              Second, given the complexity of the draft hazardous




12    waste criteria regulations, coupled with the notification




     requirement of the proposed Section 3010 regulation? it is
lo



14    probable that many relatively innocuous wastes would be




15    declared hazardous, because of a lack of test data.  This




16    would result in some truly nonhazardous wastes utilizing the




     already-too-scarce capacity of acceptable disposal sites.




     Adequate time to develop workable criteria will minimize
lo



ig    this consequence.




               Third, the draft Section 3004 regulation, standards
20



     for hazardous waste storage,, treatment and disposal facilitie^,




22    would set extremely tough facility standards that are




     inflexible from the standpoj.ng of type of hazardous waste
2o



     handled.  Furthermore, we txilieve very few existing




25    facilities, even those clearly environmentally acceptable.

-------
                                                              35



 1
     will meet the draft standards.  He suggest reshaping of the

 2
     program to allow for distinction of facilities by type of

 3
     waste handled, and continued operation of existing

 4
     facilities shown to be environmentally sound.

 5
               Fourth, the matter of economic impact of the

 6
     hazardous waste regulations, as well as other aspects of RCRA


     has not been adequately evaluated.  The draft report entitled

 g
     "Cost of Compliance with Hazardous Waste Management Regula-

 9
     tions," dated May 1978, and completed under contract to EPA


     by Battelle Columbus Laboratory predicts significantly higher


     costs for compliance and in view of the already high inflatioi

12
     rate, should be given thorough consideration in the rulemakin<

13
     process.


               These matters do not stand alone as the issues


     needing resolution.  Rather, they serve to illustrate the

16
     kinds of problems which must be addressed by EPA in this

17
     rulemaking process.

18
               The threat of lawsuits against EPA, as mentioned

19
     in the August 16, 1978 Federal Register notice, implies


     negligence on the part of the Agency in carrying out its

21
     responsibilities.  We disagree.  Simply put, development of

22
     a comprehensive solid waste disposal program and hazardous

23
     waste management regulations is an enormously complex

24
     problem that will impact significantly on all of society.

25
     We believe EPA has been working diligently on this matter.

-------
 1


 2


 3


 4


 5


 6


 7


 8


 9


10


11


12


13


14


15


16


17


18


19


20


21


22


23


24


25
                                                          36



but that the promulgation (late in the statute was inserted

by Congress without a full understanding of the difficulties

of the undertaking.

          Monsanto endorses, the objectives of the Resource

Conservation and Recovery Act, and will continue to cooperate

with EPA, both alone and through the Manufacturing Chemists

Association, to develop sound regulations which are adequate

to protect the environment.  Monsanto strongly supports the
           "r-tde
need for a -^ejti^making schedule that is adequate to allow  for

development of workable, effective regulations.

          We believe the timeta|jfie proposed by EPA will

provide adequate opportunity to resolve many of the pending

questions.  The schedule will allow for review of the most

recent drafts of the Subtitle C regulations prior to the

proposed January 7, 1979 federal Register proposal date.

Because of the complex technical nature of these regulations,

the proposed 90-day public comment period also appears

justified.

          Finally, considering the fact that public comment

on the proposed regulations will be very extensive, requiring

time-consuming EPA review, a projected final promulgation

date of January 1980 is likewise a reasonable target.

Similarly, Monsanto views the proposed timetables for

development and promulgation of RCRA section 4004 criteria;

Clean Water Act, section 40!> municipal sludge guidelines;

-------
                                                              37
 1    RCRA section 4002,  state planning guidelines;  and RCRA




 2    section 1008, landfill guidelines, as reasonable and




 3    realistic considering the task at hand.




 4              In closing, I would like to offer one further




 5    point.   This extended regulatory development schedule will




 6    not create an "open season"  for hazardous waste disposal.




 7    Many states already have comprehensive,  enforceable waste




 8    disposal laws.  We  and other responsible companies will




 9    continue to manage  our process waste disposal  activities in




10    a socially responsible manner, and in compliance with




11    existing-.laws land regulations.




12              Moreover, we have  already begun an evaluation of




13    our process waste disposal activities in anticipation of




14    additional requirements which might be imposed by RCRA




15    regulations.  Irresponsible  "midnight dumping" activities




i€    have been the work  of a very small number of people, and



17    very likely will not be eliminated by even the most severe




i8    of regulations.




19              It is  of  paramount importance  for the protection




20    of the  environment, as well  as the maintenaic e of our standard




21    of living, that  industrial and municipal waste management




22    regulations be reasonable, as well as adequately protective.




23    for this reason, Monsanto supports EPA's revised implementa-




24    tion schedule, and  looks forward to continued  participation




25    in the  rulemaking process.

-------
                                                              38


 ;             Thank you for th« opportunity to present this


 2   statement.  And I will answer questions.


 3             MR. PLEHN:  Than): you, Mr. Harness.  I apologize


 4   to you, too, for your name..  I'm now batting  333, which in


 5   baseball is pretty good, but in running meetings it's  not


 6   terrific.


 7             Are there any questions from the panel?  No


 8   questions.


 9             Thank you very much.


10             MR. HARNESS:  Thiink you.


u             MR. PLEHN:  Our next speaker is Mr. Eugene J.


12   Wingerter of the National Solid Waste Management Association.


13             STATEMENT OF EUGKNE J. WINGERTER, EXECUTIVE

              DIRECTOR, NATIOWO. SOLID WASTES MANAGEMENT

u             ASSOCIATION, ON IIEHALF OF THENATIONAL SOLID
              WASTES MANAGEMENT: ASSOCIATION


              MR. WINGERTER:  tfiank you, Stef, for allowing me

16
    to be here and also for pronouncing my name correctly. I feel


    flattered.

1ft
              From the size of the audience here  and in the next

19
    room, it's a pleasure to sue that the interest in RCRA's

20
    implementation has not wanud at all in the last two years.

21
              The Resource Conservation and Recover Act., passed  in

22
    October 1976, has been hailed as the first federal law which

23
    requires comprehensive coniurol of hazardous waste.  RCRA

24
    required that by April 19711, the U.S. Environmental Protection

25
    Agency promulgate regulations for the generation and

-------
 1

 2

 3

 4

 5

 6

 7

 8

 9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16
17

18

19
20

21

22

23

24

25
                                                         39
transportation of hazardous waste as well as for the storage,
treatment, and disposal of these wastes at specially permit-
ted facilities.  That deadline expired five months ago and
the regulations, with the exception of those related to
transportation, have not even been formally proposed.
          The need for these regulations is paramount.  The
kind of environmental assaults which occur in a society
without hazardous waste regulations was illustrated recently
in the promiscuous dumping of PCs-contaminated liquids along
a North Carolina highway.
          While several states have enacted legislation
regulating the disposal of hazardous wastes, only a few
states require a manifest to track the movement of waste from
point of generation, during transport, to final disposal at
a permitted facility.  Such a record-keeping system seems
the best mechanism for assuring that hazardous wastes
generated are taken to approved facilities and nowhere else.
          But even those states which do have cradle-to-
grave hazardous waste control laws are postponing development
of regulations until the U.S. EPA provides the model with the
RCRA regulations.
          The delay by EPA has another, and more damaging
effect.  Until a hazardous waste management program is in
place and enforced, there will be minimal development of new
facilities which meet the rigid environmental standards

-------
                                                              40

     necessary to provide secure: disposal of hazardous waste.
     Without enforced regulations,  there is little incentive for
 ,,    generators of hazardous  waste  to pay the high cost of disposal
 4    at specially designed and designated facilities.
               Without such regulations to assure the  delivery of
     waste to such facilities,  there is little reason  to expect
     new treatment and disposal facilities to be developed.
 8    And,  very simply, without facilities adequate to  take all of
 g    the kzardous wastes  genera bad  across the nation,  a hazardous
10    waste regulatory program has little meaning.  What end is
H    achieved with the manifest .'systems and disposal permits,  if
12    there are no disposal sites which can safely accept the
     hazardous waste?
               For these  reasons,, we urge that EPA be  aggressive in
14
     proposing an amended schedule  for implementation  of the
16    regulations under RCRA.   Early drafts of regulations indicate
1?    that EPA has done considerable background work on the regula-
IS    tory  issues, and that the Agency will be able to  complete
19    regulations in a timely  manner without trading off thorough-
20    ness.
21              We do urge, however, that EPA include in its new
,,.2    schedule time for interaction  with interested groups outside
23    of the federal government.  The National Solid Wastes
24    Management Association values  the opportunities provided by
25    EPA to contribute our experience and technical expertise to

-------
                                                             41



 !   the development of these regulations.  He feel that the


 2   regulations related to both hazardous and solid waste under


 3   RCRA will be better for the iiput EPA has received from many


 4   outside interest groups.


 5             Further, we urge EPA, in its haste to finalize the



 6   hazardous waste regulations, not to compromise its position


 7   that regulations apply as strictly to disposal at the site of


 8   generation as they do to disposal off-site at a waste service


 9   facility.


10             Some groups have argued, because of the impact on


u   the generating industry, that the regulations should be


12   enforced on a more gradual basis for onsite hazardous waste


13   disposal facilities than for offsite facilities. EPA has


14   stated that perhaps 80 percent of all hazardous wastes are


15   disposed of at facilities which are captive to the


16   generating industry.  Hazardous waste disposal — hazardous


17   wastesldisposed of at a generator's facility are no less likely
         \/

18   to cause environmental damage than are wastes disposed of at a


19   comparable offsite facility.  We stress the importance of a


20   regulatory scheme which enforces the strict standards equally


21   at all hazardous waste disposal facilities regardless of who


29   owns and operates them.


23             National Solid Wastes Management Association


04   appreciates the opportunity once again to make its comments


95   known to the EPA, and we intend to continue our participation

-------
                                                              42
     with the development of the hazardous and solid waste regula-


 2
     tions. We look forward to ijhe day when the hazardous waste

 q

     control program will be in effect.



               Thank you.



               MR. PLEHN:  Thank you, Mr. Wingerter. Are there



     any questions?



 7             MS. FRIEDMAN:  ATI I correct in understanding it's

 a

     the position of your organization that we should shorten the



     schedule?



10             MR. WINGERTER:  No.  I didn't say that, Lisa.  We



     are anxious to see the regulations promulgated as expeditious jjy


12          ...
     as possible.



13             MS. FRIEDMAN:  Then, do you support the schedule?



14             MR. WINGERTEJt: I cannot say that, because I have



     not looked at the details of the schedule to know just how



     effective they are as far as the feasibility.



17             MR. PLEHN:  The r.,ext statement is by Mr. Hardison,


18
     of the Union Carbide Corporation.



19             STATEMENT OF RICHARD HARISON, MANAGER,

               ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS, CARBON PRODUCTS

               DIVISION, UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION,, ON

               BEHALF OF UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION



               MR. HARDISON:  Thank you very much. You're up to



„,   60 percent now.
ffO


               My name is Richard Hardison, and I'm Manager of
24


     Environmental Affairs for the Carbon Products Division of
2o

-------
                                                              43
     Union Carbide.   And today I'm making comments  on behalf of
 2
     Carbide Corporation on the Resource Conservation and
 3
     Recovery Act.
               Union Carbide supported the enactment of  RCRA,

     because we recognized that solid waste management in this
 6
     country has been neglected.  Serious problems of environmental
     degradation, occupational  safety,  and harm to human health
 8
     have in the past resulted  from careless handling of solid
 9
     wastes.
10
               Improper disposal of waste materials  can  cause
     pollution of underground and surface water resources.  In
12
     some cases, such pollution is the result of disposal
13
     practices which may actually have met the  prevailing standards
     of the time and which were considered safe and  legal by  both
15
     industry and government.  Therefore,  a new approach was
16
     needed to effectively deal with the problem of  solid waste
     disposal.
18
               The  Environmental Protection Agency has been
19
     directed under RCRA to develop regulations that translate the
20
     Act into effective practices.  In developing the RCRA
21
     regulations the EPA has received input from state agencies,
22
     labor groups,  environmentalists and industry.   The  chemical
23
     industry has in particular worked closely  with  EPA  to provide
24
     needed technical background.  The results  of this effort have
25
     shown well considered preliminary drafts and proposed regulations

-------
                                                              44
 1    that have had severe  scrutiny from all perspectives.  While



 2    inevitably there will be  some points on which  industry and



 3    environmental groups  will differ,  we think  it  is worth



 4    emphasizing the constructive job EPA has done  so far  to



 5    reconcile these respective points  of view.



 6              He feel  that  input from  the public and private



 7    sectors has eliminated  many of the pitfalls experienced in



 8    implementation of  the air und water acts which led to



 9    extensive litigation  with consequent waste  of  time resources



10    and forced delay in achieving environmental quality goals.



11              If promulgation of rules under the *ir and  water



12    acts had received  the benefit of the kind of public and



13    private input that RCRA hail received, the court dockets would



14    not be crowded with litigation between the  EPA and industry



15    on points which could have been resolved before promulgation



16    of the regulations.



17              Union Carbide considers  a healthy, safe,  clean



18    environment to be  an  import .ant national objective. We are



19    committed not only to compliance with existing health,



20    safety and environmental  la.ws, but to the development of  new



21    technologies and new  or refined public policies designed  to



22    achieve these objectives  consistent with the other basic



23    wants and needs of people and with the achievement of other



24    important national objectives. It is our policy to contribute



25    openly and constructively to the creation of such  policies

-------
   I                                                           45


 ,    and regulations.


 2              The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act can


 3    provide the basis of a sound  program to control solid waste


 4    problems.  Union Carbide feels that it is far more important


 -    for EPA to produce technically sound and reasonable regula-


 6    tions that meet the objectives of RCRA than it is to meet


 „    arbitrarily imposed time limits for accomplishing this  task.


 „              It is our view that Congress intended RCRA to
 o

 9    provide a reasonable and responsible vehicle for management


|()    of solid wastes, and we believe that EPA has the capability


H    and the desire to produce an effective set of regulations

                          ptublid
12    that will protect tha'-pWric and the environment without


13    imposing unreasonable degcees..ef regulation.  We at Union


14    Carbide fully expect that industry's successful record of


15    compliance with the environmental acts will be continued with


lg    this challenging new one.


17              Thank you.  I would entertain questions.


18              MR. PLEHN:  Thank you, Mr. Hardison.  Are there


19    any questions?  No.


20              Thank you very much.


21              I would like to suggest that we all might like now


,2    a 10-minute break.  If there are any other persons here who


.,,,    would like to make a statement, if they would register out-


24    side and make that interest known.  Also, those of you who


9.    may have filled out cards with questions, if you could provid*

-------
emb-46






      i





      2





      3





      4





      5




      6





      7
     10





     11





     12





     13





     14





     15





     16





     17





     18





     19





     20





     21





     22





     23





     24





     25
                                                         46






those to us now, at the beginning of the break.  If there are



no further statements, we can get into the answez:ing of them



right after we resume.



          Why don't we break for 10 minutes.



          (Brief recess.)



          MR. PLEHN:  To my knowledge, there is rio one who



has indicated that theywould like to make a statement.  Is



that correct?  Is there anyone here who would like to make a



statement?



          If there is not, we will now turn to the questions




which we received on the cards.  I might take the 
-------
uab-47                                                            47

      i    involved in the development of these regulations. , And  that


      2    is the first point.


      3              The second point I think is that we have, as  also


      4    has been mentioned today,  but as  I think  that we've chosen to

                                                       f/fese-
      5    say, that we have tried in the development of Uiia regula-


      6    tions to do it in as open  and as  participatory  a way as was


      7    available to us,  and we, we personally think that that:  has


      8    been a very useful and successful way to  get the input  of


      9    the wisdom of all those in our society who are  concerned


     10    about these problems to help us with our  task.   But that has


     n    also taken time.


     12              Thirdly, we have had the difficult problems of


     13    integrating this  statute,  development of  regulations under


     n    this statute with all of the other — or  not all of the


     is    other, but with many of the other environmental laws to be


     16    administered by EPA.  The  Clean Water Act is probably the


     17    foremost example. As you know,  we are working currently to


     18    integrate the RCRA permitting process with the  NPDES permit-


     19    ting process, but other examples  are the  Clean  Water Act,


     20    work with the DPT on the integration of the transportation


     21    regulations with  their authorities in that area, the


     22    integration with  the Safe  Drinking Water  Act in terms of


     23    ground water protection, etcetera, etcetera.


     24              And I guess the  final point that I'd  like to  make


     25    is that this is,  as  you know,  a functional!zed  agency.  The

-------
emb-48
      i

      2

      3

      4
      5
      6

      7
     10

     11

     12

     13

     14

     15

     16

     17

     18

     19

     20

     21

     22

     23

     24

     25
                                                         48
Office of Solid Waste has one perspective on these problems,
but we need to integral* our efforts with other organizations
like the Office of Research and Development, the Office of
Enforcement, the Office of Planning and Management and the
Office of Air, Water and Radiation, and some of these
mechanisms of working groups and steering committees and
Red Border clearances are the best procedures that we've been
able to devise as an agency to ensure that the Administrator,
who is responsible for the activities of all of us, is
certain that he has the best judgment of every component
part of the Agency as to how these programs should go forward
and how they should properly fit together.
          Now, it's an unfortunate fact that all of those
things taken together require time, and as I said at the
outset, it would be the earnest wish of all of us that this
process were today completed, and our program were in full
effect under the law.  But unfortunately, that is not the
case.
          I understand John Skinner has a question that he
would —
          MR. SKINNER:  I have actually three questions.
The first one is, is there any possibility that the
                                                         I)
Section 4004 criteria will be reissued in proponed form.
          That's not something that we can answer at this
point in time.  It depends upon the changes that will be

-------
erab-49




      1



      2



      3



      4



      5



      6



      7



      8



      9



     10



     11



     12



     13



     14



     15



     16



     17



     18



     19



     20



     21



     22



     23



     24



     25
                                                         49


necessary in the Section 4004 criteria, whether they are


significant changes and whether they are changes that raise


issues that have not been adequately commented on in the


original public comment period on the proposed regulation.


          So, as we're developing the regulation, we will


have to make decisions as to whether or not proposal —


reproposal is necessary.  Let me state, however, that the


schedule that we presented to you today does not include


reproposal of the regulation. So that if we did decide to


repropose the regulation and have an additional public


comment period, that schedule would have to be extended


accordingly.


          The next two questions deal with the disposal of

                                     ((
sewage sludge.  And the first one is, what is the statutory


basis for excluding sewage sludge from the Resource

                               ))
Conservation and Recovery Act.


          We have not decided to exclude municipal sewage


sludge from the provisions of the Resource Conservation and


Recovery Act.  The definition of solid waste in that Act


clearly includes municipal sewage sludge.  However, Section


1006 of the Act calls for integration of RCRA with the


Federal Water Pollution Control Act, and says that nothing


in this act shall be construed to apply to any activity or


substance which is subject to the Federal Water Pollution


Control Act, except to the extent that such application is

-------
emb-50                                                             50



      i    not inconsistent with ithe requirements of such acts.  And it


      2    also says that the Administrator shall integrate all  provisio


      3    of this Act for purposes of administration and enforcement,


      4    and to avoid duplication with the provisions of other acts,


      5    including the Federal Water Pollution Control Act.


      e              So, in developing the guidelines under Section


      7    four thousand — 405 of the Clean Water Act, we are attemptin


      8    to meet the requirement for coordination and integration.


      g              The second question gets at another aspect  of that

                          II
     10    issue.  It says, doesn't Section 405 of the Clean Water Act


     n    only deal with the disposal of. sludge, and not with the


     12    generation, transportation and storage of sludge that meets

                                  >;
     13    the hazardous criteria..


     u              That is predominantly correct.  Therefore,  it is ou:


     15    intent to co-promulgatci the guideline that we develop under


     16    Section 405 of the Cles.n Water Act with Section —  with the


     17    regulations under Subtitle C for hazardous waste management


     is    of RCRA, and also with the regulations under Subtitle D,


     ig    principally the 4004 criteria as is necessary to provide


     20    control and protection that is not available under  the Clean


     21    Water Act.


     22              We have actually taken the first step in  that


     23    regard in co-promulgating a certain part of the Section 405


     24    guideline under Section 4004 in proposed form.


     25              Those are thci only questions I had, Stef.

-------
emb-51









     i





     2





     3





     4





     5





     6





     7





     8





     9





     10





     11





     12





     13





     14





     15





     16
    18





    19





    20





    21





    22





    23





    24
                                                         51






          MR. PLEHN:  He have here three questions which ask




sort of for substantive matters relating to these various




regulations, and that's not a subject of our meeting here




today.



          So we won't be answering those as part of this




process.




          Just a moment.  If there are any further questions,




I'd encourage you to get them to us.  This is another sub-




stantive question, which really is not part of today's




meeting.




          If there are no further questions, I think I




will — and if there's no-one who would like to make a




further statement — then I think that I will call this




meeting to a close.




          Thank you very much for coming.




          (Whereupon, at 2:50 p.m., the meeting was




adjourned.)

-------

-------
                     Opening Remarks

                    Steffen W. Plehn
     Deputy Assistant Administrator for Solid Waste

                     Public Meeting
   EPA's Current Schedule for Promulgating Regulations
    under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
                   September 15, 1978




     I wish to welcome you to this public meeting to

discuss EPA's schedule for promulgation of regulations

under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act  (RCRA).

The purpose of this meeting is to inform the public of

our current schedule and to provide an opportunity for

public comment on it.  If any of you have not obtained a

copy of the schedule, copies are available from our

registration desk.
     RCRA is of central importance in the efforts of EPA

to protect public health and the environment, as the recent

events at Love Canal and elsewhere in the nation have so

tragically shown.  EPA first recommended Federal legislation

to regulate hazardous wastes to the Congress in 1973.  We

continued to develop information on the nature of the hazardous

waste problem and the damages resulting from improper manage-

ment until the enactment of RCRA in October 1976.  Since

-------
then we have proceeded to develop the regulations called



for by that Act as rapidly as our resources and the complexity



of the problem has allowed.  Through a growing program of



grants we have assisted state governments in obtaining



legislation and developing their own programs for the



effective management of hazardous wastes.  We have made



major progress since the enactment of RCRA but unfortunately



we have not been able to meet many of the deadlines set



forth by the Congress in the Act.








     To date, EPA has received citizen suit letters from



six organizations notifying us of their intent to seek a



court order compelling EPA to promulgate regulations under



Subtitles C and D of RCRA:  the: four public interest group



citizen suit letters referenced, in the Federal Register



notice announcing this meeting, plus two similar letters



from the National Solid Wastes Management Association and



the Utility Solid Waste Activities Group which weie received



after that notice went to press.  The Agency has met with



all these groups in an effort to obtain a better understanding



of their concerns and to see if those concerns could be



resolved prior to the litigation.  No mutually satisfactory



resolution has been achieved to date.








     On September 13, 1978, two of the citizen suit orgain-



izations, the Environmental Defense Fund and Environmental

-------
Action, filed suit in the U.S. District Court here in



Washington to require EPA to promulgate certain Subtitle A, C,



and D regulations.  This filing followed fast on the heels



of a similar lawsuit which had been instituted less than



a week earlier by the State of Illinois, seeking to compel



EPA to issue regulations under Subtitles C and D.








     The schedule before you today represents EPA's current



best estimate of the shortest amount of time in which it can



promulgate defensible regulations with adequate allowance



for public participation.  Please be assurad that we are



concerned about that schedule.  If it were within our power



we would want to have an operational hazardous and solid



waste regulatory program in place immediately.  However,



that is not possible.








     We are seeking today to obtain the comments of the



public on our schedule.  As the result of your comments



and our further experience we may conclude that the schedule



can be shortened.  Alternately, we may determine that more



time will be required in order to assure that well con-



ceived and fully defensible regulations are achieved.








     In light of the pending litigation against the Agency



we will be somewhat constrained in responding to questions



about the Agency's proposed schedule during this meeting.

-------
Thus, although we will be happy to answer inquiries con-



cerning, for example, the availability of drafts of the



regulations and schedules for public hearings on the



regulations, we will not be able to reply, or will be able



to reply only in a limited way, to questions related to



the issues raised by the Environmental Defense Fund and



the State of Illinois lawsuits.

-------
                           STATEMENT OF THE
                       AMERICAN PAPER INSTITUTE
                       ON THE PROPOSED SCHEDULE
                         FOR PROMULGATION OF
                     HAZARDOUS WASTE REGULATIONS
                          SEPTEMBER 15, 1978


 MY NAME IS CURTIS BARTON.  I AM A GROUP HEAD IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL

 DEPARTMENT OF THE PROCTER AND GAMBLE COMPANY, AND CURRENTLY SERVE AS

 CHAIRMAN OF THE MANUFACTURING WASTE COMMITTEE OF THE AMERICAN PAPER

 INSTITUTE AND THE NATIONAL FOREST PRODUCTS ASSOCIATION.  THIS STATEMENT

 IS MADE ON BEHALF OF THAT COMMITTEE AND THE 200 MEMBER PULP AND PAPER

 COMPANIES OF API, AND THE MORE THAN 2,000 FOREST PRODUCTS COMPANIES

 REPRESENTED BY NFPA.



 FOR ALMOST A YEAR NOW, API AND NFPA HAVE BEEN CLOSELY FOLLOWING THE

 DEVELOPMENT OF THE RCRA HAZARDOUS WASTE REGULATIONS.  WE HAVE COMMENTED

 TO THE AGENCY ON SEVERAL OF THE PRELIMINARY DRAFTS AND PROPOSED REGULATIONS,

 AND INTEND TO DO SO ON ALL OF THE VARIOUS DRAFTS AND PROPOSALS TO BE ISSUED

 IN THE FUTURE.



 WHILE WE BELIEVE THE PULP AND PAPER AND FOREST PRODUCTS INDUSTRIES THEMSELVES

 GENERATE ONLY VERY LIMITED TYPES AND QUANTITIES OF WASTE WHICH MAY BE

 CLASSIFIED AS "HAZARDOUS", WE BELIEVE THE POTENTIAL EXISTS FOR EPA TO

 DEFINE "HAZARDOUS WASTE" SO BROADLY THAT IT COULD HAVE A SEVERE IMPACT ON

 OUR INDUSTRIES, AND MAY ACTUALLY UNDERMINE CURRENT ENVIRONMENTALLY-ACCEPTABLE

 DISPOSAL PRACTICES OF NON-HAZARDOUS WASTES.  TOO BROAD A DEFINITION OF "HAZARDOUS

 WASTE" COULD LEAD TO A SEVERE SHORTFALL IN DISPOSAL FACILITIES FOR TRULY

fHAZARDOUS WASTES SINCE WHAT FACILITIES DO EXIST WOULD BE OVERBURDENED WITH
I
 WASTES WHICH ARE NOT TRULY HAZARDOUS.  IT IS OF UTMOST IMPORTANCE, THEREFORE,

 THAT THE SECTION 3001 REGULATIONS IN PARTICULAR REFLECT A CAREFUL AND BALANCED

 CONSIDERATION OF ALL OF THE FACTORS INVOLVED IN DETERMINING WHICH WASTES ARE

-------
                                  -2-




TO BE TREATED AS "HAZARDOUS".








THE AUGUST 8 EPA PROPOSED SCHEDULE FOR RULEMAKING UNDER SUBTITLE C OF RCRA




CONTAINS A REALISTIC JANUARY 1980 ENI) POINT DATE FOR THE PROMULGATION OF




THE MOST IMPORTANT OF THE HAZARDOUS HASTE REGULATIONS (SECTIONS 3001-2-4-5).




ACCORDING TO THE PROPOSED SCHEDULE, HOWEVER, THE PERIOD BETWEEN PROPOSAL




(JANUARY 2, 1979) AND PROMULGATION WOULD BE MORE THAN A YEAR.  WHILE WE




BELIEVE THE PROPOSED JANUARY 1980 PROMULGATION DATE IS REALISTIC /iND SHOULD




BE ADOPTED, WE BELIEVE THE DATE FOR PROPOSAL OF THESE REGULATIONS SHOULD BE




CHANGED FROM JANUARY 1979 TO JUNE OR JULY OF 1979.  THIS WOULD ALLOW MORE




TIME AND A BETTER OPPORTUNITY FOR THE! AGENCY TO DEVELOP ADEQUATE INFOR-




MATION REGARDING THE CRITERIA WHICH WILL BE USED TO DEFINE HAZARDOUS SOLID




WASTE, AS WELL AS TO COMPLETE MORE COMPREHENSIVE STUDIES OF INDUSTRIES'




WASTE DISPOSAL PROBLEMS AND PRACTICED.  PROVIDING ADDITIONAL PRE-F'ROPOSAL




STUDY TIME ALSO MAY REDUCE RISK OF LE.NGTHY DELAYS WHICH COULD RESULT FROM




LITIGATION OVER INADEQUATELY DEVELOPED REGULATIONS.








WE WERE DISTRESSED TO LEARN JUST US! MONTH THAT EPA RETAINED A CONTRACTOR




IN MAY TO STUDY SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL PRACTICES IN THE PULP AND PAPER INDUSTRY




AMD PLANS TO COMPLETE ITS STUDY AND REPORT TO EPA BY NOVEMBER OF THIS YEAR.




THERE IS NO WAY AN ADEQUATE STUDY OF THE INDUSTRY CAN BE CONDUCTED IN THE




REMAINING TIME ALLOTTED.  EVEN IF THE CONTRACTOR WERE INTIMATELY FAMILIAR




WITH THE PULP AND PAPER INDUSTRY (WHICH IT IS NOT), THE STUDY CAN ONLY BE




BASED ON A LIMITED LITERATURE SEARCH AND A RANDOM ASSESSMENT OF PARTICULAR




OPERATIONS WITHIN THE INDUSTRY.  GIVEN THE DIVERSE NATURE OF THE INDUSTRY,




THE RESULTS CAN ONLY BE GENERAL IN NATURE AND MAY BE VERY MISLEADING.  IF




THE CONTRACTOR HAD AN ADDITIONAL FOUR TO SIX MONTHS FOR THE STUDY, AS SUGGESTED




ABOVE, THERE WOULD BE A MUCH BETTER OPPORTUNITY FOR AN ADEQUATE STUDY TO BE




PERFORMED.

-------
                                 -3-

WE ARE AWARE, OF COURSE, THAT ERA'S PROPOSED SCHEDULE ADDS SOMEWHAT TO

THE LATENESS OF THE HAZARDOUS WASTE REGULATIONS UNDER THE TIME FRAME

SET FORTH IN THE ACT.  WE BELIEVE, HOWEVER,  THAT THE ADDITIONAL TIME

BEYOND THAT PROVIDE* BY CONGRESS IS FULLY JUSTIFIED, GIVEN THE MAGNITUDE

OF THE TASK AND THE NATURE OF THE PROBLEMS BEING ADDRESSED.  THIS CERTAINLY

IS NOT THE FIRST TIME EPA HAS ENCOUNTERED A LEGITIMATE NEED TO EXTEND ITS

REGULATION DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES BEYOND STATUTORY DEADLINES TO CARRY OUT

ADEQUATELY THE MANDATE OF THE LAW.



IN SUMMARY, WE SUPPORT THE AGENCY'S PROPOSED PROMULGATION DATE OF JANUARY

1980, BUT STRONGLY URGE THAT THE PROPOSAL DATE BE CHANGED TO JUNE OR JULY

OF 1979.  THIS SUGGESTED SCHEDULED REVISION MAY HELP TO AVOID UNFORESEEN

LONGER DELAYS IN THE PROPER HANDLING OF OUR NATION'S HAZARDOUS WASTE WHICH

COULD RESULT FROM INADEQUATE TECHNICAL AND ECONOMIC ASSESSMENTS IN DEVELOPING

THESE REGULATIONS.
C. A. BARTON
9/14/78
VRT

-------
              MANUFACTURING CHEMISTS ASSOCIATION
              1825 CONNECTICUT AVENUE. N W
                                              WASHINGTON, D C 20009
FOR RELEASE-
                                                  CONTACT:
For Immediate Release
Thomas J.  Gilroy
(202) 328-4282
Members of the Press:

     Attached is a statement  by  the  Manufacturing Chemists Association

(MCA) given 9-15-78 at an EPA public meeting held to discuss its

proposed schedule of rulemaking  under the  Resource  Conservation and

Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976.

                                    /''
     The statement was presented by  \Richard  Sobel,  chairman of

MCA's RCRA Task Force.

                           # #  #


MCA-4067

9/15/78

-------
  STATEMENT OF MANUFACTURING CHEMISTS ASSOCIATION  (MCA)
                 AT THE PUBLIC MEETING IN
               WASHINGTON, D,C, ON 9/15/78 TO
Discuss EPA's PROPOSED SCHEDULE FOR RULE-MAKING UNDER THE
     RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT OF 1976
            PRESENTED BY RICHARD SOBEL, CHAIRMAN
                    MCA/RCRA TASK GROUP

-------
GOOD AFTERNOON,  MY NAME is RICHARD SOBEL.  MY STATEMENT TODAY is
ON BEHALF OF THE MANUFACTURING CHEMISTS ASSOCIATION (MCA),  I AM
CHAIRMAN OF MCA's RCRA TASK GROUP,

THE MANUFACTURING CHEMISTS ASSOCIATION (MCA) is A NON-PROFIT
TRADE ASSOCIATION HAVING 194 UNITED STATES  COMPANY MEMBERS
REPRESENTING MORE THAN 90% OF THE PRODUCTION CAPACITY OF
BASIC INDUSTRIAL CHEMICALS WITHIN THIS COUNTRY, MCA MEMBERS
OPERATE ABOUT 1,500 PLANTS LOCATED IN NEARLY EVERY STATE,
MANY OF THE PLANTS ARE GENERATORS OF HAZARDOUS WASTES, SOME
MEMBERS ARE TRANSPORTERS, AND MANY OF THE FACILITIES ALSO
INCLUDE DISPOSAL SITES FOR WASTHS WHICH MAY BE DESIGNATED AS
HAZARDOUS,  THUS, OUR MEMBERS HAVE A DIRECT AND CRITICAL
INTEREST IN HAZARDOUS WASTE GUIDELINES AND  REGULATIONS,

OUR INDUSTRY BELIEVES THAT EPA HAS DONE A COMMENDABLE JOB IN
INVOLVING THE PUBLIC AND IN GET"ING ALL THE COMPLEX ISSUES
LAID OUT,  HOWEVER, THE RULES IN THEIR PRESENT STATE ARE TOO
COMPLEX TO BE WORKABLE,  THEY NEED TO BE SIMPLIFIED WHILE
STILL REFLECTING THE REAL WORLD AND THEY NEED TO BE EXPEDITED
SO THAT AFFECTED PARTIES CAN PROCEED WITH THEIR PLANNING PRO-
CEDURES KNOWING WHAT THEY ARE FACING,

WE DO NOT BELIEVE EPA HAS BEEN DRAGGING  ITS FEET,

MCA BELIEVES THAT EPA HAS DONE AN OUTSTANDING JOB IN SOLICITING
INPUT AND IN INVOLVING THE PUBLIC AND AFFECTED PARTIES IN

-------
                              - 2 -
THE REGULATORY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS THROUGH AN EXTENSIVE
PROGRAM OF HEARINGS AND MEETINGS AND BY MAKING READILY
AVAILABLE COPIES OF PRELIMINARY DRAFTS AND DRAFTS OF THE
REGULATIONS,  ALSO, EPA DESK OFFICERS AND OTHERS INVOLVED
HAVE BEEN AVAILABLE FOR CLARIFICATION OF THESE MATTERS
GENERALLY,  ALL THIS IS PART OF AN ORDERLY AND NECESSARY
PROCESS TO DEVELOP WORKABLE REGULATIONS IN AN AREA THAT IS
PROBABLY THE MOST COMPLEX OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL AREAS BECAUSE
IT INVOLVES NOT ONLY AIR AND SURFACE WATER BUT ALSO GROUNDWATER,
AND MUST COVER THE COMPLETE SPECTRUM OF TYPES OF WASTES
(FROM GASES, THROUGH LIQUIDS, SEMI-SOLIDS, AND SOLIDS),
METHODS OF DISPOSAL (ON, IN, AND UNDER THE LAND, INCINERATION,
AND OTHERS), AND SOURCES OF WASTES (MOST COMMERCIAL AND
INDUSTRIAL FACILITIES IN THE COUNTRY).  SUBTITLE C, WHICH
COVERS HAZARDOUS WASTES, IS THE MOST COMPLEX PART OF THE
PROBLEM AS FAR AS REGULATION DEVELOPMENT GOES AND SECTIONS
3001 CONCERNING THE DEFINITION AND LISTING OF HAZARDOUS
WASTES AND 3001 ON THE STANDARDS FOR DISPOSAL FACILITIES ARE
BY FAR THE MOST TECHNICALLY COMPLEX AREAS,

IT IS DIFFICULT TO DRAFT SIMPLE, PRACTICAL, AND TECHNICALLY
VALID REGULATIONS IN SUCH A COMPLEX AREA BUT THIS IS EXACTLY
WHAT IS NEEDED,  THE COMPLEXITIES OF StTT-HHi THE 3001 CRITERIA,
FOR EXAMPLE, MIGHT BE REDUCED BY RESTRICTING THE CRITERIA TO
THOSE THAT ARE SIMPLY DETERMINED AND ARE OF WELL-RECOGNIZED
CONCERN,  MANY OF THE PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED IN EARLY DRAFTS OF
THE REGULATIONS HAVE BEEN DUE TO EFFORTS TO INCLUDE METHODOLOGIES
WHICH HAVE NOT BEEN VALIDATED BY THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY,

-------
                            -3 -

SECTION 3004 ON FACILITIES STANDARDS COVERS A DIVERSE SET OF
FACILITIES FROM INCINERATORS TO LANDFARMS, FROM DEEPWELI.S TO
LANDFILLS, THAT REQUIRE THE APPLICATION OF EXPERTISE FROM A
VARIETY OF TECHNICAL DISCIPLINES.  FOR THE FIRST TIME,
ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS WILL DEAL IN A MAJOR WAY WITH NOT
ONLY WHAT IS TO BE ACHIEVED BUT ALSO HOW IT IS TO BE ACHIEVED,

MCA BELIEVES THAT THESE RULES CAN BE SIMPLIFIED BY ADHERING
TO PERFORMANCE STANDARDS ONLY,  TELL US WHAT RESULTS ARE TO
BE ACCOMPLISHED,  MOST OF THE COMPANIES, BY FAR IN THE CHEMICAL
INDUSTRY, ARE RESPONSIBLE OPERATORS AND DO NOT REQUIRE
THE SPECIFICATION OF RIGID PROCEDURES ON DEVELOPMENT OF
OEERATUNG PLAN?, TRAINING OF PE.OPLE, PREPARATION OF
CONTINGENCY PLANS, THE PROPER NUMBER OF OPERATORS,, ETC,,
ETC,   ALSO, IT SHOULD NOT BE NECESSARY TO INCLUDE UNDER RCRA,
FACILITIES COVERED BY OTHER AcTSj FOR EXAMPLE, PITS, PONDS,
AND LAGOONS THAT ARE PART OF NF'DES SYSTEMS ARE COVERED BY THE
CLEAN WATER ACT AND WE BELIEVE ARE EXCLUDED FROM COVERAGE
BY RCRA.  NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR STANDARDS ARE SET BY THE
CLEAN AIR ACT ACCORDING TO TRIED PROCEDURES AND WE BELIEVE
THAT ADDITIONAL STANDARDS, IF NEEDED, SHOULD BE DEVELOPED
UNDER THAT ACT AND NOT UNDER RCRA.  SIMILARLY, WASTE DISPOSAL
WELLS ARE COVERED BY THE SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT AND NEED
NOT BE COVERED UNDER RCRA.

WE BELIEVE THAT STEPS IN THESE DIRECTIONS WILL HAVE BENEFITS
ALL AROUND,  THEY WOULD AVOID DUPLICATION WITH OTHER ACTS

-------
AND WOULD BE BASED ON TECHNICALLY VALID TESTS,  THEY WOULD



GREATLY SIMPLIFY THE RULE-MAKING TASK AND PROVIDE A MORE



WORKABLE AND PRACTICAL SET OF RULES.  FINALLY, THEY SHOULD



REDUCE THE TIME NEEDED TO DEVELOP RULES UNDER RCRA.







MCA AND ITS MEMBER COMPANIES SUPPORT THE OBJECTIVES OF RCRA,



IN THIS REGARD, WE WILL CONTINUE TO WORK TOWARD DEVELOPMENT



OF WORKABLE REGULATIONS THAT ARE TECHNICALLY AND LEGALLY .



SUPPORTABLE.

-------
                     Monsanto
                     Monsanto Company
                     1101 17th Street. N W
                     Washington. 0 C 20036
                     Phone (202) 452-8E80


                  September  1k,  1978
Ms.  Chris Marshall
Public Participation Officer  (WH-562)
U.S. Environmental Protection Aijency
JtOl  M Street, SW
Washington, D.C.   201(60

Subject:  EPA proposed schedule  for  rulemaking under
          the Resource Conserva:ion  and  Recovery Act
          of 1976.

Dear Ms . Marshal 1 :

         Attached is a statement which Monsanto
Company plans to  present at  the  September  15,  1978
public meeting on the above  subject.  We trust the
Agency will give  careful consideration to  our  remarks,
this matter.
         Thank you for the opportunity  to comment on
         er.
                                     Robert  L.  Ha rness
                                     Ka,,sgcr, P.cg i:! :: to
cc:  Mr. Stephan W. Plehn
     Deputy Assistant Administrator  for
                Sol id Waste  (WH-562)

     Mr. John P. Lehman
     Director, Hazardous Waste  Management
                Division  (WH-565)

RLH/csn

-------
             f:Y NAME is ROBERT L, I-'ARNESS.  ! AM MANAGER,
REGULATORY AFFAIRS FOR ['ONSANTO COMPANY.  ! HAVE BEEN
EMPLOYED BY MONSANTO FOR APPROXIMATELY TEN YEARS, AND
HAVE HELD VARIOUS POSITIONS IN PLANT ENGINEERING, PLANT
OPERATIONS AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL,  I AM APPEARING
TODAY TO PRESENT COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON EPA's
PROPOSED SCHEDULE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DESOURCE
CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT,
             THE HCNSANTO COMPANY is A LARGE CORPORATION
WHICH OPERATES MORETHAN FIFTY MANUFACTURING FACILITIES
IN THE UNITED STATES, EMPLOYING APPROXIMATELY 52,000
PERSONS WORLDWIDE.  OUR PLANTS PRODUCE A WIDE ARRAY OF
PRODUCTS AND CONSEQUENTLY A LARGE RANGE OF SOLID WASTE
TYPES ARE GENERATED,  I'E HAVE A VITAL INTEREST IN EVERY
ASPECT OF RCR.A REGULATIONS AND A SPECIAL CONCERN FOR
T!iC HAZARDOUS WASTE CRITERIA AND PRELIMINARY NOTIFICATION
REQUIREMENTS.

             ilY REMARKS WILL ADDRESS THE DOCUMENT EN-
TITLED '''PROPOSED SCHEDULE FOR RULEMAKING UNDER  THE RESOURCE
CONSERVATION ACT OF 197G,1' DATED AUGUST 8, 1973, AND WILL
FOCUS ON THE FOLLOWING TWO ISSUES:
             1.  THE PROBLEMS IDENTIFIED TO DATE IN THE
                 RULEMAKING PROCESS, PARTICULARLY THOSE
                 ASSOCIATED WITH REGULATIONS BEING

-------
PAGE Two

                 DEVELOPED UNDER P\CRA SUBTITLE C - HAZARDOUS
                 HASTE MANAGEMENT;  AND
             2.   THE NEED.  FOR A REASONABLE TIME FRAME FOR
                 DEVELOPMENT AND PROMULGATION OF REGULATIONS,
                 SO THAT EPA MAY ADEQUATELY ADDRESS AND SOLVE
                 THESE  PROBLEMS;.
PROBLEMS IDENTIFIED TO SATE
             EPA'S EFFORTS TO FULFILL ITS MANDATES UNDER
RCRA HAVE BEEN CHARACTERIZED BY PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN
THE RULEMAKING PROCESS.   THIS IS, ESPECIALLY TRUE IN THE
HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM WHERE THE AGENCY HAS
DISTRIBUTED DRAFT REGULATIONS FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT BY
INTERESTED PARTIES.  THESE INTERCHANGES HAVE LED TO
PROGRESSIVE REFINEMENTS IN THE DRAFT REGULATIONS.   HoW~
EVER, THE RELATIVELY SIMPLE LANGUAGE IN RCRA SUBTITLE C
MASKS A VERY COMPLICATED TASK.  To DATE, NO FINAL HAZARDOUS
WASTE MANAGEMENT REGULATIONS HAVE BEEN PROMULGATED, AND
EPA IS NOW FACING LAWSUITS FOR FAILURE TO FULFILL  ITS
RESPONSIBILITIES,
             HONSANTO BELIEVES THERE ARE MITIGATING FACTORS
IN THIS MATTER WHICH EXTEND THE CRITICAL ISSUE BEYOND
THE QUESTION OF FAILURE TO ACT BY A SPECIFIED DATE,  A
NUMBER OF SERIOUS TECHNICAL AND PROCEDURAL PROBLEMS HAVE
BEEN IDENTIFIED IN EPA's EMERGING HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGE-
MENT  PROGRAM WHICH HAVE NECESSITATED DELAYS IN THE

-------
PAGE THREE

RULEMAKING PROCESS,  AND WHICH MUST BE RESOLVED BEFORE PROMUL-
GATION CAN OCCUR.   AMONG THESE ARE THE FOLLOWING:
             1.   THE INITIAL DRAFTS OF THE SECTION 3001
                 REGULATIONS PROPOSE AN UNREASONABLY COMPLICATED
                 AND BROADLY INCLUSIVE DEFINITION  OF HAZARDOUS
                 WASTE.  IF PROMULGATED,  MANY  WASTES GENERALLY
                 CONSIDERED INNOCUOUS WOULD BE CLASSIFIED AS
                 "HAZARDOUS."  MOREOVER,  MANY  OF THE TESTING
                 PROCEDURES SPECIFIED IN  THE MARCH 2''l,  1978
                 DRAFT REGULATION ARE AT  THIS  TIME UNPROVEN,
                 AND,  POSSIBLY,  UNWORKABLE.  OF PARTICULAR
                 CONCERN ARE THE TOXICITY TESTING  PROTOCOLS
                 AND THE "TOXICANT EXTRACTION  PROCEDURE/'
                 A CONSIDERABLE  AMOUNT OF TECHNICAL INTER-
                 CHANGE HAS TAKEN PLACE ON THIS POINT,  BUT IT
                 SEEMS APPARENT  THAT SIGNIFICANT WORK REMAINS
                 TO DEVELOP WORKABLE CRITERIA  THAT WILL REGULATE
                 ONLY THOSE WASTES WHICH  ARE SIGNIFICANTLY
                 MORE  HAZARDOUS THAN COMMON MUNICIPAL REFUSE.
             2.   GIVEN THE COMPLEXITY OF  THE DRAFT HAZARDOUS
                 WASTE CRITERIA  REGULATIONS, COUPLED WITH THE
                 NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENT

-------
PAGE FOUR
                OF THE PROPOSED SECTION 3C10 REGULATION,
                IT IS PROBABLE THAT MANY RELATIVELY
                INNOCUOUS KASTES WOULD BE DECLARED
                HAZARDOUS,  BECAUSE OF A LACK OF TEST DATA,
                THIS V.'OULD RESULT IN SOKE TRULY NON-
                HAZARDOUS WASTES UTILIZING THE ALREADY-
                TOO-SCARCE CAPACITY OF ACCEPTABLE DISPOSAL
                SITES.  ADEQUATE TIME TO DEVELOP WORKABLE
                CRITERIA WILL MINIMIZE THIS CONSEQUENCE,
            3.   THE DRAFT SECTION 300^ REGULATION, STANDARDS
                FOR HAZARDOUS WASTE STORAGE, TREATMENT AND
                DISPOSAL FACILITIES, WOULD SET EXTREMELY
                TOUGH FACILITY STANDARDS THAT ARE INFLEXIBLE
                FROM THE STANDP3INT OF TYPE OF HAZARDOUS
                WASTE HANDLED.  FURTHERMORE, V.'E BELIEVE
                VERY FEW EXISTING FACILITIES, EVEN THOSE
                CLEARLY ENVIRONMENTALLY ACCEPTABLE, WILL
                MEET THE DRAFT STANDARDS.  V.'E SUGGEST
                RE-SHAPING OF THE PROGRAM TO ALLOW FOR
                DISTINCTION OF -ACILITIES BY TYPE OF WASTE
                HANDLED, AND CONTINUED OPERATION OF
                EXISTING FACILITIES SHOWN TO BE
                ENVIRONMENTALLY SOUND.
            K.   THE MATTER OF ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE
                HAZARDOUS WASTE REGULATIONS, AS WELL AS
                OTHER ASPECTS

-------
PAGE FIVE

                 OF RCPA,  HAS NOT BEEN ADEQUATELY
                 EVALUATED.   THE DRAFT REPORT ENTITLED
                 "COST OF  COMPLIANCE WITH HAZARDOUS WASTE
                 MANAGEMENT REGULATIONS/'' DATED HAY 197S,
                 AND COMPLETED UNDER CONTRACT TO EPA BY
                 EATTELLE  COLUMBUS LABORATORY PREDICTS
                 SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER COSTS FOR COMPLIANCE
                 AND IN VIEW OF THE ALREADY HIGH INFLATION
                 RATE, SHOULD BE GIVEN THOROUGH CONSIDERATION
                 IN THE RULEMAKING PROCESS.
             THESE MATTERS DO NOT STAND ALONE AS THE ISSUES
NEEDING RESOLUTION.  RATHER, THEY SERVE TO ILLUSTRATE THE
KINDS OF PROBLEMS WHICH MUST BE ADDRESSED BY EP^, IN THIS
RULEMAKING PROCESS.
NEED FOR AN ADEQUATE TIME  FRAME FOR REGULATION PEVELOPMENT
             THE THREAT OF LAWSUITS AGAINST EPA, AS MENTIONED
IN THE AUGUST 16, 1978 FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE, IMPLIES
NEGLIGENCE ON THE PART OF  THE AGENCY IN CARRYING OUT ITS
RESPONSIBILITIES.  !.'E DISAGREE.  SlMPLY PUT, DEVELOPMENT
OF A COMPREHENSIVE SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL PROGRAM AND HAZARDOUS
WASTE MANAGEMENT REGULATIONS IS AN ENORMOUSLY COMPLEX PROBLEM
THAT WILL IMPACT SIGNIFICANTLY ON ALL OF SOCIETY.  !'!E BELIEVE
EPA HAS BEEN WORKING DILIGENTLY ON THIS MATTER, BUT THAT
THE PROMULGATION DATE IN THE STATUTE WAS INSERTED BY CONGRESS
WITHOUT A FULL UNDERSTANDING OF THE DIFFICULTIES OF THE

-------
PAGE Six

UNDERTAKING.   MONSANTO ENDORSES THE OBJECTIVES OF THE
RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT, AND MILL CONTINUE
TO COOPERATE WITH EPA, BOTH ALONE AND THROUGH THE i'lANU-
FACTURING CHEMISTS ASSOCIATION, TO DEVELOP SOUND'REGULATIONS
WHICH ARE ADEQUATE TO PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT.  MONSANTO
STRONGLY SUPPORTS THE NEED FOR A RULEMAKIMG SCHEDULE THAT
IS ADEQUATE TO ALLOW FOR DEVELOPMENT OF WORKABLE, EFFECTIVE
REGULATIONS.  !!E BELIEVE THE TIMETABLE PROPOSED BY EPA
WILL PROVIDE ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO RESOLVE MANY OF THE
PENDING QUESTIONS.  THE SCHEDULE WILL ALLOW FOR REVIEW OF
THE MOST RECENT DRAFTS OF THE SUBTITLE C REGULATIONS PRIOR
TO THE PROPOSED JANUARY 7, 1979 FEDERAL rEGISTER PROPOSAL
DATE.  BECAUSE OF THE COMPLEX TECHNICAL NATURE OF THESE
REGULATIONS, THE PROPOSED 90 DAY PUBLIC COMMENT ALSO
APPEARS JUSTIFIED.  FINALLY, CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT
PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE PROPOSED REGULATIONS WILL BE VERY
EXTENSIVE, REQUIRING  TIME-CONSUMING EPA REVIEW, A PROJECTED
FINAL PROMULGATION DATE OF JANUARY 1980 IS LIKEWISE. A
REASONABLE TARGET.  SIMILARLY, ''ONSANTO VIEWS THE PROPOSED
TIMETABLES FOR DEVELOPMENT AND PROMULGATION OF P.CPA SECTION
ilOO^I CRITERIA; CLEAN '..'ATER ACT,SECTION '105  MUNICIPAL SLUDGE
GUIDELINES; P.CP.A SECTION '1012, STATE PLANNING  "GUIDELINES;
AND P\CRA SECTION 1003, LANDFILL GUIDELINES,AS REASONABLE
AND REALISTIC CONSIDERING THE TASK AT HAND.

-------
PAGE SEVEN

             IN CLOSING, I  WOULD LIKE TO OFFER ONE FURTHER
POINT.  THIS EXTENDED REGULATORY DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE WILL
NOT CREATE AN "OPEN SEASON'" FOR HAZARDOUS WASTE DISPOSAL.
MANY STATES ALREADY HAVE COMPREHENSIVE,  ENFORCEABLE
WASTE DISPOSAL LAWS.   :!E AND OTHER RESPONSIBLE COMPANIES
WILL CONTINUE TO MANAGE OUR PROCESS WASTE DISPOSAL ACTIVITIES
IN A SOCIALLY RESPONSIBLE MANNER, AND IN COMPLIANCE WITH
ALREADY EXISTING LAWS AND REGULATIONS,   "OREOVER, WE HAVE
ALREADY BEGUN AN EVALUATION OF OUR PROCESS WASTE ACTIVITIES
IN ANTICIPATION OF ANY ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS WHICH MIGHT
BE IMPOSED BY RCP.A REGULATIONS.  IRRESPONSIBLE ''MIDNIGHT
DUMPING" ACTIVITIES HAVE BEEN THE WORK OF A VERY SMALL
 NUMBER  OF PEOPLE, AND VERY LIKELY WILL NOT BE ELIMINATED
BY EVEN THE MOST SEVERE OF REGULATIONS,   IT IS OF PARAMOUNT
IMPORTANCE FOR THE PROTECTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT, AS WELL
AS THE MAINTENANCEOF OUR STANDARD OF LIVING, THAT INDUSTRIAL
WASTE MANAGEMENT REGULATIONS BE REASONABLE AS WELL AS
ADEQUATELY  PROTECTIVE.  FOR THIS REASON, ."ONSANTO SUPPORTS
ERA'S REVISED IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE,  AND LOOKS FORWARD
TO CONTINUED PARTICIPATION IN THE RULEMAKING PROCESS.  THANK
YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT THIS STATEMENT.

-------
                      oWationd!
                          1 1 20 CONNECTICUT AVENUE NW •  SUITE 930 • WASHINGTON DC 20036
                                          TELEPHONE (2021 659-4613
EUGENE J WINGERTER
 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
                                STATEMENT

                                    by

                           Eugene J.  Wingerter
                           Executive Director

             National Solid Wastes Management Association
                1120 Connecticut  Avenue, N.W., Suite 930
                        Washington, D. C.   20036
                           at a  public meeting

             of  the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
           Proposed Time Schedule for Promulgation of Solid
                     and Hazardous Waste Regulations
                           September 15, 1978

                            Washington, D.  C.
                      INSTITUTE OF WASTE TECHNOLOGY
                         •  CHEMICAL WASTE COMMITTEE
                         •  NATIONAL SANITARY LANDFILL COMMITTEE
                         •  RESOURCE RECOVERY COMMITTEE
                      WASTE EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURERS INSTITUTE

-------
The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, passed in October 1976, has




been hailed as the first federal law which requires comprehensive




control of hazardous waste.  RCRA required that, by April 1978, the U.S.




Environmental Protection Agency promulgate regulations for the generation




and transportation of hazardous waste as well as for the storage,




treatment, and disposal of these wastes at specially permitted facilities.




That deadline expired five months ago and the regulations, with the




exception of those related to transportation, have not even been




formally proposed.






The need for these regulations is paramount.  The kind of environmental




assaults which occur in a society without hazardous waste regulations




was illustrated recently in the promiscuous dumping of PCB-contaminated




liquids along a North Carolina highway.  While several states have




enacted legislation regulating the disposal of hazardous wastes, only a




few states require a manifest to track the movement of waste from point




of generation, during transport, to final disposal at a permitted facility.




Such a record-keeping system seems the best mechanism for assuring that




hazardous wastes generated are taken to approved facilities and nowhere




else.  But even those states which do have cradle-to-grave hazardous waste




control laws are postponing development of regulations until the U.S.




EPA provides the model with the RCRA regulations.






The delay by EPA has another, and more damaging, effect.  Until a hazardous




waste management program is in place and enforced, there will be minimal




development of new facilities which meet the rigid environmental standards




necessary to provide secure disposal of hazardous waste.  Without enforced




regulations, there is little incentive for generators of hazardous waste




to pay the high cost of disposal at specially designed facilities.

-------
                                 -2-






Without such regulations to assure the delivery of waste to such facilities,




there is little reason to expect new treatment and disposal facilities




to be developed.  And, very simply, without facilities adequate to take




all of the hazardous wastes generated across the nation, a hazardous




waste regulatory program has little meaning.  What end is achieved with




manifest systems and disposal permits, if there are no disposal sites




which can safely accept the hazardous waste?







For these reasons we urge that the EPA be aggressive in proposing an




amended schedule for implementation of the regulations under RCRA.




Early drafts of regulations indicate that EPA has done considerable




background work on the regulatory issues, and that the agency will be




able to complete regulations in a timely manner without trading off




thoroughness.






We do urge, however, that EPA include in its new schedule time for




interaction with interested groups outside of the federal government.




NSWMA values the opportunities provided by EPA to contribute our experience




and technical expertise to the development of regulations.  We feel that




the regulations related to both "hazardous and solid waste under RCRA




will be better for the input EPA has received from many outside interest




groups.






Further, we urge EPA, in its haste to finalize the hazardous waste




regulations, not to compromise its position that regulations apply as strictly




to disposal at the site of generation as they do to disposal off-site at




a waste service facility.  Some groups have argued, because of the




impact on the generating industry, that the regulations should be en-




forced on a more gradual basis for onsite hazardous waste disposal

-------
                                 -3-






facilities than for offsite facilities.  EPA has stated that perhaps 80%




of all hazardous waste are disposed of at facilities which are captive




to the generating industry.  Hazardous waste disposed of at a generator's




facility are no less likely to cause environmental damage than are




wastes disposed of at a comparable offsite facility.  We stress the




importance of a regulatory scheme which enforces the strict standards




equally at all hazardous waste disposal facilities regardless of who




owns a* operates them.






NSWMA appreciates the opportunity once again to make its comments known




to the EPA and we intend to continue our participation with the deve-




lopment of the hazardous and solid waste regulations.  We look forward




to the day when the hazardous waste control program will be in effect.




Thank you.

-------
             COMMENTS BY UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION
                FOR THE PUBLIC MEETING ON THE
        RESOURCE CONSERVATION AMD RECOVERY ACT OF 1976.

                           held
                     September 15. 1918
                           at the
        Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, B.C.
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN:

          I AM RICHARD HARDISON, MANAGER OF ENVIRONMENTAL. AFFAIRS

FOR THE CARBON PRODUCTS DIVISION OF UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION.

          TODAY I AM SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF UNION CARBIDE COBlPORATION

ON THE RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT  ( RCRA ).

          UNION CARBIDE SUPPORTED THE ENACTMENT OF RCRA BECAUSE WE

RECOGNIZED THAT SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT IN THIS COUNTRY HAS BEEN

NEGLECTED. SERIOUS PROBLEMS OF ENVIRONMENTAL DEGREGADATION,

OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HARM TO HUMAN HEALTH HAVE IN THE PAST RE-

SULTED FROM CARELESS HANDLING OF SOLD) WASTES. IMPROPER DISPOSAL

OF WASTE MATERIALS CAN CAUSE POLLUTION OF UNDERGROUND AND SURFACE

WATER RESOURCES. IN SOME CASES, SUCH  POLLUTION IS  THE  RESULT OF DISPOSAL

PRACTICES WHICH MAY ACTUALLY HAVE MET THE PREVAILING STANDARDS OF

THE TIME AND WHICH WERE CONSIDERED SAFE AND LEGAL AT THE TIME BY

BOTH INDUSTRY AND GOVERNMENT. THEREFORE, A NEW APPROACH WAS  NEEDED

TO EFFECTIVELY DEAL WITH THE PROBLEM OF SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT.

          THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY  ( EPA ) HAS BEEN

DIRECTED UNDER RCRA TO DEVELOP REGULATIONS THAT TRANSLATE THE ACT

INTO EFFECTIVE PRACTICES. IN DEVELOPING THE RCRA REGULATIONS THE

EPA HAS RECEIVED INPUT FROM STATE AGENCIES, LABOR GROUPS, ENVIRON-

MENTALISTS AND INDUSTRY. THE CHEMICAL INDUSTRY HAS IN PARTICULAR

WORKED CLOSELY WITH EPA TO PROVIDE NEEDED TECHNICAL BACKGROUND.

THE RESULTS OF THIS EFFORT ARE  SHOWN  [K WELL CONSIDERED .

-------
PRELIMINARY DRAFTS AND PROPOSED REGULATIONS THAT HAVE HAD SEVERE





SCRUTINY FROM ALL PERSPECTIVES. WHILE INEVITABLY THERE WILL BE SOME




POINTS ON WHICH INDUSTRY AND ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS WILL DIFFER, WE




THINK IT IS WORTH EMPHASIZING THE CONSTRUCTIVE JOE EPA HAS DONE SO




FAR TO RECONCILE THE RESPECTIVE POINTS OF VIEW.




          WE FEEL THAT INPUT FROM THE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTORS HAS




ELIMINATED MANY OF THE PITFALLS EXPERIENCED IN IMPLEMENTATION OF THE




AIR AND WATER ACTS WHICH LED TO EXTENSIVE LITIGATION WITH CONSEQUENT




WASTE OF TIME RESOURCES AND FORCED DELAY IN ACHIEVING ENVIRONMENTAL




QUALITY GOALS.





          IF PROMULGATION OF RULES UNDER THESE ACTS HAD RECEIVED




THE BENEFIT OF THE KIND OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE INPUT THAT RCRA HAS




RECEIVED, THE COURT DOCKETS WOULD NOT BE CROWDED WITH LITIGATION




BETWEEN THE EPA AND INDUSTRY ON POINTS WHICH COULD HAVE BEEN RESOLVED




BEFORE PROMULGATION OF THE REGULATIONS.




WHERE UNION CARBIDE STANDS:




          UNION CARBIDE CONSIDERS A HEALTHY, SAFE, CLEAN ENVIRONMENT




TO BE AN IMPORTANT NATIONAL OBJECTIVE. WE ARE COMMITTED NOT ONLY TO




COMPLIANCE WITH EXISTING HEALTH, SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS, BUT TO




THE DEVELOPMENT OF NEW TECHNOLOGIES AND NEW OR REFINED PUBLIC POLICIES




DESIGNED TO ACHIEVE THESE OBJECTIVES CONSISTENT WITH THE OTHER BASIC




WANTS AND NEEDS OF PEOPLE AND WITH THE ACHIEVEMENT OF OTHER IMPORTANT




NATIONAL OBJECTIVES. IT IS OUR POLICY TO CONTRIBUTE OPENLY AND CON-




STRUCTIVELY TO THE CREATION OF SUCH POLICIES AND REGULATIONS.




          THE RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT CAN PROVIDE THE




BASIS OF A SOUND PROGRAM TO CONTROL SOLID WASTE PROBLEMS. UNION CARBIDE




FEELS THAT IT IS FAR MORE IMPORTANT FOR EPA TO PRODUCE TECHNICALLY




SOUND AND RFJVSONABLE REGULATIONS THAT MEET THE OBJECTIVES OF RCRA THAN




IT IS TO MEET ARBITRARILY IMPOSED TIME LIMITS FOR ACCOMPLISHING THIS

-------
                           -3-
TASK. IT IS OUR VIEW THAT CONGRESS INTENDED RCRA TO PROVIDE A

REASONABLE AND RESPONSIBLE VEHICLE FOR MANAGEMENT OF SOLID WASTES,

AND WE BELIEVE THAT EPA HAS THE CAPABILITY AND THE DESIRE TO PRODUCE

AN EFFECTIVE SET OF REGULATIONS THAT WILL PROTECT THE PUBLIC AND THE

ENVIRONMENT WITHOUT IMPOSING'AN UNREASONABLE DEGREE OF REGULATION.

WE AT UNION CARBIDE FULLY EXPECT THAI INDUSTRY'S SUCCESSFUL RECORD'
         -** £&~*. <£^ <*~J<2g^,  k^&i
OF COMPLIANCE WITH WME ACTS WILL BE CONTINUED WITH THIS CHALLENGING

NEW ONE.
GJH/rr

-------
        RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT
PUBLIC MEETIN3 ON SOLID AND HAZARDOUS WASTE REGULATIONS



    PROPOSED SCHEDULE OF REGULATIONS AND GUIDELINES
                      Conments by



                   Dr. Stacy Daniels



            on behalf of Dow Chemical U.S.A.





                   Washington, D.C.
                  Septenber 15,  1978

-------
Mr. Chairman, Dow Chemical U.S.A. wishes to present comnents pertirasnt



to the proposed schedule of regulations and guidelines for hazardous waste



management (RCRA Subtitle C, Sections 3001-3006, 3010).  These conraaits



reflect our corporate concerns and philosophy in the proper management of



hazardous and solid wastes to provide adequate protection of human liealth



and the environment.  We have followed closely the developing regulations



since enactment of the RCRA.  We have participated in public workshops and



hearings and have submitted written comments on all draft and proposed



regulations.



We comnend the EPA in seeking input from the industrial sector regarding



hazard testing procedures and performance guidelines for hazardous waste



management for we believe such public participation is essential in the



development of responsible regulations.  We feel the Agency has been re-



ceptive to public input and has made substantial progress in recogruLzing



the real-world problems of solid waste implementation and enforcement.






Several major concerns have been expounded during development of the



regulations:



     1)   potential overclassification of solid wastes as hazardous



          wastes



     2)   procedural vs. performance guidelines



     3)   distinctions between on-site and off-site operations for Jrully



          integrated facilities



     4)   overlap with other environmental regulations



     5)   the time schedule for implemantation

-------
                                  -2-
The  interpretation of "What is a hazardous waste?" is critical in avoiding



overclassification of all municipal and industrial wastes as hazardous.  The



development of criteria  of hazard  for  solid waste lacks precedent.  It is



preferable to develop consensus standards with meaningful participation



by those being regulated.  Development of workable regulations reflecting



a realistic interpretation of hazard demands a logical and scientifically



sound approach over a reasonable period of time.





The  development of procedural "how-to-do-it" guidelines for facilities



for  storage, treatment,  and disposal of hazardous wastes is undesirable.



Environmental regulations which are restricted to performance guidelines



and  permit individual options have proven to be effective. Responsible



management options are necessary in waste handling operations to reflect



site-by-site variations  in solid wastes and facilities.





Excessive regulatory overlap and duplication of permitting procedures among



these areas has been of  prime concern  to the Agency.  Wastewater treatment



facilities and underground injection control facilities, for example, are



regulated under existing laws and  the  Agency to its credit has attempted to



avoid undue regulatory overlap with hazardous waste management facilities.





These concerns involve many complex issues and the Agency needs adequate time



to address them.   It is  imperative that these issues be resolved.  Promul-



gation of the regulations even within  the proposed time frame will require



simplification.  This could be accomplished by eliminating:  (a) the toxic



hazard testing requirements and retaining a listing of specific hazards, and



(b)  limiting the guidelines to performance and deleting all procedural guidelines.

-------
                                  -3-
The management of solid wastes, like the management of waterborne wastes,



does not warrant the creation of a crisis at the expense of sound regulatory



action.  Air, water, wastewater, and solid waste management are teihnically



detailed areas.





We believe that the proposed schedule for rulemaking tendered by tlie Agency



on August 8, 1978, is reasonable and responsive to measured 'and orderly in-



put and assessment.  The proposal of hazardous waste regulations by early



1979 and prom.ilgat.ion by early 1980 is not unreasonable and should be



acceptable to all public and governmental sectors.





We recomnend, however, that the Agency promulgate all Sections of Subtitle C,



including those dealing with state pn^grams (Sec. 3006) and notification



(Sec. 3010) by early 1980, since all effective dates are dependent upon the



promulgation of Section 3001, which wLll include the critical intei-pretation



of what constitutes a hazardous waste.   We thank you for the opportxmity to



present our views.

-------
                   PROPOSED SCHEDULE FOR RULEMAKING

                               under the

            RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT OP 1976
Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Solid Waste
401 M St., S.W.
Washington, D.c.  20460

August 8, 1978

-------
               Time Schedule for Subtitle C Regulations


08/04/78  Initial Implementation Task Force (ITF)  meeting to review over-
             ""~~                          '
09/12/78  Complete and distribute rwised draft of 3001 regulations (38
          workdays frcm July 19 to significantly revise 3001) .

09/19/78  Second meeting of ITF to review draft of 3001 regulations (5
          workdays for ITF members to review draft) .

09/26/78  Complete and distribute revised draft of 3004 regulations (48
          workdays from July 19 to siignif icantly revise 3004) .

10/03/78  Third ITF meeting to review draft of 3004 regulations  (5 work-
          days for ITF members to review draft) .

10/10/78  Complete and distribute revised drafts of 3002/5/6 regulations
          and draft Economic Impact Assessment (EIA) (57 workdays from
          July 19 to substantially revise EIA, the pacing item) .

10/17/78  Fourth ITF meeting to review drafts of 3002/5/6 regulations and
          draft EIA (5 workdays for ITF mesnbers to review ^drafts} .

10/31/78  Complete revision of all regulations and EIA as a result of
          above meetings and distribute (10 to 30 workdays, depending on
          specific regulations, to make revisions, resolve minor issues
          not addressed by ITF and collect additional supporting infor-
          mation where required) .

11/07/78  Steering Ccr^ttee__(I5E_menfcers) review of all regulations, EIA
          and EIS T5~worta!!ays~ror members to review semi-final draf ts) .

11/14/78  Second meeting of Steering Ccnmittee to complete review and
          clear resgulations (probably with many differences and unresolved
          issues) .

11/21/78  Revise regulations, EIA ard EIS per Steering Committee and
          start Red Border review (5 working days) .

12/12/78  Complete Red Border reviev.  (during this period there will be
          two AA discussions of unresolved issues)  (3 weseks as rejquired
          by internal rules for Red Border review) .

12/22/78  Administrator signs regulations for proposed rulemaking  (8
          working days and probably one or two Administrator/M  level
          meetings to resolve issues) .

01/02/79  Publish proposed regulations for 3001/2/4/5 in Federal Register
          and issue draft EIA and EIS  (4 workdays) .

          Publish  (promulgate) 3006.

-------
04/02/79  Close of comment period (90 calendar days).

07/05/79  Complete evaluation of comments, collection of additional
          information, analysis of comments, resolution of issues at
          staff level and re-draft of regulations (64  workdays).

07/13/79  Complete OSW review and clearance (6 workdays).

08/01/79  Publish (promulgate)  3010 in Federal Register.

09/14/79  Complete CWfrM review and clearance (9 weeks).

11/16/79  Complete Steering Committee review and clearance (9 weeks).

Ol/H/80  Complete Red Border review (8 weeks) .

01/25/80  Publish (promulgate)  3001/2/3/4/5 in Federal Register (10 workdays).

-------
                    Time Schedule for 4004 Criteria
08/31/78  Complete evaluation of 1500 public comvents to proposed
          rulernaking.

11/30/78  Complete collection of additional information and detailed
          analysis and resolution of substantive issues raised by the
          comments (61 workdays).

01/12/79  Complete re-draft of 4004 criteria based on foregoing  (31
          workdays).   Also complete draft EIS and EIA over «>ntire period.

01/19/79  Complete OSW internal review and approval by DM  (5 workdays).

03/23/79  Complete CWM review and approval (9 weeks)

          2 weeks of review by progran offices
          3 weeks (3 meetings) of disc;ussion and resolution
            (or sharpening of differences) with program offices
          3 weeks (3 meetings) to discoiss and resolve program
            office differences with M
          1 week to revise regulation pursuant to above

05/25/79  Complete Steering Committee Review (9 weeks)

          1st week - brief Steering Ccnmittee
          2nd week - review by Steering Committee
          3 weeks of negotiation of minor issues; discussion
            and information collection on major issues
          7th week - final Steering Ccmmittee review and
            clearance
          2 weeks to revise and ready criteria for red border

07/13/79  Complete Red Border review (8 weeks)

          3 weeks to obtain M concurrences or non-concurrences
          3 weeks (2 M meetings)  to resolve or focus M
            differences
          1 week to revise criteria pursuant to foregoing
          1 week to brief Administrator, resolve any outstanding
            issues and obtain Administrator's signature

07/27/79  Publish (promulgate) in Federal Register  (2 weeks)

-------
                            Time Schedule for

                  Section 405 Municipal Sludge Guidelines
 9/15/78   Complete first working draft and distribute for review by work
           group and public (84 workdays; coordinated with review of comments
           of municipal sludge requirements of 4004 regulations)

10/13/78   Complete second working draft and review by work group (20 working
           days)

 1/12/79   Complete final working draft (65 working days)

 1/19/79   Complete OSW internal review and approval by DAA (5 working days)

 3/23/79   Complete OWWM review and approval (9 weeks; coordinated with
           4004; see 4004 schedule)

 5/25/79   Complete Steering Ccnroittee Review (9 weeks; see 4004 schedule)

 7/13/79   Complete Red Border review (8 weeks;  see 4004 schedule)

 7/27/79   Publish (proposed ruleinaking) in Federal Register (2 weeks)

10/27/79   Complete public conraent period (90 calendar days)

 1/30/80   Complete evaluation of ccnments, collection of additional infor-
           mation, analysis of comments, resolution of issues at staff
           level and re-draft of regulations

 2/10/80   Complete OSW review and clearance

 4/10/80   Complete OWWM review and clearance

 6/10/80   Complete Steering Ccmnittee review and clearance

 8/10/80   Complete Red Border review

 8/30/80   Publish (promulgate in Federal Register)

-------
           Time Schedule for 4002 State Planning Guidelines





08/11/78  Publication as proposed.



11/11/78  Public cement period.



03/11/79  Revision and DAA sends forvrard for OWW1 clearance!.



04/09/79  OWN clearance.



05/07/79  Steering Committee clearance.



06/18/79  Red Border clearance and promulgation.

-------
              Time Schedule for 1008 Landfill Guidelines





12/15/78  DAA sends forward for CWW4 clearance.



01/12/79  OWM clearance.



02/09/79  Steering Committee clearance.



03/23/79  Red Border clearance and publication as proposed.



06/23/79  Public ccnment period.



10/23/79  Revision and DM sends forward for CWVM clearance.



11/20/79  OWW1 clearance.



12/18/79  Steering Coiroittee clearance.



01/30/80  Red Border clearance and promulgation.

-------
                      PUBLIC CITIZEN LITIGATION GROUP

                               SUITE 70O
                           2OOO P STREET. N. W.

                          WASHINGTON  O. C. 20036

                              UO3) 785-3704
                                           June  21,  1978
Douglas M. Costie. Administrator
Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, S. w.
Washington, D. C.  20460

                Certified Mail #  812871

                Re:  Solid Waste Disposal Act

Dear Mr. Costle:

     I am writing on behalf of Public Citizen, Inc., and  several  other
interested parties, to serve notice of our intent  to institute  legal
proceedings against "your Agency for failure to perform  a  number of  non-
discretionary duties under Subchcipter III of the Solid  Waste Disposal
Act which are necessary to implement the Act.  42  U.S.C.  §  6901,  et
seq.  Pursuant to the "citizen suit" provision of  the Act (42 U.S.C.
§ 6972), you have sixty days in which to meet your obligations  under
this Subchapter and I am hopeful that you will do  so in order to  im-
plement an important Congressionsil mandate, promote vital public
policy and avoid unnecessary and costly litigation.

     For your information. Public: Citizen is an organization funded
by the contributions of tens of thousands of citizens who are ad-
versely affected, and in numerous, cases seriously  injured by the
absence of any regulations requiring the safe transportation, storage
and ultimate disposal of hazardous waste materials.  The  organiza-
tion and its constituents lobbied for enactment of the  Solid Waste
Disposal Act and had every hope t.hat your Agency would  meet its
obligations to implement the Act within eighteen months,  or by April
21, 1978.

     More particularly, Subchapter III required EPA to  perform  the
following' non-discretionary acts on or before April 21, 1978:

     1)  Publication of criteria for identifying and listing
         hazardous waste  (42 U.S.C. § 6921(a));

-------
                                 -2-
     2)  Identification of wastes meeting these criteria
         (42 U.S.C. § 6921(b));

     3)  Promulgation of regulations establishing standards
         applicable to generators, and transporters of
         hazardous waste (42 U.S.C. §§ 6922, 6923);

     4)  Promulgation of performance standards for facilities
         used to treat, store and dispose of hazardous waste
         and development of a permit program for such facilities
         (42 U.S.C. §§ 6924;6925);

     5)  Promulgation of guidelines to assist States in the
         development of hazardous waste programs (42 U.S.C.
         § 6926).

None of these acts have yet been performed and hazardous wastes
continue to pose a serious threat to citizen health and the en-
vironment.

     I do hope that your Agency will perform' each o~f these acts
promptly, and in any event within the next sixty days.  Moreover,
I would appreciate your apprising me of both your intentions and
your efforts to meet your obligations under the Act.  I will look
forward to hearing from you and I thank you in advance for your
concern for the public health.

                                  Sincerely yours.
                                  Arthur L. Fox,  II

cc:  Hon. Griffin Bell

-------
           Environmental
           Defense
                                15.25 18th Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20036 •  202/333-1484

                                July  5,  1978
  DELIVERED BY HAND

  Administrator Douglas M. Costle
  Environmental Protection Agency
  1200 West Tower
  401 M Street, SW
  Washington, DC 20460

  Dear Administrator Costle:

       The passage of the Resources Conservation and Recovery Act on
  October 21, 1976, marked an important  addition to the nation's en-
  vironmental law.  Concern about raw materials  and energy shortages,
  the rising cost of landfilling, and the  development of innovative
  resource recovery technology demonstrated  the  need for the federal
  government to take on a larger role in the promotion of effective
  solid waste management practices.  Further,  Congress had previously
  enacted strong legislation aimed at eliminating pollution of our
  air and water resources.  Paradoxically, compliance with these laws
  tended to expand the scope of the solid  waste  disposal problem, as
  well as focus attention on abuse of our  land resources.  The Resource
  Recovery and Conservation Act served to  complement this earlier legis-
  lation by eliminating the unregulated  land disposal of discarded
  materials and hazardous wastes.

       Unfortunately, the promise of this  legislation may be signifi-
  cantly diluted by EPA delay in putting the law into effect through
  necessary regulations.  The Act mandates that  the agency promulgate
  fifteen major sets of regulations by dates ranging from six months
  to two years after the enactment of the  statute.   Twelve of these
OFFICES :N. EAST SETAUKET. NY (MAIN OFFICE): NEW YORK CITY (PflOGIU'.l SUPPORT OFFICE)- WAin'NGTOM, DC: EIF^ELEY. C/'LIFC.iN! \

                            Pttnttd on T

-------
                               -2-


regulations are now past due.  Eight of the regulations have not
yet been proposed, and three additional sets have not been pro-
mulgated in final form.  The progress of the agency to date
strongly suggests that additional regulations due in October, 1978,
will not be promulgated in time.  The table on the attached pages
indicates the mandated regulations which the agency has already
failed to promulgate by the prescribed date.

     Delay in the promulgation of these regulations is of more
than technical concern since they are essential to the implementa-
tion of the Act.  For example, criteria for determining which
facilities shall be classified as open dumps, due since October 21,
1977, are needed before an inventory can be compiled of all the
open dumps in the country, which is in turn necessary to effect the
Actte prohibition against continued open dumping of solid waste.  Also,
regulations must be promulgated under Section 3001  listing particular
hazardous wastes that are subject to management before the notice, re-
quirements of Section 3010 go into effect.

     As a result of our concern, the Environmental Defense Fund
desires to give notice of our intention to commence a legal action
based on your failure to perform the legislatively mandated duty to
promulgate the regulations listed in the attached, table within the
time period provided in the Act.  This notice is required to be
given 60 days prior to the commencement of the action by Section
7002 (c) of the Act as well as the implementing regulations. 40 C.F.R.
254.
                                          Sincerely,
                                          William A. Butler
                                          General Counsel

WAB:cs
Attachment
cc:  Assistant Administrator for Water and Hazardous Materials,
        Thomas C. Jorling
     Deputy Assistant Administrator for Solid Waste,
        Steffen W. Plehn

-------
K
ft,
o
•O
 01

 ctl
 bO
rH

 6
 O
 r.
(X,
 O

co
      4J
       ct)
      'O CTv
O
(4 k
Q. cd
   •O
    
    10
    o
    o.
 C  0
 O  k
•H  Q.

 O  0)
O  O
55 EH
                                                                                                  •O
                                                                                                   QJ
                                                                                                   <0
                                                                                                   bj
                                                  CO
                                                  CM
                                                   •a ir>
                                                   a> o
                                                   M trv
                                                   ooo
                                                   g.rH
                                                               £
                                                               •o
                                                                cu
                                                                                          4>
                                                                                          10
                                                                                             3
                                                                                             GOO
                                                                                             O  f-
                                                                                             C)  f,
                                                                                            XI  0)
                                                                                                En
                                                                                             O  fc-
                                                                                            *J  3
                                                                                               CO
                                                                o
                                                               EH
                                                                                          O
                                                                                          f. CO CU
                                                                                                Oi
                                                                                                     •O
                                                                                                      01
                                                                                                      CO
                                                                                                      O CO
                                                                                                      fJ.C-
                                                                                                      o -
                                                                                                      O 3
                                                                                                     EH CO
O)

•H
rH
•o
cd
a




CO
t—
\
rH
co
C
o
•H
.p
cd
rH
3
bO
D
K

CU
y^
3
CO
O
rH.
O
to
•H
Q
rH
flj
K
0
K

O

C
O
•H

O
CD
to
cd
•H
O
C
cd
iH
PC.

1

p*»
O
o
rH
t-
t—
N.
H
C\J
\
O









co
D
C
•H
rH
 t3
•H  CO 
O
cd
fc

01

»J

3

14
3
O
?
ctf

cd
X












CO
^~

rH
ry
.=r


to
3
O
T3
r<
cd
N
cd
w

CU
•p
cd

co

(H
O

CO
CD
K
•H
rH
0
T3
•r)
3


1

vo
o
o
ro


















co
Ol
•H
4J
•H
rH
iH
O
Cd
fe.
C>

co

^














co
f*.
\
o
rH






j>j
J3

C
o
•H
J-l
a)
O
•H
Vi
^
^j
O

£,
O


(3
CU
40
10
oo

1

o
rH
O
co







•»
0}
»
O
4J
cd
^
CU
c
CU
a

CU
J T
09
_cd


w
3
O
•a
ca
t^
cd
:c












-------
O
i-H
O
m
        
 C     to
 ?     C
6     o
rH     3
-H     60
 U     CO
 Oj     h
fa
       4J
•O     C
 c     53
 0)     h
       O
                                                                     cu                  o\                         Hi
                                                                     (,n                  t-                         to
                                                                     ,|                  -                          f-l
                                                                     n                                              n
                                                                     i:                   -                         i:
                                                                     o - -               >,           o            o
                                                                     f,O               r-1           =T            f^
                                                                     P, m               u           —'            P.
                                                                        o               cd                            »—.
                                                                     to vo               a;            t—            to CA
                                                       •p          -H rC               *rH            (H           -H
                                                       co            4-> Fr.                             ru           JJ CC
                                                       C-~ >>        nj                  T3           \            M fc.
                                                       \X1        i-l CM               0)           ^T           r-IO
                                                       vo            3 -=r s      s      10                          3
                                                       \  -a        U)v-^               O           'O            Wo
                                                       CNJ  a>        0)                  o«           QJ            aj -^r
                                                           4J        ^ t—               O            -!->            fn ^
                                                       •O  nj           c—               ?i            cd x-x
                                                        4)  bfl        G X               p.           W^r         H CO
                                                        10i-l        THO==                   iHlTv       -H t—
                                                        O3        f*c\l               0)            3c\J         SH\
                                                        D, E        V~~^               f            S            <1) 
•H
0
t,
O
%-l
10
40
i
0)
£-,
•H
3
cr
o>
t.

cu
0
•H
40
o
•x.

1

o
C\J
o
o
t—
for Public Parti- None
to
o
c
•H
rH
CU
to 13
40 iH
•H 3
3 O
CO
1

.0
.3"
0
O
t—
RCRA Implementation
c:
•rl

K
O
•H
40
cd
c.
-,-t
0







cu
o
•z.
10
0
•H
40
cd
rH
3
bO

-------
•d
 0)
4*
 fll
 la
 o  o
 ^  ir\
 O.O
•H  PH
-P
 nj  c\l
 bO
 (U'--
 ^1 1>-
   t—
 E\
•HO:
4-J  O
 C  iH
 4)     (D
 C     C
 O     O
2;     2
              (1)
              C
              O
M
C
O
•H
-p
Crf
rH
a
hO
(D
U
.!->
C
(d
fc
o
i
.=r
o
o
oo
w
C
o
•H
•P
a)
3
hO
0}
!H
4^
C
a]
(-,
O
1
in
o
o
w
ra
C
o
•H
.p
n)
nH
3
faO
to
k
JO
C
n)
t,
0
1
vo
o
o
CO

-------
         nvironmerUal action
         Suite 731  1346 Connecticut Awe. NW Washington, DC 20036 (202)833-1845
                                       July 5, 1973
Mr. Douglas  Costle, Administrator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, S.w.
Washington,  D.C. 20460
Dear Mr.  Costle:

     Pursuant to the requirements  of section 7002 (a) (2)  of the
Resource  Conservation and Recovery Act  (42 USC 6972 (a) (2)),  this
letter is being sent to inform .you of Environmental Action's
intent to file suit 60 days from the date of this letter for
your failure to promulgate regulations  under Subtitle C of the
Resource  Conservation and Recovery Act  (42 USC 6901 et.  seq.)
within the mandated time period.   Specifically, sections .3001
through 3005 of the Act (42 USC 6921-6925) require you to prom-
ulgate regulations within 18 months after the enactment of the
Act.  The Act became law on October 21, 1976, therefore regula-
tions should have been promulgated no later than April 21, 1978.

     While progression some regulations has been made,  particu-
larly section 3006, we are particularly concerned about the de-
lays in the promulgation of regulations pursuant to sections
3001, 3004, and 3005 of the Act.   It is our understanding that
the publication of proposed regulations in the Federal Register
for these sections has recently been delayed from late July to
late September.  Final promulgation is  not likely before late
December. We find this delay to be inexcusable, especially in
view of the fact that the Agency had been preparing hazardous
waste management guidelines long before passag'e of the Act.  As
you know, the timeliness of solid  waste guidelines promulgation
under section 209 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act was the sub-
ject of litigation in which Environmental Action was a party.
(See Civil Action No. C-74-1202 WHO, U.S. Dist. Ct.,  No. Dist.
of Calif.) It appears that the Agency  can only respond in a
timely fashion to congressional mandates under solid waste
management legislation after litigation provides the necessary
impetus.
                             A.  Blakeman Early
                             Legislative Director

-------
"Mr.  Douglas  Costle
•Administrator
 Environmental  Protection Agency
 4th  and M Streets,  S.W.
 Washington O.C.  20460

               60 day notice of Intent to file a civil action

 Dear-Mr .-Cos tie:

 Citizens!for a Better En'vironmentvC'CBE)/hereby notifies you of our intent,
 after 60 days, to file a civil action against you for failure to perform an
 act  not discretionary under the-Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of
 1976,-Pub!ic Law 94-580.

 Pursuant to Section 70C2(c) "of the Resource Conservation and .Recovery Act of
 1976,-and 40 CFR Part 254, this letter is being sent to the Administrator,
 Environmental  Protection Agency, vr^li a copy to the Attorney General of the
 United.States.' '

 CBE "identifies the  following failures of the Administrator to perform an act
 or-duty under  the Acf*which is not discretionary:

 FAILURE TO ACT fl

 Sections 3001, 3002, 3003, 3004 and 3005 of the Act require that, "Not later
 than eighteen  months after the enactment of this section. ...the Administrator
 shall..." promulgate regulations identifying and managing hazardous wastes.

 The  Act,.including  the relevant sections, was enacted on 21 October 1976.

 As ofjtoday, 7^ July 1978,.:no'final,.regulations have been promulgated under
 ;these|se.ctiqns'.

 7 July 1978  is more than eighteen months after 21 October 1976.

 FAILURE TO ACT 12

 Sections 3001, 3002,' 3003, 3004 and 3005 of the Act require that, "Not later
 than eighteen  months after the enactment of this section.. .the Administrator
 shall..." promulgate regulations identifying and managing hazardous wastes.

 Taking'into  account toxicity, persistence, and degradabili ty in nature, poten-
 tial  for accumulation in tissue, anc other related factors such as flammability,
 corrosiveness, and  other characteristics, certain sludges from a waste treat-
 ment plant are hazardous'wastes.

 The  Act, including  the relevant sections, was enacted on 21 October 1976.

-------
  As of today,  7  July  1978, no final regulations have been promulgated under
  any of these  sections regulating sludges from a waste treatment plant.

 .7.July. 1978 1s  more  than eighteen months after 21 October 1976.

 iIDENTIFICATIQN  OF COUNSEL

  Bill  S.  Forcade
 'Staff Attorney
 -Citizens for  a  Better Environment
 :Su1te 2610, 59  E.-Van Buren Street  .
 ?Ch1cagor Illinois . 60605-^ -'-> ~- >
 -(312)'939-1530
 • Sincerely,
 Bill  Forcad
 Staff Attorney

';.BF/pt

-------
                        CLADOUHOS & BRASHARES
                                ATTORNEYS AT LAW
                   f75O NEW YORK AVENUE. NORTHWEST, WASHINGTON, O.C. 2OOO«
                                  2O2-S33-IIOI
                                TELEX NO.89-2662

                   I90O AVENUE OF THE STARS, LOS ANGELES. CAUFORN IA 9OOS '
                                 213-558-2295

HARRY W. CLADOUMOS

MELVIN J. OUVALL, JR. *
ROBERT G  BURKE *
TERRY A BARNETT                     AUgUSt 11,  1978
OAV1D H COFFMAN
                 CERTIFIED MAIL  —  RETURN  RECEIPT REQUESTED
* ADMITTED ONLV IH CAL1FORHIA    	     __^^_^__^___^^^^_»-^	___—_
       Mr. Douglas Costle, Administrator
       U.S. Environmental Protection  Agency
       401 M Street, S.W.
       Washington, D.C.  20460
                                      Re:   Notice of Citizen's Suit
                                           •Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §6972
       Dear Mr. Costle:
            I am authorized and  requested by our client,, the "National
       Solid Wastes Management Association, to give you notice,
       pursuant to the  "citizens suits" provision of the; Resource
       Conservation and Recovery Act  of 1976,  42 U.S.C. §6972, that
       the National Solid Wastes Management Association will file
       suit sixty  (60) days from the  date of this letter in respect
       to the failure of the Environmental Protection Agency to
       promulgate regulations under Subtitles C and D of the
       Resource Conservation an3 Recovery Act of 1976, 42 0.S.C.
       §6901 et sec, within the  time  periods mandated by the statute.
                                      Sincerely yours.
                                      William C.  Brashares

       WCB:jjp

-------
   WALD, HARKRADER & ROSS
HOMAS H r
ONALO H C
ERR* r. LCN
ERR* o AN
LCXANOER
TEPHEN M
TEVCN K VA
HOMAS W B
ITT
CM
NER
R
SIERCK
UITT
LOMSNI
ICHARO A BROWN
OBERT 0 CORNELL
OBERT M COHAN
ANCT N. HENORV
EFFREV F. LtSS
ARBARA B. PRICE

ROBERT M LICHTMAN
NCAt. P PUTLEDCE
DAUiCL F O'KECFE.JR
TONI K GOLDEN
JAMES DOUGLAS WELCH
C COLfMAN BIRD
DAVID P 8E«Z
OAVIO O WCIN9EPG
GIL8C.RT E HARDY *
LESLIE 0 MICHELSON
JUDITH C LCS5ER
GCORGC A Avrqv
DONALD T OuCKLtN
ROBERT E NACLC
KEITH S WATSON
ROBERT * SKITOL
JUOITH RICHARDS HOPE
LEWIS M POPPER
ANTHONY L YOUNG
MARC E LACKRIfZ
ALFRED H WURGLITZ »

                                                 I32O NINETEENTH STREET, H W

                                                  WASHINGTON, D. C 2OO36

                                                      t2OZ) 29«-2i2i
                                                    SCLHAM LEVINC <
                                                       or COUNSCL
                                                       PHILIP ELMAN
             * HOT ADwrrCO IN O C
                                    August  30,  1978
Hand Delivered
Hon. Douglas M. Costle
Administrator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D. C.  20460

Re:  Notice of Citizen's Suit
     Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 6972

Dear Administrator Costle:

We are writing on behalf of the Utility Solid Waste  Activities
Group ("USWAG") and its members, including  thirty-nine  electric
utility members and the Edison Electric Institute  ("EEI") .   USWAG
is the successor organization to the  Solid  Waste Group  Task Force
of EEI, the principal national association  of investor-owned
electric light and power companies.   USWAG's offices are located
at 1140 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Washington, D. C.   20036
(phone:  202/862-3800).

We are authorized and requested to provide  you with  notice,
pursuant to Section 7002 of the Resource  Conservation and
Recovery Act of 1976, 42 U.S.C. § 6972  ("RCRA") and  40  C.F.R.,
Part 254, of our intention to file suit sixty  (60) days from
the date of this letter with respect  to the failure  of  the
Environmental Protection Agency to promulgate regulations under .
Subtitles -C and D of RCRA within the  time periods  required  by
the statute.
We understand that  four  environmental  groups  and the  National
Solid Wastes Management  Association  have  also filed  "citizen

-------
WALD, HARKRADER & ROSS
  Hon.  Douglas  M.  Costle
  August  30,  1978
  Page  Two
  suit"  notices  pursuant to Section 7002 and that EPA has
  scheduled  for  September  15, IS78, a public meeting to discuss
  these  notices  and  the Agency's proposed schedule for promulgating
  regulations  under  RCRA.  Because of the potential impact of
  RCRA on  USWAG's members, representatives of USWAG will appear
  at  the public  meeting.

  We  also  understand that  EPA has held at least one private
  meeting  with environmental groups to discuss the Agency's
  proposed'schedule  for publishing implementing regulations.
  We  are concerned about such nonpublic discussions and request
  that we  be notified of any future meetings on this subject in
  time to  allow  our  full participation.

  USWAG  recognizes that implemertation of a statute as significant
  as  RCRA  must be accomplished on the basis of adequate information
  and careful  analysis.  Its members thus are hopeful that a
  reasonable and appropriate timetable for promulgation of regu-
  lations  can  be developed without litigation.

                                     Sincerely yours.
                                     Thomas H. Truitt
                                     Counsel to Utility Solid
                                     Waste Activities Group
  cc:   The Honorable Griffin Bell
       Attorney General of the United States

       Mr. Thomas C. Jorling
       Assistant Administrator for Water
       and Hazardous Materials

       Mr. Steffen W. Plehn
       Deputy Assistant Administrator
       for Solid Waste

-------
                                                        52



 1




 2



 ,                    REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE
 3





 4    DOCKET NUMBER:




     CASE TITLE: Public Meeting on EPA's Current Schedule for

     Promulgating Regulations Under the Resource Conservation and

     HEARING DATE: September 15, 1978        Recovery Act




 7    LOCATION:     401 M Street   Washington, D.C.






     I hereby certify that the proceedings  and evidence herein




     are contained fully and accurately in  the notes taken by me




     at the hearing in the above  case before the Environmental




     Protection Agency




     and that this is a true and  correct transcript of the same.
Lu





14                               Date: September 21,  1978



15




16
                                  Official  Reporter



                                Acme  Reporting Company

                                1411  K Street N.W.

                                Washington,  D.C. 20005




20



21
23




24




25

-------
                 Attendees - Public Meeting
           on Proposed Schedules for Promulgating
                  Rulemakings under RCRA,
                     September 15, 1978
                     Washington, D.C.
Ackelsberg, Oscar J.
W.R. Grace & Company
Assistant Vice President
1114 Avenue of Americas
New York, New York  10036

Amber, Jerome S.
One Parkland Blvd.
Parklane Towers West
Suite 628W
Dearborn, Michigan  48126

Ancharrow, M. Reamy
LEBOEVF, LAMB, LEIBY,
  & MACRAE
1757 N Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20036

Anderson, M. Kent
Government Relations Trane
2020  14th Street North
Arlington, Virginia  22201

Andrews, Lewis E.
NASA Technical Manager  Code LB-4
400 Maryland Avenue
Washington, D.C.  20546

Aoki, S.
Clean Water Action Project
1341 E Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20005

Aschliman, Nick
Staff Engineer
Gulf Coast Waste Auth.
910 Bay Area Blvd.
Houston, Texas  77058

Austin, John D., Jr.
American Mining Congress
1200 18th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20036

Bailey, David E.
PEPCO
Environmental Engineer
1900 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20068
 Balikov,  Henry R.
 Environmental Counsel
 J.H.  Amber  Corp.
 Thornall  Street
 Edison, New Jersey  08817

 Barta, J.W.
 Huntington  Alleys  Inc.
 Chemical  Project Leader
 P.O.  Box  1958
 Huntington,  West Virginia
25720
Barton,  C.A.
Group Leader
The Proctor & Gamble  Company
Hillcrest  Tower
7162 Reading Road
Cincinnati, Ohio   45222

Baughman,  Claire W.
Assistant  Manager
CIBA-GEIGY Corp.
Ardsley, New York  10502

Herman,  Eugene
Legal Department
E.I. DuPont De Nemours &  Company
Wilmington, Delaware  191398

Bock, Raymond W.
National Marketing; and Sales Mgr.
Waste Management Inc.
The Chemical Waste Management Div
900 Jorie  Blvd.
Oak Brook, Illinois   60521

Brashares, William C.
Attorney at Law
Cladouhos  & Brashares
1750 New York Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C.   20006

Brennan, Harry M.
Director,  Air & Waste Conservation
Amoco Chemicals Corp.
200 East Randolph  Drive
Chicago, Illinois  60601

Brenner, R.J.
Mobil Chemical Co.
Manager Environmental Affairs
P.O. Box 240
Edison,  New Jersey 08817

-------
Brown, Christine
Georgetown University
Research Assistant
2 'Ogara
Georgetown University
Washington, D.C.  20057

Brown, J.C.
Senior Process Engineer
Olin Chemicals
P.O. Box 248
Charleston, Tennessee  37310

Brown, Jerry L.
Chief Chemist
Monsanto Company
P.O. Box 249
Anniston, Alabama  36202

Browne, Ellen T.
Energy and Environmental Analysis
  Inc.
1111 North 19th Street
Arlington, Virginia  22209

Browne, Richard C.
Attorney and Counsellor at Law
Suite 804
1140 Conn. Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20036

Brubaker, Bruce H.
Special Assistant to the
  Director
Diamond Shamrork Corp.
1100 Superior Avenue
Cleveland, Ohio  44114

Bruhns, Capt. U.K. f :'im)
President
Offshore Supply Assnv.Inac.
2800 North Loop West
  Suite 400
Houston, Texas  77092

Buck, Kathleen A.
Office of the Director
  Of Government Relations
One Farragut Square South
Washington, D.C.  20006

Burre, David L.
Environmental Engineer
Borden Inc.,
180 East Broad Street
Columbus, Ohio  43215         2
 Byrne, Thomas D.
Government Affairs Rep.
Alton Box Board Company
917 Crystal Plaza North
Arlington, Virginia  22202

Caple, Arthur
EHA - Maryland
Chief Solid Waste
201 W. Preston Street
Baltimore, Maryland  21157

Carey, Mike
Engineer
Pennwalt
King of Prussia, Pennsylvania

Carmel, Perry
Licensing, Permits
  and Safety Officer
3527 Whiskey Bottom Rd.
P.O. Box 599
Laurel, Maryland  20810

Carrol, David W.
Manufacturing Chemist  Assn.
1825 Conn. Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20009

Cheely, Albert H., P.E.
1333 Village Drive
So. Charleston, West Virginia  25309

Chu, Joseph P., Ph.D., P.E.
Supervisor
Environmental Activities Staff
General Motors Corp.
General Motors Technical Center
Warren, Michigan  48090
Coates, Harry A.
Fred C. Hart Associates,
527 Madison Avenue
New York, New York  10022
Inc.
Cobb, Clifford W.
Solid Waste Project
NACOR
1735 New York, Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20006

-------
Cole, Ray C.
House of Representative
  Commerce Comm.
Staff Assistant
HOB Annex 2
Washington, B.C.

Connelly, Leo B.
Asst. General Counsel
NYC Dept. of Environmental
  Protection
2353 Municipal Bldg.
New York, New York  10003

Connor, Kay
Administrative Assistant
Carrier Corp.
The Blake Building - Suite 510
1025 Connecticut Avenue
Washington, D.C.  20036

Coolick, Frank
Supervisor of Engineering
Solid Waste Administration
32 East Hanover Street
Trenton, New Jersey  08625

Cooper, Jack L.
Director, Environmental Affairs
National Food Processors Assn.
1133 Twentieth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20036

Cox, Geraldine V.
Environmental Scientist
American Petroleum Institute
2101 L Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20037

Cunningham, Howard, C., Dr.
Manager, Regularory Compliance
Witco Chemical
277 Park Avenue
New York, New York  10017

Curtin, Lawrence N.
Holland & Knight
P.O. Drawer B W
Lakeland, Florida  33802

Dach, Leslie
Science Associate
EDF
1525 18th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20036
Davis, Owen H.
Director Federal Agency Relations
 Pacific Gas and Electric Company
 1050 17th Street, N.W.
 Washington, D.C.  20036

Davoli, Dana J., Ph.D.
Staff Scientist
Citizens for a Better Environment
59 East Van Buren, Suite 2610
Chicago, Illinois  60605

Dawson, Russell
Senior Editor
BPI
P.O. Box 1067
818 Roeder Road
Silver Spring, Maryland  20910

Denyes, Wells
Washington Representative
Eastman Chemical Products,  Inc.
500 12th Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C.  20024

Deschenes, Denise
Jr. Engineer
Texas Eastern Transmission  Corp.
P.O. Box 2521
Houston, Texas   77006

Di Nal, Joan G.
Attorney
Atlantic Richfield Company
515 South Flower Street
Los Angeles, California  90071

Drance, Andrew
Washington Rep.
Garden State Paper Company,  Inc.
2020 North Fourteenth  Street
Arlington, Virginia  22201

Dunn, J.
Exec. Secretary
APWA/ISW
1776 Mass. Avenue
Washington, D.C.  20832

Edwards, Moyer  B.
Director Environmental  Control
Alabama By-Products  Corp.
P.O. Box 10246
Birmingham, Alabama  35202

-------
Eliopoulos, Phoebe
Board of Editors
Environmental Reporter
The Bureau of National Affairs,
1231 25th Street, N.W.
Washingotn, D.C.  20037

Ellerbusch, Fred
Bristol-Myers Products
225 Long Avenue,
Hillside, New Jersey  07205

Engelman, C.R.
Industrial Chemicals Div.
American Cyanamid Co.
Blerdan Avenue
Wayne, New Jersey  07470

Erickson, Lee E.
Administrator
Environmental Control Dept.
Stauffer Chemical Company
Westport, Conn.  06880

Erk, Leyla
Research Assistant
Rubber Manufacturers Assn.
1901 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20006

Farrington, Edmond, H.
Kerr- McGee Corp.
605 Commonwealth Building
1625 K Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20006

Feigner, Ken
Chief, Waste Mgmt. Branch
EPA Region X
1220 Sixth Avenue
Seattle, Washington  98101

Ferguson, James T.
Theodore Jonas Assoc.
2009 North Fourteenth Street
Arlington, Virginia  22201

Fleming, G.G.
Superintendent - Transportation
Services
Chessie System
Operating Dept.
Baltimore, Maryland  21201
   Forbes,  Phillip  B.
   Manager  Integrated  Planning
   ARCO  Chemical  Company
IncB.O.  Box 2819
   Dallas,  Texas

   Frahn,  Kurt
   Environmental  Engineer
   HDR  Engineers
   P.O.  Box 5576
   Clearwater,  Florida  33518

   Fredericks,  B.C.
   Executive Assistant
   Englehard Industries Divison
   Engelhard Minerals  & Chemicals Corp.
   70 Wood  Avenue,  South
   Metro Park Plaza,
   Iselin,  New  Jersey   08830

   Foushee, Charles
   President
   Caldwell Systems  Inc.
   P.O.  Box 1682
   Lenoir,  North  Carolina   28645
   Friedman,  Frank B.
   Arco  Chemical  Company
   1500  Market  Street
   Philadelphia,  Pennsylvania  19101

   Frye,  Russell
   Assoc.
   Smith  &  Schnacke,  Attorneys
   P.O.  Box 1817
   Dayton,  Ohio  45401

   Gagner,  Gerald J.
   Manager  of Resource  Recovery
   Waste  Resources Corp.
   1721  Arch Street
   Philadelphia,  Pennsylvania  19103

   Garmon,  James  J.
   Environmental  Engineer
   Goodyear Tire  & Rubber
   1144  E.  Market Street
   Akron, Ohio  44316

-------
Gatsy, Blair
Reporter/Editor
Resources News Service
363 National Press
  Building
Washington, D.C.  20045

Garrahan, Kevin G.
Camp Dresser & McKee, Inc.
5408 Silver Hill Road
  Suite 507
Suitland, Maryland  20028

Gilchrist, James E.
Counsel
Exxon Company, U.S.A.
P.O. Box 2180
Houston, Texas  77001

Glenn, Michael K.
Dunnington, Bartholow & Miller
161 East 42nd Street
New York, New York  10017

Goldfield, Carl
Assistant Legislative Counsel
American Public Power Assoc.
2600 Virginia Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20037

Goldsmith, Robert
Staff Attorney
Citizen for a Better Eiviron.
59 East Van Buren, Suite 2610
Chicago, Illinois  60605

Gosline, Carl A.
Assistant Technical Director
Manufacturing Chemists Assoc.
1825 Conn. Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20009

Graves, John W., P.E.
Director of Environmental
  Safety and Health Affairs
Fennzoil Company
Pennzoil Place
P.O. Box 2967
Houston, Texas  77001

Gray, Harold B.
Senior Technical Representative
Hercules Incorporated
1800 K Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20006
Greco, James R.
Director, Government .and Industry
  Affairs
Browning-Ferris, Inc.
Fannin Bank Building
Houston, Texas  77030

Grisdela, Margaret
Associate Director
Public Affairs
A/C Pipe Producers Assoc.
1600 Wilson Boulevard
Suite 1308
Arlington, Virginia  22209

Guinan, O.K.
Manager, Environmental Services
Bureau of Explosives
Assoc. of American Railroads
1920 L Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20036

Guthire, S.
Legal Assistant
Kimberly Clark
1730 Penn. Avenue, N.W.
Suite 1000
Washington, D.C.  20006

Hall, M.E.
Senior Staff Engineer
Environmental Project
Union Carbide Corp.
Charleston, West Virginia  25306

Hannigan, Vera
Union Pacific Corp.
815 Conn Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC.  20006

Hansen, James C.
Manager, Public Relations
Dow Chemical U.S.A.
Suite 700 South
1800 M Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20036

Hardison, R.A.
Manager
Union Carbide Corp.
12900 Snow Road
Parma, Ohio  44130

Harlow, Dan R., J.D., Ph.D.
Director, Scientific Affairs
Chemical Specialist±os
1001 Conn. Avenue
Wa«h1not-nn  T> r

-------
Harness, Robert L.
Manager, Regulatory Affairs
Monsanto Company
1101 - 17th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20036

Helsing, Craig R.
Regularory Liaison
Can Manufacturers Institute
1625 Mass. Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20036

Hershson, Morris
President
National Barrell & Drum Assoc.
1028 Conn. Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20036

Hickman, H. Lanier, Jr., P.E.
President Hickman Associates
1629 K Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20006

Holik, Jeff
Attorney
Baker, Hortetler, Patterson
818 Conn. Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20006

Hontz, Phil
Marketing Representative
Texas Instruments
Dallas, Texas

Houston, Betsy
Assistant Vice President
Wilson £. Hamilton & Assoc.,  Inc.
1901 L Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20036

Hughes, Chris
Environmental Project Manager
Edison Electric  Institute
1140 Conn. Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20036

Ince, H.C., Jr.
Manager, Environmental Engineer
J.P. Stevens
Box 2789
Greenville, South Carolina  29602
Jaffee, Edward L.
Washington Rep.
PPG Industries, Inc.
1730 Rhode Island Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20036

Jimmink, Mary
Manager, Washington Office
Association of the Nonwoven Fabrics Industry
1500 Mass. Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20005

Johnson, Charles
Technical Director
NSWMA
1120 Conn. Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20036

Johnson, Karl T.
Vice President
The Fertilizer Institute
1015 18th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20036

Johnson, Victor R., Jr., P.E.
Southern Region Manager
Chemical Waste Management, Inc.
2131 Kingston Court,  S.E., Suite  112
Marietta, Georgia  30067

Keilman, D.J.
Principal Env. Engineer
Hercules Inc.
910 Market Street
Wilmington, Delaware   19899

Kerns, B.A.
Manager Environmental  Control
Westinghouse Electric  Corp.
Westinghouse Building
Gateway Center
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania  15222

Kesten, S. Norman
Assistant to the Vice  President
ASARCO Incorporated
120 Broadway
New York, New York  10005
Keyser, Earline A.
Bechtel Corporation
1620 Eye Street, N.W.,  Suite
Washington, D.C.  20006
                                                                  703

-------
Klllorin, Mary
Administrative Assist.
3M Corporation
1101 15th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20005

King, James E.
Professional and Regulatory
Services Department
Proctor & Gamble Co.
Ivorydale Technical Center
Cincinnati, Ohio  45217

King, William B.
Deputy Director
Armstrong Cork Co.
1666 K Street, N.W.
  Suite 205
Washington, D.C.  20006

Kleppinger, Edward W., Ph.D.
President
EWK Consultants Inc.
Suite 639
1311 Delaware Avenue, S.W.
Washington, D.C.  20024

Knight, Bruce L.
Environmental Control Division
Marathon Oil Company
539 South Main Street
Findlay, Ohio  45840

Knight, Gary D.
Director
Environment and Land Policy
Chamber of Commerce of the
  United States
1615 H Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20062

Komoroski, Kenneth S.
Environmental Engineer
PPG Industries, Inc.
One Gateway Center
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania  15222

Konsoulis, Mary
Legal Assistant
Seymour & Dudley
1225 Conn. Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20036
Kratsas, Robert G., Dr.
Ecologlst
Standard Oil Company  (Indiana)
200 East Randolph Drive
Chicago, Illinois  60601

Kuahner, Francine Bellet
Associate Director
Chemical Specialities Manufacturers Assoc.,
  Inc.
1001 Conn. Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20036

LaBarbera, D.R.
Senior Engineer
E.I. DuPont
Chambers Work
Deepwater, New Jersey  08023

LaRose, Keith
Legal Consultant
Fred C. Hart Associates, Inc.
527 Madison Avenue
New York, New York  10022

Latta, Edward C.
Senior Plant Engineer
SPS Company
Jenkintown, Pennsylvania  19046

Laubusch, Edmund J.
Assistant Secretary Treasurer
The Chlorine Institute, We.
342 Madison Avenue
New York, New York  10017

Lawrence, J.T.
Transportation Associate
Western Electric
Gullford Center
P.O. Box 25000
1-85 and Mt. Hope Church Rd.
Greensboro, North Carolina  27420

Le, Tien
Analyst
Brookhaven National Lab.
Building 475
Upton, Long Island, New York  11973

Lehr, Leon G., P.E.
Civil Engineer
USDA Forest Service
Rosslyn Placa E.
1621 N. Kent Street
Arlington, Virginia  22209

-------
Lewis, C.W. Bill
Member
House of Representative
State of Arizona
Phoenix, Arizona  85007

Lewis, Donald W., P.E.
Chief Engineer
National Slag Association
300 S. Washington Street
Alexandria, Virginia  22314

Liberman, Arthur L.
Patent and Trademark Counsel
International Flavors & Fragrances,
521 West 57th Street
New York, New York  10019

Lindsey, Alan M., P.E.
Coordinator - Air & Solid Waste
International Paper Company
P.O. Box 16807
Mobile, Alabama  36616

Lindsey, Maureen
Research Associates
Moshman Associates, Inc.
6400 Goldsboro Road
Bethesda, Maryland  20034

Ludington, Judith A.
Assistant Environmental Scientist
Wapora, Inc.
6900 Wisconsin Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20015

Lue-Hing, Cecil, D.Sc., P.E.
Director Research and Development
The Metropolitan Sanitary District
  of Greater Chicago
100 East Erie Street
Chicago, Illinois  60611

Lyle, Edward
Attorney
Morgan Lewis & Bockins
1513 - 26th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20007

MacDonald, Ira A.
Regulatory Compliance Director
Ashland Chemical Company
P.O. Box 2219
Columbus, Ohio  43216
      Maddux, Helene
      Energy and Environmental Analysis, Inc.
      1111 North 19th Street
      Arlington, Virginia  22209

      McCauley, Kenneth
      Waste Water Engineer
      Western Electric
      4500 S. Laburnum Avenue
      Richmond, Virginia  23231

      McCoy, Billy C.
      Senior Scientist
      Radian Corp.
Inc.  Suite 125, Culpeper Bldg.
      7923 Jones Branch Dr.
      McLean, Virginia  22102

      McEntire, C. Allen
      Environmental Engineer
      South Carolina Dept. of Health and
        Environmental Control
      2600 Bull Street
      Columbia, South Carolina  29201

      McHugh, Thomas W.
      Manager
      Health, Safety & Environment
      Emery Corporate Manufacturing
      4900 East Avenue
      Cincinnati, Ohio  45232

      McLeland, Le-nhung
      Assistant for Legislative Programs
      American Chemical Society
      1155 Sixteenth Street, N.W.
      Washington, D.C.  20036

      McManus, Frank
      Editor & Publisher
      Resource Recovery Report
      1707 H Street, N.W.
      Washington, D.C.  20006

      Milford, Charles, 0.
      Vice President
      Roebuck System, Inc.
      Box 198
      Roebuck, South Carolina  29576

      Miller, Steven R.
      Attorney
      DOE
      B-206
      Washington, D.C.  20545

-------
Morrow, Robert R.
Attorney
Sutherland, Asbill & Brennan
1666 K Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20006

Mosher, Dale C.
Project Manager
Wehran Engineering
666 East Main Street
Middletown, New York  10940

Muckenfuss, Laura A.
Grants Coordinator
Greenville County
County Courthouse
Greenville, South Carolina  29601

Mullen, Hugh
Director Government Relations
IU Conversion Systems, Inc.
3624 Market Street
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania  19104

Murphy, E.G.
Environmental Planner
M-NCPPC
8787 Georgia Avenue
Silver Spring, Maryland  20906

Neeld, Jack
Director of Environmental Control
Continental Oil Company
P.O. Box 727
Westlake, Louisiana  70669

Neighbors, Milton
President
M.L. Neighbors, Inc.
919 Eighteenth Street, N.W.
Suite 800
Washington, C.C.  20006

Nelson, Robert J.
Coatings Engineer
National Paint & Coatings Assoc.
1500 Rhode Island Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20005

Newman, Lewis R.
Colt Industries, Inc.
1901 L Street, N.W.
Suite 303
Washington, D.C.  20036
Niles, O'Jay
Director of Technical Services
American Textile Manufacturers Inst.
400 S. Tryon Street
Charlotte, North Carolina  28285

Norton, Lawrence, Jr.
Manager, State and Regional Affairs
National Agricultural Chemicals Assoc.
The Madison Building
1155 Fifteenth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20005

Nowers, Philip P.
Director
Waste Equipment Manufacturers Inst.
National Solid Waste Management Assoc.
1120 Conn. Avenue, N.W.
Suite 930
Washington, D.C.  20036

Olexy, Robert A.
Regional Director
Browning-Ferris Industries
1023 N. Lobdell Avenue
Suite A
Baton Rouge, Louisiana  70806

Onuschak, Emil, Jr.
Environmental Affairs
Columbia Gas System Service Corp.
20 Montchanin Road
Wilmington, Delaware  19807

Packard, Jean
Principal Associate
Ralph Tabor and Associates
316 Pennsylvania Avenue, S.E.
Washington, D.C.  20003

Pannella, Harrison, T.
Technical Services Director
American Coke and Coal Chemicals Inst.
1010 16th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20036

Parker, Hampton M.., Ph.D.
Technical Manager - Environmental Affairs
Union Carbide Corporation
270 Park Avenue
New York, New York  10017

-------
Pelensky, Mike
Chemical Engineer
EPA Region III
6th & Walnut Street
Philadelphia, Pa.  19106

Pellissier, Rino L.
Senior Environmental Engineer
FMC Corporation
2000 Market Street
Philadelphia, Pa.  19103

Peruzzi, Robert V.
Manager Pollution Abatement
  Technology
Rohm & Haas Co.
Engineering Division
P.O. Box 584
Bristol, Pa.  19007

Peterson, Charles W.
Project Engineer
SCS Engineer
11800 Sunrise Valley Drive
Suite 432
Reston, Virginia  22091

Post, Howard A.
Industry Specialist
U.S. Department of Commerce
Washington, D.C.  20230

Price, Donald R.
Program Coordinator
Waste Management, Inc.
900 Jorie Blvd.
Oak Brook, Illinois  60521

Randolph, Anne
Environmental Protection Spec.
DOE
2000 M Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20036

Raymond, Deborah D., Ph.D.
Environmental Safety Depart.
The Proctor & Gamble Company
Cincinnati, Ohio  45217

Reick, Ken
Environmental Engineering Dept.
The Anaconda Company
660 Bannock Street
Denver, Colorado  80204
ReynoIds, Rose
Legal Assistant
Nixon, Hargrave, Devans & Doyle
1666 K Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20006

Reifler, Ronald L.
Environmental Engineer
City of Baltimore Health Dept.
Room S-219
111 North Calvert Street
Baltimore, Maryland  21202

Richardson, Russell, C., Jr.
Governmental Affairs
American Consulting Engineers
  Council
1155 15th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20005

Ricker, Jon
Env. Engineer
Mobil
150 E 42nd Street
New York, New York  10017

Robertson, Charles
Exec. Vice President
ENSCO
P.O. Box 1975
El Dorado, Arkansas  71730

Rogers, Margaret
Legislative Assistant
Printing Industries of America,
1730 North Lynn Street
Arlington, Virginia  22209
Inc.
Rucker, Eldon
Environmental Affairs Assist. Dir.
American Petroleum Institute
2101 L Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20037

Russell, Cheryl
Reporter
Bureau of National Affairs
1231 25th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20037

Russell, Eileen
Producer
ABC News
7 W 66th Street
New York, New York  10021
                                   10

-------
Ryman, Kermit W.
Washington Branch
Chevron, U.S.A. Inc.
1700 K Street, N.H.
Suite 1204
Washington, D.C.  20006

Samtur, Harold R.
501 Eugenia
Madison, Wisconsin  53705

Savage, Robbi, J.
Environmental Analyst
National Association of Manuf.
1776 F Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20006

Schwartz, Amy, L.
Attorney
Allied Chemical
P.O. Box 1057 R
Morristown, New Jersey  07960

Schwelm, Elaine
Administrative Assistant
Nuclear Engineering Co.
1100 17th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  22306

Scott, Marsha
Beveridge, Fairbanks & Diamond
One Farragut Square South
Washington, D.C.  20006

Shawver, Robert
Environmental Engineer
Navy Dept.
Code 104.3 Chesdiv
log 57 Washington Navy

Sherman, James S., P.E.
Senior Chemical Engineer
Radian Corp.
7923 Jones Branch Drive
McLean, Virginia  22102

Sherman, Kathleen
Project Manager
League of Women Voters
1730 M Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20036

  Yard  203747
Shoemaker, Daniel J., P.E.
Section Manager
Betz, Converse, Murdoch, Inc.
Plymouth Meeting
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania  19462

Shuster, Edward R.
Vice President
Newco Chemical Waste Systems, Inc.
4626 Royal Avenue
Niagra Falls, New York  14303

Sickler, R. Scott
Regulatory Analyst, Washington Affairs
Ford
815 Conn. Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20006

Simon, Jacky L.
Legal Assistant
Arnold & Porter
1229 Nineteenth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20036

Simonsen, Bernard
Vice President
IT Corporation
336 W. Anaheim Street
Wilmington, California  90744

Shiver, James K.
Washington Rep.
Diamond Shamrock Corp.
1629 K Street,N.W.
Room 600
Washington, D.C.  20006

Simmons, Donald W.
Engineer
Environmental Control
National Steel Corp.
2800 Grant Building
Pittsburgh, Pa.  15219

Simmons, Larry L.
Manager
Industrial Programs
Energy Impact Associates
P.O. Box 1899
Pittsburgh, Pa.  15230
                                   11

-------
Smith, George C., Dr.
Technical Coordinator
Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp.
900 Agnew Road
Pittsburgh, Pa.  15230

Sobel, Richard
Director Environmental
  Services
Allied Chemical
P.O. Box 1087R
Morristown, New Jersey  07960

Soffer, Douglas J.
American Management System, Inc.
1515 Wilson Boulevard
Arlington, Virginia  22209

Speary, William A., Jr.
Environmental Counsel
Browning Ferris Inc.
P.O. Box 3151
Houston, Texas  77001

Stankiewicz, Frank
Environmental Protection Dept.
American Cyanamid Co.
Berban Avenue
Wayne, New Jersey  07470

Steadoan, J.B.
Proj. Manager
Wiley & Wilson Inc.
2310 Langhorne Road
Lynchburg, Virginia  24505

Stern, Sharon L.
Associate
DeBevoise & Liberman
806 15th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.

Steinberg, Gary
Clean Waste Action Proj.
1341 G Street, N.W.
Suite 200
Washington, D.C.  20005

Stout, E.L.
Conservation Engineer
Atlantic Richfield Company
North American Producing Division
P.O. Box 2819
Dallas, Texas  75221
                                   12

-------
Strohm, Carl
Env. Engineer
Metro Sanitary District
  of Chicago
666 N. Lake Shore Drive
10th Floor
Chicago, Illinois  60611

Sullivan, J. Mark
Project Director
EPA SWM Project
National Wildlife Federation
1412 16th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20006

Suzuki, Robert H.
Corp. Environmental Control
  Dept.
Mobay Chemical Corp.
Penn Lincoln Parkway West
Pittsburgh, Pa.  15216

Swartz, Fred W.
Washington Rep.
Hooker Chemicals & Plastics Corp.
1747 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20006

Tennille, Norton F., Jr.
Arnold & Porter
1229 Nineteenth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20036

Taranto, B.L.
Environmental Control Advisor
Exxon Chemical Company, U.S.A.
P.O. Box 222
Linden, New Jersey  07036

Thiel, Robert S.
Corporate Environmental
  Engineer
Velsicol Chemical Corp.
341 East Ohio Street
Chicago, Illinois  60611

Thillmann, John, H.
Chief Environmental Branch
Fairfax County  Government
4100 Chain Bridge Road
Fairfax, Virginia  22039

Thomas, Gary
Bureau Chief
Griffin- Larrabee News
1237 National Press Bldg.
Washington, D.C.  20045
       Thomas, Jerry L.
       Environmental Coordinator
       E.I.  Du Pont De Nemours S Co. (Inc.)
       P.O.  Box 27001
       Richmond, Virginia  23261

       Timberlake, Cecil H.
       Federal Relations Representative
       Phillips Petroleum Company
       Suite 1107
       1825  K Street, N.W.
       Washington, D.C.  20006

       Toothaker, Anne M.
       Regulatory Affairs
       Environmental Protection
       General Electric Company
       Building 36, Room 120
       Schenectady, New York  12345

       Torres, Donald T.
       City of Baltimore Health Dept.
       Room S-219
       111 North Calvert Street
       Baltimore, Maryland  21202

       Townsend, Steven
       Sanitary Engineer
       Philadelphia Water Dept.
       1140 Municipal Serv. Bldg.
       15th & J.F.K. Blvd.
       Philadelphia, Pa.  19107

       Trumble, Glenn
       Engineer
       Velsicol Chemical Corp.
       1199 Warford Street
       Memphis, Tennessee  38108

       Tucker, R.E.
       Director of Mkt.
       Environmental Control
       11300 Rockville Pike
       Rockville, Maryland  20852

       Turk, John G., Ph.D.
       Vice President-Technical
       Glass Packaging Institute
       1800 K Street, N.W.
       Washington, D.C.  20006
13

-------
 Turner,  James P.
 Manager,
 Manufacturing Chemists  Assoc.
 1825  Conn. Avenue,  N.W.
 Washington, D.C.   20009

 Vaugh, David R.
 Specialist-Environmental Affairs
 Olin  Chemicals Group
 120 Long Ridge Rd.
 Stamford, Conn.   06904

 Waldrop, Philip G.
 Regional Planner
 Great Lake Basin  Commission
 3475  Plymouth Rd.,
 P.O.  Box 999
 Ann Arbor, Michigan  48106

 Ward, S. Daniel,  P.E.
 Staff Engineer
 Radin Corp.
 7923  Jones Branch Dr.
 McLean, Virginia   22102

 Weinberg, David B.
 Wald, Harkrader & Ross
 1320 Nineteenth Street, N.W.
 Washington, DC.   20036

 Weidman, H.G.
 Engineer
 Exxon
 P.O. Box 222
 Linden, New Jersey  07036

 Weinert, John R.,
 Research Consultant
 USS Chemicals
 600 Grant Street,  Room  2813
 Pittsburgh, Pa.   15230

 Weller, Janet
 Associate
 Cleary, Gottlieb
 1250 Conn. Avenue,  N.W.
 Washington, D.C.   20036

 Wentworth, Marchant
 Solid Waste Project
 Environmental Action Foundation
 1346 Conn. Avenue,  N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20036
Weller, Frank W.
Environmental Conservation Production
Exxon Company, U.S.A.
P.O. Box 2180
Houston, Texas  77001

Whitaker, Lida
Environmental Engineer
Chesnav facengcom
Bldg. 57
Washington Navy Yard
Washington, D.C.  20374

Wiechmann, Richard
Director of Environmental Affairs
American Paper Institute
1619 Mass. Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20036

Wilbur, Linda B.
Manager, Federal Monitoring
National SOlid Waste Management Assoc.
1120 Conn Avenue, N.W.
Suite 930
Washington, D.C.  20036

Wingerter, Eugene J.
Executive Director
National Solid Waste Management Assoc.
1120 Conn. Avenue, N.W.
Suite 930
Washington, D.C.  20036

Wittman, Nelson, E.
Assistant Vice President
Government Relations
DuBois Chemicals
DuBoia Tower
Cincinnati, Oh'io  45202

Womack Don
Vice President
Texas Utilities Services Inc.
1150 Conn. Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20036

Woodson, D.L.
Roanoke Valley Regional Solid Waste
  Management Board
P.O. Box 12312
Roanoke, Virginia  24024
                                    14

-------
Wyche,  Bradford,  W.
Wald, Harkrader & Ross
1320 Nineteenth Street, N.W.
Washington,  D.C.   20036

Young,  Earle P.,  Jr.
Assistant  Vice  President
Environmental Affairs
American  Iron and Steel Institute
1000 16th  Street, N.W.
Washington,  D.C.   20036

Zeigler,  George A.
Manager,  Government Relations
National  Lime Assoc.
5010 Wisconsin  Avenue
Washington D.C.  20016
                                                       ual744
                                                       SW-45P
                                                       Order No. 728
                                      * U.S. GOVWIIWTPIIItmilSOfFICi ItTt- 620.-007/3720

                               15

-------

-------

-------