Ifl
5295
OSW000972
BACKGROUND DOCUMENT
RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT
SUBTITLE C HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT
SECTION 3002
UNIFORM HAZARDOUS WASTE MANIFEST
U.S. EnvJrwmentp! P;-'-.*.-.-* /v*ncy
Regl;-1 V, Ul-r.^y
230 oouth Dei*be?a Sii'toS:
Chicago, Illinois 60604
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF SOLID WASTE
March 1984
-------
-------
BACKGROUND DOCUMENT
UNIFORM HAZARDOUS WASTE MANIFEST
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION TITLE PAGE
I Background 1-1
II Summary II-l
III Comments and Rationale III-l
IV Conclusions and Final Rule IV-1
-i-
-------
SECTION I - BACKGROUND
A. Introduction
On February 26, 1980, EPA established a manifest system to
ensure that hazardous waste designated for delivery to an off-
site treatment, storage or disposal (TSD) facility actually
reaches its destination. The central element of the system is
the "manifest," a control and transport document that accompanies
the waste from its point of generation to its point of destina-
tion. In developing the initial regulations (see 45 fR 12722
et. iejj_. . February 26, 1980), EPA considered a uniform manifest
requirement along with other options. While considering these
options, EPA reviewed DOT's hazardous materials regulations and
determined that it would be necessary to coordinate EPA's require-
ments with DOT's regulations by requiring that specific information
accompany the waste.
DOT's hazardous materials regulations cover EPA's universe
of hazardous wastes (49 CFR 171.3 and 171.8) and require the
regulated community to use a shipping paper for the transportation
of hazardous waste. DOT's current regulations, 49 CFR 172,
allow industry to use a shipping paper format of their choosing
for the required information.
Since EPA's manifest information requirements were similiar
to DOT'S shipping paper information requirements, EPA concluded
that a shipping paper could be used to satisfy RCRA manifest
requirements if additional information required by EPA were
included on the shipping paper. By not requiring a specific
form, EPA's intent was to allow the regulated community the
option of either adapting their existing DOT shipping papers to
function as hazardous waste manifests or designing a form to
accommodate EPA's manifest information requirements.
B . Mani fest Irnplementati on Problems
Following the introduction of the Federal manifest system,
February 26, 1980, there has been a proliferation of manifests
as various States decided to implement their own forms. At
least 22 States require that generators use specific manifest
forms for the transport of hazardous waste. This situation has
caused three major problems.
First, the lack of uniformity in State manifest forms has
created a burden for generators, transporters, and State programs.
Currently, a transporter carrying hazardous waste may be required
to carry the manifest of each State in which he travels in order
to comply with various State manifest requirements. Failure to
carry a particular State's manifest may delay or prevent shipments
from reaching their destination or subject the transporter to
State enforcement action. Under these conditions, a generator may
be required to go through the costly and inefficient procedure
of filling out several manifest forms with duplicative information
in order to ensure that the waste reaches the designated facility.
1-1
-------
1-2
State programs have been burdened in some cases
adapt their administrative and data processing
handle the varying out-of-State manifests which
by the need to
procedures to
they receive.
Second, the lack of uniform information requirements prevents
generators with sites in more than one State from standardizing
manifesting procedures. This situation makes it extremely dif-
ficult for multistate generators to implement standardized data
management programs for coordinating hazardous waste information.
Third, enforcement activities have been complicated. "Prob-
able cause" to monitor and inspect a vehicle is easier to conduct
if the investigators are trained to follow uniform manifest stan-
dards.
C. Comments
Nearly 200 comments were received by EPA on the proposed Uni-
form Hazardous Waste Manifest (UHWM). This Background Document
discusses the comments received by the Agency on this rulemaking
by first stating the comment received, followed by the commenter's
rationale. For many of these issues, commenters presented sugges-
tions both for and against a given approach, frequently reflecting
the different concerns of States on the one hand, and industry
on the other. Each issue, with the relevant comments and rationale
is followed by the Agency's response. Following is a list of
the generic issues raised by commenters. The groups of issues
are separated into four areas:
GROUP A: Form Information
GROUP B: Form Design
GROUP C: Form Management
GROUP D: Other
GROUP A Form Information
GROUP
ISSUE 1
ISSUE 2
ISSUE 3
ISSUE 4
ISSUE 5
ISSUE 6
COMMENT
Require or allow additional information to
be included on the form.
Allow use of a State manifest document number III.l
Require more detailed waste description III.2
i nformation.
Require or allow use of vehicle identi- III.2
fication numbers.
Allow States to print addresses of State III.3
agencies.
Include addresses and phone numbers of all III.3
parti cipants.
-------
1-3
ISSUE 7
ISSUE 8'
ISSUE 9
ISSUE 10
ISSUE 11
ISSUE 12
ISSUE 13
ISSUE 14
ISSUE 15
ISSUE 16
ISSUE 17
ISSUE 18
ISSUE 19
ISSUE 20
ISSUE 21
GROUP B:
ISSUE 22
ISSUE 23
ISSUE 24
ISSUE 25
Add the site ocdress of the generator if
different than the mail'ng address.
Include a handling code for each waste
described on the Manifest.
Require the hazardous
Mani fest .
number on the
Allow the use of State identification numbers
Require waste quantity to be described by
weight or volume or allow use of either ,
type of measure.
Include a space for transporter to acknow-
ledge receipt of placards offered by the
generator.
Incorporate ICC Bill of Lading information
on the Manifest.
Require or allow emergency response telephone
numbers and information.
Allow certain information to be pre-printed
with check-off boxes.
Provide for information on the physical state
of the waste.
Add identification numbers for multiple
locations within a generator's site.
Supplement vague DOT proper shipping descrip-
tions with -hemical lab analysis information.
Space for an alternate treatment, storage,
or disposal facility is needed.
Add information to the Manifest that will en-
courage or assist in recycling.
Revise the '"orm instructions to include bulk
containers » n d dump trucks.
Form Design
Bind the form on the top.
Pre-print the word "waste."
Color code columns.
Add date boxes to the Manifest form.
III. 4
III. 5
III. 5
III. 6
III. 7
III. 8
III. 8
III. 9
III. 9
III. 10
III. 10
III. 11
III. 11
III. 12
III. 13
III. 13
III. 13
III. 14
III. 14
-------
1-4
ISSUE 26 Shade and arrange automated data processing III.14
information for easy entry.
ISSUE 27 Allow "free-form" computer print-outs and III.15
use of word processors.
ISSUE 28 Allow the Manifest document number to be III.15
pre-assigned/pre-printed.
ISSUE 29 Revise instructions for the Proper Shipping III.17
Descri pti on.
ISSUE 30 Revise the wording in the generator's III.17
certification.
ISSUE 31 Require that the Manifest have a red border. III.17
ISSUE 32 The type and number of containers should be III.18
entered on the left of the form.
ISSUE 33 Reduce or eliminate "tick marks." III.18
ISSUE 4 Color code each sheet of the Manifest. III.18
ISSUE 35 Use an 8 1/2" x 11" form. III.19
ISSUE 36 Number the information boxes on the form. III.19
ISSUE 37 Allow the instructions to be printed on III.19
the back.
ISSUE 38 Correct the Type of Container table to III.20
eliminate the confusion caused by dual
designations for tank car.
ISSUE 39 Make Hazard Class a separate column. III.20
ISSUE 40 May fractions be used in the Total III.20
Quantity column?
ISSUE 41 Add more space for special handling III.21
instructions, addresses, etc.
ISSUE 42 Allow States to print "tick marks" in III.21
shaded area.
GROUP C: Form Management
ISSUE 43 Allow States, generators and others to print III.21
and distribute the form.
ISSUE 44 Specify copy distribution. III.22
ISSUE 45 Allow the use of a certified equivalent III.22
mani fest.
-------
ISSUE
ISSUE
ISSUE
ISSUE
ISSUE
GROUP
ISSUE
ISSUE
ISSUE
ISSUE
ISSUE
ISSUE
ISSUE
ISSUE
ISSUE
ISSUE
ISSUE
ISSUE
46 1
47
48 1
i
49 -
50 1
1
D: Other
51 1
r
52
i
53
1
1
54 1
55 (
<
n
56 1
c
57
(
58
(
59 (
60 F
i
61 F
t
62 1
1-5
COMMENT PAGE
Federal regulations should apply only to III.23
interstate shipments.
The consignment State manifest requirements III.24
should have primacy.
Explain the proper shipping description when III.25
a non-RCRA waste is shipped.
Allow photocopying of additional copies. III.25
Require that a copy of the Manifest III.26
be sent to the States.
Restrict State program reports to the infor- III.27
mation required on UHWM.
The Manifest document number should be III.27
"unique," not "serially increasing."
Transporter information required on the Mani- III.28
fest should be completed by the transporter
and facility information be completed by the
faci1ity.
Make provisions for lab-pack shipments. 111.28
Clarification for discrepancy indication III.29
space is needed since State imposed deadlines
may vary.
Make units of measure the same as those pre- III.29
sented in the Biennial Report.
Training should be provided in order to III.29
ensure successful implementation.
The Agency should establish the number of III.30
copies required for each Manifest.
Clarify the EPA's position on "preemptive III.30
authority."
Require a quarterly report from the generator III.30
if the State does not get a copy of the
Mani fest.
Preempt State licenses and permitting of III.31
transporters.
The effective date of 180 days is acceptable III.31
but it should be sooner.
-------
ISSUE 63
1- > Ur ' -.1 _
Canadian fl
C 8 ;; a d 3.
; '' ' ; k r, j ,i i e d g e the
n 1 i..-u of the Uniform
nth r i y i n a t i n g in
TI.3
SEC ! .ON I!
The Agency received ne^rl, ^o ' .
representing both industries' ana State-
mat Ion, design, riaragement and othe > >;
Hazardous Waste manifest. These lette a an
of specific issues, which EPA has s e p. c i
comment groups (see Section I). More u
groups were concerned with the form inf;s
and only nine (9) general comment groups ?.i_,c
The remaining comments fell into a mi^ce'i"!
designated as "Other."
J ' :OC; "" -merit 1 ttt, , s
oncerns witn the infer-
iC'.- ;; or the Uniform
"-. sed a large number
.1:,- ove r si xty (60 )
! the co-ment
n i form d.s i g n
f . %, mar a gerent.
r. v, .j u r c .1 EPA has
In general, EPA was attempting to limit the paperwork burden
whereas State and industry commenters suggested the addition of
specific information which they believed EPA should require on
the Manifest. Much of the information they sou^nt was of a pro-
grammatic nature and did not meet the primary purpose, of the
manifest: transportation safety and tracking. As a co -jromise,
EPA has allowed additional spaces for specific infor",,; -..n items
recommended by State and industry commenters in a sh^df area on
the form as optional information items.
More than a third cf the comment groups /ealt vit
Where these comments could be incorporated into ine
form, the Agency made every effort to do so (e.-j., c
compatibility). Where incorporation of --.. o^-nt
ing or contrary lo the efficient opiraliop of
were rejected (e.g. , ?. s e p a n . - ^-.tzard Class
form design «: u g g e s t i f.
or in If sign.
sign of the
., c 11, processing
would be conflict-
the Manifest, they
column). Some of the
are allowed
dots in c-
orma
:. 1 chough not Incorporated specifically,
by the generator or a State (e.g., light
Ion area to f a c i ' ' : a t e data processing).
As ,nth c;
recommenced varic
were incorporatoo w h e r £
by generators) whl1
f or-!! design COT- .
s form mana gem.-nt
y;s nU ,.c.
" e r w e r a
Uniform H j " a r d j u <
Other suggestion;-
a re all owed to be
they would not be
require general.
W a
to
*-rs, States and industries
alternatives. These, too,
g. , ac>juisition of the form
rejected (e.g., apply the
interstate shipments only).
i ; e; i
ado.fv-d as federal requirements, but
ar«u anforced by the States wherever
tent with federal regulations (e.g.,
copies to the generator's State).
Comments friiing under the miscellaneous area of "Other"
were diverse. ^ome comments were outside the jurisdiction of
EP.Vs authority, (e.g., provide for lab-packs). Others affected
the coordination of the Manifest with other program elements
(e.g., make units of measure codes on the Manifest the same as
those used in the Biennial Report). Some of the groups of
-------
II-l
comments were concerned about the implementatian of the Manifest
(e.g., applicability of DOT preemption authority over States
with inconsistent laws). All the comments were examined during
and after the comment period while the final rule was being
drafted. The results of the comment review and the follow-up
is discussed more completely in Section III below.
SECTION III - COMMENTS AND RATIONALE
The following section discusses the four basic areas of com-
ments the Agency received during the comment period. Each basic
area is subdivided into groups and followed by the Agency's response
(see Section I for a list of the comment groups).
GROUP A: Form Information
1. Require or allow additional information to be included on the
form.
Comments identified a number of additional information items,
and suggested that they be required on the form, allowed to be
required by States on the form, or allowed to be included on the
form by States or generators at their discretion.
RESPONSE:
EPA considered these comments in light of several concerns
applicable to Federal manifest information requirements and to
the design of a Federal Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest. EPA
manifest requirements must be designed to protect human health
and the environment, as provided in Section 3002 of RCRA. The
primary purposes of the manifest requirements must, therefore, be
to provide for tracking of hazardous waste shipments to ensure
that all wastes designated for a treatment, storage, or disposal
(TSD) facility reach their destination and to ensure transportation
safety. It is alos necessary in order to ensure that the manifest
system operates efficiently and effectively and achieves these
primary purposes to make sure that the Manifest forms are not
unneccesarily complex and can be completed easily and quickly,
and that the necessary information on the Manifest can be easily
identified and understood.
Many of the information items suggested by commenters may be
helpful in some cases for management of hazardous waste, but are
not necessary for the purposes of transportation safety and track-
ing of waste shipments. Others were related to transportation
safety or tracking, but went beyond the existing requirements
that EPA has determined to be adequate for these purposes. Were
EPA to attempt to accommodate a significant number of these
suggestions, the information items would not all fit on the form
and require a form larger than standard size or serveral pages
long. This would impede the convenience and efficiency of handl-
ing of forms, and thus impede the effective operation of the
Manifest system.
-------
1 i - ?
In addition, requiring or providing for a significant number of
additional information items woulJ increase the complexity of
the '"or r , a so interfering with its efficient and effective use.
Or. the other ha fid, EPA recognizes the legitimate interest on
the part of States to design their own unique tracking and
hazardous waste management systemc, as long as they are equivalent
to and not inconsistent with the federal system. EPA also realized
that if no provision were made for information items that States
believed to be critical to their programs, States would attempt
to require such additional information to be submitted on separate
documents, which would also increase the complexity and burden of
the system and defeat in part the advantage of a uniform manifest.
Although federal requlations would prohibit States from requiring
that such additional documents travel with the waste shipments, in
most cases States would be able to require separate submission of
such documents from generators or treatment, storage, or disposal
facility operators. In the proposed rule that appeared in
the March 4, 1982, Federal Register, the Uniform Hazardous Waste
Manifest form limited the information to Federally required
information. During the comment period, the Agency learned that
although many of the industry commenters were in favor of preclud-
ing States from requiring additional information on the form,
they would support a manifest that provided for certain limited
State-required information items if such a compromise would
eliminate the need for a separate additional State information
report or form.
In light of these considerations, EPA has designed a form
thav provides for the minimum information items required by
federal law, and also provides for certain limited additional
information items to be required by States. The Federal informa-
tion items are limited to those that already are required by EPA's
manifest regulations. Additional information that may be required
by States is limited to the few items considered most critical by
States. In addition, the new Uniform Manifest regulations provide
that States or generators may add other information or instructions
to the form, either in the margins or on the back of the form.
This should provide States and generators with all the information
they believe to be critical to their unique manifest handling and
tracking systems without the need to provide or require additional
documents other than the Uniform Manifest. At the same time, the
optional information is sufficiently limited to maintain the sim-
plicity and ease of handling necessary for the effective operation
of the Federal manifest system, and has been accommodated within
the convenient format of a single sheet of paper of standard size
(8 1/2" by 11 ").
All Federally-required information is clearly indicated on the
form. This information must appear on all completed manifests, and
compliance with these information requirements will be enforced by
federal and State enforcement personnel during the transportation
phase of a shipment of hazardous waste.
-------
III-l
Additional information that may be required by States ("Optional
State information") is indicated on the form by lettered, rather
than numbered items, and by shading of these spaces. States may
require generators or treatment, storage, or disposal facility
operators to submit this information. Such additional information
may be voluntarily carried with a shipment by the transporter, but
the transporter may not be found in violation if the form fails to
include such information.
States may also pre-print additional information or instructions
on the form, such as in the margin or on the back of the form, as
provided in 40 C.F.R. §271.10(h). However, such preprinting may
not require the entry of any additional information by generators,
transporters, or TSD facility operators beyond the specifically
identified Federally-required information or optional State informa-
tion. Where neither the generator's State nor the State in which
TSD facility is located prints and supplies the manifest, the
generator may preprint any information on the form other than the
required signatures and dates.
EPA's responses to comments on each specific information
item suggested are set forth in the remainder of the issue groups
concerning form information. The considerations discussed above
should be borne in mind when considering those responses to
specific suggestions. Additional discussion of this issue can
be found in the preamble to the final Uniform Manifest regulations.
2. Allow use of a State manifest document number:
Several States suggested that the Agency allow them to add a
State manifest document number. The States that made this request
commented that they currently used document numbers in the management
and tracking of manifests in their State and that these numbers
were critical to the enforcement of their programs. Some commenters
suggested that the EPA manifest document number was too cumbersome
for data processing use and that by allowing generators to control
the entry of the EPA Manifest document number on the Manifest, a
greater margin of error could be expected. Some concern was also
expressed regarding the likelihood of intentional manipulation
of Manifest document numbers for illegal purposes.
Of those commenters who supported the issuance of State man-
ifest document numbers, most suggested that the States be allowed
to preprint manifest document numbers. This would allow States
that want total control of manifest issuance, management, and track-
ing to exercise such control.
RESPONSE:
The Agency believes that the addition of a State manifest
document number as a State-required information item is acceptable.
States with existing manifests and manifest tracking systems
argued that they need to control the tracking of hazardous waste
shipments with manifest document numbers which they print on the
-------
III-2
manifest. The addition of a State number would ensure that the
number was compatible with their automated data processing (ADP)
system. .Since the addition of this number on the manifest by the
State controlling the distribution of the manifest would create
no additional burden on industry, the Agency believes that allow-
ing the addition of a State manifest document as a State information
item is appropriate.
3. Require more detailed waste description information.
Several States requested that the final rule contain a stan-
dard that generators be required to supply more detailed information
on the contents of the waste. A few TSD facilities also suggested
that a more complete waste description should be part of the final
rule. They argued that the additional information would be help-
ful both for emergency response purposes and for safer management
of the waste once it arrived at a TSD facility.
The Agency agrees with the commenters that in some cases this
additional information may be useful to the TSD facility operator
but believes that such a requirement on each manifest is unnecessary
for the limited purposes of the Federal manifest system. The
Agency believes detailed information regarding a waste should be
in the possession of the facility pri-or to the arrival of a shipment
and that the procedures established in the facility standards are
sufficient to protect human health and the environment. Thus, it
would be unnecessary to require detailed information on a shipment
by shipment basis. EPA recognizes, however, that some States may
wish to go beyond the federal manifest system, and believes that
a State requirement for a more detailed waste description to be
entered on the Uniform Manifest is not inconsistent with Federal
requirements as long as it is limited to appropriate spaces on the
form. EPA, therefore, allows States or TSD facilities to require
additional waste description information either on a shipment by
shipment basis from the generator or as a condition of acceptance
of a shipment at a facility. The Manifest form has been designed
to include spaces labeled "J" and "S" and titled "Additional
Descriptions for Materials Listed Above" for States to require
this additional information. Generators or TSD facilities may
also enter information in this space even if the State does not
require entry of such information.
4. Pecjui re or 571 ow use of ve h i c 1 e i dent i f j_cat i on nurnb_?_r^s_.
Several State commenters i.. this group suggested that the Agency
require the use of vehicle identification numbers for transporters.
Tneir rationale was that enforcement actions would be easier, and
tracking of shipments mere complete.
The vehicle identification number would be a unique number
required to be displayed on each vehicle used to transport hazardous
-------
III-3
waste, including each separate trailer or tractor-trailer combina-
tion. Upon observation of this number on a vehicle, regulatory
and enforcement personnel would be able to refer to files of such
number^ to identify the transporter and the load he was carrying.
EPA has declined to require inclusion of a vehicle indenti-
fication number for the following reasons. First, the Federal
manifest information requirements already provide for entry of
the transportater's EPA identification number. Although this
number is a single number for all of a transporter's vehicles.
EPA believes that this identification of the transporter is
sufficient for tracking and safety purposes. Once Federal or
State personnel can determine from the EPA identification,
number the, name, address, and phone number of the transporter,
separate identification of the vehicle is not necessary. Second,
to the extent that a vehicle identification number system is
intended to identify vehicles without reference to the manifest,
it is beyond the scope of the Manifest requirements. In addition,
other identification numbers already are in use for identification
of vehicles, such as license plate numbers and ICC numbers.
Third, to the extent that States already require vehicle identifi-
cation numbers, there may be inconsistencies between the format
and requirements among the States, so that requiring a nationally
uniform numbering system would disrupt existing State procedures.
Fourth, to the extent no requirements for vehicle identification
numbers currrently are in effect, the imposition of such a
system would create a substantial burden on transporters for
obtaining and applying to all vehicles the appropriate numbers.
DOT particularly shares this concern with EPA, in light of DOT'S
responsibility to prevent interference with interstate commerce.
However, EPA can find no environmental reason to disallow the use
of vehicle identification numbers as an optional State information
i tern.
5. Allow State to print State agency's address
Several State commenters suggested that they be allowed to
print on the Manifest the name, address, telephone number, and
logo of their State.
RESPONSE:
States will be allowed to preprint their State name, agency,
address, logo, and appropriate telephone number(s) in the margin
or on the back of the form as provided in §271.10(h). The top
margin has been expanded to provide space for this information
(approximately 3/4").
6. Include addresses and phone numbers of all participants.
The regulations promulgated May 19, 1980, require the name,
EPA identification number, mailing address, and telephone number
of the generator, the name and EPA identification number of each
transporter, and the name, EPA identification number, and site
-------
III-4
address of the TSD facility. The March 4, 1982, proposed rule
would have added the TSD facility's telephone number to this
information. Several commenters suggested that the name, address,
and telephone number for each participant in a shipment should be
included on the form. Addresses and telephone numbers for trans-
porters were thought to be particularly essential.
RESPONSE:
The group of commenters who suggested the addition of the
addresses and telephone numbers of all participants in the manage-
ment of a hazardous waste thought this information was essential
to the proper tracking and safety of each shipment. The Agency
does not totally agree. The EPA identification numbers are directly
related to the name, address and telephone number of each participant.
The Agency agrees that the name, address, and telephone number of
the generator is necessary since the facility owner or operator
is required to send a signed copy of the Manifest back to the
generator and may need to call the generator regarding the waste.
The name and address of the TSD facility is also a Federally-
required information item. However, only the name of the
transporter is a Federally required information item, since EPA
believes the address of the transporter is not a useful item of
information on the Manifest. Upon investigation, the Agency found
that several addresses exist for each transporter such as home
office, dispatcher, terminal, etc. Thus, the Agency could not
determine which of these addresses was the primary point for
tracking and safety purposes. Since the entry of only one of
these addresses in many cases would not be sufficient for tracking
and safety purposes, and since the relevant addresses can readily
be obtained by reference to the EPA identification number, EPA
chose not to require an address for the transporter to be entered
on the Manifest form. EPA has however, provided spaces in the
optional State information area of the form for the telephone number
of the transporter (s) and TSD facility.
7. Add the site address of the generator if different than the
mailing address.
Comments received by the Agency suggested that EPA add the
generator's site address if it is different than the generator's
mailing address, which is required. The reasons given for this
request was that the site address information would provide informa-
tion concerning where a shipment actually began.
RESPONSE :
The generator's mailing address on the Manifest is neces-
sary to the TSD owner or operator when he sends the Manifest by
mail back to the generator. Many generator sites are not suitable
for mailing purposes and many companies prefer to have copies
of manifests go to one central company office, which would be
-------
III-5
the appropriate address for inclusion on the Manifest. The actual
generating site location is, therefore, not needed for compliance
with the manifest system. If a facility owner or operator needs
to know the site address for the generator, he can call the generator
wftose telephone number is required on the Manifest. States that
wish to know the site address of the generator can determine it
from the EPA identification number which is required as part of
the Manifest document number. Therefore, the Agency does not agree
that the generator's site address is necessary on the Manifest.
8. Include a handling code for each waste described on the
Mani fest.
Several commenters suggested that the handling code for each
waste described on the Manifest should also be included on the
Manifest. Most of these commenters believed that this information
should be added by the TSD facility after the waste was processed
but before the Manifest was sent to the State. A few commenters
suggested that the generator should be held accountable for the
handling code.
RESPONSE:
State commenters and some industry commenters in this group
supported the inclusion of a waste handling code for each waste
shipped. Some believed this information should be required while
others were not specific. The Agency has allowed for the entry of
the waste handling code on the Manifest as a State or other optional
information item. The Agency is not concerned with whether the
code entered is one of the established EPA Handling Codes found in
40 CFR Parts 264 and 265, since the information is not critical for
the transportation safety or tracking of a waste shipment. States
may choose to require that the handling code information be a
State handling code number. EPA is not concerned over whether
the handling code is submitted by the generator or the TSD facility,
since the Federal government will not enforce against the inclusion
of this information item on the Manifest.
Although the waste handling code is part of the required in-
formation for the Biennial Report, the Agency does not believe
that it is necessary for either transportation safety or tracking
and, therefore, it is not required on the Manifest.
9. Require the hazardous waste number on the Manifest.
The hazardous waste number of each waste was not a required
manifest information item in the May 19, 1980, rule and the Agency
did not propose to require it for each waste listed on the Manifest
in the March 4, 1982, proposed rule. However, a column was provided
for the hazardous waste number as an optional information item on
the proposed rule which the generator could add at his discretion.
Since the Agency did not require the hazardous waste number,
there was no requirement for it to be either the EPA hazardous
waste number or a State hazardous waste number.
-------
III-6
Several commenters suggested that this piece of information be
required, not optional, for all hazardous wastes and for all ship-
ments: This comment was directed from some States and TSD facilities
that believed the information would be helpful to their data manage-
ment and reporting functions.
RESPONSE:
Although several commenters from both industry and government
suggested that the Agency require handling codes as a mandatory
information item, EPA is not convinced that such a requirement
is justifiable. Although useful to States and facilities, the
handling code is not the type of information that will enhance
protection of human health or the environment nor will it improve
the tracking of the waste.
The hazardous waste number is intended primarily to aid in
determining proper management of the waste for treatment, storage,
or disposal purposes, rather than for transportation safety pur-
poses. EPA believes that it is the generator's responsibility to
communicate this type of information to the TSD facility operator
prior to shipping the waste in order to ensure that the facility
can handle the waste. EPA's Manifest regulations already require
identification of the waste by reference to DOT material descrip-
tions, and believes that DOT'S identification requirements are
appropriate and sufficient for transportation purposes. In
addition, DOT's Emergency Response Guidebook presents instructions
on emergency handling of waste by referring to DOT proper shipping
descriptions, not to hazardous waste numbers.
For these reasons, the Agency has decided not to include the
hazardous waste number (either the EPA number or any State hazardous
waste number) as a required information item. However, space has
been provided on the form in the optional State information area
for this number.
10. Allow the use of State identification numbers.
Several State commenters suggested that they should be allowed
to require generators, transporters, and owners and operators of
TSD facilities to use existing State identification numbers. Many
of the States with existing manifest systems also have data manage-
ment systems designed around State issued numbers. In their opinion,
continued operation of State systems would continue more efficiently
if allowed to use existing State issued numbers.
RESPONSE:
As with other information that States believed was essential
to the operation of their programs, EPA cannot justify the State
identification number as essential for tracking or transportation
safety, since the Federal manifest handling and reporting system
does not depend on such State numbers. Thus, this number is not a
required information item on the Manifest. In addition, the Agency
examined various State identification numbers currently in use and
-------
III-7
found that the alphabetical and numeric combination and the number
of characters varied considerably among States. It would have
been difficult for EPA to have established a federally required
State identification number that would have accommodated all the
States' concerns. EPA does believe, however, that States may be
allowed to require State identification numbers to be entered on
the Manifest without interfering with the Federal Manifest system.
Therefore, this information item is allowed in the optional State
information area, with its format and field to be determined at
the discretion of the States.
11. Require waste quantity to be described by weight
or by volume or allow use of either type of measure.
Comments addressing the units of measure for the total quan-
tity of each hazardous waste can be separated into three separate
sub-groups: those favoring units of weight: those favoring units
of volume; and those favoring a choice of either. State comments
were divided on this issue. Some States have systems that require
units of measure to be reported by volume, while other States have
systems that require units of measure to be reported by weight.
Industry comments, for the most part, supported the third option
which would allow the entry of quantities by either method.
The Agency was asked by one commenter to limit the application
of the units of measure for wastes shipped as gallons (or liters)
to liquids. Situations existed, according to the commenter, where
shipments listed in gallons consisted of dry waste.
RESPONSE:
The Agency reviewed the comments from the States and industry
and then consulted with DOT to determine the feasibility of stipu-
lating the quantity of the waste in either weight or volumetric
units. DOT'S regulations require that the total quantity of the
waste appear on the shipping paper (manifest). DOT is not concerned
with whether the units are in volume or weight. EPA agrees with
this approach. To only require one type of unit would not increase
EPA's protection of human health and the environment nor would it
improve tracking of the waste. Also, those States that require a
particular unit of measure appear to base their need for this in-
formation on accounting and fee collection, rather than on safety.
The Manifest instructions allow the quantity of waste to be given
either in units of volume or units of weight.
The Agency agrees, however, that the units of measure should
reflect the nature of the waste. For example, a dry powder or
other solid should be shipped as a quantity measured in weight not
gallons. This has been indicated in the instructions by noting
"liquids only" after the units of measure "liters" and "gallons."
-------
III-8
12. Include a space for transporter to acknowledge receipt by
transporters of placards offered by the generator.
The comments in this group included a recommendation by
generators that the Manifest contain a space for the transporter
to acknowledge receipt of placards offered by the generator. Some
commenters believed that such a statement on the Manifest would
document compliance of the generator standards.
RESPONSE:
The Agency recognizes that some generators may wish to document
compliance with the generator standards. One such requirement,
placarding, could be substantiated, in some commenters1 opinion, by
the simple addition of a statement that the transporter would sign
or initial. The statement would indicate that the generator had
offered the appropriate placards to the transporter, thereby docu-
menting compliance with the generator's placarding requirements.
The Agency believes that to include this information item as a
federally-required item would be an unjustifiable burden on all
generators. For example, generators who transport their own
waste would not need this type of statement. From the Agency's
point of view, neither of the two Manifest information criteria,
protection of human health and the environment or tracking would
be enhanced. The Agency believes, however, that generators who
desire this kind of documentation on the Manifest can enter it in
the Special Handling Information space and require as part of their
contract with the transporter.
13. Incorporate ICC Bill of Lading information on the Manifest.
Several industry commenters suggested that the Agency provide
space for the Bill of Lading information required by the Interstate
Commerce Commission (ICC). They believed that inclusion of this
information on the Manifest would reduce the amount of paperwork
they would be required to carry with each shipment of hazardous
waste.
RESPONSE:
Recently, ICC published a notice in the Federal Regi ster (47
F_R 29403, July 6, 1982) ruling that ". . . hazardous waste of no
economic value destined for disposal (other than nuclear or radio-
active waste) do not constitute 'property1 within the meaning of
49 U.S.C. 10521. Accordingly, the Commission does not have jurisdic-
tion over the for-hire transportation by motor carriers of such
wastes." Therefore, the Agency does not expect that Bill of Lading
requirements will apply to hazardous waste shipments destined for
treatment, storage or disposal facilities. Consequently, the Agency
does not believe that the form should include space dedicated for
Bill of Lading use. In the unlikely event the ICC Bill of Lading
information is required for a shipment of hazardous waste, the
generator may be able to provide the ICC-required information as
an attachment or on the back of the Manifest form. If this is
-------
III-9
not practical, it may be necessary to carry both the UHWM and a
Bill of Ladi ng.
14. Require or allow emergency response telephone numbers and
i nformati on.
The comments in this group include several recommendations
that the UHWM contain an emergency response telephone number.
Some commenters believed that the National Response Center's (NRC)
number or the Chemtrec telephone number should be required on each
Manifest. Some State comments suggested that they be allowed to
preprint the telephone number of the State emergency response office
while others suggested an all-inclusive list of State emergency re-
sponse telephone numbers to be included on the back of the Manifest.
RESPONSE:
EPA evaluated the DOT emergency response requirements and
decided that the existing DOT requirements for emergency response
information were adequate. The development and use of the DOT
identification (UN/NA) number for emergencies and DOT requirements
for notifying the National Response Center (NRC) by telephone in
certain circumstances and file a written report in all instances
i s suffi ci ent.
DOT regulations (49 CFR 171.15) and EPA regulations (40 CFR
263.30) require transporters to call the NRC under certain emergency
circumstances. EPA does not believe that the inclusion of the NRC
telephone number on the Manifest is justifiable since there will
be spills that will not necessitate a telephone call to the NRC.
Originally, the Agency considered adding emergency response
telephone numbers but rejected their mandatory inclusion since
it could be construed as an implicit instruction to call in the
event of any situation, including those of a non-emergency nature.
DOT and EPA regulations presently require transporters to call the
National Response Center (NRC) as the result of certain accidents
(49 CFR 171.15 and 40 CFR 263.30). For those spills of
sufficient threat, EPA and DOT standards require transporters to
call the NRC, and EPA believes that transporters already are or
should be aware of that requirement and the appropriate number,
as well as the proper procedures to follow.
However, EPA will not preclude a State from preprinting such
numbers, including State emergency response numbers. The Manifest
regulations regarding preprinting, 40 CFR §271.10(h), allow States
to print the NRC number, or any other emergency telephone numbers
or information, in the margin or on the back of the form, provided
they do not conflict with established emergency response procedures.
15. Allow certain information to be preprinted with check-off
boxes.
Commenters suggested that the UHWM should be simplified by
allowing certain information to be pre-printed in the form of
-------
111-10
check-off boxes. For example, if a generator typically sends
waste to one of two companies, the UHWM form should have space
for the. names, addresses and EPA identification numbers of both
companies. The generator could then use a check-off box to
indicate to which of the two TSD facilities the waste was being
sent. Other check-off boxes for other items was suggested.
16. Provide for information on the physical state of the waste.
Both State commenters and some industry commenters suggested
the need for additional information regarding the waste description.
The industry comments were primarily from TSD facilities. .Included
in the additional information they suggested was need for the
physical state of the waste (e.g., solid, liquid, gas and sludge).
Both groups of commenters believed that such information would
facilitate improved management by the receiving facility.
RESPONSE:
The Agency considered requiring a more specific waste des-
cription for the waste listed on the Manifest. Included in this
consideration was the need for the physical state of the waste.
EPA is relying on the DOT proper shipping description for identifying
each waste, and believes that their nomenclature and format is
sufficient to protect human health and the environment during
transportation. In many cases, the DOT shipping description con-
tains an indication of the physical state (e.g., Flammable Solid,
Corrosive Liquid, etc.) and an additional statement of the physical
state would be redundant.
The Agency believes that the TSD facility should know before
a waste shipment arrives what it is recieving and that generic
information such as the physical state should be transmitted prior
to the shipment being made, before the Manifest is prepared. In
addition, it would be difficult to identify a standard term for
some physical states for easy entry on the Manifest. For example,
the physical state of "sludge" as suggested by some of the commenters
would be unacceptable since the definition varies considerably
between federal and State regulations and industry.
The Agency has, therefore, rejected the physical state of a
hazardous waste as a required piece of information for generators
to put on the Manifest. States may, however, require the physical
state of a waste as part of the information requirements they
place on generators or TSD facility owners or operators. It should
be entered under "Additional Information for Waste Listed Above."
17. Add identification numbers for multiple locations
within a generator's site.
The Agency received comments suggesting that EPA require or
allow the use of a second generator identification number when
wastes are generated at more than one location within a generator's
site. They believed that this would make tracking of the waste
-------
III-ll
more complete and allow them to determine the exact production
line or.process stream origin.
RESPONSE:
The Agency does not agree with these commenters since the
generator EPA identification number is issued on a site by site
basis. To issue two or more numbers per site would be confusing
and a burden on State and Federal tracking systems. If, however,
a. generator wants to keep more specific records that allow him to
identify which waste stream came from which process stream, he can
do so on the Manifest form in the space titled "Special 'Handling
Instructions and Additional Information." This information could
also appear in the margins or on the back of the form.
18.
Vague DOT proper shipping descriptions should be supplemented
with chemical Tab analysis information.
State comments and comments from treatment, storage and dis-
posal facilities indicated a desire for the Manifest to contain
additional information that would provide a more specific descrip-
tion with regard to the DOT proper shipping description. Some of
the comments suggested that DOT shipping descriptions were vague and
that the Agency should include a requirement that the description
include chemical lab analysis information.
RESPONSE:
The Agency disagrees with these commenters. EPA has worked with
DOT in the development of a transportation and control document
that meets both the requirements of the Hazardous Materials Trans-
portation Act (HMTA) and RCRA (Section 3002). As a result, EPA
has chosen to supplement the DOT-required information with other
information that the Agency believes will help protect human health
and the envirionment and provide for tracking of waste shipments.
Although a chemical analysis or a more complete chemical description
could be helpful to a State program or to a treatment, storage or
disposal facility, it is not sufficiently related to the transpor-
tation and tracking functions to warrant a federal requirement that
it be included on the Manifest. States or facilities can, on their
own, require such information provided it is not a condition
of transportation.
19. Space for an alternate treatment, storage, or disposal
faci1ity i s needed.
The Agency received comments suggesting that a specific space
be provided for the alternate TSD facility. Since the regulations
allow for a generator to enter an alternate facility, these com-
menters believed that the Manifest should have a specific space
for it.
-------
111-12
RESPONSE:
EPA considered providing a specific space for the alternate
facility but rejected it based on the belief that it would be used
only rarely, and that space on the Manifest should be used for more
pertinent information. EPA regulations currently allow generators
to identify an alternate facility, but do not require it. In many
cases, the limited number of TSD facilities in an area will make
it very difficult to identify an alternative facility. In addition,
an alternate facility is intended to be used in emergency situations.
Providing a space for an alternative facility might give the incorrect
impression that use of the alternate facility is left to the dis-
cretion of the transporter. Finally, in those few emergency situa-
tions in which use of an alternative facility will be necessary,
since an alternate facility is to be used only in emergency situations
and since these should be relatively few, it is not a significant
burden to require the transporter to contact the generator to
decide on an alternate.
For those generators who are able to identify an alternate
facility and wish to note it on the Manifest, however, the space
allotted to generators for "Special Handling Instructions and
Additional Information" can be used for the alternate facility.
The required information can be entered by the generator at the
time of the shipment or by the transporter as provided for in 40
CFR 262.20(d) and 263.21. Therefore, the Agency is not providing
a special space for the alternate facility information.
20. Add information to the Manifest that will encourage or assist
in recycli ng.
This group of commenters suggested that any additional informa-
tion which would facilitate resource recovery should be provided
for on the Manifest. They were of the opinion that a more specific
waste description would encourage the recycling of wastes. Some
commenters thought States could assemble information from the Man-
ifest, compile the data, and make it available to others interested
i n recycli ng waste.
RESPONSE:
The Agency agrees with the commenters regarding the need to
encourage recycling. However, since the additional data commenters
requested do not enhance protection of human health and the environ-
ment during transportation or improve tracking of shipments, such
information is not appropriate for inclusion on the Manifest. The
Agency does encourage generators to explore their recycling opportun-
ities as an alternative to treatment, storage or disposal. If the
"Special Handling Instructions and Additional Information" space
is useful for this purpose, generators should place the information
in this space.
-------
111-13
21. Revise the form instructions to include bulk containers and
dump trucks.
Several commenters from industry pointed out that the instruc-
tions for the Manifest should include a category for dump trucks and
other bulk containers. Other comments indicated that "roll-offs" or
dumpsters should also be included in the list of types of containers.
RESPONSE:
The commenters were correct in noting that the table in the
instructions to the form was incomplete and should have included
a category for containers that describe a dump truck. This category
has been included as "DT." The Agency does not agree with the
commenters who suggested that a separate category for "roll-offs"
or dumpsters be included in the table of types of containers. EPA
intended that the code for metal boxes, cartons, and cases (CM) be
used for "roll-offs" and dumpsters, and has clarified this in the
instructions.
GROUP B: Form Design
22. Bind the form on the top.
Some comments suggested that the form copies be bound at the
top to be compatible with use on a clip-board.
RESPONSE:
The Agency agrees with the commenters that the form should
be bound at the top when used on a clip-board. However, other
applications for managing the Manifest in transit may necessitate
binding the Manifest on both sides (for computer/word processor
printing), on one side for book-type usage, or on the bottom.
Therefore, the Agency is not requiring that the copies of the
Manifest be bound on any side or bound at all.
23. Pre-print the word "waste."
Industry comments included a recommendation that the word
"waste" be preprinted on the Manifest since, in their opinion, all
or most of the shipments would begin with the word "waste."
RESPONSE:
It is true that the proper shipping description according
to DOT for a large percentage of the hazardous wastes will be
preceded by the word "waste." However, there will be some cases
where the proper shipping description according to DOT will include
the word "waste" as part of the description, where the word "waste"
does not precede the description (e.g., Hazardous Waste, liquid,
N.O.S., ORM-E, NA 9189). Therefore, the Agency is not requiring
that the word "waste" be preprinted on the Manifest. However, it
will be permissable for generators to preprint this word and the
proper shipping description if they desire.
-------
111-14
24. Color code columns.
One industry commenter suggested color-coding the column on
the left margin of the form to indicate which information was the
responsibility of the generator (red), transporter (green), and
facility (blue).
RESPONSE:
EPA does not believe that color coding is necessary to identify
the respective portions of the form for completion by generators,
transporters, and TSD facility operators. Instead, EPA has designed
the form with words in the left margin that identify the appropriate
sections for generators, transporters, and TSD facility information.
EPA believes that this is an adequate and simpler way to accomplish
the same goal.
The Agency also has decided to shade certain areas of the
form in order to differentiate between federally-required information
and optional State-required information.
25. Add date boxes to the Manifest form.
The Agency received comments suggesting that the form should
include boxes into which the required dates should be entered.
Since the Agency only provided blank lines, some of the commenters
believed that this information would be clearer for everyday use
and for entry into data management systems if date boxes were used.
RESPONSE:
The Agency agrees that the data entry may be enhanced by
providing specific areas for the dates required on the Manifest.
Many of the data entry items are likely to be used in automated
data processing (ADP) systems, and EPA is willing to make such
entry easier by providing heavy lines and "spacing dots" for certain
entries and has designed the form accordingly. These entries
include the dates required on the Manifest, container (number and
type), total quantity, unit (weight/volume), Manifest document
number, and EPA identification numbers.
26. Shade and arrange automated data processing for easy entry.
Commenters addressed the usefulness of the proposed form
for automated data processing (ADP) entry purposes. They suggested
that spaces where ADP information would be entered should be shaded.
This, they believed, would facilitate correct entry of essential
data.
RESPONSE:
The Agency has chosen to provide heavy lines around the infor-
mation that is likely to be useful in automated data processing.
As discussed elsewhere in this Background Document, the Agency
-------
111-15
agrees that automated data entry may be enhanced by highlighting
specific information areas on the Manifest. However, EPA has
chosen 'not to shade areas for simplified data processing use.
Instead, as discussed elsewhere, these areas are highlighted by
heavy lines. The shaded area on the Manifest is reserved to
differentiate Federally required information from optional State
required information. Heavy lines do not appear in the shaded
area of the forms since different States may have different formats
or fields for those data. States printing and supplying the
Manifest form may have data entry boxes, spacing dots, lines, etc.,
printed anywhere on the form. The Agency will consider a form
with shaded areas different than those mandated by EPA to be
inconsistent with EPA's requirements. Copies with shaded areas
different than those specified on the UHWM that are removed prior
to shipment (e.g., sent to the State) or otherwise not required
to travel with the shipment may be part of a Manifest copy set.
This will allow those States that print and distribute the form
and who want different areas of the form shaded for automated
data processing purposes to receive such copies without affecting
the uniformity of the Manifest. Likewise, industries may highlight
information on copies of the Manifest they keep other than for
Manifest recordkeeping purposes required by regulation.
27. Allow "free-form" computer print-outs and use of word
processors.
Comments from industry recommended that the Agency allow
them to substitute a computer printed manifest for a standard form.
Commenters argued that using a computer print-out would be less
burdensome than manually completing manifests. Also, commenters
believed that a computer completed manifest would be more accurate,
neater, and could contain more information on one page.
RESPONSE:
The Agency agrees that for some generators the use of a
computer or word processor could reduce the amount of paperwork.
Computers or word processors can be used to print information on
the standard form. The Agency also agrees that in such circumstances
the Manifest would likely be more accurate, neater, and could
contain more information. The Agency, therefore, will allow use
of a computer or word processor in the preparation of the UHWM.
"Free-form" or other manifest formats not using the UHWM format
and design requirements will not be allowed. The Agency believes
that the purpose of developing the Uniform Manifest would be
negated if forms other than the UHWM form were allowed.
28. Manifest document number should be preassigned/preprinted.
State commenters suggested that the Manifest document number
should be preassigned and preprinted to help preclude misnumbering
of manifests and to ensure the uniqueness of each manifest number.
Examples of errors were given, e.g., as where the same number could
be applied to a manifest by two different people at one generator's
site if the numbers were not preprinted. State commenters also
-------
111-16
indicated that preassigned and preprinted numbers was essential
to their specific program and manifest tracking needs.
RESPONSE:
EPA understands the commenters concerns' for simplifying data
management. Since EPA is not printing and supplying the form,
the Agency cannot preprint a Manifest document number. EPA has,
to some extent, preassigned Manifest document numbers by requiring
the use of EPA identification numbers as part of the Manifest
document number. It would be difficult for the Agency to preassign
nationally the remaining five digits required as part of the Manifest
document number.
Since RCRA allows for a State program to be more stingent,
EPA has provided a space on the Manifest for a State Manifest
document number. Although not a federally-required piece of inform-
ation, the States may require generators to enter such a number,
or the States may preprint such a number before distributing the
Manifest. Neither of these additions would be inconsistent with
the Federal system.
29. Revise instructions for the Proper Shipping Description.
Several commenters suggested revising the instructions for
the proper shipping description. One commenter believed that the
instructions should include specific language rather than a refer-
ence to DOT language. Other comments suggested that the way the
form was developed would result in some cases of incorrect entry
of the DOT identification (UN/NA) number. Specifically, these
commenters suggested that the UN/NA column be incorporated into
the Proper Shipping Description.
RESPONSE:
The Agency partially agrees with this group of commenters.
EPA's instructions for the proper shipping description reference
DOT's regulations for describing a hazardous material in transit.
EPA believes that it would be redundant and of little value to
persons responsible for completing the Manifest to require them
to comply with two nearly identical regulations. Since the Agency
has worked closely with DOT and has adopted DOT's system for
properly describing a hazardous waste material, EPA regulations
are simplified by referencing the DOT regulations for shipping
paper requirements. Although EPA does not require that instructions
be printed on the backs of the Manifest form, States and industry
may do so if they desire.
The Agency does agree with the commenter's concerns that the
proposed form did not allow for correct entry of the proper shipping
description, including the DOT identification number (UN/NA number).
The proposed form provided a separate column for the UN/NA number
at the end of the space for the proper shipping description. In
some instances, however, the UN/NA number will not be the last
entry in the proper shipping description. Under some circumstances,
-------
111-17
it must appear before other required information such as "Waste
Adipic Acid ORM-E, NA 9077, RQ. " Therefore, EPA has eliminated the
separate UN/NA column from the form.
30. Revise the wording in the generator's certification.
Comments received by the Agency indicated that some industries
believed that the generator certification statement should be re-
vised. Commenters1 suggestions on the wording were "material covered
by this manifest or herein named," rather than "above-named material
Other commenters suggested similar wording that would take into
account the use of a continuation sheet, while others suggested that
the generator's certification statement should include an indication
that all the proper placards had been offered to the transporter.
One commenter indicated that the generator's certification stipulated
in the Proposed regulation was not intended for shipments by air or
international shipments.
RESPONSE:
EPA's paramount concern with respect to the wording of the
certification statement is that it is consistent with the language
used by DOT which is based on the transportation of dangerous goods.
That language now uses the phrase "contents of this consignment."
EPA does not believe, in any case, that this phrasing will create
confusion. The Agency is interpreting the certification to include
not only the wastes identified on page one of the Manifest (EPA form
8700-22) but also to include any wastes listed on the Manifest
Continuation Sheet (EPA form 8700-22A).
With regard to a space or provision in the generator's
certification statement for transporters to acknowledge that the
generator had offered them the proper placards, the Agency does
not agree that such a space or provision is justifiable in all
cases. If a generator wished to document that he complied with
that standard, he could enter a statement to that effect in the
"Special Handling Instructions and Additional Information" space
on the form and have the transporter sign or initial the statement.
The Agency does not believe that this should be a Federally-required
information item for all generators or transporters, since its
inclusion does not enhance protection of human health and the
environment nor tracking.
31. Require that the Manifest have a red border.
One State commenter suggested that the Manifest have a red
border. The rationale for this suggestion indicated that with
such an identifiable outline, emergency response personnel would
be able to locate the form quickly and more easily.
RESPONSE:
DOT has determined that such a State requirement is inconsistent
with the intent of the DOT standards and has preempted such a
State requirement (DOT preemptive ruling #4). EPA agrees with this
-------
111-18
ruling.' The Agency believes that through the establishment of a
national standard, the Uniform Manifest form will be easily
recognizable from all other forms as it is used in transportation
and that a red border is not needed.
32. The type and number of containers should be entered on the
left of the form.
Several comments received by the Agency requested that the
format of the proposed form be changed. The specific suggestion
was that the columns on the proposed form for number and type of
containers be moved from the right side of the proper shipping
description to the left side of the proper shipping description.
The reason given for this suggestion was to accommodate existing
procedures of the regulated community. Many forms currently in
use have the number and type of container information to the far
left of the waste description.
RESPONSE:
EPA proposed placing the Number and Types of Containers column
to the right of the waste description but considered moving it to
the far left to accommodate industry practice. However, since the
industry practice is not universal and since DOT does not specify
the location of such information, the Agency has decided that the
location will be to the right. This placement lends itself to
automated data processing (ADP) input as some commenters suggested.
33. Reduce or eliminate "tick marks."
Comments recieved by the Agency suggested that the "tick-
marks" shown on the Manifest in the proposed rule be reduced in
size or line thickness or removed altogether. The rationale
presented was that interference with the entry of information
could result, particularly with typewriter entry.
RESPONSE:
The Agency agrees with this group of commenters and has revised
the form to remove the "tick-marks" and replace them with light
"spacing dots" that will serve the same purpose as "tick-marks."
Use of light markings will facilitate neat entry and simplify
automated data processing, but will not obscure the data entry.
34. Color code each sheet of the Manifest.
Some of the suggestions received indicated that State
commenters believed that color coding of the different Manifest
copies would simplify recordkeeping and improve compliance.
RESPONSE:
Although the Agency agrees that color coding the copies of
the Manifest form could simplify recordkeeping, EPA cannot justify
-------
111-19
such a requirement. Different companies or States may already use
color coding schemes for other records. For EPA to formulate
another scheme would result in an unjustifiable burden on the
regulated community. EPA does not specify the color of the Manifest
copies nor limit the number of copies. This determination is left
to the States.
35. Use an 8-1/2" x 11" form.
One group of commenters suggested the use of 8-1/2" x 11"
paper; while another group of commenters suggested the use of
8-1/2" x 14" paper. The commenters in the former group believed
that the smaller paper would facilitate recordkeeping in standard
files. The commenters in the second group believed that the infor-
mation needs of the States could only be met by the additional
spaces and, therefore, a longer form.
RESPONSE:
EPA considered requiring a 8-1/2" x 14" UHWM in order to
accommodate the additional information sought by the States.
After many revisions, the Agency was able to develop a form size
that was based primarily on how much information was required by
Federal regulation and secondarily on how much was sought by the
States. The final version contains all the Federally required
information plus spaces for most of the information sought by
industry and the States. The result is an 8-1/2" x 11" form
which simplifies filing and typewritten entries.
36. Number the information boxes on the form.
One group of commenters suggested that the boxes on the mani-
fest be numbered. The commenters' reasoning was that the numbering
of the spaces would correspond with the instructions and make com-
pletion of the form easier and communication between generators,
transporters, TSD facilities, and regulatory agencies less compli-
cated.
RESPONSE:
The Agency agrees with this group of commenters and has
numbered the federally-required information spaces and lettered
the State information spaces.
37. Allow the instructions to be printed on the back.
Some commenter indicated that the instruction for completing
the Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest should be printed on the back
of the form. Most of these commenters suggested that the instruction
should be augmented by State-specific instructions which should also
be with the form. The reason these commenters gave was that by
including the instructions with the form, confusion regarding the
completion of the form would be reduced.
-------
111-20
RESPONSE:
The Agency will allow (but not require) instructions to be
printed on the back of the Manifest form. States may include
State-specific instructions provided the instructions do not
require new, different, or additional information.
38. Correct the "Type of Container" to eliminate the confusion
caused by dual designations for tank car.
Several commenters noted an inconsistency in the instructions
for the Manifest. In particular, the table for Types of Containers
indicated that tank cars could be identified as CT or TC.
They suggested that this situation be clarified.
RESPONSE:
The final rule clarifies the Agency's intent for type of con-
tainer code which is to use the abbreviation "TC." The table has
been corrected to eliminate this confusion.
39. Make Hazard C1ass a separate column.
The Agency recieved several comments that suggested making
the hazard class identification of each waste a separate column on
the Manifest. Since each hazardous waste shipped offsite must be
properly identified by a DOT.hazard class, this group of commenters
believed that a separate column on the Manifest that would identify
the hazard class of each waste entered would assist in data manage-
ment and any emergency response necessary for a spill of hazardous
waste.
RESPONSE:
The Agency considered making a separate column for the hazard
class designation, but DOT's proper shipping description require-
ments preclude such a column. Some descriptions require the
hazard class after the proper shipping name (e.g., Waste sulfuric
acid, spent, corrosi ve materi al , UN 1832, RQ) while other descrip-
tions contain the hazard class as part of the proper name (e.g.,
F1ammable liquid, N.O.S., UN 1993). Because of this requirement,
it would be confusing and sometimes redundant to develop a Hazard
Class column.
40. May fractions be used in the Total Quantity column?
Several commenters asked the Agency to clarify the quantity
entry on the Manifest. Specifically, this group of commenters
asked the Agency to clarify whether fraction or decimal entries
would be allowed in the quantity column.
-------
111-21
RESPONSE:
EPA does not believe that fractions or decimals should be
used for quantity description. The Agency believes that the quantiy
description should be as accurate as possible without using fractions
or decimals. For example, if a shipment contains 18,500 pounds,
the correct quantity description would be 18,500 pounds, not 9
tons, nor 9 1/4 tons, nor 9.25 tons.
41. Add more space for special handling instructions, addressees.
etc.
Several commenters suggested that the Manifest form provide
more space for several items. The most frequently mentioned items
in need of additional space were the special handling instructions,
the waste description, and the address spaces.
RESPONSE:
The Agency gave full consideration to the information re-
quired by RCRA and the space limitations of the form. As discussed
elsewhere in this background document, various sizes of paper were
considered. Of primary concern was the inclusion of all Federally-
required information. Also considered important, however, was the
advantage of fitting the form on standard 8 1/2" x 11" paper.
Although the 8 1/2" x 11" form allows less space for other items
than a larger form would allow, the Agency believes that the 8-1/2"
x 11" form design of the final rulemaking satisfies the Agency's
primary concerns while allowing space for some State information.
42. Allow States to print "tick marks" in shaded area.
Several State commenters suggested that the Agency allow them
to print "tick-marks" in the State information spaces to facilitate
automated data processing (ADP).
RESPONSE:
The Agency will allow States to print and distribute the UHWT.
(See previous discussion.) Along with the right to print the form
is the right to tailor the State information area of the form to
some degree as set forth in §271.10 (h). This includes preprinting
spacing dots and other organizational marks.
GROUP C: Form Management
43. Allow States, generators and others to print and distribute
the fornu
States with existing manifests were most concerned with
their right to print and distribute copies of the Manifest.
Most of their rationale was based on their beliefs that their
current systems were working efficiently and provided control of
-------
111-22
hazardous waste shipments. Other States commented that their
tracking systems were dependent on printing a State manifest docu-
ment number on the Manifest. It was this number that States use
to track shipments. Without the right to print and distribute
copies of the Manifest, the States believed they would lose their
ability to track each shipment of waste traveling in their State.
RESPONSE:
The Agency agrees with the commenters who suggested that
States wanting to preprint a State manifest document number and
distribute copies of the Manifest should have the ability.to do so.
Although the Agency does not believe that a State manifest document
number is necessary since EPA requires a Manifest document number
based on the generator's EPA identification number, the Agency is
allowing States to enter a State manifest document number in the
upper right-hand corner of the form (items A and L). This number
may also be entered by the generator, if the State law allows.
44. Specify copy distribution.
The Agency received comments that suggested the copy distri-
bution of the Manifest be stipulated on each sheet. Several State
commenters believed that the top copy should go to the State, while
other specific recommendations were made for copy distribution;
One commenter suggested that the last copy be the one the generator
keeps initially since the generator would be more likely to make
sure that all copies, including the last copy, were legible.
RESPONSE:
The Agency is allowing States that print and distribute the
Manifest to stipulate copy distribution. The distribution instruc-
tions, however, must appear in the margin or on the back of the
form. Compliance with State copy distribution requirements will
not be enforced by EPA. EPA will, however, enforce proper handling
of the Manifest as required by 40 CFR Parts 262, 263, 264 and 265.
The Agency is not concerned with which copy is managed by a parti-
cular individual, as long as the information is available.
45. Allow the use of a "certified equivalent" manifest.
Some commenters with existing manifests suggested that the
Agency provide for the approval of a different manifest that would
be evaluated and approved as equivalent to the Federally required
one. These commenters explained that their particular manifesting
requirements would be severely affected if they were to be required
to use another form. Lack of specific information and the burden
of retraining were cited as reasons for the recommendation.
-------
11-23
RESPONSE:
The primary purpose of developing the Uniform Hazardous Waste
Manifest is to create national uniformity in the shipping document
required for hazardous waste transportation. If the Agency approved
other manifests based on existing or new systems, this purpose
would be defeated. EPA believes that the information provided for
in the final form will allow most, if not all, States and companies
with existing manifest systems to obtain the basic information
necessary for managing hazardous waste shipments.
The Agency questions whether there could be a significant
difference between existing manifests that could be approved as
"equivalent" and the UHWM. If an existing manifest form were so
similar to the UHWM as to be equivalent, then there would be no
real reason to approve a form that was only slightly different.
If the information on the form was significantly different, then
it could not be approved as "equivalent," and supplemental forms
would be necessary to meet the additional information needs of the
State or generator.
Training personnel to comply with a new system may be a
burden initially, but the long-term problems associated with
varying manifests on a national basis will be eliminated by one
standard form.
The Agency is not approving manifests other that EPA form
8700-22 and form 8700-22A. EPA believes that there is sufficient
flexibility in usage of these forms to meet the information and
management needs of the States and regulated community.
46. Federal regulations should apply only to interstate shipments.
Some States, notably California and Texas among others, sug-
gested that EPA allow them to use their existing manifest systems
and forms for intrastate shipments. The comment from California, in
fact, pointed out that only two percent of the hazardous waste
shipments originating within California actually left the State.
Other comments indicated that there would be a significant burden in
manpower retraining and revision costs to existing State manifest
systems and forms if States were required to use a Uniform Hazardous
Waste Manifest for both inter- and intrastate shipments.
RESPONSE:
The Agency considered making the UHWM provisions applicable
only to interstate shipments. This consideration was rejected for
several reasons. First, as discussed elsewhere in this background
document, one of the primary purposes of creating the UHWM was to
provide a national uniform and consistent form for use in hazardous
waste transportation. If the UHWM form was not required for
both intra- and interstate shipments, confusion enforcement diffi-
culties would result. In addition, DOT's regulations relate to
-------
111-24
the nature of the transportation company's business and not to
the nature of a particular shipment. EPA and enforcement officials
would be confronted with the difficult task of judging compliance
with not only the Federal system but with the various State systems
if intrastate shipments used different manifests. At the same
time, the regulatd community would be confronted with the additional
burden of proof that their shipment was intrastate rather than
i nterstate.
Second, the Agency understands that some generators may be
located in States where adequate facilities are available and,
therefore, will not have to ship their waste interstate. However,
there are many generators who will have to ship their waste inter-
state and many generators with facilities they own in several
States who will be faced with the problem of understanding the
various State hazardous waste laws. The Agency believes the lack
of uniformity for these generators will cause a more difficult
adjustment and resource burden on the regulated community than
would be off-set by the imposition of the UHWM standards on only
interstate shipments. Also, the Agency believes that a one-time
change to a uniform system will be less burdensome over time than
the continued implementation of various State manifest requirements.
Therefore, with the concurrence of DOT, EPA is requiring use
of the UHWM in all States regardless of whether the shipments
originating in that State are intrastate or interstate.
47. The consignment State manifest requirements should have primacy
Several recommendations from industry and States suggested a
priority system for acquiring copies of the Manifest. One such
recommendation suggested that the Manifest for the State to which
the waste was being sent (consignment State) should have precedence
over other States' manifests. The rationale was that the consign-
ment State had the responsibility for final waste management.
A few other comments suggested that generators should obtain
the forms from the generator's State rather than the consignment
State, if that State prints and supplies the forms.
EPA agrees that it is necessary to specify a hierarchy setting
forth the source from which the generator must obtain the Manifest
forms. EPA has adopted the following hierarchy:
a.) if the consignment State supplies the Manifest and requires
its use, then the generator is obligated to obtain the Manifest
from that State;
b.) if the consignment State does not supply the Manifest, but
the generator State does supply and require the use of the Manifest,
then the generator is obligated to obtain the Manifest from the
generator State;
c.) if neither the consignment State nor the generator State
supplies the Manifest, then the generator may obtain the Manifest
-------
111-25
from any source he chooses.
By adopting this priority scheme, States that want to get
additional State information on the Manifest will be able to obtain
it more easily and in a format of their choosing. In the event
both the generator State and the consignment State want additional
information on the Manifest, the generator may find it necessary
to coordinate the information entry on the Manifest with both
States. The Agency does not, however, intend to enforce the
optional State information items, regardless of whether they are
required by a generator State and/or a consignment State. The
rationale for this hierarchy for acquisition is discussed in
greater detail in the preamble to the final Uniform Manifest rule.
48. Explain the proper shipping description when a non-RCRA waste
is shipped.
Commenters asked that the Agency explain the proper shipping
descriptions for wastes which are identified on a Manifest but not
covered by RCRA. The comment was apparently directed at the problem
that might occur when regulated and non-regulated waste appeared
on the Manifest. An example of this is a generator sending two
drums of new cleaning solvent to an incinerator along with a load
of spent sol vent.
RESPONSE:
The Agency was required by RCRA to establish regulations for
the control of hazardous waste. The Department of Transportation,
on the other hand, is mandated to regulate the transportation of
hazardous materials. EPA does not have the authority under Sub-
title C of RCRA to regulate shipments of non-hazardous waste.
Therefore, there is no EPA regulation on proper shipping names
for wastes regulated by a State and not regulated under RCRA.
RCRA regulated hazardous wastes and non-RCRA regulated waste
designated as hazardous (or nonhazardous) by State law may be
shipped together and identified on the same manifest. DOT'S
regulations in 49 CFR 172.201 allow hazardous material (including
hazardous waste) to be entered on a shipping paper (manifest)
together with non-federally regulated materials/wastes provided the
hazardous materials/wastes are entered first, or in a contrasting
color, or if the hazardous material/waste is identified by an "X"
in a column captioned "HM." Thus, wastes not regulated by RCRA
may appear on a Manifest. Since the Agency is not regulating
non-hazardous waste under RCRA, it is not specifying the "proper"
shipping description for such wastes.
49. Allow photocopy ing of additional copies.
The Agency received suggestions to allow the photocopying of
additional copies of the Manifest. In anticipation of the need
for more than a four copy set, viewed by some as the minimum num-
ber, several commenters suggested that the Agency allow generators,
-------
111-26
transporters and TSD facility owners or operators to make copies
of the Manifest for the purposes of recordkeeping and reporting.
Several State commenters suggested that photocopying of the
Manifest should not be allowed. Their reasons were that altera-
tions were more difficult to detect.
RESPONSE:
i he Agency did not stipulate the number of copies in a
Manifest since there would be many different situations requiring
multiple copies, e.g., more than one transporter and internal
company recordkeeping practices. The Agency believes 'that it
would be impractical to require carbon copies at the expense of
legibility. As the number of copies increases, legibility will
decrease. If a generator is working with a six copy set, for
example, he may find a photocopy of the first page to be more
readable than a carbon copy of the last page. Industry commenters
suggested that the Agency restrict the information required in
the State's periodic reports to the Agency to only that information
required on the Manifest. This restriction would allow States to
prepare their reports based on the information they received on
Manifests alone.
50. Require that a copy of the Manifest be sent to the States.
Some State commenters asked that the Agency require gener-
ators and permitted facilities to send copies of the Manifest to
the generator State and to the consignment State, respectively.
RESPONSE:
The Agency has not changed its position regarding unnecessary
recordkeeping and reporting burdens. The system that EPA establish-
ed for manifest tracking is adequate to protect human health and
the environment. The generator's responsibility is to submit an
Exception Report, to the Regional Administrator or State Director
within 45 days of when the shipment was made. If he has not received
a copy of the UHWM signed by the designated facility indicating
delivery. The Agency does not believe that it is justifiable to
require generators (or facility owners or operators) to send copies
of the Manifest to the State for tracking purposes or any other
purpose when the Federal system is adequate to protect human health
and the environment.
The Agency will not, however, preempt States from requiring
additional manifest reporting. As discussed in the preamble to
the final Uniform Manifest regulations, EPA believes States have
independent authority to impose such requirements.
-------
111-27
AREA D: Other
51. Restrict State program reports to the information required
on the UHWM.
Industry commenters suggested that the Agency restrict the
information required in the States periodic reports to the Agency
to only that information required on the Manifest. This restriction
would allow States to prepare their reports based on the information
they received on the manifests alone.
RESPONSE:
The information the Agency is mandated to require on the
Manifest and the information EPA requires in State reports are not
the same. The Agency is mandated to create a manifest system that
contains information protective of human health and the environment
and which will track the waste from "the cradle-to-grave". The
State reporting requirements are necessary for hazardous waste
management and overview. As a result, the information required on
the Manifest and in a State report are mandated for different
purposes. Some of the information appropriate for State reports
is neither necessary nor appropriate for tracking waste shipments
or protecting human health and the environment during transportation.
Generators are not precluded from adding such information in the
margin, on the back, or as an attachment to their file copy of the
Manifest -- thus achieving the same result. Neither are States
precluded from requiring generators or owners or operators of TSD
facilities to keep any additional information. Consequently, the
Agency does not believe that the State reports should be limited
to information contained on the Manifest.
52. The Manifest document number should be "unique" not "serially
i ncreasi ng."
Commenters suggested that the definition of "Manifest docu-
ment number" should be revised to delete any reference to serially
increasing numbers since that implies that Manifests must be used
in a particular order and to use them out-of-order would be a
violation. These same commenters suggested that the Manifest
doucument number should be defined in terms of its uniqueness.
RESPONSE:
The Agency agrees with this group of commenters. The require-
ment of "serially increasing" was intended simply as a means of
ensuring uniqueness, and was not intended to imply that use of
Manifest numbers out of order would constitute a violation. EPA
has, therefore, changed the definition of "Manifest document
number" to be one that is "unique." The "uniqueness" of the Manifest
Doucument Number will be for the generator to control shipments
from each generating site during a calendar year. The generator
is not responsible for the uniqueness of the Manifest Document
-------
111-28
Number assigned to shipments from other sites of generation or
from year to year. The EPA identification number and date of
acceptance by the transporter can, if necessary, be used to
identify different manifests in the unlikely event of duplicate
document numbers.
53. Transporter information required on the Manifest should be
completed by the transporter and facility information re-
quired on the Manifest should be completed by the facility.
EPA received comments from industry suggesting that the
transporter information required on the Manifest should be completed
by the transporter and information about the TSD facility should
be completed by the owner or operator of the facility.
RESPONSE:
The Agency requires the generator to complete most of the
Manifest. The Agency is not concerned about who actually writes
or types information on the form. The Agency has taken this position
because the Agency considers the generator responsible for preparing
the form, regardless of who actually completes the form. Thus,
EPA will look to the generator for questions on the Manifest pre-
paration. Also, the Agency believes that the generator must have
prior knowledge of who the transporters will be and to which TSD
facility the waste must be sent. As a result, the manifest system
requires the generator to enter the transporter information in the
order they will manage the waste shipment and to enter the waste
description and TSD facility information.
54. Make provisions for lab-pack shipments.
The Agency received comments from industry suggesting that
EPA allow for the use of lab-pack shipments. Lab-packs are ship-
ments of drums which contain similar wastes with different DOT
shipping descriptions but the same EPA characteristic. Commenters
indicated that single line entries on a Manifest for each laboratory
container of hazardous waste packed in vermiculite and placed in
a 55-gallon drum would result in a Manifest of several pages.
These commenters believed that protection of human health and the
environment could be maintained if they were allowed to list generic
categories of lab wastes packed in containers as a one line item
rather than listing all the containers inside a drum.
RESPONSE:
The Agency has relied on the DOT regulations for shipping
description nomenclature. Therefore, comments suggesting changes
to DOT's proper shipping description requirements cannot be
addressed by EPA. The Agency did consider the problem of paperwork
burden for shipments containing many line entries on a Manifest.
In an effort to reduce the number of manifests necessary to properly
ship multiple wastes, EPA developed and DOT allows the use of a
continuation sheet with additional spaces for waste entries. This
was done to help reduce the paperwork burden on t.HA
-------
111-29
community. If DOT develops new shipping description requirements
for lab-pack type shipments, EPA will reconsider the need for
the continuation sheet.
55. Clarification for the discrepancy indication space
is needed since State imposed deadlines may vary.
One commenter suggested that the discrepancy indication space
instructions should be clarified to explain that Discrepancy Reports
may be required by States at time intervals other than the fifteen
days required by the EPA rules. Also, the commenter suggested that
the regulations clarify which State's time deadline would apply.
RESPONSE:
The Agency has included in the instructions to the UHWM a
caution to facility owners and operators that authorized States
may also require Discrepancy Reports and that they should contact
the appropriate State agency for details. Since an authorized
State may have shorter time restrictions for the submission of
such reports along with other more stringent requirements, the
Agency chose not to itemize all the possibilities. Rather, a
general statement which cautions all affected facilities was
used in the instructions.
56. Units of measure vary from those presented in the Annual
Report (now Biennial Report).
One group of commenters pointed out that the units of measure
in the Manifest instructions and those used in the Biennial Report
(now Annual Report) varied and should be consistent.
RESPONSE:
The Agency agrees with the commenters and the final UHWM
rule is consistent with respect to the Annual Report (now Biennial
Report) abbreviations for the units of measure.
57. Training should be provided in order to ensure successful
i mpl ementati on .
One group of commenters suggested that EPA provide adequate
training during the implementation of the Uniform Hazardous Waste
Manifest. Their belief was that adequate training would improve
compliance and thereby protect human health and the environment.
RESPONSE:
The Agency agrees with these comrnenters and is planning to
provide training to Regional and State personnel. When possible,
the Agency will assist industry in developing training sessions to
improve compliance.
-------
111-30
58. The Agency should establish the number of copies required
for each Manifest.
Comments recieved by the Agency indicated that EPA should
establish the number of copies required for each Manifest. In
addition to the minimum of four copies required by the current
regulations for every Manifest, some commenters suggested five
copies in order to provide a copy to a second transporter. Other
commenters suggested providing a copy to a second transporter.
While, other commenters suggested other numbers of copies with
varying distribution: six copies - standard four plus one each
for the generator State and,the consignment State; seven copies-
standard four plus one each for the second transporter, generator
State, and consignment State; five copies - standard four plus one
for either the generator State or the consignment State.
RESPONSE:
The Agency cannot justify a required number of copies for a
Manifest since varying management practices will dictate the
number of copies needed. For the Agency to require the maximum
number that might be needed under all circumstances could result
in waste when only four were necessary. Variations in industry
recordkeeping practices may necessitate additional copies. There-
fore, the Agency is not establishing a specific number of copies
for each manifest.
59. Clarify EPA's position on "preemption authority."
Several commenters requested that the Agency clarify the pre-
emptive authority of EPA and DOT with regard to the mandatory use of
the Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest. Some of these commenters
questioned the existence of the statutory preemptive authority at
all.
RESPONSE:
A full discussion of this issue is presented in the preamble of
the final rule.
60. Require a quarterly report from the generator if the State
does not get a copy of the Manifest.
This group of State commenters suggested that the Agency
require a quarterly report of Manifest information if those gener-
ators were not required by EPA to submit copies of each Manifest
to the State.
RESPONSE:
The Agency considered Quarterly Reports from generators
early in the developing of the generator standards. This option
was rejected because of the increased paperwork burden such a
requirement would place on generators and because the Agency re-
-------
111-31
quirement for developed Exception Reports. The Agency also rejected
the suggestion that generators be required to submit a copy of
each Manifest to EPA or to the State since information on successful
or completed shipments could be obtained from Biennial Reports or
on-site inspections. Although the Agency does not require that
Manifest copies nor quarterly reports be sent to the State, the
Agency has not precluded States from requiring such reports.
61. Preempt State 1icenses and permitting of transporters.
The Agency received suggestions during the comment period
that indicated an industry's concern with State licensing and
permitting of transporters. Many of the commenters believed that
State permitting and licensing would be an unnecessary and a
duplicative burden on the regulated community.
RESPONSE:
Permitting and licensing by States is not a federal require-
ment. Since Section 3009 of RCRA allows States to be more stringent,
it is beyond the scope of the federal system to preempt a State
law requiring licensing or permitting of transporters.
62. The effective date of 180 days is acceptable but it should
be sooner.
This group of commenters asked the Agency to make the effec-
tive date of the regulations as soon as possible. Some industry
commenters said that the 180 days was more than sufficient. State
commenters believed that an effective date 180 days after publication
in the Federal Regi ster was insufficient to allow them to properly
implement the rule in their State.
RESPONSE:
The Agency has decided to keep the statutory implementation
requirement of six months. In the event that States do not have
enough time to implement the UHWM requirements, EPA and DOT will
enforce the use of the UHWM. State legislation or laws need not
be in place in order for EPA and DOT to enforce the UHWM. The
Agency does not believe any additional delays are warranted or
justi fi abl e.
63. The United States should acknowledge the Canadian manifest in
Tieu of the Uniform Manifest for shipments originating in Canada
Environment Canada suggested that EPA allow the use of Canadian
manifests for shipments destined for TSD facility in the United
States. In return, Canada would allow the United States Uniform
Hazardous Waste Manifest to be used for shipments destined for a
Canadian treatment, storage or disposal facility. The rationale
was that this agreement on trans-boundary shipments would facilitate
the free-flow of hazardous waste across the U.S.-Canadian border.
-------
U.S. r'' rcrr^cyuf! i'--
P.% , V, Us'::-'1;
?50 '->D'jth Dec i" b'. ' >"' ^>'!-('-'^s-
Chicago, Illinois 60604
i Agency
-------
IV-1
RESPONSE:
The Agency considered this comment but has explained to the
Canadian Government the difficulties its adoption would create.
The basic need for the UHWM is to have a standard form that is
recognizable and enforceable. The possibility exists that the
Canadian national manifest would be significantly different from
the U.S. Manifest and that each Province may also develop differing
manifest forms. EPA has indicated its willingness to work with
the Canadian government to resolve this problem. At present,
however, EPA will not recognize any manifest other than the UHWM
for shipments of hazardous waste while those shipments are being
transported in the United States.
SECTION IV - CONCLUSIONS AND THE FINAL RULE
The final rule for the Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest
accomplishes the purposes and Congressional mandate it was designed
to meet. The UHWM is the primary transportation document that
ensures that hazardous waste is destined for and received by permit-
ted treatment, storage and disposal facilities. It ensures the
"cradle to grave" concept in hazardous waste movements. The Feder-
ally required information is the same as that originally required
in the February 26, 1980, rule. In addition, certain information
identified by States as essential to the management of their State
hazardous waste management programs has been included on the form
as State optional informational items. The State optional infor-
mation items have been lettered and shaded to help delineate the
federally required information.
The Agency believes that generators located in States that
require optional information to be completed will find the federal
UHWM a convenient form on which to include the State information.
The inclusion of a State information area on the form (shaded)
will eliminate the need for some States to require additional
information on a separate form. Thus, this form will eliminate
duplication of Federal and State information requirements and
multiple manifesting.
States and generators are allowed some flexibility in printing
the Manifest. Although a standard base form must be used, States,
may pre-print certain information (e.g., State manifest document
number, logo) and generators may pre-print certain information
required of them, (e.g., their name, address and identification
number).
Management of the UHWM which includes the responsibility
for completion, copy distribution, and recordkeeping has not
changed from the 1980 rule. The generator is responsible for
completing most of the form, while transporters must sign and date
the UHWM acknowledging acceptance. Treatment, storage or disposal
-------
IV-2
facility owners or operators must sign and date the Manifest and
indicate discrepancies, if any. All three parties are still
required to keep a copy for three years and the TSD facility must
return a signed copy to the generator. If the generator does not
recieve a signed copy from the facility within 45 days of shipping
the waste, the generator must file an Exception Report.
In order to implement the use of the UHWM form, the Agency has
the authority to require its use in States where EPA administers
the program. In States seeking final authorization to administer
the program, EPA has the authority to require the use of the UHWM
as a condition of final authorization. In States with .interim
authorization, or full authorization, EPA has relied on the
authority of DOT to require those States to change their laws and
require the use of the Uniform Manifest. Thus, all States will be
required to implement the UHWM on the same day, rather than on the
effective dates of individual State authorizations.
In summary, the Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest will provide
for all the information needs of the federally mandated program
while also providing for State informational needs. In addition,
generators of hazardous waste will have one standard form that
will meet both federal and State information needs, thus elimina-
ting duplicative paperwork requirements. Finally, the Uniform
Hazardous Waste Manifest will be the only hazardous waste document
required for transportation of shipments regulated under RCRA.
This rule preempts the States from requiring that any additional
documents accompany the waste shipment while in transportation.
The final rule for the Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest (UHWM)
accomplishes the purposes and congressional mandate it was designed
to meet. The UHWM is the primary transporation document that
insures that hazardous waste is destined for and received by permit-
ted treatment, storage and disposal facilities. It insures the
"cradle to grave" concept in hazardous waste movements. The
federally required information is the same as originally required
in the February 26, 1980, rule. In addition, certain information
identified by States as essential to the management of their pro-
grams has been included on the form. To help delineate the
federally required information from the optional State information,
the State information section has been shaded.
The Agency believes that generators located in States that
require this optional information will find the federal UHWM a
convenient form on which to include the State information. The
inclusion of a shaded State information section will eliminate
the need for some States to require additional information on a
separate form. Thus, this form will eliminate duplication of fed-
eral and State information requirements and multiple manifesting.
------- |