March 2000
                     TRANSFER STATIONS
     A Response to a Recurring Environmental Justice Circumstance:
   The Siting of Waste Transfer Stations in Low-Income Communities and
                       Communities of Color
                     EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
                         Prepared by the

           National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
               Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee.
                Waste Transfer Station Working Group
       A Federal Advisory Committee to the U.S Environmental Protection Agency

 This report and recommendations have been written as a part of the activities of the
\ National Environmental Justice Advisory Council, a public advisory committee
I providing extramural policy information and advice to the Administrator and c >ther
 officials of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The Council is
 structured to provide balanced, expert assessment of matters related to
 environmental justice.

 This report has not been reviewed for approval by the EPA and, hence, its contents
- and recommendations do not necessarily represent the views and policies of the
\ EPA, nor of other agencies in the Executive Branch of the federal government, nor
 does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute a recommen iation
 for use.

I This report is  EPA Report number EPA 500-R-00-001. Additional copies of this report may
 be requested by contacting EPA's Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
 Outreach and Special  Projects Staff at 202-260-4039 or via e-mail at
I benjamin.kent@epa.gov.
 Comments or questions can be directed to EPA's Office of Environmental Justice (OEJ)
 through the Internet. OEJ's Internet e-mail address is environmental.justice@epa.gov.

 Executive summaries of the reports of the NEJAC meetings are available on the Internet at
 OEJ's World Wide Web homepage: http://es.inel.gov/oeca/oej.html.


The NEJAC Waste and Facilities Siting Subcommittee would like to recognize the Waste Transfer
Station Working Group for the time and effort that went into preparing this document. The
Subcommittee thanks the following working group members for volunteering their valuable time to
produce such a comprehensive, high-quality report:

 • Mathy Stanislaus, Esq., Environ-Sciences/MELA, Chair, Waste Transfer Station Working Group

 • Sue Briggum, WMX Waste Management

 • Kenneth K. Fisher, Esq., New York City Council

 • Miles Glasgow, Neighbors United for Legitimate Environmental Order and Proper and Responsible

 * Michael Holmes, St Louis Community College

 • Naftalie Martinez, Servicios Cientificos Tecnicos

 • Vemice Miller-Travis, Partnership for Sustainable Brownfields Redevelopment, Chair, NEJAC
   Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee

 • John H.  Skinner, PhD, Solid Waste Association of North America

 • Tiwana M. Steward-Griffin, Esq., Rutgers University Environmental Law Clinic

 • Samara Swanston, Esq., Watchperson Project, Inc.
                      NEJAC Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee
Kent Benjamin (Designated Federal Official)    David Moore
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency         Mayor, City of Beaumont (Texas)

Vernice Miller (Chair)                       Mervyn Tano
Partnership for Sustainable Brownfields         International Institute for Indigenous Resource
Redevelopment                             Management

Sue Briggum                               Johnny Wilson
WMX Technologies, Inc.                     Clark Atlanta University

Michael Holmes                             Neftali Garcia Martinez
St. Louis (Missouri) Community College       Scientific and Technical Services

Brenda Lee Richardson                      Michael Taylor
Women Like Us                             Vita Nuova

Mathy Stanislaus                            Denise D Feiber
Enviro-Sciences/MELA                      Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc.

Lorraine Granado
Cross Community Coalition

                                                          A Regulatory Strategy for Siting and
                                                           Operating Waste Tram fer Stations



    I. Resource Conservation Recovery Act (RCRA)—Solid Waste Management Planning 	4
    II Facility Siting 	'.	5
    III. Best Management Practices 	7
    IV. Community Participation 	7
    V. Marine Waste Transfer Stations	8
    VI. Air Quality and Clean Air Act 	8
    VII. Waste Reduction	8
    VIII. Regulatory Review and Enforcement	9
NEJAC—A Federal Advisory Committee to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

                                                             A Regulatory Strategy fo,' Siting and
          	Operating Waste Tram fer Stations




The National Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC) is a Federal Advisory Comrr ittee
established in 1993 to provide independent advice, consultation, and recommendations to the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on matters related to environmental justice. NEJAC has
established six subcommittees which address various issues corresponding to EPA's areas of authority,
responsibility, and structure. Among the subcommittees is the Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee.

NEJAC and its subcommittees meet sermannualiy to plan their activities and address pressing issues
raised by the public. During the December 1997 NEJAC meeting in Durham, North Carolina the
closing of New York City's Fresh Kills Landfill and the proliferation of waste transfer station:: (WTSs)
in low-income communities and communities of color in Brooklyn and the Bronx were raised to the
  The clustering and disproportionate siting of noxious facilities in low-income communities znd
  communities of color led to the creation of the environmental justice movement. The siting ,ind
  operation of waste transfer stations is such an example. For several years, communities arotnd the
  country have raised the issue of waste processing facilities that are disproportionately sited ii and
  impact on environmental justice communities to the National Environmental Justice Adviso y
  Committee (NEJAC).

  NEJAC formed the Waste Transfer Station Working Group to conduct a factual examination of
  waste transfer station siting and operation, with a focus on alleviating the impacts of clustering,
  disproportionate siting, and unsafe operations in low-income communities and communities of

  In deliberating on its recommendations, the Working Group was challenged with resolving ihe issue
  of the clustering of waste transfer stations with few environmental controls and the legitima" e role
  that waste transfer stations play in providing an essential municipal service—the economica disposal
  of solid waste. The recommendations in this report are intended to identify areas that will al ow for
  the sustainable management of waste transfer stations and promote equality in the distribution and
  siting of these facilities.

  Some of the recommendations in this report focus on policy and regulatory changes, wliile other
  recommendations  focus on voluntary standards and partnerships between local, state, ard federal
  governments. The Working Group sought to implement NEJAC' s mission to provide recomm sndations
  to EPA to achieve  environmental justice. However, these recommendations also call on all levels of
  government, in the spirit of collaboration that existed among the Working Group, to work with their
  communities, the waste trade,  environmental justice and environmental organizations, and all other
  stakeholders to implement these recommendations.  It  must be remembered, however,  hat these
  recommendations are merely a  beginning. The realization of safe siting and operation of wasj e transfer
  stations and livable communities requires good-faith collaboration for its implementation.
NEJAC—A Federal Advisory Committee to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

A Regulatory Strategy for Siting and
Operating Waste Transfer Stations	

Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee. WTSs are facilities where municipal waste is unloaded from
collection vehicles and subsequently re-loaded onto larger transport vehicles to be taken to a disposal
site. Most of the waste comes from outside the communities that are home to the WTSs and, in part,
from outside the local municipality. WTSs are part of regional waste streams and serve the economic
needs of the region and the waste industry. The affected communities assert that WTSs, in combination
with historic patterns of other negative-impact facilities in their neighborhood, have resulted in
degraded health and environmental conditions, as well as displacement of community revitalization
plans and economic activity.

These concerns were consistent with concerns raised by citizens that have approached NEJAC and the
Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee about local conditions at WTSs and EPA's role in ensuring
more consistent protection at these facilities. In tours conducted by NEJAC, public comments, calls to
NEJAC members, and discussions during subcommittee meetings, citizens from New York City,
Atlanta, San Francisco, Las Vegas, Philadelphia, Baton Rouge, Washington, DC, Los Angeles,
Birmingham, and other cities asked NEJAC to examine EPA's authority under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) to develop baseline standards for WTSs.

In response, the Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee developed and approved a resolution that
called for a number of EPA actions including examining the risks associated with the siting and
operation of WTSs. In February 1998, NEJAC's executive committee approved the resolution and
forwarded it to EPA Administrator Carol Browner. The resolution called upon EPA to support the
formation of a NEJAC Working Group to evaluate issues such as:  1) the adequacy of current standards
that address WTS  emissions; 2) illegal commingling of hazardous and medical wastes; 3) the adequacy
of regulatory standards to address the transport of waste from city, interstate; and 4) regional
environmental and health impacts, and means to  ensure public participation.

At the May 1998 meeting of the subcommittee in Oakland, California, the Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response (OSWER) agreed to support the establishment of a NEJAC Working Group. The
Waste Transfer Station Working Group was formed to conduct a factual examination of WTS siting
and operation and  to recommend actions to alleviate the impacts on communities and ensure safe
operation of WTSs. The Working Group is made up of individuals with the diverse perspectives
necessary to provide a thorough and fair examination of these difficult issues. They included
representatives of community-based and environmental justice organizations, private and public waste
trade associations, and local governments.

Given the significant budget constraints of the project, the subcommittee decided to conduct fact-
findings in two cities in which citizens had expressed concerns representative of the issues associated
with WTS siting and operation across the United States. New York City and Washington, DC, were
known to have WTSs with considerable controversy and were accessible within a small travel  budget.
Although the subcommittee report focuses primarily on the concerns of these two urban environments,
it was supplemented by members' experiences in other cities. The Working Group was mindi\il that the
concerns raised by clustered facilities in New York City and Washington, DC, were serious, and similar
situations in other  parts of the country have been raised to NEJAC. However, the Working Group was
also made aware that there existed well-designed and well-sited WTSs in parts of the country,  and that
its examination did not address differences in rural, tribal, and suburban communities. Therefore, the
Working Group endeavored to outline a national baseline that would be consistent with good practices
in place throughout the country, and that would upgrade standards in cities with the kinds of problems
seen first hand in New York City and  Washington, DC, in a manner that acknowledged the limitations
of its examination.
                 NEJAC—A Federal Advisory Committee to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

                                                                A Regulatory Strategy} or Siting and
	Operating Waste Transfer Stations

In November 1998 and February 1999, the Working Group held fact-finding sessions in New York
City and Washington, DC, respectively, to gather information regarding the operation of WTSs and
their impact on surrounding communities. These sessions followed a two-day format. The fi: st day the
Working Group toured the WTSs in the area; the second day the Working Group hosted a public
meeting to which representatives from various stakeholder groups were invited to present in: brmation
about WTSs. At  both the New York and Washington meetings, the Working Group heard from
residents and business owners, environmental justice and environmental groups, community representa-
tives, waste industry representatives, technical organizations, and state and local government officials.

After the meetings, the Working Group began drafting this report based on the information gathered.
The Working Group also researched the ways that other parts of the nation are managing W.'Ss. Even
though the meetings were only held in New York City and Washington, DC, the Working Grsup sought
to gain information on the perspectives of other areas of the nation. This information was gathered by-
Working Group members communicating directly with several stakeholders from across the lau'on, and
by soliciting input and comments on a draft recommendations report issued October  7,1999

The draft report was sent to more than eighty people, representing state and local agencies,
environmental, community, industry, and technical groups and associations. Following the di .tribution
of the draft report, several of the reviewers pointed out that the cities of New York and Wast ington
represent extreme and, perhaps, atypical urban settings. They indicated that other areas of th« country
have their own, unique set of challenges that can best be addressed at the state and local leve.
Reviewers' comments are summarized  in a report appendix.


WTSs are facilities where municipal waste is unloaded from collection vehicles and temporal ily stored
before being reloaded onto larger long-distance transport vehicles for shipment to landfills. Based on
observations by the Working Group and information presented to it, WTSs are disproportion, itely
clustered in low-income communities and communities of color. They are commonly found < djacent to
high-density housing, recreational areas, food establishments, and small businesses.

These temporary storage areas for waste can bring many problems to a community if they are not
managed correctly. In addition to quality of life issues such as noise, odor, litter, and traffic, \/TSs can
cause environmental concerns associated with poor air quality (from idling diesel-fueled true) 3 and
from particulate matter such as dust and glass) and disease-carrying vectors such as rodents and

Currently, there are no national standards or regulations that apply directly to the managemen: of
WTSs. Because WTSs are managed mainly at the local level by local ordinances and enforcement
agencies, the variance at which they are operated can be great. Moreover, many WTSs in urbim areas
are located in mixed zoned neighborhoods of color. WTSs in New York and Washington process waste
that is generated not only within the municipality, but also from surrounding municipalities and states.

From the Working Group's perspective, the issues surrounding WTSs should be raised to EPA, states,
and local governments. The recommendations provided in this report support the need for nalional
standards, more community involvement in local land-use decisions, and tougher enforcemen: at the
local level. The Working Group recognizes that the recommendations in this report are gathered from a
limited number of meetings and with a limited amount of resources. It is the Working Group'; desire to
NEJAC—A Federal Advisory Committee to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

A Regulatory Strategy for Siting and
Operating Waste Transfer Stations

bring this important issue to light and challenge community groups and federal, state, and local
governments to respond aggressively to a problem that will continue to grow with the population.


The recommendations in this report call for actions that systematically address the issues associated
with siting and operating WTSs. These recommendations range from regulatory actions and the
development of a best practices manual to immediate actions in the communities suffering from the
clustering and disproportionate siting of WTSs, WTSs in close proximity to residential uses, and the
unsafe operation  of WTSs. At the core of these recommendations is the direct and continuous
participation of communities in every aspect of the development and implementation of these

To ensure a thorough and fair examination of these difficult issues and to develop recommendations
that could be implemented from a regulatory, technical, and political perspective, the Working Group
consisted of individuals representing a variety of stakeholders such as nearby residents, business owners
and employees, community groups, environmental justice organizations, the private and public waste
trade, and local government. In conducting its work, the Working Group consulted with EPA and
sought information and recommendations from individuals representing diverse perspectives.

With a focus on solution-building, the Working Group sought to develop recommendations using a
consensus-based  process to develop as much as unanimity as possible for its recommendations. This
process required  every member to understand the complexity of the issues, their representative
positions, and to struggle with recommendations that would respond to the issues of WTS siting and
operation. The Working Group did achieve consensus on all recommendations—a significant feat in
light of the diversity of the Working Group. The achievement of agreement on these recommendations
does not mean that the Working Group does not have concerns regarding their full implementation.
Only through the  full and complete implementation of these recommendations will the suffering of
communities from the clustering, disproportionate siting, and unsafe siting and operations of WTSs be
addressed, and all future WTSs be designed and operated in a safe manner. The full implementation of
these recommendations will require the commitment of resources and the collaboration of EPA, state
and local permitting agencies, with local communities.

The Working Group strongly urges EPA and state and local regulatory agencies to review these
recommendations in the light of the good faith and hard work of the Working Group. Moreover, it must
be noted that these recommendations are presented as a packaged, comprehensive strategy to fully
address the issues of WTSs and should be viewed as an initial framework for further development and
implementation. It is the view of the Working Group that the elimination of any of these
recommendations would not fully respond to the conditions observed.

The following is an overview of the recommendations set forth in the report.

I. Resource Conservation Recovery Act (RCRA)—Solid Waste Management Planning

RCRA Sections 6942 and 6947 provide the authority to the EPA to issue regulations for the
establishment of solid waste management plans by states. In developing these" plans, this authority
permits EPA to consider the "characteristics and conditions associated with solid waste management,
including collection, storage, processing, and disposal methods and practices; location of facilities;
reasonable protection of ambient  air quality, population density; distribution and projected growth, type
4                NEJAC—A Federal Advisory Committee to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

                                                                 A Regulatory Strategy for Siting and
	Operating Waste Tr, msfer Stations

and location of transportation; constituents and generation of waste and the political, economic,
organizational, financial, and management problems affecting comprehensive solid waste
management." EPA is also provided the authority to review and approve solid waste management plans
and withdraw approval if they fail to comply with minimum requirements.

The Working Group believes that the above-noted provisions provide EPA with the authori y to
directly address the impacts of WTSs. Moreover, WTS siting and operations observed durir g the
Working Group's fact-finding tours, as well as issues raised to NEJAC over several years, justifies
EPA's use of such authority. There is unanimity for the issuance of federal siting and operation criteria
to be included in state solid waste management plans. The Working Group also considered
recommending the promulgation of federal standards for WTSs comparable to those EPA has
published for municipal solid waste landfills. However, one member of the Working Group,
representing a solid waste professional association, did not agree that EPA should establish enforceable
federal regulations for WTSs; he did not believe that the Working Group's effort demonstrated the
existence a nationwide problem of such severity to justify federal regulation, and he does not agree that
RCRA provides EPA with the legal authority to do so.

Based on these considerations, the Working Group recommends that EPA:

  •  Issue federal criteria to revise solid waste management plans to address the safe and eqi itable siting
    and operation of WTSs;
  •  Review solid waste management plans of states where the presence of WTSs has been implicated
    as a threat to public health, the environment, and environmental justice;
  •  Convene a meeting of organizations that can provide resources to support the coordination of solid
    waste planning; and
  •  Convene regional planning workshops to address the clustering of WTSs and the siting 
A Regulatory Strategy for Siting and
Operating Waste Transfer Stations
  •  Identifying the total number of WTS, total throughput, and capacity of waste processed with the
  •  Identifying WTSs that have a high degree of incompatibility with adjacent community land uses;
  •  Establishing fair goals for reducing total solid waste throughput in the community and consolidating
    and closing WTSs that have high degree of incompatibility with adjacent community land uses by
    working with facility owners;
  *  Establishing a mechanism to transition closed facilities to uses acceptable to impacted communities
    and in consideration of investments by facility owners,
  •  Establish a plan for WTSs continuing operation to implement best management practices,
    transportation impacts, and community complaint systems.

Future siting of WTSs: With respect to the future siting of facilities, the Working Group recommends
that the siting of WTSs be based on an examination of the entire area or region that solid waste is
handled, particularly because WTSs provide an essential municipal service. The Working Group
recommends the following process for selection of such sites:

  •  Establish an advisory  panel of representatives of communities (particular from communities with
    existing WTSs), municipalities, public and private waste trade groups, environmental justice and
    environmental organizations, local community development organizations, and permitting agencies.

  •  The advisory panel should establish site-selection criteria—to which all WTSs  (public or private,
    small or large) would be subject—that prevent clustering and disproportionate siting and ensure the
    protection of public health and the environment
  *  Subject the criteria to public review and finalize them based on the review.
  •  In consultation with the advisory panel, identify sites meeting the criteria and subject them to public
  •  Subject the sites identified to environmental and community impact analyses. Provide communities
    adjacent to each site with independent technical services to review the impacts from the proposed
  •  Select sites based on an affirmative demonstration that they will not result in clustering or
    disproportionate impacts.

Permitting: With respect to processing applications to site and operate WTSs, the Working Group
recommends that EPA work with local permitting agencies to:

  •  Identify all neighborhoods potentially impacted by the proposed WTSs and their transportation
  *  For all potentially impacted neighborhoods, establish a baseline of information needed to assess
    impacts for the proposed facility including demographics, sensitive receptors, health statistics, and
    impacts from similar facilities;
  •  Require the identification of the source and volume of waste to be processed;
  •  Require an affirmative demonstration that clustering and disproportionate impacts will net result
    from the proposed WTSs;
  •  Require the demonstration of the application of best management practices for the proposed WTS;
  •  Require the submission of a transportation plan.
HI. Best Management Practices
                 NEJAC—A Federal Advisory Committee to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

                                                                A Regulatory Strategy) yr Siting and
                                                                 Operating Waste Tra isfer Stations
Separate from the recommendation for the federal regulation of WTSs, the Working Group
unanimously recommends that EPA develop a manual of best management practices for WTSs. The
Working Group learned of methods used at some WTSs around the country and the world that are
effective in eliminating or reducing impacts. A manual discussing such methods would sera as an
information base for facility operators, government regulators, and the public of practices  deemed best
for addressing various types of facilities and impacts.

In developing a comprehensive best management practices manual, the Working Group recommends
developing a baseline of impacts from WTSs. The Working Group recommends that the bas ;line
consider the various types of settings (e.g., urban, suburban, rural, and tribal), location (e.g., waterfront,
land-based), and proximity to human populations. The baseline also must the include the variability of
impacts depending on the type of waste processed. The Working Group was made aware of various
facilities that are functionally equivalent to WTSs but process such diverse wastes as asbestos, medical,
and low-level radioactive wastes. The best management practices manual would be developed based on
the baseline of impacts. The report provides an initial framework for the major areas that must be
considered in the manual.

The Working Group recommends that EPA convene a diverse focus group to ensure that the best
management practices consider all pertinent variables in siting, operation, geography, and government
al structure.  At a minimum, the focus group should include representatives from:

  •  State, tribal, and local regulatory agencies responsible for issuing design and operating permits for
    WTSs and for ensuring compliance;
  •  Public and private solid waste professionals with expertise in planning, designing, and  operating
  •  Community, environmental and environmental justice organizations that have been invol /ed with
    solid waste and WTS issues.

IV. Community Participation

The direct participation of community residents, particularly those that reside in the commun ties
burdened by the clustering and disproportionate siting of WTSs, is critical to the development of
solutions that are responsive to community needs and concerns. All the recommendations in his report
call for meaningful and continuous community participation in every aspect of the development  and
implementation of these recommendations.

The Working Group recommends that the process of community outreach and consultation fce guided
by the "NEJAC Public Participation Model." In addition, because components of implementing  these
recommendations are inextricably linked to issues of local land use, the Working Group reco Timends
that community consultation to identify community uses, plans, and environmental justice
circumstances be based on the NEJAC Waste & Facility Siting Report: "Environmental Justice,  Urban
Revitalization, and Brownfields: The Search for Authentic Signs of Hope," and EPA's "Land Use
Based Remedy Selection Guidance."

The Working Group also recommends providing of technical assistance to communities to piomote
meaningful participation.

V. Marine Waste Transfer Stations                          U.S. EPA Headquarters I ibrary
                                                                  Mail code 3201
                                                           1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
                                                              Washington DC 20460
NEJAC—A Federal Advisory Committee to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency                7

A Regulatory Strategy for Siting and
Operating Waste Transfer Stations

The use of marine WTSs was identified by community residents during the Working Group's fact-
finding sessions as an equitable method to process solid waste in a manner that would minimize
impacts to the community. EPA had initiated a rule-making process for such facilities under the
authority of the Shore Protection Act, entitled: "Waste Handling Practices for Vessels and Waste
Transfer Stations." The Working Group recommends that EPA finalize this rule.

VI. Air Quality and Clean Air Act

The degradation of air quality by WTS  operations was a consistent issue raised during the fact-finding
sessions. The Working Group held preliminary discussions with EPA's Office of Air and Radiation on
strategies to address air quality impacts. It should be noted that some Working Group members
expressed the view that the topic of air  quality was outside their area of expertise. However, the
Working Group recommends that EPA move forward on a program to characterize air emissions from
WTSs and to develop strategies to address them. The Working Group recommends EPA's further
investigation of the following:

 •  Examine comprehensively air quality controls for inclusion in the best management practices
    manual such as air monitoring, odor elimination technologies, and negative air pressure designs for
    the types of air contaminants at WTSs.
 •  Issue guidance to calculate emissions from WTSs includes emissions from combustion engines
    within WTSs.
 •  Work with states to develop an indirect source review program pursuant to the authority of the
    Clean Air Act [42 U.S.C. 7401(a)(5)] to mitigate the effects of "any facility, building structure,
    installation, real property, road or highway which  attracts, or may attract, mobile sources of
 •  Mitigate the emissions from heavy-duty diesel vehicles by establishing programs for converting
    older, high-emitting engines to cleaner engines; establishing a program to identify and monitor
    diesel trucks with pollution control  systems that can be disabled and retrofit them with low-NOx
    kits; and dedicating a portion of settlement funds in the settlement reached with truck engine
    manufacturers for clean air projects in communities clustered with WTSs.
 •  Examine the increase in vehicle miles traveled associated with the transport of solid waste.
 •  Foster the establishment of clean fuel fleet.

VII. Waste Reduction

During the Working Group's fact-finding sessions, it was clear that part of the capacity needed for
WTS was due the inadequate waste reduction programs. While waste reduction was not the focus of
the Working Group's activities, the Working Group recommends that EPA examine and assess the
effectiveness of waste reduction strategies and programs throughout the country. In particular, the
Working Group recommends the following be examined:

 •  Effective technologies and techniques to reduce the total volume of solid waste generated and to
    maximize recycling levels;
 •  Incentives to encourage waste reduction and recycling; and
 *  Creation of local businesses involved  in waste reduction and recycling.
8                NEJAC—A Federal Advisory Committee to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

                                                                A Regulatory Strategy fo <• Siting and
                                                                 Operating Waste Transfer Stations
VIII. Regulatory Review and Enforcement

Inadequate enforcement was commonly cited by participants in the Working Group's fact fin ling
sessions as a key reason for the impacts from WTSs operations. Among the enforcement issues that
they raised included confusion or conflict regarding the lead local enforcement agency; uncieir
standards to undertake enforcement actions; unresponsiveness of local regulatory agencies in
addressing patterns of non-compliance identified by community residents; inadequate enforcement
staffs; and the hindrance of regulatory enforcement by court injunctions brought by facility owners.

To begin addressing these issues, the Working Group recommends that;

 •  Permitting agencies charge a fee as part of each WTS permit to fund adequate enforcenu nt;
 •  Environmental monitors be required  as part of every permit;
 •  Multi-jurisdiction enforcement agreements be developed where waste is processed and h indled in
    more than one jurisdiction;
 •  The federal government exhibit leadership in implementing these recommendations in W ashington,
    DC, since the federal government is a major generator of solid waste; and
 •  Independent third-party inspectors be hired for all municipally owned or operated facilities.

Because enforcement of WTS standards is primarily a local municipal function, these recommendations
set forth a strategy for the local lead enforcement agency. The Working Group recommends he
implementation of these recommendations by EPA and other federal enforcement agencies providing
assistance to the local enforcement agencies.
                                                        U.S. EPA Headquarters Library
                                                               Mail code 3201
                                                            Pennsylvania Avenue Mw
                                                           Washington  DC  20460
NEJAC—A Federal Advisory Committee to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency