United States Office ot tne Insoector Gtsnerai Marcn 3t 1988
Environmental Protection -101 M St., SW
Agency Wasnington. DC 20460
Report of Audit
E1D37-05-0456-80855
EPA's Program To Control
Exports of Hazardous Waste
-------
V
-------
attention to the Export of 'Hazardous Waste review. Regardless, the
Export of Hazardous Waste report was issued on March 31, 1988, which met
our commitment. to issue the report by March 31.
Attachment
cc: AIGA
Director, Technical Services Division
-------
United State* Office of tf» IrMpactor General
Environmental Protection 401 M St. SW
Agency Wartingmn, DC 20460
Report of Audit
El D37-05-0456-80855
EPA's Program To Control
Exports of Hazardous Waste
-------
EPA'S FKX3WM TO OONIRDL
EXPORTS OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
MARCH 31, 1988
AUDIT REPORT NUMBER
E1D37-05-0456-80855
-------
TABT.vf OF CONTENTS
SCOPE AND OBJECTIVES 1
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS 2
ACTION REQUIRED . 7
BACKGROUND 8
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1. EPA OFFICES SHOULD COORDINATE THEIR EFFORTS TO
CONTROL HAZARDOUS WASTff EXPORTS 12
2. NEED TO ENSURE AN EFFECTIVE NATIONWIDE MONITORING
PROGRAM EXISTS WITH THE U.S. CUSTOMS SERVICE 29
3. EXPORTERS SHOULD PROVIDE A COMPLETE DESCRIPTION
OF THE MANNER IN WHICH EXPORTED HAZARDOUS WASTE
WILL BE HANDLED 43
4. EPA SHOULD STRENGTHEN PROCEDURES TO NOTIFY EXPORTERS
WHEN A RECEIVING COUNTRY OBJECTS TO THE EXPORT .49
5. HAZARDOUS WASTE EXPORT PROGRAM NEEDS BETTER
ACCOUNTABILITY 54
APPENDICES
1. ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR FOR ENFORCEMENT AND COMPLIANCE
MONITORING'S REPLY TO OIG DRAFT REPORT 59
2. ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR FOR SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY
RESPONSE'S REPLY TO OIG DRAFT REPORT 63
3. ACTING ASSOCIATE ADMINISTRATOR FOR INTERNATIONAL
ACTIVITIES' REPLY TO OIG DRAFT REPORT 66
4. DISTRIBUTION 70
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
A. ..- WASHINGTON. D.C. Z0460
'*' -•«/»•'
'AR 3 1
SUBJECT: Audit Report No. E1D37-05-0456-80855
EPA's Program to Control
Exports of Hazardous Haste
OPPtCE Of
THE INSPECTOR
FRCM: Ernest E. Bradley ^
Assistant Inspector General for Audit
TO: Sheldon Meyers
Acting Associate Administrator for
International Activities
J. Winston Porter
Assistant Administrator for
Solid Haste and Emergency Response
Thomas L. Adams, Jr.
Assistant Administrator for
Enforcement and Compliance Monitoring
•We- nave completed an audit of the Environmental Protection Agency's
(EPA) yrc"-jr*iffl. to control exports of haCTrtcw waste
the Resource conservation and Recovery Act (ECRA) . Ttm objectives
of our audit were to determine the adequacy of EPA's:
1. Enforoanent efforts in identifying specific industries and
companies that are not outlying with ha^rrif»ta waste export
regulations.
2. Efforts in implementing a Msnorandum of Understanding
(MDU) with the U.S. QMfcem* Service to establish a program
to monitor and spot check international shipments of
hazardous waste.
3. Policies and procedures for ensuring that exporters are
complying with hazardous waste export regulations.
we performed the audit in accordance with the 'SftBtfy*** *rtf
of Gou*frprc*^pfci»^ Qrgap^y-at;ion3. Programs. Acfrwlti^*- and FVmctions
issued by the CcnptroUer General of the United States. In the
course of our review, we identified and reviewed internal controls
that would affect the ptojidm to control hazardous waste exports.
The weaknesses we found are included in this report. No other
iqreies cave to our attention which we believed were significant
enough to warrant expanding the scope of this audit. We conduct!*!
our fieldwork from March 30, 1987 to Danpntier 8, 1987.
-------
Our audit generally covered EPA's activities from October 1, 1986,
through September 30, 1987. in order to accomplish our objectives,
we interviewed EPA officials who have responsibilities for
administering the hazardous waste export program. The following
EPA offices were included in our review:
1. Office of International Activities (OIA).
/
2. Office of Enforcement and Compliance Monitoring -(OECM) .
3. Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER).
In addition, we reviewed and evaluated Agency policies, procedures,
and practices pertinent to hazardous waste exports. We also
interviewed and visited generators and transporters of hazardous
waste. We reviewed their records to determine compliance with EPA
regulations. Further, we interviewed U.S. Customs Service officials
in Washington, DC, and we visited the Customs Ports of Los Angeles,
CA, and Laredo, TX, to review export documents. We also visited
the Bureau of Census in Washington, DC, and reviewed data that the
Bureau of Census has on hazardous waste exports.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
The Administrator has stated that the Agency must continue to look
beyond our national boundaries and give attention to our work with
other nations to promote sound environmental practices worldwide.
As part of this endeavor, the Agency revised existing 'regulations
in August 1986 which provided Agency employees additional means to
more effectively regulate hazardous waste exports. In the Federal
Register containing the final regulations, EPA explained it
intended to prosecute violators to the fullest extent because of
the adverse environmental and health consequences that can result
when any, exported hazardous waste is mishandled. Also, this
nation's reputation as a responsible trading partner can be
adversely affected when another country receives unwanted hazardous
waste.
Despite these goals we found hundreds of tons of exported hazardous
waste that were not handled in accordance with the Agency's regula-
tions. Accordingly, the Agency needs a coordinated effort to ensure
compliance with its hazardous waste export regulations. This effort
should include (1) an enforcement strategy to identify those exporte
in noncompliance with the Agency regulations, (2) a joint nationwide
prograa with the U.S. Customs Service to monitor and spot check
hazardous waste exports, (3) procedures to ensure that exporters
provide complete descriptions of how hazardous wastes will be handle
in receiving countries, and (4) stronger procedures to notify export
when a receiving country objects to the export. This effort also
needs to deal with the differing responsibilities of OIA, OECMr and
OSWER under the hazardous waste export prograa in terns of assuring
the program is properly carried out. This should include reporting
their activities in the Agency tracking system to ensure program
accountability.
-2-
-------
We discussed our findings and recommendations with OIA, OECM, and
OSWER officials. Their comments and actions taken in response to
our findings are discussed in the body of this report. Also,
their formal comments to our draft report are attached as
appendices to this report. Their actions, if properly implemented,
will substantially correct the deficiencies found during our
review.
l. SPA Offices Shoj?ldu.4&ordjjiai;e-jrhe.ir Efforts To control
qaz ardous Waste Exports
Hazardous waste exports were not adequately controlled because
officials from different Agency offices did not establish a
compliance system to ensure exporters followed applicable Agency
regulations. Consequently, the Agency did not resolve apparent
acts of noncompliance and had inadequate assurance that exported
hazardous waste were properly handled. In our review we found
hundreds of tons of exported hazardous waste which were not
handled in accordance with the Agency's regulations. Thus, in
addition to the adverse environmental and health consequences that
can result when any exported hazardous waste is mishandled, this
nation's reputation as a responsible trading partner could also be
adversely affected.
The Agency's program to control the export of hazardous waste was
not adequate because:
* The Agency did not Know che extent of noncompliance with
EPA's requirement that hazardous waste exporters must submit
notifications of intent to export hazardous waste (notifica
tion) and file an annual report stating the actual amount o
hazardous waste exported. These reports are required by
statute. As a result, the Agency did not know the amount of
hazardous waste actually exported to other countries.
* The Agency did not have an enforcement strategy and did not
resolve apparent acts of noncoapliance. Agency offices needed
to coordinate and commit their staff to develop an effective
strategy.
The Assistant Administrators for OECM and OSWER substantially
agreed with our draft report finding and recommendations. As a
result of our view, OECM completed an enforcement strategy
on March 28, 1988. The strategy refines existing procedures for
evaluating (l) notifications of intent to export, (2) manifests
accompanying export shipments, and (3) annual reports to ensure
compliance with regulations and international agreements.
Additionally, procedures will be implemented for appropriate
enforcement responses to instances of noncompliance.
The actions by the Assistant Administrators, if properly
implemented, will substantially correct the deficiencies cited in
our draft report. We recommend the Assistant Administrators take
appropriate steps to ensure their respective offices and EPA
regional offices implement the enforcement strategy.
-3-
-------
2'. Need To Ensure An Ef factive Nationwide Monitoring Prnn
Exists With The O.sT Customs Service riagj^g
EPA did not have a nationwide monitoring program to spot check
international shipments of hazardous waste because EPA had not
completed efforts to coordinate with the U.S. Customs Service
(Customs). Consequently, hazardous waste exporters could disregard
EPA regulations with little chance of detection.
Congress intended that EPA work with Customs to establish an
effective monitoring program to spot check hazardous waste exports.
Accordingly, in February 1987 EPA and Customs signed a Memorandum
of Understanding (MOU) which calls for certain actions on the part
of EPA and Customs so that an effective monitoring and spot check
program can be established.
All Customs ports have been notified of their responsibility to
forward a copy of the hazardous waste manifest to EPA. However,
EPA could not determine all ports where hazardous waste is
exported from because many manifests do not identify the port of
export. EPA's National Enforcement Investigation Center (NEIC)
officials advised us that through December 10, 1987, they had
received 274 manifests. Three ports account for 129 manifests
covering shipments to Canada. There were 143 manifests that did
not show the port of exit.
The coordination with customs needed improvement because hazardous
waste manifests often did not identify the port of exportation.
Also, EPA had neither completed development of exporter profiles
nor targeted ports of exit through which illegal exports of
hazardous waste were likely to occur. This would help Customs
identify illegal hazardous waste shipments. In addition, the
receiving country's consent, which EPA forwards to the exporter
for attachment to the manifest, did not always contain the data
that customs needs to ensure the hazardous waste shipment is proper.
The Assistant Administrators for'&ECM- and^QSWER substantially
agreed with our draft report finding and recommendations. NEIC
is developing a joint enforcement strategy to address enforcement
activities specific to customs. This strategy includes rein-
forcing procedures for collecting manifests at ports of exit,
developing a waste exporter profile, training customs' inspectors,
and expanding the existing program of spot checks of export ship-
ments.
The draft enforcement strategy addresses the issues discussed in
our draft report. We recommend the Assistant Administrators ensure
the joint enforcement strategy is completed and appropriate steps
taken to implement the strategy. We ask that the Assistant
Administrator for OECM provide us a date by which the joint enforce-
ment strategy will be completed and a copy of the final strategy.
.4-
-------
3. Exporters Should Provide AComplete Description Of The
Manner In Which Exported Hazardous Waste Will Be Handled
EPA has not provided guidance to exporters which would help ensure
that exported hazardous waste will be properly handled by the
receiving country. " Consequently, exporters do not always provide
EPA an adequate description on their export notifications of the
manner of treatment, storage or disposal in the receiving country.
For example, the description for treatment of (1) 40 metric, tons of
lead dross in Pakistan was given simply as "Recycling"; (2) 120
drums of spent chemical catalyst containing mercury sludge in South
Africa was given as "P.acycling; and (3) 250 tons of lead flue dust,
250 tons of lead furnace, slag, and 11,000 tons of lead press coke
in West Germany were gi/-- ^s "Reclamation."
Exporters did not provide - ruate descriptions because EPA's
hazardous waste export regulation is unclear on how much informa-
tion the exporter needs to include in a notification. Therefore,
OIA does not consistently review these notifications to ensure that
exporters provide a complete description of the manner in which the
hazardous wastes are to be handled. Consequently, exporters can
engage in sham recycling or other illegal treatment methods that
can result in environmental harm to the receiving country and the
health of its population. EPA is aware of evidence that certain
materials exported ostensibly for recycling were actually sham
recycling and resulted in potential risk to the health and the
environment of the receiving country.
The Assistant Administrators for OECM and OSWER substantially
agreed with our draft report finding and recommendations. The
Assistant Administrator for OECM stated the enforcement strategy
provides for NEXC technical review of notifications of intent to
export. This should minimize the incidence of inadequate informa-
tion on the manner of handling of the wastes in the foreign country
He added that if this approach does not prove adequate, appropriate
revisions of the regulations will be addressed.
The Acting Associate Administrator for-OIA™believed a careful
check is needed of EPA's legal authority to require a complete
description of the manner of treatment, storage, or disposal of
hazardous waste exports. He stated that if such authority exists,
and a requirement is established, EPA must develop guidelines to
advise exporters on the kind of information that exporters should
provide to EPA.
Our draft report recommended several steps the Agency should take
to resolve this issue. We -ecommend iie Agency implement these
recommendations. In addition, if the proper authority exists, we
reconnend the Agency implement "XA's proposal to develop guidelines
to advise exporters of what kind of information is needed.
-5-
-------
4. EPA Should Strengthen Procedures To Notify Exporters When
A Receiving Country Objects To The Export.
O±A records do not show that it informed exporters of objections
made by receiving countries to intended exports of hazardous waste.
For example, Mexico objected to a shipment of 40,000 gallons of
flammable, corrosive dross and 900 metric tons of crushed battery
plates. Several exporters advised us they were not aware of
objections to their planned exports. However, they stated that
they did not export the hazardous waste to the objecting country.
Unless the Agency's records clearly show the exporter is notified
of objections to its exports, the Agency could be held accountable
if the shipment occurs and the receiving country complains that the
shipment occurred against its wishes. Further, the exporter may
complain if his shipment is stopped at the receiving country's
border and OIA is unable to show that the exporter was notified of
the objection. OIA needs to have a formal procedure that
adequately documents it has notified an exporter when the receiving
country has objected to the exporter's planned hazardous waste
shipment. The procedure should consist of a telephone call followe-
by a certified letter to the exporter.
The Acting Associate Administrator for OIA agreed with our draft
report finding and recommendations. He explained that OIA has
adopted the practices recommended in the our draft report. When
there is an objection, OIA will notify the exporter by telephone,
and follow-up by sending a copy of the objection to the exporter by
certified mail. At the same time, the EPA regional office where
the exporter is located will be notified of the objection.
The actions taken by OIA, if properly implemented, will correct the
deficiencies cited in our draft report. -We- recommend that the
Acting Associate Administrator provide usljijsopy of the procedures
for the new practices established as a resultI of our report.
5. Hazardous Waste Export Program Needs Better Accountability
OIA-is not part of the Agency's Strategic Planning and Management
System (SPHS). Thus, senior Agency officials cannot adequately
monitor the hazardous waste export program. Also, OIA's internal
control reviews are not sufficiently documented to show the extent
that employees included the hazardous waste export program in their
reviews. Consequently, the Agency is less likely to identify and
quickly resolve significant program weaknesses that need manage-
ment attention.
A strong and well managed national compliance program needs
reliable information so that senior Agency officials can judge a
program's success and identify areas needing management attention.
One of the Agency's principal means for determining the success of
Agency programs is through the SPMS. SPHS provides the Agency a
.6-
-------
way to track progress and guide the Agency in implementing its
legislative mandates through goal setting, planning and evaluation
functions.
The Acting Associate Administrator for OIA agreed with our draft
report finding and recommendations. He explained that OIA would
welcome the opportunity to meet with Agency officials to discuss
bringing the hazardous waste export program under the Agency's
SPMS. He further stated that OIA has started an examination of
internal controls in order to better identify ways of improving
those for the hazardous waste export program.
The actions planned and initiated by the Acting Associate
Administrator, if properly implemented, will i«oi-ove OIA'S control
over the hazardous waste export program. w* recommend mat tne
Acting Associate Administrator take appropriate action to meet with
Agency officials to determine what aspects of the hazardous waste
export program can be brought under SPMS. He should also implement
procedures to correct any additional weaknesses identified by the
internal control review.
The comments by OIA, OECM, and OSWER provided additional information
regarding the findings in our draft report. After reviewing this
data, we made appropriate changes to our findings before we finalizec
this report.
ACTION REQUIRED
In accordance with EPA Order 2750, each action official is required
to provide this office a written response to the audit report
within 90 days of the audit report date.
We have no objection to the further release of this report at your
discretion.
-7-
-------
BACKGROUND
EPA has identified the improper management of hazardous waste as
a serious environmental problem in the United States. The
mismanagement of such waste has had tragic consequences. The
Agency has on file hundreds of cases of damage to human health and
the environment that resulted from the indiscriminate dumping or
other improper management of hazardous waste.
There are a whole series of numbers available to describe and
characterize the current hazardous waste management problem. One
estimate is that more than 260 million metric tons of hazardous
waste are generated annually or a quantity equal to more than 170
billion gallons.- Large portions of this total are believed to be
mixtures of hazardous and non-hazardous wastes, such as wastes
mixed with industrial process liquids.
To ensure that hazardous waste is managed properly, Congress
enacted the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) in 1976.
Through RCRA, Congress authorized EPA to regulate current and
future waste management and disposal practices* The basic thrusts
of the hazardous waste management provisions of RCRA were to
establish (1) standards for the safe treatment, storage and
disposal of hazardous waste at approved facilities; and (2) a
•cradle to grave" tracking system to assure hazardous wastes reach
approved facilities.
RCRA defines the term "hazardous waste" as a solid waste, or
combination of solid wastes, which because of its quantity,
concentration, or physical, chemical, or infectious characteristics
may:
1. Cause or significantly contribute to an increase in mortality
or an increase in serious irreversible, or incapacitating
reversible illness; or
2. Pose a substantial present or potential hazard to human
health or the environment when improperly treated, stored,
transported, disposed of, or managed.
Under EPA regulations, a waste is considered hazardous if it
exhibits a hazardous waste characteristic, has been listed as a
hazardous waste by EPA because of its hazardous constituents, or is
a mixture that contains a listed hazardous waste* The hazardous
waste characteristics EPA identified are ignitability, corrosivity,
reactivity, and toxicity.
The Agency has a specific mandate to determine which wastes are
hazardous and, therefore, subject to these regulations.
Accordingly, EPA developed a list, of hazardous wastes using
criteria established by statute, currently, EPA lists 450 generally
agreed upon materials or substances as hazardous waste. Other
wastes may also be regulated if they fail tests that EPA developed
to measure their toxicity, corrosivity, reactivity, or ignitability.
-8-
-------
Recognizing that improper management of hazardous waste can expend
beyond the nation's boundaries, EPA promulgated regulations H
.February 1980 under RCRA which placed certain requirements on
exporters of hazardous waste in light of the special circumstances
involved in international shipments. These regulations required
exporters of hazardous waste to:
1. Initiate a manifest.
2. Use proper labels and containers.
3. Comply with the record Keeping and reporting requirements of
RCRA.
4. Notify EPA four weeks prior to the initial shipment of
hazardous waste to each foreign country in a reporting year.
The notification requirement assisted EPA in tracking exports of
hazardous waste. However, the foreign country was not required to
give prior written consent to EPA before shipment of the waste.
Thus, EPA had no authority to prohibit the export of hazardous
waste if the foreign country objected to its receipt.
Subsequently, Congress became concerned that EPA's regulations
were inadequate to address the present and potential environmental
health, and foreign policy problems which occur when wastes are
exported to nations which do not wish to receive them or lack
sufficient information to manage then properly. Congress also
expressed concern that the failure to effectively regulate exr~ts
could create a major loophole for circumvention of Federal '
hazardous waste lava. For example, in April 1986 a Federal grand
jury returned an indictment against four officers and two corpora-
tions that were claiming to be recycling waste when in fact they .
knew the waste waa illegally disposed of in Mexico. Congress actec
to strengthen the nation's hazardous waste laws and in November
1984 the President signed into law the Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984 (HSWA). The HSWA waa a major new statute that
significantly changed the way that this country managed hazardous
waste including the export of such waste. These amendments
provided that, beginning 24 months after their enactment, the
export of hazardous waste is prohibited unless:
1. A primary exporter of hazardous waste notifies EPA of an
intended export before such wastes is scheduled to leave the
United states.
2. The government of the receiving country gives its consent to
accept the waste.
3. A copy of the receiving country's written consent is attachet
to the manifest which accompanies the waste shipment.
4. The shipment conforms to the terms of such consent.
-9-
-------
In August 1986 EPA promulgated final regulations to implement the
HSWA. The final regulations were consistent with the HSWA require-
ments .
Penalties for noncompliance with the regulations are severe. The
HSWA authorize criminal prosecution of persons who knowingly export
hazardous waste and fail to file any record, application, manifest,
report or other documents required to be maintained or filed for
purposes of compliance with regulations promulgated by the Agency.
Violators may be fined $50,000 per day of violation and/or
imprisoned up to two years. Repeat offenders are subject to a
$100,000 fine and four years in prison.
Congress also intended that EPA should work with the U.S. Customs
Service to establish an effective program to monitor and spot check
international shipments of hazardous waste to assure compliance
with the statute's requirements. EPA is to consult with the
Customs Service in order to develop this monitoring and spot-check
program.
The Office of International Activities (OIA) is charged with the
responsibility of developing policies and procedures for the
direction of the Agency's international programs and activities
subject to United states foreign policy. Therefore, OIA has a
major responsibility in EPA and within the Federal government for
all aspects of Federal hazardous waste export policy, including
the development of new regulations and the implementation of export
notification and consent procedures, as required under RCRA.
With -respect to this program, the specific responsibilities of OIA
include:
1. Coordinating Federal government involvement with complex
hazardous waste export proposals.
2. Assessing the foreign policy implications of hazardous waste
exports and recommending methods and alternatives for
monitoring and evaluating such activities.
3. Working closely with Agency program offices and the U.S.
Department of State to (a) refine and revise hazardous waste
export policies, (b) enhance government objectives, and (c)
maintain the United States as a responsible member of the
international community.
4. Developing international agreements with other countries,
such as Canada and Mexico on the transboundary movement of
hazardous waste.
The Office of Enforcement and Compliance Monitoring (OECM) also ha:
responsibility for the hazardous waste export program. OECM staff
assisted in drafting the hazardous waste export regulations. They
also negotiated agreements with other government agencies (e.g.,
the U.S. Customs Service and the Bureau of Census) which will better
-10-
-------
ensure compliance with the regulations. Similarly, the Office of
Solid Waste and Emergency Response has responsibilities for drafting
regulations and developing programs and strategies for RCRA.
The Agency's hazardous waste export program could increase in
importance because HSWA is clear in its assessment that land
disposal is the least desirable method of managing hazardous waste.
HSWA required the Agency to restrict dioxin and solvent-containing
waste from land disposal by November 1986. By July 1987 the Agency
was required to restrict land disposal of wastes on the "California
list.* This list represents wastes that the State of California
indicated should be banned from land disposal.
Further requirements have been imposed on the Agency. By 1990 EPA
must decide whether it is safe to continue land disposal of 450
hazardous wastes containing over 300 separate toxic constituents.
Should EPA fail to meet this deadline, so called "hammer clauses"
go into effect banning such disposal. The HSWA requires that the
bans take effect immediately unless EPA can demonstrate that there
is not sufficient treatment capacity for handling the restricted
waste. In that case, an extension of two years is allowed.
In addition, the export: of hazardous waste may increase because
HSWA gave facilities that handle hazardous waste until November 8,
1985, to either certify that they were in compliance with certain
interim requirements and apply for a final permit, or to begin
closure proceedings. By April 1986 EPA's Office of Waste Programs
Enforcement reported that two-thirds of land disposal facilities
had lost their interim status, either because they could not certif
compliance with requirements or because they chose to close
rather than comply with nev more stringent requirements to be
imposed over the next two years. While most of these facilities
will remain in operation as a non hazardous waste facility, the
number of facilities handling hazardous vaste could likely decline.
In August 1987 the OECM Assistant Administrator agreed that the
hazardous waste export program will become more important because
of these conditions.. The factors described above will likely
create additional pressure for companies, who do not eliminate or.
recycle hazardous vaste resulting from their operations, to export
their hazardous vaste to other countries.
-11-
-------
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
FINDING NO. 1 - EPA OFFICES SHOULD COORDINATE THEIR EFFORTS TO
CONTROL HAZARDOUS WASTE EXPORTS
Hazardous waste exports were not adequately controlled because
officials from different Agency offices did not establish a
compliance system to ensure exporters followed applicable Agency
regulations. Consequently, the Agency did not resolve apparent
acts of noncompliance and had inadequate assurance that exported
hazardous waste were properly handled. In our review we found
hundreds of tons of exported hazardous waste which were not
handled in accordance with the Agency's regulations. Thus, in
addition to the adverse environmental and health consequences that
can result when any exported hazardous waste is mishandled, this
nation's reputation as a responsible trading partner can also be
adversely affected.
The Administrator has stated that the Agency must continue to look
beyond our national boundaries and give attention to our work with
other nations to promote sound environmental practices worldwide.
Unless the Agency acts to ensure that exporters have complied with
the Agency's regulations, neither Congress nor EPA can determine
whether the export right is being abused. Also, the Agency cannot
assess the impact of previous legislation and determine whether
additional controls are necessary or desirable. Congress has
expressed concern that failure to effectively regulate exports may
be creating a major loophole for circumvention of Federal hazardous
waste laws. The Agency needs to establish procedures to ensure
exporters have complied with the regulations.
The Agency's program to control the export of hazardous waste is
not adequate because:
» The Agency did not know the extent of noncompliance with EPA's
requirement that hazardous waste exporters must submit notifi-
cations of intent to export hazardous waste (notification) and
file an annual report stating the actual amount of hazardous
waste exported. These reports are required by statute. As a
result, the Agency did not know the amount of hazardous waste
actually exported to other countries.
* The Agency did not have an enforcement strategy and did not
resolve apparent acts of noncompliance. Agency offices needed
to coordinate and commit their staff to develop an effective
strategy.
In August and September 1987, the Assistant Administrators of
the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Monitoring (OEQf) and the
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER) exchanged
memoranda explaining that an enforcement strategy for the hazardous
waste export program is important. OECM's National Enforcement
Investigations Center (KEIC) is finalizing a strategy which will
include defining appropriate responses to cases of noncompliance.
-12-
-------
On November 23, 1987, our office presented information to NEIC that
will be useful in developing exporter profiles and defining areas
of noncompliance.
Compliance with the hazardous waste export regulations is important
because certain studies indicate the amount of hazardous waste
exported may be increasing. For example, reports prepared for the
Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development indicated that
between 1982 and 1983, wastes transported in Western Europe for
disposal in another country virtually doubled.
The International Solid Waste Association has also issued figures
showing that 2.2 million tons of hazardous waste cross national
boundaries each year with no way of knowing how much of it is being
exported to developing countries. More recent statistics are not
available, however, OECM and Office of International Activities
(OIA) officials believe current land disposal restrictions will
increasingly make international shipments of hazardous waste more
economical.
The severe consequences of improper handling of hazardous waste
led Congress to pass the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments
(HSWA) of 1984. The HSWA prohibits the export of hazardous waste
unless the exporter complies with the notification requirements anc
receives prior written consent from the receiving country. These
requirements help ensure hazardous waste exports are properly
handled and that instances of sham recycling and other improper
handling of hazardous waste exports will be detected.
The Agency is aware of situations where hazardous waste exports
have been mishandled. For example:
* In January 1986, Mexican environmental authorities discovered
an illegal dumping site in a rural community near Tecate,
Mexico. Authorities determined that a Mexican recycling
company bought 10,000 gallons of heavy hydrocarbons and other
hazardous materials from U.S. companies. The waste was
shipped to Mexico and then dumped. The Mexican company was
not a licensed recycler or importer and was not authorized to
dump the material at the illegal dumping site. In April 1986
a Federal grand jury sitting in the Southern District of
California returned a 41 count indictment against four
officers and owners of two corporations that were allegedly
involved in this illegal activity. :
Although the wastes in this example, according to an OECM
official, may not have been covered by EPA's hazardous waste
regulations, the example shows the importance of complying with tr
regulations. The regulations require the receiving country to gi\
its consent to receive the waste and the opportunity to track the
waste, whenever an exporter does not comply, a situation is
created where another country may receive unwanted hazardous waste
which cannot be managed properly.
-13-
-------
NoncoTnpliance With EPA's Notification Of Intent
To ExportHazardous Waste Requirement
HSWA addressed Congress' concern that EPA's existing regulations
were inadequate to control the export of hazardous waste.
Accordingly, HSWA required EPA to promulgate rules to improve
regulations pertaining to hazardous waste exports. In August 1986,1
the Agency issued revised regulations. With respect to the notifi-J
cation requirement, the Agency required exporters to include in
their notifications:
1. The period of time and the estimated frequency or rate at
which such waste is to be exported.
2. Estimated total quantity of waste exported.
3. All points of entry to and departure from each country
through which the hazardous waste will pass.
The regulations also require that notifications be sent to OIA
in Washington, DC, who will obtain the receiving country's
consent. In promulgating these regulations, the Agency explained
that the primary purpose is to provide sufficient information to
a receiving country in order for it to make an informed decision
on whether to accept the waste and to manage it in an environ-
mentally sound manner.
By comparing notifications with 80 annual reports submitted to OIA
from companies exporting hazardous wastes in FYs 1985 - 1986, we
found instances of non-compliance with the notification requirement
Our comparison disclosed the following instances (that occurred
since the export regulations were promulgated) where OIA did not
have on file a notification from the exporter. All of these
companies, except Company E, shipped their wastes to Canada in
1986. Company E shipped its waste to England.
Company Quantity Description
A 16 tons Scrap Circuit Boards containing
Copper, Epoxy, and Fiberglass
with small amounts of Tin and Lead
B 130 tons Baghouse Oust containing Zinc
or Copper
C 500 tons Metal Hydroxide Sludge
O 95 tons Metal Hydroxide sludge
E 19 tons (metric) Metal Hydroxide sludge
F 4,605 gallons Waste Zinc Cyanide
-14-
-------
H
I
J
24 tons
4 tons
2 tons
55 gallons
2,340 gallons
19 tons
Electroplating Sludge
Spent Chromic Acid
Nickel Plating Bath Filter Sludge
Waste Hydrochloric Acid
Waste Flammable Liquids
Contaminated Sand and Gravel
with Chrome
Instances where an exporter knowingly exports hazardous waste but
purposefully avoids submitting a notification could constitute a
significant.criminal violation. Without filing a notification and
obtaining the receiving country's consent, there is no assurance
that the receiving country would agree to accept the waste and
ensure that the waste will be handled properly. We contacted
company officials in these instances of noncompliance and they
claimed they were unaware of the notification requirement. An
official for Company F, that has regularly exported hazardous
waste, explained that he was unaware of the Agency's requirement tc
file a notification even though the requirement has been in effect
since I960.
Noncoipplianee With EPA's Annual Report Requirement
EPA did not know the extent of noncompliance with its requirement
that exporters of hazardous waste must file an annual report
stating the actual amount of hazardous waste exported. Present ou
data indicate noncompliance could be significant. Agency official:
have been reluctant to make the commitment necessary to determine
noncompliance and enforce the regulations requiring exporters to
submit an annual report because they believe significant enforce-
ment action will not result.
Unless exporters comply with the annual report requirement, the
Agency cannot provide Congress with accurate information on the
actual amount of hazardous waste exported. Therefore, Congress
will not have accurate or reliable information on which to make
additional policy or regulatory decisions or to assess the impact
of previous legislation. In addition, the Agency loses an
important source of information for developing exporter profiles
and a basis for developing an enforcement strategy.
HSWA requires that any person who exports hazardous waste must f il
with the Administrator no later than March 1 of each year a report
summarizing the types, quantities, frequency, and ultimate
destination of all such hazardous waste exported during the
previous calendar year. This requirement became effective immedi-
ately upon enactment of HSWA. Therefore, annual reports were due
on March 1, 1985, 1986 and 1987.
Congress' rationale for requiring annual reports from hazardous
waste exporters is that the annual report will assist EPA as an
enforcement tool and aid Congress and EPA in determining whether
-15-
-------
thr export right is being abused and whether additional controls
ar. necessary or desirable. The annual report would also provide
actual amounts of hazardous waste exported whereas the notifica-
tions are estimates and not actual shipments.
Although exporters have sent OIA hundreds of notifications each
year, relatively few exporters have submitted annual reports.
Agency officials became aware that exporters were not complying
with the annual report requirement after the first annual reports
were due in March 1985. A February 1986 memorandum from the former
OECM Assistant Administrator to the OSWER Assistant Administrator
outlined several concerns about the proposed export rule. One
concern was that exporters of hazardous waste were not complying
with the annual report requirement. The Assistant Administrator
stated:
We have gooc reason to believe that the regulated community
is not in compliance with current export requirements. To
date, only ten persons have submitt:d annual reports. Yet,
we have received hundreds of notifications.
In April 1986, an OECM attorney also advised OECM's Assistant
Enforcement Counsel for Waste that the Agency received very few
annual reports on hazardous waste exports. The attorney explained
that OIA, OSWER, and the General Counsel were concerned about the
apparent widespread noncompliance with the annual reporting
requirement.
The OECM attorney drafted a letter that the Agency could send to
persons who notified the Agency that they intended to export
hazardous waste but never filed an annual report. The purpose of
notifying exporters was to provide the Agency with the opportunity
to initiate enforcement actions against exporters not in compliance
with the annual reporting requirement.
However, officials recognized that there may have been some
confusion on the part of the regulated community and EPA regional
offices as to where annual reports should be sent. This
confusion vas caused by RCRA §3017(g), which only required sub-
mission of the, annual reports to the "Administrator", but gave no
address. Thus, a submission to the Regional Administrator complied
with the RCRA requirement. Therefore, officials recognized that
the Agency should not bring actions against these individuals.
In May 1986, the Acting Assistant Administrator for OECM, in a
presentation before the Government Institutes, explained that the
Agency vas considering an export enforcement strategy to deal with
the apparent widespread noncompliance with the annual export
reporting requirement. He also cited statistics shoving that the
Agency received hundreds of notifications each year but less than
20 annual reports had been submitted since the reporting requiremen
became effective in March 1985.
-16-
-------
We asked OECM officials whether the Agency launched an enforcement.
initiative. Officials stated that", no actions were taken to notify
exporters about their noncompliance with the Agency's annual report
requirement. OECM officials also had not contacted regional
officials to determine whether exporters may have submitted their
initial annual reports to the Regional Administrators. The regula-
tions issued in August 1986 now require that exporters send their
annual reports to OIA.
The Agency does not know the extent of noncompliance with the
annual report requirements. For 1986, the Agency received 344
notifications. Through December 22, 1987, OIA advised us that 84
exporters filed an annual report for 1986. We contacted 29
companies that submitted notifications to OIA but did not file an
annual report. Officials for 11 companies stated they exported
hazardous waste but were unaware of the annual report requirement
and therefore had not filed an annual report. Of the other 18
companies, IS stated they did not export hazardous waste or that
the waste was not hazardous, and 3 stated that they filed the annual
report with a state agency.
The following are examples of exporters who intended to ship
significant amounts of hazardous waste but did not file annual
reports.
Exporter Country Quan^ty Description
A Canada 269,451 gallons Used Solvents containing
Nitric and Sulfuric Acid
49,854 gallons Electroplating Sludge
B Canada 1,518 tons Metal Hydroxide Sludge
C Canada 300 tons contaminated Earth
0 Canada • 134 tons Metal Bearing Oust
E Mexico 3,539 tons Electric Arc Furnace Dust
F Mexico 295 tons Electric Arc Furnace Oust
OIA, OECM, and OSWER officials did not determine if these companie:
actually exported hazardous waste and violated the annual reportin<
requirement. We contacted the above six companies. Three compani<
confirmed that they exported the hazardous waste but were not awan
of the annual report requirement. Officials from the other three
companies explained that they filed annual reports with their stat
environmental agencies and believed these reports would fulfill th
Federal annual reporting requirement. We presented the above info
mation and other data to NEIC which will assist them in detenainin
compliance.
-17-
-------
EPA's Intent To Determine Compliance
Using Census Data
Our review showed the Agency cannot use the Bureau of Census
(Census) data because the Census information is incomplete.
Therefore, the Agency lost a means to help determine compliance
with the Agency's requirements. For example, if the Census data
was complete the Agency could use the data to determine compliance
with the notification requirement.
Each year OIA received hundreds of notifications. However, our
analysis of 344 notifications received by OIA between January 1,
1986 and November 30, 1986, shows the large majority are to two
Canadian facilities:
Notifications of Intent
Receiving Country . : Received bv OIA
Canada 300*
Mexico' , 14
England 3
West Germany 8
Philippines 2
South Africa 2
Taiwan 2
Australia 1
Belgium. 1
Brazil 1
Holland 1
India 1
Japan 1-
Korea 1
Spain
Total 344
*283 (82 percent) notices are to two facilities in Canada.
Since the majority of notifications are for only two Canadian
facilities, we asked officials if they reviewed Census data to help
determine whether exporters are complying with the notification
requirement. Officials advised us that, when the Agency issued its
final hazardous waste export regulations in August 1986, the Federa
Register explained that exporters may be required to comply with
pertinent export control laws and regulations issued by other
Federal agencies. EPA hoped to use information filed with Census
to determine exporter compliance with EPA regulations.
Census Shippers Export Declarations Are Incomplete
In issuing the revised export regulations, Agency officials
explained that Census requires exporters to file Shippers Export
Declarations (SEDs) for shipments that are valued over $1,000.
Exporters submit the SEDs to the U.S. Customs Service (Customs)
-18-
-------
at the port of exportation. Customs in turn forwards the SEDs to
Census, which prepares a statistical report of domestic export
valued over $1,000. EPA officials recognized that a hazardous
waste shipment could have a value over $1,000, especially those
containing gold, silver or other valuable material. Therefore,
when the value of a hazardous waste shipment exceeds $1,000, the
exporter must prepare an SED. EPA officials intended to use this
data to help determine compliance with EPA's regulation.
Our review of SEOs showed that exporters are not classifying
hazardous waste shipments properly. We examined SEDs at Census and
discussed with Census officials their procedures for processing
this data. Our review showed that exporters could inadvertently ot
purposefully classify hazardous waste exports under another classi-
fication number. For example, an exporter that ships hazardous
waste containing gold or silver could classify the shipment under
the Census category for gold or silver scrappings. We found 5
exporters incorrectly classified electric flue furnace dust, an EPA
listed hazardous'waste, as zinc waste and sweepings in 16 shipments
totalling 2,065 tons. As explained on page 35 of this report,
these exporters also did not provide a required manifest to Customs
for each of these shipments.
In addition, census officials explained that exporters of hazardous
waste could avoid preparing SEDs for hazardous waste shipments by
purposefully stating the value of a hazardous waste as less than
$1,000. Customs officials advised us that they do not have the
expertise to determine whether a specific shipment has a value
greater than $1,000 or to determine whether exporters have proper!}
classified hazardous waste on the SED even when the value is greater
than $1,000.
We discussed this issue with NEIC officials, who have experienced
similar problems with Census data. In response to our draft report
they stated that data collected by Census is of little value becaus
* NEIC's experience in reviewing limited SEDs collected by
Customs, along with hazardous waste manifests, shows serious
problems with proper completion of these documents and
classification of wastes.
> Census' SED requirement imposes an additional set of waste
classification codes much different than EPA. This contributi
to misclassification problems.
* Most exports of hazardous waste have no economic value and
thus, these exporters are not required to prepare an SED.
In addition, NEIC officials explained if Census were to require al
exporters of hazardous waste to file an SED regardless of value,
this would be a new requirement on the regulated community. It
would directly duplicate the revised EPA regulation which require
exporters to prepare a hazardous waste manifest and annual report.
NEIC officials added that if an exporter decides to avoid complian
-19-
-------
with the EPA export requirements, he could just as easily avoid
compliance with the SED requirement. Therefore, NEIC officials
believe efforts to improve the collection of export data through
the SED process could be better spent in improving compliance with
EPA export requirements.
We agree with NEIC comments and have included them in the body of
the report. Accordingly, based upon this additional information,
we have deleted two recommendations that were in our draft report.
census Statistical Category for
Hazardous Waste Inaccurate
The Federal Register explaining the final rule also showed that
the Agency requested Census officials to create a separate
statistical category for hazardous waste exports. OECH and OSWER
officials met twice with Census officials during the development
of the regulation. They convinced Census to create a separate
category because it could also help EPA determine exporters
compliance with the Agency's hazardous waste export regulations.
Agency employees were to request Census data for the hazardous
waste category and the supporting SEDs which Census microfilms.
Employees could then compare this information to notifications
received and identify violators of the Agency's notification
requirement.
Census agreed to the Agency's request for a new hazardous waste
category and on January 1, 1986, Census created a new statistical
reporting number (818.8000) that exporters must use on their SEDs
when exporting hazardous waste. Census defined 818.8000 as follows:
For the purpose of this subpart, item 818.8000 covers
hazardous waste material as described in Title 40 Code of
Federal Regulations, Parts 260 and 261.
This new statistical classification was contained in a Census
publication "Schedule B-Statistical Classification of Domestic
and Foreign Commodities Exported from the United States.11 Census
officials said that this document is sent to 30,000 brokers,
exporters, and other businesses and persons that export merchandise.
Census officials provided us a summary of the 818.8000 category
for January 1, 1986 through November 30, 1986 which listed 145
countries, including several third world countries, and the
cumulative value of shipments to each country. The following are
examples of countries that are shown under this statistical
category and the exported shipments cumulative value:
-20-
-------
Cumulative Value of
Country Exported Shipments
Hong Kong . $252,999
Korea 247,415
Dominican Republic 145,218
Columbia 132,922
Venezuela 120,705
Thailand 42,521
Although these countries received shipments valued over $1,000,
our review showed OIA did not receive any notifications to these
and several other countries.
Our review of Census data arid discussions with Census officials
also showed a need to make this Census data more accurate in order
to be useful to EPA. Our review of Census data for the period
January through November 1986, showed most shipments could not be
clearly identified as hazardous waste. The SED, for example, did
not contain descriptions of the chemical makeup of the shipments.
Instead, the shipments were described in very general terms.
We discussed our review of Census data with Census officials. They
advised us that the data accumulated under number 818.8000 probably
contained exports that were not hazardous waste. Census officials
explained that this number had been previously designated for
miscellaneous exports valued at less than $10,000.
Although 30,000 exporters and brokers received a revised Census
publication designating statistical number 818.8000 for hazardous
waste exports, exporters may have continued reporting miscellaneous
exports under this category. Therefore, data listed under the
category for hazardous waste may not be hazardous waste.
For the 1987 Census publication, Census officials assigned hazard-
ous waste exports another statistical category (818.7777). However
Census' original classification error may have confused exporters c
hazardous waste because no hazardous waste exports were listed unde
this category through April 1987. Furthermore, Census officials
said they intend to discontinue collecting hazardous waste exports
under 818.7777 in FY 1988 because other countries have no provisior
for collecting information on hazardous waste exports. An OECM
official explained that Census is making their collection of infor-
mation consistent with that of other countries. Since other
countries do not collect this information, Census also decided to
discontinue collecting data on hazardous waste exports.
Compliance with the Agency's notification retirement is critical
to the success of the Agency's program to control hazardous waste
exports. Agency officials acted appropriately in reaching an
agreement with Census to collect data on hazardous waste exports.
However, Census' information has not been useful to the Agency in
determining compliance. Accordingly, the Agency developed a strati
to improve the Agency's program to ensure hazardous waste exporter;
comply with the Agency's regulations.
-21-
-------
An EnforcementStrategy Would Strengthen The Agency'sProgram
At the time of our review the Agency had not developed an enforce-
ment strategy for the hazardous waste export program. Consequently,
the actions necessary to deter violations of the hazardous waste
export regulations and to remove any economic benefit resulting
from noncompliance were more difficult to achieve. The Agency did
not have an enforcement strategy because officials from several
Agency offices, involved in the enforcement of the hazardous waste
export regulations, had not coordinated with each other to develop
a strategy.
When EPA issued its original regulations pertaining to hazardous
waste exports in February 1980, Agency officials recognized several
issues that needed to be addressed. A December 1980 memorandum
from the Deputy Assistant Administrator for Solid waste to the
Deputy Director for Policy outlined these issues. One of the issues
consisted of a need for officials from several Agency offices to
develop an enforcement strategy for the export of hazardous waste
program. '
An enforcement strategy is a cornerstone for any environmental
program because it helps to ensure that appropriate enforcement
action can be taken quickly for serious violations. The
Administrator's Overview in the Agency's 1987 Operating Guidance
stated that a primary goal for the Agency is to ensure a strong
enforcement presence in all of the Agency's programs. A strategy
that defines deterrent activities the Agency can take is important
because it provides the best protection for the environment and
reduces the resources necessary to administer the regulations by
addressing noncompliance before it occurs. To enforce the hazardous
waste export program, Agency officials needed to develop an
enforcement strategy with procedures for determining what type of
enforcement actions and penalties should be assessed against
violators for specific violations.
Our review of Agency documents and discussion with officials from
OIA, OECM, and OSWER showed little communication between these
offices to develop and implement an enforcement strategy for the
hazardous waste export program. The Agency initially promulgated
regulations for the program in 1980. Each of these offices has
responsibilities for enforcing the Agency's environmental programs.
OSWER has specific responsibilities for RCRA enforcement and OIA
has specific responsibilities over the hazardous waste export
program. OECM has responsibility for providing overall guidance to
Agency offices so they can develop strong enforcement strategies in
all of the Agency's programs. To develop an effective enforcement
strategy for the hazardous waste export program, officials from
these three offices needed to coordinate and commit their staff to
develop an enforceable international regulatory strategy.
-22-
-------
A joint effort between Agency offices requires recognition that
the program to control export of hazardous waste is important
The program was not listed among the Agency's highest priorities
and has few employees devoted to the program. For FY 1988, OLA
allocated 2.5 staff years to processing export notifications.
OSWER's FY 1988 RCRA {Resource Conservation and Recovery Act)
Implementation Plan (RIP), which each year provides the national
direction and priorities for the RCRA program, also did not mentier
the Agency's hazardous waste export program. An October 1986
memorandum from the Director of the RCRA Enforcement Division to
several Agency officials regarding an agreement with Customs to
monitor hazardous waste exports stated:
We are not able to provide any substantial support for
the export effort and noted that support.must be provided
by OECM. This is not a priority for the severely resource-
constrained RCRA program in the Agency's FY 87 RCRA
Implementation Plan or FY 88 Budget.
We also discussed OECM's budget with an OECM senior budget analyst
who explained that OECM's budget did not provide a specific resourc
allocation for the hazardous waste export program. However, we are
aware from discussions with NEIC officials that, in mid FY 1987,
NEIC began to develop a data base for the storage and retrieval of
export information including data from notifications, annual report
and hazardous waste manifests. This data base should allow NEIC tc
detect areas of noncompliance.
In addition, the EPA Administrator and the Commissioner of the U.S.
Customs Service entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) ir
February 1987. Elements of an enforcement strategy are in the MOU.
At the time of our review, Customs, EPA and state officials had
conducted spot checks of hazardous waste shipments at two ports.
These actions are appropriate and the Agency can use the MOU to
timely complete an enforcement strategy.
An effective enforcement strategy can be completed and implemented
timely if officials know that a program, although not listed as the
highest Agency priority, is still important. The Administrator in
his overview to the 1987 Agency Operating Guidance stated:
The Agency Priority List is not intended to include
everything EPA and its state and local partners must do
to fulfill various statutory and judicial requirements.
In fact, a number of these nondiscretionary activities
are not included on the list.
Although the hazardous waste export program is not listed as an
Agency priority, Congress has expressed concern over this nation's
exportation of hazardous waste to other countries. An enforcement
strategy will allow the Agency to determine what actions EPA offici
need to take to effectively control hazardous waste exports. For
example, the Agency did not emphasize comparing annual reports of
-23-
-------
hazardous waste exported with notifications to determine if
exporters failed to comply with either requirement. Providing
these documents to EPA is important for managing the program.
The annual report is a statutory requirement which provides more
specific and accurate information than the notifications. Congress
believed that the reporting requirement would assist the Agency as
an enforcement.tool and would aid Congress and the Agency in
determining whether the export right is being abused and whether
additional controls are necessary.
when notifications and annual reports are received, inconsistent
reviews were made by OIA. In some instances OIA requested addi-
tional information from the exporter to complete the notification.
However, our review of notifications and the annual reports
disclosed other instances where OIA did not request the exporter to
submit the data needed to complete the notification. For example:
'" -t
* our review of all 39 non-Canadian notifications filed in
1987 as of the date of our review showed that 9 did not
state the estimated frequency of shipments or the time
period over which the shipments were to occur. This
information could be useful in developing profiles of
exporters as part of an enforcement strategy.
* Our review cf exports to Canada showed several exporters
did not notify OIA 30 days in advance of hazardous waste
exports in accordance with EPA regulations. There were
17 notifications that OIA did not receive timely. In
only one instance did OIA notify the exporter that he was
not in compliance with the regulation. In 6 of these 17
instances, the date of the notification was after the
intended date of the first shipment. In these cases, the
Canadian government had no opportunity to give its consent
to accepting the shipment before the shipment took place.
Timely notification is necessary to provide the receiving
country adequate, time to decide if it will accept the
shipment.
We discussed the issues in this finding with officials from the
Agency's OIA, OSWER, and OECM. An August 5, 1987 memorandum from
the Assistant Adainistrator for OECM advised the Assistant
Administrator for OSWER of the need to develop an enforcement
strategy for the hazardous waste export program because exports of
hazardous waste are likely to increase. In this memorandum, the
Assistant Administrator for OECM further stated that he believed
the export control program to be important. He explained that the
issue of export of hazardous waste has received increased attentioi
in both the United States and the international community. For
example, the United states is involved in the Organization for
Economic Cooperation and Development's negotiations on an inter-
national agreement on hazardous waste exports. He further explain
that as the Agency continues its enforcement of permitting facili-
ties and land ban requirements, American exports of hazardous wast
are likely to increase.
-24-
-------
On September 8, 1987, the Assistant Administrator for OSWER advised
the Assistant Administrator for OECM that he agreed the hazardous
waste export program is important and that enforcement of the '
program needs continued attention by the Agency. He expla'ined that
the Director of the office of Waste Programs Enforcement (OWPE-)
would work with OECM to develop an enforcement strategy. We believe
his action is appropriate and he needs to ensure OWPE carries out
its commitment.
An August 14, 1987 memorandum by the Assistant Administrator for
OECM also advised the Acting Associate Administrator for OIA of his
interest in participating in the development of this nation's
position regarding international agreements on exports of hazardous
waste. He proposed steps whereby his office could make contribution;
by providing legal enforcement analyses of various international
proposals. He requested the Acting Associate Administrator's
assistance in determining how OECM could best participate and help
with this important topic.
In December 1987, NEIC's Director issued a memorandum to all
Regional Waste Management Division Directors. The memorandum
discussed NEIC's steps for developing an export enforcement program.
These actions were appropriate and addressed several of the issues
discussed in our draft report. Timely completion and implementation
of the enforcement strategy will result in better Agency control
over the hazardous waste export program.
Conclusions
OIA, OECM and OSWER have a role in the Agency's hazardous waste
export program because of their respective responsibilities in
enforcing the Agency's regulations. We found that all three
offices needed to coordinate their efforts to determine the extent
of noncompliance with the hazardous waste export regulations.
Consequently, at the tine of our audit, the Agency did not have an
enforcement strategy which would help ensure compliance and deter
violations. Also, the Agency did not resolve apparent acts of
noncompliance, did not have accurate data on the amount of
hazardous waste actually exported, and did not: have adequate
assurance that exported hazardous waste was handled properly.
Compliance with the hazardous waste export regulations is
important. The HSWA (1) is clear that land disposal is the least
desirable method of managing hazardous waste and (2) requires the
Agency to restrict land disposal of waste. This restriction,
combined with fewer facilities permitted to treat the waste, will
likely create additional pressures on companies, who do not
eliminate or recycle hazardous waste from their operations, to
export their waste to other countries.
-25-
-------
Instances of improper handling of exported hazardous waste can
create adverse environmental and health consequences in other
countries and adversely affect this nation's reputation as a
responsible trading partner. In our opinion, the Agency can take
steps to improve its control over the program to control hazardous
waste exports.
OECM officials need to determine the extent that exporters are
complying with the requirement to file an annual report on actual
waste exported. NEIC is accumulating data which will permit this
analysis. Without accurate information of the amount of waste
actually exported, neither Congress nor the Agency has reliable
information to make additional policy or regulatory decisions or to
assess the impact of previous legislation.
In addition, HSWA provides for substantial penalties for exporters
who knowingly do not comply with the regulations. The Agency needed
to develop an enforcement strategy for the hazardous waste export
program. An enforcement strategy will help the Agency determine
what level of enforcement action to take for various violations.
Officials from OIA, OSWER, and OECM needed to coordinate with each
other to develop an effective enforcement strategy.
.Draft Report Recommendations
We recommended in our draft report that the Assistant Administrators
for OECM and OSWER.
coordinate the Agency '"si efforts to contact exporters that
have not filed a notification or an annual report. The
exporters should be instructed to submit these documents to
OIA if they exported hazardous waste.
Insure an enforcement strategy for the hazardous waste
expj3rt__pragram is completed. This effort should be coordi-
nated with d$A. The enforcement strategy should provide that
employees review notifications and annual reports in a
consistent manner and that they resolve acts of apparent
noncompliance. Accordingly, the strategy should include (a)
steps for identifying exporters which are not following the
notification or annual report procedures, (b) appropriate
enforcement responses to identify cases of noncompliance, and
(c) requirements of the MQ& with Customs. Further, the
Assistant Administrators should coordinate the contact of
Regional Administrators to determine whether annual reports
or notifications have been inadvertently sent to the regions
instead of to OIA.
Reply-To— OTG-- Draft Report -
The Assistant Administrator for OECM substantially agreed with oar
draft report finding and recommendations. He stated that NEK has
developed a draft EPA enforcement strategy in cooperation with OIA
and OWPE which addresses the issues raised in our draft report, on
March 28, 1988 OCEM issued the (final) EPA enforcement strategy..
-26-
-------
The enforcement strategy refines existing procedures for (1) evalua
ting notifications of intent to export, (2) manifests accompanying
export shipments, and (3) annual reports to ensure compliance with
regulations and international agreements. Procedures are defined
for appropriate enforcement responses to instances of non-complianc
This includes requests to exporters for additional information and
inspections of facilities where appropriate.
This process will be supported by the NEIC database of export
information. Facilities that notified but did not file an annual
report will be contacted to determine if wastes were exported and
appropriate enforcement actions taken. The inspection strategy
also provides for targeted inspections of waste generators most
likely to export wastes to determine compliance with regulations.
Notices of violation, warning letters, administrative orders with
penalties, civil suits and criminal investigations are possible
enforcement responses depending upon the nature and severity of the
non-compliance.
The Assistant Administrator for OSWER also agreed with our draff"
report finding and recommendations. He stated that the recently
revised RCRA Enforcement Response Policy dated December 21, 1987,
states that violations of export requirements are Class 1 violation
The "systematic failure" or "substantial deviation" in complying
with the export requirements will cause violators to receive a
formal enforcement response. Violators will be penalized by assess
ment of an economic sanction within 90 days of violation discovery.
In addition, the Assistant Administrator res^Adad that OWPE is
involved in other activities related to the export rule which will
be carried out during this fiscal year.
* RCRA inspector training workshops which will be conducted
in all ten regions during 1988, beginning in March, will
include discussion of hazardous waste export reouirements .
* OWPE is coordinating with NEIC on the development of the
Enforcement Strategy on Hazardous Waste Exports. OWPE is
reviewing the draft strategy and will provide comments.
* The draft F¥ 1989 RIP notes the importance of reviewing
hazardous waste export documentation during generator and
transporter inspections. The draft FY 1989 RIP-also provides
for flexibility from national program commitments- to allow
for regional initiatives.
Comments
-the actions by the Assistant Administrators for OECM and OSWER,
if properly implemented, will substantially correct the
deficiencies cited in our draft report.
-27-
-------
We recommend that the Assistant Administrators for OECM and OSWER
take appropriate action to ensure their respective offices and EPA
regional offices implement the enforcement strategy. We request
each Administrator provide us the documentation to support the
completion of each action.
-28-
-------
FINDING NO. 2 - NEED TO ENSILE AN EFFECTIVE NATIONWIDE MONITORING
PROGRAM EXISTS WITH THE U.S. CUSTOMS SERVICE
EPA did not have a nationwide monitoring program to spot check
international shipments of hazardous waste because EPA has not
completed efforts to coordinate with the U.S. Customs Service
(Customs) . Consequently, hazardous waste exporters could disregard
EPA regulations with little chance of detection.
Congress intended that EPA work with Customs to establish an effec-
tive monitoring program to spot check hazardous waste exports.
Accordingly, in February 1987, EPA and Customs signed a Memorandum
of Understanding (MOU) which calls for certain actions on the part
of EPA and Customs so that an effective monitoring and spot check
program can be established.
The coordination with Customs needed improvement because hazardous
waste manifests often did not identify the port of exportation.
Also, EPA had neither completed development of exporter profiles
nor targeted ports of exit through which illegal exports of
hazardous waste were likely to occur. This would help customs
identify illegal hazardous waste shipments. In addition, the
receiving country's consent, which EPA forwards to the exporter for
attachment to the manifest, did not always contain all the data
that Customs needs to ensure the hazardous waste shipment is proper.
Congress Intended Vigorous Enforcement
Hazardous Waste Exports
To have an effective enforcement program, Congress recognized that
EPA and Customs needed to cooperate in order to enforce the regu-
lations pertaining to the export: of hazardous waste. The relevant
legislative history of Section 245 of the Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984, which added Section 3017 of the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) , states:
The requirements of this section should be vigorously
enforced using all the tools of section 3008. To accom-
plish this, the Agency should work with the U.S. customs
Service to establish an effective program to monitor and
spot check international shipments of hazardous waste to
assure compliance with the requirements of the section...
[S. Rep. No. 98-284, 98th Cong. 1st Sess. 48 (1983).]
Section 3008 of RCRA provides EPA with enforcement tools including
informal, administrative, civil, and criminal actions. Criminal
penalties can be incurred by any person who knowingly exports a
hazardous waste without the consent of the receiving country or in
nonconformance with an international agreement between the U.S. and
a receiving country. The penalty and prison terms may be doubled
for second offenses. The Agency explained in the Federal Register
containing the final regulations that it intends to prosecute
violators to the fullest extent.
-29-
-------
customs can provide valuable assistance in a program to control
hazardous waste exports. The Export Administration Act grants
Customs independent authority to stop, inspect, search, seize, and
detain suspected illegal hazardous waste exports. Exporters who
violate the Export Administration Act or Customs regulations are
also subject to enforcement actions under those authorities, in
March 1987, customs responded to EPA's final regulations by issuing
a circular to all Customs ports explaining that effective November
8, 1986, exporters of hazardous waste are required to submit to
Customs, at the point such waste leaves the country, a copy of the
uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest. Customs officials are instructed
to annotate the manifest with the date of receipt and port of export
and mail the manifest to NEIC.
To accomplish the intent of Congress, EPA and Custom* recognized
that they needed an agreement delineating their respective, areas
of responsibility. In February 1987, EPA and Customs signed a KOU
that provides guidance to coordinate their responsibilities for
enforcement of hazardous waste export requirements.
Many Manifests Do Not Identify The Qustoms fiprjj;
All customs ports have been notified of their responsibility to
forward a copy of the hazardous waste manifest to EPA* However,
EPA is unable to determine all ports where hazardous waste is
exported from because many manifests do not identify the port of
export. National Enforcement Investigations Center (NEIC)
officials advised us that through December 10, 1987, they have
received 274 manifests. There were 143 manifests that did not
show the port of exit.
In addition, not all manifests may be sent by Customs to EPA as
agreed to in the MOU, Customs officials at -.e port advised an
OECM attorney that Customs personnel are not Always removing '
manifests which are stapled to a Shippers Export Declaration.
Consequently, the manifests are not sent to NEXC. Instead, the
manifests are handled by Customs as part of the Shippers Export
Declaration which are sent to census. Custom inspectors suggested
that Customs could require exporters to hand deliver the manifests
to Customs to ensure better compliance.
EPA's revised hazardous waste export regulations explain the proce-
dures and the importance of the manifest to EPA. The regulations,
issued in August 1986, requires transporters of hazardous waste to
deliver a copy of the manifest to a customs official at the point
the waste leaves the country, customs is to periodically forward
the manifest copies to NEIC. EPA officials explained in the Federal
Register containing the revised regulations that this procedure
will assist the Agency and Customs in establishing an effective
program to monitor and spot check exports of hazardous waste. The
manifest allows EPA to:
-30-
-------
1. Monitor closely generators' compliance with the conditions in
the exporters' notification and the conditions placed on the
shipment by the receiving country.
2. Coordinate enforcement actions with foreign countries.
3. Establish trends and patterns for enforcement and program
development.
4. Provide clear evidence of an important element of proof in
enforcement actions (i.e., that an export did or did not
occur) and serves as a deterrent to illegal activities.
5. Respond promptly to hazardous waste incidents in foreign
countries.
The Assistant Attorney General for the Department of Justice's Lane
and Natural Resources Division agreed that Customs' submission of e
manifest to EPA would be beneficial. In a February 1986 memoranda
to EPA's Associate Enforcement Counsel for Criminal Enforcement am
Special litigation, he stated: .
First, it could help generators operating in good faith
to defend themselves against allegations which might
arise from events occurring beyond United States juris-
diction, froa middleman malfeasance, and from allegations
of improper disposal within the United States. Second,
in cases of statutory violations it would help provide
investigators with a hot trail, rather than stale clues
which might only come through annual reports. Thus,
investigatory resources could be applied in a more econo-
mical manner. Fresh information would not help only
investigators preparing for enforcement actions; it would
also allow remedial action to be required before potential
harm becomes actual harm to human health or the environ-
ment. Third, any action which will help us stop viola-
tions at our own borders especially when little energy
need be expended to implement a requirement will benefit
us diplomatically as a nation to avoid adverse incidents
with our closest neighbors.
Because many manifests did not identify the port of exit, we
examined EPA documents for indications of other ports where
hazardous vaste may be exported. Our limited review of FV 1986
notifications received by OIA shoved that exporters intended to
ship hazardous wastes from several U.S. ports. The following are
examples of other U.S.. Customs ports intended for use by hazardous
waste exporters in FY 1986:
-31-
-------
Company
A
Port of Export
Alexandria Bay, Massena
or Champlaign, NY
Importing Quantity and
Country Description of
B
Wilmington, NC
Philadelphia, PA
Baltimore, MD
Newark, NJ
Elizabeth, NJ
San Ysidro, CA
Canada 23 tons of Nickel
Niplex Strip
(A waste poison)
28 tons of Waste
Cadmium Cyanide
Sludge
25 tons of Nickel
Cyanide Enstrip
220 tons of Metal
Hydroxide Sludge
Holland 7 tons of Nickel
Hydroxide Battery
Plates
€ tons of Cadmium
Hydroxide Battery
Plates
2.8 tons of Cadmium
Hydroxide
357 Ibs. of Nickel
Hydroxide
England Lead Flue Dust
(Quantity unstated)
S
Port Huron, MI
Mexico Combustible Liquid
Waste Ink (Quantity
unstated)
Canada 1,000 gallons of
Waste Nitric Acid
1,600 gallons of
Waste Corrosive
Liquid
12,000 gallons
of Waste Sodium
Hydroxide.
Our discussion with the Customs official primarily responsible for
coordinating with EPA on hazardous waste exports explained that
Customs needs feedback from EPA on which ports submit manifests
-32-
-------
to EPA. This information will help Customs officials determine
how well Customs ports are adhering to the MOU requirements.
Therefore, EPA needs to periodically provide Customs a list of
ports from which manifests have been received to help Customs
evaluate their ports' adherence with this requirement.
EPA needs to provide Customs with export information. Therefore,
receipt of hazardous waste manifests are important in establishing
an effective program to monitor and spot check international ship-
ments of hazardous waste. Receipt of the manifest by Customs also
allows EPA to more quickly confirm what actually happened to the
waste in case it is disposed of illegally and creates an inter-
national incident. Also, this procedure can help generators
operating in good faith to defend themselves against untrue alle-
gations or middleman malfeasance.
The export of hazardous waste is unlike the domestic situation,
where EPA can check the treatment, storage or disposal facility.
with hazardous waste exports, EPA has no jurisdiction over the -
ultimate destination in a foreign country. Therefore, EPA needs
to. rely on exporters submitting manifests to Customs. By having
a manifest, EPA could identify the waste, the amount transported,
origination, destination, the route by which the waste left this
country, the transporter and other information essential to any
enforcement action. If an international incident involving the
exporting of hazardous waste were to occur, the manifest would
enable a quick and appropriate response by EPA.
If hazardous waste exporters or transporters do not provide
Customs a manifest, or a complete manifest, EPA is presented with
a difficult situation. An Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Monitoring (OECM) attorney involved in the hazardous waste export
program explained that (1) EPA in an attempt to find alleged wrong
doers would be forced to rely on annual reports, which nay be file
up to twelve months (or more) after the date of export, (2) the
annual reports are of limited usefulness because they, unlike the
manifests, are not timely and do not provide the actual dates of
shipments; and (3) attempting to show intentional actions by the
broker and transporter possibly more than a year after the actions
have occurred, gives violators the opportunity to "cover their
tracks."
A situation where illegal disposal of this nation's waste occurs i
another country could be the cause of considerable embarrassment.
Should a member of Congress or the Executive Branch inquire as to
the improper disposal, EPA would have to wait for the annual repor
to be filed if a manifest had not been received.
For FY 1987, notifications show hazardous waste exporters expected
to continue to use several different Customs ports to export hazaz
dous wastes. These ports are therefore more likely to submit
manifests. For example:
-33-
-------
Company Port of Export: Importing Country Description of Waste
A Charleston, NC England 38 tons of Waste
Mercury Components
13 tons of Mercury
Oxide
B New York, NY Sweden 38 tons of Waste
Water Sludge
containing Nickel
Cadmium
C Jersey City, NJ South Africa 16 tons of Spent
Chemical Catalyst
(Mercury Sludge)
0 Seattle, WA Philippines 250 tons of Spent
Batteries
j .*
E Laredo, TX Mexico 22,900 tons of
Electric Furnace
Emission Control
Dust
Although port of export is useful data to EPA, the hazardous waste
export regulations do not require the exporter's notification to
show the intended port of export. Such information would assist
EPA and customs in establishing an adequate monitoring and spot
checking program and an effective enforcement strategy. While most
notifications indicated the intended port of export, several FY
1987 notifications with significant amounts of hazardous waste did
not show a port of export. For example:
Company Importing Country Description of Waste
A Japan 10 tons of Solid Arsenic
Compound
B Netherlands 240,000 gallons of Organic
Effluent Haste Flammable
Liquid
C
Pakistan 40 metric tons of Lead Dross
D England 8,000 metric tons of
Flammable Waste, Spent
Halogenated Solvents
E Australia 300 tons of Waste Magnesium
scrap
-34-
-------
In these instances, EPA should contact the exporter regarding the
intended port of export. Providing this, information to customs
port officials could alert them that hazardous waste exporters are
intending to export hazardous waste through their ports and the
approximate dates of shipment. They could then better ensure that
a proper manifest is submitted to Customs and that the shipment is
proper.
Exporters Mav NotBe Aware Of The
Requirement To Submit A Manifest
Customs records in Laredo, TX disclosed that some exporters may not
be aware of the requirement to submit a manifest to Customs. We
identified through a review of the Census Bureau's Shippers Export
Declarations five exporters who made 16 shipments in total from
December 1986 through June 1987 of electric furnace flue dust but
did not submit a manifest to Customs and misclassified the waste as
zinc waste and sweepings (see page 19 of this report). Electric
furnace flue dust is listed by EPA as a hazardous waste.
We discussed these shipments with the forwarding agent who handled
all of the exporters' shipments. The forwarding agent confirmed
that all the exporters prepared a manifest but that the agent's
representative neglected to submit a copy of the manifest to the
railroad. The railroad in turn did not submit a manifest to Custom:
when the shipment crossed the border into Mexico. He also advised
us that he is unaware of EPA's regulation requiring the transporter
to submit a manifest to customs' officials.
We also interviewed an official of the rail carrier involved in all
of these shipments. The official explained that his office is also
unaware of the requirement that the transporter submit a hazardous
waste manifest to Customs officials at the port of export. In
addition, he stated that Customs does not ask for the manifest.
Similarly, we contacted a Customs' inspector in charge of in-bound
and outbound rail shipments at Laredo, TX. The inspector stated
that he and his inspectors have not received any hazardous waste
manifests.
we provided to NEIC officials the names of the exporters that did
not submit a manifest to Customs. Officials need to contact these
exporters and ensure they submit a manifest to customs for each
export of hazardous waste. Appropriate enforcement action should
be considered when exporters do not submit required manifests.
Procedures Needed To Identify Illegal
Hazardous Waste Shipments
EPA had not completely fulfilled its responsibilities under the
MOU. Thus, efforts to establish an effective monitoring program ot
hazardous waste; exports were hindered. EPA needs to coordinate its
efforts in order that Customs can initiate an effective monitoring
and spot check program..
-35-
-------
In the MOU, EPA agreed to:
» Develop procedures for Customs to identify hazardous wastes
and notify EPA when shipments of hazardous wastes do not
comply with Section 3017.
x Notify appropriate Customs officials when they should take
"for cause" inspections of suspect shipments.
* Promptly respond to Customs' request for assistance in
inspecting, seizing, detaining, or otherwise handling known
or suspected noncomplying shipments.
* Take the lead on investigatir." noncompliance with Section 3017
and bring enforcement actions .here appropriate.
(j '
Custom officials said that these actions will help in their efforts
to monitor and spot check hazardous waste exports. In September
1987, EPA, Customs and state of Texas personnel performed joint
inspections of hazardous waste shipments in Texas. In December,
EPA, Customs and state of Michigan personnel performed inspections
in Michigan. At the time of our audit, an NEIC official explained
that these initial spot checks provided insights into the function!]
of Customs border stations and inspection programs which will be
used in the development of additional spot checking and training
activities.
After reviewing the results of these inspections EPA officials
should contact Customs about a -: nwide spot check program. At
the time of our audit, EPA h?' ^pleted and did not have an
agenda for coapleting the above ac.^^ns. One Customs official
explained that Customs needed EPA to specifically develop:
* Profiles of exporters that are most likely to viola >. or have
previously violated EPA's hazardous waste export regulations.
* A list of ports through which most hazardous waste is leaving
or through which illegal exports are most likely to occur.
Agency officials stated that they had not acted to provide this
data because of other priorities.
Because the Agency did not provide this data, EPA's Region 6
initiated action to develop a course designed to train Customs
officials on regulations and enforcement for the import and export
of hazardous waste. Region 6 officials advised us that they
requested Headquarters officials to develop a training course for
Customs. Headquarters declined to fund this effort because of
a lack of funds. Subsequently, Region 6 officials independently
contracted with a consulting firm to develop a course designed to
train Customs officials on regulations and enforcement on the
import and export of hazardous waste. Region 6 believed this
course is important because of their concern that international
shipments of hazardous waste are likely to increase in the future.
-36-
-------
The specific objectives of this course were to familiarize Customs
employees with:
' General hazardous waste regulations.
* Related import/export hazardous waste regulations (including
international agreements).
* Inspections of transporters and profiles of potential
violators.
An associate with Region 6's consulting firm advised us that he
contacted Federal, state and local government officials to obtain
relevant information for developing a waste exporter profile. None
of the agencies the firm contacted, however, had useful informatior
to help in the development of an exporter profile. Because the
contract with Region 6 required a completed project by August 1987,
the course included little valuable information about waste exports
profiles. In August 1987, the consultant provided Region 6's
project officer a draft of the training course curriculum. The
consultant stated that the specifics on the hazardous waste import/
export regulations were covered in detail. However, the contractoi
also stated that the implementation section of the course, which is
the most practical section, is the one for which the least amount
of information was available to the consultant. The consultant
explained that there was little information available on profiles
of violators. •
In November 1987, Region 6, OECM, and NEIC officials presented the
course to customs inspectors in El Paso, TX. Customs officials
explained to us that the exporter profile information is most
important to them because the profile will enable Customs inspectoi
to identify and target specific exporters, transporters, and export
brokers who are exporting hazardous waste. . Region 6 initiated
steps to develop a course that will assist Customs to implement an
effective program to inspect and target exporters of hazardous
waste. At least one other EPA region expressed interest in
developing a course that would help Customs implement an effective
monitoring and spot check program. Because the Office of
International Activities (OIA) has significant responsibility in
EPA for controlling the hazardous waste export program, it needs
to review the course developed by Region 6 and make any necessary
changes so that the course can be given to Customs inspectors
nationwide. Because OECM and the Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response (OSWER) have responsibilities in this area, the
course should also be reviewed by these two offices.
State Department Cables Are Not Always Complete
EPA has not ensured that the receiving country's consent, which
is forwarded to the exporter, contains all relevant data that
Customs needs to ensure the hazardous waste shipment is proper.
Consequently, hazardous waste shipments that do not conform (with
-37-
-------
either the description and terms in the exporters notification or
the conditions established by the receiving country for accepting
the waste) can more easily occur without Customs detection.
Subsection (a) of Section 3017 provides that a copy of the receiving
country's written consent be attached to the manifest which accom-
panies each waste shipment. The shipment described on the manifest
must conform to the terms of the consent. EPA defined the acknow-
ledgment of consent as the cable prepared by the U.S. Embassy in
the receiving country. The cable should contain relevant informa-
tion from the exporter's notification and a description of the
terms and conditions of the receiving country for accepting the
hazardous waste. Cables are to be transmitted to EPA via the
Department of State in Washington, DC and then to the exporter for
attachment to the manifest accompanying each waste shipment.
EPA decided to use the cable, as opposed to a reproduction of the
actual communication from the receiving country, for purposes of
uniformity, and to provide an English translation to the exporter
of the terms and conditions of consent. Agency officials stated in
the Federal Register containing the final regulations that:
Where.the terms of the receiving country's consent are
understandable only by reference to the export notifi-
cation (e.g., the receiving country simply references a
notification and gives consent without reiterating the
terms described in the notification) the cable will also
include relevant portions of such notification.
Agency officials further explained that they would work closely
with the State Department to establish procedures to ensure cables
prepared by the U.S. Embassy in the receiving country include all
of the relevant information contained in the exporters original
notification, as well as an exact reiteration or translation of the
receiving country's written consent to that notification. This
would provide Customs officials with the information necessary to
check the shipment against the receiving country's consent to the
notification. Without an English translation, the exporter and
customs would have difficulty ensuring the shipment conforms with
the consent.
Our review showed cables did not contain all relevant information.
Of 23 cables received from U.S. Embassies in FY 1987 for countries
other than Canada, 20 cables only made reference to the export
notification and did not include relevant information needed by
Customs. The following are examples of significant shipments when
the cable lacked relevant information (e.g., a description and
quantity of the waste):
-38-
-------
Date of Receiving Quantity and
Notification country Description of
08/26/86 Mexico 960 tons of Emission
" . Control Dust
09/17/86 Australia 300 tons of Magnesium
Scrap
09/25/86 England 10 tons of Sludges from
Electroplating Tin on
Copper Wire
11/26/86 Mexico 4,500 tons of Flue Dust
from Electric Arc
Furnaces containing
Lead Cadmium and Zinc
12/01/86 England 4 tons of Toxic Waste
containing Mercury
We discussed this issue with OIA officials. We determined the
Agency does not have written procedures for working with the State
Department to ensure that cables prepared by U.S.. Embassies in
receiving countries include all relevant information.
Customs needs complete data from the exporters notification and the
receiving country's terms of acceptance to ensure the hazardous
waste shipment is proper. Without this data exporters may purpose-
fully or accidentally ship another type of hazardous waste or
greater quantities of the waste than agreed to by the receiving
country. Acknowledgment of consents, in the form of cables, do not
always contain the data needed by Customs to effectively monitor
hazardous waste exports. EPA needs to review all cables carefully
and establish procedures with the State Department to ensure cables
contain all relevant information provided in the exporters notifica
tions and the receiving countries' terms for accepting the wastes.
Conclusions
Congress intended that Customs and EPA work together to establish
an effective program to monitor and spot check international
shipments of hazardous waste to assure compliance with hazardous
waste export requirements. SPA and Customs have acted appropriatel
in developing an MOU that explains their respective areas of
responsibility.
Customs ports have submitted manifests to NEIC. However the mani-
fests often do not identify the port name. Agency data strongly
indicate that hazardous waste exports are shipped from several
ports across the nation. EPA needs to advise Customs personnel
that all ports may not be (1) separating manifests from Shippers
Export Declarations, (2) annotating the port name on the manifest,
-39-
-------
or (3) submitting the manifest to NEIC. EPA also needs to periodi-
cally analyze data from notifications, annual reports and manifests.
EPA could .then provide useful information to Customs which will
better ensure that all manifests for hazardous waste exports will
be submitted a't Customs ports across the country.
Receipt of these manifests is important so that EPA can better
provide a quick and thorough response to any international incident
involving the export of hazardous waste from this country.
In addition, EPA needs to establish procedures for Customs to
identify hazardous wastes and notify EPA when shipments of hazardou
wastes do not comply with Section 3017. EPA's Region 6 has indepen
dently contracted with a consultant to develop a training course
which will assist Customs in implementing an effective monitoring
and spot check program. Officials from 01A, OECM, and OSWER should
give the course to Customs inspectors nationwide.
EPA also needs to ens .re that the receiving country's consent,
which is forwarded to the exporter, contains all relevant data that
Customs needs to determine that the ('hazardous waste shipment is
proper. OIA officials should work more closely with the State
Department to make sure that cables prepared by U.S. Embassies in
receiving countries include all relevant information regarding the
export.
Draft Report Reconunendati ons
we recommended in oxir' draft report that the Acting Associate
Administrator for OXA take aoorooriate action to:
- • f •.
1. Inform all exporters of hazardous waste of the requirement
to submit a manifest to Customs for each export of hazardous
waste.
2. Request exporters to show the intended port of export on noti-
fications. OIA should follow-up with the exporter when this
information is not included in the notification.
3. Evaluate Region 6's course to train Customs inspectors. In
this evaluation, OIA should obtain comments from OECM and
OSWER officials. OIA should then initiate action with Custom
to provide the course to Customs inspectors nationwide.
4. Review cables prepared by U.S. Embassies in receiving
countries for all relevant information that will help Customs
determine that the hazardous waste shipment is proper. When
relevant information is lacking, OIA should attach the neces-
sary data and cor-act the responsible embassy, through the
State Department if necessary, to complete the information
needed by Customs. OIA should also remind the embassy of the
information requirements for subsequent cables that the
embassy may prepare.
-40-
-------
We also recommended that the Assistant Administrator for OECM take
appropriate action to ensure that SEIC:
1. Obtains copies of manifests for hazardous waste exports from
all Customs ports where hazardous waste is exported.
2. Periodically reviews and analyzes notifications, annual reports
and manifests received. This information should then be
t provided to Customs for distribution to its ports.
Agency Reply To QIC Draft Report
The Acting Associate Administrator for OIA agreed with ou-r draft
report finding and recommendations. Accordingly, he has acted to
ensure Customs has all relevant information needed to determine the
shipment is proper. In cooperation with #£IC, OIA has begun
development of an improved Acknowledgement of Consent letter which
is sent to the exporter when a receiving country agrees to accept
the shipments. This new letter will include a reference to leaving
a copy of the manifest for customs at the border. The letter will
also name the specific wastes being consented to, and note the
requirement to submit an annual report. The Acting Associate
Administrator believed this should facilitate increased compliance
with the export regulations and assist in determining cases for
enforcement action.
The Assistant Administrator for OECM also agreed with our draft
report finding and recommendations. He stated that NEIC is
developing a joint enforcement strategy with Customs to address
enforcement activities specific to customs. The activities specific
to Customs include reinforcing procedures for collecting manifests
at ports of exit, developing a vaste exporter profile, training for
Customs inspectors and explaining the existing program for spot
checking export shipments. This will involve training of Customs
inspectors and joint border inspections involving Customs, EPA and
authorized State RCRA programs. A waste exporter profile is under
development with a mid-1988 completion target and will be provided
to Customs as part of inspector training.
The Region 6 training course also is under review by NSIC as the
basis for training of Customs inspectors at the targeted ports-
This review will be coordinated with OIA and OSWER.
The Assistant Administrator for oswER substantially agreed with cut-
draft report finding and recommendations. He will incorporate : '
export program consideration into appropriate guidance, particularly
inspection manuals and inspector training programs.
Auditor
We- agree with the actions planned and started by the Agency to
implement a nationwide monitoring program with Customs. The
actions to strengthen Customs' manifest procedures will better
-41-
-------
ensure that complete manifests will be submitted to Customs and
forwarded to EPA. In addition, the actions taken and planned to
train Customs inspectors to. perform joint inspections will help
Customs identify illegal shipments and notify EPA when violations
occur. 1 Further v- OIA's development of an improved Acknowledgement
of Consent letter will also better ensure Customs has all relevant
information needed to determine that the hazardous .waste shipment
is proper.
We recommend'- the Acting Associate Administrator for OIA and the
Assistant Administrators for QECM and OSWER complete their actions.
£
We requests the Agency provide us documentation to support the
completion of each action to implement our recommendations.
-42-
-------
FINDING NO. 3 - EXPORTERS SHOULD PROVIDE A COMPLETE DESCRIPTION
OF THE MANNER IN WHICH EXPORTED HAZARDOUS WASTE
WILL BE HANDLED
EPA has not provided guidance to exporters that would help ensure
that exported hazardous waste will be properly handled by the
receiving country. Consequently, exporters do not always provide
EPA an adequate description on their export notifications of the
manner of treatment, storage or disposal in the receiving country.
For example, the description for treatment of
-------
United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) and the Senior Advisors
on Environmental Problems of the Economic Commission for Europe, is
an environmental organization that performs unique functions which
cannot be carried out by governments acting alone or bilaterally.
These organizations have pursued guidelines for international
shipments of hazardous waste. For example, in June 1986 OECD
adopted a resolution requiring certain actions on the part of its
member countries pertaining to hazardous waste exports, with
respect to the manner in which the exported hazardous waste would
be handled, OECD required member countries to require exporters to
provide certain information, including: "The information used by
the exporter to assure himself that the proposed disposal operation
can be performed in an environmentally sound manner." This informa-
tion requirement and other information requirements were important
because OECD was "Convinced that the exports of hazardous waste .
may, if not properly maintained and controlled, result in serious
risks to health and the environment." In addition, an OECD survey
concluded that "... while in many (OECD) countries hazardous
waste management is now regulated, in others there is still a legal
vacuum."
The requirement to provide a description of the manner in which
hazardous waste will be treated, stored or disposed of in the
receiving country is important because it provides the Agency some
assurance that the exporter intends to handle the exported waste in
an environmentally sound manner. However, the regulation does not
provide criteria about how much information the exporter should
include in the notification. Consequently, notifications received
by the Office of International Activities (OIA) identify the
manner, but often do not provide a description of how the exported
hazardous waste will be treated, stored or disposed. A review of
39 non-Canadian FY 1987 notifications showed that 19 did not
provide any description of the manner for handling the waste. The
following examples illustrate the lack of a description of the
manner of handling the waste by exporters in their notifications:
Notification's
Notification Receiving Quantity and Description of Treatmer
Data Country Description of Waste Storage or Disposal
West
04/10/87 Germany 250 tons of Lead Reclamation
Flue Dust
250 tons of Lead
Furnace Slag
11,000 tons of Lead
Press Coke
03/24/87 Japan 10 tons of Waste Recycling
Arsenic Compounds
-44-
-------
03/18/87 Philippines
03/17/87 England
03/03/87
South
Africa
02/24/87 Netherlands
11/10/86 Pakistan
10/27/86 Mexico
6 tons of Selenium
Metal Powder
Up to 250 tons of
used batteries that
contain (1) alkaline
electrolyte gel.
That is corrosive
and (2) levels of
mercury that exceed
the toxicity
threshold under
40 CFR 261.24
500 tons of Furnace
Brick, contaminated
with Lead Alloys
120 drums of Spent
Chemical Catalyst
containing Mercury
Sludge
150,000 gallons of
Organic Effluent
Waste Flammable
Liquid
40 metric tons of
Lead Dross
25 tons of Emission
Control Dust from
steel production
The company has indi-
cated that it will
reclaim the hazardous
waste to recover
metal, plastic and
other merchantable
materials in
conformance with the
Philippines Pollution
Board laws regulations
"... recycle the
materials for values
rather than dispose of
it as a hazardous
waste."
Recycling by Thor
Chemicals, Inc.
In the Netherlands,
recycling/land
incineration
Recycling
Test, Recycling
In the above 8 examples and the other 11 notifications, the
exporters provided no description of the recycling, incineration
or other process for handling the vasts in the receiving country.
Exporters do not provide adequate descriptions because the regu-
lation suggests that a cursory "description of the manner . . ."
(e.g., land or ocean incineration, other land disposal, ocean
dumping, recycling) is sufficient. Although, OIA employees do not
receive full descriptions from exporters, they still process the
notifications. However, without a complete description of the
manner in which the hazardous waste will be treated, stored or
disposed, the Agency has less assurance that the intended process
will be adequate and not a sham recycling or other illegal treatmei
method.
The receiving country may also object to the intended export unles:
the notification contains an adequate description of the treatment,
storage, or disposal method. For example, in April 1987 Canada
objected to a shipment of 60 tons of metal hydroxide sludge becaus-
-45-
-------
the exporter's notification did not contain an adequate description
of the manner in which this waste would be treated. Consequently,
the exporter had to provide Canada the necessary data to resolve
the objection while ensuring proper storage of the waste until it
could be shipped. In cases like this, the exporter cannot ship the
waste until the objection is resolved.
Many of the incomplete notifications pertain to hazardous waste
that exporters wanted recycled because the waste contained precious
metals. In response to the draft regulations issued in March 1986
several commentors focused on recycled waste and suggested that all
hazardous waste exported for use, reuse, reclamation or other
recycling be exempt from the export requirements. The commentors
explained that recyclers have an economic incentive to be certain
that their wastes are in fact recycled; therefore, more secure
handling of wastes intended for recycling is assured. EPA did not
agree with this rationale. EPA explained that its authority to
regulate materials for recycling under Subtitle C has been fully
discussed in other rule-makings. .In addition, hazardous waste
recycling and ancillary activities are within the statutory meanin^-
of the terns "treatment, storage and disposal.". EPA did not belie
Congress intended to exempt hazardous wastes exported for recycling
which EPA fully regulates domestically.
The Agency comments to the final regulations covering the exporta-
tion of hazardous wastes for recycling are clear evidence that
this is the type of waste about which foreign countries would also
wish to receive notice and either reject the import or monitor its
disposition. The potential for illegal recycling activity is
increased since the foreign facility is outside EPA's enforcement
jurisdiction. The requirements that EPA imposes domestically upon
each person owning or operating a facility for the treatment,
storage or disposal of hazardous waste are contained in Subtitle
C of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Each
facility must provide a description of the manner in which wastes
will be handled in order to receive an EPA permit to operate. The
permit application explains the type of information EPA requires in
order to determine that the facility can operate properly. As
provided in RCRA, the permit application requires a description of
the processes used for treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardou
waste; the design capacity of such processes, and the specific
hazardous wastes to be handled at the facility.
Conclusions
The Agency needs to determine the information needed from the
exporter to satisfy the notification requirement that the exporter
provide a description of the manner in which exported hazardous
waste will be treated, stored or disposed. The primary purpose
of a notification, which includes a description of the manner of
treatment, storage or disposal, is to provide sufficient infor-
mation so that receiving countries can make an informed decision
on whether to accept the waste and, if so, to manage it in an
environmentally sound manner.
-46-
-------
This information combined with the other information requirements
will better (1) ensure that the environment, public health, and
U.S. foreign policy interests are safeguarded and (2) assist EPA
and Congress in determining whether the right to export is being
abused. Page 13 of this report explains that EPA is aware of
evidence that certain materials that have been exported ostensibly
for recycling were actually examples of sham recycling. Requiring
information from the exporter as to ^iow it is assured that exported
hazardous waste will be treated, stored or disposed of will help
the Agency ensure the exporter has taken precautionary measures.
Any notification based on false representations is invalid and
exposes the exporter to civil and criminal enforcement actions
.pga-ft-Report Recommendations
We recommended in our?-'-raft report ~.iat the Acting Associate
Administrator for OSAr- in coordination with the Assistant
Administrators for the Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Monitoring (OECM) and the Office of solid Waste and Emergency
Response (OSWER) determine whether the hazardous waste export
regulations provide EPA sufficient authority to require that
exporters provide a complete description of the manner of treat-
ment, storage, or disposal of hazardous waste exports. If
sufficient authority does not exist, the Assistant Administrator
should determine whether the Agency should promulgate a new rule
requiring exporters to provide a complete description of the manner
of treatment, storage, or disposal of hazardous waste exports.
If EPA determines it has sufficient authority under the existing
regulation to require a complete description of the manner of
treatment, storage, or disposal, we-recommended the Acting
Associate Administrator- for OIA in coordination with the
Assistant Administrators for OECM and OSWER:
1. Determine the amount of information needed from the exporter
to satisfy the export regulation requirement that the notifi-
cation provide a description of the manner in which the
hazardous waste will be treated, stored, or disposed in the
receiving country. This would include the sane information
used by the exporter to assure that the proposed disposal
operation can be performed in an environmentally sound manner.
2. Review notifications to ensure the exporter provides a complet
description of the manner in which the hazardous waste is to
be handled. For incomplete notifications, the exporters
should be notified that the notification is incomplete and a
complete description must be provided in order to process the
notification. The exporter should be made aware that shipment
is prohibited until such information is provided.
3. Refer to National Enforcement Investigations (KEIC) officials
for their consideration all instances where the exporter
fails to provide the required information.
-47-
-------
froenev Reply To QIC Draft Report
The Acting Associate Administrator for OIA believes a careful
check is needed of EPA's legal authority to require complete
description of the manner of treatment, storage, or disposal of
hazardous waste exports. If such authority exists and a
requirement is established, EPA must develop guidelines to advise
exporters of what kind of information to look for. For an exporter
to assure himself that the waste will be treated in an environ-
mentally sound manner, an on-sight inspection of the facility may
be needed. The Assistant Administrator for OECM substantially
agreed with our draft report finding and recommendations. He
stated that the enforcement strategy provides for NEIC technical
review of notifications of intent to export. This should minimize
the incidence of inadequate information on the manner of handling
the waste in the foreign country. If -his approach does not work
appropriate revisions of the regulations will be addressed.
The Assistant Administrator for OSWER also agreed that exporters
should provide a complete description of the manner in which
exported hazardous waste will be handled. He added that EPA's role
should be to ensure the adequacy of the notification information
for the receiving country to make judgments on the manner in which
the waste will be handled.
We agrees with the Agency's comments. A determination should be
made regarding EPA's legal authority to require from exporters
a complete description of the manner of treatment, storage, or
disposal of hazardous waste exports. If such authority is
determined to exist, then the Agency should develop guidelines
to advise exporters of the information needed. NEIC's technical
review of notifications should be useful in developing these
guidelines.
We/ ^recommend the Acting Associate Administrator for 0£A in
coordination with the Assistant Administrators for oSQi and OSWER
implement our draft report recommendations. In addition, if the
proper authority exists, we recommend the Agency implement OIA's
recommendation to develop guidelines to advise exporters of what
kind of information is needed.
t the Agency provide us documentation to support the
completion of each action to implement our recommendations.
-48-
-------
FINDING NO. 4 - EPA SHOULD STRENGTHEN PROCEDURES TO KOTTPY EXPORTERS
WHEN A RECEIVING COUNTRY OBJECTS TO THE EXPORT
The Office of International Activities (OIA) records did not show
that it informed exporter* of objections made by receiving
countries to intended exports of hazardous waste. Consequently,
several exporters advised us they were not aware of objections to
their planned exports. However, they stated that they did not
export the hazardous waste to the objecting country.
Unless the Agency's records clearly show the exporter is notified
of objections to its exports, the Agency could be held accountable
if the shipment occurs and the receiving country complains that the
shipment occurred against its wishes. Further, the exporter may
complain if his shipment is stopped at the receiving country's
border and OIA is unable to show that the exporter was notified of
the objection. OIA needs to have a formal procedure that adequately
documents it has notified an exporter when the receiving country
has objected to the exporter's planned hazardous waste shipment.
The procedure should consist of a telephone call followed by a
certified letter to the exporter.
Countries importing hazardous waste can object to intended shipment:
for a variety of reasons. The waste may be a substance that is too
dangerous and cannot be processed or disposed safely within the
country. Also, the country may object if the exporter has not
complied with the country's requirements for importing hazardous
wastes. In these instances the objecting country formally notifies
OIA and not the exporter. OIA's responsibility is to quickly
notify the exporter of the receiving country's objection. The
exporter. can either resolve the objection and send the waste to
that country °* find an alternate location,- foreign or domestic.
Most objections OIA received were from Canada. From December 1986
through May 1987 Canada raised objections to 61 intended shipments
from 54 companies. In most cases Canada objected to the shipments
because the exporter pr his representative did not have a Canadian
identification number, used an improper waste code, or submitted an
incomplete notification. For example:
Company
Data of
Notification
Date of
Letter Of
Objection
10/16/86 12/18/86
B
10/27/86 12/10/86
Quantity and
Description
of Waste
130,000 gallons
of Xylene,
Acetone,
Methanol,
Toluene
10 Tons of
spent Gold
Cyanide 400
Ibs. of spent
Silver Cyanide
Basis for
Objection
Exporter not
registered wit*
Province of
Ontario
Exporter not
registered wit!
Province of
Ontario
-49-
-------
Incomplete waste
description
Awaiting
Consignee's
agreement to
accept the
waste
Facility is not
authorized by
the Province of
British Columbia
Discrepancies
between export
and importer
information
C 01/20/87 02/25/87 250,000 gallons
of Xylene,
Toluene, Phenol,
Sodium Chloride
D 02/26/87 04/21/87 400 tons of
Hydroxide
sludge
1,100 gallons
of Nickel
Sulfate
E 03/14/87 03/19/87 5 tons of spent
solvent from
cleaning and
painting parts
F 03/26/87 05/07/87 17,160 gallons
of waste water
' sludge
3,300 gallons of
caustic Alkali
3,300 gallons of
spent sulfuric
acid
3,300 gallons of
Cyanide
3,300 gallons of
Ammonia
In the above examples', OIA could not provide us documentation to
show that it contacted the exporter. In these instances we called
the exporter or his representative. They advised us that OIA had
not informed them of Canada's objection to their hazardous waste
shipments. The exporters claimed they did not ship the hazardous
waste to Canada. We visited exporters B and E and we confirmed
through a reviev of their records that they did not export the
hazardous waste but properly disposed of the waste domestically.
Unless OIA sufficiently documents that the exporter has been
informed of the objection, the Agency could be placed in an embar-
rassing situation. This could most likely occur with exports to
countries, like Canada, with whom the United States has a bilateral
agreement. In the agreement, the exporter can ship the hazardous
waste if Canada does not respond to OIA within 30 days regarding
the shipment. The bilateral agreement with Canada states:
-50-
-------
If no response is received by the designated authority of
the country of export within the 30 day period referred
to in paragraph (c) of this article, the country of import
shall be considered as having no objection to the export
of hazardous waste described in the notice and the export
may take place conditional upon the persons importing the
hazardous waste complying with all the applicable laws of
the country of import.
Therefore, in the above six examples, the exporter could have
exported the shipment when, after 30 days, the company received no
notice of an objection from Canada through OIA. in these examples,
if the export takes place, it is contrary to the wishes of the
Canadian government. If the shipment is stopped at the border by
Canadian authorities, the exporter will likely inquire of OIA as to
why the company was not notified of the Canadian objection. The
exporter must either resolve the objection or find another foreign
or domestic location to ship the hazardous wastes. In addition,
the exporter must properly store the hazardous waste until the
objection is resolved or an alternate location is found to send the
" waste.
.Although the majority of objected to shipments occur with Canada,
there were three intended exports in which other countries objected
to shipments of hazardous waste.
company
Date of
Notification
of Intent
12/29/86
Date of
Letter of
Objection
01/1S/87
B
11/10/86
01/22/87
B 11/10/86
(2nd export)
02/16/87
Quantity And
Description
of Waste
40,000 gallons
per week of
flammable,
corrosive and
poison liquids
and gas
700 metric tons
of Lead Dross
and 900 metric
tons of crushed
Batter Plates
770 metric tons
of crushed
Battery Plates
Receiving Countr
and Basis for
Ob-lection
Mexico-Cons ignee
had been denied
authority to
import waste
Taiwan-Consignee
does not have
sufficient pollv
tion protection
equipment and
procedures
Korea-government
opposed lead
imports
OIA officials advised us in cases where a country opposes or rejed
the import of specific type of waste, an OIA employee is to call
the exporter about the rejection and then send a registered letter
to the exporter confirming the rejection. This procedure, for
example, would be followed for Company B when Korea informed OIA
that it opposed lead imports.
-51-
-------
However, as with the Canadian objections, OIA could not provide
us documentation to show they contacted cither exporter A or B
regarding their intended exports of waste. Notifying the exporter
is important because Taiwan and Korea do not have a bilateral agree-
ment with the United States and the export is not allowed until the
exporter receives, through OIA, an Acknowledgment of Consent from
the receiving country. The president of Exporter B advised us that
OIA did notify him of the objections by Taiwan and Korea.
A company may try to proceed with the export if it is unfamiliar
with the regulations and believes that EPA would notify it of any
objection* In addition, an exporter may be under other pressures
which would cause it to export the waste, unless it is clearly
informed of an objection. For example, EPA informed the State
Department regarding exporter B's intended exports that "The U.S.
site where the material is located is the subject of an EPA closure
order and the exporter . . . will be rapidly near ing a deadline for
moving the material to another site for treatment."
We also asked the president of exporter B about the objections
raised against his exports. He stated that the wastes were never
exported. Instead, his company disposed of 1,206 tons of crushed
battery plates and 221 tons of lead dross at a California smelter.
The exporter has 1,000 tons of lead dross remaining at its facil-
ities until an alternative location can be found.
In instances such as the one above, OIA may need to ensure the
objected to shipments are ultimately handled by the exporter in a
proper manner. To help OIA accomplish this task, it should rely on
liaison officers that have been established in several regions to
assist OIA when needed. We contacted these liaison officers who
stated they have not: been called upon by OIA .to resolve problems
regarding hazardous waste exports. In instances such as that
described in the preceding paragraph, the regional liaison could
help confirm the final disposition of the waste.
We discussed this issue with OIA officials. They explained that in
certain cases OIA will call the. exporter regarding the objection
and follow up with a certified letter. This procedure is important
and OIA should use it for all objected to shipments. OIA should
also ensure that its records are documented to show that exporters
are contacted when the receiving country objects to a hazardous
waste shipment.
Draft Report Recommendation a
v*0 recommendeo: in our draft report that the, &r*ina Associate
Administrator for OTA:
1. Revise OIA's procedures for notifying exporters when the
receiving country objects to an intended export. OIA should
promptly telephone the exporter and ensure that the name of
-52-
-------
the person contacted is documented. In addition, OIA should
promptly send a certified letter to the exporter confirming
the objection.
2. Contact regional offices to help the Agency ensure that, in
cases where the receiving country objects to significant
shipments of hazardous waste, the exporter either resolves
the objections or properly disposes of the waste.
•Agenc KeDl To OIG Draft
'he Acting Associate Administrator for OIA agreed with our draft
report finding and recommendations. He explained that OIA has
adopted our draft report recommendation. When there is an objection
OIA will notify the exporter by telephone, and follow-up by sending
a copy of the objection to the exporter by certified mail. At the
same time, the EPA regional office where the exporter is located
will be notified of the objection.
Auditor Comments
The actions by OlA's Acting Associate Administrator, if properly
implemented, will correct the deficiencies cited in our draft
reoort.
'econunendationa
We recommend that the Acting Associate Administrator provide us a
copy of the procedures for the nev practices established as a result
of our. draft recommendations.
-53-
-------
FINDING NO. 5 - HAZARDOUS WASTE EXPORT PROGRAM NEEDS BETTER
ACCOUNTABILITY
The Office of International Activities (OIA) is not part of the
Agency's Strategic Planning and Management System (SPMS). Thus,
senior Agency officials cannot adequately monitor the hazardous
waste export program. Also, OIA's internal control reviews are
not sufficiently documented to show the extent that employees
included the hazardous waste export program in their reviews.
Consequently, the Agency is less likely to identify and quickly
resolve significant program weaknesses that need management
attention.
A strong and well managed national compliance program needs
reliable information so that senior Agency officials can judge a
program's success and identify areas needing management attention.
One of the Agency's principal means for determining the success of
Agency programs is through the SPMS. SPMS provides the Agency a
way to track progress and guide the Agency in implementing its
legislative mandates through goal setting, planning and evaluation
functions.
SPMS provides a step-by-step process or framework for the Agency
to set goals and priorities, plan actions, manage and track
performance, and identify areas for in-depth evaluation. The
principal clients of SPMS are the Administrator and Deputy
Administrator. To monitor progress on program commitments, the
Deputy Administrator meets with Assistant Administrators during
quarterly reviews and with the regions during semi-annual reviews.
Thus, all Agency managers should be involved in the development of
SPMS priorities, guidance, measures, and commitments for their
important programs.
QIA Activities Mot Measured Bv SPMS
Despite the importance of its activities, OIA is not part of SPMS.
The Acting Associate Administrator for OIA advised us that he was
aware that OIA's activities were not included in SPMS. However, he
was not aware of why OIA is not in SPMS because the previous
Associate Administrator made the decision. OIA had no documenta-
tion to show whether any of its activities had ever been considered
for inclusion in SPMS.
OIA is charged with the responsibility of developing policies and
procedures for the direction of the Agency's international programs
and activities, subject to U.S. foreign policy. In addition, OIA
negotiates arrangements or understandings relating to international
cooperation with foreign organizations, and supervises all programs
with respect to such activities which are completely within the
purview of EPA.
These international activities are important because the
Administrator has stated that the Agency must look beyond our
national boundaries. Therefore, the Agency must give attention to
-54-
-------
its work with other nations to promote sound environmental
practices worldwide. The Agency recognizes that many environ
mental problems require international cooperation.
We also discussed why OIA activities are not part of SPMS with
officials in the Agency's Office of Management Systems and
Evaluation (OMSE). OMSE is responsible for maintaining SPMS and
for conducting program evaluations upon the request of the Deputy
Administrator or senior Agency program managers. OMSE officials
explained that they were unaware of OIA's program to monitor
hazardous waste exports, one OMSE official believed that OIA
managers may have reviewed their programs and decided that their
activities could not be measured by SPMS. Thus, OIA did not
request OMSE's assistance in establishing commitments for OIA
activities.
The Agency's work with other nations to promote sound environmental
practices such as in the international movement of hazardous waste
should be tracked by SPMS. By including OIA's programs in SPMS,
the Agency can determine the success of the program to control
hazardous waste exports. The Administrator has stated that many
environmental problems require international cooperation and that
this is an important area for the Agency. The activities of OIA,
such as controlling the export of hazardous waste, should therefore
be included in SPMS.
In determining what activities should be monitored by SPMS, the
Administrator has stated that officials must define success
carefully and not rely on administrative "beans" to measure per-
formance. Accordingly, the management process of identifying goals
and objectives is as critical to the success of the program as the
actual measures and commitments that result.
OIA officials need to discuss with officials of the Agency's
Offices of (1) Management Systems and Evaluation, (2) Solid Waste
and Emergency Response, and (3) Enforcement and Compliance
Monitoring the development of SPMS priorities, measures and commit-
ments for the program to control hazardous waste exports.
Internal Control Reviews Mot Thoroughly Documented
The Federal Manager's Financial Integrity Act (FHFIA) of 1982
(31 U.S.C. 3512(b) and (c)) requires department and Agency manager:
to identify internal controls and accounting systems weaknesses
that can lead to fraud, vaste, and abuse in government operations.
FMFIA requires Federal managers to correct the weaknesses and to
report annually to the President and the Congress on their progresi
The legislation provides an important impetus to the restoration
of the public's confidence in the management of its Government.
In February 1984 the Agency issued EPA Order 1000.24 on
••Establishing, Evaluating, and Reporting on Internal Control
Systems.11 The heads of the Agency's primary offices were given
-55-
-------
responsibility to evaluate internal controls relative to their
organizations, report any material weaknesses disclosed during the
evaluation process, and take actions to correct weaknesses in
internal controls.
As part of the process to evaluate internal controls, the Associate
Administrator for OIA, like other senior officials, submits annual
reports which explain that they have evaluated their internal
controls. OIA's annual statement, dated September 30, 1986, stated
that there were no weaknesses in 1985 that needed corrective action
However, OIA identified four weaknesses in OIA's control systems in
1986 and officials took action to improve:
1. Expenditure monitoring.
2. Procedures for obtaining official passports and visas for
EPA travellers.
3. OIA's system for tracking international travel data.
4. Guidance to EPA staff on international travel.
OIA's internal control documentation does not show which specific
activities were reviewed by OIA employees, without adequate
documentation we could not determine whether OIA em£*oyees reviewed
OIA's hazardous waste exports program. Employees involved in this
program, however, advised us that they did hot include the
hazardous waste export program in any internal control review.
Instead, the internal control reviews focused upon OIA's
financial, budget, staff and administr .tive controls. However, the
Associate Administrator's assurance letter explained that their
review of internal controls included important activities such as
program management and operations.
Internal control reviews of OIA's activities should be thoroughly
documented and should include OIA's program activities such as
those pertaining to the hazardous waste program. In this way OIA
management will have better assurance that internal control weak-
nesses and weaknesses in program operations, such as those
described in this report, are quickly identified and addressed.
We discussed this issue with OIA officials who agreed with our
conclusions and explained that our report would be used to help
strengthen internal controls over the hazardous waste export
prograa.
We recommended in our draft report that the Acting Associate
Administrator for OIA take appropriate action tos
-56-
-------
include significant OIA activities in SPMS.
2. Ensure thorough documentation of internal control
These reviews should include all significant program
activities such as the hazardous waste export program.
Aoencv xecly To PIG Draft Report
The Acting Associate Administrator agreed with ottr draft report
finding and recommendations. He explained that OIA would welcome
.he opportunity to meet with Agency officials to discuss bringing
the hazardous waste export program under the Agency's Strategic
Planning and Management System (SPMS). OIA would like to explore
the use of SPMS as a step-by-step process for setting goals and
priorities, in plarthii.g actions and in managing performance. He
added that as the number of shipments of hazardous waste to other
countries increases and grows in importance, OIA is ready to
examine the options for better managing all aspects of the program.
The Acting Associate Administrator further stated that OIA has
also begun an examination of internal controls in order to better
identify ways of improving those for the hazardous waste export
program. Work has already begun in consultation with the organiza-
tion and management offices of the Agency. This will assist OIA ir
developing a comprehensive set of internal controls to improve the
accountability of the hazardous waste export program.
Auditor Comments
W*- agree with the Acting Associate Administrator's comments. _
OIA should be considered for inclusion in SPMS because it is
responsible for policies and procedures pertaining to the Agency's
international program and activities subject to U.S. foreign polic:
In addition, OIA negotiates understandings relating to internationi
cooperation with foreign organizations. Further, as the Acting
Associate Administrator stated in his response, hazardous waste
exports continue to increase.
OIA actions to examine its internal controls will also benefit the
hazardous vasts export program. The Acting Associate Administrate
should ensure that employees implement all corrective procedures
identified by the reviev.
-57-
-------
Recommendation
We racommena the Acting Associate Administrator for the OIA
take appropriate actions tor
1. Meet with officials from the Office of Policy, Planning, and
Evaluation to discuss bringing the hazardous waste export
program under SPMS.
2. Implement procedures to correct any additional weaknesses
identified by internal control reviews.
We request the Acting Associate Administrator provide us documenta
tion to support the completion of the actions planned and begun by
OIA.
-58-
-------
*
I UNITED STATES ^V«ONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY APPENDIX 1
/ WASHINGTON, D.C. J04M
MAR 8
O»l U I III I * », I »•«
»MM ,«Mr| i«\, i
Ml>M1iit>M.
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: OECM Response to Draft Report of Audit on EPA's "rogram
to Control Exports of Hazardous Waste
PROM: Thoaas L. Adaas, Jr. ^Vi . \c- \
Assistant Administrator**1^***'*-' ^' -***•" • \
TO: Ernest E. Bradley III
Assistant Inspector General for Audit
i
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the subject draft
report. Your staff is to be complimented on a thorough and
comprehensive review of the export program. Data provided by your
staff have already been very useful in supplementing information
developed by the enforcement prograa on compliance with export
regulations.
As a general comment, the national Enforcement Investigations
Center (NEIC) has developed a draft EPA enforcement strategy in
cooperation with the Office of International Activities and the
Office of Haste Programs Enforcement that addresses the enforcement
issues you raise. This strategy is currently under review at the
Headquarters level and will be completed by March 28, 1988. NEIC
is also developing a joint enforcement strategy with the U.S.
Customs Service to address enforcement activities specific to
Customs. Implementation of these two strategies will strengthen
the ongoing enforcement of export regulations in 1988 and beyond.
The EPA enforcement strategy refines existing procedures for
evaluating notifications of intent to export and manifests
accompanying expert shipments and annual reports to ensure
compliance with regulations and international agreeaents.
Procedures arc defined for appropriate enforcement responses tc
instances of non-compliance. This includes requests to exporters
for additional information and inspection* of facilities where
appropriate. This process will be supported by the NEIC database
of export information. An inspection strategy provides for
targeted inspections of waste generators most likely to export
wastes to determine compliance with regulations. Notices of
Violation, Warning Letters, Administrative Orders with penalties,
civil suits and criminal investigations ars possible enforcement
responses depending upon the nature and severity of the
non-coapliancs.
-59-
-------
The joint strategy with Customs includes reinforcement of
procedures for collection of manifests at ports of exit,
development of a waste exporter profile, training for Customs
inspectors and expansion of the existing program of spot checks of
export shipments.
We have comments on several findings and recommendations.
These are presented below in order of presentation in the report.
Finding No. 1, Page 3. This finding is specifically addressed
by the enforcement strategy drafted by the NCIC and currently under
review in Headquarters. The strategy is scheduled for completion
and implementation by March 28, 1988.
Finding No. 2, Pages 3 and 4. The draft joint enforcement
strategy under development with Customs addresses improvement of
the collection of manifests. In addition, we have provided Customs
with a list of the 10 ports of exit for which notifications of
intent to export indicate receive over 95 percent of export
shipments. A waste exporter profile is under development with a
mid-1988 completion target and will be provided to Customs as part
of inspector training. The draft enforcement strategy provides for
NEIC technical review of export documents and procedures to ensure
that all required information is included on all export related
documents.
Finding No. 3, Pages 4 and 5. The enforcement strategy
provides for NEIC technical review of notifications of intent to
export. Me believe this will minimize the incidence of inadequate
information on the Banner of handling of the wastes in the foreign
country. If this approach does not prove adequate, appropriate
revisions of the regulations will be addressed.
Finding No. 1, Page 11. Our previous comments on the status
and content of the enforcement strategy are applicable to the two
bullets and following paragraph on this page.
Page 14. Th« enforcement strategy specifically addresses the
annual report compliance requirement. The NEIC database contains
notices of intent to export for 198? and 1988. As 1987 annual
reports are received, they arc entered in the database. Facilities
that notified but did not file an annual report vill be contacted
to determine if wastes ware exported and appropriate enforcement
actions taken. Also, a report of vasts exports for 1987 will be
compiled when all annual reports have been processed. Exporters
who are detected to be in non-coapliance with annual report
requirements for earlier years will also be subject to enforcement
actions.
Page 20. We believe the enforceaent strategy under review is
fully responsive to the concerns expressed on pages 20-22.
-60-
-------
Page 24 - Recommendations 2 and 3, and discussion on page
16-19. We do not agree with your recommendations concerning
Census information. Your report points out some of the problems
inherent in use of Shipper Export Declarations (SED) as a source c:
information on exporters. Our experience in reviewing limited SEDs
collected by Customs, along with hazardous waste manifests,
indicates that there are serious problems with proper completion o
these documents and classification of wastes. It is probable that
current procedures produce little data of value in evaluating
exports. Host exports of hazardous wastes have no economic value
and thus these shippers are not required to prepare an SED.
Exports with a value of more than $1,500 are usually recyclable
materials being exported for legitimate recycling. We believe thes
types of shipments are adequately regulated.
We believe that any efforts to improve the collection of
export data through the SED process could be better spent in
improving compliance with EPA export requirements. If the Census
Bureau were to require all export shippers of hazardous waste to
file an SED regardless of value, this would in effect be a new
requirement on the regulated community which directly duplicates
the export requirement for preparation of a hazardous waste
manifest and annual report. If an exporter decides to avoid
compliance with EPA export requirements, he could just as easily
avoid compliance with the SED requirement. The SED requirement
imposes an additional set of waste classification codes much
different than the EPA and Department of Transportation codes with
inherent misclassification problems.
Finding No. 2, Page 25. We have addressed the issues
concerning this finding through both the EPA enforcement strategy
and the joint enforcement strategy with Customs. The EPA strategy
includes the technical review of manifests received by Customs.
This review will identify any incomplete manifests, and exporters
will be contacted to obtain the proper information. Upon
completion of the NEIC database and modification of administrative
procedures used by Office of International Activities (OIA) in
mid-1988, all Acknowledgements of Consent will be waste-specific.
A waste exporter prof11* is under development for completion in
mid-1988. Custom* has been provided information on port* of exit
most likely to handl* export shipment*.
Page 26 - First Paragraph. The date of issue of the Customs
circular given in the first sentence as October 1986 is incorrect
other Agency Compliance Circular No. 188 was issued by Customs in
March 1987. This was preceded by a telegram to Customs ports on
March 4, 1987.
Pages 31 and 32. The joint enforcement strategy under
development with Customs specifically addresses the issues raised
on these pages. The program of spot checking of export shipments
begun in Texas and Michigan in 1987 will be expanded in 1988 to
-61-
-------
include approximately 10 ports of exit most likely to receive
export shipments. This will involve training of Customs inspectors
and joint border inspections involving Customs, EPA and authorized
State RCRA programs. The Region VI training course is under review
by NEIC as the basis, for training of Customs inspectors at the
targeted ports. This review will be coordinated with OIA and the
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER).
Recommendations - Page 35. The EPA enforcement strategy and
the joint Customs enforcement strategy specifically provide actions
consistent with all of these recommendations.
-62-
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY APPENDIX
WASHINGTON, O.C. 204*0
MAR I 6 T-7'
OFFICE OF
SOLID WASTE AND EMEMGCNCV MESi
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: pDraft Report of Audit on EPA's Program
to Contra-* Exports of Hazardous Waste
FROM
/Assistant Administrator
TO: Ernest E. Bradley, III
Ass 1 stant•1nspector General for Audit
We have reviewed the draft audit report of EPA's program
to control exports of hazardous waste. The report resulted
in two recommendations pertaining to OSWER.
The first recommendation stated that OSWER and OECM should
coordinate their efforts to control hazardous waste exports.
Specifically, OSWER and OECM should coordinate efforts to contact
exporters that have not filed a notification or an annual report
Both offices should also request that the Bureau of Census retain
its statistical data for hazardous waste exports. The enforcement
strategy for the hazardous waste program should be completed.
Responsibilities related to the enforcement of hazardous
waste export requirements are shared, as stated in the draft
report, between the Office of International Activities (OlA),
the National Enforcement Investigations Center (NE1C), the Office
of Enforcement acd Compliance Monitoring (OECM), Regional Offices,
and the Office of Haste Programs Enforcement (OWPE). We believe
OWPE is carrying out this office's responsibilities as described
in the draft Hazardous Waste Export Enforcement Strategy, currently
undergoing Headquarters review. OWPE is responsible for incor-
porating export program consideration into appropriate guidance,
particularly inspection manuals and inspector training programs.
NE1C will provide overall coordination of the exports enforcement
program, including development of enforcement activities vich
Customs. OIA will continue their program responsibilities, with
assistance from NEIC through the Information management and
technical review activities. OWPE will assist through guidance
to the Regions concerning inspection procedures and training.
OECM will assist in enforcement responses as appropriate, and
the role of Customs will be more fully defined by the joint
enforcement strategy.
-63-
-------
-2-
With regard to the other recoamendatloo addressed to OSUER,
we are in agreement with the OIG chat EPA should povide a complete
description of the manner in which exported hazardous waste will
be handled. The draft enforcement strategy, which is an NEIC-lead
effort, addresses the issue of increasing che awareness of the
regulated community and achieving a high level of compliance.
The draft strategy describes the procedures which hazardous
waste exporters must follow In order to comply with hazardous
waste export requirements. The importance of these requirements
has been recognized in several documents recently prepared by
this office.
The revised RCRA Enforcement Response Policy, dated
December 21, 1987, provides an example of violations in the
appendix. Violations of export .requireaents are noted as being
Class I violations.. •; The "systematic failure to comply" with export
rule requirements o'r "substantial deviation" from the requirement
are noted as indicating that the handler should be designated a
high priority violator. High priority violators are the category
of violator given the highest priority for enforcement response
within the RCRA enforcement program. These violators will receive
a formal enforcement response and be penalized by assessment of an
economic sanction within 90 days of violation discovery.
The following are examples of OUPE activities related to the
export rule which will be carried out during this fiscal year:
9 RCRA Inspector Training Workshops which will be conducted
in all ten Regions during 1988, beginning in March, will include a
discussion of hazardous waste export requirements.
* the draft FY 89 RCRA Implementation Plan (RIP) notes the
importance of reviewing hazardous waste export documentation
during generator and transporter Inspections
One final comment concerns the statement made In the report
that EPA should help ensure exported hazardous waste will be
properly handled by che receiving country. The goal of EPA
overseeing U.S. export handling in the country of Import is a
laudable one, but It also presents some quite complicated issues
regarding the autonomy of other nations. This issue is currently
under debate in UNEP and OECD. All parties agree that there
should be a good description of the intended mode of hazardous
waste management. However, it should be recognized that the
U.S. legal authority to prohibit hazardous waste shipments is
problematic at best, if the Importing country approves of such
shipment.
-64-
-------
-3-
Moit shipments cited In the report were ahlpnents to developed,
not undeveloped countries. In soae cases, these countries define
the wastes in question as hazardous and In other cases they do
not define then as hazardous. Moreover, what la acceptable disposal
or recycling In one country would not be acceptable in another.
Judging the integrity of a recycling operation is often a
highly complex, technical judgaent. The U.S. should not be in a
role of making such case-by-case judgments of the integrity of
operations that are licensed or approved of in another country.
Rather our role should be to ensure the adequacy of the notification
information for the receiving country to make such judgments,
especially where other developed countries are involved.
cc: Office of International Activities
-65-
-------
t ^ffiZ ? UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY APPENDIX
WASHINGTON DC 20460
MAR 2 3 1968
MEMORANDUM
TO: Ernest E. Bradley, III
Assistant Inspector General for Audit
PROM: TTheldon Meyers
Acting Associate Administrator
SUBJECT: OIA's Response to the Inspector General's (IG)
Draft Report of Audit on SPA ' s Program to Control
Exports of Hazardous Haste
The EPA Office of International Activities (OIA) appreciates
the opportunity to comment on the draft report from the Inspector
General on the implementation of the hazardous waste export
rule. He welcome an examination of the hazardous waste export
program as a sign of the Agency's commitment to an efficient
and enforceable export program. The report should help strengthen"
the Agency's procedures for implementing the program and ensuring
that the U.S. is a responsible member of the international
community.
In general, OIA agrees with the basic thrust of the report.
while we do not take direct issue with the Report's assertion
that hazardous waste exports could be better controlled, we
believe it must be put in the proper context. Although there
is much room for improvement, we believe that the Agency is now
controlling exports of wastes better than ever before. Under
the hazardous waste export regulations mandated by the 1984
amendments to RCRA, EPA requires that exporters notify the
Agency in advance of the proposed shipments and the United
States aust secure tbt prior written consent of the receiving
country in order for tbt shipments to commence, in our view
this new requirement Is a very significant achievement. There
has only been a little over a year of implementation of the
regulation** with «ore experience and adequate resources
dedicated to its implementation the system should prove to be a
very effective mechanism for managing the transf rentier shipment
of hazardous wast*.
In response to the Report, OIA has initiated close
consultations with various sectors, both within and outside of
EPA. For example, we are working with the National Enforcement
Investigations Center (NEIC) in the development oC a long-tern
-66-
-------
-2-
enforcement strategy that will include careful tracking through
the manifest system, examination of annual reports to see if
they match the individual notifications, and development of a
data base to include all the notices and information contained
in them. The enforcement strategy also calls for increased
cooperation with the U.S. Customs Service under the EPA-Customs
MOO. Part of this cooperation will include seminars put on by
the Agency to train Customs Inspectors about the various aspects
of hazardous waste exports. In order to implement the enforcement
strategy, OIA will work closely with NEIC, especially to determine
non-compliance with the regulations and to develop an appropriate
enforcement response to the export of hazardous wastes.
OIA has also undertaken an internal review of its procedures
for implementing the hazardous waste export regulations, especiall
in processing the notifications and responses and in managing
the information contained in the notices. OIA is working closely
with the Management'and Organization Division of EPA's Office
of Administration and Resources Management and Program Evaluation
Division to develop short and long-term program objectives and
to streamline the processing of the notices and responses from
receiving countries. During the spring, we will be working
together on management and operational elements as well as on
programmatic and policy matters.
I would also mention another initiative undertaken by the
United States to bring about better international control of
the transfrentier shipment of hazardous waste. In 1986
contracting parties to the London Ocean Dumping Convention
adopted guidance on the Export of Wastes for Disposal at Sea.
The basic purpose of this action is to ensure that any wastes
exported to another country for the purpose of sea disposal are
disposed of in full conformance with all appropriate Internationa
environmental rules, primarly those set by the London Dumping
Convention. The guidance also urges parties to ensure that
wastes exported for a purpose other than sea disposal are not
ultimately disposed of at sea unless done in compliance with
the requirements of the Convention. A member of the EPA OIA
chaired the international work group that developed this guidance
EPA has lead responsibility within the U.S. for seeing that it
is implemented effectively.
In addition, with strong EPA participation, the U.S. has
been actively engaged in negotiating conventions in the OECD
and in ONEP concerning the transboundary movement of hazardous
waste. These conventions call for prior notice of proposed
exports and the written consent of the receiving country before
the shipments can commence. These conventions should improve
the international systems for the export and import of hazardous
waste and give particular protection to developing countries
through the ONEP global convention. They will serve as an
effective complement to the domestic hazardous waste export
regulations under RCRA and facilitate development of a uniform
-67-
-------
-3- • " •
system worldwide for international shipments of hazardous
waste. Both conventions are expected to be completed within
the next two years.
As to the specific recommendations in the Report, OIA is
working to determine what is feasible and what additional
resources might be needed for their implementation. In cooperation
with NSIC, OIA has begun development of an improved Acknowledge-
ment of Consent letter which is sent to the exporter when a
receiving country agrees to accept the shipments. This new
letter will include a reference to leaving a copy of the manifest
for the Customs Service at the border. It will also name the
specific wastes being consented to, and note the requirement to
submit an annual report. This should faciliate increased compliance
with the export regulations and assist in determining cases for
enforcement action.
OIA does not disagree with the recommendation that more
information is needed in the notice on how the waste will be
managed, but we believe a careful check of our legal authority
to require this information is necessary. If such authority
exists, and a requirement is established, EPA must develop
guidelines to advise exporters of what kind of information it is
looking for. It would also seem that in order for an exporter
to assure himself that the waste will be treated in an environ-
mentally sound manner, an on-sight inspection of the facility
itself would be needed.
In transmitting any objections from a receiving country
back to the exporter, OIA has adopted the practices recommended
in the Report. When there is an objection, this office first
notifies the exporter by telephone, and follows-up by sending a
copy of the objection to the exporter by certified nail. At
the same time, the EPA Regional Office where the exporter is
located is notified of the objection.
OIA believes that there is another very important element
that should be highlighted in the Inspector General's Report,
for improving implementation of the regulations. That is the
amount of resources needed to implement the recommdenations.
Many of the shortcomings identified in the Report involve the
screening of information in the notices and the review of cables
from the State Department. This is a time-consuming process,
especially during the peak time of year when the renotification
process begin*. In the past, OIA has found it difficult to
keep up with this work while undertaking other tasks such as
answering questions from the regulated community and tracking
proposed exports of hazardous waste that may cause problems in
foreign policy as well as in the environmental and health area.
-68-
-------
-4-
Concerning the IG's Finding number 5 on better accountability,
OIA would welcome the opportunity to meet with Agency officials
to discuss bringing the hazardous waste export program under
the Agency's Strategic Planning and Management System (SPMS).
OIA would like to explore the use of SPMS as a step-by-step
process for setting goals and priorities, in planning actions
and in managing performance. As the number of shipments of
hazardous waste to other countries increases and grows in
importance, OIA is ready to examine the options for better
managing all aspects of the program.
OIA has also begun an examination of internal controls in
order to better identify ways of improving those for the
hazardous waste export program. Work Has already begun in
consultation with the organization and management offices of
the Agency. This will assist OIA in developing a comprehensive
set of internal controls to improve the accountability of the
hazardous waste export program.
-69-
-------
APPENDIX 4
DISTRIBUTION
Administrator (A-ioi) ..................... 1
Deputy Administrator (A-101) .............. -. . . 1
Associate Administrator for International
Activities (A-106) ..................... 3
Assistant Administrator for Solid Waste and
Emergency Response (WH-562A) ... ..... . ....... X
Assistant Administrator for Enforcement and
Compliance Monitoring (LE-133) ............... l
Comptroller (PM-225) ..................... 1
Agency Follow-up Office, Attention Resource
Management Staff (PM-208) ............ . ..... i
Associate Administrator for Regional Operations (A-101) .... i
Director, Financial Management Division (PM-226) ....... i
Office of Public Affairs (A-107) ......... ...... 1
Office of Congressional Liaison ............... 1
Regional Administrators .................... 1C
National Enforcement Investigations Center (Denver, CO) .... ]
-70-
------- |