United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of
Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
ft EPA
DIRECTIVE NUMBER: 9471.00-Ola
TITLE: Assurance of Hazardous Waste Capacity Guidance
to State Officials
APPROVAL DATE: April 15, 1991
EFFECTIVE DATE: April 15, 1991
ORIGINATING OFFICE: Capacity Programs Branch,
Waste Management Division,
Office of Solid Waste
D
FINAL
DRAFT
STATUS:
D A - Pending OMB Approval
D B - Pending AA-OSWER Approval
REFERENCE (Other Documents):
Supplement to 9471.00-01 (formerly 9010.00) and
9471.00-02 (formerly 9010.OOa)
OSWER OSWER OSWER OSWER
DIRECTIVE DIRECTIVE DIRECTIVE
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of
Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
EPA
DIRECTIVE NUMBER: 9471.00-Ola
TITLE: Assurance of Hazardous Waste Capacity Guidance
to State Officials
APPROVAL DATE: April 15, 1991
EFFECTIVE DATE: April 15, 1991
ORIGINATING OFFICE: Capacity Programs Branch,
Waste Management Division,
Office of Solid Waste
lx I FINAL
DRAFT
STATUS:
D A - Pending OMB Approval
D B - Pending AA-OSWER Approval
REFERENCE (Other Documents):
Supplement to 9471.00-01 (formerly 9010.00) and
9471.00-02 (formerly 9010.OOa)
OSWER OSWER OSWER OSWER
DIRECTIVE DIRECTIVE DIRECTIVE
-------
3-EPA
United Mates environmental Protection Agency
Washington. DC 20460
OSWER Directive Initiation Request
1. Directive Number
9471.00-Ola
2. Originator Information
Name of Contact Person
Stephen Bergman
Mail Code
OS- '
Office
Capacity Programs
3. Title
Assurance of Hazardous Waste Capacity Guidance to State Officials
4. Summary of Directive (include brief statement of purpose)
The attached guidance document describes the submission that will constitute the
basis for the State's assurance that sufficient hazardous waste capacity
would exist to manage wastes generated in the State during the next 20 years.
It .is limited in scope, requiring only the States address status of progress
to meet capacity needs.
5. Keywords
assurance / hazardous waste / capacity / guidance / State officials^CAPS^^ f
6a. Does This Directive Supersede Previous Directive(s)? '
X No
b. Does It Supplement Previous Directive(s)?
No
Yes What directive (number, title)
Yes What directive (number, title)
9471.00-01 & 9471.00-02
7. Draft Level
X A - Signed by AA/DAA
B - Signed by Office Director
C - For Review & Comment
D - In Development
8. Document to be distributed to States by Headquarters?
X
Yes
No
This Request Meets OSWER Directives System Format Standards.
9. $gnatgp& of Lead Office Directive} Coordinator
en,~OSW Policy DirecEIves Coordinator
Date
fa
10. Name #hd Title of Approving Official
Henry Longest for Don R. Clay, AA/OSWER
Date
4/15/91
EPA Form 1315-17 (Rev. 5-87) Previous editions are obsolete.
OSWER OSWER OSWER O
VE DIRECTIVE DIRECTIVE DIRECTIVE
-------
OSWER Directive 9471.00-Ola
\
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 ,
APR I 5 1991
OFFICE Or
SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
Ms. Cynthia Bailey
Executive Director
Department of Waste Management
101 N. 14th Street
Richmond, Virginia 23219
Dear Ms. Bailey:
The attached guidance document, Assurance of Hazardous Waste
Capacity, describes the submission that will constitute the basis
for the state's assurance that sufficient hazardous waste
capacity would exist to manage wastes generated in the state
during the next 20 years. It is limited in scope, requiring only
that States address status of progress to meet capacity needs.
This submission and the accompanying transmittal letter, together
with the 1989 CAP and any amendments, revisions or supplements
submitted by the state since its original submission, will be
considered as we determine the adequacy of the state's assurance.
We would like to thank all those State representatives who
commented on our draft, as well as those who made recommendations
at various meetings we have attended over the past year. The
comments were thoughtful and informative, and we appreciate the
effort you made. We are trying to improve the capacity assurance
planning process, and we cannot do that without your assistance.
We have enclosed a summary of the many comments that we received
concerning the draft guidance, and an explanation of how each
was, or will be, addressed.
Although the intent of this letter is to transmit the 1991
guidance document to you, I would also like to use this oppor-
tunity to tell you what the Agency is doing to implement the 1939
CAP and how the Agency is preparing for the 1993 CAP.
-------
OSVJER Directive 9471.00-Ola
Capacity Assurance Planning Data Requirements
One of the areas that is most crucial to the success of the
capacity assurance program as a waste management planning tool is
the collection of accurate data. Without accurate data, planning
becomes a meaningless exercise. EPA is aware of the limitations
of former data collection efforts and is working towards elimi-
nating past problems.
The Biennial Report and Capacity Assurance staffs are
working together to ensure that States^ have the authority and
ability to collect the information that is needed to effectively
utilize this planning effort. The Agency will generally not ask
the States for any data that are not collected through the
Biennial Reporting process. In other words, the Biennial
Reporting process will be the primary data collection tool for
SARA CAP data requirements. The state, however, is free to use
its state equivalent system.
The Biennial Report staff, with assistance of workgroups
comprised of State, regional and Headquarters members, plans to
promulgate a rule which will codify what the States will report
voluntarily in the 1991 cycle. We do not anticipate making any
major revisions in the reporting process in terms of expanding
the universe of facilities who report, nor do we anticipate any
major changes in terms of the type of information collected. The
reporting process will be modified to some degree to enhance the
capacity assurance planning process; major changes will only be
proposed, however, after the Office of Solid Waste has had time
to fully evaluate them, to determine how necessary the additional
information is.
Again, thanks to all of you who commented on our draft, as
well as those of you who have added your recommendations for the
CAP process at other times. Our dedication to improving the
process is greatly enhanced by your interest and suggestions.
Sincerely,
Enclosure
• lay /
Assistant Administrator
-------
OSKER Directive 9471.00-Ola
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
INTRODUCTION 1
BACKGROUND 1
BASIS FOR ASSURANCE 1
INTERSTATE AND REGIONAL AGREEMENTS .2
1989 MILESTONES AND SUPPLEMENTAL CONDITIONS 2
1992 SUBMISSION (FORMERLY THE 1991 SUBMISSION) 3
• GOVERNOR'S TRANSMITTAL LETTER 4
• PROGRESS TO MEET CAPACITY NEEDS 5
- WASTE MINIMIZATION PROGRAM 5
- FACILITIES STATUS 5
- INTERSTATE OR REGIONAL AGREEMENT 5
• SUBMISSION OF MATERIALS TO EPA 6
STATUS OF CAPACITY ASSURANCE PLAN 6
-------
OSWER Directive 9471.00-Ola
demonstrated the state's knowledge of its hazardous waste
management system as well as its present and planned future
export and import balance. The Agency decided that an array of
20 years of data and projections was necessary, for the first
round of implementation, to show that provisions for waste
minimization, treatment or disposal had been made for all
hazardous waste the state included in its projections.
The Agency understands the concern states have with the lack
of reliability of projections that extend 20 years into the
future, and we are working with the states to determine just hov:
far in the future reliable projections can extend. For this
submission, we intend to rely on states' commitments to maintain
capacity for the latter years of the 20 year period. We do net
find it necessary to use data and projections covering a 20 year
period (1992 to 2012), as a basis for deeming a state's assurance
adequate. The status of the CAP submitted pursuant to the 1992
submission, coupled with the data included in the 1989 capacity
assurance plan which covers the period through 2009 (or 18
years), will be sufficient to judge the adequacy of the state's
basis for assurance.
IV. INTERSTATE AND REGIONAL AGREEMENTS
CERCLA 104(c)(9) requires that assurances relying upon the
availability of facilities outside the state must be in
accordance with an interstate agreement or regional agreement or
authority. All but seven states are currently participating in
regional capacity sharing agreements. Although Congress did net
specify the form these agreements would take, we believe they
contemplated that interstate agreements would demonstrate that
states were working cooperatively to plan for adequate treatment
and disposal capacity.
Several changes in regional agreement participation have
occurred since October 1989 and will likely continue to occur.
Since one of our goals is to portray a more realistic view of the
country's hazardous waste management, we urge States to continue
to pursue arrangements that they believe more accurately reflect
actual interstate waste flows.
V. 1989 MILESTONES AND SUPPLEMENTAL CONDITIONS
Although some of the state Capacity Assurance Plans
(CAPs) have been approved unconditionally, the great majority of
CAPs are those for which Regional Administrators have established
supplemental conditions, such as schedules to provide.additional
information or to obtain capacity through regional agreements or
siting. The Agency believes that approval with supplemental
conditions is a productive procedure because it allows the Agency
to keep states, who thus far have made a good faith effort to
comply with the statute, actively involved in the process.
-------
OSWER Directive 9471.00-Ola
by the Governor or his designee. Also, if the Governor has
delegated authority to provide the assurance, and the 1989
submission did not contain this information, then the 1992 CAP
submission should also include a letter signed by the Governor,
delegating authority to the signatory to provide the assurance.
However, if the 1989 CAP submission included a letter signed by
the Governor and/or a letter which delegated authority to the
signatory to provide the assurance, then a new signature by the
Governor is not required at this time; the designee's signature
will suffice.
Dear Regional Administrator:
Section 104(c)(9) of the Comprehensive Environmental Respon-
se, Compensation, and Liability Act, as amended, requires as a
condition for providing remedial actions that states assure the
availability of treatment or disposal facilities which have the
capacity to treat, destroy, or securely dispose of all hazardous
wastes that are reasonably expected to be generated within this
[State, Commonwealth, Territory] for twenty years.
In evaluating the adequacy of the materials that provide a
basis for you to evaluate this assurance, [name of state,
commonwealth, territory] wishes the Regional Administrator to
consider the following:
[name of state, commonwealth, territory]'s Capacity
Assurance Plan ("CAP") submitted [month/day], 1989.
Agreement between EPA Region [number] and [name of
state, commonwealth, territory] approving of the state's CAP,
including supplemental conditions and/or milestones.
[any amendments, revisions or supplements to the
state's CAP since its original submission referred to above --
please briefly describe each inclusion]
The following attached documents:
Status report on progress to meet capacity needs;
and
Letter signed by [name of governor], Governor cf
[name of state, commonwealth, territory] delegating authority to
the undersigned to provide this assurance, if not provided with
the 1989 submission.
The government of this [State, Commonwealth, or
Territory] hereby reaffirms its commitment to carry out the
activities described in these incorporated documents.
Sincerely yours,
4
-------
OSWER Directive 9471.00-Ola
C. Submission of Materials to EPA
All materials should be transmitted to EPA for review.
The Agency expects that the states' 1992 submission will include
one document containing two subparts: 1) a transmittal letter,
and 2) a report describing: a) the waste minimization program,
b) the status of facilities, and c) interstate/regional
agreements.
An original and four (4) copies of this document should be
sent to the appropriate regional office.
VII. STATUS OF CAPACITY ASSURANCE PLAN3
It should be clearly understood that although the 1992
submission will not be as broad in scope as the one for 1989,
failure to submit the requested information will constitute
default in the state's obligation to assure capacity under CERCLA
104(c)(9). Thus, if the state fails to submit the CAP by
February 15, 1992, the state will no longer have assured capacity
under CERCLA 104(c)(9). If no 1992 submission is madeh the 1989
CAP cannot form the basis for continuing capacity assurance.
If the status of the state's 1989 CAP is unapproved, this
submission will not change the status of such a CAP. Until the
1989 submission has been approved, a previously unapproved CAP
will retain its status of not approved.
Once the 1992 CAP has been submitted, priority for review
and determinations will be given to those states in which there
are pending Superfund remedial actions.
3 It may happen that EPA will approve a CAP, but that
subsequent information or events persuade EPA that the CAP no
longer provides adequate assurance. In that case, EPA would net
provide remedial actions until adequate assurance was provided.
------- |