United States         Policy, Planning,        230-R-92-OOf^
             Environmental Protection    And Evaluation        May 1992
             Agency           ((PM-219)
&EPA       Report To The President
             On The 90-Day Review of
             Regulations
             Overview Volume
                                         Printed on Recycled Paper

-------
         UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

                       WASHINGTON. D.C. 20460
                            MAY   51992
                                              THE ADMINISTRATOR
The Honorable George Bush
President of the United States
The White House
Washington, D.C. 20500

Dear Mr. President:

     Last January you asked us to undertake a 90-day review of
our regulations and programs to accelerate actions that can
eliminate unnecessary regulatory burdens or promote economic
growth.

     The results of our effort speak for themselves:  in this
report, which I am pleased to transmit to you today, we describe
88 actions that we have taken in the 90-day period or will take
in the near term.  These actions should save the economy $4-8
billion per year, or between 3 and 6 percent of the $130 billion
that the United States is spending this year on environmental
protection. They will also stimulate economic growth in a number
of ways.

     The 90-day period, which I have characterized as "pause and
review," afforded us the opportunity both to look back at some
existing regulations and to accelerate initiatives with an eye to
reducing economic burdens.  Your directive provided a coherent
vision that mobilized our energy and creativity.

     The actions and commitments presented in this report build
on our regulatory and institutional reform efforts of the last
several years.  From the start, we have sought to integrate our
environmental and economic concerns, to harness the market on
behalf of the environment, and to apply cost-effective methods in
meeting our regulatory responsibilities.  We have sought to
refocus our attention on the most serious risks to public health
and the environment.  We have pursued inclusionary rulemaking,
involving all the relevant parties up front as we craft a
workable, sensible regulation, rather than following the
traditional pattern that more typically entails confrontation and
costly litigation.

     In undertaking our 90-Day Review, we have taken a hard look
at the many changes taking place in the world around us that

-------
alter old assumptions and practices concerning the economy and
the environment.  We have consulted widely with the regulated
community — the parties most directly affected by environmental
regulations and policies.  And we have listened to scholars from
research centers and others who follow our work.

     In short, our actions will:

     1.   reduce unnecessary regulatory burdens on small
          communities and small businesses;

     2.   expand the use of market-based approaches;

     3.   reduce barriers to the development and use of natural
          gas and other relatively low-risk products;

     4.   reorient hazardous waste programs toward high risk
          wastes; and

     5.   spur development of new technologies and promote the
          export of U.S. environmental technologies and services.


     These actions do not represent any lessening of our
Administration's commitment to a clean environment.  The
activities we are initiating should stimulate business and trade,
and should enable us to do our job — protecting health and the
environment — in better, more cost-effective ways.

     To remain healthy, all institutions, public and private,
must constantly review their efforts to be sure they are meeting
their  stated objectives.  EPA has been and remains committed to
continuous improvement.  The seeds of some of the actions we
describe in this report were sown some time ago. Other actions
were formulated entirely during the 90-Day Review.  We will
continue to look for ways to improve our economy and our
environment.  This report is part of a long-term agenda for EPA
to assure the cost-effectiveness and credibility of environmental
protection.

     Many of our actions will require a good deal of effort in
the coming months.  We look forward to working with you to
deliver on these commitments to the American people.
                                   Respectfully,
                                   William K.

Enclosure

-------
                        TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY	1

CHAPTER ONE:   Environmental Protection and the Economy	12

               1.   EPA's Assignment From the President	12
               2.   The Costs and Benefits of Environmental
                         Regulation	14
               3.   Current and Projected Environmental
                         Expenditures	15
               4 .   Current Environmental Challenges	18
               5.   Toward More Efficient and Effective
                         Environmental Policy	19
               6 .   EPA' s 90-Day Review Process	22

CHAPTER TWO:   The 90-Day Review: Actions and Commitments	26

               1.   Overview	26

               2 .   Program Summaries	27
                    2.1. Air and Radiation	27
                    2.2. Prevention, Pesticides,
                              and Toxic Substances	30
                    2.3. Solid Waste and Emergency Response.... 32
                    2.4. Water	35

               3 .   Priority Areas	38
                    3.1. Market Incentives	38
                    3.2. Biotechnology	39
                    3.3. Natural Gas	40
                    3.4. Technology Innovation	41
                    3.5. Export Promotion	41
                    3.6. Small Communities	43
                    3.7. Small Businesses	44
                    3.8. Inclusionary Rulemaking	45
                    3.9. Resource Conservation and Recovery
                           Act (RCRA)  Reforms	45

CHAPTER THREE: Other EPA Activities That Serve the
                 Objectives of the President's Request	46

               1.   Strategic Planning and Budgeting	46
               2.   Applying Total Quality Management	48
               3 .   Permitting Reform	49
               4.   Reducing Reporting Burdens	50
               5.   Better Science in Agency Decision-Making...51
               6.   Better Economics in Agency
                      Decision-Making	52
               7 -   Voluntary Conservation and Emission
                      Reduction Programs	52

-------
REFERENCES	54

EXHIBITS	55

INDEX OF EPA ACTIONS AND COMMITMENTS	62

RULES ACTIVELY UNDER DEVELOPMENT WITH STATUTORY/JUDICIAL
  DEADLINES	87

EPA 90-DAY REGULATORY REVIEW TASK FORCE	97
APPENDIX	SEPARATE VOLUME

-------
                        EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
I.   ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AND THE ECONOMY

     On January 28,  1992, President Bush asked the heads of federal
regulatory departments and agencies to review their programs over
a 90-day  period and accelerate initiatives  that would eliminate
unnecessary  regulatory burdens or  speed  economic growth.   The
President was  concerned  that "excessive regulation  and  red tape
have imposed an enormous  burden  on our economy,"  and that "because
of the constant pressure  to develop new programs,  we are not doing
nearly enough, to review and revise existing programs"  (See Exhibits
1 and 2).

     This  report  presents  the  results  of  the  Environmental
Protection Agency's 90-Day Review effort.   It describes 88 actions
that the Agency has already taken during the 90 days or will take
in the months ahead.  These actions, summarized below, would reduce
regulatory costs by $4 - 8 billion annually (see Figure E.I).

     EPA shares the President's concerns about the economic effects
of environmental regulation.    The Agency recognizes  the  strong
links between the environment and the economy.  In the long term,
the  two  are interdependent.   A  healthy environment  supports
economic  activity,   and,   conversely,  economic  growth  provides
resources for environmental protection programs.  The challenge for
EPA is to develop policies  and regulations  that integrate economic
and environmental objectives and maximize social welfare.

     The rising cost of environmental  protection heightens the need
to meet this challenge. Americans now spend over  $130 billion per
year to protect the  environment,  and this amount is  expected to
increase  by 30  - 40%  by  the year  2000  (see  Figure E.2).   The
magnitude of these  expenditures, and  their potential effect  on
economic  growth,  make it  critical to  ensure that  we make  our
environmental investments wisely.

     To achieve this goal,  the Agency is modifying its regulatory
development, budgeting, strategic planning, and research processes
to:

•    set  risk-based  priorities  for environmental  protection and
     devote resources to the most serious environmental problems;

•    craft programs, within its administrative discretion,   that
     maximize the net social benefits to the American public;

-------
                  	Figure  E.1	

                   Annualized Cost Savings of Environmental Initiatives
                    for EPA Program Offices Under the 90-Day Review
                                                                             7.72
                                                                                       I Low Case

                                                                                       I High Case
            Air and
           Radiation
      Solid
     Waste and
    Emergency
     Response
                                           Water
                Prevention,
                Pesticides
                and Toxics
                                                                        TOTAL
  Source: EPA economic analyses and unpublished data.
                                       Figure  E.2
                Annualized Costs for Pollution Abatement and Control by Medium
200,000


180,000


160,000
     1972
                 1976
                             1980
                                         1984
                                                     1988
                                                                 1992
                                                                             1996
                                                                                        2000
   I Air & Radiation
I Water
I Solid & Hazardous  D Chemicals
 Waste
I Multi-Media
 Source: EPA, 1990a; EPA economic analyses and unpublished  data


 Note: Costs for Pesticides and Toxic Substances are included under chemical and multi-media categories.

-------
•    encourage the most efficient means of addressing environmental
     problems; and

•    promote economic growth and the international competitiveness
     of U.S. industry.

     Many   of   this  Administration's   programs   reflect  EPA's
commitment  to  these objectives.  For example, the  Clean Air Act
Amendments  of  1990, an  initiative  of President  Bush's, employs
flexible, performance-based, cost-minimizing regulatory approaches .
Most notable are the marketable permits provisions of the  acid rain
program.  In the non-regulatory arena, EPA is pursuing activities
that benefit both the economy and the environment — promoting the
export of U.S. environmental goods and services,  for example.

     President Bush's request for a  90-day review of regulations
provided  EPA with  an opportunity  to accelerate  activities that
promise to promote economic growth, and to look broadly at existing
programs  for additional  opportunities to meet environmental goals
more efficiently.  EPA identified numerous ways to reduce  the costs
of achieving the nation's environmental objectives.  In many cases,
the  activities   described  in  this   report  will   result  in
environmental improvements while helping the economy.

     All of  these  actions are fully  consistent with  the Agency's
legal  mandates and  environmental  goals.   The  Agency  faces  an
extensive list of statutory and court-ordered deadlines (see "Rules
Actively Under Development with  Statutory/Judicial Deadlines" near
the end of this document).  Meeting all legal mandates on schedule
has been and continues to be an Agency priority, and the activities
described in this report do not  in any way  hinder progress toward
that goal.

     Beyond  the  specific actions  in  this  report,  the Agency  is
continuing  an across-the-board  effort to improve  regulations and
policies.   The Agency is  strengthening in-house scientific  and
economic capabilities to ensure that regulations are based on sound
analysis and that  the costs  and benefits of regulations  are well
documented.  The Agency is also  working to shift priorities toward
high risk  problems  through  a  strategic planning and  budgeting
process, and to  evaluate the effectiveness of existing  programs
through the development  and use  of environmental  indicators.

     The 90-Day Review is particularly timely given recent changes
in the  nature of EPA's work.   Further improvements in environmental
protection  are likely to  be increasingly costly.   Efforts  to
control stormwater pollution, smog, and a variety of other problems
are increasingly targeting numerous small  sources,  such  as farms
and dry  cleaners.   The Agency  also  devotes a growing amount  of
effort  to  global  environmental  issues such as upper  atmospheric
ozone and climate change  — issues that provide new challenges yet

-------
also  present potential  business opportunities.   As  the Agency
addresses these and other emerging environmental problems, it will
be particularly important to integrate environmental and economic
objectives.
II.  SUMMARY OF EPA 90-DAY ACTIONS AND COMMITMENTS
EPA's  90-Day  Review has resulted in  88  actions and commitments.
These  reforms will  reduce  economic  burdens and promote growth in
five major ways:

•    reduce unnecessary regulatory burdens on small communities and
     small businesses;

•    expand the use of market-based approaches;

o    reduce barriers to the development and use of  natural gas and
     other relatively low risk products;

•    reorient hazardous waste programs toward high risk wastes; and

•    spur development of new environmental technologies and promote
     the export of U.S. environmental technologies and services.

Highlights of EPA activities  in each of these areas are presented
below  and  listed  in  Table  E.I.    Where  possible,  preliminary
estimates of annualized cost  savings are provided.  A complete list
of activities (including cost savings estimates where available) is
provided in the  " Index  of  EPA Actions and Commitments," near the
end of this document, and a  detailed description of each of these
actions can be found in the Appendix to this volume.


1.   Reduce Unnecessary Regulatory Burdens on Small Communities and
     Small Businesses.

     Environmental  regulation can be particularly burdensome for
small  communities and small  businesses.  These entities typically
do  not  have the   technical  and  financial  resources  of  large
municipalities  or  companies,  nor   can   they  achieve  the  same
economies of scale.  Yet the  ability of these entities to prosper
is vital to the health of our economy and the environment.  Small
business is the source of 50% of the jobs  in this country.  Nearly
90% of all the government jurisdictions EPA works with serve fewer
than 10,000 people.

-------
                 TABLE E.1: HIGHLIGHTS OF EPA 90-DAY ACTIONS AND COMMITMENTS

                Total number of actions and commitments: 88; total estimated savings: $4-8 billion per year.

1. Reduce Unnecessary Regulatory Burdens on Small Communities and Small Businesses

         Regulatory Flexibility Act:  revised internal EPA guidance to further tailor all Agency regulatory requirements to the needs
         and capacities of small businesses and communities.
         Stormwater regulation: promulgated rule which exempts small municipal dischargers of industrial stormwater and reduces
         sampling and reporting requirements.  Projected savings:  $5-10 million annually.
         TRI.  CERCLA. EPCRA release reporting: will examine ways to eliminate unnecessary reporting requirements.
         Perchloroethvlene: will propose to exempt this dry cleaning solvent and degreaser from regulation as a contributor to ozone.
         Underground storage tanks: will propose rules to expand the availability of financial responsibility compliance mechanisms
         for local governments. Projected savings: $30-70 million annually.  Will propose extending financial responsibility
         compliance deadlines to 1999.  Projected savings:  $75-150 million annually.
         Superfund liability for financial institutions:  clarified scope of liability to improve availability of capital.

2. Expand the Use of Market-Based Approaches

         Mobile - stationary source trading:  will issue guidance allowing states, cities and companies to buy older,  more polluting cars
         to reduce mobile source air emissions in  lieu of requiring more expensive controls on stationary sources of air pollutants, and
         permitting other mobile - stationary source trades.  Projected savings: $100-750 million annually.
         Marketable air quality permits:  is assisting Los Angeles-area sources of volatile organics and nitrogen oxides develop a
         market to buy and sell emission rights to reduce ozone levels.  Projected savings:  $270-430 million  annually.
         Water pollutant discharge trading: is promoting opportunities  for point and non-point sources of water pollutants in the same
         watershed to trade discharge amounts to improve water quality more cost-effectively.
         Pricing municipal waste management services: will provide information needed to consider and establish market-based
         municipal solid waste management systems.
         State  grants for Clean Air market incentives:  is providing five states grants to develop their own air quality market
         incentives.
         Privatize municipal wastewater systems:  is examining economic benefits of and regulatory barriers to privatizing wastewater
         treatment systems.

3. Reduce Barriers to Developing and Using Relatively Low Risk Products

         Natural gas:  will issue final "WEPCo" rule allowing utilities to modify existing plants without having to undergo "new
         source" review. Projected savings:  $400 million-1.1 billion annually. Will propose emission standards for natural gas
         vehicles to make them more competitive with vehicles  using other fuels.
         Biotechnology: will propose new or revised FIFRA, TSCA and  RCRA regulations to remove barriers to the development and
         safe use of biotechnology products.
         Low-risk products and pesticides:  will propose changes to TSCA Premanufacture Notification Exemptions  (PMN) and FIFRA
         requirements to accelerate production and marketing of low-risk products and pesticides.  Projected savings for PMN rule:
         $10 million annually.

4. Reorient Hazardous Waste Programs Toward Controlling High Risk Wastes

         RCRA reforms:  will implement 23 actions to meet four major objectives:  1) Target RCRA on waste posing significant risk;
         e.g.,  proposed rule to allow low risk wastes to exit from the Subtitle  C system.  Projected savings:  $60 million-1.8 billion
         annually; 2) Expedite the pace of cleanups and eliminate unnecessary costs; e.g, will propose to establish treatment standards
         for contaminated soils.- Projected savings (overlap with above): $2.4-3.2 billion annually.  Will also propose to  suspend the
         toxicity characteristic rule for non-underground storage tank petroleum-contaminated media.  Projected savings:  $75-150
         million annually,   3) Tailor management standards to the nature of the risks being managed;  4) Streamline permitting and
         encourage innovative technologies.
         Accelerate site clean-ups subject to Superfund and TSCA:  Will propose to amend PCB regulations to expedite clean-ups and
         reduce costs.  Projected savings: $500 million-1 billion annually. Testing new Superfund Accelerated Cleanup  Model at nine
         pilot sites.

5. Spur Development of New Technologies and Promote the Export of Environmental Technologies and Services

         Technology Innovation: will define new technology needs and  form partnerships with industry to meet these needs.
         Export Promotion: will work with private and governmental organizations to help U.S. environmental companies identify and
         develop new markets; e.g. established U.S. Environmental Training Institute.

-------
     In response to a growing concern about the cumulative burden
of environmental  regulations on small entities,  EPA revised, in
April,  its  internal  guidance  for  implementing  the  Regulatory
Flexibility  Act.   The  new guidance requires  Agency programs to
expand  efforts to  tailor  requirements   to  the  needs  of  small
businesses  and small  communities.   This  action  will  heighten
attention to small entities  throughout the Agency's programs.  In
addition, EPA is taking the  following near-term actions to reduce
unnecessary burdens on small communities and businesses.

     EPA  published  a Stormwater  Implementation Rule  on  April 2
     which reduces the  burden  of  previous rules in various ways,
     including  lessening  sampling  and reporting requirements and
     exempting  small municipal dischargers.
     Projected  savings: $  5  - 10 million.

     EPA   will  propose   to  eliminate   unnecessary   reporting
     requirements  in  several programs.   Specifically,  EPA will
     issue  an  advance  notice  of  proposed  rulemaking  in  early
     summer, 1992, announcing its intention to evaluate  options for
     reducing Toxic Release Inventory reporting burdens  for certain
     small releasers.   EPA will also lead an inter-Agency effort to
     streamline extensive  and potentially  overlapping  release
     reporting  requirements, many of which effect small entities,
     required under several  statutes, including the Comprehensive
     Environmental  Response,  Compensation,   and  Liability  Act
     (CERCLA  or  "Superfund")   and  the   Emergency Planning  and
     Community  Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA).

     EPA will propose, in June,  to  exempt perchloroethylene, a dry
     cleaning  solvent and degreaser,  from regulation as an ozone
     precursor.  Promulgation of this proposal would allow states
     to exempt such sources from current ozone state implementation
     plan rules.

     EPA  will  reduce  burdens for  underground  storage  tank (UST)
     owners  in  two ways.

          EPA will issue regulations in July  to provide additional
          financial responsibility compliance mechanisms for local
          governments.
          Projected savings  $ 30 - 70 million.

          EPA   will  propose in  November  to  extend  financial
          responsibility  compliance deadlines  to 1999.
          Projected savings  $ 75 - 150 million.

     EPA published, on April 29, regulations clarifying the scope
     of  the exemption  from cleanup  liability under  CERCLA for
     financial  institutions  that  hold  security  interests  in
     property  contaminated with hazardous waste.   As  a result,
     small businesses  in particular will have greater access to

-------
     funding  for  improvements and modernization  —  capital that
     otherwise  would  have been  restricted  by  lenders due  to
     Superfund liability concerns.


2.  Expand the Use of Market-Based Approaches

     Market incentives were a special focus  of the Review.  In his
memorandum   initiating  the   90-Day   Review,   President   Bush
specifically  stated:    "Regulations should  incorporate  market
mechanisms .to the maximum extent possible."  Market mechanisms can
often provide the most efficient means of achieving environmental
goals.

     Over the last several  years, the Agency has placed increasing
emphasis on the use  of market mechanisms.   The  90-Day Review has
provided a  further impetus to this  effort.   As a result  of the
Review,  EPA  is  implementing  several  market-based programs  and
committing to pilot or study additional programs.  Most important:

     EPA released an information document in March giving states,
     cities  and  companies  the option  of  scrapping  old,  high-
     polluting  automobiles  in place  of  more costly  measures  to
     satisfy certain emission-reduction requirements.   The Agency
     is  currently developing  guidance  for  additional   mobile  -
     stationary source trading actions.
     Projected savings (for all programs): $ 100 - 750 million.

     EPA is helping the South Coast Air Quality Management District
     in Southern California to develop and implement  a marketable
     permits program  for volatile  organic  compounds  and nitrogen
     oxides as a cost-effective approach to attainment  of  the ozone
     standard.
     Projected savings: $ 270 - 430 million.

     EPA has  analyzed the  potential use  of  point —  non-point
     source water pollution trading and, starting with a national
     meeting on April 27-28, will promote cost-effective watershed
     management through this approach.

     EPA  will  develop a  draft  full-cost accounting   guide  to
     municipal  solid  waste  pricing this  spring  and  begin  a
     demonstration project to  investigate the effect  of price on
     waste generation.

     EPA will  fund five  grants to states,  totaling  $610,000,  to
     help them develop their own economic incentives programs under
     the Clean Air Act.

     EPA  will  determine  how the   economy  can benefit  from
     privatization of municipal wastewater systems and will promote
     privatization efforts where appropriate.

-------
3.  Reduce Barriers  to  the Development and Use of Relatively Low
Risk Products

     Some products are less harmful to the  environment than others
that are used  for  the same purpose.   For example, natural gas is
considered a relatively clean  fuel because it generates less air
pollution than other fossil fuels per unit  of  energy produced.
Regulations can provide barriers to the production and use of such
products,  particularly  when   regulations   governing  existing
commodities and  pollution sources are  less  stringent  than those
addressing new products and facilities.  The activities described
below seek to  remove regulatory biases against emerging low risk
products and processes,  or to tilt the regulatory playing field in
their favor.

     EPA  is  taking  steps  to   further  the use  of  natural  gas,
     including:

          EPA  will shortly issue a final rule (the  "WEPCo" rule)
          allowing electric utilities to make certain changes at
          existing power plants without having to undergo expensive
          and time-consuming "new source" review.  This will reduce
          impediments to  the expanded use  of natural gas.
          Projected  savings: $  400 million - 1.1 billion.

          EPA  will propose emissions standards  for natural gas
          vehicles by June that will  allow them to compete on an
          equal basis with other vehicles.

     EPA is removing barriers  to the  development and safe use of
     biotechnology products, since these substances  can pose less
     risk to the environment and may  be more effective than their
     alternatives  such  as conventional chemicals.   Specifically,
     EPA  will  reduce its requirements  for  microbial  pesticides
     under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide,  and Rodenticide Act
     (FIFRA), encourage the development of microorganisms for uses
     under the Toxic Substances Control  Act  (TSCA),  and reduce
     barriers  under  the  Resource Conservation  and  Recovery Act
     (RCRA) and TSCA to the use of bioremediation  technologies.

     EPA is streamlining the review process for certain pesticides
     and toxic substances that, based on  experience with similar
     substances, may pose lower risks.  Specifically:

          EPA  will issue  a notice of  proposed rulemaking in July
          1992 to  amend the Premanufacture Notification Exemption
          Rules under TSCA,  to reduce costs for manufacturers of
          low  risk   substances,  and  to  speed  marketing  and
          production of such substances.
          Projected  savings: $  10 million.


                                 8

-------
          EPA will  publish in May  1992 a notice  in the Federal
          Register  requesting  public  input  on  a  project  to
          encourage the development and use of pesticide products
          that present reduced risks compared to those they would
          replace.


4.  Reorient Hazardous Waste Programs Toward High Risk Wastes

     The Agency is proposing significant reforms to its hazardous
waste management and site cleanup programs.  Proposed revisions to
RCRA, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act (CERCLA —  commonly referred  to as Superfund), and
TSCA will better target regulations toward high risk activities and
facilitate cleanups at abandoned and active waste sites.

     Most of the reforms address  Subtitle  C of RCRA, which governs
the  management  and  disposal of  hazardous  waste.   The  current
program was  developed  under tight  time frames and was  based on
limited technical information.  The proposed reforms reflect a wide
consensus  about the  need  for  program  refinements.  Through  23
separate  actions,  the   Agency   seeks   to  accomplish  four  main
objectives:

     First, refocus the RCRA regulatory system on high risk waste
     activities.  As part of this effort, EPA will  soon  issue a
     notice of proposed rulemaking under the RCRA hazardous waste
     program to allow low risk wastes to exit from the Subtitle C
     system.
     Projected savings:  $ 60 million - 1.8 billion.

     Second, expedite the pace of cleanups at RCRA facilities and
     eliminate  unnecessary  costs.     This  initiative  includes
     promulgating a  final rule  defining two  new unit types  to
     facilitate cleanups.  Most notably, EPA will propose in Fall,
     1992, to modify treatment standards for contaminated soils in
     order to establish a health-based system that will encourage
     more innovative and cost-effective  treatment technologies.
     Projected savings:  $ 2.4 - 3.2  billion.1

     Third, tailor RCRA management  standards  to  better  fit risks
     posed by waste management activities.  Reforms  in  this area
     would also  be extended to research and development operations.
     Specific reforms would reduce technical barriers  to the use of
     innovative technology at RCRA sites.

     Fourth,  streamline  the  RCRA  permit system  to  facilitate
      The  cost savings associated  with this action  overlap with
those for  the previous action   — the  two are not necessarily
additive.

-------
     cleanups and the  post-closure  permit  process.   Reforms will
     explore ways  to grant greater  flexibility in administering
     permits.

     In addition to these reforms, EPA is proposing other changes
under Superfund  and  TSCA,  as well as RCRA,  to  speed cleanups of
contaminated sites.  Most important:

     EPA is  piloting the Superfund Accelerated  Cleanup Model to
     speed  actions  to  reduce immediate risks  at  both National
     Priority  List  (NPL)  and  non-NPL   sites.    The Agency  has
     recently initiated  nine pilot projects and  will  soon begin
     others.

     Under TSCA, EPA will propose to amend the PCS disposal rules
     to provide increased flexibility in  managing  cleanups of PCB-
     contaminated sites.  This would expedite cleanup activity and
     reduce costs.
     Projected savings: $ 500 million -  1 billion.

     Under RCRA, EPA will issue a  notice  of proposed rulemaking in
     June 1992 to suspend the Toxicity Characteristic Rule for non-
     UST  petroleum-contaminated  soils.  This   action  will  make
     cleanups easier to accomplish.
     Projected savings: $ 75 - 150 million.


5.  Spur Development of New Environmental Technologies and Promote
the Export of U.S.  Environmental Technologies and Services

     EPA is aiding  economic growth in two additional ways.  First,
EPA  is  promoting  the  development  of   innovative  environmental
technologies to  reduce the cost  of  complying with environmental
regulations.  EPA is  establishing an in-house council to define new
technology  needs,  form partnerships with industry  to  meet these
needs, and recognize outstanding innovations.

     Second, in  a  complementary effort,  the Agency is assisting
U.S.  companies   in  capturing  growing  international markets  for
environmental  technologies  and  services.    The potential  for
expanding exports in this  area is tremendous.   The global market
for environmental goods and services is estimated at $200 billion
per year, and is expected to  be growing at an annual rate of 5.5%.

     EPA will launch efforts  to expand overseas markets for U.S.
environmental  goods  and  services  by  "building  capacity"   in
developing countries and capitalizing on EPA's strong international
reputation to help  U.S.  companies  enter into new markets.    EPA is
organizing efforts to  promote U.S.  exports  in collaboration with
the  private  sector  and  other   agencies,   through:   the  U.S.
Environmental   Training   Institute;   the   Asian  Environmental
Partnership;  the  development of   an   environment  and  energy

                                10

-------
technology clearinghouse;  new technical information packages for
developing countries; and other outreach efforts.


III.  NEXT STEPS

      To remain healthy, all institutions  — public and private —
must  constantly review  their efforts  to  determine if  they are
meeting their objectives and to make further improvements.  EPA is
committed to  continuous improvement.   The 90-Day Review  was an
occasion for an intensified effort to increase  the effectiveness of
our environmental programs and find ways to achieve our goals more
efficiently.

     The ideas developed during this review came from the public as
well as staff  and managers  throughout the Agency.   The proposals
are in many cases the result  of  extensive efforts  to  involve all
interested parties  in  the  policy development  process.    EPA is
committed   to  sponsoring   open  and   informed  dialogues   on
environmental  issues, both through formal comment  processes and
other processes.

     In response to an Agency  Federal Register notice concerning
the 90-Day Review, EPA  received  over  700  comments  from about 220
organizations  or individuals  within the comment period.    These
comments, summarized in  the Appendix to this report, contained many
good  suggestions  from  the public regarding  possible areas  of
improvement.   Because  of  the short  time available,   the  Agency
developed specific actions and commitments in the limited number of
areas discussed above.

     As the Agency identifies additional targets for its continuous
improvement reviews, it  is important  to have  the insights  of the
public  regarding  situations  where the burdens imposed  by  our
policies are greater than  necessary  to  achieve the environmental
objective. Sometimes relatively small changes  in EPA's policies or
operating procedures  can have a very  positive benefit for  the
regulated community  or  the economy as  a  whole, while having no
significant adverse  impact on the environment.   The Agency is
continuing to  search for such opportunities,  and remains  open to
further suggestions.
                               11

-------
                            CHAPTER 1

             ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AND THE ECONOMY


1.  EPA's Assignment from the President

     On January 28,  1992, President Bush asked the heads of federal
regulatory departments and agencies  to review existing programs as
well as those under  development over a 90-day period and accelerate
initiatives that would eliminate unnecessary regulatory burdens or
speed economic growth.  The President was concerned that "excessive
regulation and red  tape have  imposed an enormous burden  on our
economy," and that "because of the constant pressure to develop new
programs, we are not  doing nearly  enough  to review  and  revise
existing programs"  (see Exhibits 1 and 2).

     This  report   presents  the  results  of  the  Environmental
Protection  Agency's   90-Day   Review  of  existing  and  pending
activities.   It describes 88  actions that  the  Agency  has taken
during the 90 days, or is planning to  take in the months  ahead.
These  actions,  summarized in Chapter  2,  would reduce regulatory
costs by $4 -  8 billion annually.

     EPA  shares  the  President's concerns   about  the effect  of
environmental regulation on economic growth.  EPA recognizes that,
over the long term, environmental protection and economic growth
are  interdependent.    Economic growth  provides  the  resources
necessary  for environmental protection.    Conversely,  a healthy
environment  supports  economic  activity.  For an example of what
happens  when  the  environment  is  overlooked  in the pursuit  of
economic growth, one has only to look at  Eastern Europe.

     Yet environmental and economic objectives can compete.  The
actions required by regulations consume investment capital, time,
and other resources.   In two  independent studies  (both funded in
part  by  EPA),  researchers  found   that the costs  imposed  by
environmental  regulation  have  a noticeable negative effect  on
economic growth, as  traditionally defined. (Hazilla and Kopp, 1990;
Jorgenson and  Wilcoxen, 1990).

     Under  what  conditions   are   the  costs  of  environmental
regulation justified? Properly structured environmental regulation
improves economic efficiency.   As  discussed below, environmental
regulations have been found to  save the national economy billions
of dollars a year by decreasing health care costs, increasing human
and agricultural productivity,  and decreasing capital maintenance
and  replacement  costs.    The   challenge  for  EPA is to develop
policies and regulations that integrate economic  and environmental
objectives to maximize  social  welfare and improve the quality of
life.
                                12

-------
     EPA must meet this challenge in a way that  is consistent with
its legal mandates.   Improving economic efficiency — maximizing
the difference between benefits and costs —  is  only one objective
of  environmental  policies.   Other values,  including  equity and
citizens' rights, are often weighed in the political process.  The
resulting laws determine in part how EPA may set regulatory goals
and choose regulatory approaches.

      The laws are diverse  in this regard.  Some, such as the Toxic
Substances Control Act, direct  EPA to balance  the  benefits and
costs of  its actions.  Others direct the Agency to  protect the
public health without regard to cost.  For example, under the Clean
Air Act, EPA must set  standards  for ambient  air pollutants which
protect the  public health  with  "an ample margin of  safety."  In
addition, the statutes  EPA  implements are often very specific about
the regulatory approach the Agency should use  in achieving these
goals.  The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, for example, mandate
a market-based approach to controlling sulfur  dioxide emissions,
and a technology-based approach to controlling air toxics.

     While varied in the  factors  they allow EPA to  consider in
implementing  the  law,  the  dozen  major federal  statutes  EPA
administers all call for strong protection of human health and the
environment — a call that  is  supported by the American people.  A
poll conducted in December, 1991, by the Roper Organization found
that a majority  (55%)  agreed  with  the statement that "protecting
the environment  is so important that  requirements and standards
cannot  be too  high,  and   continuing  improvement must  be  made
regardless of cost."   Significantly,  only 44% agreed with the same
statement in 1980 (Roper,   1992).   Other  studies report  similar
findings.  While  these  studies do  not purport  to measure  the way
citizens would balance explicit environmental  - economic tradeoffs,
they do indicate a substantial and  growing  commitment to investing
in environmental improvements.

     President Bush's request  for  a  90-day review of  regulations
has provided  EPA with  an occasion  to examine the manner  in which
its policies  and regulations affect the balance between the economy
and the environment  and to make  needed improvements.   All of the
actions EPA  is taking  or committing to take  are fully consistent
with the  Agency's legal mandates  and environmental  goals.   The
Agency is facing an extensive list of statutory and  court-ordered
deadlines    (see   "Rules   Actively   Under    Development   with
Statutory/Judicial  Deadlines" near  the  end  of  this  volume).
Meeting  all   of  our  legal mandates  on  schedule has  been  and
continues to  be an Agency priority,  and the activities described in
this report do not in any way hinder progress toward  that goal.

     The remainder  of  this chapter  provides background  for  the
review effort.-   Section 2 discusses  the  costs and benefits  of
environmental regulations;   Section 3 reviews  current and projected
environmental  expenditures;   Section  4  describes  the  special

                               13

-------
challenges EPA faces in directing future expenditures, and Section
5 explains  the  types  of changes  EPA is  making to  improve the
effectiveness  and efficiency  of its  policies,  and  reviews the
rationale for these changes.   Finally,  Section  6 describes how EPA
conducted the 90-Day Review.

2.  The Costs and Benefits of Environmental Regulation

     As Professor Thomas Schelling has  observed,  "Policy judgments
are easier to come by,  the farther we are from our goals.  If there
are only  two  directions and ,we know which way is  forward ...  no
fine discrimination  is  needed"  (Schelling,  1984).  In the 1970's,
EPA found itself in such a situation.  There was less concern about
the economic implications of environmental decisions, since there
was a  strong  consensus that the nation's air  and  water were too
polluted.  The major cleanup efforts, funded largely by the private
sector, have produced substantial social benefits to our society.

     A  1982 Resources  for  the  Future  (RFF)  study  reviews and
synthesizes  a  series  of air  pollution studies  to  derive  some
general estimates of the benefits  of  EPA's early water  and air
pollution regulations (Freeman, 1982).  Clearly such exercises are
difficult to conduct.  Further, it is impossible to  account for all
the benefits society enjoys.  Nonetheless,  for air pollution, RFF
found  that  the overall annual benefits  from regulations  between
1970 and  1980 ranged from $8.9 to 93.1 billion with a most likely
estimate of $39.5 billion.   EPA (1990)  estimated costs during that
period  to be  roughly  $15.8  billion per  year.    The difference
between benefits and costs yields a  net benefit in  1978 dollars of
about  $24 billion  per year.    Later  studies  corroborated  this
conclusion.  Further, as the United States'  population  and national
income grow, the benefit estimates increase  accordingly while costs
do not.  Therefore,  the net benefits of EPA's  air pollution program
prior to  1990 appear to be very large.

     The same RFF study quantified the benefits  from implementation
of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 and
1977.   It found that the benefits  resulting  in 1985  ranged from
$6.9 to $33.5 billion per year.  EPA estimates the costs of these
amendments  in  1985  were  roughly  $38  billion.    Based on  this
analysis, it  appears  that  benefits  fell  short  of costs.  A  joint
study  by  staff of  the Council of  Environmental Quality  and the
Office  of Management  and  Budget (Farrow  and Lyon,  1992)  found
     2A recent study  (Portney, 1990) questioned the net benefits of
the  1990 Clean  Air  Act  Amendments.    Data limitations  and the
prospective nature of this study, however, prevent EPA from drawing
definitive  conclusions  from the  analysis.    EPA  is  currently
conducting both  a  retrospective and prospective cost and benefit
study  of the Clean  Air Act,  pursuant  to Section  812 of the
Amendments.

                                14

-------
similar results.

     These  studies,  while  instructive,  have  limitations.    In
particular, it  is  often  difficult  to predict with much precision
the  human health  and environmental benefits  of  regulations.
Further, when these effects  can be estimated, it may not be easy to
place  a dollar  value on them.   This  is particularly  true  for
certain  programs,  such  as  groundwater  protection,  that do  not
always directly benefit human health or ecological resources.

     Nevertheless,  these aggregate  assessments of  benefits  and
costs  demonstrate  that regulations must  be  carefully  crafted if
benefits are to outweigh  costs.  This is  especially critical as  the
nation   spends   an  increasing  portion  of   its  resources  on
environmental protection.

3.   Current and Projected Environmental Expenditures3

     The improvements  in environmental  quality over the  past 20
years have been possible  because  the citizens of this country have
made a  significant  commitment to protecting the environment. The
United States now  spends  over $130  billion  per year on pollution
control.  This amount is  up  about 30% since 1987 and has increased
roughly four fold in the past 20 years.   Total spending is expected
to grow by another 30 -  40% by  the year 2000, depending on how
various laws are implemented (see Table 1) .  As  a percentage of the
Gross National Product these costs range from 1.9%  in  1987, to 2.1%
in 1992 to 2.6%  or  more  in  2000. For 1987 this was approximately
one quarter of what the nation spent on national defense and also
about a quarter of what the nation spent on medical care.

                             Table 1
               U.S. Pollution Control Expenditures

Total annualized costs   1972    1987   1992    2000*
Billions of est. 1990 $    30     98    130   160-190
Percent of GNP            0.9    1.9    2.1   2.6-2.8

* The  range  reflects uncertainty about the timing and  nature of
future regulatory requirements.
Source: EPA, 1990a; EPA, unpublished data.


     While the  level  of spending on environmental  protection is
changing,  so  is the  allocation of  expenditures.  Over the  next
decade, there is expected to be a reallocation of the percentage of
       All  cost  estimates  are  in  1990 dollars

                               15

-------
pollution  control  expenditures  from  air  and  particularly water
pollution  control  to  land  pollution   (principally hazardous  and
solid  waste)  control  (see Table  2).  This is  a result  of the major
land pollution  control legislation first passed by Congress in the
mid-1970's and  greatly expanded  in  the  1980's.

                            Table 2
       Pollution Control  Expenditures by Environmental Media
Environmental  Medium
Air  and radiation costs
Water costs
Land costs
Chemical control costs
Multimedia costs

Source: EPA,  1990a
                       1987
                       28.9%
                       42.9
                       26.0
                        1.2
                        1.1

                      100.0%
                     100.0%
Figure 1 combines Tables 1  and 2,  showing total annual!zed costs
for  pollution abatement and  control  for 1972-2000, broken out  by
environmental medium.
                                 Figure  1
       200,000
       180,000
           1972
                  Annualized Costs for Pollution Abatement and Control by Medium
                  1976
                          1980
                                  1984
                                          1988
                                                 1992
                                                         1996
                                                                 2000
         I Air & Radiation
I Water
I Solid & Hazardous D Chemicals
 Waste
I Multi-Media
        Source: EPA, 1990a; EPA economic analyses and unpublished data
        Note: Costs for Pesticides and Toxic Substances are included under chemical and multi-media categories.

                                   16

-------
     The funding sources for these expenditures are also changing.
The share of  total annualized costs incurred by  state and local
governments fell during  the  1970's  at  the expense of the federal
government as it expanded its environmental involvement, while the
private sector share remained relatively stable. During the period
1980-1987, there was remarkable stability in the cost shares. The
future projections, however, are for a  rapid growth in the federal
share  with  a  corresponding  reduction  in  all  other  shares,
particularly the private sector,  over the period 1987-2000.  The
primary reason  for  this  is  the  projected  140  percent increase in
non-EPA federal costs,  primarily due  to  proposed Department of
Defense and  Department  of  Energy  expenditures  on  military  and
nuclear waste cleanup.

                             Table 3
        Shares  of Total Annualized Costs by Funding Source
Funding Source           1972      1980      1987
EPA                       3.7%      7.9%      7.9%
Non-EPA Federal           0.3       3.3       3.1
State                     5.8       3.8       3.5
Local                    29.0      22.2      22.5
Private                  61.2      62.8      63.0      60.0
Source: EPA, 1990a      100.0%    100.0%    100.0%    100.0%


     These costs, when expressed as a percentage of Gross Domestic
Product (GDP), are roughly comparable to or  higher  than those of
other developed countries (see Figure 2).  In 1985, the U.S. spent
a higher  percentage  of its GDP on environmental  protection than
Finland,  the  Netherlands,  the United Kingdom, France  or Norway.
West Germany's investments in environmental  protection as a percent
of GDP exceeded those of the U.S.  (EPA,  1990a).

       The  disparities that  remain  are due  to  numerous  cross-
national  differences,  but two are especially significant.  First,
the  U.S.  is  the  only nation  with comprehensive  programs  for
remediating both active and inactive waste sites.  As noted above,
hazardous waste clean-up  accounts  for  a  major  and  increasing
portion of U.S.  pollution control costs.  Second, the statistics do
not reflect differences in  energy prices.  The U.S. uses much more
energy per  unit of GDP than  any  other developed country  except
Canada, in  part because of  relatively low  energy  prices.   The
higher fuel  prices of other nations reduce their energy consumption
and associated pollution, but  are not reflected in their pollution
control cost estimates.
                                17

-------
                                  Figure 2

                  1985 POLLUTION CONTROL EXPENDITURES BY COUNTRY
                                                 Household

                                                 Non-Household
                0.00  0.20
                    0.40  0.60  0.80  1.00  1.20  1.40

                    Percentage of Gross Domestic Product
1.60  1.80
        Source: EPA, 1990a
4.
Current. Environmental  Challenges
     EPA   recognizes  that   this  country's   pollution  control
expenditures  are  considerable,  and  that further  environmental
improvements  are  likely  to  come  at  increasing  cost.    Thus,
additional  investments   must  be  made  judiciously.    This   is
particularly true  in light of the changing nature of EPA's work.

     Many  of  the  most obvious  problems  of  the  1970's  — gross
examples of  air and  water pollution — have  been addressed with
some degree of success.  A variety of pressing problems remain.  A
recent study by EPA's Science Advisory Board (SAB,  1990) ranked the
most serious environmental risks to human and ecological health.
Topping  the list  of risks  to  human  health  were:  ambient  air
pollutants  from factories and  automobiles;  worker  exposure   to
chemicals  in  industry  and  agriculture;   indoor  air  pollutants
(including  radon); and  pollutants in  drinking water.   The most
serious  risks  to  the  natural  ecology and  human  welfare  were:
alteration and destruction of wildlife habitat; species extinction
and  overall loss  of biological  diversity;   stratospheric  ozone
depletion; and global climate change.

     Efforts to address these and other problems have expanded the
universe of pollution sources affected by Agency policy.  Smaller,
more numerous and  more diverse sources have been brought into the
regulatory fold. Stormwater,  which was largely uncontrolled until
recently, is now the subject of  regulations  that  will eventually
require  permit  coverage  for  173  cities, 47  counties  and over
100,000 industrial facilities that discharge stormwater.  Reducing
drinking water risks requires continued attention to  a large number
of small providers. Over 90% of the public water supply systems  in

                                18

-------
the U.S. serve less than 10,000 individuals each  (EPA,  1991).
Likewise,.air  regulations  are currently  being  extended to  small
entities  such  as dry cleaners,  local  gasoline  stations, and
transportation and storage facilities.

     The Agency  is  also spending  an  increasing amount  of its
resources  on global  environmental  issues such  as stratospheric
ozone  and  climate   change.    These  and  other  trans-national
environmental problems  can  only  be effectively addressed through
coordinated efforts among nations.  Not surprisingly, the number of
international environmental  agreements has jumped sharply in recent
years (U.S. International Trade Commission, 1991).


5.   Toward More  Efficient and Effective Environmental Policy

     Given the increasing costs  associated with meeting existing
requirements  and  the  need  to  address  emerging  environmental
problems, the Agency  is working to ensure that current and future
investments  are  made  wisely.   EPA  is  modifying  its  regulatory
development, budgeting, strategic planning, and research processes
to achieve this end.   The Agency is also promoting economic growth
directly where  possible.   In particular, the  growing worldwide
demand for environmental goods and services creates an opportunity
for EPA to help U.S.  environmental companies identify and develop
new markets.

     The remainder of  this section discusses how regulations should
be crafted  to best ensure they integrate  environmental and economic
objectives  and   maximize   social  welfare.     EPA's  technology
innovation and trade  promotion efforts are discussed  further in
Chapter 2.   The Agency's modifications  to its strategic planning
and  budgeting  processes, its science  reforms,  modification  to
permit programs,  and  other non-regulatory  activities  consistent
with the objectives of the 90-Day Review are discussed in greater
detail in Chapter 3.

     In crafting  efficient  regulations,  EPA  is guided by  three
fundamental  economic  principles,  consistent  with  those  in the
President's directive (see Exhibit 2):

     (1)  regulation is needed only when a market failure exists;

     (2)  regulations should be crafted to maximize net benefits;
          and

     (3)  when correcting  a  market  failure,  regulations  should
          promote cost-effective  outcomes and innovation.

The first  two principles  are reviewed briefly below.   The  third
principle,   which   is  directly  germane  to many  of  the  reform
activities   presented  in  this report,  is  discussed in  greater

                               19

-------
 detail.

     (1)  Regulation is needed only when a market failure exists.
Society readily acknowledges that well structured markets improve
welfare.  A well-functioning market requires, among other things,
that  individuals  and  companies  bear the  full  costs  of  their
actions.   When  polluters do  not see  the  full  costs  of  their
actions, regulation may be justified.  Effective regulation fully
internalizes the social costs of pollution so that a polluter will
weigh these costs  in addition to the private costs of production.

     The  manner in  which governments  force private  parties  to
internalize  these  costs  is  crucial  to sound  regulatory policy.
These considerations are  addressed below.

     (2)  The regulatory  decision should maximize social welfare.
Regulatory decisions, on  balance, should make society better off.
The  importance  of  this principle is  best illustrated through an
example:   banning   all   pesticides     would   undoubtedly  have
environmental benefits,  but the  costs  of our  food  supply would
increase  tremendously.   At least in the  short  run,  even a quick
look at the evidence  suggests  that  such a  regulation would,  on
balance,  leave society worse off.

     (3)  When correcting a market failure, the regulation should
promote  cost-effective outcomes and  innovation.    A variety of
regulatory mechanisms  exist,  including:  setting technology-based
standards; setting performance standards; establishing goals that
collectively polluters must achieve (e.g through trading pollution
rights);  and using  direct  economic  incentives  (e.g.  pollution
taxes).  Each of  these approaches has  advantages  and disadvantages,
and is better suited to some problems  than others.  In particular,
each has different implications for efficiency.

     One  well  established  regulatory  approach  is  the use  of
uniform,  technology-based standards.   These standards  have the
advantages  of providing  certainty about  the consequence  of the
regulation, and  of being  relatively easy to enforce.  Technology-
based  standards,  however,  can provide  some disincentives.   In
particular, once polluters adopt the approved technology, they no
longer  search for  more cost-effective solutions  to  the problem.
Even if  they are aware of cheaper abatement solutions, polluters
may be  reluctant to adopt such options since they could be deemed
to be in noncompliance as a result.

     In  contrast,  performance-based  standards  provide polluters
with  strong  incentives   for  innovation.    The  search  for  less
expensive  abatement  solutions goes  on  perpetually  since  cost
savings  would result  at  any point  that  a  lower  cost abatement
program is adopted.  Market-based approaches provide even greater
incentives,  since  every  reduction below a  permitted  level will
result  in  less  pollution  fees  paid or in excess emission permits

                                20

-------
that can be sold.

     There  is   an   important  corollary  to  these  principles.
Regulations should  strive  to  put competitors on a "level playing
field"—otherwise, achieving environmental objectives at the least
cost to  society is  impossible.  For example,  prior  to 1990, the
Clean  Air Act   regulated  new  sources  of  acid  rain much  more
stringently  than existing sources.   In  the  1970's,  officials
believed that, as older sources were retired, acid rain emissions
would decrease  over time.   Over two decades,  however, utilities
learned  how  to  keep  older   coal-fired  boilers  productive  by
refurbishing  them  in ways  that would  not  trigger  new source
reviews.   Thus, the  "old  dirties"  continued to live  on  under a
regulatory regime that penalized new boilers, thereby stifling the
development of new coal-fired utilities.

     The cost-effectiveness principles discussed above apply even
when  the regulatory  goal  has  not been  set  using  cost-benefit
analysis.  For example, the goals established in drinking water and
toxic  waste  remediation projects   reflect  equity and citizen's
rights as well  as efficiency  concerns.   EPA's  challenge in these
cases is to meet the social objective at least cost.

     Many of  the regulatory reform activities  discussed  in  this
report are designed to improve the efficiency  of  regulations by
more closely adhering to the above principles.  As described in the
next chapter,  EPA is proposing to take or  has taken steps to reduce
unnecessary requirements for small entities, where the benefits of
such requirements may be small and the  costs  disproportionately
high.  EPA is  also expanding its use of market-based approaches in
a  variety of areas.    Further,  EPA  has taken  or  is  proposing
regulatory reforms  to  level  the  playing  field  for  lower  risk
products  such as natural  gas,  as  well as  certain  biotechnology
products, pesticides, and toxic substances.

     To further  the  efficiency of environmental  regulation  over the
long term, EPA is working to strengthen its analytic capabilities.
In particular, EPA is improving its ability to estimate and value
benefits.  For example, EPA has recently released internal exposure
assessment guidance  which will  standardize risk assessments across
offices and strengthen consideration of scientific uncertainties.
In the ecological area,  EPA has brought together ecologists  and
economists to work collaboratively to develop methods for assessing
ecological benefits.

     Finally,    EPA   is   working  to  inform   discussions  about
environmental investments.  As  the Agency's knowledge of costs and
benefits expands, and as it learns  from  experience  the practical
advantages and' disadvantages  of  various  regulatory  and policy
approaches, the  Agency is sharing this information with legislators
and the public.   To shape  future legislation,  EPA has presented
frank  statistics to  Congress  highlighting disparities  between

                                21

-------
Congressional priorities and environmental priorities identified by
EPA's Science Advisory Board.   Several EPA reports have fueled  the
dialogue  about environmental  protection and  the  economy ;  this
report further contributes to the discussion.


6.   EPA's 90-Day Review Process

     In order to make this 90-Day Review as meaningful as possible,
EPA Administrator William K. Reilly decided that EPA would select
a limited number  of specific  regulations and related activities
which  appeared to present  special opportunities to promote  the
President's goals and to focus its analysis on them. (See Exhibit
3,  "90-Day  Economic  Review  of   Regulations,"  Memorandum  from
Administrator  William   K.  Reilly,   February  5,   1992.)     The
Administrator .'s  memorandum  listed several  topics  that he  had
decided should receive  focussed attention:

    "•    Reduce regulatory burdens for small communities  and  small
          businesses;
     •    Increase incentives  for  the use of clean fuels such as
          natural gas;
     •    Reform  RCRA  (through legislation  or regulation  -  the
          mixture  and   derived  from  rule5   offers  a  near-term
          opportunity);
     •    Expand market-based approaches to regulations;
     •    Accelerate    inclusionary    rulemaking    (particularly
          negotiated rulemakings or "reg negs");
     •    Accelerate rules that reduce the regulatory burden on  the
          economy; and
     •    Strengthen innovative technology development and export
          promotion  efforts.
     In addition,  we should explore  ways to speed  biotechnology
     reforms."

     Each of these topics became the  focus for a series of agency-
wide workgroups that met throughout the 90-day period. The reports
of each of these workgroups are included in the Appendix volume to
this report and summarized in Chapter 2 of this Overview volume.

     In order to be sure that it considered a full range of topics
for further  analysis and had access  to relevant information,  EPA
       See:   SAB,  1990; EPA, 1990a;  EPA,  1990b;  and, EPA, 1992,
 forthcoming.
     5See discussion of the Hazardous Waste Identification Rule in
Chapter  2, and Item SI in the Index of EPA Actions and Commitments
at  the end of this volume.

                                22

-------
made a. vigorous effort to get assistance from the public.    A key
element of  this  effort was  a request for public comment that EPA
published in the Federal Register. The notice stressed  that  "each
regulation or related activity that a commenter suggests for review
should meet the President's criteria as well as  meet the following
tests: (a) Any suggested changes that might be made  as a result of
the  review must   be within  EPA's  statutory  authority.   (b)
Significant economic savings would be possible if changes are  made.
(c) Proposed changes will not compromise environmental  protection
goals." The  notice also  stressed that EPA  would only be able  to
choose a limited number of topics for review in  the  90-day period.
(See Exhibit 4, Federal Register. 57:42, March  3, 1992, pp.  7564-
7566) .

     EPA also  made other attempts to  obtain public comments.  It
held a large public meeting on February 27 and met with several
smaller groups from within  and  outside the government during  the
90-day period.  The  Office  of  Small and  Disadvantaged Business
Utilization sent out a special request for comments  from the  small
business community. The White House also forwarded written comments
that  it  had  received   from  various  parties  concerned  with
environmental regulations. EPA's program offices also held several
public meetings during the  90-day period at which they discussed
topics under review.

     In response  to  the  Federal Register  notice and  the other
requests for comments, EPA  received  over 700 comments from about
220 individuals or organizations within the comment period. Trade
associations and individual  companies comprised  over  90 percent of
the commenters. Other commenters included local governments, state
governments, non-profit organizations,  and individuals (see Figure
3).

     The comments  covered  all  of EPA's program areas. The air
program received the most  comments, followed by the water program,
toxics, waste, and pesticides.  The Agency also received comments
concerning  general  policies  on  subjects   such as  cost-benefit
analysis, risk assessment, and effects of environmental regulations
on small business  (see Figure 4).

     Some of the comments were  on topics that  EPA  had announced
would  receive special  attention  in  the   90-Day  Review.  These
comments were given to the workgroups focusing on these topics. A
number of  comments concerned specific rules that EPA is presently
developing,   including some comments  that  previously  had  been
submitted to  the  Agency.    These  were  given to  the  offices
responsible  for  the relevant rulemakings  to use  in the  90-Day
Review or in their ongoing regulation development.   A third group
of comments  addressed a wide variety of other subjects.  These were
passed along to appropriate Agency staff.
                               23

-------
                                             Figure  3
                                    90-Day Moratorium Comments
                                            Commenters
                                          Government
                                              6%
                     Trade Associations
                           56%
                                                                   Individual Firms
                                                                        37%
                                                n = 221
Note:
Government includes coments from federal agencies (.5%), state governments (2.7%) and local governments (3.2%).
                                            Figure  4
                                    90-Day Moratorium Comments
                                           By Program Area
                            Toxics (1)
                              15%
                                                n = 720

              Note: (1) includes Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act, SARA Title III and TRI
                                                 24

-------
     Highlights  of  the  comments  are  included  in  the  program
summaries in Chapter 2 and a more detailed summary of comments is
in the Appendix to this volume.
                               25

-------
                            CHAPTER 2

           THE 90-DAY REVIEW: ACTIONS AND COMMITMENTS
1.    Overview

     As a result of its 90-Day Review,  EPA is taking a total of 88
actions, some of which it completed in the 90-day period and others
of  which  it has  committed to  take  in  the  near future.   These
actions would reduce  regulatory costs  by $4  -  8 billion annually
(see Figure 5).  While these savings are considerable, EPA does not
expect that current levels  of  environmental protection will suffer
from these  actions.  Indeed, by saving this amount  of  money,  the
nation  should  actually  be in a better  position  to make  real
environmental gains.

     This chapter summarizes the actions and commitments the Agency
is  making.  A  complete list  of actions,  along with  associated
savings, is in the Index of EPA Actions and Commitments, near the
end  of  this  volume.  More  detailed  reports about  the  four  EPA
programs and the nine priority areas may be found in the Appendix
to this report,  which is in a separate volume.  The Appendix also
has a more detailed summary of public comments.

     The EPA reforms described in this  report will reduce economic
burdens and promote growth in five major ways:

•    reduce unnecessary regulatory burdens on small communities and
     small businesses;

•    expand the use of market-based approaches;

•    reduce barriers to the development and use  of natural gas and
     other relatively low risk products;

•    reorient hazardous waste  programs toward high risk wastes; and

•    spur development of new technologies and promote the export of
     U.S. environmental technologies and services.

The pages that follow include  many examples of each of these types
of  measures.
                                26

-------
                  	Figure  5	

                  Annualized Cost Savings of Environmental Initiatives
                   for EPA Program Offices Under the 90-Day Review
                                                      7.72
                                                            I Low Case

                                                            1 High Case
              Air and
             Radiation
                                 Water
                Solid
               Waste and
               Emergency
               Response

Source: EPA economic analyses and unpublished data.
Prevention,
Pesticides
and Toxics
                                                   TOTAL
2.   Program Summaries

     2.1.  Office of Air and Radiation

Background and Public Comment

     The  Office of  Air  and Radiation (OAR) administers the  Clean
Air Act,  the Indoor Radon Abatement  Act, and parts of the Atomic
Energy Act.  Under  these authorities,  it develops and implements
regulations to set national emissions standards for air pollutants
and national ambient air  quality standards, and produces guidance
and  criteria  for  states  to use  in their development  of  State
Implementation  Plans   (SIPs)  to  attain  national  air  quality
standards.

     Over 200 of  the public  comments received  in connection with
the  90-Day Review concerned  air issues. All  but  twenty of  these
dealt  with  issues   connected  with  the  ongoing  development  of
regulations implementing  the new Clean  Air Act Amendments of  1990.
The bulk  of these  comments was nearly equally divided among several
broad areas:  Title I of  the Act, which covers attainment of ambient
air quality standards;  toxic air emissions control; and Title II,
which covers emissions  from mobile sources.
                                  27

-------
     Among the concerns about ambient air quality that received the
most comments  were the cost implications  of  the "best available
control  technology"  (BACT)  definition,  visibility  issues,  new
source review, and emissions trading.  Regarding air  toxics, by far
the most comments addressed the use of risk assessment in setting
standards and priorities. Most  other comments addressed particular
issues in specific  rulemakings. Title II comments focused on non-
road engine  standards, onboard diagnostic  systems, and improved
vehicle evaporative emissions  control systems. Comments in other
areas addressed  acid rain monitoring  and nitrogen oxides control
(Title    IV),    permitting   flexibility    (Title   V),    and
Chlorofluorocarbon  (CFC)  control  issues  (Title VI).  Many of the
comments received are duplicates of those already received in the
course of  the ongoing  rulemakings.   Comments  on  rulemakings in
progress will be  addressed as part  of  the standard notice and
comment process 'for the rulemakings to which they apply.

     EPA received  only 20 comments  on existing rules.  Twelve of
these  called  for  revisions the Agency  already has  underway in
response to litigation, legislation, or discussions  with regulated
industries.   The remaining  eight  comments called  for  review or
repeal of specific rulemakings, such as the small-boiler New Source
Performance  Standards  and  the  Navajo  power  plant  emissions
standard.  Each  of these was reviewed by a subcommittee of OAR's
Clean Air Act  Advisory Committee,  which  did not recommend any of
them as 90-day initiatives.  Instead,  the subcommittee recommended
that OAR  focus its  90-day efforts  primarily on the  four market-
based initiatives outlined below, which are expected  to yield the
most cost savings of any  initiatives considered.

Overview of  90-Day  Actions and Commitments

     OAR will  undertake or consider 16 actions as a result of its
90-Day Review. These actions include burden-reducing  revisions to
existing  regulations,  development of  market  incentive programs,
development of programs to stimulate production of natural gas, and
development  of at least one future regulation through regulatory
negotiation.  Several of these actions will also provide relief to
small businesses.

     The following  four actions are examples:

•    Economic  Incentives  Program for National Ambient Air Quality
     Standard  (NAAQS)  Attainment.  The  South  Coast  Air Quality
     Management  District (SCAQMD)  in  Southern  California  has an
     extensive effort underway to  develop a  marketable permits
     program for volatile organic  compounds (VOC's)  and nitrogen
     oxides emissions as a cost-effective approach to attainment of
     the  ozone  standard.    If  successful, it is  expected  that
     similar programs may be developed in other states facing ozone
     nonattainment  problems.  During the  past year,  EPA staff have
     helped  SCAQMD develop the concepts  underlying this program.

                                28

-------
     For  this  initiative,  EPA will  provide technical assistance
     over  the next  year  to  help  SCAQMD  write  the regulations
     implementing this program.

•    Reform of Electric Utility New Source Review Requirements .  In
     this action, often called the  "WEPCo" rule, EPA's new source
     review rules will be amended by adopting a broad  exclusion for
     pollution   control    projects   and   revising   the   review
     requirements for other plant modifications.  The result will
     give  utilities  the  flexibility  and  certainty they  have
     indicated they need in order to comply with the requirements
     of the new Clean Air Act  (e.g., the requirements of the Acid
     Rain Program),  and will reduce impediments to the expanded use
     of natural gas. EPA  expects  to  finalize  this action shortly.

•    Accelerated  Retirement  Program for  Older  Vehicles.    Old
     automobiles, especially those built before the strict emission
     control requirements  introduced in the  1970's,  pollute far
     more than those  built under today's strict emission control
     laws.  Removing these  cars from the  road would greatly reduce
     pollution immediately.  Moreover, it appears that this could
     be done at much less cost than achieving comparable reductions
     from  stationary  sources.   This initiative  will result  in
     published  guidance  and  criteria  for  states,   cities,  and
     companies. The guidance will give them the option of scrapping
     old,  high-polluting  automobiles  and using  the  resulting
     improvements  in  air  quality  to  satisfy  certain  emission-
     reduction requirements, in place of  more costly controls that
     would otherwise be required.  This program would be the first
     nationwide application of the  concept  of mobile/stationary
     source trading.

•    Economic Incentive Rule Expansion.   Title  I of the 1990 Clean
     Air Act requires the  Agency to promulgate certain  rules for
     economic incentive programs.  For this initiative, the Agency
     will expand the scope of the rulemaking to  encourage the early
     adoption  of  economic  incentive  programs generally, and  to
     provide guidance in  the development of such programs.

     In addition to these initiatives, OAR will  award over $600,000
in state grants in fiscal year 1992 to develop state-level market-
based air pollution control projects; produce  a study clarifying
property rights to methane emissions from  coal mines as  a  way to
stimulate the  capture and  sale  of  these  emissions;  incorporate
emissions-averaging  provisions  into forthcoming  rules  on  VOC
control and hazardous organic chemical plant emissions; and develop
a mobile/stationary source emissions trading program.   OAR  will
also seek public comment on several strategies for improving the
cost-effectiveness of future air toxics  regulations.

     For  the  remainder of  its initiatives,  OAR is  proposing  to
exempt a chemical widely used  in drycleaning — perchloroethylene,

                               29

-------
or  "PERC"  — from regulation  as a volatile  organic  compound  (a
contributor to ozone); to revise the guidance  for home builders on
radon  control;  to rescind  the  smoke  standard for  heavy diesel
engines; to  review the radionuclides air  emission standards for
possible redundancy with Nuclear Regulatory Commission regulations;
and  to reexamine  the need  for  a  costly  procedure to  test for
emissions from painting processes and to enhance its efforts with
the states to implement small business assistance programs. All of
these actions, if finalized,  will reduce regulatory burdens across
the board, and for small  business in particular.  Finally, OAR has
committed  to  explore  the  potential  for  using  a  negotiated
rulemaking process in at least one  future rulemaking.

     In  addition to  these  actions taken  as  part of  the 90-Day
Review,  OAR  is   in  the  midst  of  an  ambitious  Clean  Air Act
implementation program that embodies most of the 90-day objectives
identified by the President and the Administrator.   As discussed in
the OAR section of the Appendix  to  this report, the Clean Air Act
itself was passed at the initiative of the President and includes
regulatory  reforms  such  as  market  incentives   and  technology
innovation.

     OAR  actions  are  listed  in the  Index  of  EPA Actions and
Commitments and described in more detail in the Appendix.


     2.2. Office of Prevention,  Pesticides and Toxic Substances

Background and Public Comment

     The  Office  of Prevention,  Pesticides and  Toxic  Substances
(OPPTS) administers several major statutes, including the Federal
Insecticide,  Fungicide,  and Rodenticide  Act   (FIFRA),  the  Toxic
Substances  Control Act   (TSCA),  Section  313  of  the  Emergency
Planning   and  Community  Right-to-Know  Act   (EPCRA),   certain
authorities under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA)
and  several  laws  concerning  asbestos.    Under  these  laws  EPA
responsibilities  include  reviewing  new  chemicals  and pesticides,
evaluating  substances already  in  commerce,  and  collecting and
reporting  information  on  routine and  accidental  releases  of
chemicals. About 20%,  or roughly 140, of the comments EPA received
addressed these areas.

     Most comments addressed Section 313 of EPCRA. More than half
of  these were  requests   for  exemptions from  the Toxic Release
Inventory reporting requirements6.  The remainder suggested various
ways of reducing reporting burdens.
     6 Other reporting requirements under EPCRA are administered by
EPA's Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER) and are
discussed in the OSWER summary.

                                30

-------
     The  Agency also  received  a  number  of  comments  regarding
polychlorinated  biphenyls  (PCBs),   the new  chemicals  program,
possible  regulation of  lead,  and  TSCA  Section  8(e)  reporting
requirements.

     In  the  pesticides  area,  most  of the  comments  discussed
farmworker protection standards.  Other areas addressed included
minor  use pesticides,  and  the registration  and re-registration
programs.


Overview of 90-Day Actions and Commitments

     OPPTS is  proposing to undertake  11 reforms.  These  reforms
would  reduce  unnecessary  reporting  burdens, streamline  review
and/or approval requirements for low risk substances, revise rules
regulating the use and disposal of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB),
and encourage the development  and use  of biotechnology products.
Several of the actions will provide relief to small businesses.

     Three of the most important actions are:

•    Propose  Amendments  to Disposal  Rules  for  PCB-Contaminated
     Soils. Liquids, and  Sludges.  Amendments of this  type would
     speed testing of innovative remediation technologies,  reduce
     duplicative paperwork burdens for  both the government and the
     regulated community, reduce disposal costs, and give  states
     the primary role in managing PCB  waste  storage and disposal
     facilities within their borders.

•    Propose  Amendments  to  Premanufacture  Notification  (PMN)
     Exemption Rules.   Specifically,  EPA  will propose in July,
     1992, revisions to  three existing regulations  (the  polymer
     exemption  rule,  the  low  volume  exemption  rule,  and  the
     Expedited  Follow-Up  Significant  New  Use  Rule),  and  will
     develop a  new  exemption  for  "low risk" substances.   These
     amendments would shift the focus of new chemical reviews away
     from  low risk  categories  of  substances toward high  risk
     chemicals.  The  Agency has established categories of chemicals
     that are not expected to pose  risk  to human health  or  the
     environment, and will  propose revisions to testing and review
     requirements for new chemicals in these categories.  This will
     reduce costs for  manufacturers of  low risk  substances  and
     speed marketing and production of such substances.

•    Develop  Incentives  for Safer  Pesticides.   EPA intends  to
     publish  a   Federal  Register   notice   soliciting   public
     participation  in  a  project  designed   to  encourage  the
     development of  lower  risk pesticides as well as improved pest
     control  practices.   Some   of  the  possible  measures  being
     considered by EPA are: counsel applicants early in the process
     to clarify registration requirements, accelerate  the  review

                                31

-------
     process, allow fee waivers, and reduce or defer certain data
     requirements for lower risk products.

     The  Office  is also  considering reducing  reporting burdens
under TSCA and EPCRA. The Agency plans to issue an advance notice
of proposed  rulemaking under  Section 313  of EPCRA  to consider
options  for  amending  Toxic  Release  Inventory  (TRI)  reporting
requirements;  these amendments  could modify the  threshold  for
reporting, or exempt facilities that release or transfer off-site
(in waste) less than 5,000 pounds of  listed  TRI chemicals.  It has
been estimated that this  exemption  could potentially reduce the
number of reports filed by as much as 90%, while still covering 85%
of total  releases.   OPPTS  will also solicit comment  on certain
refinements to EPA's policy concerning the mandatory reporting of
information under TSCA Section 8(e) regarding release of chemical
substance  to,  and  the  detection  of   chemical  substances  in,
environmental media.  These refinements  could lower the burden on
industry  in  several ways, including narrowing what is presently
considered   "substantial   risk   information,"   lengthening  the
reporting deadline for written information,  and specifying certain
types of information which need not be reported.

     Other actions and commitments include: providing appropriate
relief  to   users   and  registrants   of   minor  use  pesticides;
reclassifying  PCB  and  PCB-contaminated  transformers  to  reduce
record-keeping   and  disposal  costs;   holding   a   workshop  on
reregistration;  and issuing  both FIFRA and TSCA  biotechnology
rules.

     OPPTS activities are listed in  the  Index of EPA Actions and
Commitments and described  in detail in the Appendix.  Biotechnology
reforms are discussed in more detail below in this chapter and in
the Appendix.


2.3. Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response

Background and Public Comment

     The  Office  of  Solid Waste  and Emergency  Response (OSWER)
administers   several  major  statutes,   including  the  Resource
Conservation  and  Recovery  Act   (RCRA)  and  the  Comprehensive
Emergency Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) .  RCRA
addresses  the management  and disposal  of  hazardous  and  non-
hazardous waste and underground storage tanks (USTs). CERCLA, also
known  as  Superfund, governs  the cleanup of  abandoned hazardous
waste  sites.   Superfund also  governs the response to releases of
hazardous  substances  into  the  environment, and  planning  and
preparedness  to  prevent releases.    The Oil Pollution Prevention
Act and the Clean Air Act Amendments of  1990  complement this part
of Superfund.


                                32

-------
     The reforms advanced by OSWER came from three sources:  (1) a
series of external and internal reviews conducted during the past
several years, (2) OSWER staff suggestions, and (3) public comments
received as part of the 90-Day Review.

     Roughly 25 percent of all the comments EPA received related to
OSWER programs. Approximately two-thirds of these focused on RCRA.
The major RCRA issues addressed were the definition of solid waste,
used oil7, and the "mixture"  and "derived-from"  rules. Other issues
included recycling and the land disposal restrictions.  Commenters
expressed concern over the  ambiguity  of the existing solid waste
definitions.  Comments pertaining to used oil generally supported
not  listing used  oil as  a hazardous waste.    Some  commenters
advocated  management   standards,  and  others  requested  specific
exemptions  from existing regulations.   Comments concerning the
remanded  derived-from  and  mixture  rules  generally  supported
hazardous waste determinations  based  on risks.   Some  commenters
requested a multi-tiered approach for managing hazardous wastes.

     Superfund  liability  issues,  including municipal and  lender
liability, were the most frequently commented on CERCLA  issues.
Other CERCLA issues addressed were Superfund transaction costs, use
of a risk-based approach  in  the  Superfund process, and the list of
extremely hazardous substances.

     Other  OSWER  issues  identified by several   commenters  were
possible revisions to the oil spill regulations  and the underground
storage  tanks  financial  responsibility regulations. The  reforms
outlined  below address  many of  the   concerns  raised  in  public
comments.
Overview of 90-Day Actions and Commitments

      OSWER has developed a set of 38 far reaching regulatory and
policy reforms.  The reforms fall into three general categories:
(1) RCRA Subtitle C (hazardous waste program); (2) Superfund; and
(3) various additional activities in a range of program areas that
promote cooperative  endeavors with  the regulated  community and
states  and  provide   relief   to  small  communities  and  small
businesses. The  economic  benefits associated with  these reforms
will be achieved while maintaining,  and in  some  cases improving,
the existing level of environmental protection.

     (1)  RCRA Subtitle C.  The  most significant reforms address
core  RCRA  Subtitle  C  programs.   The  current   RCRA system  is
essentially a  series  of standards and  management practices that
ensure  safe management and cleanup  of hazardous  wastes.    The
      While used oil is not included in  this  package,  the Agency
intends to take final action on used oil in summer, 1992.

                                33

-------
program  is  composed of  prevention measures,  engineering design
standards, permitting  requirements,  and cleanup  standards.   The
current system, however,  was developed under tight time frames and
was based on  far less information than is  available today.   The
desirability of  program  refinements  is generally accepted by all
interested parties.

     The proposed RCRA reforms are designed to accomplish four main
objectives.  First,  the  program will redirect RCRA towards waste
activities presenting  high  risks and exclude low risk activities
from Subtitle C controls.  To achieve these  ends,  the program will
soon propose  several  approaches  for identifying low  risk waste
which would  be allowed  to  exit the Subtitle C  system,  and will
develop  tailored management standards for  certain  low-risk and
high-volume  wastes,  especially  those associated with hazardous
wa s te recyc1ing.

     Second, through revisions  to the Subtitle C Corrective Action
program, the  Office will expedite  the pace  of  cleanups  at RCRA
facilities and eliminate unnecessary time delays and costs.

     Third, the  Office will adjust  RCRA management  standards to
better fit the nature of the environmental risks posed  by waste
management activities.   Reforms in  this   area  would  streamline
permitting for low risk or  low complexity operations, including
those  involving the development of innovative  technologies.  In
particular, specific reforms will reduce technical barriers to the
use of innovative technology at RCRA sites.

     Fourth, the program seeks to streamline the RCRA  permit system
to facilitate  cleanups, hazardous waste recycling, and addressing
closed facilities.  As an example,  the Agency will explore ways to
streamline the post-closure permitting process.

     Several examples  of specific major RCRA actions are:

•    Proposed Hazardous Waste Identification Rule ("HWIR")  to allow
     low risk  wastes to  exit from the RCRA system.   The proposed
     HWIR rule, signed April 30, will modify the current "mixture"
     and "derived from" rules.

•    Establish Special Treatment Standards  for Debris to encourage
     innovative and cost-effective treatment technologies.

•    Establish   Special   Health-Based  Treatment  Standards  for
     Contaminated  Soils  to  encourage  more  innovative and cost-
     effective treatment technologies.

•    Suspend  the  Toxicity  Characteristic   Rule  for  Petroleum-
     Contaminated Media  —  Both UST  and non-UST— in States with
     "Adequate" State Clean-up Programs. This would help to promote
     clean-ups.

                                34

-------
•    Establish  Temporary Units and  Corrective Action Management
     Units to facilitate site cleanups.


     (2) Superfund.  Reforms in the Superfund program are designed
to make the program more effective, efficient, and equitable while
expanding the protection of public  health and the environment.   The
centerpiece  of  the  reform effort is the  Superfund Accelerated
Cleanup Model, which will  speed actions to reduce  immediate risks
at both NPL and non-NPL sites. In  addition,  the Superfund program
will explore  developing  standardized or presumptive remedies  for
site cleanup and establishing standardized soil cleanup levels.

     (3) Other Reforms.  OSWER initiatives  also include actions to
relieve  unnecessary  burdens  on  small  communities  and  small
businesses and enhance its cooperative efforts with industry.   The
Office  will  undertake  reforms  in the underground  storage tank
program,   including   a    proposal  to   extend   the   financial
responsibility  compliance  deadline  to  1995  for  certain   UST
facilities, a rule to provide additional financial responsibility
mechanisms  to  local  governments,  and a  commitment to  develop
options  to clarify UST  lender liability.    To  reduce  reporting
burdens on small businesses, it intends to coordinate a government-
wide project to reduce potentially duplicative accidental release
reports required under several laws administered by EPA, including
CERCLA, Title III of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization
Act  of the  Emergency Planning and Community  Right-to-Know   Act
(EPCRA), as well as laws  administered by other agencies.  Further,
the Office will  expand the use of alternative  dispute resolution to
reduce  litigation burdens and  initiate  a   pilot environmental
extension  service  to  provide  technical  advice   on  solid   and
hazardous waste to small  communities and businesses.  Finally,  the
Office  will  sponsor  experiments  in a  number of  communities  to
measure  the   effects  of  unit pricing  on waste  generation   and
recycling  and will develop a guide  for municipalities on  this
subject.

     OSWER actions  are listed  in  the Index of EPA  Actions   and
Commitments and described in more detail in the Appendix.


     2.4. Office of Water

Background and Public Comment

     The Office of Water  (OW)  administers the Clean Water Act,  the
Safe Drinking Water Act,  the Coastal Zone Management Act,  and the
Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act, among other laws.
Under  these  statutes, OW  works with  the states  and cities  to
control industrial and  municipal  effluent discharges to  surface
waters,  to protect  drinking water  resources,  and to  preserve
critical aquatic habitats.

                               35

-------
     OW's  90-Day  activities reflect  the  changing nature  of the
environmental problems it is confronting.  To a great extent, point
sources of water pollution have been controlled, and OW has turned
its attention to  diffuse  sources  of pollution such as sediments,
nutrients and pesticide run-off from agricultural activities, and
stormwater.  In addition,  it is becoming  increasingly clear that
the  actions needed  to  address  these sources,   and the  costs
associated with these actions,  vary by watershed. This indicates
that site-specific remedies need to be developed and implemented to
effectively control these diffuse sources.

     To  address  these sources  efficiently,  OW has  been looking
beyond  its traditional  regulatory approach  —  technology-based
standards  enforced through  facility  specific  permits —  and is
seeking to develop innovative, cost-minimizing programs.   The 90-
Day Review offered an opportunity to accelerate these efforts.

     About 130  comments received on OW's programs covered a variety
of surface water and drinking water issues, but by far the largest
number  of  comments focused  on  the NPDES program for industrial
sources  of  stormwater.     The  key   concerns  were  monitoring
requirements and deadlines for submission  of applications. Several
commenters  also  requested  that  general  permits  for groups  of
facilities that are similar to those  allowed  under  the  proposed
rule be issued as soon as possible.

     Other major areas addressed in the comments include wetlands
delineation and permitting,  water quality standards for toxics, and
effluent guidelines. OW's primary action under the  90-Day Review is
directed at resolving the key stormwater  issues  discussed by the
majority of the commenters.

Overview of 90-Day Actions and Commitments

     OW will initiate or propose 7 regulatory reforms  that will
reduce  burdens for  dischargers  and  control  authorities,  lower
compliance  and administrative  costs,  and  stimulate  innovative
approaches  for environmental  improvement.  In particular,  OW is
expanding  the  use  of  general permits  in its NPDES  program,  is
pursuing  other means of  reducing permitting burdens,  and  is
exploring  opportunities   to use  market-based approaches  within
individual watersheds.  Three actions are particularly important:

•    Stormwater Regulations.
     Phase  I:  On April  2 the Agency  promulgated the stormwater
     implementation rule.  The rule encourages the use of general
     permits for  industrial stormwater discharges and includes a
     number of  other refinements to previous regulations to reduce
     the burden of  stormwater requirements.   Among other things,
     the   revised   regulations   reduce sampling   and  reporting
     requirements,  allow simple  notices  of  intent  for  general

                                36

-------
     permits in lieu of burdensome application requirements, extend
     application deadlines for group applications, and remove small
     municipal  dischargers  from  the   universe  of  facilities
     requiring NPDES permits for stormwater.

     Phase II: The second  component of  OW's stormwater effort is
     designed to elicit  information that can be  used  to develop
     cost-effective programs for  small  stormwater discharges.  To
     this end, the Office will hold  a series of public meetings in
     May and  June,  1992,  to consider the most  effective ways  of
     addressing  remaining  risks   from  stormwater  discharges,
     focusing heavily on those  sources  not  currently required to
     have NPDES permits. These sessions will  solicit input from the
     public on the advisability  and  type of rulemaking that may be
     appropriate for these sources.

•    Point — Non-point Source Trading: EPA estimates that over 700
     waterbodies in the U.S. have the  basic characteristics that
     make them potential areas to apply point — non-point source
     trading programs.  These programs have the potential to reduce
     loading control costs by 50% or more.  In this initiative, EPA,
     with the State  of  North  Carolina,  held a  public  meeting  in
     Durham on  April 27-28, 1992,  to discuss  opportunities  for
     improving the cost-effectiveness of pollution control programs
     through point / non-point source trading. A recently completed
     EPA report on trading opportunities will provide the focus for
     identifying  and  resolving  trading  program  implementation
     issues. Specific follow-up  actions  to promote trading will be
     based, in part,  on information  and  comments obtained from the
     meeting attendees.

•    Wise Water Use Partnerships;   EPA  will  initiate a voluntary
     program  to  encourage  cost-effective  water  conservation
     techniques by  industrial  facilities and  other large  water
     users. OW will host a meeting of potential  partners in early
     May,  1992,  to  create the  partnership charter and  obtain
     initial commitments to this voluntary cost-savings program.

     The Office is also emphasizing the use of regulatory processes
that include substantial public input, such as policy dialogues.  In
addition to  the Phase II  stormwater effort, OW is seeking  the
public's input on how to structure cost-effective policies for two
areas  (combined  sewer  overflow   controls  and  management   of
contaminated  sediments).  The  Office will also  seek comment  on
issues  related  to  the  privatization  of  municipal  wastewater
systems. Finally, the Office will hold,  in May  1992, a Governors'
Forum on Implementation of the  Drinking Water Program  to address
the  capacity  constraints  states  face  in implementation of  the
expanding drinking water  requirements.   The Forum will look  at
issues related to the level of federal oversight and flexibility,
as well as the need for statutory changes.


                                37

-------
     OW  actions  are  listed  in  the Index  of  EPA Actions  and
Commitments and described in more detail in the Appendix.


3.   Priority Areas

     As described  in  Chapter  1,  EPA established nine interoffice
workgroups  to  address areas  of  priority concern  for  the 90-Day
Review. The work of these groups is described generally below and
in  more detail  in the  Appendix.  To avoid  repetition  with  the
previous section  of this chapter,  EPA actions and commitments in
the  priority  areas   are only  summarized  in  this  section  and
references are given to specific  actions  and commitments listed in
the Index of EPA Actions and Commitments.
     3.1. Market Incentives

     In his memorandum initiating the 90-Day Review, President Bush
specifically   stated:   "Regulations   should  incorporate  market
mechanisms to the maximum extent possible."  EPA further recognized
the potential of market incentives by making them one of the areas
of special focus for the review.

     Incentive mechanisms are well-suited to address both current
and future environmental problems.  In many cases,  these tools offer
the prospect of achieving environmental improvements at less cost
than with other tools,  such as with traditional command-and-control
regulations. They  can be particularly effective in  dealing with
pollution  from  large  numbers  of widely  dispersed sources  and
providing  a greater  stimulus  for innovation and  technological
change.  The prospect  of  achieving environmental goals  at lower
costs is  especially welcome  in light of the generally increasing
marginal costs of pollution control, the increasing percentage of
the GNP being devoted  to pollution control, and  the current state
of the economy.

     EPA's emphasis on economic incentives  is  not new.  In recent
years the Agency has initiated a series of pollutant "banking" and
"trading"  programs,  such as for  lead. More recently,  the Agency
actively supported the market-based provisions of the Clean Air Act
Amendments  of  1990, including  the acid  rain trading provisions.
The Agency published a report, Economic  Incentives;  Options  for
Environmental Protection, in March 1991  (EPA, 1991). EPA will soon
be releasing  a new report  on the United States experience with
economic incentives to control  environmental pollution.

     However,  the  number of  regulations  currently incorporating
economic  incentives remains  small.  EPA  used the 90-Day Review to
identify program areas where market incentives could be immediately
proposed,  tested using  demonstration projects  or presented  as
viable  options to  the public. This  activity has  furthered  the

                                38

-------
Agency's efforts  to  incorporate market-based approaches into  the
fabric of its everyday activities.

     In the course of the 90-Day Review/ EPA decided to undertake
a series of actions to further the use of economic  incentives as a
tool for environmental protection. The actions  are  grouped  in four
different areas and cover each of the Agency's programs:

1.   increasing efficiency  in environmental improvement,  such as
     the "trading" plans announced by the air and water offices;

2.   reducing  regulatory   barriers,   such   as  the  Lower  Risk
     Pesticides Policy;

3.   filling information gaps,  such as the  full cost accounting
     guide and experiments in municipal solid waste pricing; and

4.   building capacity, such as the grants to states to help states
     and localities develop their own economic incentives.

Fourteen individual actions are listed in the Index  of EPA Actions
and Commitments: A6, A8 - A13, PI, P7, S24,  Wl - W4.


     3.2. Biotechnology

     Biotechnology  is a rapidly developing  industry with  many
beneficial applications.  EPA has  both a  regulatory and research
and  development  interest  in  seeing  that  these  applications
materialize without posing unreasonable risks to human health and
the environment.   The  Toxic Substances Control Act  (TSCA),  the
Federal Insecticide,  Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), and the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act  (RCRA)  are  among the many
federal statutes that regulate the development  and use  of micro-
organisms .  Among these microorganisms are those being produced to
enhance crop production, to  control agricultural pests, to extract
valuable minerals,  to produce fuels  such  as ethanol from plant
matter, and to clean up toxic waste (via bioremediation).

     The 90-Day Regulatory Review provided  a good  opportunity to
examine ways in which EPA can develop its regulatory and research
programs to protect  the  environment and minimize  impacts  on  the
growth of America's biotechnology industry.

     EPA explored  five key  types of  actions  during the  90-Day
Review:

1.   coordinating federal regulatory agency oversight;

2.   encouraging the use of low-risk pesticides;

3.   encouraging development of microorganisms (particularly those

                               39

-------
     used in bioremediation) for TSCA uses;

4.   encouraging development of bioremediation; and

5.   reducing regulatory barriers to the use of bioremediation.

     Many of these activities are expected to provide substantial
cost savings and eliminate  delays  in future product development.
Eight individual actions are listed in the Index of  EPA Actions and
Commitments: PI, P2, P10, S3, S4, S12, SIS, S19.


     3.3. Natural Gas

     Natural gas has numerous environmental attributes that make it
a very attractive fuel.  For this reason  EPA decided that one focus
of  its  90-Day  Review   should  be  finding  ways   to reduce  the
regulatory  burdens   on  and   biases   against   its  production,
transportation, and use.

     Natural gas is a comparatively "clean" fuel,  producing much
less  air pollution per unit energy produced than  other  fossil
fuels, and less carbon dioxide  that contributes to global climate
change. Currently, natural gas provides  more than one-fifth of all
the primary energy used  in the U.S.  (19 quadrillion British thermal
units (Btu's) out of a total of  85 quadrillion Btu's. Gas supplies
nearly half  of all the  energy  consumed in U.S. homes,  nearly a
third of industrial energy demand, and 17% of electrical generation
demand.

     Recent technological improvements promise to push efficiency
ratings for gas-fired  combined  cycle power plants to  nearly double
the efficiency of  existing  fossil-fired generation plants.  These
advantages,  combined  with  lowered  gas  price projections,  make
gas-fired combined cycle plants  likely to provide the  most economic
and environmentally benign  choice for new capacity additions in
many situations, including  baseload,  intermediate  load,  and peak
generation capacity — so long as regulatory burdens  do not impede
this approach.

     EPA will  assist the efficient production, transportation and
use of natural gas through a series of market-oriented deregulatory
or regulatory-reform initiatives. An example of this is the "WEPCo"
rule, which will reduce  impediments  to the expanded use of natural
gas at existing power plants. Several initiatives involve working
closely  with  the Department  of Energy, such as assisting  state
Public Utility Commissions with evaluating investments in natural
gas generation.  Six individual actions  are listed in the Index of
EPA Actions and Commitments: A14, M12 - M16.
                                40

-------
     3.4. Technology Innovation

     EPA decided to look for ways to promote technology innovation
during  the  90-Day Review  for  two reasons: (1)  to strengthen or
improve  the  competitiveness  of  American  industry  by improving
cost-effectiveness of  compliance with environmental regulations;
and (2) to promote opportunities for U.S. environmental technology
and service vendors in world markets. EPA is in a special position
to accomplish these  goals because  interested  parties  around the
world   look   to   the   Agency  for  leadership  in  environmental
technology.

     It has become increasingly clear over the past several years
that continued improvement in environmental protection will depend
on innovations in technology and monitoring. A number of Agency and
inter-agency  panels have concluded  that the  increasing  costs of
carrying out the growing number of environmental mandates point to
the need for new technologies that are more cost-effective.   Such
technologies include:

          cleaner, "greener" products;
          cleaner production processes;
          improved pollution co.ntrol equipment;
          more cost-effective cleanup techniques; and
          improved monitoring and measuring methods.

     Part  of  the  reason  that   some  of   these  products  and
technologies have not yet been fully developed and commercialized
is that they face regulatory barriers and economic disincentives.
These barriers and disincentives include unresolved questions about
product  and   cleanup   liability,   technology-based  regulatory
standards and regulatory reliance on "available technology," public
concern over  risk,  inadequate  data on  the potential markets for
various  technologies,   conflicting  regulatory   standards,   and
difficulties in obtaining permits.

     The  Agency  is   taking steps  to  reduce  the  barriers  to
innovation  and  promote the  exchange  of  information.    It is
modifying existing regulatory programs  to remove disincentives for
the  development  and   use  of  new  technologies.     EPA  is  also
establishing an in-house council  to define new technology needs,
form partnerships with industry to meet  these needs, and recognize
outstanding innovations. Nine individual actions  are  listed in the
Index of EPA Actions and Commitments: P10, S2 - S5, S12, S18, S19,
Ml.

     3.5. Export Promotion

     In  response  to  the  President's  call to  promote  economic
growth, EPA chose to focus its  90-Day Review in part on assisting
U.S.  companies in capturing growing  international  markets  for
environmental goods and  services.   The Organization  for Economic

                                41

-------
Cooperation and  Development estimates that this  market is worth
$200 billion annually  and  that  it  will grow at an average annual
rate of 5.5% through the year 2000 (OECD, 1991).  The markets for
environmental  goods   and   services   fall  into   three  general
categories:

1.   technologies that are  required by regulations or legislation,
     e.g. pollution control devices that are an outgrowth of U.S.
     environmental leadership;

2.   technologies that improve efficiency, are cost-effective and
     result in less pollution and/or more waste minimization; and

3.   technologies that respond to an emerging consumer demand for
     "green" products.

U.S. industry is a leader in many of the  technologies suitable for
these markets.

     EPA has two unique and linked  capabilities to promote the use
and  development  of  these  technologies.  First,  by  providing
technical  assistance  and  information  abroad,  especially  in the
developing countries where the  Agency is active,  EPA can enhance
the demand  for environmental technologies  and  services.  Second,
working  with  other  agencies  and  entities  through the  Federal
Technology Transfer Act  and other  programs  such as the Superfund
Innovative  Technology Evaluation  Program,  EPA  can promote the
innovation, development, and diffusion of new technologies. A key
objective of  EPA's future  activity is to use  these capabilities
more effectively.

     In order  to  promote exports of  U.S. environmental goods and
services, EPA will undertake a series of actions. Immediate actions
include  establishing  an EPA  Export  Promotion 2000  study group;
improving coordination with other federal programs that have export
promotion  responsibilities; increasing  international   access  to
EPA's  Environmental  and  Energy  Efficient Technology  Transfer
Clearinghouse;  and  launching  the U.S.  Environmental  Training
Institute  —  a  public-private  endeavor  that will  help  build
environmental  capacity in  developing  countries and provide U.S.
companies with an opportunity to showcase environmental goods and
services to potential clients.

     Future  actions  include building  on existing  bilateral and
multilateral programs to  assess the environmental and technological
needs  of developing  countries  and  newly  democratized nations;
demonstrating the application of emerging technologies for solving
environmental problems;  evaluating the potential for establishing
U.S.  environmental and technology centers  (e.g.,  in cooperation
with  the  Commerce Department  in  Asia,  Mexico  and  elsewhere);
organizing  "reverse"  trade  missions   (i.e., missions  of  foreign
buyers  to the  U.S.); completing  and expanding  a directory  of

                                42

-------
vendors who  offer environmental  goods  and services  (the  "Green
Pages"); and negotiating an interagency agreement with the Agency
for International Development to initiate international pollution
prevention demonstration projects in developing countries.

Four  actions  are  listed  in  the  Index  of  EPA  Actions  and
Commitments: M2 - M5.
     3.6. Small Communities

     Small  communities  are  an  integral part  of American life.
Almost 90% of all the government units with which EPA works serve
communities of fewer than 10/000 people. These communities contain
over 70% of the nation's  landfills,  80%  of the nation's drinking
water systems and 90% of the nation's wastewater facilities.

     With limited financial, technical and institutional resources,
small local governments' ability to meet their communities' needs
can  be  outstripped  by  the  nation's  cumulative  environmental
mandates. EPA realizes that the burden of environmental regulations
on  small  communities could  threaten not  only their ability to
provide environmental services, but their viability as institutions
as well.

     EPA is working hard to change  the  way it works with small
communities.  EPA  recognizes  that  small  communities  are  often
disproportionately burdened by environmental regulations and that
small communities  often require more tailored regulations to help
them protect  their  citizens' health  and the environment.  In an
effort to further the partnership developing between EPA and small
communities, EPA has undertaken several important projects.

o    EPA has established a "Small Communities Cluster" which will
     bring senior EPA headquarters and regional officials together
     with local government officials and public interest groups to
     find realistic,  cost-effective ways  for  even the  smallest
     communities to implement environmental laws.

o    EPA will collect data on the environmental services provided
     by small communities and on their  technical,  financial,  and
     institutional   capacity  to  provide  these   services.   The
     information gained through this program will help EPA improve
     its interaction with small communities.

o    EPA revised-,  in  April, its guidelines  for administration of
     the  Regulatory  Flexibility  Act  to require  more  rigorous
     analysis of the regulatory burdens of small communities and of
     options for minimizing these burdens.

     In addition to these projects,  many of EPA's program offices

                               43

-------
are taking action  on  rules which will benefit small communities.
Seventeen individual actions are listed in the Index of EPA Actions
and Commitments: S6, S7, S10, S23 - 27, S29, S33, Wl, W2, W5, W7,
M6 - M8.
     3.7. Small Businesses

     Small business is a vital part of the U.S. economy. Not only
is small business the source of 50% of the jobs in  this country and
the major source  of  new  job creation,  but it is also the proving
ground  for  many new  business  ideas  which can  have an important
impact on the environment.

     EPA decided to focus on small businesses in the 90-Day Review
because environmental regulations often can  cause severe problems
for these enterprises. Generally speaking,  small businesses cannot
devote the same level of  resources to address environmental issues
as larger businesses.  This does not  mean that small businesses
should be allowed to  abide  by weaker environmental  standards, but
it does  mean that the Agency must think  carefully about  how it
regulates them and the assistance that it gives them.

     Some examples of areas  where the Agency needs  to be especially
sensitive include:

o    the burden of regulatory record-keeping and reporting, and how
     these processes might  be streamlined for small business;

o    the manner in which small businesses can be most efficiently
     informed of applicable requirements  under the multiplicity of
     statutes;

o    the manner in which the Agency analyzes the economic impacts
     of proposed regulations and cumulative  requirements on small
     business;

o    the means by which fines and penalties  can be most equitably
     assessed for small businesses;

o    the coordination between EPA and other government agencies on
     actions that affect small business; and

o    the  involvement of the  small business  community  in  Agency
     decision-making.

     In  the  actions  which  EPA has  initiated as  a  result  of the
90-Day  Review,  there  are  a  number  that  take into  account the
special  circumstances and  concerns  of  small  businesses.  These
actions  cover  most   of  the  areas  listed  above.    Thirty-four
individual  actions  are listed  in the Index of  EPA  Actions and
Commitments: A3  - A5, A8  - A12,  A16,  P3 - P9,  Pll, S2  - S6, S7,

                                44

-------
S10, S23, S25, S27, S28, S33, S36, Wl, W3 - W7 , M8, M10.


     3.8. Inclusionary Rulemaking

     Over the past nine years, EPA has been trying to involve the
public and  regulated  parties more fully  in regulatory decision-
making.  This  experience   has   shown   that  EPA,  industry  and
environmentalists  can work  together to  find solutions  to each
party's  needs.   In most  cases   the  regulations  that  have been
developed are more pragmatic and environmentally effective than
they would  otherwise  have been.  For this reason,  EPA decided to
make inclusionary rulemaking a focus of the 90-Day Review.

     Inclusionary  rulemaking  involves a  range  of  activities,
including:  public hearings and meetings,  workshops, roundtables,
policy dialogues, negotiated rulemaking, and the use of  "alternate
dispute resolution" in enforcement cases.   Industry has testified
before Congress  and at numerous meetings that negotiated  rules save
money. Environmentalists claim that pollution reduction  goals have
not been compromised  and  that  implementation schedules  have been
reasonable. EPA  has  been pleased with the  results and wants  to
expand its activities in this area.

     In the course of the 90-Day Review, EPA conducted an Agency-
wide examination of rules under  development and  concluded that a
series of  rules  may  benefit  from   greater  use  of  inclusionary
processes.  Several additional regulatory negotiations,  including
one on air emissions from architectural and industrial maintenance
coatings, are under consideration.   In addition,  as  noted in the
Index  of  EPA Actions and Commitments, several  of EPA's 90-Day
activities expand the  use  of inclusionary processes: SI, S22, S31,
S32, and W7.


     3.9. RCRA Reform

     The final area on which EPA placed special emphasis  in the 90-
Day Review  was  reform of regulations  to  implement the Resource
Conservation and  Recovery Act  (RCRA).  EPA  is  making  commitments
that will lead to substantial savings in this area, while ensuring
continued protection  of human  health and the  environment.  These
commitments are described earlier in this  chapter, along with the
other reforms being implemented  by the  Office  of  Solid  Waste and
Emergency Response. Twenty-eight individual  actions are  listed in
the Index of EPA Actions and Commitments:  SI - S28.
                               45

-------
                            CHAPTER 3

          OTHER EPA ACTIVITIES THAT SERVE THE OBJECTIVES
                    OF THE PRESIDENT'S REQUEST


     In addition to the actions that EPA is taking specifically as
part of the  90-Day Review, the Agency  is engaged  in a number of
other activities  that support the  President's  request to reduce
unnecessary  regulatory  burdens  and  promote  economic  growth.
Several of the major activities of  this type  are described in this
chapter.

     1.  Strategic Planning and Budgeting
     2.  Applying Total Quality Management
     3.  Permitting Reform
     4.  Reducing Reporting Burdens
     5.  Better Science in Agency Decision-making
     6.  Better Economics in Agency Decision-making
     7.  Voluntary Conservation and Emission Reduction Programs


1.   Strategic Planning and Budgeting

     Over the past three years, EPA has launched a major initiative
to  integrate  the  Agency's  strategic  planning  and  budgeting
processes.  The goal is to focus limited resources on environmental
problems  that pose the  greatest risks  to  human health  and the
environment.   Ten themes drive EPA's  strategic  planning  for the
future:

     1.1)  Strategic Implementation of Statutory Mandates.  EPA is
responsible  for administering twelve  major  federal environmental
statutes  that  have  shaped  the  Agency's   regulatory  programs,
organization and culture.   The Agency has an  extensive set of legal
obligations  under these  statutes, and  is   seeking  to implement
mandated programs in a more integrated, effective way.

     1.2)    Improving  the Science  and Knowledge  Base.    EPA is
improving  cross-media  integration of  science  and  information
management,   including  research   in   environmental  economics.
Specific  efforts   include:     core   research   to  improve  our
understanding  of  relative risks to human health and ecosystems;
cross-media  research and technical assistance to program offices;
economic  research to  improve EPA's ability  to  value ecological
resources and to use market-based approaches to risk reduction; and
improving  data  collection  and reporting   capabilities  through
improved  statistical  methods and analyses  and  application  of
enhanced geographical information  systems.

     1.3)  Pollution  Prevention.   EPA is finding ways to prevent
pollution from occurring and thereby eliminating or minimizing the

                                46

-------
need  for  end-of-pipe  controls.    The  benefits  of  preventing
pollution include reduced costs of ongoing regulatory compliance;
recapturing and recycling waste  streams;  reducing energy demand;
increasing efficiency and performance and reducing consumption of
natural  resources,  virgin  and  hazardous/toxic  materials.    In
carrying out the  1990 Pollution  Prevention  Act,  EPA is screening
new regulatory activities for  pollution  prevention alternatives;
sponsoring  research  on  products,  processes,  recycling/reuse,
economic and institutional factors, and emerging technologies; and
providing  funding and technical  assistance to states  and local
governments.

     1.4)  Geographic  Targeting on an Ecosystem Basis.  Geographic
targeting  involves  thorough integration  of Agency  resources and
actions  across  media,   frequently  using  watersheds  or  other
geographical areas  as a focus.   This approach  promotes holistic
ecosystem protection that carefully selects  the appropriate mix of
regulatory and non-regulatory tools and measures to reduce health
and environmental  risks posed by problems  within a fixed geographic
area.  To date,  EPA has  implemented this approach in water quality
programs within the Great Lakes,  the Chesapeake  Bay,  the Gulf of
Mexico, and other watersheds,  estuaries  and lakes.   Other areas
being considered include flyways,  terrestrial migration corridors,
deep  water  ecosystems,  airsheds  in  major  urban  areas,   and
international border areas.

     1.5)  Greater Reliance  on  Market and Economic Incentives.  In
many areas,  economic  incentives  and disincentives  can stimulate
firms and consumers to improve environmental  quality without having
to use "command and control" regulation.   As  described elsewhere in
this report, EPA is pursuing several  innovations in this area.

     1.6) Improving Cross-Media Program Integration and Multi-Media
Enforcement.  Historically,  EPA regulatory programs have developed
around media-specific goals,  such as clean air or clean water.
This theme supports EPA's efforts to  look broadly across an array
of environmental  problems  at  a  single  site or  among individual
sources  and  pursue  the   option  that  maximizes   health   and
environmental protection.  It also requires  that EPA find ways to
avoid actions that transfer risks from one environmental media to
another. Several efforts  are underway to explore and promote multi-
media  approaches   to  permitting,  compliance  and  enforcement.
Computerized data  systems are being developed to detect patterns of
violations which will  facilitate  cross-media enforcement.  EPA has
concluded  several  innovative  settlement  agreements that require
violators to contribute  to solving the environmental problems they
created or to commit to preventative  actions.

     1.7)  Building  State and  Local  Capacity.   The  majority of
national environmental  programs  are delegated  to and  funded by
states and local governments.  States  are  assuming a growing number
of responsibilities, and local  governments today are increasingly

                               47

-------
becoming  both  the   "regulated  community"  and the  "regulator."
Technical  and financial  assistance  efforts  to  help  states  set
priorities, build state capacity, fund needed infrastructure, and
communicate regulatory and technical information are underway.

     1.8) International Cooperation.  Many environmental problems
transcend political  boundaries and require coordinated, hemispheric
or worldwide  cooperation.   EPA is  actively engaged  in foreign
policy discussions  on issues that  will affect the  nation's and
global environmental quality,  including global  climate change,
upper atmospheric ozone,  and oceans policy.   The  Agency is also
supplying scientific and technical assistance to a growing number
of on-the-ground cooperative efforts  in  Eastern Europe, the former
Soviet Union,  Mexico,  Brazil,  and  the  Caribbean basin.   EPA is
giving new emphasis  to strengthening  bilateral programs, improving
cooperation,   and   finding  ways   to   integrate   economic  and
environmental decision-making.

     1.9)  Education  and  Outreach.    Public  understanding  of
environmental  issues is  critical  to achieving  wise  public  and
private policies and actions. With  this in mind, EPA is expanding
and strengthening its  capabilities  to communicate scientific and
technical   information.   One   important   means   is   through
implementation of the National  Environmental Education Act, which
will focus on Kindergarten through Grade 12 environmental science
curricula.   Outreach efforts include making the  Toxics Release
Inventory data available so that local communities and the public-
at-large can  find ways to reduce potential environmental risks.

     1.10)  Better  Management  and  Infrastructure.     Using  the
concepts and  practices  of  total quality management (TQM), EPA is
seeking improvements in the scope and quality of services that are
provided by encouraging and rewarding individuals and teams that
advance the Agency's efforts to  protect  health and the environment
more effectively.   The Agency  is  addressing the  needs  of EPA's
workforce to be better trained and to recruit and assimilate a more
culturally  diverse  workforce.    EPA  is  continuing to  upgrade
information management systems  to  manage growing  quantities of
environmental data.   The Agency  is also seeking to collaborate with
other  federal   and  private organizations  that  share  common
interests,  and  offer  opportunities  to  merge  activities  and
resources that will  serve the Agency's mission of protecting public
health and the environment.

     Several  of  these themes are echoed in the pages that follow.


2.  Applying  Total  Quality Management

     During the  past 18 months, EPA has undertaken an intensive
Agency-wide program to  implement the principles  of Total Quality
Management  (TQM).    EPA's  TQM  training  and application  of  TQM

                                48

-------
principles  are similar  to  programs in  many public  and private
organizations.  Nearly all Agency management and staff have been or
will be trained in applying TQM to their work by:

     •    reorienting their programs to be more responsive to the
          needs of the regulated community;

     ••    paying more attention to the feedback provided by those
          who  are  involved in  carrying out  particular programs
          (such as state regulators);

     •    actively seeking  ways to eliminate  obsolete policies,
          approval steps and other structural barriers to progress;
          and,

     •    placing increased emphasis on continuous improvement.

     In many ways, TQM principles reinforce the objectives of the
90-Day Review.  EPA is seeking ways to work  with people outside the
Agency to achieve  real  environmental gains in the most effective
way possible.  For  example, EPA is applying  TQM to explore barriers
to technological innovation.  Working  with the National Advisory
Council for  Environmental Policy  and Technology  (NACEPT), EPA is
examining the research and development  community's needs to obtain
permits to test innovative technologies.


3.  Permitting Reform

     EPA is applying Total Quality Management (TQM) principles to
the administration of federal and state permit programs.  Many of
EPA's  policies and  regulations are  implemented through  permit
programs that are integral to EPA's air  quality, water  quality, and
waste management programs.   The  regulated community often comes to
know   EPA   and  state   environmental   agencies   through  their
interactions with permit writers and those who enforce permits.  It
is especially important that these permit programs are efficiently
administered  by state and  federal agencies  in  order  to attain
statutory goals most effectively.

     Looking at federal and state permit programs  from the point of
view of the "customer"  (e.g. the regulated  community) may help EPA
identify  opportunities  to  eliminate  unnecessary  duplication,
streamline permitting processes, and reduce  the uncertainties often
associated with trying to meet permit conditions while regulatory
requirements are changing.  A number of  actions are underway now in
individual  permit  programs  to  improve  their  efficiency  and
effectiveness using TQM principles and techniques. For example, as
described  in  Chapter   2 of  this  report,  EPA  is   using  group
applications and general permits to control water quality impacts
from stormwater drainage. This  will reduce the permitting burden.
In addition,  EPA  will  propose revisions to the  sewage sludge

                                49

-------
standards that will set priorities on the basis of risk and phase
in certain application  requirements  as  companies reapply for new
permits over  the present five year  cycle.   These changes should
enable  the  Agency  to focus  first on  those sources  posing the
greatest risks and to make the process move more smoothly for all
applicants.   Finally,  EPA is convening  focus groups  among the
regulated   community,   states,    permitting  authorities,   and
environmental groups to identify further areas  for improved permit
program efficiency.


4.  Reducing Reporting Burdens

     Another on-going initiative pertains  to reducing the amount
and  type of  information  that  must be  reported to  regulatory
agencies  under several  statutes.    Four  aspects of  EPA program
reporting requirements are under review:  (1) de minimis reporting
thresholds; (2)  overall  systems  structures;  (3)  more consistency
among  state-delegated  programs; and   (4)  opportunities to  use
electronic reporting technologies.

     4.1) De Minimis Thresholds;  Several commenters during the 90-
day  Regulatory  Review  suggested  that  raising  the  reporting
threshold for Toxic Release Inventory chemicals and for reportable
quantities  of hazardous  air pollutants  would  reduce paperwork
burdens on facilities substantially, without creating significant
losses  in data on releases.   EPA offices are exploring ways to
respond to these comments.

     4.2) Systems Structures;  Different EPA programs have created
many related  information  requirements.   Examples include:   (a)
waste/release/pollution  prevention data  collected in  the  Toxic
Release  Inventory, the  Resource  Conservation and Recovery Act
Biennial Report, Hazardous Waste Manifests, and Capacity Assurance
Planning reports;  (b) motor vehicle emissions testing for vehicle
prototype certification; (c) industry-specific surveys,  e.g., under
RCRA and for Effluent  Guidelines  under the Clean Water Act; and (d)
facility/spill  response planning,  under  the Chemical  Accident
Prevention  sections  of  the  Clean  Air  Act,  under  the  Spill
Prevention  Control and Cotmtermeasures  provisions  of  the  Oil
Pollution Act,  and possibly under Underground Storage  Tank and
Occupational Safety and Health Administration programs as well.  In
these and other cases, EPA is analyzing  data, and uses and sources
of the data to identify areas of overlap and suggest more efficient
and less burdensome ways to collect and maintain the data.

     4.3) Improving State  Consistency;    States  implementing EPA
programs  often  develop their own  data  reporting requirements —
creating  additional  reporting   burdens  for  firms operating  in
different  states and arguably,  compromising  states'  ability to
share data  with  each  other.  One  example  is the Hazardous  Waste
Manifest, used to track shipments of hazardous wastes, which exists

                                50

-------
in approximately 20 state-specific versions.   Efforts are underway
to develop uniform or consistent manifest requirements, implemented
through negotiated  rulemaking,  that will meet  states'  needs and
minimize  burdens on  regulated entities  operating across state
lines.   This approach may  be considered wherever  state  program
diversity increases the burden of EPA requirements.

     4.4) Electronic reporting:  Electronic Data Interchange (EDI)
promises  to reduce  burdens  by facilitating  the  automation  of
regulated entities reporting to EPA.  Pilot projects are currently
underway to  demonstrate  this concept in waste  and  water  quality
programs, in collaboration  with states  which have been delegated
authority to administer federal  programs.  In addition, given that
the handling and processing of paper reports constitute substantial
barriers to the coordination of related reporting activities, EDI
is being investigated as  a way to integrate information collection
across various programs.


5.  Better Science in Agency Decision-male ing

     Sound science must be  the  foundation for all EPA policy and
program decisions,  particularly as the environmental  issues  EPA
faces  become more  complex.    Recognizing  the need  to   improve
scientific  data  and  analytic  methodologies,  EPA  has  recently
undertaken several important initiatives.

     In early 1991, EPA commissioned an independent Expert Panel on
the Role of Science at EPA to advise the Agency on how to  achieve
this  objective.    Last  month  this panel  completed its   report,
Safeguarding the Future;   Credible Science,  Credible  Decisions.
This report  contains many specific recommendations  for improving
the Agency's science base and encouraging the development  and use
of  the highest  quality  science.    In  response,  EPA is   already
implementing many of  the recommendations.   EPA  is revising  its
research  planning process;  involving  the  scientific  community
outside of the Agency with a new peer review system; establishing
science advisors in each program office; and placing new emphasis
on recruiting and maintaining high-caliber Agency scientists.

     A  second  initiative is  a  thorough review of the  Agency's
Integrated Risk Management Information System  (IRIS).  Since 1988,
IRIS has been expanded to include hazard identification and human
health risk information for 492 chemicals.   The database contains
risk information that has been derived by Agency consensus, and it
is widely used by health  professionals  and  environmental program
managers  inside  and  outside  the  Agency.    Currently,   EPA  is
undertaking a total quality management  review of  IRIS  to  improve
the quality of  information and service provided to IRIS customers,
through increased public involvement and peer review.

     A third initiative  concerns  risk assessment.  In  the past,

                                51

-------
EPA's  risk  assessments  have  focussed  on  cancer  effects  of
pollution.   During 1992, more  emphasis  is being  placed  on non-
cancer  effects,  exposure assessments,  and  the  development  of
ecological risk assessment guidelines.

     A  fourth  initiative  concerns  how  the  results  of  risk
assessments are characterized by program managers and others.  In
February  1992,  EPA  issued  guidance  on  how  risk  assessment
information  and  risk management  information  (costs,  benefits,
feasibility) need to be presented and described.  These guidelines
will ensure risk assessors better communicate uncertainties to risk
managers,   and that  common  risk descriptors are  used  among all
offices.
6.  Better Economics in Agency Decision-making

     EPA  is making  a  concerted effort  to improve  the  use  of
economics  in Agency decision-making.   To  achieve this,  it has
recently  formed  two independent advisory committees  composed of
national leaders in environmental economics.   These committees will
advise EPA in ways to improve the use of economics  in its programs.
Each of these committees held their first meetings during the 90-
Day Review.

     The  first committee  is the Environmental Economics Advisory
Committee  (EEAC)  of the Science Advisory  Board.   At its April 15
meeting,  EEAC  initiated  a review  of environmental  accounting
practices.   Many economists and others have long been concerned
about the  ability of  conventional  economic  accounting systems to
accurately   reflect  resource   depletion  and   degradation  of
environmental  quality.     Environmental  accounting  provides  a
consistent and comprehensive system for looking at  the interactions
between  the environment  and  the economy.   EPA  has  initiated a
demonstration environmental accounting project for the Chesapeake
Bay region.

     The  second  committee,  the  Clean Air  Act Compliance Analysis
Council (CAACAC), was congressionally mandated under the Clean Air
Act Amendments of 1990  and  held its  first meeting April 19.  The
CAACAC is charged with reviewing and  making  recommendations  to the
Administrator regarding the data, methodologies, and findings for
certain analyses called for  by the Act.  The  Committee is reviewing
Agency plans to conduct a  retrospective (i.e.,  1970-1990) analysis
of the costs and  benefits of the Clean Air Act.
7.  Voluntary Conservation and Emission Reduction Programs

     Oftentimes,  the  most effective way to promote environmental
protection  and  economic growth  is to  provide  information  and
assistance to organizations to encourage them to take actions that

                                52

-------
are in their own economic interests  and provide public benefits as
well.   EPA has  several  such activities underway,  including the
Green Lights Program and the 33/50 toxic waste reduction program.

     The Green Lights Program demonstrates the economic advantages
and environmental benefits of installing energy-efficient lighting.
Participants voluntarily sign an agreement with EPA to survey all
their facilities and install new lighting systems where profitable
and  where lighting  quality  is  not compromised.    EPA  provides
participants  with  technical support  so  that  upgrades  can  be
completed in five years.

     Since January 1991,  425 corporations, seven states, and three
cities have  committed to the Green Lights  program.   Because of
their voluntary commitments, 8.7 billion kilowatt hours of energy
will  be  conserved.   Air  emissions from  electric  power  plants
(carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide) will be reduced
by over seven million metric tons annually  —  for carbon dioxide
reductions, the equivalent of taking 1.6  million cars off the road.
Moreover,  program participants  will be  cutting their  electric
utility bills  by an  estimated  $702 million a  year.  A  similar
initiative  to  promote voluntary production of  energy-efficient
computers ("Green Computers") is also underway.  EPA estimates that
Green Computers could save  at least 20  billion  kilowatt-hours of
electricity and prevent the release  of  15 million tons of carbon
dioxide every year.

     The "33/50" Program is  another voluntary pollution prevention
program.   Under this program, companies develop their own goals and
make commitments to reduce their releases voluntarily of 17 toxic
chemical  wastes through  pollution  prevention   in support  of
national reduction goals of  33%  by  1992 and 50% by  1995.   The 17
chemicals have  been targeted using information  reported  to the
Toxic Release  Inventory  for 1988   as  the  baseline.   Over  6000
companies reported releases  to the environment and/or transfers of
wastes offsite totalling 1.4 billion pounds in the baseline year.
By March 1992,  734  corporations  had  pledged  to reduce in excess of
304 million pounds  of the chemical wastes for these 17 chemicals by
1995.   Some  companies  are going   beyond  the basic program  by
addressing additional chemicals, overseas facilities, and pollution
prevention  management plans which  will lead  to  environmental
improvements on  a  continuing basis  beyond  the  lifetime  of  this
initiative.
                               53

-------
                                 REFERENCES
Farrow,  S.  and  Lyon,  R.  "An Economic  Analysis  of  Clean Water Act  Issues:
Preliminary Results," draft paper, Council on Environmental Policy and Office of
Management and Budget, Executive Office of the President of the United States,
February 6, 1992.

Freeman, A.M., Air and Water Pollution Control; A Benefit-Cost Assessment. New
York, Wiley, 1982.

Hazilla and Kopp,  "Social Cost of Environmental Quality Regulations: A General
Equilibrium Analysis," Journal of Political Economy. 1990, vol. 98,  no. 4.

Jorgenson and Wilcoxen, "Environmental Regulation and U.S. Economic Growth," Rand
Journal of Economics. 1990, vol. 21, no. 2.

Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD),  "The Environmental
Industry:  Trends  and Issues," September 25, 1991.

Portney, P.,  Public Policies for Environmental Protection.  Resources  for the
Future, 1990.

Roper Organization, Roper Reports. 92-1  (1992).

Schelling,  T.,  Choice and Consequences; Perspectives  of  an Errant  Economist.
Harvard University Press, 1984.

Schultz, C., The Public Use of Private Interest. Brookings Institute, 1977.

Science Advisory Board,  Reducing Risk;  Setting Priorities and Strategies for
Environmental Protection. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1990.

U.S.  Environmental  Protection  Agency,  Unfinished   Business;  A  Comparative
Assessment of Environmental Problems. 1987.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Investments; The Cost of a
Clean Environment.  1990a.

U.S.  Environmental  Protection  Agency,   Economic   Incentives:   Options  for
Environmental Protection. 1990b.

U.S.  Environmental  Protection  Agency,  Fiscal Year  1990  Compliance  Report;
National Public Water System Supervision Program. March, 1991.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, The United States Experience with Economic
Incentives to Control Environmental Pollution. 1992, forthcoming.

U.S. International Trade Commission,  International Agreements  to  Protect the
Environment and Wildlife. Publication 2351, January, 1991.
                                      54

-------
                        EXHIBITS
"Reducing  the  Burden of Government  Regulation,"  Memorandum
from  President  George  Bush,   January  28,   1992,  Weekly
Compilation  of  Presidential  Documents,  Vol.  28,  No.  7,
February 17, 1992, pp. 232 - 234.

"Regulatory Coordination," Memorandum  from  President George
Bush, January  28,  1992,  Weekly  Compilation  of  Presidential
Documents, Vol. 28, No. 7,  February 17, 1992, p. 232.

"90-Day  Economic  Review  of  Regulations,"  Memorandum  from
Administrator William K. Reilly, February 5, 1992 (included as
the Appendix to the March 3, 1992, Federal Register notice -
Exhibit 4).

"Ninety Day Economic Review of Regulations," Federal Register,
Vol 57,  No. 42, March 3,  1992, pp. 7564-7566.
                          55

-------
Weekly Compilation of
Presidential
Documents
232
 Monday, February 17, 1992
 Volume 28—Number 7
 Pages 231-268
Memorandum on Regulatory
Coordination
January 28,1992

Memorandum for the Secretary of the
Interior, the Secretary of Agriculture, the
Secretary of Energy, the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency, the
Chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, the Chairman ofthe Nuclear
Regulatory Commission
Subject: Regulatory Coordination
  As you know, the Congress has failed to
enact important growth-oriented legislation
that we have proposed. Although we will con-
tinue to work with the Congress to enact
these proposals, we must also redouble our
efforts to create jobs and achieve economic
growth within existing statutory constraints.
  For such efforts to succeed, we must pre-
vent the fragmentation of policy-making and
better coordinate existing programs within
the executive branch. We have  made great
strides in this area, but more remains to be
done. Your agencies share responsibility for
promoting safe and efficient energy produc-
tion while at the same time protecting the
environment. It  is therefore essential that
you work together to streamline the regu-
latory process and ensure that the regulated
community is not  subject to duplicative or
inconsistent regulation.
  I hope that improved coordination will be
one especially valuable outcome of the 90-
day moratorium and review period described
in the attached memorandum. I look forward
to your reports on this important undertak-
ing. Although the Congress  has created the
regulatory schemes within which we must
operate, I am confident that, with your help,
the executive branch can do much to create
conditions conducive to a healthy and robust
economy.
                       George Bush

Note: This memorandum was released by the
Office of the Press Secretary on January 30
Jan. 301 Administration of George Bush, 1992

 but was not made available in time for pub-
 lication in the appropriate issue.
 Memorandum on Reducing the
 Burden of Government Regulation
 January 28,1992

 Memorandum for Certain Department and
 Agency Heads
 Subject: Reducing the Burden of
 Government Regulation
   As you know, excessive regulation and red
 tape have imposed an enormous burden on
 our economy—a hidden tax on the average
 American household in the form  of higher
 prices for goods and services. Just  as Ameri-
 cans have the right to expect  their govern-
 ment to spend tax dollars wisely,  they have
 the right to expect  cost-effective  and mini-
 mally burdensome regulation.  Although the
 Congress has thus far failed to pass most of
 the Administration's regulatory reform pro-
 posals, there is much the Administration can
 and should do on its own to reduce the bur-
 den of regulation.
   A major part of this undertaking must be
 to weed out unnecessary and burdensome
 government regulations, which impose need-
 less costs on consumers and substantially im-
 pede economic growth.  We must be con-
 stantly vigilant to avoid unnecessary regula-
 tion and red tape.
   We must also remember that even those
 regulatory programs that may have been jus-
 tified when adopted often fail to keep pace
 with  important  innovations.   New  tech-
 nologies and markets can quickly make exist-
 ing rules obsolete. By the same token, exist-
 ing  regulations often impose unnecessary
 constraints on emerging technologies  and
 markets that could  not have been foreseen
 at the time the  regulations were promul-
 gated. Existing regulatory programs also
 need to be revised to take advantage of regu-
 latory innovations, such as the  flexible, mar-
 ket-based approaches to regulation that many
 of your agencies have developed over the
 past few years.
   I am concerned that, because of the con-
 stant pressure to develop new  programs, we
                                                           56

-------
Administration of George BusK, 1992 /Jan. 30

are not doing nearly enough to review and
revise existing programs. For that reason, I
ask that each of your agencies set aside a
90-day period, beginning today, to evaluate
existing regulations and programs and to
identify and accelerate action  on  initiatives
that will eliminate any unnecessary regu-
latory burden or  otherwise promote eco-
nomic growth. During this period, agency re-
sources  should, to the maximum extent pos-
sible, be devoted to these efforts. Specifi-
cally, I  request that you take the following
steps:
  1. During the  90-day  review period, your
agency  should work with the public, other
interested agencies, the Office of Informa-
tion and Regulatory Affairs, and the Council
on  Competitiveness to (i) identify each of
your agency's regulations and programs that
impose a substantial cost on the economy and
(ii)  determine whether each such regulation
or program adheres to  the following stand-
ards:
  (a) The expected benefits to society of any
     regulation should clearly outweigh the
     expected costs it imposes on society.
  (b) Regulations  should be fashioned to
     maximize net benefits to society.
  (c) To the maximum extent possible, regu-
    latory agencies should set performance
    standards instead of prescriptive com-
     mand-and-control requirements, there-
    by allowing the regulated community to
    achieve regulatory goals  at the lowest
    possible cost.
  (d) Regulations should incorporate market
    mechanisms to  the maximum extent
    possible.
  (e) Regulations should provide clarity and
    certainty to the regulated community
    and should be designed to avoid need-
    less litigation.
  2. To the maximum  extent permitted  by
law, and as  soon as  possible,  your agency
should propose administrative  changes (in-
cluding  repeal, where appropriate) that will
bring each regulation ana program into con-
formity  with the standards set forth above.
As  you  implement  these  proposals, you
should carefully  order your agency's regu-
latory priorities to ensure that programs im-
posing the largest  unnecessary burden are
the first to be revised or eliminated.
                                     233

  3. You should designate, in consultation
with the Council on Competitiveness, a sen-
ior official to serve as your agency's perma-
nent regulatory oversight official. This person
will be responsible for conducting the review,
for implementing the  resulting proposals,
and for ensuring that future regulatory ac-
tions conform to the standards set forth in
this memorandum and in applicable Execu-
tive orders.
  4. To  the maximum extent permitted by
law, and subject  to the  exceptions listed
below, your agency should refrain from issu-
ing any proposed or final rule during the 90-
day review period. This  moratorium on  new
regulations will ensure that, to the maximum
extent possible, agency resources are devoted
to reducing the regulatory  burden on the
economy. Of course, you should not post-
pone any regulation that is subject to a statu-
tory or judicial deadline that falls during the
review period.  This  moratorium does not
apply to:
  (a) regulations that you determine, after
    consultation with the working group of
    the  Council on Competitiveness  de-
    scribed  below,  will  foster economic
    growth;
  (b) regulations  that  respond to emer-
    gencies  such as  situations that pose an
    imminent danger to human health or
    safety;
  (c) regulations that you determine,  after
    consultation with the working group of
    the  Council on Competitiveness  de-
    scribed below, are essential to a criminal
    law enforcement function of the United
    States;
  (d) regulations issued with respect to a
    military or foreign affairs function of the
    United States;
  (e) regulations related solely to agency or-
    ganization, management, or personnel;
    and
  (f) formal  regulations required by statute
    to be made on the  record after oppor-
    tunity for an agency hearing.
  5. At the end of the review period, each
agency should submit a written report to me.
Each report should indicate the regulatory
changes recommended or made during the
review period and the potential savings to the
economy of those changes, including an esti-
                                  57

-------
234                                       Jan. 301 Administration of George Bush, 1992

mate of the number of jobs that will be cre-
ated. It should also include a summary of
any regulatory  programs that are left un-
changed and an explanation of how such pro-
grams  are consistent with  the regulatory
standards set forth in paragraph 1 above.
  The 90-day review, and the preparation of
the reports described in paragraph 5.above,
will be  coordinated by a working group of
the Council on Competitiveness, chaired by
the Chairman of the Council of Economic
Advisers and the Counsel to the President
  I look forward to your reports on this im-
portant undertaking. I  am  confident that,
with your help, the executive branch can do
much to  create conditions conducive to a
healthy and robust economy.
                         George Bush
The Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary
of Defense, the Attorney General, the
Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of
Agriculture, the Secretary of Commerce, the
Secretary of Labor, the Secretary of Health
and Human Services, the Secretary of
Housing and Urban Development, the
Secretary of Transportation, the Secretary of
Energy, the Secretary of Education, the
Chairman of the Interstate Commerce
Commission, the Chairman of the Board of
Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the
Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission,
the Chairperson of the Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation, the Chairman of the
Securities and Exchange Commission, the
Chairman of the Federal Communications
Commission, the Chairman of the Federal
Maritime Commission, the Chairman of the
Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission, the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency, the
Chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, the Chairman of the
Commodity Futures Trading Commission,
the Chairman of the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission

Note: This memorandum was released by the
Office of the Press Secretary on January 30
but was not made available in time for pub-
lication in the appropriate issue.
                               58

-------
7564	Federal Register  / Vol. 57. No. 42 / Tuesday. March 3, 1992 / Proposed Rules
                                   ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
                                   AGENCY

                                   40 CFR Chapter I

                                   [FRL-4111-*]

                                   Ninety Day Economic Review of
                                   Regulations

                                   AGENCY: Environmental Protection
                                   Agency.
                                   ACTION: Request for public comment

                                   SUMMARY: This document requests
                                   public comments that will assist the
                                   Environmental Protection Agency (EPAJ
                                   in responding to a directive from
                                   President Bush. The directive requests
                                   the Agency to undertake a 90-day
                                   review to identify any unnecessary and
                                   burdensome regulations which impose
                                   needless costs on consumers and
                                   substantially impede economic growth,
                                   and to accelerate actions which will
                                   promote economic growth. EPA invites
                                   the public to make written comments
                                   and/or to attend several open meetings.
                                   DATES: EPA invites members of the
                                   public to make written comments by
                                   March 20,1992. Because the 90-day
                                   period will  conclude on April 27,1992.
                                   comments received later than March 20,
                                   1992, will still be welcome, but EPA may
                                   not be able to consider them fully jn this
                                   90-day review. EPA will also include
                                   discussion of possible regulatory
                                   changes at several meetings open to the
                                   public (see  SUPPLEMENTARY
                                   INFORMATION below). At these meeting*
                                   EPA hopes  to consider any written
                                   comments that have been received on
                                   the areas being discussed; thus it would
                                                      59

-------
                Federal Ragtoter  /  VoL  57, No. 42 / Tuesday. March 3. 1992 / Proposed "Rules
                                                                       7565
be helpful (although not required) if
written commentB on issues that might
be discussed at these meetings are
received at least several days before the
meetings. There will also be time set
aside at these meetings for members of
the public to speak.
      KSES: Five copies of each set of
written comments should be sent to:
Assistant Administrator for Policy,
Planning and Evaluation (PM-219),
Attention: 90-Day Review, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 401M
St. SW.. Washington, DC 20460.
Comments should include the docket
number FRL-4111-8. The public docket
will include copies of all written
comments received in response to this
notice. The docket will be available for
public review at EPA Headquarters
during normal business hours. To review
the docket please contact Mark
Goldman at EPA Headquarters,
(202)260-4454.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
For general information contact Mark
Goldman. (202)260-4454. Office of
Communications, Education and Public
Affairs (A-107), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 401M St. SW.,
Washington, DC 20460. For specific
information about one of the public
meetings or particular EPA programs,
see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
below.
SUPPLEMENTARY MFORMATKM:

Background
  On January 28,1992, President Bush
requested the Administrator of the -
Environmental Protection Agency, along
with the heads of other Federal
regulatory departments and agencies to
"set aside a 90-day period * * * -to
evaluate existing regulations and
programs and to identify and accelerate
action on initiatives that will eliminate
any unnecessary regulatory burden or
otherwise promote economic growth."
The President asked the Agency to
identify those regulations which impose
substantial costs on the economy and to
determine whether each such regulation
adheres to a set of five standards or
criteria which he set out in his
memorandum. He further requested the
Agency to work closely with the public
and other agencies on this effort and to
make a report to him at the end of the
90-day period. (See Weekly Compilation
of Presidential Documents, February 17,
1992, Vol. 28 No. 7, pg. 232. "Reducing
the Burden of Government Regulation,"
Memorandum from President George
Bush, January 28,1992, and "Regulatory
Coordination," Memorandum from
President George Bush, January 28,
1992.)
 • In response to this directive, EPA has
initiated a review of tts regulations and
related aqgvflies. In a memorandum to
key Ageney staff, EPA Administrator
William K. Reilly stated that the
President's request "presents EPA with
an opportunity to accelerate the use of
innovative, cost-minimizing regulatory
approaches and to speed pro-growth
activities. It also provides an
opportunity to reconsider regulations
that unnecessarily impede economic
growth." (See Appendix 1 "90-Day
Economic Review of Regulations,"
Memorandum from Administrator
William K. Reilly. February 5.1992.)
   Administrator Reilly's memorandum
stated that to fulfill the President's
request, EPA will undertake "a 90-day
effort to identify specific steps we could
take in each of these areas, and to
provide an assessment of the economic
effects of suggested actions * * '.All of
these actions must be consistent with
our statutory mandates and
environmental objectives." The
memorandum further stated that, "In
fact these initiatives promise to advance
environmental interests, which is the
President's objective, by better
integrating our efforts with national
economic priorities of promoting jobs,
investment and growth." Administrator
Reilly's memorandum made it clear that
the intent of EPA's review is not to slow
down environmental progress, but
rather to find ways to achieve this
progress in protecting public health and
 the environment in a more economically
 efficient manner.
   In order to make this 90-day review as
 meaningful as possible, EPA plans to
 select a limited number of specific
 regulations and related activities .which
- appear to present special opportunities
 to promote the President's goals and to
 focus its analysis on them. Although
 EPA will be preparing a report for the
 President on  the review at the end of 90
 days, some of the analyses may
 continue past that time.
   For its review, EPA will select the
 topics for focussed analysis from
 existing and proposed individual
regulations, groups of regulations, non-
regulatory programs and policies and
 procedures that implement those
 regulations and programs. The
 Administrator's memorandum and the
section of this notice entitled "Program
Office Reviews and Public Meetings"
 list several topics that are already being
considered for this review and on which
 EPA would especially appreciate
 comments.
   Public comments  on  regulations under
 development will continue to proceed
 through the normal notice and comment
 process, and this notice does not extend
 those comment periods. Further, any
 revisions to regulations initiated as a
 result of this review will be made only
 after full notice and comment.
   Thus, the purpose of this request for
 public comment is to invite interested
 members of the public to identify
 regulations and related activities for
 EPA's review and to provide
 information that would be useful to EPA
 in its review.

 Guidelines for Comments
   In light of the short time available for
 this review, the Agency makes the
 following requests concerning any
 comments  that members of the public
 choose to submit:
   1. Each regulation or related activity
 that a commenter suggests for review
 should meet the President's criteria as
 well as meet the following tests:
   (a) Any suggested changes that might
 be made as a result of the review must
 be within EPA's statutory authority.
   (b) Significant economic savings
 would be possible if changes are made.
   (c) Proposed changes will not
 compromise environmental protection
 goals.
   2. Because EPA intends to focus its
 review on a limited number of
 regulations and related activities,
 commenters who suggest more than one
 regulation  or related activity for review
 should also suggest which one(s) should
 receive EPA's priority attention.
   3. Each regulation or related activity
 that is suggested for review should be
-accompanied by a short (1-2 page)
••summary of why it meets the President's
 criteria and any factual material or
 analysis that would assist EPA in the
 review. Supporting materials may be
 appended. EPA is particularly interested
 in information concerning economic and
 environmental effects.
   4. The comments most useful to EPA
 would be those that both (1) identify a
 specific regulatory burden that can be
 shown to be unnecessary, for instance,
 due to changes in the regulatory context
 or new data or analysis, and (2) include
 suggestions for achieving the same
 environmental goal(s) in a less
 burdensome or more efficient manner.

 Program Office Reviews and Public
 Meetings
   The four EPA program offices are at
 various stages in reviews of several
 •topics. They have also scheduled some
 meetings to which members of the
 public are  invited. Formal advisory
 committee meetings listed below also
 have been or will be announced
 separately in the Federal Register. These

-------
 7566
Federal Register  / Vol. 57, No. 42 / Tuesday. March 3. 1992  / Proposed  Rules
 meetings will focus in whole or in part
 on the review effort
    As mentioned above, at these
 meetings EPA hopes to consider any
 written comments that have been
 received on the areas being discussed;
 thus it would be helpful (although not
 required) if written comments on issues
 that might be discussed at these
 meetings are received at least several
 days before the meetings. There will
 also be time set aside at these meetings
 for members of the public to speak.
   1. Office of Air and Radiation. The
 Clean Air Act Advisory Committee will
 meet on Tuesday. March 31,1992, from
 10:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., at the J.W. Marriott
 Hotel, Pennsylvania Ave. and 14th
 Street N.W., Washington. DC. For
 further information contact: Paul
 Rasmussen (202) 260-7430.
   2. Office of Water. The Management
 Advisory Group to the Assistant
 Administrator for Water will  meet on
 March 9.10. and 11,1992, at the Holiday
 Inn, Interstate 80. Grand island,
 Nebraska. On March 11, at 10 a.m., a
 portion of the agenda will be dedicated
 to two particular topics of discussion
 under the moratorium: stormwater
 control and trading discharge
 allocations between point and nonpoint
 sources. For further information contact
 Michelle Miller, (202) 260-5554.
   3. Office of Solid Waste and
 Emergency Response. The Office has
 recently received extensive public
 comment as it conducted reviews of
 Superfund and Resource Conservation
 and Recovery Act  (RCRA)
 Implementation. These reviews have
 suggested a series  of areas  for reform. In
 addition, the Office has recently
 conducted a series of public outreach
 activities involving affected
 environmental groups and citizens,
 regulated industries, states  and local
 governments, research institutions, and
 other Federal Agencies. Based on these
 efforts, the  Office is focussing during the
 Spring of 1992 on two areas of reform:
 Redirecting RCRA towards waste
 presenting significant risks; and
 revitalization of Superfund. The Office
 plans to publish a Federal Register
 notice inviting comment on the first area
 for reform in April. A public meeting on
 the second  area for reform is planned
 for late March (details will be
 announced when they are available). In
- addition, the Office will hold public
 meetings and have additional
 opportunities for public comment at
                        other areas are targeted for reform in the
                        near future. For further information
                        contact: Margaret Schneider (202) 280-
                        4617.
                          4. Office of Pesticides, Prevention and
                        Toxic Substances. The Office plans to
                        take advantage of upcoming meetings of
                        interested groups to solicit public input
                        on actions the Agency is taking and
                        might take to improve its programs. In
                        particular, officials  will attend the
                        Pesticide Users Advisory Committee
                        meeting on March 24-25,1992, and the
                        meeting of the American Association of
                        Pesticide Control Officials on March 16-
                        18,1992. both in Washington, DC. At
                        these meetings, EPA plans to discuss,
                        among other current issues, incentives
                        to encourage the development and
                        registration of pesticides that may
                        present lower overall risks to human
                        health and the environment than those
                        currently on the market. The Office is
                        also already considering several specific
                        issues in the context of this review: How
                        best to address the  risks of lawn care
                        pesticides, chemical inventory
                        exemptions and EPA's Section 6(e)
                        policy on environmental releases under
                        the Toxic Substances Control Act For
                        further information  contact: Judith
                        Nelson (202) 260-2890.
                          Dated: February 27.1992.
                        Richard D. Morgenstem,
                        Acting Assistant Administrator for Policy.
                        Planning and Evaluation.

                        Appendix

                          1. "90-Day Economic Review of
                        Regulations," Memorandum from
                        Administrator William K. Reilly.
                        February 5,1992.
                        February 5,1992.
                        Memorandum
                        To: Assistant Administrators, General
                           Counsel, Inspector General, Regional
                           Administrators, Associate
                           Administrators
                          Subject: 90-Day Economic Review of
                           Regulations
                          President Bush has asked each federal
                        agency to review its regulations over the next
                        90 days. I fully support this initiative, for I
                        believe it presents EPA with an opportunity
                        to accelerate the use of innovative, cost- '
                        minimizing regulatory  approaches and to
                        speed pro-growth activities. It also provides
                        an opportunity to reconsider regulations that
                        unnecessarily impede economic growth.  I
                        have directed Dick Motgenstera to lead a 90-
                        day effort to identify specific steps we could
                        take in each of these areas, and to provide an
                        assessment of the economic effects of
                        suggested action*. Your participation and
 support are critical. All of these actions must
 be consistent with our statutory mandates
 and environmental objectives.
  While many of EPA's regulations are
 exempt from the moratorium because of
 statutory or judicial deadlines (including. I
 am assured by both Michael Boskin and
 Boyden Gray, proposals necessary to meet
 such deadlines), the review should cover the
 full range of EPA activities. We should first
 Identify those rules or proposals necessary to
 meet deadlines to ensure they are put into the
 review process as early as possible.
 Moreover, we should scrutinize every
 regulation to assure that expected costs do
 not exceed expected benefits, and must
 continue  to pursue vigorously the most cost-
 effective  strategies in all our regulatory
 actions. At the White House meeting on  the
 review, I  proposed the following areas in
 which I expect EPA can implement more
 cost-effective approaches to achieving
 environmental objectives:
  • Reduce regulatory b.irdens for small
 communities and small bub nesses;
  • Increase incentives for U.e use of clean
 fuels such as natural gas:
  • Reform RCRA (through legisL'jnn or
 regulation—the mixture and deriveo  from
 rule offers a near-term opportunity);
  • Expand market-based approaches to
 regulations;
  • Accelerate tnctuaionary ralemaking
 (particularly negotiated rulemakings, or "reg
 negs");
  • Accelerate rules that reduce the
 regulatory burden on the economy; and
  • Strengthen innovative technology
 development and export promotion efforts.
  In addition, we should explore ways to
 speed biotechnology reforms.
  Nothing I have proposed is inconsistent
 with EPA priorities. In fact, these initiatives
 promise to advance environmental interests,
 which is the President's objective, by better
 integrating our efforts with national economic
 priorities  of promoting jobs, investment and
 growth. We have already made substantial
 progress toward furthering economic
 objectives through instituting regulatory
 reforms and developing programs that benefit
 both the economy and the environment, often
 while increasing energy efficiency. Enduring
 public support for environmental protection
 depends on continued efforts to develop and
 implement the most economically efficient
 environmental programs.
  Dick will develop a strategy for the review
 in consultation with you. He will follow up
 with each of you shortly. Given your
commitment to developing environmental
programs  sensitive to economic concerns. I
am confident the review will be productive. I
have attached, for your review, a
memorandum on this subject issued by the -
President  on January 28.1992.
William K. ReiUy.

(FR Doc •92-5008 Filed 2-28-92:1119 pm|
                                                             61

-------
                   INDEX OF EPA ACTIONS AND COMMITMENTS
(Listed by Office,  Cross-Referenced by the Administrator's Priority Areas)
REF.
NO.


Al
A2
A3
A4
I
OAR ACTIONS

REVISIONS TO EXISTING REGULATIONS
Review Radionuclides NESHAP for
NRG Licensees
— reduce duplication with NRC
Eliminate Smoke Standard for Heavy
Duty Diesel Engines
— revisit in light of more recent
requirements
Revise Radon Home Building
Standards Guidance
— improve cost -effectiveness by
targeting areas with highest radon
potential
Exemption of Perchloroethylene
(Perc) As a Volatile Organic
Compound (VOC) Due to Its
Negligible Ozone Contribution
— allows states to eliminate VOC
rules for PERC sources, especially
small sources like drycleaners
ACTION/ COMMITMENT


NPRM, July 1992
NPRM, December 1992
Propose revised
guidance, October
1992
NPRM, June 1992
ECONOMIC EFFECT


Cost savings: $3
million in first
year
Cost savings:
$100,000 annually
per manufacturer
New approach
limits cost to
$500 per house

ADMINISTRATOR' S
PRIORITY AREAS




Small Business
Small Business
                                    62

-------
REP.
NO.
OAR ACTIONS
ACTION/COMMITMENT
ECONOMIC EFFECT
ADMINISTRATOR'S
PRIORITY AREAS
AS    Revise Capture Efficiency
      Guidelines
      — explore less burdensome ways to
      test the effectiveness of
      emission-reduction methods for
      painting processes; previously
      mandated complex test required
      building an enclosure around the
      process	
                                    Complex test
                                    suspended March 20,
                                    1992; guidance,
                                    April 1993
                                         Small Business
A6    Improving Cost-Effectiveness of
      MACT Standards
      — seek public comment on several
      specific strategies for improving
      cost-effectiveness
                                    Seek comment in
                                    preamble to the
                                    Hazardous Organics
                                    NESHAP (HON), April
                                    1992
                                         Incentives
A7    Revision of Electric Utility New
      Source Requirements ("WEPCo")
      — improves flexibility and
      certainty by exempting pollution
      control projects and revising
      requirements for other types of
      plant modifications	
                                    Final rule, Spring
                                    1992
                      Cost savings of
                      $400 million -
                      1.1 billion per
                      'year
                   Natural Gas
      ECONOMIC INCENTIVES
A8    Assistance to California South
      Coast Market-Incentives Program
      — assures cost-effective
      attainment of air quality
      standards in Southern California
      by providing technical help in use
      of market approaches to pollution
      control
                                    On-going technical
                                    assistance;
                                    establish key
                                    elements for
                                    acceptable program
                      Cost savings of
                      $270 - 430
                      million annually
                   Incentives
                   Small Business
                                                    63

-------
REF.
NO.
OAR ACTIONS
ACTION/COMMITMENT
ECONOMIC EFFECT
ADMINISTRATOR'S
PRIORITY AREAS
A9    Accelerated Retirement of Older
      Vehicles ("Scrappage")
      —improves cost-effectiveness of
      ozone control by allowing
      emissions from scrapped vehicles
      to be traded for costly
      stationary-source emissions	
                                    Information
                                    document, March
                                    1992; Guidance,
                                    September 1992 (see
                                    All)
                      Combined with All
                   Incentives
                   Small Business
A10   State Grants Program
      — provides targeted funds to
      states for developing cost-
      effective market-based approaches
      to pollution control	
                                    $610,000 to be
                                    awarded in FY92
                                         Incentives
                                         Small Business
All   Mobile-Stationary Source Trading
      Program
      —improves cost-effectiveness of
      ozone control by allowing
      emissions trading between mobile
      and stationary sources
                                    Guidance, September
                                    1992
                      Cost savings of
                      $100 - 750
                      million annually
                   Incentives
                   Small Business
A12   Expansion of Economic Incentives
      Rule
      — expands limited Clean Air Act
      mandate into broad guidance and
      encourages use of market-based
      pollution control programs where
      appropriate	
                                    NPRM, May 1992;
                                    promulgate, November
                                    1992
                                         Incentives
                                         Small Business
A13   Emissions Averaging in the
      Hazardous Organics NESHAP (EON)
      —improves cost-effectiveness of
      air toxic controls by allowing
      emissions averaging among all
      sources at a facility	
                                    NPRM, April 1992
                                         Incentives
                                                    64

-------
"REF.
NO.

A14
A15


A16
OAR ACTIONS
NATURAL GAS
Development of Coalbed Methane
— establishes procedures for
addressing conflicting ownership
claims to coalbed methane, thereby
encouraging the capture and
sale/use of this resource
Develop Emission Standards for
Natural Gas Vehicles
— promotes natural gas as
automobile fuel by providing
incentives for the use of natural-
gas vehicles through the
availability of CAFE credits, and
by providing regulatory certainty
to vehicle producers

SMALL BUSINESS
Enhanced Implementation of Small
Business Assistance Program (SBAP)
— augments mandated program
through more on-site visits and
regional meetings with those
having difficulty in planning for
and/or implementing a SBAP
ACTION/ COMMITMENT

Study completed, May
1992
NPRM, June 1992


Increased on-site
planning assistance
in FY92 and FY93
ECONOMIC EFFECT






ADMINISTRATOR' S
PRIORITY AREAS

Natural Gas



Small Business
65

-------
REF.
NO.


PI
P2
P3
P4
P5
OPPIS ACTIVITIES

PESTICIDES
Reduced Risk Pesticides
— incentives for development and
registration of "safer" pesticides
(e.g. . reduce data requirements,
fee waivers)
Microbial Pesticides: Experimental
Use Permits and Notification (FIFRA
Biotech rule)
— narrows the scope of
genetically modified and
nonindigenous organisms subject to
small-scale testing notification
requirements
Reregistration Workshop
— identify problems and issues for
pesticides reregistration by
meeting with registrants and others
Pheromone Project
— explore modifications to
procedures and regulations to
encourage use (e.g. . further reduce
data requirements)
Minor Use Project
— examine ways to provide relief
for users and registrants of minor
use pesticides
ACTION/ COMMITMENT


Publish FR notice,
May 1992
Publish NPRM, May
1992
Hold workshop, May
26-28, 1992
Users' manual, Summer
1992
Develop legislative
initiative, late
Spring/Summer 1992
ECONOMIC EFFECT



$100,000-500,000
savings in direct
cost per year;
reduction in
regulatory
uncertainty



ADMINISTRATOR' S
PRIORITY AREAS


Biotechnology
Incentives
Biotechnology
Small Business
Small Business
Small Business
66

-------
REF.
NO.
OPPTS ACTIVITIES
ACTION/COMMITMENT
ECONOMIC EFFECT
ADMINISTRATOR'S
PRIORITY AREAS
     TOXICS
P6
TSCA Section 8(e) - Modifications
to Policy Guidance on Reporting of
Environmental Release Information
— (e.g., establish threshold for
reporting releases to the
environment, eliminate duplicative
reporting)	
Publish FR notice,
late May - early June
1992
                   Small Business
P7
PMN Exemption Rules
— amend rules to reduce
administrative burdens/costs
(polymer exemption rule; low volume
exemption rule; and Expedited
Follow-Up Significant New Use Rule)
and develop new exemption for "low
risk" substances
NPRM, July 1992
$10 million per
year
Incentives
Small Business
P8
TSCA Chemical Inventory
— exempt certain substances from
TSCA inventory and premanufacture
notification reporting	
Draft revised
guidance or rule
amendments late 1992
                   Small Business
P9
Reclassification of PCB and PCB-
Contaminated Transformers
— relax regulatory requirements
for reclassifying PCB transformers
to a lower regulatory status based
on new data
NPRM, September 1992
Small direct
savings and
significant
decrease in
potential
liability
associated with
PCB cleanups
Small Business
                                                    67

-------
REF.
NO.
P10
Pll
OPPTS ACTIVITIES
PCB Disposal Rule
— increase flexibility for cleanup
of large volumes of PCB
contaminated wastes (soil, dredged
material); reduce requirements for
R&D and treatability studies; and
reduce permitting paperwork for
multi-jurisdictional sites
TRI
— evaluation of options for
reducing reporting burdens (e.g. .
modify thresholds for reporting,
exempt small releasers, etc.)
ACTION/COMMITMENT
NPRM, Fall 1992
ANPRM, Spring/Summer
1992
ECONOMIC EFFECT
$500 million - $1
billion savings
per year

ADMINISTRATOR' S
PRIORITY AREAS
Tech Innovation
Biotechnology
Small Business
68

-------
REF.
NO.
OSWER ACTIVITIES
ACTION/COMMITMENT
ECONOMIC EFFECTS
ADMINISTRATOR'S
PRIORITY AREAS
      RETARGETING RCRA TOWARD HIGH RISK
      WASTES
SI    Hazardous Waste Identification
      Rule
      — proposed rule will refocus the
      regulatory system on high risk
      waste,activities; will remove low-
      risk wastes from Subtitle C
      regulation
                                    NPRM, early May 1992
                      Depending on
                      final approach,
                      cost savings of
                      $60 million -
                      $1.8 billion
                      annually — much
                      from contaminated
                      soil
                   RCRA
                   Inclusionary
                   Rulemaking
S2    Redefinition of Solid Waste
      — four potential rules to tailor
      requirements to the unique
      management practices used by
      industry and to encourage
      recycling — areas include: 1)
      "universal wastes", or wastes
      commonly and widely generated at
      non-industrial sites that can be
      recycled without the need for
      substantial regulatory control
      (e.g.. ni-cad batteries and
      fluorescent bulbs); 2) cement and
      other building materials (examines
      appropriate use of hazardous waste
      in making cement and other
      building materials); 3) low-risk
      storage activities, especially
      those associated with recycling;
      and 4) metals reclamation	
                                    Universal wastes
                                    NPRM, June 1992;
                                    cement and other
                                    building materials
                                    study, September
                                    1992; low-risk
                                    storage study,
                                    September 1992;
                                    metals reclamation
                                    study, September
                                    1992
                      Promote sound
                      recycling
                   RCRA
                   Tech Innovation
                                                    69

-------
REP.
NO.
OSWER ACTIVITIES
ACTION/COMMITMENT
ECONOMIC EFFECTS
ADMINISTRATOR'S
PRIORITY AREAS
      EXPEDITING THE PACE AND
      ELIMINATING UNNECESSARY COSTS OF
      RCRA CORRECTIVE ACTION
S3    Define Two New Unit Typest

      - Corrective Action Management
      Unit ("CAMU")
      — allows broad area of
      contamination to be designated as
      a unit; movement and consolidation
      of waste within the unit would not
      trigger land disposal restrictions
      or minimum technology
      regu irement s; and

      - Temporary Unit
      — allow temporary use of less
      stringent requirements as part of
      cleanup process	
                                    Final rule, December
                                    1992 (separated from
                                    full Corrective
                                    Action Rule)
                      Decreases
                      corrective action
                      costs
                   RCRA
                   Tech Innovation
                   Biotechnology
S4    Contaminated Soil
      — revise treatment standards;
      will encourage use of innovative
      and cost-effective technologies
      for soils
                                    NPRM, Fall 1992
                      Cost savings of
                      $2.4-3.2 billion
                      per year — not
                      additive with Si
                   RCRA
                   Tech Innovation
                   Biotechnology
S5    Modify Treatment Standards for
      Contaminated Debris by Adopting a
      Technology-Based Approach
      — currently, using numerical
      concentration standards may
      subject debris to unnecessary
      treatment given the risks involved
                                    Final rule, June
                                    1992
                      Cost savings up
                      to $80 million
                      annually
                   RCRA
                   Tech Innovation
                                                    70

-------
REF.
NO.
OSWER ACTIVITIES
ACTION/COMMITMENT
ECONOMIC EFFECTS
ADMINISTRATOR'S
PRIORITY AREAS
S6    Suspension of TC Rule for Non-UST
      Petroleum Contaminated Media
      — would apply to states with
      legal authorities and technical
      programs in place for cleanup
      response to petroleum releases,
      and controls on the disposition of
      wastes generated from cleanups	
                                    NPRM, June 1992
                      Cost savings of
                      $75-100 million
                      annually
                   RCRA
                   Small Business
                   Small Communities
S7    Final Determination of the
      Applicability of the TC Rule to
      UST contaminated Media and Debris
                                    FR notice on data
                                    availability and
                                    request for comment,
                                    July 1992	
                      Decrease
                      corrective action
                      costs at UST
                      facilities
                   RCRA
                   Small Business
                   Small Communities
S8    Stabilization Initiative-
      Accelerating RCRA Cleanups at
      Contaminated Sites
      — encourage source control in the
      near-term as appropriate and
      protective	
                                    Policy guidance,
                                    Spring 1992
                      Address high
                      risks in a more
                      timely manner
                   RCRA
89    Technical Impracticability
      Ouidance
      — sites would be cleaned up to
      levels technically feasible
                                    Develop guidance and
                                    procedures, December
                                    1992
                      Decrease
                      corrective action
                      costs
                   RCRA
810   OSWER Directive on Reducing Costs
      of RCRA Corrective Actions to
      Clarify Flexibility and Promote
      Use of Cost-Cutting Opportunities
      in UST Cleanups	
                                    Final directive,
                                    Fall 1992
                      Decrease UST
                      corrective costs
                   RCRA
                   Small Business
                   Small Communities
      ADJUSTING MANAGEMENT STANDARDS TO
      BETTER FIT ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEM
      ASSOCIATED WITH WASTE ACTIVITY
                                                    71

-------
REP,
NO.
OSHBR ACTIVITIES
ACTION/COMMITMENT
ECONOMIC EFFECTS
ADMINISTRATOR'S
PRIORITY AREAS
SIX   Propose Universal Land Disposal
      Restrictions Treatment Standards
      Based on Constituent Concentration
      Rather Than Haste Treatment
      — simplifies and streamlines
      current practice by replacing many
      existing treatment standards with
      a common set of treatment
      standards known as universal
      standards; these standards would
      replace existing standards which
      are constituent-specific and/or
      waste-specific
                                    NPRM,
                                    Fall 1992
                      Decrease
                      administrative.
                      costs
                   RCRA
S12   Containment Buildings
      Authorization
      — authorizes new type of RCRA
      unit to allow waste storage
      without placement on land, thereby
      not triggering LDR; will explore
      whether bioremediation in a
      containment building may not be
      land disposal; would ease storage
      requirements for large volume
      wastes
                                    Final rule,
                                    June 1992
                      Promote sound
                      recycling
                   RCRA
                   Tech Innovation
                   Biotechnology
S13   Streamline Permitting for Mixed
      Waste
      — would rationalize the
      permitting program by one or more
      mechanisms: extend small quantity
      generator exemption, new class
      permitting, permit by rule
      approach	 	
                                    NPRM,
                                    Winter 1992
                      Decrease
                      administrative
                      costs,  relieve
                      burden  of
                      complying with
                      overlapping
                      authorities
                   RCRA
                                                    72

-------
REP.
NO.
S14
SIS
816
S17



S18
OSWER ACTIVITIES
Regulatory Relief for Specific
Wastes Treated Below Delisting
Levels
— would generically exclude
residues of F006 and K062 from
Subtitle C control once they are
treated using high temperature
metal recovery and meet treatment
standards
Existing Sumps
— extend deadline for sumps to be
assessed and upgraded
Joint EPA/NRC Mixed Waste Testing
Guidance
— directed at NRC licensed
generators of mixed waste; would
give guidance where both agencies
have jurisdiction
Paperwork Reduction for
Characteristic and K061 Waste as
Part , of the LDR Program
— can reform requirements without
sacrificing the appropriate level
of regulatory controls including
enforcement
(see also "Streamlining Post-
Closure Permitting", at S21)

REDUCING TECHNICAL BARRIERS TO
INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY
Expand the 1,000kg RCRA Sample
Exclusion to 10,000kg for Soils
— existing limit is barrier to
pilot scale testing
ACTION/ COMMITMENT
Final Rule, May 1992
NPRM, Summer 1992
Held public forum,
April 1992;
guidance, September
1992
Final rule, May 1992



NPRM, Fall 1992
ECONOMIC EFFECTS
Promote sound
recycling







ADMINISTRATOR' S
PRIORITY AREAS
RCRA
RCRA
RCRA
RCRA



RCRA
Tech Innovation
Biotechnology
73

-------
REF.
NO.
S19



S20
S21
OSWER ACTIVITIES
Develop Directive Encouraging RD&D
Testing
— areas to be addressed: 1) use
of temporary treatment units for
corrective action, once regulation
is in effect; 2) use of financial
responsibility variance provision
for RD&D permits where risks are
limited; 3) broadening RD&D
capabilities at existing
facilities and 4) assistance in
developing public test and
evaluation facilities
(see also "CAMUs", at S3, and
"Containment Building
Authorization", at S12)

STREAMLINE RCRA PERMITS TO
FACILITATE CLEANUPS
Enhancing Flexibility in the
Permit System
— to ease burden in administering
permits
Streamlining Post-Closure
Permitting Process
— will examine alternatives to
post-closure permits that provide
equal protection of health and
environment
ACTION/COMMITMENT
Policy directive,
Spring 1993



Strawman proposal,
September 1992
Strawman
distributed, March
1992; NPRM,
December 1992
ECONOMIC EFFECTS




Decrease permit
administration
and transaction
costs
Decrease
administrative
costs; savings up
to $20 million
annually for the
regulated
community
ADMINISTRATOR'S
PRIORITY AREAS
RCRA
Tech Innovation
Biotechnology



RCRA
RCRA
74

-------
REF.
NO.

S22



OSHER ACTIVITIES

PROMOTE COOPERATION WITH REGULATED
COMMUNITY AND STATES:
- Environmental Extension Service
— establish pilot: a network of
non-government agents who provide
solid and hazardous waste
informational and technical
assistance to industries and
communities
- Alternative Dispute Resolution
— coordinate and expand existing
and planned activities, including
use of model orders and
training/outreach
- Investigate Granting CERCLA
Section 122 (f)(2) Unconditional
Covenants Not to Sue
— will explore innovative and
"standard" technologies for
certain superfund sites that can
result in permanent risk reduction
ACTION/ COMMITMENT


Award grants,
October 1992
Expand current
activities, e.g. .
training throughout
1992; RCRA Model
Order Provision,
Fall 1992
Investigate
possibility with
interested parties,
Summer, 1992
ECONOMIC EFFECTS





ADMINISTRATOR' S
PRIORITY AREAS


RCRA
Inclusionary
RCRA
Inclusionary
RCRA
Inclusionary
75

-------
REF.
NO.
OSWER ACTIVITIES
ACTION/COMMITMENT
ECONOMIC EFFECTS
ADMINISTRATOR'S
PRIORITY AREAS
      PROVIDING RELIEF TO SMALL
      COMMUNITIES AND BUSINESSES
S23   Uniform Accidental Release
      Reporting
      — several laws, including Title
      III of SARA, require industry to
      report certain information on
      accidental releases of hazardous
      substances—will identify
      reporting concerns raised by
      industry and recommend approaches
      for minimizing duplication	
                                    Forum, April 1992;
                                    report, November
                                    1992
                                         RCRA
                                         Small Business
                                         Small Communities
S24   Market Incentives for Municipal
      Solid Waste
      — develop full cost accounting
      guide to municipal solid waste
      management, and begin a
      demonstration project to
      investigate the effect of price on
      waste generation	
                                    Draft report, Spring
                                    1992
                      Aids communities
                      in looking for
                      alternative solid
                      waste management
                      strategies
                   RCRA
                   Small Communities
                   Market Incentives
S25   Extended Financial Responsibility
      Compliance Deadline for Certain
      UST Facilities to 1999
      — exploring mechanisms to give
      states a role in determining which
      facilities meet the criteria for
      an extension
                                    NPRM, November 1992
                      Cost savings of
                      $75-100 million
                      annually
                   RCRA
                   Small Business
                   Small Communities
S26   Additional UST FR Compliance
      Mechanisms for Local Governments
                                    Final rule,
                                    September 1992
                      Cost savings of
                      $30-70 million
                      annually
                   RCRA
                   Small Communities
                                                    76

-------
REF.
NO.
OSWER ACTIVITIES
ACTION/COMMITMENT
ECONOMIC EFFECTS
ADMINISTRATOR'S
PRIORITY AREAS
S27
Strategy for De Minimis
Settlements in Superfund Cases
— will allow for a greater number
of such settlements, which will
occur earlier in the process	
Complete strategy,
May 1992
                   RCRA
                   Small Communities
                   Small Business
S28
Clarify Lender Liability for USTs
— through rulemaking
Propose rule, Fall
1992
Decrease
uncertainty in
UST lending
market
Small Business
S29
Municipal Liability for Superfund
Cases
— will examine options for
determining a fair share for
generators and transporters of
municipal solid waste to
contribute in settlements; a
reasonable contribution will allow
such parties to obtain protection
from the U.S. against third-party
suite
Decision, Spring
1992
                   Small Communities
                                                    77

-------
REF.
NO.


S30
S31
S32


S33
OSWER ACTIVITIES

CREATING AN EFFECTIVE, EQUITABLE
AND EFFICIENT SUPERFUND PROGRAM
Clarification of Lender Liability
Under Superfund
— clarifies the scope of the
exemption from cleanup liability
under CERCLA for financial
institutions that hold security
interests in property contaminated
with hazardous waste
Superfund Accelerated Cleanup
Model
— designed to speed cleanup and
reduce redundant studies;
currently applied to Superfund
sites as a pilot project
Conduct Superfund Outreach Efforts
(see also S22) :
- State-EPA Superfund Policy Forum
- Superfund Revitalization Public
Forum
Standardized or Presumptive
Remedies for Wood Treaters,
Municipal Landfills, Sites
Contaminated with Solvents, and
Sites with Ground water
Cont aminat ion
ACTION/ COMMITMENT


Final rule
published, April 29,
1992
Nine pilots underway

Forum underway,
meets periodically
(3-4 times annually)
Conduct forum, June
1992
Pilot project
underway
ECONOMIC EFFECTS


Facilitates the
access of
businesses to
capital that
otherwise would
have been re-
stricted due to
Superfund liabi-
lity concerns
$15 million
annual savings on
new sites - two
years can be
saved between
discovery and
placing site on
NPL



$550,000 per year
savings per site
ADMINISTRATOR ' S
PRIORITY AREAS



Indus ionary

Inclusionary
Inclusionary
Small Business
Small Communities
78

-------
REF.
NO.
OSWER ACTIVITIES
ACTION/COMMITMENT
ECONOMIC EFFECTS
ADMINISTRATOR'S
PRIORITY AREAS
S34
Promote Voluntary Cleanups Prior
to Being Listed on the NPL
— PRPs would still be required to
enter into an order or consent
decree and would pay oversight
costs in advance; cleanup
expedited; includes community
part j.c ipat ion	
Search for pilot
projects underway
S35
Tiered Oversight of NPL Sites
— level of oversight depends on
the severity of risk, PRP
relationship with EPA, compliance
history, public concern, scope of
response action, and site
complexity	
Begin pilot during
1992
Savings of 30
percent of
oversight costs
S36
Double-Walled Above-Oround Storage
Tanks (ASTs)
— developing policy directive
which clarifies alternative means
that containment facilities may
use 'to satisfy the secondary
containment provisions of the Oil
Pollution Prevention regulation
Guidance, April 1992
Allow the AST
market to
stabilize quicker
Small Business
S3 7
Establish Standardized Risk-Based
Soil Cleanup Levels for CERCLA
Sites
— provides early estimates of
site cleanup costs, fosters
national consistency in cleanup
approaches, and speeds the process
Studies available,
July 1992
                                                    79

-------
REF.
NO.
S3 8


OSWER ACTIVITIES
Requirements for Reportable
Quantities (RQs)t
— expedite rulemaking to adjust
RQ levels; exploring interim
measures in the following areas:
- ethylene glycol
— from airplane deicing
operations
- other categories of compounds
— including ethylene glycol,
generally, and polycyclic organic
matter
ACTION/ COMMITMENT

Directive issued,
February 1992
Met with industry
represent at ives ,
March 1992
ECONOMIC EFFECTS

Reduce
administrative
costs associated
with reporting
Reduce
administrative
costs associated
with reporting
ADMINISTRATOR'S
PRIORITY AREAS



80

-------
REF.
NO.


HI
W2
W3
W4

OW ACTIVITIES

INCENTIVE PROJECTS
Point/Nonpoint Source Trading
— to identify opportunities for
improving the cost-effectiveness
of traditional water pollution
control programs through
point/nonpoint source trading
Privatization of Municipal
Wastewater Systems
— to facilitate and promote
private investment, ownership, and
operation of wastewater treatment
systems
Wise Hater Use Partnerships
— to initiate a voluntary program
to encourage industrial facilities
and other high volume water
consumers to use cost-effective
water conservation techniques
(similar to the Agency's Green
Lights Program)
Point/Point Source Trading
— to publicize the Point/Point
Source Trading Report and initiate
a dialogue on the future of
Point/Point trading in meeting
water quality standards once BAT
requirements are met

ACTIONS/ COMMITMENTS


Public meeting held,
April 27-28, 1992;
Provide guidance and
otherwise promote
application
Publish FR notice to
solicit comment and
announce public
meeting (May 1992)
Hold meeting of
"partners" in May
1992
Publish study in FR
and seek comment on
feasibility

ECONOMIC EFFECTS


Provides cost
savings to direct
dischargers;
within a
watershed, total
treatment costs
may be reduced by
up to an order of
magnitude
Provides funding
for construction
and maintenance
of facilities
Reduces costs as
water supply and
water treatment
expenditures
decline
Provides costs
savings to
dischargers

PRIORITY AREAS


Incentives
Small Business
Small Communities
Incentives
Small Communities
Incentives
Small Business
Incentives
Small Business

81

-------
REF.
NO.
OW ACTIVITIES
ACTIONS/COMMITMENTS
ECONOMIC EFFECTS
PRIORITY AREAS
      PERMITTING
W5    Stomwater Implementation Rule
      (Phase I)
      — extande application deadlines
      for group applications; encourages
      use of general permits; and
      reduces application, sampling, and
      reporting requirements, among
      other things	
                                    Published April 2,
                                    1992
                      Reduces reporting
                      and recordkeeping
                      burden and costs
                      — cost savings
                      of $5-10 million
                      per year
                   Small Business
                   Small Communities
W6    NPDES Regulation Revisions
      —• expands the use of general
      permits; reduces types of permit
      modifications requiring notice and
      comment; and requests comment on
      revisions to small business
      exemptions for organic toxiclty
      testing requirements, among other
      things      	
                                    Propose, June 1992
                      Reduces burden
                      and costs for
                      dischargers by
                      cutting red tape
                   Small Business
                                                    82

-------
REF.
NO.
OW ACTIVITIES
ACTIONS/COMMITMENTS
ECONOMIC EFFECTS
PRIORITY AREAS
W7    EXPAND USE OF INCLUSIONARY
      RULEMAKINO
      Storm Water Phase II
      — to develop an effective
      approach for addressing the
      remaining risks from stormwater
      discharges, focusing on sources
      not covered by the Phase I
      Stormwater Rule
                                    Publish FR notice on
                                    Phase II and public
                                    meetings in May and
                                    June 1992
                                         Small Business
                                         Small Communities
                                         Inclusionary
      Combined Sewer Overflow
      — to identify ways to accelerate
      construction of CSO controls for
      priority CSO systems, balancing
      national consistency and
      state/local flexibility needs
                                    Conduct feasibility
                                    study of reg neg or
                                    other inclusionary
                                    process
                                         Inclusionary
      Governor'* Forum on Implementation
      of Drinking Water Program
      — to address issues associated
      with implementation of the 1986
      SDWA Amendments and alternatives
      for enhancing program
                                    Hold forum, May 1992
                                         Inclusionary
                                         Small Communities
      Contaminated Sediment Management
      Strategy
      — to build support for and ensure
      cost effective approaches for
      implementing the Contaminated
      Sediment Strategy	
                                    Begin three national
                                    forums to be held in
                                    April, May, and June
                                    1992
                                         Inclusionary
                                                    83

-------
REF.
NO.


Ml


M2
M3
M4
OTHER OFFICES' ACTIVITIES AND
AGENCY-WIDE ACTIVITIES

TECHNOLOGY INNOVATION
Establish an Agency-wide
Innovative Technology Council
to Promote Tech Innovation through
a Range of Activities, Including!
1) estimating national/
international markets for
innovative technologies and define
priority technology gaps; and
2 ) providing information regarding
opportunities for collaborative
public/private research and
technology development

TRADE PROMOTION
Establish an EPA Export Promotion
2000 (E-2000) Study Group
— to develop an overall export
strategy for EPA
Undertake a Range of Export
Promotion Activities, Including:
1) evaluating the potential for
establishing U.S. environmental
technology center, e.g. , in
cooperation with the DOC in Asia,
Mexico, and elsewhere; and
2) organizing "reverse" trade
missions (i.e. missions of foreign
buyers to the U.S.)
Increase International Access to
EPA's Environmental and Energy
Efficient Technology Transfer
Clearinghouse
ACT IONS/ COMMITMENTS


Establish Council
by July 1, 1992;
estimate markets
and define tech
gaps by May 1,
1993; develop
"primer" on
opportunities for
collaborative
research and tech
development by
December 1, 1992



Implement over the
next year
Installed
clearinghouse at
the Inter-American
Development Bank
OFFICE (S)


OSWER
OAR
OW
ORD
OPPTS
Reg .4,5


OIA
ORD
OSWER
OPPE
OIA
OIA
ECONOMIC
EFFECTS








ADMINI STRATOR ' S
PRIORITY AREAS


Tech Innovation


Trade Promotion
Trade Promotion
Trade Promotion
84

-------
REF.
NO.
MS


M6
M7
M8


M9
OTHER OFFICES' ACTIVITIES AND
AGENCY-HIDE ACTIVITIES
Launch the U.S. Environmental
Training Institute
— to help build environmental
capacity in developing countries
and to provide U.S. companies with
an opportunity to showcase
environmental goods and services
to potential clients

SMALL COMMUNITIES / BUSINESSES
Establish Small Community
"Cluster"
— to bring together local,
regional, state, and national
government officials as well as
interest groups to find cost-
effective ways to implement
environmental protection
requirements
Develop a Handbook of
Environmental Regulations for
Local Government Officials
Revised Guidance for Implementing
the Regulatory Flexibility Act
— expand coverage to small
communities and expand
applicability of requirement

PERMITTING
Expand Total Quality Management
Activities in the Regions to
Improve Permitting Processes from
Point of View of All "Customers"
ACTIONS/COMMITMENTS
Hold inaugural
course, May 12-22,
1992


First meeting held,
February 1992
Publish during
Summer, 1992
Guidance Issued in
April, 1992


Action during 1992
OFFICE (S)



OSWER
OAR
OW
OPPTS
Regions

All



ECONOMIC
EFFECTS









ADMINISTRATOR' S
PRIORITY AREAS
Trade Promotion


Small
Communities
Small
Communities
Small
Communities and
Businesses


Permitting
85

-------
REF.
NO.
M10
Mil


M12
M13
M14
M15
M16
OTHER OFFICES' ACTIVITIES AND
AGENCY-WIDE ACTIVITIES
Assess Cumulative Burden and
Reporting Burden of Permitting on
a Typical Small Business Sector of
the Economy
Improve Ability of Agency to
Provide Permits for RD&D Purposes

NATURAL OAS
Ensure an Unregulated, Competitive
Market for CNO
Refine Natural Gas Price
Projections and Promote Refined
Estimates
— analyze and refine natural gas
price projections
Redefine Appliance Efficiency
Standards
— work with DOE to remove bias
against natural gas
Natural pas
Develop Action Plan for State
PUC's Regarding Evaluation of New
Supply- and Demand-side Options
Streamline Environmental Impact
Statements for Pipeline
Construction
ACTIONS/ COMMITMENTS
Action during 1992
Review during 1992


Work with Federal
and state
authorities
Actively publicize
and highlight new
analysis to
utilities and
regulations
Currently reviewing
furnace standards
Develop and Publish
Action Plan

OFFICE (S)




OPPE/OAR
OPPE/OAR
OPPE/OAR
OPPE/OAR
OFA
ECONOMIC
EFFECTS









ADMINISTRATOR ' S
PRIORITY AREAS
Permitting
Small Business
Permitting


Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
86

-------
RULES ACTIVELY UNDER DEVELOPMENT WITH STATUTORY/JUDICIAL DEADLINES
Introduction

     This list includes significant rules that are actively under
development and are subject to statutory and/or judicial deadlines.
There are 102 rules on the list.  Possible omissions from this list
are minor actions not included in the Regulatory Agenda (e.g. , some
SIPs may have deadlines) and actions with deadlines after October
1992 that were not included in the April  1992 Agenda.
                               87

-------
RULES ACTIVELY UNDER DEVELOPMENT WITH STATUTORY/JUDICIAL DEADLINES
TITLE

Office of Air and Radiation  (OAR)

National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS): Lead  (Review)
NAAQS: Ozone  (Review)
NAAQS: Carbon Monoxide  (Review)
NAAQS: Nitrogen Dioxide  (Review)
Treatment, Storage, and Disposal
Facility—RCRA Air Emission
Standards
     DEADLINE
Final, Statutory, 12/31/80
Reviews  due by  12/31/80  and
5-year intervals thereafter

Final, Statutory, 12/31/80
Reviews due by 12/31/80 and
5-year intervals thereafter

Final,Statutory,12/31/80
Reviews due by 12/31/80 and
5-year intervals thereafter

Final,Statutory,12/31/80
Reviews due by 12/31/80 and
5-year intervals thereafter

Final, Statutory, 5/87
Individual Constituents  Standards  Final, Statutory, 5/87
—Phase  III  of RCRA Air  Emission
Standards

Motor Vehicle Test Procedures  for  Final, Statutory, 5/15/91
Evaporative  Hydrocarbons
(Revision)
Guidelines  for  Oxygenated
Gasoline  Oxygen Credit  Programs
Under  Section 211(M)  of the  Clean
Air Act Amendments  of 1990  (CAAA)

Protection  of Stratospheric
Ozone: Phase Out

New Source  Performance  Standards
 (NSPS): Municipal Waste Combustion
—Phase II  and  Phase  III

California  Clean Fuels  Pilot
Program—Credits Program
Other, Statutory, 8/15/91
Final, Statutory, 9/15/91


Final, Statutory, 11/91



Final, Statutory, 11/91
                                88

-------
TITLE
DEADLINE
OAR

Control of Gasoline Motor Vehicle
Refueling Emissions

Cold Ambient Air Temperature
Carbon Monoxide Emission Standards

Protection of Stratospheric
Ozone: Product Ban

Protection of Stratospheric
Ozone: Servicing of Motor Vehicle
Air Conditioners

Operating Permit Requirement

Phaseout of Lead in Gasoline and
Test Procedure for Lead
Substitutes

Motor Vehicle Certification Short
Test and Performance Warranty
Procedures

Reformulated Gasoline

Protection of Stratospheric
Ozone: Recycling

Urban Bus Particulate Matter
(PM) for Model 1991 to 1992

Guidance for the Implementation
of Section 112(G)—Modifications

Acid Rain Excess Emissions
Requirements Regulation

On-Board Vehicle Based Diagnostic
System Requirement

Acid Rain Permits Regulation

Acid Rain Allowance System
Regulation
Final, Statutory, 11/15/91


Final, Statutory, 11/15/91


Final, Statutory, 11/15/91


Final, Statutory, 11/15/91
Final, Statutory..

Final, Statutory,
11/15/91

11/15/91
Final, Statutory, 11/15/91



Final, Statutory, 11/15/91

Final, Statutory, 1/1/92


Final, Statutory, 1/1/92


Final, Statutory, 5/92


Final, Statutory, 5/15/92


Final, Statutory, 5/15/92


Final, Statutory, 5/15/92

Final, Statutory, 5/15/92
                               89

-------
TITLE
DEADLINE
OAR

Acid Rain Continuous Emissions
Monitoring Regulation

Protection of Stratospheric
Ozone: Federal Procurement

Protection of Stratospheric
O z one: Labe1ing

In-Use Urban Bus Test Program

Acid Rain Opt-In Regulation

Requirements for the Enhanced
Monitoring of Ozone and Ozone
Precursors

Acid Rain Nitrogen Oxides Control
Regulation

NAAQS: Sulfur Oxides (Review)


Medical Waste Incinerator

Development of a List of Source
Categories for Regulating Source
of Hazardous Air Pollutants
Subject to Section 112 of the
CAAA

Enhanced Monitoring and
Compliance Certification
Regulations

California Clean-Fuels Pilot
Program — Opt In, Vehicle
Standards, Sales Requirements,
and Fuel Availability

Clean-Fuel Fleet Programs
Final, Statutory, 5/15/92


Final, Statutory, 5/15/92


Final, Statutory, 5/15/92


Final, Statutory, 5/15/92

Final, Statutory, 5/15/92

Final, Statutory, 5/15/92
Statutory: Final, 1/1/97
Final, Statutory, 5/15/92

Final, Statutory, 11/92
Other, Statutory, 11/92

Final, Statutory, 11/92

Final   Schedule,   Statutory,
11/92
Final List, Statutory, 11/91
Other, Statutory, 11/91
Final, Statutory, 11/92
Final, Statutory, 11/92
Final, Statutory, 11/92
Other, Statutory, 11/92
                                90

-------
TITLE
DEADLINE
OAR

National Emission Standard for     Final, Statutory, 11/92
Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP):
Hazardous Organics

Standards for Tank Vessel Loading  Final, Statutory, 11/92
Operations
NESHAP: Coke Oven Emissions from
Coke Oven Charging, Door Leaks,
and Topside Leaks on Coal Charged
Batteries
Final, Statutory, 11/15/92
Gaseous and Particulate Emission   Final, Statutory, 11/15/92
Regulations for 1996 and Later
Model Year Non-Road Diesel Engines
Rated Equal To or Greater Than Fifty
Horsepower
Gasoline Detergent Additives
Regulation

Development of a Schedule for
Regulating Source Categories of
Hazardous Air Pollutants Subject
to Section 112 of the Clean Air Act
Amendments of 1990

General Provisions for Major and
Area Resources of Air Toxics

Protection of Stratospheric
Ozone: Safe Alternatives

Economic Incentive Program Rules
Authorized Under Title I of the
Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990

NESHAP: Perchloroethylene Dry
Cleaning
Final, Statutory, 11/15/92


Final, Statutory, 11/15/92
Final, Statutory, 11/15/92


Final, Statutory, 11/15/92


Final, Statutory, 11/15/92
Amendments to National Emission
Standards for Benzene Waste
Operations
Final, Judicial, 11/15/92
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(NPRM), Judicial, 11/15/91

Final, Judicial 12/1/92
NPRM, Judicial, 3/2/92
                                91

-------
TITLE
DEADLINE
OAR

Acid Rain Phase I Reserve/
Phase II Allowance Allocations
Subpart

National Emission Standards for
Coke Oven Batteries

Clarification of Best Available
Control Technology Regulatory
Definition

Fuel and Fuel Additives:
Registration Requirements
NSPS: Review of Subpart DA—
Electric Utility Steam Generating
Units (S02)

Control Techniques Guidelines

Control of Air Toxics from Motor
Vehicles

Locomotive Emissions Standards

Prohibition of Leaded Gasoline
for Highway Use

Office of Water (OW1

Sewage Sludge Use and Disposal
Regulation

Indian Rules for the Wellhead
Protection Program and Sole Source
Aquifer Demonstration Program
Final, Statutory, 12/31/92
NPRM, Statutory, 12/31/91
Final, Statutory, 12/31/92
Final, Judicial, 1/7/93
NPRM, Judicial, 1/7/92
Final, Consent Decree, 6/1/93
NPRM, Consent Decree, 4/1/92
Final, Statutory, 8/7/78

Final, Statutory, 11/93
Final, Statutory, 11/93

Final, Statutory, 5/15/95


Final, Statutory, 11/95

Final, Statutory, 12/31/95
Final, Statutory, 8/31/87
NPRM, Statutory, 11/30/86

Final, Statutory, 12/19/87
National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System and Sludge
Management State Program Regulations
for Indian Tribes
Final, Statutory, 8/4/88
                                92

-------
TITLE
DEADLINE
OW
Treatment of Indian Tribes as
States under Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (CWA)

National Primary Drinking
Groundwater Disinfection

National Primary Drinking Water
Regulations: Inorganic and
Organic Compounds (Phase V/24
Contaminants)

Effluent Guidelines Plan
Final, Statutory, 8/4/88
Final, Statutory, 6/18/89
Final, Judicial, 2/29/92
NPRM, Judicial, 6/29/90
Final, Statutory, 6/19/89
NPRM, Judicial, 4/92
Final, Judicial, 2/19/92
Effluent Guidelines and Standards  Final, Judicial, 6/92
for the Offshore Subcategory of
the Oil and Gas Extraction Category

Revision to the Safe Drinking      Final, Judicial, 7/31/92
Water Act Underground Injection
Control (UIC) Regulations for
Class I Hazardous Waste Injection Wells

Plan to Review and Promulgate      Final, Judicial, 8/92
Effluent Guidelines and Standards  NPRM, Judicial, 4/92
Under CWA 304(m)

Water Quality Standards for Toxic  Final, Statutory, 8/92
Pollutants
National Primary Drinking Water
Regulation: Radionuclides
Final, Judicial, 4/17/93
NPRM, Judicial, 6/16/91
Final, Statutory, 6/19/89
Effluent Guidelines and Standards  Final,  Judicial, 5/93
for the Organic Chemicals,
Plastics and Synthetic Fibers
Category

National Primary Drinking Water    NPRM,  Judicial 6/30/93
Regulations: 25 Contaminants from  Final,  Statutory 1/1/91
Drinking Water Priority List       NPRM,  Statutory 1/1/90
(Phase V)
                               93

-------
TITLE
DEADLINE
OW
Effluent Guidelines and Standards
for the Pesticide Chemicals
Category

Effluent Guidelines and Standards
for the Pharmaceutical
Manufacturing Category

National Primary Drinking Water
Regulations: Arsenic

Effluent Guidelines and Standards
for the Pulp, Paper, 'and
Paperboard Category

Effluent Guidelines and Standards
for the Waste Treatment Category

Effluent Guideline and Standards
for the Metal Products and
Machinery Category

Effluent Guidelines and Standards
for the Coastal Subcategory of
the Oil and Gas Extraction
Category

Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response (OSWER)

Reimbursement of Local
Governments for Emergency Response
to Hazardous Substance Releases
Final, Judicial 7/93
NPRM, Judicial 5/92
NPRM, Judicial, 8/94
Final, Judicial, 2/96
Final, Judicial, 1/95
NPRM, Judicial, 11/30/92

Final, Judicial, 9/30/95
NPRM, Judicial 10/31/93
Final, Judicial, 1/96
NPRM, Judicial, 4/94

Final, Judicial 5/96
NPRM, Judicial, 11/94
Final, Judicial, 7/96
NPRM, Judicial 1/95
Final, Statutory, 10/17/87
Underground Storage Tanks
Containing Hazardous Substances—
Financial Responsibility Requirements
Final, Statutory, 8/8/88
Degradable Plastic Ring Carrier
Regulation
Final, Statutory, 10/28/90
                                94

-------
TITLE
DEADLINE
OSWER

Land Disposal Restrictions—
Phase 1: Rulemaking on
Contaminated Debris and Newly
Identified Wastes

Management of Used Oil
Identification and Listing of
Hazardous Wastes from Coke By-
Product Industries

Oil Pollution Prevention
Regulation—Phase II

Revisions to the National Oil
and Hazardous Substances Pollution
Contingency Plan

Identification and Listing of
Hazardous Wastes from
Chlorotoluene Production
Final, Judicial, 5/92
Final, Judicial, 5/1/92
NPRM, Judicial, 9/3/91
Final, Statutory, 11/8/86
NPRM, Statutory, 11/8/85

Final, Judicial, 7/92
NPRM, Judicial, 7/91
Final, Statutory, 2/8/86

Final, Statutory, 8/18/92
Final, Statutory, 8/18/92
Final, Judicial, 9/92
NPRM, Judicial, 9/91
Final, Statutory, 2/8/86
Disposal of Containerized Liquids
in Hazardous Waste Landfills
Final, Judicial, 10/92
Judicial    deadline    for
Supplemental Notice 10/91
Final, Statutory, 2/8/86
List of Regulated Substances and   Final,  Statutory,  11/15/92
Thresholds for Accidental Release
Prevention; Requirements for Petitions
Under Section 112(R)(3) of the
CAAA of 1990
Hazardous Waste Listing
Determination for Wood Surface
Protection Chemicals
NPRM, Judicial, 12/31/92
Final, Judicial, 12/31/93
                               95

-------
TITLE
DEADLINE
OSWER

Hazardous Waste Listing
Determination for Carbamate
Chemicals

Land Disposal Restrictions -
Phase II: Rulemaking on
Contaminated Soil and Newly
Identified Wastes

Reportable Quantity Adjustments
of Lead, Lead Compounds, Lead-
Containing Hazardous Waste
Streams, and Methyl Isocyanate

Risk Management Plans for
Chemical Accidental Release
Prevention

Land Disposal Restrictions -
Phase III: Rulemaking on Newly
Identified Wastes

National Priorities List (NPL)
for Uncontrolled Hazardous Waste
Sites—Proposed Update XI

National Priorities List for
Uncontrolled Update Waste Sites
—Hazardous Proposed Update XII

Office of Prevention, Pesticides
and Toxic Substances (OPPTSi

Pesticide Management and
Disposal: Container Design,
Residue Removal, Storage,
Disposal, and Transportation

Priority Review of Refractory
Ceramic Fibers

Regulatory Investigation of
Dioxin in Pulp and Paper Mill
Sludge
NPRM, Judicial, 1/31/93
Final, Judicial, 1/31/95
Final, Judicial, 4/93
Final, Judicial, 4/30/93
NPRM, Judicial, 4/30/92
Final, Statutory, 4/30/88
Final, Statutory, 11/15/93
Final, Judicial, 3/94
Statutory: Annual Update
Other,    Statutory,    Annual
Update
Final, Statutory, 12/24/91
Other, Statutory, 5/8/92
Final, Judicial 11/30/92
                                96

-------
Chair:
             EPA 90-DAY REGUIiATORY REVIEW TASK FORCE
Richard Morgenstern, Acting Assistant
Administrator for Policy, Planning  and
Evaluation  (OPPE)
     Project
     Manager:
Elizabeth Drye, OPPE
     Senior Policy
     Advisor:       Frederick Alldn, OPPE

     Senior
     Economist:     Al McGartland, OPPE
PRIORITY AREA REVIEWS:
Biotechnology
Chair:  Linda Fisher, Assistant Administrator
for Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic
Substances

Judith Nelson, Elizabeth Milewski, Larry
Zeph, Sharlene Matten, John Melone, Ellie
Clark, Tony Baney, Fred Betz, Steve Lingle,
Deb Debkowski, Bob Benson, John Kingscott
Small Communities
Chair:  Laurie Goodman, Associate
Administrator for Regional Operations and
State and Local Relations

Ann Cole, Lou Kerestesy
Small Businesses
Chair:  Karen Brown, Small Business and
Asbestos Ombudsman

Robert Rose, James Malcolm
Natural Gas
Co-Chair:  Eileen Claussen, Director, Office
of Atmospheric and Indoor Air Programs

Co-Chair:  Daniel Esty, Deputy Assistant
Administrator for Policy, Planning and
Evaluation

'Bruce Schillo, Kathleen Hogan

            97

-------
Resource
Conservation and
Recovery Act
Reform
Chair:  Don Clay, Assistant Administrator for
Solid Waste and Emergency Response

Margaret Schneider, Mark Pollins, Caroline
Previ, Ellen Brown
Market Incentives
Co-Chair:  Maryann Froehlich, Acting
Director, Office of Policy Analysis, OPPE

Co-Chair:  Mark Luttner, Special Assistant to
the Deputy Assistant Administrator for Water

Robert Brenner, Thomas Eagles, Karen Martin,
Sharon Saile, Margaret Schneider, Ellen
Brown, Barnes Johnson, Al McGartland, Barry
Korb, Barry Elman, Ken Munis, Daniel Mussatti
Judith Nelson, Allen Jennings, Robert Lee,
Dana Ott
Technology
Innovation
Co-Chair:  Walter Kovalick, Director,
Technology Innovation Office, OSWER

Co-Chair:  Fred Lindsay, Director, Office of
Environmental Engineering and Technology
Demonstration, ORD

Margaret Kelly, Winston Smith, Mark Luttner,
John Seitz, Bill Bryson, Jim Hanlon, Tim
Opplet, Frank Princiotta, Joe Carra, Lou
True, Joe Wigold, Mike Moore, John Convery,
Mike Mastracci, David Berg
 Export  Promotion
 Co-Chair:  Daniel Esty, Deputy Assistant
 Administrator for Policy, Planning and
 Evaluation

 Co-Chair:  Alan Hecht, Deputy Assistant
 Administrator for International Activities

 Scott Bidner, Tim McProuty, Ron Slotkin,
 David Schnare, Larry Weinstock
                                98

-------
Inclusionary
Rulemaking
Co-Chair:  Robert Brenner, Director, Office
of Policy Analysis and Review, OAR

Co-Chair:  Thomas Kelly, Director, Office of
Regulatory Management and Evaluation, OPPE

Chris Kirtz, Judith Nelson, Cynthia Puskar,
Margaret Schneider, Lou Kerestesy, Bettina
Fletcher
PROGRAM OFFICE COORDINATORS:
Office of Air
and Radiation
Robert Brenner, Director, Office of Policy
  Analysis and Review

Thomas Eagles, Office of Policy Analysis and
  Review
Office of Water
Cynthia Puskar, Acting Director, Policy Staff
Office of Solid
Waste and Emer-
gency Response
Margaret Schneider, Director, Policy Analysis
  and Regulatory Management Staff

Mark Pollins
Office of
Prevent ionf
Pesticides
and Toxic
Substances
Judith Nelson, Director, Regulatory
  Coordination Staff

JoAnne Foulks, Diane Seal, Joe Powers
  Debbie Sisco
OTHER PARTICIPANTS:

Office of the
Administrator
Mark Joyce, Special Assistant
Mark Goldman, Special Assistant
                                99

-------
Office of Policy,
Planning and
Evaluation
Brendan Doyle, Special Assistant
Paul Lapsley, Director, Regulatory Management
  Division
Ken Munis, Special Assistant
Katy Schnitz, Intern
Brett Snyder, Acting Chief, Economic Analysis
  and Research Branch
Terry Sopher, Senior Analyst
Edgar Thornton, Special Assistant
Office of
Coromuni cation,
Education and
Public Affairs
Peggy Knight, Director, External
  Relations Division

Sandro Young
Office of
Enforcement
Scott Fulton, Deputy Assistant Administrator
George Hayes, Special Assistant
Office of
General Counsel
Charles Elkins, Associate General Counsel

Carl Garvey, Dana Ott
Summary of Public
Comments
Brett Snyder, Dwight Atkinson, Jim Casey,
Donn Viviani, Harriet Tregoning, Drusilla
Hufford, Tom Gillis, Doreen Sterling, Adam
Saslow, Walter Walsh, Fred Talcott, Bob
Sachs, Chris O'Donnell, Connie Sasala, Angela
Carson, Linda Setneska, Chris Boelke, Ron
Dexter, Michael Branagan, Bob Benson, Jerry
Newsome, William Painter, Mahesh Podar,
Christine Ruf, Andrew Otis, Chris Knopes,
Todd Ramsden, Barry Korb, Mike Doonan, Peter
Nagelhout, Laura Cornwell, Ron McHugh
Project  Support
Pat Lyttle, Tish Barbee, Carolyn  Inge,
Roberta Lane, Pat Pender, Darren  Reid,
Mardiko Smith, Theresa Stevenson, Deloris
Swann, Barbara Willis
                                100
                   •frU.S. Government printing office • 1992  312-014/40148

-------