-------
-------
The Congress intended RCRA to address the following
environmental problems:
(1) The ever-increasing amounts of waste material
being generated as a result of National economic
and population growth.
(2) Serious financial, management, intergovernmental,
and technical problems in solid waste collection,
treatment and disposal in urban areas resulting
from population concentration.
(3) Open dumping of solid waste which needlessly
pollutes valuable land resources as well as air
and water resources.
(4) Human health and environmental dangers resulting
from improper disposal of solid waste and especi-
ally hazardous waste.
(5) Increasing amounts of pollution control residuals
(sludges, etc.) destined for land disposal as a
result of the Clean Air Act, Water Pollution
Control Act, and other Federal and State laws.
(6) The wasteful burial of recoverable resources with
attendant increases in dependence on foreign
energy and material sources, and in balance of
payment deficits.
(7) The need to continue the development of solid
waste as an energy source to conserve and reduce
-------
dependence on alternate energy sources such as petroleum,
natural gas, nuclear and hydroelectric generation.
The goals and objectives of RCRA are to:
°Promote the protection of health and the environ-
ment , and
°Conserve valuable material and energy resources.
Congress intends that these goals and objectives be
achieved by:
(1) Providing technical and financial assistance and
a broad-based information and public education
program to State and local governments for devel-
opment and implementation of solid waste manage-
ment plans.
(2) Prohibiting future open dumping on land and
requiring upgrading or closing of existing open
dumps.
(3) Regulating the treatment, storage, transporta-
tion, and disposal of hazardous wastes.
(4) Promulgation of guidelines for solid waste man-
agement practices and systems.
(5) Conducting a research and development program for
improved solid waste management and resource con-
servation techniques.
(6) Demonstration of improved solid waste management
and resource conservation and recovery systems.
(7) Establishing a cooperative effort among Federal,
State, and local governments and private enterprise,
-------
Thus, the new Act mandates a comprehensive Federal-
State-local approach to all aspects of waste management,
including resource conservation and recovery, land disposal
of municipal and industrial wastes, and authorizes a new
regulatory program for hazardous wastes.
Highlights of the new Act are:
(1) Solid waste is redefined to include waste sludges,
liquids, and contained gases from industrial,
commercial, mining, and agricultural operations,
as well as the more traditional garbage and
refuse we have usually regarded as "solid waste."
Thus, the scope of solid waste management activi-
ties has been expanded significantly. Also note
that hazardous waste is a sub-set of the overall
solid waste definition.
(2) The term "disposal" is broadly defined to include
"the discharge, deposit, injection, dumping,
spilling, leaking, or placing of any solid waste
or hazardous waste into or on any land or water
so that such solid waste or hazardous waste or any
constituent thereof may enter the environment or
be emitted into the air or discharged to any
waters, including groundwaters." Thus, the multi-
media impacts of solid waste disposal, including
impacts on groundwater, are to be considered when
EPA and State and local governments carry out the
new Act's provisions.
-------
(3) New solid waste management guidelines, similar in
nature to those previously developed by the Office
of Solid Waste, are mandated by the Act.
(4) Technical assistance panels are to be formed to
provide State and local governments, upon request,
with advice and assistance regarding all aspects
of solid waste management, including hazardous
waste management. Not less than 20 percent of
general appropriation funds are to be set aside
for this purpose. This reinforces Congress's
intent that technical assistance is a major thrust
of the new Act and is not to be overshadowed by
the regulatory provisions.
(5) After consultation with the States, within one
year EPA is to define criteria for sanitary land-
fills and open dumps. Given the expanded solid
waste and disposal definitions, these criteria may
well apply to many other land disposal practices
besides the traditional "landfill" for garbage and
refuse.
(6) All open dumps are to be inventoried (probably by
the States) and a list of such open dumps is to
be published (by EPA) within two years. There-
after, open dumping of solid waste or hazardous
-------
waste is prohibited unless such open dumps are
under a timetable or schedule for compliance
(meaning closure or upgrading to sanitary landfill
status) established as part of a State's solid
waste plan. Compliance with the prohibition on
open dumping can take no longer than five years
after the inventory is published, in any event.
Thus, seven years from now, in 1984, all open
dumping will be prohibited. This provision will
have a profound impact on solid waste management
practices in this country, particularly in rural
areas.
(7) In cooperation with regional and local governments,
States are to develop new solid waste plans which
encompass all aspects of solid waste management,
including resource conservation and recovery, and
hazardous waste management. A substantial new
planning and implementation grant program for State
and local governments is provided for this pur-
pose. These comprehensive solid waste management
plans will represent a major new thrust in many
States.
(8) Under RCRA, all Federal facilities engaged in
solid waste or hazardous waste activities, and all
Federal agencies having jurisdiction over solid
waste facilities, are subject to all Federal, State,
-------
interstate, and local requirements, both substan-
tive and procedural. This includes reporting and
permit requirements. Thus, for the first time,
Federal facilities will require State or local
solid waste permits. This is a major departure
from precedent established under air and water
pollution control laws.
The new Act contains many other important provisions,
but time, and, I suspect, your patience, will not allow me to
cover them here. The highlights noted above should give you
a sense of the new scope and direction Congress intends for the
solid waste management activities in this country.'
Overview of Hazardous Waste Management Program
With the enactment of RCRA last October, the U.S.
hazardous waste management program has entered a new phase.
For the first time, Congress has mandated Federal regulatory
control over land disposal of hazardous waste. At the same
time, Congress made it clear that the States should imple-
ment the hazardous waste regulatory program as part of a compre-
hensive solid waste management program. Special State grants
for development and implementation of hazardous waste manage-
ment programs are included in the new Act for that purpose.
Before RCRA, the Federal hazardous waste management
program was aimed at developing a better data base concern-
ing hazardous waste characteristics, damage assessment, and
-------
control technology options; translating these data into
advisory guidances; assisting the States to develop their
programs; and providing technical assistance as needed.
After RCRA, most of these elements remain in the Federal
program, but the emphasis has shifted to developing a compre-
hensive, integrated set of national standards for the defi-
nition and "cradle-to-grave" management of hazardous waste.
What were to be guidances will now be Federal regulations.
Instead of saying "you should do so-and-so," EPA can now say
"you shall do so-and-so."
With these new powers come added responsibilities. We .
can no longer philosophize about the way hazardous wastes
should be managed. We are now mandated to say how hazardous
wastes will be managed. The program we develop has got to
be tough enough to adequately protect the public health and
environment, and yet be practical enough that State and local
governments can implement it, and the private sector can live
with it. The program is to be developed and in operation
by October 1978. This is a tall order. Clearly, EPA cannot
do it alone.
Most people would agree that the State government level
is the optimum level to implement a hazardous waste manage-
ment regulatory program. Many hazardous wastes are trans-
portable, and are in fact transported for hundreds of miles
to treatment and disposal sites within the State, or outside
-------
the State of origin. Local and regional governments are
not well equipped to deal with this. On the other hand,
\
the Federal government is not well equipped to deal with
State-by-State variations in climate, geology and other
factors influencing proper hazardous waste management.
And yet the private sector, and many States, would like
to see uniform national standards for hazardous waste manage-
ment to remove the spectre of each State having different
standards, definitions, and criteria.
All of this argues forcefully for a Federal/State
partnership in developing and implementing the national
hazardous waste management regulatory program. Local govern-
ments also have a strong say in the matter, since the
hazardous waste treatment and disposal facilities, which must
be developed to make the regulatory program work, will be
located in their jurisdictions.
Fortunately, most States agree with this premise.
Several States have already begun to develop hazardous waste
management programs on their own, ahead of the Federal pro-
gram. As has been the case in other environmental areas,
the State of California was the first to develop and operate
a hazardous waste management program. The Federal government
and most other State and local governments have a lot to
learn from the California experience in this area. Later in
the program we will get a full briefing by California State
-------
and county personnel on how they did it and how
their program is working. I will be taking notes.
RCRA Hazardous Waste Management Provisions
Most of you by now probably have a reasonably good idea
of the hazardous waste management regulatory provisions in
RCRA. They include a hazardous waste definition; national
standards for hazardous waste generators, transporters, and
treatment, storage and disposal facilities; a facility per-
mit program; guidelines for State assumption of the program;
and a one-time notification system to government by anyone
who generates, transports, treats, stores, or disposes of
hazardous waste. Consequently, I won't dwell on these pro-
visions. But perhaps it would be of interest to discuss how
all these provisions fit together into an integrated program.
Figure 1 is an attempt to pull all of the provisions together
on one page with an indication of their interrelationships.
The keystone of the program is the definition of
hazardous waste. This element determines the scope of the
program, and thus has an influence on whether or not States
choose to participate in the program. Our goal is to base
the hazardous waste definition on objective criteria for
hazardous parameters such as flammability, corrosivity,
toxicity, etc. This implies the development of standard
sampling and analysis methods by which a waste can be tested
against these criteria. Wastes which are found to be
hazardous will then be placed on a list.
10
-------
Determines Scope of Program
Influences State Participation
DEFINE
HAZARDOUS WASTE
NATIONAL STANDARDS
• Generators
• Transporters
• Facilities
STATE PROGRAM
Equivalent and
Consistent
Reporting, Labeling, Manifest>
Reporting, Manifest
Reporting, Design, Operation,
Fiscal Responsibility, etc.
o
0}
o
Develop
&
Implement
With EPA
Grant Assistance
Standard
Sampling
&
Analysis
Methods
AND
Establish
Cut Off
Levels
PERMIT SYSTEM
None
None
Storage, Treatment
8 Disposal Facilities
State
Permi t
Program
-------
Next come the national standards for hazardous waste
generators, transporters, and operators of hazardous waste
treatment, storage, and disposal facilities. We view these
standards as minimum levels of performance somewhat analogous
to speed limits. They are independent, enforceable standards;
various legal sanctions can be applied to violators. Note
that all parties subject to the standards are required to
notify EPA, or the State if they have an authorized program,
during a 90-day period following final publication of the
hazardous waste definition.
Common elements of all the standards are recordkeeping
and reporting requirements, and compliance with a manifest
system, which is a waste tracking and control mechanism to
ensure that hazardous wastes are transported to approved
treatment and disposal facilities. Each hazardous waste ship-
ment will require a manifest. Thus we are talking about tens
of thousands of transactions per year on a national basis.
This implies that the manifest must be compatible with ADP
systems. Since hazardous wastes are often transported across
State lines, we are coming to the conclusion that the mani-
fest system should be uniform across the nation, if at all
possible.
A permit system for hazardous waste treatment/storage/
disposal facilities is mandated, in addition to the national
standards. Note that permits are required only for treatment/
12
-------
storage/disposal facilities. Generators and transporters
who do not have such facilities do not require a permit.
We look upon the permit system in a positive sense.
Whereas someone who violates a national standard can be
punished, a hazardous waste facility can only obtain a per-
mit if the Federal or State authorities believe the sur-
rounding community will be safe from harm. If we can impart
this concept to the public, and preserve the integrity of
the permit system, we will go a long way towards overcoming
public opposition to siting new hazardous waste facilities.
j
As mentioned before, the Congress clearly intended for
the States to implement the hazardous waste program. Among
other things, implementation implies issuing hazardous waste
facility permits, along with inspection and compliance
enforcement activities. Several States, including California,
do these things already, at least to some extent. One
potential problem is that State programs, in order to be given
implementation authority for RCRA, must be "equivalent" to
the Federal program and "consistent" with other State pro-
grams. We are wrestling with the interpretation of these
terms now. The Congress evidently foresaw this problem,
however, and provided for interim authorization, of State
programs for a 24-month period while the details of full
authorization are being worked out. We intend to be liberal
in our requirements for interim authorization, with the
understanding that State programs will achieve equivalency
13
-------
in the 24-month transition period. Federal grant funds are
mandated for the development and implementation of these
State programs.
In total, then, the hazardous waste management program
mandated by RCRA is an integrated, comprehensive program
keyed to the definition of hazardous waste, followed by a
series of implementation provisions. These provisions con-
sist of national standards, a notification system, and a
facility permit system developed by the Federal government
to provide national consistency, but intended to be imple-
mented and enforced by State governments with Federal finan-
cial and technical assistance. We believe this is a sensible
and practical approach. The interplay between these program
elements is complex, however, and most likely will require
several iterations as the program develops and matures.
Current Status of Regulation Development
You may be interested in our progress to date. OSW has
produced Development Plans for each hazardous waste regula-
tion. The Development Plans contain a statement of the
purpose of the regulation; identify major issues; outline
how we will coordinate regulation development with other EPA
offices, and with State and local governments, other Federal
agencies, the Congress, and the public; describe anticipated
requirements for environmental and economic impact appraisals;
14
-------
and provide an anticipated schedule for regulation prom-
ulgation. At present we are projecting final promulgation of
the hazardous waste regulations in April 1978, or 18 months
after RCRA enactment as mandated by the new law.
Next, we are now preparing Advanced Notices of Proposed
Rulemaking, which will be published in the Federal Register
in the next few months. These documents are intended to
alert the public that EPA is embarking on the regulatory
development process, and to solicit public comment on a
number of issues and options being considered by the Agency.
We hope you will comment on the issues and options discussed
in them; we need your input.
Each regulation will be developed by a Working Group
composed of representatives from EPA Headquarters and regional
offices, and where appropriate, from other Federal agencies and
State and local governments. For example, the Department of
Transportation will be represented on the hazardous waste
transporter standards Working Group. State and local govern-
ment representatives will be invited to participate in the
Working Groups developing the State hazardous waste program
guidelines and the facility permit regulations. All of these
Working Groups will be activated this month.
Public Participation
EPA intends to provide ample opportunities for public
participation in the development of the hazardous waste regu-
latory program. We have already held a public meeting on the
new Act in Washington, D.C., in December. Similar public
15
-------
meetings are scheduled in all 10 EPA regions throughout the
country in late February and March of this year.
Two sets of public hearings on each regulation are
planned. One series will be held after responses to the
ANPRM's are received and before proposed rulemaking is pub-
lished in the Federal Register. Another series is planned
after the proposed regulations, but before .final regulations
are promulgated.
Further, OSW intends to form an Advisory Committee which
will have a wide range of representatives from the public and
private sectors. We will look to the Advisory Committee for
review and comment on the hazardous waste regulations as they
develop.
In addition, there will be a series of conferences and
workshops on specific technical issues as they crop up. For
example, we are already planning such a conference to discuss
the application of standard leaching tests as they relate to
the question of hazardous waste definition.
Finally, we plan to develop a public education program to
effectively communicate the essence of hazardous waste issues
to the general public. The public education program being
pursued by the State of Minnesota as part of the Chemical
Waste Landfill Grant program will provide useful input to the
national program. Clearly, the hazardous waste management
program cannot succeed without public understanding and
support.
16
-------
In summary, the new Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act mandates a wide range of new initiatives in solid waste
management which will have a substantial impact on public
health and environmental protection, and on material and
energy conservation and recovery. The hazardous waste manage-
ment program is a sub-set of this overall program. While our
attention is now focused on developing the new hazardous
waste regulations and guidelines mandated by the Act, we also
will continue our technical assistance and public education
efforts. In the long view, the regulations are but the first
step in the national hazardous waste management program. It
will take a joint effort by Federal, State and local govern-
ments, by industry, and by the public to translate these
beginnings into an effective program to protect the public
health and environment from the potential damage inherent in
improper hazardous waste disposal practices.
The Congress has given us the green light to proceed
with this program. It will be up to all of us to make it
work.
Thank you very much.
pcrl490
SW-584
,, BefiWaV, library
1'
------- |