DESCRIPTION OF THE WASTE MANAGEMENT
      DATA BASE SYSTEM
  DPRA
  DEVELOPMENT PLANNING AND RESEARCH ASSOCIATES, INC.
  200 Research Drive     PO. Box 727     Manhattan, Kansas 66502
  Telephone 913-539-3565      Cable: AGRI      Telex 704314

-------
    Development Planning and Research Associates, Inc.
200 Research Drive, P.O. Box 727, Manhattan, Kansas  66502
            DESCRIPTION OF THE WASTE MANAGEMENT
                     DATA BASE SYSTEM
                            For

                EPA Contract No. 68-01-6621
                  Work Assignment No. 171
                            To
                 Economic Analysis Branch
                   Office of Solid Waste
           U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                     Washington, D.C.
                          P. 627
                        August 1985

-------
                                 CONTENTS
                                                                      Page
  I.  INTRODUCTION                                                      1
 II.  GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF WMDBS                                      1
      A.  Background and Purpose                                        2
      B.  System Implementation                                         3
      C.  Development of the WMDBS Data Base                            5
      D.  Data Access Design                                           17
III.  PROGRESS TO DATE                                                 33
 IV.  FUTURE OPTIONS                                                   34
APPENDIX — REFERENCES

-------
                    DESCRIPTION OF THE WASTE MANAGEMENT
                             DATA BASE SYSTEM
                             I.  INTRODUCTION

This document presents an overview of the Waste Management Data Base System
(WMDBS) and provides the reader with a general introduction to this system.
As such, the discussion is of a nontechnical nature, concentrating on the
conceptual/design aspects of WMDBS as well as on the user's interface with
the system.

This document has three major sections in addition to this introduction.
The first section describes WMDBS and includes a discussion of (1) the
background and purpose of WMDBS, (2) the implementation of WMDBS, (3) the
development of WMDBS's data base, and (4) the data access design.
Additionally, example screens are included as well as a listing of data
which will be available.

The second major section outlines the progress on WMDBS to date and
discusses what still needs to be completed.  The final section discusses
additional items and options which could be considered for addition to
WMDBS in the future.
                     II.  GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF WMDBS

WMDBS may be conceptualized as consisting of three major parts:  a data
base, a series of menus which allow the user to interface with this data
base and group of programs which run the menus and retrieve the data
requested by the user.  This description will address the first two parts
of the system only, since a discussion of the third would of necessity be

-------
more technical than most readers of this document might desire.   The
description begins with a discussion of the background and purpose of
WMDBS.  This is followed by a brief, non-technical description of how the
system will be implemented and what the advantages and disadvantages are of
this method of implementation.  The next section deals with WMDBS's data
base and its development.  This description ends with a discussion of the
menus which will be used to allow the user to interface with this system.
This final subsection will include example screens illustrating how a user
might obtain information on landfills.
                        A.  Background and Purpose

During the past seven years, numerous RCRA treatment, storage, and disposal
regulations have been researched, analyzed, proposed and promulgated.  As a
result of these efforts, surveys (e.g., Mail, Site Visit, Burner) have been
conducted, statistics analyzed, costs have been estimated, and many reports
have been prepared.  Unfortunately, the information from this vast and
growing data on hazardous waste facilities and the costs to regulate them
has not been available in a consolidated, up-to-date data base.  Instead,
this information has often remained within the original reports which are
scattered throughout EPA and contractor files.  Analysts, needing to
assemble data from these reports, must go back to the original documents,
printouts, and worksheets to extract the desired information on a
case-by-case basis.  Analysts must also determine which of the
informational sources are the most applicable to their needs, and then try
to locate the desired reports, printouts or worksheets.

The intent of WMDBS is to provide a mechanism by which these data on
hazardous waste facilities can be conveniently stored and retrieved without
the inconvenience and possible confusion described in the preceding
paragraph.  Thus, to construct the data base portion of WMDBS, recent
(i.e., within the last four years) reports and surveys on hazardous waste
facilities have been reviewed and relevant information extracted.  These

-------
data have or will be entered into the WMDBS data base.  This information
can be conveniently retrieved in a form useable to the Economic Analysis
Branch (EAB) for the analysis and development of policies and regulations.
Additionally, WMDBS is designed so that as new regulations are proposed and
new technologies develop, this information can be easily added to the
system.
                         B.  System  Implementation

WMDBS will be implemented on an IBM  AT microcomputer using dBASE III.  The
AT will provide adequate space to store the system's data base as well as
provide adequate speed for handling  requests made by system users.  dBASE
III is a sophisticated data base management system for microcomputers and
will provide the software necessary  to store, retrieve, manipulate and
display information in a manner which will meet the needs of EAB.

WMDBS will be implemented as a menu-driven system providing a user friendly
interface with the system and the machine.  The advantage of such an
interface is that the menus act as intermediaries between the user and data
base, thus, relieving the user from  the burden of learning the data
retrieval language and understanding the structure of the data base.  The
user simply has to respond to questions which define the type and amount of
information desired.  The computer will then respond by executing the steps
necessary to retrieve and present the information requested.  The menu
programs are written to respond to only those options specified on the
screen.  This restriction of system  response prevents new users from
accidentally entering a key or function which could damage the program or
data base, and keeps more familiar users from performing operations
prohibited for reasons of system security or integrity.

With a menu-driven system the user is limited to a predefined set of
operations, since only those options specified in the menu can be selected.
dBASE III, however, provides enough flexibility so that changes to the

-------
system can be easily integrated with already functioning operations.   Thus,
most user perceived limitations of the menu system can be easily remedied,
allowing the system to grow as the use and demands of the system change.
Finally, a knowledgeable user can go around the menu system.

The WMDBS program is made up of several sub-programs called modules.   Each
module performs a specific function within the overall system.  At this
time, there are seven such modules:  CONTROL, TECHNOLOGY, PROFILE1,
PROFILE2, COST1, COST2, and COSTS.

Except for CONTROL, each module is designed to only work when the user
chooses to look at one technology.  Additional modules will have to be
added to handle the multiple technology comparison option.  The specific
functions for the presently developed  modules are as follows:

     •    CONTROL is the main controlling module of the program.  Initially
          it asks the user to" enter the type of comparison  that is to be
          performed.

     i    TECHNOLOGY presents the  technology choices on the screen and
          prompts the user to select  the  technology to be worked with.

     •    PROFILEl presents a list of all  of the  profile  information from
          which the user can  select.

     •    PROFILE2 controls the  presentation of profile information
          selected in PROFILEl.

     t    COST1 displays the  available cost information on  the  screen and
          prompts the user to select  what cost  information  they would like
          to see.

-------
     •    COST2 prompts the user to select the display format for the cost
          information.

     •    COSTS displays the cost information in a spreadsheet format
          allows the user to perform some manipulations on the data.
                  C.  Development of the WMDBS Data Base

Figure 2-1 illustrates the process of information extraction and storage
used for WMDBS.  Hazardous waste laws and regulations are developed whose
effects must be assessed.  Surveys and studies are in turn generated during
this assessment.  These studies and surveys are examined and reviewed, and
relevant information is taken from them and entered into the data base
portion of WMDBS.  We anticipate that as new reports and surveys are
conducted, new information will be added to the system and old information
will be updated or replaced.

There are three types of data in the data base portion of WMDBS — profile,
cost and auxiliary.  Profile information includes data which serves to
describe hazardous waste facilities and technologies such as number of
units by technology, size distributions for each technology, facility
capacities, and waste quantities.  A listing of the profile information
which has been collected to date is presented in Table 2-1.  This listing
is organized by technology and the sources for these data are noted.

The cost information portion of the data base will contain cost estimates
for managing (i.e., storage, treatment and disposal) hazardous waste under
RCRA.  The majority of these data can be organized by technology, within
technology by design type (e.g., unlined, double synthetic liner) and
within design type by size.  Originally, these costs were going to be taken
directly from the cost/impact reports which have been written for each of
the technologies,and for the treatment and storage of hazardous waste.
However, we found, for example, that for each of the four major land

-------
         Figure 2-1.   Data  collection and storage schematic for Waste  Management Data  Base  System
       Legal  and
      regulatory
        Impetus
                        Universe of hazardous
                          waste management
                         Information sources
   Data
collection
Haste Management
    Data Base
                                    PROFILE
                                  INFORMATION
                                    SOURCES
                                                                                      AUXILIARY
                                                                                     IHFORMATIOH
                                                                                       STORAGE
         LAWS
          AND
      REGULATIONS
          (1)
                                COST
                             INFORMATION
                               SOURCES
   DATA
COLLECTION
    (2)
      COST
   INFORMATION
     STORAGE
                                                                                           PROFILE
                                                                                          INFORMATION
                                                                                           STORAGE
(3.
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
Proposed and promulgated pertinent laws and regulations.
Profile and cost data deemed aopronriate are extracted and collected from sources.
Source title and other bibliographic data.
Requlatory authority for creation of source information.
Assumptions used in source.
Cost information.
Profile information.

-------
                      Table 2-1.   Profile information which has been collected for WMDBS
Technology
Data available
Source
CONTAINERS       Number of facilities using technology, 1981
                 Number of storage facilities using technology, 1981
                 Number of TSD facilities using technology, 1981

                 Total  quantity of hazardous waste stored using technology, 1981:
                     Bil gal
                     MMT
                 Average quantity of HW stored/facility, during 1981:
                     Bil gal
                     Thous MT
                 Average storage time (hours)

                 Average total gallons of HW stored/facility in containers
                   on any day, 1981
                 Average maximum gallons of HW stored/facility in containers
                   on any day, 1981
                                                       Mail  Survey
                                                       Mail  Survey
                                                       Mail  Survey
                                                       Mail  Survey
                                                       Mail  Survey

                                                       Mail  Survey
                                                       Mail  Survey
                                                       Mail  Survey
                                                       Mail Survey

                                                       Mail Survey
DISPOSAL         Number of facilities using technology, 1981
SURFACE          Number of disposal facilities using technology, 1981
IMPOUNDMENTS     Number of TSD using technology, 1981

                 Total quantity of HW disposed of in technology, 1981:
                     Bil gal
                     MMT
                 Average quantity of HW disposed of per facility using
                   technology, 1981:
                     Bil gal
                     MMT
                 Total gallons of waste disposed of using technology, 1981

                 Total capacity, 1981
                 Estimated expansion capacity, 1981
                 Total number of- units
                                                       Mail Survey
                                                       Mail Survey
                                                       Mail Survey
                                                       Mail Survey
                                                       Mail Survey
                                                       Mail Survey
                                                       Mail Survey
                                                       Mail Survey

                                                       Mail Survey
                                                       Mail Survey
                                                       Mail Survey
GENERATORS       Number of HW generators
                 Number of generators by 2-digit SIC
                 Number of generators by 3-digit SIC

                 Number of generators by waste type
                 Number of generators by EPA region
                 Total gallons of HW generated, 1981

                 Amount of total generated HW which was recycled off-site
                   by another firm, 1981
                 Amount of total HW which is recycled on-site, 1981
                 Amount of total HW which is recycled off-site by same firm

                 Total gallons of HW shipped off-site in 1981
                 Percent of total HW shipped off-site which is sent to firms
                   owned by others
                 Average total gallons of HW at a generation facility in 1981

                 Average optimum size of a waste shipment  (gal)
                 Amount of HW accumulated in tanks
                 Amount of HW accumulated in containers

                 Amount of HW accumulated in other types of storage
                                                       Mail Survey
                                                       Mail Survey
                                                       Mail Survey

                                                       Mail Survey
                                                       Mail Survey
                                                       Mail Survey
                                                       Mail Survey
                                                       Mail Survey
                                                       Mail Survey

                                                       Mail Survey

                                                       Mail Survey
                                                       Mail Survey

                                                       Mail Survey
                                                       Mail Survey
                                                       Mail Survey

                                                       Mail Survey
                 Number of facilities
                 Number of facilities by EPA Region
                 Total quantity of waste generated

                 Number of facilities exceeding storage criteria
                 Number of facilities subject to volume based regulatory
                   criteria
                 Quantity of industrial used oil generated in 1983 by SIC
                   (million gallons)

                 Number of facilities exceeding capacity requirements
                   by SIC
                                                  Biennial Report, 1985
                                                  Biennial Report, 1985
                                                  Biennial Report, 1985

                                                     Waste Oil, 1984

                                                     Waste Oil, 1984

                                                     Waste Oil, 1984
                                                     Waste Oil, 1984
                                                     Continued . . .

-------
                                             Table 2-1 (Continued)
                                                                                  Page 2
Technology
                  Data available
  Source
INCINERATORS         Number of facilities, with technology, 1981
                     Number of treatment facilities using technology, 1981
                     Number of TSD using technology, 1981

                     Total  quantity of HU treated using technology, 1981:
                         311 gal
                         M11 MT
                     Average quantity of HU processed/facility using technology, 1981:
                         311 gal
                         M11 MT
                     Median facility capacity (thous. MT/yr)

                     No. of commercial facilities with technology by EPA Region
                     Total  no. of commercial facility with technology, 1980
                     Vol. of HW processed by comm. off-site facilities using
                       technology by EPA Region

                     Total  volume of HU processed by commercial off-site facility
                       using technology, 1980
                     Engineering & construction time requirements for a median
                       facility
                     Total  quantity of all wastes burned, 1981

                     Avg. heat value of HU burned in 1981 (Btu/T)
                     Avg. hourly feed rate of HW to incinerator (lbs/nr)
                     Avg. total gal. of HU residual produced/facility, 1981

                     Avg. % of HU residuals shipped off-site/facility
                     Avg. day/year incinerator operated (8 hrs/day)
                     Avg. normal min. & max. combustion chamber temp.

                     Avg. normal min. & max. combustion chamber residence  time
                                                                         Mail  Survey
                                                                         Mail  Survey
                                                                         Mail  Survey
                                                                         Mail Survey
                                                                         Mail Survey

                                                                         Mail Survey
                                                                         Mail Survey
                                                                      Boor Allen, 1980

                                                                      Booz Allen, 1980
                                                                      Booz Allen, 1980

                                                                      Booz Allen, 1980
                                                                      Booz Allen, 1980

                                                                      Booz Allen, 1980
                                                                      Booz Allen, 1980

                                                                      Booz Allen, 1980
                                                                      Booz Allen, 1980
                                                                      Booz Allen, 1980

                                                                      Booz Allen, 1980
                                                                      Booz Allen, 1980
                                                                      Booz Allen, 1980

                                                                      Booz Allen, 1980
INJECTION
WELLS
Number of facilities using technology, 1981
Number disposal facilities using technology, 1981
Number of TSD using technology, 1981

Total quantity of HU disposed of in technology, 1981:
    Bil gal
    Mil MT
Avg. quantity/facility of HU disposed of in technology,  1981:
    Bil gal
    Mil MT
Total number of units

Total gal. of waste disposed of in technology, 1981
Total capacity, 1981
Mail Survey
Mail Survey
Mail Survey
                                                                                              Mail Survey
                                                                                              Mail Survey

                                                                                              Mail Survey
                                                                                              Mail Survey
                                                                                              Mail Survey

                                                                                              Mail Survey
                                                                                              Mail Survey
LANDFILLS
Number of facilities using technology, 1981
Number of disposal facility using technology, 1981
Number of TSD facility using technology, 1981

Total quantity of HU disposed of using technology,  1981:
    811 gal
    M11 MT
Avg. amount HU disposed per facility using technology,  1981:
    B11 gal
    M11 MT
Number of units by size group

No. of units affected, by the regulation, by design  type
Number of unites affected by the regulation
Number of units needing counter pumping

Total number of units in U.S.
No. of commercial facilities with this technology by EPA region
Total-number of commercial facilities with this technology in
  the U.S., 1980

                               8
Mail Survey
Mail Survey
Mail Survey
                                                                                              Mail Survey
                                                                                              Mail Survey

                                                                                              Mail Survey
                                                                                              Mail Survey
                                                                                           OPRA 4 EPA, 1984

                                                                                              DPRA, 1984
                                                                                               EPA, 1982
                                                                                               EPA, 1982

                                                                                               EPA, 1982
                                                                                           Booz Allen, 1980

                                                                                           Booz Allen, 1980
                                                                                            Continued . . .

-------
                                             Table 2-1 (Continued)
                                                                                  Page 3
Technology
                  Data available
     Source
LANDFILLS
(Con'd)
Plume size (acres/unit) for units needing counterpumping
Average size (acres/unit) for units needing counterpumping
Engineering & construction time requirements for a secure
  landfill (years)

Vol. of HW processed by offsite commercial facility in  1980 by
  EPA Region (TMT)
Total volume of HW processed at off-site commercial
  facilities using this technology, 1980
Number of units

Average size/unit (avg. overall units in U.S.)
    EPA, 1982
    EPA, 1982

Booz Allen, 1980
                                                                                           Booz Allen, 1980

                                                                                           Booz Allen, 1980
                                                                                              Mail Survey

                                                                                               EPA, 1982
LAND
TREATMENT
Number of facilities using technology, 1981
Number of disposal facilities using technology,  1981
Number of TSD using technology, 1981

Total quantity HW disposed of using technology,  1981:
    Bil gal
    MMT
Avg. quantity of HW disposed of/ unit using technology,  1981:
    Bil gal
    MMT
Number of units by size

Number of units needing corrective action
Number of units affected by regulation
Number of commercial facilities offering this HW service by
  EPA region

Total number of commercial facilities offering  this HW
  service in the U.S., 1980
Number of land treatment units
Engineering 4 construction time requirements

Average acreage of units needing counterpumping
Average plume size of units needing counterpumping
Total volume of HW processed by commercial facilities
  (off-site) using this technology, 1980

Volume of hazardous waste processed by commercial
  facilities (off-site) by EPA region
Total capacity for treatment, 1981
   Mail Survey
   Mail Survey
   Mail Survey
                                                                                              Mail Survey
                                                                                              Mail Survey

                                                                                              Mail Survey
                                                                                              Ma.il Survey
                                                                                               EPA, 1982

                                                                                               EPA, 1982
                                                                                               EPA, 1982

                                                                                               EPA, 1982
                                                                                           Booz Allen, 1980
                                                                                        EPA, 1982 & Mail Survey
                                                                                           Booz Allen, 1980

                                                                                               EPA, 1982
                                                                                               EPA, 1982

                                                                                           Booz Allen, 1980
                                                                                           Booz Allen, 1980
                                                                                              Mail Survey
OTHER
DISPOSAL
METHODS
Number of facilities with this  technology,- 1981
Number of disposal using this technology,  1981
Number of TSD using this technology,  1981

Total quantity of HW disposed of  in this technology,  1981:
    Bil gal
    MMT
Average quantity of HW disposed of/facility using  this
  technology, 1981:
    Mil gal
    MMT
   Mail Survey
   Mail Survey
   Mail Survey
                                                                                              Mail Survey
                                                                                              Mail Survey
                                                                                              Mail Survey
                                                                                              Mail Survey
OTHER
STORAGE
METHODS
Number of facilities using  technology,  1981
Number of storage facilities using  technology,  1981
Number of TSD using technology,  1981

Total quantity of HW stored in technology, 1981:
    Stored
    Bil gal
    MMT
Avg. quantity of HW. stored/facility stored in technology, 1981:
    BJ1 gal
    MMT
   Mail Survey
   Mail Survey
   Mail Survey
                                                                                              Mail Survey
                                                                                              Mail Survey
                                                                                              Mail Survey

                                                                                              Mail Survey
                                                                                              Mail Survey
                                                                                            Continued . .

-------
                                             Table 2-1  (Continued)
                                                                                  Page 4
Technology
                  Data available
                                                                                               Source
OTHER
TREATMENT
METHODS
Number of facilities using process, 1981
Number of TRT facilities using process, 1981
Number of TSD facilities using process, 1981

Total quantity of HW processed:
    B11 gal
    MMT
Average quantity assessed per facility:
    811 gal
    MMT
Mail Survey
Mail Survey
Mail Survey
                                                                                              Mail  Survey
                                                                                              Mail  Survey

                                                                                              Mail  Survey
                                                                                              Mail  Survey
STORAGE              Number of facilities with technology, 1981
SURFACE              Number of storage facilities using technology, 1981
IMPOUNDMENTS         Number of TSD facilities using technology, 1981

                     Total  quantity HW handled by technology, 1981:
                         Bil gal
                         MMT
                     Average quantity HW handled by technology/facility:
                         Bil gal
                         MMT
                     Total  gallons of waste handled by technology, 1981

                     Total  capacity for technology, 1981 (gal)
                     Total  expansion capacity, 1981 (gal)
                     Total  number of units, 1981
                                                                         Mail Survey
                                                                         Mail Survey
                                                                         Mail Survey
                                                                         Mail Survey
                                                                         Mail Survey

                                                                         Mail Survey
                                                                         Mail Survey
                                                                         Mail Survey

                                                                         Mail Survey
                                                                         Mail Survey
                                                                         Mail Survey
STORAGE
TANKS
Number of  facilities using  technology,  1981
Number of  storage  facilities using  technology,  1981
Number of  TSD  facilities using  technology, 1981

Total quantity of  hazardous waste stored  using  technology,  1981:
    Bil gal
    MMT
Average quantity of HW  stored/facility, 1981:
    Bil gal
    Thous  MT
Average number of  HW storage tanks/facility,  1981

Total gallons  of hazardous  waste stored in,  1981
Average storage time (hours)
Average number of  lined tanks/facility
Mail Survey
Mail Survey
Mail Survey
                                                                                              Mail Survey
                                                                                              Mail Survey

                                                                                              Mail Survey
                                                                                              Mail Survey
                                                                                              Mail Survey

                                                                                              Mail Survey
                                                                                              Mail Survey
                                                                                              Mail Survey
SURFACE              Number units by size group
IMPOUNDMENTS         Number of affected units
                     Number of units

                     Average size
                     Number of units needing corrective action
                     Avg. acreage of unit needing corrective action

                     Plume size for unit needing corrective action
                                                                      DPRA & EPA, 1984
                                                                      OPRA & EPA, 1984
                                                                          EPA,  1984

                                                                          EPA,  1984
                                                                          EPA,  1984
                                                                          EPA,  1984

                                                                          EPA,  1984
TANKS
 Number of facilities by types and sizes of tanks
                                                                                               ICF, 1985
TREATMENT            Number of facilities with  this  technology, 1981
SURFACE              Number of facilities using technology,  1981
IMPOUNDMENTS         Number TSD using technology,  1981

                     Total quantity  of  HW processed,  1981:
                         Bil gal
                         MMT
                     Avg. quantity of HW processed/facility,  1981:
                         Bil gal
                         MMT
                     Estimated total gallons of waste processed,  1981
                                                     10
                                                                         Mail  Survey
                                                                         Mail  Survey
                                                                         Mail  Survey
                                                                         Mail  Survey
                                                                         Mail  Survey

                                                                         Mail  Survey
                                                                         Mail  Survey
                                                                         Mall  Survey

                                                                        Continued  .  .

-------
                                             Table 2-1 (Continued)
                                                                                  Page 5
Technology
                  Data available
       Source
TREATMENT
SURFACE
IMPOUNDMENTS
(Con'd)
Total capacity, 1981 (gal)
Average capacity per facility, 1981 (gal)
Total number of units

Total expansion capacity, 1981 (gal)
     Mail  Survey
     Mail  Survey
     Mail  Survey

     Mail  Survey
TREATMENT
TANKS
Number of facilities with this technology, 1981
Number of treatment facilities using this technology, 1981
Number of TSD facilities using this technology, 1981

Quantity of waste handled in this manner:
    B11 gal
    MMT
Average quantity handled in this manner/facility:
    Bil gal
    MMT
Average number of units per facility

Total gallons of HW treated, 1981 (exclude wastewater
  treatment)
Total capacity of treatment tanks, 1981  (excluding
  wastewater treatment)
Average time hazardous waste is treated  in tanks (hours)

Average number of lined tanks at facility
     Mail  Survey
     Mail  Survey
     Mail  Survey
                                                                                              Mail  Survey
                                                                                              Mail  Survey

                                                                                              Mail  Survey
                                                                                              Mail  Survey
                                                                                              Mail  Survey
                                                                                              Mail  Survey

                                                                                              Mail  Survey
                                                                                              Mail  Survey

                                                                                              Mail  Survey
TSD

FACILITIES
Number of facilities

Number of facilities by SIC
Number of facilities by waste group

Number of facilities by EPA Region

Number of facilities by ownership type
Number of facilities by 3-digit SIC

Number of facilities, by groundwater contamination method
Number of facilities in seismic area
Number of facilities on a floodplain

Number of facilities by method of covering closure costs
Number of facilities by method of covering post-closure
  costs
Number of facilities by ownership type

Amount of total waste handled by ownership type
Amount of managed waste that was hazardous
Amount of HW that was received from off-site facilities

Amount of HW that was received from small quantity
  generators
Quantity of the waste handled by ownership type:
    Mil gal
    MMT
Quantity of HW received from off-site, 1981

Quantity of waste handled by waste code, 1981
Average number of up gradient wells per facility
Total quantity of waste managed in 1981 (gal.)

Total HW management capacity, 1981 (.gal)
     Mail Survey
Biennial Report, 1985
     Mail Survey
     Mail Survey

     Mail Survey
Biennial Report, 1985
     Mail Survey
     Mail Survey

     Mail Survey
     Mail Survey
     Mail Survey

     Mail Survey

     Mail Survey
     Mail Survey

     Mail Survey
     Mail Survey
     Mail Survey
                                                                                              Mail Survey

                                                                                              Mail Survey
                                                                                              Mail Survey
                                                                                              Mail Survey

                                                                                              Mail Survey
                                                                                              Mail Survey
                                                                                              Mail Survey

                                                                                              Mail Survey
WASTE
PILES
Number of facilities with technology, 1981
Number of storage facilities using this technology, 1981
Number of TSD using this technology, 1981
                                                     11
     Mail Survey
     Mail Survey
     Mail Survey

   Continued .  .

-------
                                             Table 2-1 (Continued)
                                                                                  Page 6
Technology
                  Data available
  Source
WASTE
PILES
(Con'd)
Total quantity of HW stored using this technology, 1981:
    Bil gal
    MMT
Average quantity HW stored/facility using this
  technology, 1981:
    Bil gal
    MMT
Number of units by size

Total number of units affected by design type
  (Amended Part 265)
Total number of units
Number of units affected by regulation

Number of units needing counterpumping
Average acreage of a unit needing counterpumping
Plume size for an average unit needing counterpumping

Average total quantity stored (yd3)/facility
Average max. quantity stored (yd3)/facility
Average quantity removed at one time  (yd3)/facility
DPRA, 1984
Mail Survey
                                                                                              Mail  Survey
                                                                                              Mail  Survey
                                                                                        OPRA,  1984  & EPA,  1982
                                                                                              OPRA,  1984
                                                                                              DPRA,  1984
                                                                                               EPA,  1982

                                                                                               EPA,  1982
                                                                                               EPA,  1982
                                                                                               EPA,  1982

                                                                                              Mail  Survey
                                                                                              Mail  Survey
                                                                                              Mail  Survey
                                                    12

-------
disposal technologies, several cost/impact reports have been written and
the costs from these reports are difficult to compare because of (1)
changes in RCRA in the interim between reports and (2) differences in
assumptions between reports.  Additionally, the models used to develop the
costs have become more sophisticated as the costing of RCRA regulations has
become better understood, again making comparisons with previous cost
estimates difficult.  Consequently, cost models recently developed by
Pope-Reid Associates will be used to generate most of the costs in this
portion of the data base.  The technologies whose costs will be generated
in this fashion include landfills, surface impoundments, waste piles, and
land treatment.  The costs for other technologies (containers, tanks,
injection wells, and incinerators) treatment and storage will be taken from
reports as they are completed and then approved by EAB.  Costs will be
adjusted, using appropriate indices, so that they reflect the same year to
allow inter-technology comparisons.

In addition to profile and cost information for the different disposal
technologies, such data will also be included for special classes of waste
generators and handlers, including small quantity generators and waste oil
generators, handlers and recyclers.  Information will also be included on
hazardous waste generators as a group as well as on treatment, storage and
disposal facilities (TSD's).  Pope-Reid Associates is currently working on
an Integrated Facility Cost Model which will allow the analyst to look at
the costs at a TSD facility which uses more than a disposal unit and/or
technology.  Results of this model will be included in WMDBS for common TSD
facility configurations generated from information in the Mail Survey.

Each piece of profile and cost information in WMDBS will be referenced so
that the user will be able to find out the source of the data requested.
Consequently, the auxiliary portion of WMDBS's data base will include a
complete bibliographic reference for each of the sources.  A regulatory
summary will also be included for those reports (i.e., cost reports)
needing such summaries to allow the user to conveniently obtain this
                                    13

-------
information.  Additionally, when appropriate a topical  listing  of
assumptions and corresponding page numbers will  be included for certain
reports.

In terms of the computer programming for the data base portion  of WMDBS,
programs have only been developed to date for profile and cost  information.
The profile information is contained in a data base called Profile,  which
contains seven fields:

     •    TITLE contains the text which is displayed on the screen.
     •    SOURCE contains the source of the information.
     •    T is used to mark a title line.
     •    N is the number of lines needed to display a particular profile
          item.
     •    SELECTED is used to mark the information that the user has
          selected to see.
     •    TECH is the technology for which the information applies.

A complete description of these fields is shown in Table 2-2.

The cost information is contained in a data base called Cost, which
contains 17 fields:

     •    FORM used to identify special lines for formatting output.
     •    TECHNOLOGY identifies the technology.
     •    SIZE identifies the unit size of the technology.
     •    DESIGN identifies the design type.
     •    Tl used to identify special lines for formatting output.
     •    T2 used to identify special lines for formatting output.
     t    TITLE displays the cost information title.
     •    F1-F15 contains various cost information.

A complete description of these fields is shown in Table 2-3.
                                    14

-------
Table 2-2.  Description of the seven fields making up the
         profile portion of the WMDBS data base
Field
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
TOTAL
Field name
TITLE
SOURCE
T
N
PAGE
SELECTED
TECH

Type
Character
Character
Character
Numeric
Numeric
Character
Character

Width
75
10
1
2
3
1
_2
94
                           15

-------
Table 2-3.  Description of the seventeen fields making up the
             cost portion of the WMDBS data base
Field
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
TOTAL
Field name
FORM
TECHNOLOGY
SIZE
DESIGN
Tl
T2
TITLE
Fl
F2
F3
F4
F5
F6
F7
F8
F9
F10
Fll
F12
F13
F14
F15

Type
Character
Character
Character
Character
Numeric
Numeri c
Character
Character
Character
Character
Character
Character
Character
Character
Character
Character
Character
Character
Character
Character
Character
Character

Width
1
7
9
9
2
2
28
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
_9
193
                              16

-------
                          D.   Data Access Design

This section describes and explains the screens which serve as  the  user
interface with WMDBS.  As previously indicated, WMDBS has been  designed as
a menu-driven system.  Consequently, this section will  walk the reader
through the series of menus and screens which will be available to  the user
to access WMDBS.

Figure 2-2 shows the entrance screen to WMDBS.  As can be seen, the user
has four choices:

     (1)  look at information from only one technology
     (2)  compare two or more technologies
     (3)  examine the information for all technologies, or
     (4)  exit the system.

The user simply enters the number of the option desired.  To facilitate
presentation, we will assume that the user chooses to look at only one
technology and we will follow the screens through under this assumption.
(If the user had chosen either Option 2 or 3, the screens would be similar
to those which will be shown below for one technology except that the
displays will focus on a technology comparison rather than a presentation
of data for only one technology.)

The screen shown in Figure 2-3 will appear after the user has chosen to
examine one technology; it lists those technologies for which WMDBS has
information.  At this point in WMDBS's development, there are 17 choices.
Some of these choices (e.g., generators, TSD's) are technically not
"technologies," but rather represent facilities which may use one or more
of the listed hazardous waste technologies.  Later data additions for waste
oil, small quantity generators, and integrated facilities may necessitate a
renaming of this listing.

Once a technology has been selected, the system allows the user to choose
whether profile or cost information will be examined by displaying the

                                    17

-------
Figure 2-2.  The entrance screen to the Waste Management
                    Data Base System
    Welcome to the Waste Management Data Base System
          Select one of the following options:

                   1.  One technology
                   2.  Technology comparison
                   3.  All technologies
                   4.  Exit system

                   Enter your selection (1-4):
                              18

-------
        Figure 2-3.  Screen allowing choice of technology
      Waste Management Data Base System Technology Choices
            Select one of the following technologies

1.  Containers                     10.  Other treatment methods
2.  Disposal surface impoundments  11.  Storage surface impoundments
3.  Generators                     12.  Storage tanks
4.  Incinerators                   13.  Surface impoundments
5.  Injection well                 14.  Treatment surface impoundments
6.  Landfills                      15.  Treatment tanks
7.  Land treatment                 16.  TSD's
8.  Other disposal methods         17.  Waste piles
9.  Other storage methods
                  Enter your selection (1-17):
                               19

-------
following menu at the bottom of the technology screen (see Figure 2-4):
Select (C)ost or (P)rofile information.  The user enters either a "C"  or a
"P."

Assume for purposes of illustration that the user has chosen landfills as
the technology and profile information as the data type of interest.   The
screen shown in Figure 2-5 would next appear.  The banner indicates the
information type (profile) requested as well as the technology (landfills).
Four types of profile information automatically appear under the banner:

     •    the number of facilities in the U.S. for the technology chosen
     •    the amount of unused capacity in 1981 for the technology
     •    the quantity of waste managed in 1981 by the technology, and
     •    the total capacity for the technology in 1981.

Beneath this information is a listing of the other profile information
which is available for landfills.  This same format is followed no matter
which technology is chosen by the user.  The only difference would be the
numbers appearing for the four automatically appearing data items and the
types of information which would appear in the listing of "other" available
profile information.

To choose from the "other" available profile information, the user must
place an "X" next to the data desired as is shown in Figure 2-6.  In this
case, the user has chosen to look at:

     •    total quantity of hazardous waste disposed of using technology,
          1981, and

     •    average amount of hazardous waste disposed of per facility using
          technology, 1981.

Figure 2-7 shows the information which would then appear on the screen for
this request.  Once,all the requested information has appeared, the main
                                    20

-------
        Figure 2-4.  Technology screen with Cost/Profile
                     Information Menu shown
      Waste Management Data Base System Technology Choices
            Select one of the following technologies

1.  Containers                     10.  Other treatment methods
2.  Disposal surface impoundments  11.  Storage surface impoundments
3.  Generators                     12.  Storage tanks
4.  Incinerators                   13.  Surface impoundments
5.  Injection well                 14.  Treatment surface impoundments
6.  Landfills                      15.  Treatment tanks
7.  Land treatment                 16.  TSD's
8.  Other disposal methods         17.  Waste piles
9.  Other storage methods
                 Enter your selection (1-17):  6
             Select (C)ost or (P)rofile Information
                               21

-------
        Figure 2-5.  Example screen showing the format for selecting
          profile information after a technology has been chosen
                     Waste Management Data Base System
                            Profile Information
                           Technology:  Landfill
The number of facilities, 1981:  199

Quantity of waste managed, 1981:  7,553,910 metric tons

Unused capacity, 1981:  177,015,148 metric tons

Total capacity, 1981:  251,636,566 metric tons

                           Source:  Mail Survey
    Total  quantity of HW disposed of using technology, 1981
    Average amount HW disposed per facility using technology, 1981
    Number of units by size group
    Number of units affected, by the regulation, by design type
    Number of units affected by the regulation
    Number of units needing counter pumping
    Total  number of units in U.S.
    Number of commercial facilities with this technology by EPA region
    Total  number of commercial facilities with this tech. in the U.S., 1980
    Plume  size (acres/unit) for units needing counterpumping
    Avg.  size (acres/unit) for units needing counterpumping
                 Enter an 'X1  by the desired information:
                                    22

-------
                Figure 2-6.  Example illustrating procedure
                     for choosing profile information
                     Waste Management Data Base System
                            Profile Information
                           Technology:  Landfill
The number of facilities, 1981:  199

Quantity of waste managed, 1981:   7,553,910 metric tons

Unused capacity, 1981:   177,015,148 metric tons

Total capacity, 1981:   251,636,566 metric tons

                           Source:  Mail Survey
    Total  quantity of HW disposed of using technology, 1981
    Average amount HW disposed per facility using technology, 1981
    Number of units by size group
    Number of units affected, by the regulation, by design type
    Number of units affected by the regulation
    Number of units needing counter pumping
    Total  number of units in U.S.
    Number of commercial facilities with this technology by EPA region
    Total  number of commercial facilities with this tech. in the U.S., 1980
    Plume  size (acres/unit) for units needing counterpumping
    Avg.  size (acres/unit) for units needing counterpumping

                 Enter an 'X' by the desired information:
                                    23

-------
          Figure 2-7.   Requested profile information
               Waste Management Data Base System
                      Profile Information
                     Technology:  Landfill
    Total quantity of HW disposed of using technology,  1981

                    .81 Billion Gallons, or
                     3 Million Metric Tons

                     Source:  Mail Survey
Average amount HW disposed per facility using technology,  1981

                       15 Thousand Metric Tons
                      4.1 Million Gallons

                     Source:  Mail Survey
                              24

-------
screen (Figure 2-1) will  then appear.   The user can then make further
selections or exit the system.

To illustrate what cost information is available to the user, we  will  now
assume that the user has  chosen to look at landfill cost information.
Because cost information  is available  for both commercial and non-
commercial facilities, the user will have to specify which landfill  type is
of interest.  For this example, we will assume that the user has  chosen
noncommercial landfills.   Figure 2-8 shows the screen which would appear
once these decisions have been made.  This screen would be the same  for  all
technologies for which RCRA costs have been estimated.  As can be seen,  a
series of costs are listed (first year, closure, annual, post clpsure).
Beneath this listing is a menu which allows the user to choose those costs
of interest.  If the user is interested in-seeing all of the listed  first
year, closure, annual or post closure  costs, either F, A, C, or P is typed.
If the user is interested in only the  totals for these costs, a "T"  would
be typed.  To obtain specific costs, an I (individual costs) would be  typed
in; and the user would then place an X next to those costs of interest.

Once the cost selection has been made, the user will then be asked to
decide on the display format (Figure 2-9).  There are two choices:

     (1)  view the costs  for all design types for a specified size
          (hereafter referred to as Display Option 1), or

     (2)  view the costs  for all standard sizes I/ for a specified design
          type (hereafter referred to as Display Option 2).

If the user chooses to view all design types (Display Option 1),  he  will be
asked to choose a specific size.  If the alternate display is chosen,  the
user must choose a specific design type.
\J   These are the sizes which are commonly used in regulatory cost studies
     for each of the technologies.

                                    25

-------
            Figure  2-8.   Replica of screen if cost information
                          is  selected by the user
                     Waste Management Data Base System
                            Profile Information
                           Technology:  Landfill
First Year
  Containment costs
  G.W.M.  well construction
  Other capital  costs
  Initial G.W. testing
  Initial reckeeping and adm costs
  Total

Closure Costs
  Closure of last cell
  Other capital  costs
  G.W.M.
  Recordkeeping
  Total
F)irst Year
TJotal Costs
A)nnual Costs
I individual Costs
Annual Costs
  Cell cover costs
  Containment system cost
  0 and M costs
  G.W. monitoring
  Record keeping
  Total

Post Closure Costs
  Equipment replacement
  G.W. monitoring
  Inspection
  Recordkeeping
  Total

       C)losure Costs
       PJost Closure Costs
Enter Selection:
                                    26

-------
Figure 2-9.   Screen allowing the user to choose the  cost
               information display format
            Waste Management Data Base System
                   Profile Information
                  Technology:   Landfill
           Select the Display Format

                1.   By design type within size

                2.   By size within a design type


           Enter your selection (1, 2):
                           27

-------
Figure 2-10 shows the case where first year costs are displayed according
to Display Option 2.   The costs for all standard sizes are shown where a
single synthetic liner (SSL) is chosen as the specified design type.
Figure 2-11 shows the alternate display option with 2,000 MT/year chosen as
the specified size.

The overall format shown in Figures 2-10 and 2-11 will be followed no
matter which technology and costs are examined.  Note that a menu appears
at the bottom of the  screen.  The options are:

     •    Left, Right, Up or Down — These options allow the user to roll
          the screen.  They are needed because the space on the screen is
          limited and not all of the data can be shown at once.

     0    Change — This option allows the user to change the specified
          design type or size.  Figure 2-12 shows the situation where the
          user has selected "Change" and now must decide on a new design
          type.

     §    By — This  option allows the display type to be changed between
          Display Option 1 (view the costs for all design types for a
          specified size) and Display Option 2 (view the costs for all
          standard sizes for a specified design type).

     •    Info ~ This option allows the user to return to the screen
          (Figure 2-8) listing all the available cost information, so that
          other costs can be viewed.

     •    National — This option causes national costs to be calculated
          for the displayed costs.  Figure 2-13 shows the case where
          national first-year costs are calculated.

     t    Cost Conv.  ~ This option allows the cost units to be changed
          from thousands of dollars per year to dollars per metric ton, or
          vice versa.
                                    28

-------
Figure 2-10.   First year costs displayed showing the costs for all  standard
      sizes when single synthetic liner (SSL) has been chosen as the
                           specified design type
Waste
In 84 Dollars Cost
Dollars in Thousands
Sizes (MT)
# of Facilities
First Year
Containment Costs
G.W.M. Well Construction
Other Capital Costs
Initial G.W. Testing
Initial Rec and Adm
Costs
Total
Management
Information
Data Base
System





for Landfills
Design Type: SSL
500
N.A.*

19.6
63.1
176.8
5.0

12.7
414.8
2000
N.A.

51.2
85.5
315.9
5.0

12.7
708.6
6000
N.A.

109.
108.
500.
5.

12.
1113.



7
8
3
0

7
8
15000
N.A.

1,021.
133.
734.
5.

12.
1654.



3
0
1
0

7
7
35000
N.A.

372.
160.
1046.
5.

12.
2423.



5
1
5
0

7
6
L)eft  R)ight  U)p  D)qwn  C)hange  B)y  I)nfo  N)ational  Z)Cost Conv
FJunction  Q)uit
SELECT ONE

* N.A. = Not available at this time.
                                    29

-------
 Figure 2-11.  First year costs displayed showing costs for all  design
     types when 2000 MT/year has been chosen as the specified size
                   Waste Management Data Base System
In 84 Dollars       Cost Information for Landfills
Dollars/Metric Ton            Size: 2000

Design Type                                   UL                     SSL
# of Facilities                               8                       5
First Year
  Containment Costs                            4.1                     25.6
  6.W.M. Well Construction                     0.0                     42.8
  Other Capital  Costs                        145.5                    158.0
  Initial  6.W.  Testing                        0.0                      2.5
  Initial Rec and Adm Costs                    0.0                      6.4
  Total                                      197.1                   1482.8
L)eft  R)ight  U)p  D)own  C)hange  B)y  I)nfo  N)ational  Z)Cost Conv
FJunction  Q)uit
SELECT ONE
                                    30

-------
     Figure 2-12.   Screen illustrating the use of the "Change"  option
In 84 Dollars
Dollars in Thousand
Waste Management Data Base System
 Cost Information for Landfills
        Design Type: SSL
Sizes (MT)
# of Facilities
First Year
Containment Costs
G.W.M. Well Construction
Other Capital Costs
Initial G.W. Testing
Initial Rec and Adm
Costs
Total
500
N.A.*

19.6
63.1
176.8
5.0

12.7
414.8
2000
N.A.

51.2
85.5
315.9
5.0

12.7
708.6
6000
N.A.

109.7
108.8
500.3
5.0

12.7
1113.8
15000
N.A.

1,021.3
133.0
734.1
5.0

12.7
1654.7
35000
N.A.

372.5
160.1
1046.5
5.0

12.7
2423.6
UL   SSL   SCL   DL(S*C)   DSL*C

SELECT DESIGN

*  N.A. = Not available at this time.
                                    31

-------
    Figure 2-13.  Screen illustrating the use of the "National" option
In 84 Dollars
Dollars in Thousand
Waste Management Data Base System
 Cost Information for Landfills
        Design Type: SSL
Sizes (MT)
# of Facilities
500
N.A.*
2000
N.A.
6000
N.A.
15000
N.A.
35000
N.A.
First Year
Containment Costs
6.W.M. Well Construction
Other Capital Costs
Initial 6.W. Testing
Initial Rec and Adm
Costs
Total
National First Year Costs

19.6
63.1
176.8
5.0

12.7
414.8
N.A.

51.2
85.5
315.9
5.0

12.7
708.6
N.A.

109.7
108.8
500.3
5.0

12.7
1113.8
N.A.

1,021.3
133.0
734.1
5.0

12.7
1654.7
N.A.

372.5
160.1
1046.5
5.0

12.7
2423.6
N.A.
L)eft  R)ight  U)p  D)own  C)hange  B)y  I)nfo  Q)uit  N)ational
ZJCost Conv  F)unction
SELECT ONE

*  N.A. = Not available at this time.
                                    32

-------
     •    Function ~ This option allows the manipulation of the shown  cost
          information.  This portion of WMDBS has as yet not been
          completed, but the user will  be able to:
               subtract one column of numbers from another to find the  cost
               differential between two different sizes or design types,
               calculate total  net present value of the costs (the user
               will specify the discount rate and the inflation rate; a
               facility life of 20 years will be assumed), or
               calculate annual revenue requirements (the user will  specify
               the same things as for net present value, as well as the
               real rate of return on invested capital, excluding
               inflation)

     •    Quit ~ This option allows the user to return to the main screen
          (Figure 2-2).

One other option which the user has which does not appear in the menu  is  to
specify a "non-standard size," i.e., a size other than those which
automatically appear in the cost displays.  The user, in the case of an
Option 2 display, would just roll the screen until the column after the
largest standard size appears.   The size heading will initially read zero.
The user will cursor up to the heading and enter a size.  The cost
information for that size will  then automatically appear on the screen.
                          III.  PROGRESS TO DATE

To date, over 15 reports or surveys have been reviewed and data have been
extracted from them. \j  These references are listed in the Appendix.  A
\J   Note some of these reports explain the models PRA will  be developing
     and the cost generation equations; consequently, the data from these
     will likely not be entered directly into WMDBS.
                                    33

-------
large number of other reports and documents have been examined, but were
determined inappropriate for WMDBS at this time.  We anticipate that the
WMDBS data base will be continuously updated and expanded as new reports
and surveys appear.  Some of those we hope to include in the near future
are:  the Commercial Facilities survey, the Subtitle D survey, the
incinerator RIA reports, waste oil cost work, and the small quantity
generator RIA.

Approximately half of the collected profile data have actually been entered
into the data base itself.  No cost information has as yet been entered,
since Pope-Reid Associates (PRA) is in the process of developing cost
equations which will be used to directly generate the costs for many of the
technologies.  Once these equations are available, they will be entered
into the system.  We presently have costs for the standard landfill and
surface impoundment sizes, but we have opted to wait until the equations
are ready to enter this information, because it is possible we may need
only to use the cost equations if their calculation times are not too slow.
This would save storage space.  Cost information for technologies not yet
covered by the PRA models will be entered as it becomes available.

Most of the screens for examining one technology have been developed.
Those which have not been developed are those dealing with the function
option (subtraction, NPV, ARR and annualized costs).  All of the developed
screens are operational and can access the data base for requested
information.  We will shortly develop the function screens and those
screens where two or more technologies are examined.
                            IV.  FUTURE OPTIONS

WMDBS should not be viewed as a static and fixed system.  We have attempted
to design it so that it can be easily updated, expanded or changed.  We
anticipate that as new studies and surveys are conducted, these will be
added to the system. , Additionally, information areas which have as yet not
                                    34

-------
been considered for the data base could be included.  One of these areas  is
risk assessment and estimation, since information is needed in the
assessment of regulatory options.  Having this information readily
available to the EAB staff would likely be very useful.

As the EAB staff uses WMDBS, new ways of using and combining the profile
and cost information will likely become apparent.  Given the flexibility  of
the system, it can be readily changed to perform these new uses.
Additionally as EAB needs change, it is anticipated that WMDBS will be
altered and expanded to meet these needs.
                                     35

-------
 APPENDIX





REFERENCES

-------
                                REFERENCES
Booz-Allen & Hamilton, Inc.  1983 (August).  Review of Activities of Major
     Firms in the Commercial Hazardous Waste Management Industry:  1982
     Update.For the Office of Policy Analysis, U.S. Environmental
     Protection Agency.

Booz-Allen & Hamilton, Inc. and Putnam, Hayes & Bartlett, Inc.  1980
     (December).  Hazardous Waste Generation and Commercial  Hazardous Waste
     Management Capacity.  For the Office of Planning and Evaluation and
     the Office of Solid Waste, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
     (SW-894).

Dietz, S., M. Emmet, R. DiGaetano, D. Tuttle and C. Vincent.  1984 (April).
     National Survey of Hazardous Waste Generators and Treatment, Storage
     and Disposal Facilities Regulated Under RCRA in 1981.Westat, Inc.
     For the Office of Solid Waste, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

DPRA, Inc.  1985 (August).  National Summary Biennial Report on 1983
     Hazardous Waste Generation, Treatment/Storage and Disposal"
     Activities^Prepared for Office of Solid Waste, U.S. Environmental
     Protection Agency.

DPRA, Inc.  1984 (June).  Supporting Documents for the Regulatory Analysis
     of Amendments to Parts 26,.264 and 265 Land Disposal Regulations.
     Office of Solid Waste, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Franklin Associates, Ltd.  1984 (October).  Characterization of Industrial
     Used Oil Generators.  Prepared for Office of Solid Waste, U.S.
     Environmental Protection Agency.

Franklin Associates, Ltd.  1984 (September).  Composition and Management of
     Used Oil Generated in the United States.  Prepared for Office of Solid
     Waste, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Geraghty & Miller, Inc.  1984 (February).  Stochastic Model  of Corrective
     Action Costs at Hazardous Waste Management Facilities.   Prepared for
     Office of Solid Waste, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

ICF, Inc.  1985 (March).  Estimated Costs of Compliance with Proposed RCRA
     Regulations for Hazardous Waste Storage, Treatment, and Accumulation
     Tank Facilities.Prepared for Economic Analysis Branch, Office of
     Solid Waste, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

ICF, Inc.  1984 (March).  The Risk-Cost Analysis Model Phase III Report.
     For the Office of Solid Waste, Economic Analysis Branch, U.S.
     Environmental Protection Agency.

-------
ICF Inc. and Geraghty & Miller, Inc.  1983 (September).  Economic Analysis
     of a Proposal to Modify Groundwater Monitoring Requirements (Draft
     Report).  Office of Solid Waste, Environmental Protection Agency.

Pope-Reid Associates, Inc.  1984 (October).  Guidance Document for
     Estimating Closure and Post-Closure Costs, Volume I - Unit Costs.
     Office of Solid Waste, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Pope-Reid Associates, Inc.  1984 (February).  User's Manual for the Waste
     Pile Computer Cost Model and the Stochastic Waste Pile Costing Model.
     Prepared for Office of Solid Waste, U.S. Environmental Protection
     Agency.

Pope-Reid Associates, Inc.  1983 (October).  Average and Maximum
     Engineering Cost Estimates for Closure.  Office of Planning and
     Resource Management, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Pope-Reid Associates, Inc.  1982 (April).  Hazardous Waste Landfill Design
     Costs and Performance Modeling.  Office of Solid Waste, U.S.
     Environmental Protection Agency.

Snyder, Michael K.  1981 (October).  Overview Cost Analysis of Land
     Treatment Disposal Option.  Midwest Research Institute.  For
     Development Planning and Research Associates, Inc.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  1984 (August).  Liner Location Risk
     Analysis Model.  Office of Solid,Waste, U.S. Environmental Protection
     Agency.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  1982 (August).  Supporting Document
     for the Regulatory Analysis of the Part 264 Land Disposal Regulations
     (Pocket Report).  Vols. I, II and III.Office of Solid Waste, U.S.
     Environmental Protection Agency.

Westat, Inc.  1982 (September).  National Survey of Hazardous Waste
     Generators and Treatment, Storage and Disposal Facilities Regulated
     Under RCRA in 1981TMail survey questionnaires prepared for Office of
     Solid Waste, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

-------