United States       Office of Policy
Environmental Protection  (1807T)
Agency
April 2013
EPA-100-K-12-010
 Hazardous Waste
 Determination Program
 Evaluation
 Appendices
 Promoting Environmental Results
                         
 Through Evaluation

-------
APPENDIX A: HAZARDOUS WASTE DETERMINATION NON-
COMPLIANCE RATE BY SECTOR
Federal RCRA 262 Subpart A - Sector Non-Compliance Rates - The following table lists the 21
industries with the highest sector non-compliance rates, where non-compliance is calculated
as follows: (number of EPA-conducted CEI's during which a RCRA 262 Subpart A violation was
found/total number of EPA-conducted CEI's)
Sector
Bare Printed Circuit Board
Manufacturing
Copper Foundries (except
Die-Casting)
General Medical and Surgical
Hospitals
Colleges, Universities, and
Professional Schools
Fabricated Structural Metal
Manufacturing
Paint and Coating
Manufacturing
Electroplating, Plating,
Polishing, Anodizing, and
Coloring
Wood Preservation
Iron Foundries
All Other Miscellaneous
Manufacturing
Metal Coating, Engraving
(except Jewelry and
Silverware), and Allied
Services to Manufacturers
All Other Plastics Product
Manufacturing
Automotive Body, Paint, and
Interior Repair and
Maintenance
Pharmaceutical Preparation
Manufacturing"
NAICS Code
334412
331525
62211
61131
332312
32551
332813
321114
331511
339999
332812
326199
811121
325412
Total EPA
Conducted
CEI's
91
35
193
457
39
192
531
167
57
78
183
100
66
169
Total EPA
Conducted
CEI's
w/Violations
Found
42
11
57
132
11
52
142
42
14
18
39
20
13
32
Sector Non-
Compliance
Rate
46%
31%
30%
29%
28%
27%
27%
25%
25%
23%
21%
20%
20%
19%

-------
Federal RCRA 262 Subpart A - Sector Non-Compliance Rates - The following table lists the 21
industries with the highest sector non-compliance rates, where non-compliance is calculated
as follows: (number of EPA-conducted CEI's during which a RCRA 262 Subpart A violation was
found/total number of EPA-conducted CEI's)
Sector
Plastics Material and Resin
Manufacturing
Petroleum Refineries
Research and Development in
the Physical, Engineering,
and Life Sciences
All Other Basic Inorganic
Chemical Manufacturing
Printing
All Other Miscellaneous
Chemical Product and
Preparation Manufacturing
All Other Basic Organic
Chemical Manufacturing
NAICS Code
325211
32411
54171
325188
32311
325998
325199
Total EPA
Conducted
CEI's
189
112
236
160
189
164
240
Total EPA
Conducted
CEI's
w/Violations
Found
28
15
31
20
23
18
26
Sector Non-
Compliance
Rate
15%
13%
13%
13%
12%
11%
11%
APPENDIX B: THEME PREVALENCE
Theme Prevalence in Interviews, Discussions, and the Federal Facility Survey
Theme
Generators have difficulty making waste
determinations for listed wastes
Reliance upon third parties (vendors,
suppliers, disposers) for information used
to make determinations can result in
generator determination violations
Lack of training/staff turnover
Industry specific guidance/outreach would
be most helpful.
Lack of consistency of the regulations and
Response
Index

49



44
43

41
39
Data
Sources
Rated 3

13



9
6

9
6
Data
Sources
Rated 2

4



6
11

7
8
Data
Sources
Rated 1

9



11
9

6
11
Percentage
of Data
Sources
Rated

77%



77%
77%

64%
73%

-------
Theme Prevalence in Interviews, Discussions, and the Federal Facility Survey
Theme
how to interpret them at the different
levels of government is confusing to
generators, leading to hazardous waste
determination violations (Fed., Sate,
County)
Hazardous waste determination
regulations are generally confusing and
difficult to follow (e.g. narrative
interpretations, references to previous
sections)
There is a need for more
interpretation/guidance/definitive
answers from EPA
Generators struggle with understanding
the hazardous waste recycling regulations
Generators are often unaware that they
are generating a hazardous waste at all
and therefore subject to RCRA
Cost constraints can lead to hazardous
waste determination violations
The size and/or sophistication of a firm
plays a role in its ability to make accurate
determinations
Reduced funding at the federal, state,
and county level has eliminated many
generator outreach and training programs
Generators are not concerned with
hazardous waste determination unless
they are fined for non-compliance
Generators have difficulty making waste
determinations for characteristic wastes
Hazardous waste generators often
mischaracterize peripheral waste
Generators often use the MSDS for waste
determinations but fail to account for
materials that have been mixed or altered
Response
Index









38


37

34


30

29


28


23


23

22

19

18
Data
Sources
Rated 3









7


9

7


6

3


4


4


4

0

3

2
Data
Sources
Rated 2









4


3

6


6

4


3


1


4

8

2

1
Data
Sources
Rated 1









14


8

7


6

14


11


10


3

9

7

11
Percentage
of Data
Sources
Rated









73%


60%

57%


51%

63%


56%


46%


36%

50%

37%

43%

-------
Theme Prevalence in Interviews, Discussions, and the Federal Facility Survey
Theme
during the production process
RCRA does not keep up with changes to
products and /or technology
Generators do not have procedures in
place to ensure proper waste
determination
Generators are often confused about the
rules/interpretations with regard to
empty containers
Generators have difficulty knowing when
to make a waste determination during the
production process
A lack of presence by regulating entities
dissuades generators from being attentive
to waste determinations
Generators have difficulty characterizing
materials that are subject to different
regulations by multiple entities (EPA,
DOT, FDA)
Generators do not understand when a
waste should be analyzed for the
determination vs. when process
knowledge is sufficient.
Generators are too busy /overwhelmed to
keep up with compliance requirements
Generators inappropriately apply RCRA
exclusions/exemptions
Generators have difficulty understanding
and/or applying the analytical results of
sampled waste streams
Generators don't understand how to apply
the "derived from" rule
Generators don't understand how to apply
the "mixtures" rule
Facilities that fluctuate between
Response
Index


18


16


15


15


14



14



14

14

13


12

7

6
6
Data
Sources
Rated 3


3


0


1


2


0



1



1

4

1


2

0

0
1
Data
Sources
Rated 2


3


7


2


2


2



1



3

0

1


1

1

1
1
Data
Sources
Rated 1


3


4


9


6


11



10



6

2

9


4

6

4
1
Percentage
of Data
Sources
Rated


30%


33%


37%


31%


40%



36%



30%

20%

33%


23%

20%

16%
9%

-------
Theme Prevalence in Interviews, Discussions, and the Federal Facility Survey
Theme
generator statuses have difficulty with
waste determination compliance
Regulators lack the expertise needed to
make effective interpretations of
hazardous waste determination
regulations
Response
Index





3
Data
Sources
Rated 3





1
Data
Sources
Rated 2





0
Data
Sources
Rated 1





0
Percentage
of Data
Sources
Rated





3%
APPENDIX C: STAKEHOLDER RECOMMENDATIONS, ORGANIZED BY
RECOMMENDATION TYPE
Stakeholder Category
State Regulator
State Regulator
State Regulator
State Regulator
State Regulator
State Regulator
State Regulator
Assistance Provider
Assistance Provider
Assistance Provider
Assistance Provider
Assistance Provider
State Agency
Recommendation Type: Provide/improve/increase guidance
for making hazardous waste determinations
Recommendation
Provide more technical support to generators.
Targeted training with follow up (inspections) to measure effectiveness.
Provide cheat sheets to help regulators.
Develop hazardous waste review docs to explain to generators the scope
and application of individual listings.
Require transporter and consultant training and certification.
Develop more user- friendly website for generators to get help making
determinations.
Have universities provide training/curriculum in hazardous waste
determination.
Create a checklist that says" if you're doing x, you most likely have this
waste."
Directory that lists standard wastes for each sector.
Industry guide to characterization.
For each sector, spell out the top ten things they can do to reduce
waste.
Make the info on RCRCA Online easier to find.
Have outreach and training programs with a certification system to

-------
Stakeholder Category

Representative
State Agency
Representative
State Agency
Representative
State Agency
Representative
Waste Services Provider
Waste Services Provider
Waste Services Provider
Waste Services Provider
Waste Services Provider
Waste Services Provider
Industry Representative
Industry Representative
Industry Representative
County Regulator
HW Generator
HW Generator
HW Generator
Industry Representative
Industry Representative
Recommendation Type: Provide/improve/increase guidance
for making hazardous waste determinations
Recommendation
ensure that businesses attend.
More training and outreach.
More face to face technical assistance and training.
Face to face outreach and training with both generators and inspectors.
Reinstate RCRA Hotline.
Publicly available waste determination trainings similar to those given
by McCoy.
Focus more on improving compliance and provide substantive and
feedback and guidance.
Provide more general and simple guidance and make it easy to find
online. Make it sector specific and write it in language the lay person
can understand.
Create an online wizard that a generator could walk through. Have it
ask you questions and based upon answers provide determination
guidance.
Create a list of primary sectors and then a tree of questions for specific
sectors.
More educational visits.
When a business is registered, provide a fact sheet that says "these are
what your typical waste streams will be."
Alert generators to what may be hazardous.
It would be really helpful if EPA took more of its guidance out of the
case specific guidance and discussed the general application for
guidance.
Reinstate RCRA Hotline.
Enable the hazardous waste training that's required to fulfill the
Hazmat training requirement for DOT.
Provide more outreach and make the regulations user friendly.
More opportunities for training webinars specific to industry.
Reinstate RCRA Hotline.

-------
Stakeholder Category

Industry Representative
Industry Representative
Industry Representative
Industry Representative
Industry Representative
Industry Representative
Industry Representative
Federal Representative
Industry Representative
Industry Representative
Industry Representative
Industry Representative
Federal Facility
Representative
Federal Facility
Representative
Federal Facility
Representative
Federal Facility
Representative
Federal Facility
Representative
Federal Facility
Representative
Federal Facility
Recommendation Type: Provide/improve/increase guidance
for making hazardous waste determinations
Recommendation
Locate all guidance materials in one, easy to access locations.
We encourage EPA to develop testing guidance and propose this
guidance for public comment.
We also strongly encourage EPA to reinstate the RCRA hotline.
Put all FR, background documents, etc., that deal with RCRA on the
web, back to the beginning.
Provide more education and guidance materials to new businesses.
Host an industry/EPA advanced waste seminar that addresses these and
other issues.
Provide industry specific training courses.
Make outreach /guidance sector specific.
Provide relief and regulatory guidance for retailers which participate in
household
hazardous waste collection programs.
Reinstate RCRA Hotline.
Create more reliable documents so they don't have to continually argue
over the same interpretations.
Require training for people who make hazardous waste determinations.
Issue guidance straight-forward guidance on how to handle common
things (i.e. aerosol cans, batteries, solvent wipes, etc.). Existing
guidance on these common wastes is vague and no helpful at all.
Provide a training roadshow where the EPA comes to certain areas and
provides training in a classroom setting.
In rural America such as Native American lands, the webinar is not
always available. On-site technical assistance would be the most
beneficial.
Develop free user friendly hazardous waste management software for
generators.
Provide a newsletter with helpful tips and hints to make hazardous
waste determinations.
Back when EPA ran the 1 -800 hotline to answer questions, I used it
pretty often. That was a good thing. Those old answers are posted on an
EPA web site but it is almost impossible to find the site.
Make your website easier to use.

-------
Stakeholder Category
Representative
Federal Facility
Representative
HW Generator
Recommendation Type: Provide/improve/increase guidance
for making hazardous waste determinations
Recommendation

Have the states be more involved with assisting the generators as
opposed to just inspecting them for compliance.
Translate regulations into other languages.
Stakeholder Category
State Regulator
Assistance Provider
State Agency
Representative
Waste Services Provider
Industry Representative
Industry Representative
Industry Representative
County Regulator
HW Generator
Recommendation Type: Other
Recommendation
Require TSDFs to better focus on proper waste determinations.
Provide economic incentive for businesses to implement changes,
currently only negative incentives exist (fines).
Somehow tie training to a financial incentive.
EPA should do the determinations.
Be more transparent with how the rules are developed.
EPA has made a mistake by having small business assistance program
purchasing.
in
EPA should request state input prior to making a new
clarification /interpretation about hazardous waste.
The land ban rule, it is extra work and I'm not sure of the benefit. It's
outdated, it's run its course, there was a reason - so people know what
can't go into the landfills. We have a separate set of manifests, initially
there was a reason for it; we've outlived it.
Maybe the way EPA should be looking at it is not addressing HW
determination compliance directly, but indirectly through improving the
regulations that apply to training or improving the regs that apply to
notification requirements and then get at the HW determination that
way.

-------
Stakeholder Category
State Regulator
Industry Representative
Industry Representative
Industry Representative
Federal Regulator
Federal Regulator
Federal Regulator
Industry Representative
Federal Facility
Representative
Federal Facility
Representative
Recommendation Type: Other
Recommendation
Create an alternate method for calculating generator status, perhaps a
rolling 12 month average.
Revise regulations to state that if a non-primary product material (e.g.,
spent material, by-product, listed waste, etc.) is used as is or is
reclaimed such that the recovered component is used within the same
site, within the same company, or within another site or industry (third
party), it is not waste, and not subject to any 260-270 requirements. If
the material is diverted to disposal, only then is it subject to 260-270
standards, if it is a hazardous waste.
If a potential hazardous waste is exempt due to its management, use,
recycle, etc., then any further RCRA management conditions should be
removed. Once a material is exempt, then the only RCRA requirement
should be disposal under RCRA if the material is not reused or recycled
for some reason. Notification that the once disposed material is now
recycled may be appropriate in some cases, however, RCRA
requirements for the management of the material in the use or recycle
mode is not.
Increase my budget - more coverage - or more grant $ for the states.
Enforcement alert s - do compliance alerts about common problems -
e.g., full analysis on used oil, bulbs, common errors might pick up a lot
of non-compliance - folks operating around the margins - maybe the
folks who have out of date chemicals - discrete number of routine
violations - failure to recognize.
Require generators to do a mass balance of everything that leaves their
property and put it online to assist in targeting.
Regulation changes - issue of recordkeeping - keep records even if you
determine it's not hazardous waste - 262.40 requirements - affirmative
obligation to record the basis for a determination, even if operator
knowledge - have that retained or, less ideal, Biannual Report that large
quantity generators submit (BRS) - currently have to keep a record if
you have.
We find the state (New York) often has incorrect or debatable
interpretations of regulations and too much is left up to the individual
inspector.
Refer to 40CFR1 12 for how a regulation should be written.
List of qualified and certified analysis labs by state.
10

-------
Stakeholder Category
Federal Facility
Representative
Federal Facility
Representative
Federal Facility
Representative
Federal Facility
Representative
Federal Facility
Representative
Federal Facility
Representative
Federal Facility
Representative
Federal Facility
Representative
Federal Facility
Representative
Recommendation Type: Other
Recommendation
It is absurd to say to us, you must test your own lamps to see if they are
HW. Everyone uses the only lamps available. Just simply say that lamps
are or are not a HW. Same goes for other waste. Tis much better to
simply say it is hazardous vs. you must test your waste.
Because the environment is becoming a bigger and larger part of the
world's focus, maybe the EPA should consider having an "EPA
Consultation" Branch/Division in the same manner as the "OSHA
Consultation" Branch.
Require delegated program States to make determinations & provide a
responsive answer (not just respond saying that they are working on it),
in writing, within 15 calendar days of an information request related to
RCRA waste determinations.
Provide electronic copies of all forms, State and Federal.
Users are afraid to involve regulators.
Provide data where other facilities have failed to meet the expectations
of HW determinations. Include references and finding discussions.
Provide competent State regulators.
DO NOT OVER REGULATE!
Make sure that hotline person has a broad range of knowledge.
Stakeholder Category
State Regulator
Assistance Provider
Waste Services Provider
Industry Representative
Recommendation Type: Simplify the regulations
in general
Recommendation
Simple - plain English regulations.
Re-write the regulations and make them simpler.
Revise archaic regulations.
Simplify regulations - give waste classifications by NAICS
code.
11

-------
Stakeholder Category
Industry Representative
HW Generator
County Regulator
HW Generator
HW Generator
HW Generator
Industry Representative
Industry Representative
Federal Representative
Industry Representative
Federal Facility
Representative
Federal Facility
Representative
Recommendation Type: Simplify the regulations in general
Recommendation
Simplify and streamline the regulations.
The archaic parts of RCRA rules need to be reviewed. Some of them are
derived from a rule that has no place as a regulation, like the listings
we've talked about. Simplicity is a much better answer. You would get a
lot better compliance.
Regulate waste determination of materials independent of their use
(i.e. product vs. waste).
Beneficial reuse should be encouraged, but don't make it too
complicated because it becomes a RCRA2 and people have two sets of
regulations to memorize.
Make the regulations more linear - in terms of how they are written.
Base how waste is treated on where it is going. If going to a cement
kiln, treat this way. Group wastes by the analysis they need.
The whole hierarchy needs to change, not just determination. Start with
what is a waste, take a flow chart type approach; is it a waste or not a
waste. Although that seems very simple, that's been very convoluted.
Then you move into the determination of is it a hazardous waste or a
non-hazardous waste. Then you have probably ten areas of things that
are technically hazardous waste but if you do work with them they're
not hazardous. All of that needs to be clarified and streamlined.
Streamline the regulations.
Put regulations into plain English.
Re-write regulations, making them less vague.
Simplify regulatory determination requirements. There are far too
many intricacies in determining whether a solid waste is a hazardous
waste, many of which have no bearing on whether they are potentially
harmful to the environment if improperly disposed.
Just simplify the categories for the hazardous waste determination. 1
feel the TSD's have the upper hand in the process, whereby allowing the
price of disposal to remain unchecked because of availability to a small
number of local TSDS. As a chemist responsible for these
determinations at the largest research arm of the USDA, 1 am very
knowledgeable about the waste streams, but the end processing of
those waste streams would be more effective if we used a system that
did not try to out categorize the DOT's HMIS or GHS - clearly, the
products at the end will burn, corrode, are toxic etc. and the 120+
hours of training I need to accomplish each year for emergency
response, hazmat shipment, and hazmat characterization should be
12

-------
Stakeholder Category

Federal Facility
Representative
Recommendation Type: Simplify the regulations in general
Recommendation
streamlined so we do not wind up with the typical governmental
alphabet soup on the manifests and declarations. Also, you might want
to consider how IATA assembles their info for international shipping of
dangerous goods; they do a very fine job of consolidating the
information into a legible form which would decrease the hurdle all
newbies into this field have to cross or the barriers companies, including
the Feds, have to cross to convince management types the regulations
are necessary and the funding needed to achieve program compliance.
The regulations just have to be simpler. Do away with listings and make
everything based on characteristics.
Stakeholder Category

State Agency
Representative
Waste Services Provider
Waste Services Provider
Waste Services Provider
Waste Services Provider
County Regulator
Industry Representative
Industry Representative
Federal Regulator
Assistance Provider
Industry Representative
Recommendation Type: Define and clearly interpret specific
sections of the regulations
Recommendation
Hire an entity to create industry specific interpretation of hazardous
waste determination regulations.
Provide more interpretation of the regulations.
"At the end of the day, someone needs to answer the difficult question
of 'are these regulations focusing on the right thing.'"
EPA should offer answers to specific questions about waste
determination.
Clarify "generator knowledge."
EPA should revise the definition of reactivity based on information that
is widely available or generally held by generators. We need a definitive
test for reactivity.
Clarify the closed loop exemption.
More clarity on electronics products. There is no consistent guidance
about these at the Fed/state level.
Provide clear, reliable answers to generators so they wouldn't have so
many questions.
Clarify the term "knowledge" with regard to process knowledge.
Provide definitive ruling on the regulatory requirements to donate or
13

-------
Stakeholder Category

Federal Facility
Representative
Federal Facility
Representative
Federal Facility
Representative
Federal Facility
Representative
Recommendation Type: Define and clearly interpret specific
sections of the regulations
Recommendation
salvage potentially
regulated consumer products.
Do not give cryptic answers. Be straight forward. Be more specific about
the definition of process change; to what micro level is determined to
be "de minis" and what constitutes a real process change.
Definition of "point of generation" is required in the regulations.
Clarify definition of D003 and identify criteria that can also be tested
analytically.
Improve clarity of underlying constituent regulations.
Stakeholder Category
Waste Services Provider
Industry Representative
Industry Representative
Industry Representative
Waste Services Provider
Industry Representative
Industry Representative
Industry Representative
Industry Representative
Recommendation Type: Address situations where applying the
regulations is not practical
Recommendation
Simplify waste streams for Pharmaceuticals and other industries
EPA should take themselves out of the industrial manufacturing setting
think about what it takes to implement these regulations in a hospital
setting and determine if it is really necessary at certain levels.
Find a way to make more prompt decisions with regard to issues facing
hospitals (e.g. P listed hazardous waste containers counting towards
the generator status of a hospital).
Finalize the proposed universal waste rule for Pharmaceuticals.
Address issues with the pharmaceutical industry.
Consumer products exemptions.
Expansion of Universal Waste rules to cover consumer products.
Expansion of Universal Waste Rules to cover Pharmaceuticals.
Provide consumer product relief under the Universal Waste rules
allowing consumer products to be characterized generally as Universal
Waste limiting the resource intensive product level hazard characteristic
review.
14

-------
Stakeholder Category
Industry Representative
Federal Facility
Representative
Federal Facility
Representative
Federal Facility
Representative
Federal Facility
Representative
Recommendation Type: Address situations where applying the
regulations is not practical
Recommendation
Provide consumer product relief under the Universal Waste rules
allowing consumer product waste determinations to be made at a
consolidation or returns processing facility or provide a specific ruling
on when waste determination must be made in the retail returns
process.
RCRA regulations are strongly biased by an underlying assumption that
wastes are generated by continuous industrial processes. However,
most of our wastes are one-time generation events and contaminated
media, which must be sampled and analyzed. The time required to
sample and analyze the waste, develop a waste profile, make disposal
arrangements, and schedule the waste pickup, makes it very difficult to
meet the 90-day accumulation time limitation. EPA needs to address
accumulation time and other requirements for wastes that must be
individually assessed and which require variable treatment and disposal
arrangements.
Pharmaceutical waste is very confusing and more guidance is needed for
hospitals, etc.
Make Pharmaceuticals universal waste.
Deal with consumer products as a single category of hazardous waste,
not as each of the separate categories that comprise consumer products
(i.e. electronics, Pharmaceuticals, etc...).
Stakeholder Category
Industry Representative
Industry Representative
Industry Representative
Industry Representative
Industry Representative
Recommendation Type: Increase collaboration with the
regulated industries
Recommendation
EPA staff should learn about an industry before they try and regulate it.
More open communication with industry and folks trying to make
determinations.
Work more closely with trade associations.
Work more closely with industry to develop guidance documents.
EPA should learn about the practical challenges faced by industries
when trying to apply these regulations.
15

-------
Stakeholder Category
Recommendation Type:  Increase collaboration with the
regulated industries
                          Recommendation
Federal Regulator
To what extent are we getting to trade shows - as soon as we get a
travel budget we want to do that again.
Assistance Provider
Work more with industry associations.
State Agency
Representative
Work with trade associations to create and disseminate hazardous waste
determination information.
Federal Facility
Representative
Be less confrontational and more cooperative with the regulated
industries.
Federal Facility
Representative
EPA needs to use utilize the expertise of Pharmacologists who hold
PharmD. degrees when issuing guidance to hospitals on how to
characterize Pharmaceuticals.
Stakeholder Category
Assistance Provider
HW Generator
Industry Representative
Industry Representative
Industry Representative
Industry Representative
Federal Facility
Representative
Recommendation Type: Specific waste stream issues
Recommendation
Make aerosol cans universal waste.
Acetone - On one hand the air rules are encouraging because it's not an
ozone creating chemical and on the other hand the waste rules are dis-
incentivizing because it's a listed waste only because of ignitability.
For empty P listed pharmacy pill containers, count only the weight of
the residue in the container towards the amount of P listed waste, don't
include the weight of the container.
Products that have been reverse distributed (returned to a retail
facility) should not be considered waste until the retailer has had time
to make the proper decisions about whether that product can be
reused, donated, etc...
Remove regulatory burdens for recycling aerosol cans.
Add materials to the list of Universal Wastes
o Aerosol cans
o Un-used medicines
Ban the sales of tetrachloroethylene and other F001 & 2 listed solvents.
OR make actual concentrations of chemicals be what is used for
determinations. When the regulations state that contamination of any
level makes it hazardous waste, then that is not even consistent with
the treatment standards.
                                                                                            16

-------
Stakeholder Category
Federal Facility
Representative
Federal Facility
Representative
Recommendation Type: Specific waste
stream issues
Recommendation
Specific to non-CRT electron tubes - telling me its regulated if it
contains TCLP metals at regulated levels isn't helpful for a
manufactured article that may or may not be testable - especially when
there are over 12,000 different types ranging in size from ounces to
hundreds of pounds with varying construction from mostly glass to
mostly metal.
Reduce the UHC assessment burden.
Stakeholder Category
State Regulator
State Regulator
County Regulator
County Regulator
HW Generator
Industry Representative
State Agency
Representative
Federal Facility
Representative
Recommendation Type: Revisit listed wastes
Recommendation
Change the F006 listing to what processes were included in the listing,
not just those that were excluded.
Develop an alternative hazardous waste identification method for listed
hazardous waste based on toxic constituent concentration.
Revisit F listed wastes.
There should be a way out of "once listed, always listed."
I'd like to see more clarity around listed waste. Specifically with regard
what's in and what's out. Maybe some of the listings don't need to be
there. If the hazardous constituents aren't present then maybe we
shouldn't have to list the waste.
Eliminate outdated and unnecessary hazardous waste listings. If
hazardous wastes were determined solely on objective analytical
criteria, most problems could be avoided. In addition, regulations
should clearly exclude all materials that are not discarded or abandoned
in line with the 2008 DSW rule.
Refine what wastes meet the definition of hazardous waste - specifically
look at the listed wastes.
P listed waste is very confusing to us. Especially since there are also
poisons that are just as toxic or more so that are not considered P listed
waste. Could similar regulations be devised that are based on the
measured toxicity rather than a list of chemicals that are P listed?
17

-------
Stakeholder Category
HW Generator
HW Generator
HW Generator
State Regulator
Industry Representative
Federal Facility
Representative
Federal Facility
Representative
Federal Facility
Representative
Recommendation Type: Improve consistency between
regulating agencies as well as the regulations themselves
Recommendation
In MN the 6.1 definition should be identical for lethality - evaluate
LDSOs and LCSOs, wish we didn't have anyway.
Can't overstate the consistency issue. I can't understand why EPA allows
states to have their own regulations. A national program that ensures
consistency for everyone would be very helpful.
Consistency with the satellite issue.
Aware of that difficulty and emphasize all the time. Fire dept. says one
thing and allows material to be thrown away but RCRA says differently.
Ex: Evaporation of solvent on rags. Could be F-listed solvent. Outreach
on every level. Talking with fire dept.
Come up with standard methods for sampling so that generators and EPA
follow the same protocol for collecting a representative sample.
Ease up designating by waste streams and go more towards profiles.
Standardization between States, our workers work in several States have
their own State regulations, besides Federal regulations. Really confuses
our workers from what California, Washington, Virginia, Hawaii, Florida
or New Hampshire state regulations require. Not to mention when they
work in Japan or Guam.
Have the EPA or my state's (CA) hazardous waste determinations
become the same.
If a federal Facility generates a federal HW, remove the requirement to
additionally determine if it is ALSO a State-only waste. Wastes that are
not Federal would still need to be screened for State-only criteria. In
other words, if we are handling a waste as federal HW, it is most likely
being properly transported, treated and disposed of. Why subject us the
bother and expense of State designation as well.
Stakeholder Category
Waste Services Provider
Recommendation Type: Address unregulated
known to be harmful to the environment
waste streams
Recommendation
Actively managed listed wastes. Renewed interest in
to the listed wastes.
adding chemicals
18

-------
Stakeholder Category
Waste Services Provider
County Regulator
County Regulator
Industry Representative
Recommendation Type: Address unregulated waste streams
known to be harmful to the environment
Recommendation
Address issues with nanoparticles.
EPA should be nimble enough to handle wastes that are likely to damage
the environment but are not covered under Fed. Haz. waste laws. EPA
should take the lead on emerging wastes.
EPA should capture more new chemicals, update list of hazardous
wastes, and change the things that don't need to be there.
Come up with a way to deal with all the other drugs that are not
regulated under RCRA.
Stakeholder Category
Federal Facility
Representative
Federal Facility
Representative
State Agency
Representative
Industry Representative
Waste Services Provider
Recommendation Type: Increase enforcement
Recommendation
Audit our facilities & enforce non-compliance occasionally -
management doesn't recognize non-compliance as a problem!
Most federal facilities, or at least the M&O contractors, already
understand and know how to properly characterize waste (the
process/rules haven't changed very much for many years). Lack of
enforcement by EPA allows facilities to become lax. State agencies use
enforcement as a political tool but don't have the expertise to properly
enforce. Improved EPA oversight of the States would also help.
Make sure to follow up with enforcement after any outreach/assistance
efforts.
Create a penalty for incorrect determinations to prevent "over-coding."
More regular/routine enforcement.
Stakeholder Category
Industry Representative
Recommendation Type: Require manufacturers to provide
more product information to generators via the MSDS or other
means
Recommendation
Require manufacturers to provide end of life disposal information.
19

-------
Stakeholder Category
Federal Facility
Representative
Assistance Provider
Federal Facility
Representative
Recommendation Type: Require manufacturers to provide
more product information to generators via the MSDS or other
means
Recommendation
Require manufacturers to place the appropriate RCRA waste codes on
MSDSs. Some companies already do this and it is a great aid in making
process waste determinations. 50% of the waste leaving this facility
could be more easily designated if the manufacturer placed the codes
on the MSDS.
Revise the MSDS and make generic to industry.
Most federal waste streams are from products that can no longer be
used it would be helpful if Waste information would be required to be
included on the MSDS including shipping names, and waste codes.
APPENDIX D:  INTERVIEW GUIDE FOR INDUSTRY/TRADE
ASSOCIATION REPRESENTATIVES
1.  Tell us a little about your organization (what percentage of the industry your
   organization represents, and if there are different types of companies represented
   within your membership).
2.  Tell us a little about the characteristics of your members (size, years in operation,
   profitability, generator status, etc...)
       a.   Do you have a sense of the characteristics of companies in your sector who
           are not members?
3.   Do the members of your association come to you for guidance about hazardous
    waste determination?
4.   What are the most common challenges or points of confusion that your members
    have with making hazardous waste determinations?
       a.  Are there particular types of wastes, processes, or sections of the
           regulations that are particularly problematic?

       b.  Within your association, are there certain types of companies which have a
           more difficult time with making determinations (e.g. smaller businesses,
           those that are new to the industry, etc...)?
5.   Does your organization provide members with assistance for making hazardous
    waste determinations (e.g. training, programs, helpline, education materials, etc.)?
       a.   What kinds of information do you think members most need?
                                                                           20

-------
6.  Are you aware of any assistance programs (state, federal, etc...) that are
    particularly helpful for businesses in your industry when making hazardous waste
    determinations?
       a.  Do you know of any programs that were  helpful but are no longer offered?


7.  Are there states in which making accurate hazardous waste determinations is a
    greater challenge for your members?


8.  Do many of your members utilize waste services vendors for making hazardous
    waste determinations?
       a.  Do you think waste services vendors typically provide good information on
           hazardous waste determination?

       b.  Have any of your members reported difficulties (e.g., incorrect
           determinations, over classification of waste as hazardous, etc.)?
9.  What changes would you recommend EPA make to increase compliance with its
    hazardous waste determination regulations?
APPENDIX  E:  INTERVIEW GUIDE FOR  HAZARDOUS WASTE SERVICE
PROVIDERS
1.  Tell  us  a little  about your business (e.g.  size of  the  firm,  when  you began
    operations, areas of focus, etc...).

2.  Tell us a little about your clients (e.g. sectors, size, generator status, etc...).


3.  Prior to enlisting your service, do your clients typically have difficulty making
    hazardous waste determinations?
       a.  Is your ability to make determinations for them something that you market?


4.  Which industries/products/processes present the greatest challenge when making a
    determination?
       a.  Do these challenges drive clients to use your business?
       b.  What other challenges drive clients to use your service?


5.  When training employees, what resources do you use to ensure that they are
    knowledgeable about  hazardous waste determination regulations?
       a.  Do you encounter situations where it is unclear whether a waste should be
           treated as hazardous? If so, what resources do you find helpful to properly
           characterize these wastes?
6.  Are there specific challenges that you face making hazardous waste determinations
    as a third party?
       a.  Are there circumstances where these challenges could lead one to
           over/under characterize waste as hazardous?
                                                                             21

-------
7.  Do you have a sense of which states have the most stringent hazardous waste
    determination regulations?

8.  Which states have the most active RCRA enforcement programs? Assistance
    programs?


9.  Are you aware of any assistance programs (state, federal, etc...) that are
    particularly helpful for making hazardous waste determinations?
       b.  Do you know of any that were helpful but are no longer offered?

10. What changes would you recommend EPA make to increase hazardous waste
    determination compliance?

11. Have you conducted any studies which demonstrate how your company improves
    hazardous waste determination compliance for your clients?
APPENDIX F:  DISCUSSION QUESTIONS FOR  HAZARDOUS WASTE
GENERATORS (DISCUSSIONS  HELD AS PART  OF CASE STUDIES)
1.   To what extent do businesses like yours struggle to comply with hazardous waste
    evaluation rules?

2.   What parts of waste evaluation are most challenging?

3.   How do you determine which wastes to evaluate?

4.   What factors  lead businesses like yours to sometimes make incorrect waste
    evaluations?

    For example, some factors might include not enough information or confusion
    about the rules, not enough time, not enough resources or management attention,
    cost of conducting tests, lack of staff experience or expertise, incorrect guidance
    from suppliers or shippers, rapidly changing production processes, etc.

5.   Are there certain types of waste or processes that are particularly hard to
    evaluate? Why?

6.   Have there been any changes in recent years that have made it harder or easier for
    businesses like yours correctly evaluate wastes?

7.   What sources of information does your business rely on for waste evaluations (e.g.,
    vendors, contractors, suppliers, assistance providers, trade associations, the state,
    EPA, etc.)? How helpful is the information they provide?  What information or
    assistance do you  lack?

8.   How often do you rely on testing to evaluate waste?

9.   If you had the opportunity, what would be the one thing you want EPA or the state
    to do differently to help you evaluate  waste?
                                                                           22

-------
APPENDIX G:  DISCUSSION QUESTIONS FOR  EPA  REGIONAL
COMPLIANCE  ASSISTANCE COORDINATORS
1.   Please describe how the EPA regional compliance assistance coordinators interact
    with the following groups;
       State regulating agencies
       Generators in their region

2.   What type of hazardous waste determination assistance do you provide (e.g.
    written assistance, such as newsletters, regulatory updates, etc...)?

3.   What aspects of the regulations seem to be most challenging for regulated entities?

4.   Are there particular sections of 40 CFR. 262.11 that generators have difficulty
    interpreting?

5.   In your experience, what are the most important factors leading to non-compliance
    with hazardous waste determination regulations?

6.   What changes would you recommend EPA make to increase hazardous waste
    determination compliance?

APPENDIX H: DISCUSSION QUESTIONS FOR  SMALL BUSINESS
ASSISTANCE  PROVIDERS
    1.  Do you believe that hazardous waste determinations are one of the most
       common sources violations for small businesses1?

    2.  Why do you think small businesses have a difficult time complying with
       hazardous waste determination regulations?


    3.  At what point in the hazardous waste determination process are small
       businesses likely to make decisions which lead to non-compliance? For example,

           o   When characterizing the waste? (i.e., is it a solid waste? / is it a
              hazardous waste?)

           o   When determining whether that waste is eligible for a RCRA exclusion?
              (i.e.,  Is it a product to be re-used or a hazardous waste?)

    4.  Are there particular industries where small businesses are common, that have
       more difficulty complying with hazardous waste determination regulations?
       What special challenges do they face?

    5.  Aside from industry type, are there other common characteristics of small
       businesses that struggle with hazardous waste determination?
1 We assume that small businesses are typically small quantity generators (SQGs) or conditionally
exempt small quantity generators (CESQGs). If you do not think this assumption is accurate,
please let us know.
                                                                           23

-------
    6.  To what extent do small businesses in your state rely upon assistance providers,
       consultants, trade associations, or others to make hazardous waste
       determinations?

          a.  Do you feel they are effective at increasing compliance?

    7.  Are you aware of any state programs which you believe are especially effective
       at increasing hazardous waste determination compliance amongst small
       businesses?

          a.  Has your state had any programs in the past which you feel were
              effective?
    8.  If you had the opportunity, what would be the one thing you want EPA or your
       state to do differently to help small businesses increase hazardous waste
       determination compliance?
APPENDIX I:  DISCUSSION  QUESTIONS FOR SECTOR-BASED
ASSISTANCE  PROVIDERS  (HOSTED BY THE  EPA OFFICE OF
ENFORCEMENT AND COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE)
    1.  To what extent to businesses in your sector struggle to comply with hazardous
       waste determination regulations?

    2.  What aspects of the regulations are most challenging?

    3.  What factors lead firms in your sector to sometimes make incorrect hazardous
       waste determinations?

       For example, some factors might include not enough time, not enough
       resources or management attention, cost of conducting tests, not enough
       information or confusion about the requirements, lack of staff experience or
       expertise, incorrect guidance from suppliers or shippers,  rapidly changing
       production processes, etc.

    4.  What types of waste or processes present particular challenges? Why?

    5.  What sources of information do businesses in your sector rely on the most for
       making proper hazardous waste determinations?

    6.  If you had the opportunity, what would be the one thing you want EPA or your
       state to do differently to help businesses increase hazardous waste
       determination compliance?
                                                                         24

-------
APPENDIX J:  DISCUSSION  QUESTIONS FOR EPA REGIONAL
ENFORCEMENT MANAGERS
    1.  In your experience, how common are violations related to hazardous waste
       determination, compared to other types of hazardous waste violations?

    2.  What aspects of the regulations seem to be most challenging for regulated
       entities?

    3.  In your experience, what are the most important factors leading to non-
       compliance with hazardous waste determination regulations?

    4.  If you had the opportunity, what would be the one thing you want EPA or your
       region to do differently to increase hazardous waste determination compliance?
APPENDIX K: DISCUSSION QUESTIONS FOR STATE ASSOCIATIONS
    1.  Describe findings from EPA analysis of compliance with hazardous waste
       determination regulations.  Have you found similar patterns of hazardous
       waste determination non-compliance within your state?

    2.  Why do generators have a difficult time making hazardous waste
       determinations?

    3.  What programs does your state operate to help generators with making
       hazardous waste determinations?

    4.  What other state programs stand out?

    5.  What is the effectiveness of third parties within your state?

    6.  What is the one thing you would  like your state to implement?
APPENDIX L:  DISCUSSION  QUESTIONS FOR CASE  STUDY STATES
(COMPOSITE  OF QUESTIONS ASKED IN THREE STATES)
    1.  Please describe the state's approach to ensuring compliance with hazardous
       waste determination requirements.  For example, what are the state's
       activities with regard to inspections, enforcement, assistance, and outreach?

    2.  Are there any unique features of this state's hazardous waste program
       compared to other states?

    3.  How does MPCA coordinate with the EPA region, and what is the division of
       responsibilities?
                                                                        25

-------
4.   Please describe how the county and state inspectors work together to ensure
    compliance with hazardous waste determination regulations.

5.   How do you target the inspections?

6.   How many inspections do you conduct?

7.   Please describe your experience with hazardous waste generator compliance
    with waste determination regulations.

8.   Are there common problems generators have with hazardous waste
    determination?

9.   What are strengths and limitations of the program?

10. What are the greatest challenges the state faces in  improving compliance with
    the HW determination regulations?

11. What do you think EPA should be doing differently to help states ensure
    compliance with hazardous waste determination regulations?
                                                                         26

-------