99-15544. Office of Solid Waste Burden Reduction Project  

  • [Federal Register Volume 64, Number 117 (Friday, June 18, 1999)]
    [Notices]
    [Pages 32859-32868]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 99-15544]
    
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
    
    [FRL-6363-8]
    RIN 2050-AE50
    
    
    Office of Solid Waste Burden Reduction Project
    
    AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency
    
    ACTION: Notice of data availability and request for comment.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: To meet the goals of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the 
    Office of Solid Waste (OSW) plans to reduce the recordkeeping and 
    reporting burden on states, the public and regulated community 
    associated with the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The 
    Paperwork Reduction Act establishes a federal government-wide goal to 
    reduce the recordkeeping and reporting burden on the states, the public 
    and regulated community by 40% from a starting date of 1995 to 
    September 2001. We are working to reduce burden while protecting human 
    health and the environment.
        For this Notice of Data Availability (NODA), we reviewed our 
    recordkeeping and reporting requirements and their burden on the 
    states, public, and regulated community; reviewed burden reduction 
    ideas developed by other EPA offices and the regulated community; 
    developed additional burden reduction ideas; and sought input from EPA 
    offices and states. In today's NODA, we are soliciting comment on our 
    ideas and our background documents. These background documents are 
    available on the Internet and in the RCRA Information Center. We plan 
    to issue a proposed rulemaking to implement many of these ideas.
    
    DATES: Written comments must be received by September 20, 1999.
    
    ADDRESSES: Commenters must send an original and two copies of their 
    comments referencing docket number F-1999-IBRA-FFFFF to: RCRA Docket 
    Information Center, Office of Solid Waste (5305G), U.S. Environmental 
    Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460. Hand 
    deliveries should be made to the RCRA Information Center at the 
    Arlington, VA address below. Comments also may be submitted 
    electronically via the Internet to: rcra-docket@epamail.epa.gov.
        Comments in an electronic format also should reference docket 
    number F-1999-IBRA-FFFFF. All electronic comments must be submitted as 
    an ASCII file avoiding the use of special characters and any form of 
    encryption.
        Commenters should not submit any confidential business information 
    (CBI) electronically. Commenters must submit an original and two copies 
    of CBI under separate cover to: RCRA CBI Document Control Officer, 
    Office of Solid Waste (5305W), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 
    401 M Street, SW, Washington, D.C. 20460.
        Public comments and technical background information are available 
    for viewing in the RCRA Information Center (RIC), located on the first 
    floor of Crystal Gateway I, 1235 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, 
    VA. The RIC is open from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, 
    excluding Federal holidays. To review docket materials, it is 
    recommended that an appointment be made by calling (703) 603-9230. The 
    public may copy a maximum of 100 pages from the docket at no charge. 
    Additional copies are $0.15 per page. The docket index and some 
    technical background information materials are also available 
    electronically.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION ON THIS NOTICE CALL: The RCRA Hotline. Callers 
    within the Washington Metropolitan Area must dial 703-412-9810 or TDD 
    703-412-3323 (hearing impaired). Long-distance callers may call 1-800-
    424-9346 or TDD 1-800-553-7672. The RCRA Hotline operates weekdays, 
    9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. eastern time. Send written requests to: RCRA 
    Information Center (5305W), U.S. EPA, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 
    20460.
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    
    Electronic Access
    
        Background information materials for this Notice are available on 
    the Internet. Follow the instructions below to access these materials 
    electronically:
    
    WWW: http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/data/burdenreduction
    FTP: ftp.epa.gov
    Login: anonymous
    Password: your Internet address
    Files are located in /pub/epaoswer
    
        The official record for this action will be kept in paper form. 
    Accordingly, we will transfer all comments received electronically to 
    paper form and place them in the official record. The official record 
    also will include all comments submitted in writing.
    
    Acronyms
    
    ICR: Information Collection Request
    LDR: Land Disposal Restrictions
    LQG: Large Quantity Generator
    NODA: Notice of Data Availability
    OSHA: Occupational Safety and Health Administration
    OSW: Office of Solid Waste
    PRA: Paperwork Reduction Act
    RCRA: Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
    TRI: Toxics Release Inventory
    TSDF: Treatment, Storage and Disposal Facility
    
    Index of Notice
    
    Glossary of Terms
    
    I. Background and Purpose of NODA
        A. What is RCRA?
        B. What is recordkeeping and reporting burden?
        C. Why do we ask you to recordkeep and report?
        D. What are our goals for reducing recordkeeping and reporting 
    burden?
        E. How is burden estimated?
        F. What is an ICR?
        G. What is the baseline for OSW paperwork requirements?
        H. What is the OSW Burden Reduction Initiative?
        I. What is in today's NODA?
        J. What we would like you to do.
        K. Information on burden reduction ideas not in the NODA.
        L. What happens after we receive comments?
    II. Major Burden Reduction Ideas
        A. Should we allow facilities to submit all information and keep 
    records of all information electronically?
        B. Should we reduce reporting and recordkeeping requirements for 
    generators and TSDFs?
        C. Should we lengthen the periods between facility self-
    inspections?
        D. Should we change RCRA personnel training requirements?
        E. Should we streamline the LDR paperwork requirements?
        F. Should we reduce the amount of data collected by the Biennial 
    Report?
    III. Other Burden Reduction Efforts Taking Place in RCRA
        A. Changes to the hazardous waste manifest.
        B. Integrating the Biennial Report with the Toxics Release 
    Inventory
        C. Other RCRA Initiatives
    IV. Other Agency Burden Reduction Initiatives
    V. Technical Background Information
        A. Is there a description of other burden reduction ideas not in 
    today's NODA?
    
    [[Page 32860]]
    
        B. What are the RCRA hazardous waste reporting requirements?
        C. What are the accounting changes for EPA Information 
    Collection Requests?
        D. What are EPA burden hours?
    
    Glossary of Terms:
    
        Boilers/industrial furnaces: An enclosed device using controlled 
    flame combustion to accomplish recovery of materials or energy.
        Characteristic waste: A solid waste that is a hazardous waste 
    because it exhibits one or more of the following hazardous 
    characteristics: ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, or toxicity.
        EPA identification number: A number assigned by EPA to each 
    generator; transporter; and treatment, storage, or disposal facility. 
    Identification numbers are facility-specific, except for the 
    transporter who has one for all his/her operations.
        Facility: All land and structures used for treating, storing, or 
    disposing of hazardous waste. A facility may consist of several 
    treatment, storage, or disposal units.
        Generator: Any person whose process produces a hazardous waste in 
    excess of 100 kg/month or acutely hazardous waste in excess of 1 kg/
    month, or whose actions cause a hazardous waste to become subject to 
    regulation.
        Groundwater: Water below the land surface.
        Hazardous waste: Includes solid wastes that have not been excluded 
    from the definition of hazardous waste; have been listed as hazardous 
    wastes by EPA; exhibit one or more characteristics of hazardous waste; 
    or have been mixed with a hazardous waste.
        Inspections: Owner/operators of facilities must inspect their 
    facilities for malfunctions and deterioration, operator errors, and 
    discharges which may cause of lead to releases of hazardous 
    constituents to the environment or a threat to human health.
        Land disposal: Includes placement in a landfill, surface 
    impoundment, waste pile, injection well, land treatment facility, salt 
    dome formation, salt bed formation, underground mine or cave, or 
    concrete vault or bunker intended for disposal purposed.
        Land Disposal Restrictions: Also known as the land ban, these 
    restrictions prohibit any land disposal of untreated hazardous wastes. 
    Land Disposal Restrictions establish treatment standards that must be 
    met prior to any land application of hazardous wastes.
        Listed waste: A waste is a listed as hazardous based on the process 
    from which the waste was generated and/or the constituents found in the 
    waste.
        Manifest: The paperwork that must accompany a shipment of hazardous 
    waste as it moves from the generator to the transporter and eventually 
    to the treatment, storage, or disposal facility.
        Notification form: A form that notifies regulators of hazardous 
    waste management activities at a facility.
        Operator: The person responsible for the overall operation of a 
    facility.
        Owner: The person who owns a facility.
        RCRA: The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) was enacted 
    to protect human health and the environment, and to conserve valuable 
    material and energy resources. The most important aspect of RCRA is the 
    establishment of standards for the management and tracking of waste 
    from generator to transporter to treatment, storage, and disposal.
        Permit: Lays out the legally enforceable requirements that owners 
    and operators of hazardous waste treatment, storage, and disposal 
    facilities must comply with.
        Recordkeeping and reporting requirements: A generator, transporter, 
    or treatment, storage and disposal facility must keep all data relating 
    to hazardous waste management units. They must also file reports to 
    EPA, which become part of their operating record.
        Solid waste: Any garbage, refuse, sludge, or other waste materials 
    not excluded by definition. Hazardous waste is a subset of solid waste.
        Treatment, Storage and Disposal Facility: A facility that treats, 
    stores, and/or disposes of hazardous waste.
        Treatment: Any method, technique, or process designed to change the 
    physical, chemical, or biological character or composition of a 
    hazardous waste to neutralize it or recover energy or material 
    resources from the waste, or to render the waste nonhazardous or less 
    hazardous.
        Treatment standards: Standards that hazardous wastes must meet 
    prior to land disposal.
    
    I. Background and Purpose of Today's NODA
    
    A. What Is RCRA?
    
        The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) establishes a 
    program for controlling hazardous waste from the time it is generated, 
    through its treatment and storage, until its ultimate disposal. RCRA 
    also establishes a program for controlling nonhazardous industrial 
    solid waste and municipal solid waste by encouraging states to develop 
    comprehensive plans to manage these wastes, setting criteria for 
    municipal solid waste landfills and other solid waste disposal 
    facilities, and prohibiting the open dumping of solid waste. RCRA is 
    implemented by EPA and the states.
        EPA's regulations implementing RCRA are listed in Title 40 of the 
    Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). Within Title 40, the hazardous waste 
    regulations are listed in Parts 260 through 279. The solid waste 
    regulations are listed in Title 40, Parts 240 through 258. In this 
    NODA, we often give the location of where you can find specific 
    regulations as 40 CFR, with the specific part or parts listed afterward 
    (e.g., 40 CFR Part 264).
    
    B. What Is Recordkeeping and Reporting Burden?
    
        Recordkeeping and reporting burden includes information that EPA 
    requires or requests of you (the public, states, and regulated 
    community), and then is reported to us and/or kept as records by you.
    
    C. Why Do We Ask You To Recordkeep and Report?
    
        We need information to ensure that human health and the environment 
    are protected as required by RCRA. We can require that you provide us 
    with information and/or that you keep records of information under the 
    authority of RCRA. In addition, we sometimes ask you to submit 
    information through voluntary surveys, focus groups, and studies.
    
    D. What Are Our Goals for Reducing Recordkeeping and Reporting Burden?
    
        To meet the federal government-wide goal established by the 
    Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), we are taking steps to reduce 
    recordkeeping and reporting burden by 40 percent. Recordkeeping and 
    reporting burden includes not only the time spent submitting 
    information to us (writing a letter and putting it in the mail) or 
    keeping records (creating and maintaining a filing system), but also 
    the time it takes to develop the information (collecting data; 
    organizing, analyzing, and summarizing data; writing reports; or 
    filling out forms). Burden covers information that we require by 
    regulation and the information that we request you give us voluntarily.
        The PRA establishes a government-wide goal of reducing the 
    paperwork burden to the public by 40 percent from the total amount of 
    paperwork required or requested from the public annually as of 
    September 30, 1995. The PRA allows us to reduce paperwork burden in 
    stages: 25 percent by September 30, 1998, an additional 5 percent by 
    September 30, 1999, another 5 percent
    
    [[Page 32861]]
    
    by September 30, 2000, and a final 5 percent by September 30, 2001.
    
    E. How Is Burden Estimated?
    
        We estimate the amount of time it takes you to respond to our 
    information requests as follows: First, we list all of the activities 
    you as state employees, members of the regulated community, or private 
    citizens undertake to collect, organize, or otherwise develop the 
    information; report the information; or keep it in your records. For 
    each activity, we then estimate the time it takes an average respondent 
    to complete the information request, taking into account differences 
    such as facility size or level of data complexity. Next, we verify 
    these estimates through consultations with a small number of 
    respondents. Finally, these hour estimates are multiplied by the number 
    of people or entities expected to complete the information collection. 
    The results of these analyses are published in Information Collection 
    Requests (ICRs).
    
    F. What Is an ICR?
    
        An Information Collection Request (ICR) is a document summarizing 
    our estimates of paperwork burden for an information collection. We 
    have to obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 
    of the ICR before we can collect any information. Under the Paperwork 
    Reduction Act, you (state employees, members of the regulated 
    community, or private citizens) have an opportunity to comment on the 
    estimates in our ICRs prior to our submitting them to OMB for approval. 
    After a 60-day public comment period, we review and incorporate, where 
    appropriate, your comments into our estimates.
        OMB generally approves ICRs for a three-year period. In order to 
    continue an information collection after this period, we must renew the 
    ICR with OMB. ICR renewals follow the procedures outlined above, 
    including consultations and public comment.
    
    G. What Is the Baseline for OSW Paperwork Requirements and What 
    Progress Has Been Made to Date in Reducing It ?
    
        On September 30, 1995, the paperwork burden baseline for the 
    regulations OSW implements was 12,600,000 hours. To meet the 
    government-wide goal, we would have to reduce this burden baseline by 
    5,040,000 hours to an annual total of 7,560,000 hours by September 30, 
    2001. As of October 1, 1998, we achieved burden reductions totaling 
    nearly 2,000,000 hours or 16 percent. A chart of all OSW burden hours 
    is available in the RCRA docket or on the Internet.
    
    H. What Is the OSW Burden Reduction Initiative and What Have We Done to 
    Date?
    
        The OSW Burden Reduction Initiative grew out of workshops and round 
    tables for reinventing the RCRA regulations, such as the Land Disposal 
    Roundtable we sponsored in July 1998. Over the last two years, we 
    reviewed all of the OSW reporting and recordkeeping requirements and 
    developed ideas for eliminating or streamlining them. After obtaining 
    input from within EPA and a limited number of state experts, we 
    developed today's NODA to seek broader input on the ideas. The goal of 
    the Burden Reduction Initiative is to reduce paperwork while 
    maintaining a protective OSW program.
    
    I. What Is in Today's NODA?
    
        In today's NODA, we present our major burden reduction ideas. We 
    also reference other smaller ideas, which are available in the RCRA 
    Docket and on the Internet. And, we mention other ongoing burden 
    reduction efforts so you can gain an understanding of our overall 
    burden reduction strategy.
        If all of the burden reductions ideas presented in today's NODA and 
    the background documents were implemented, we would achieve burden 
    reductions that would allow us to meet our 40 percent goal. We estimate 
    these ideas add up to 3.3 million hours, which is about a 40% overall 
    reduction in burden. Note that this figure does not include savings 
    from accounting changes, which are discussed at the end of the NODA. 
    Also, in calculating this figure, we made sure that we were not double-
    counting any burden reduction savings from the multiple ideas.
        Some of the ideas presented today are controversial, and we may not 
    necessarily go forward with each idea in a rulemaking. However, we do 
    expect to go forward with many of them. As discussed throughout today's 
    NODA, your input will help us decide which areas are the best 
    candidates to pursue in a later rulemaking. Please note that today's 
    Notice does not change any existing recordkeeping and reporting 
    requirements--they remain effective and are enforceable.
    
    J. What We Would Like You To Do
    
        After reviewing today's NODA and the background information, we 
    would like you to comment on: the positive and negative impacts of the 
    burden reduction ideas; whether they would reduce burden as we have 
    estimated; and other ideas for reducing RCRA burden, both in areas 
    covered by this NODA and any others.
    
    K. Information on Burden Reduction Ideas Not in the NODA
    
        You can find on the Internet at: 
    http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/data/burdenreduction a document 
    entitled ``Burden Reduction Ideas'' which lists some additional burden 
    reduction ideas not in the NODA. This document is a chart that lists 
    each idea, its ICR number(s) and regulatory citation(s), its baseline 
    burden hour estimate, and an estimate of the burden savings that might 
    be achieved if it were implemented.
    
    L. What Happens After We Receive Your Comments?
    
        After reviewing comments received, we will issue a proposed 
    rulemaking to implement a number of these burden reduction ideas. We 
    will consider your comments and suggestions, and will probably do 
    supplemental analyses on some of the ideas. The proposed rulemaking 
    that follows this NODA will present more complete rationales for 
    changes we are considering to existing requirements.
    
    II. Our Major Burden Reduction Ideas
    
        For the ideas presented below, we summarize our existing policies 
    on the issue, discuss possible changes, and highlight areas you might 
    want to comment on. Comments are of course welcome on any and all 
    aspects of the discussion below.
    
    A. Should We Allow Facilities To Submit All Information and Keep All 
    Records of Information Electronically?
    
    Existing Policies for Electronic Reporting and Recordkeeping
        EPA has been working to introduce electronic reporting and 
    recordkeeping into our programs. In the short term, our goal is to 
    eliminate the cost to industry and government of using paper to 
    transfer data and eliminate the errors and delays involved in 
    keystroking reports into databases. Our longer term goal is to use 
    electronic reporting as a tool for streamlining and automating the 
    exchanges of data among industry, environmental agencies, and the 
    public. To accomplish these goals, we are developing guidelines and 
    have convened workgroups to ensure that we develop consistent and 
    effective electronic reporting and recordkeeping programs across all 
    program offices.
        In the RCRA program, we are exploring ways to increase electronic 
    reporting and recordkeeping. While we have no RCRA-wide policy on this 
    subject, we have made strides in some
    
    [[Page 32862]]
    
    areas. For example, on November 2, 1996, we wrote an interpretive 
    letter to the company Safety-Kleen saying that they can store 
    electronic image files of manifests instead of keeping paper copies. We 
    also recently initiated a pilot project to test the feasibility of 
    using Electronic Data Interchange and the Internet to automate 
    manifesting activities. In this pilot, users will prepare, transmit and 
    keep copies of a digitally signed electronic manifest. The pilot is 
    scheduled to be completed by September 1999 and will be evaluated by 
    EPA as part of a manifest revisions proposed rule. We are also heavily 
    promoting electronic reporting for the Biennial Report.
    Possible Changes to Our Policies for Electronic Reporting and 
    Recordkeeping
        We are evaluating whether to develop an across-the-board policy 
    whereby you could electronically report and keep records of RCRA-
    required documents so long as you meet some conditions, such as 
    ensuring data integrity in storage and that the documents are readily 
    available during inspections. This would mean that you would not have 
    to keep paper copies of any RCRA records, unless you prefer to do so. 
    In some cases, this policy would mean that we would have to upgrade our 
    data management systems. We will not be able to do this immediately, 
    but over time we could move to a primarily electronic system for RCRA, 
    while maintaining paper capability for those parties who cannot or will 
    not go to electronic reporting.
    Questions/Comments
        We want comment on whether electronic reporting and recordkeeping 
    should be allowed across-the-board, or whether it should be limited to 
    specific areas. In addition, please comment on the enforceability of 
    electronic signatures (we especially want comment from state agencies 
    who would be implementing the requirements), the accessibility of 
    electronic records during inspections, and how easy it would be for 
    companies to submit electronically. Also comment on whether you would 
    see any burden or cost savings from electronic reporting and 
    recordkeeping.
        In addition, please comment on whether the costs of automation such 
    as obtaining a computer, software, and on-line provider outweigh these 
    cost savings. Even though the electronic submissions would be 
    voluntary, we need to understand how many parties are likely to pursue 
    electronic submissions to help us decide what resources we should be 
    committing to this area.
    
    B. Should EPA Reduce Reporting Requirements for Generators and 
    Treatment, Storage and Disposal Facilities (TSDFs)?
    
    Existing Reporting Requirements
        We receive more than 300 notifications, reports, certifications, 
    demonstrations, and plans from generators and TSDFs in order to show 
    compliance with the RCRA regulations, as well as applications for 
    extensions, permits, variances, and exemptions. Generators and TSDFs 
    must notify us of their regulated waste activities and TSDFs must 
    submit information such as ground-water quality reports, closure and 
    post-closure certifications, and Part A permit applications. These 
    reporting requirements are in 40 CFR Parts 262, 264, 265, 266, 268, 
    270.
    Possible Changes to Reporting Requirements/Agency Analyses and Data
        We are evaluating whether we should continue to require facilities 
    to submit all this information. We would still require facilities to 
    develop and maintain the required information. Rather than submitting 
    the required information to EPA, however, it would be kept on-site.
        We believe that not requiring facilities to submit this information 
    will save them time and money. Receiving less information would also 
    reduce our data management and administrative burden. We have developed 
    a list of all of the reporting requirements that apply to generators 
    and TSDFs, and the burden for each of these activities. This list is 
    available in the RCRA Information Center and on the Internet at: http:/
    /www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/data/burdenreduction.
        Please be aware that we believe some notices to be high priority 
    (to ensure compliance with regulations), and do not plan on eliminating 
    the requirement that they be sent to EPA. Below are some of the notices 
    we will keep:
         40 CFR Parts 264.143, 145 and 265.143, 145 requirements 
    that facilities submit financial assurance information or updates of 
    financial assurance information. Allowing facilities to maintain this 
    information on site only rather than sending it to EPA will increase 
    the likelihood that facilities will not obtain adequate financial 
    assurance for closure or corrective action.
         40 CFR Parts 262.12; 263.11; 264.11; 265.11; and 266.70 
    requirements that facilities notify us of their legal owner. This 
    information is needed to identify responsible parties in enforcement 
    cases.
         40 CFR Part 264.12 requirement that TSDFs notify 
    generators that they have appropriate permits. Eliminating this 
    requirement would shift the burden of proof to the Agency when we 
    attempt to bring an action against a generator that ships waste to an 
    unpermitted TSDF.
         40 CFR Parts 264.12; 265.12 transfer of ownership 
    requirements. These requirements help ensure that the buyer is fully 
    aware of its RCRA obligations and increases the likelihood that the new 
    owner will be in compliance with RCRA.
         40 CFR Part 268.7(a) generator notification requirements. 
    This tracking requirement is essential for federal regulators to ensure 
    that the correct information is placed on file at the waste generating 
    facility and is provided to the receiving facility, and allows us to 
    monitor what happens to hazardous waste from generation to treatment.
         40 CFR Part 268.7(b)(3)-(b)(4) treatment facility 
    notifications. This tracking requirement is essential for federal 
    regulators to ensure that the correct information is placed on file at 
    the facility and is provided to the waste disposal facility, and to 
    allow us to monitor what happens to hazardous waste.
         40 CFR Part 268.9 characteristic waste notifications. 
    Maintaining this notice and supporting information is important because 
    once the waste has been decharacterized it can be land disposed in a 
    nonhazardous landfill. An inspector will not know where this waste was 
    sent for treatment or disposal without this notice because the 
    receiving facility is out of RCRA jurisdiction. Therefore, this 
    information is critical to maintain the RCRA cradle-to-grave tracking 
    process.
         40 CFR part 264.1036--RCRA air regulations subpart AA 
    reporting requirements are used to determine compliance.
         40 CFR part 264.1065--RCRA air regulations subpart BB 
    reporting requirements are used to determine compliance.
         40 CFR part 264.1090--RCRA air regulations subpart CC 
    reporting requirements are used to determine compliance.
         40 CFR Parts 262.12, 263.11, 264.11 notification of 
    regulated waste activity. This is a basic requirement to inform us of 
    who is generating and managing hazardous waste.
    Questions/Comments
        By identifying these high priority notices, we are asking whether 
    the remaining paperwork imposed by existing regulations has to be sent 
    to us.
    
    [[Page 32863]]
    
    The notices highlighted above are, in our opinion, necessary to 
    properly ensure compliance. The other nearly 300 notices, however, may 
    not be absolutely necessary, and simple recordkeeping onsite may 
    suffice. We recognize that opinions will vary on how we should decide 
    which notices to keep and thus welcome comments on a methodology for 
    deciding what to drop and what to keep.
        We are also interested in learning what impact there may be on the 
    environment, human health, and worker health and safety if this 
    information were not required to be submitted to EPA. In addition, we 
    would like to know if this proposal would relieve the public and 
    regulated community of significant burden.
        To help you evaluate which of these notices and other documents are 
    necessary to be submitted to us, we have developed some criteria, such 
    as notices necessary for:
         Hazardous Waste Program Evaluation: These are items 
    collected to measure the success of programs in protecting human health 
    and the environment. They could include corrective action reports.
         Hazardous Waste Program Implementation: This is 
    information collected to help us develop regulations and policies. This 
    could include the biennial report and assurances of financial 
    responsibility for corrective action.
         Enforcement: These items are necessary for the enforcement 
    of environmental regulations. For example, the requirement that 
    hazardous waste generators and transporters notify us of their legal 
    owner provides us with information needed to identify responsible 
    parties in enforcement cases.
         Required by statute: These are information items we must 
    collect according to the RCRA statute, such as the hazardous waste 
    reports under RCRA Section 3002.
    
    C. Should We Lengthen the Periods Between Facility Self-Inspections?
    
    Existing Self-Inspection Requirements
        RCRA regulations require large quantity generators and treatment, 
    storage and disposal facilities to inspect their facilities to ensure 
    that they are operating in compliance with RCRA requirements. The 
    regulations include both facility-wide and specific types of unit and 
    equipment inspection standards. Some of RCRA's inspection requirements 
    specify a frequency with which inspections must be conducted. For 
    example, an owner of a container storage area must inspect it at least 
    weekly, while an owner of a tank must inspect it daily. You can find 
    RCRA's inspection requirements throughout the regulations, but mostly 
    in 40 CFR Parts 264 and 265.
        Inspections are a vital component of an effective regulatory 
    system. We also recognize that some facilities may have very good 
    facility management practices and might be able to inspect less 
    frequently without sacrificing human health and environmental 
    protection.
    Possible Changes to the Inspection Requirements
        We are evaluating whether to revise RCRA's inspection requirements 
    by lengthening the time between inspections. We believe that some 
    facilities might have controls in place that could let us reduce the 
    frequency of inspections; this could possibly be established on a case-
    by-case basis. These special inspection schedules might be worked out 
    during facility permitting, and/or we might put a special variance in 
    the regulations under which we could allow less frequent inspections. 
    We are also considering a variable implementation schedule, where for 
    example, larger tank inspection frequency would remain the same, while 
    smaller tanks would be inspected less frequently. And, we are 
    considering a phased schedule where facility inspection might go from 
    daily to weekly to biweekly, if no problems arise.
    Questions/Comments
        We would like comment on whether we should lengthen any of RCRA's 
    inspection frequencies, on the extent to which such an action would 
    reduce burden, and whether this would impact human health and the 
    environment. Also, you might suggest mechanisms such as variances and 
    waivers that we could use to allow a less frequent schedule, and what 
    should be involved in such mechanisms, such as public input. If you are 
    opposed to the idea of lengthening inspection frequencies, please 
    explain your concerns.
    
    D. Should We Change RCRA Personnel Training Requirements?
    
    Existing RCRA Requirements for Personnel Training
        RCRA regulations require large quantity generators (LQGs) and 
    treatment, storage, and disposal facilities (TSDFs) to train their 
    employees on how to perform their jobs in a way that ensures the 
    facility's compliance with RCRA requirements (see 40 CFR 262.34(a)(4) 
    for LQGs and 40 CFR 264.16 for TSDFs).
        The training program must ensure that employees are able to respond 
    to emergencies by familiarizing them with emergency procedures, 
    equipment, and systems, and must include introductory and refresher 
    courses and be taught by a qualified trainer. Employees must complete 
    the program within six months after being hired or assigned to a new 
    position at the facility. LQGs and TSDFs must keep updated information 
    on employees, job descriptions, and the type of training that facility 
    personnel have received. Training records on current personnel must be 
    kept until closure of the facility.
    Possible Changes to RCRA Personnel Training Requirements
        We are evaluating two alternatives for changing the RCRA personnel 
    training requirements. Alternative 1 would keep the requirements for 
    personnel training under RCRA the same. However, we would eliminate all 
    associated recordkeeping. Alternative 2 would eliminate the RCRA 
    personnel training requirements that we believe overlap with 
    Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) training 
    requirements.
        Alternative 1: Eliminate Recordkeeping for RCRA Personnel Training.
        We are evaluating eliminating all recordkeeping associated with 
    RCRA personnel training and replacing it with a one-time certification 
    that all employees have been properly trained. Under this approach, we 
    would maintain the Section 264.16(a)-(c) requirements and eliminate 
    paragraph (d), replacing it with the certification. We would like 
    comment on whether a certification would be sufficient to verify that 
    employees have received proper training.
        Alternative 2: Replace RCRA Personnel Training Requirements that 
    overlap OSHA Training Requirements.
        We believe that some RCRA personnel training requirements overlap 
    with OSHA's requirements for health and safety training (see 29 CFR 
    1910.120 for some of OSHA's training requirements). For example, both 
    regulatory programs require that facility personnel be trained in 
    emergency response.
        We are evaluating whether to eliminate RCRA requirements that may 
    duplicate OSHA's. For requirements that overlap, we could just 
    reference the OSHA requirements, or simply eliminate the entire set of 
    RCRA requirements. We would work closely with OSHA if we did this. We 
    have prepared a document that is in the
    
    [[Page 32864]]
    
    RCRA Information Center and on the Internet which provides information 
    on what we believe to be overlapping requirements.
    Questions/Comments
        We would like comment on whether we should eliminate all 
    recordkeeping for RCRA personnel training, or all training and 
    recordkeeping that duplicates OSHA's. Please let us know if and where 
    you believe the RCRA and OSHA training programs are duplicative for 
    LQGs and TSDFs. In addition, please comment on whether the RCRA 
    regulations require training beyond the scope of OSHA's training and 
    whether their elimination would impact human health or the environment.
    
    E. Should We Streamline the LDR Paperwork Requirements?
    
    Existing LDR Paperwork Requirements
        The Land Disposal Restrictions (LDR) are a major component of the 
    RCRA program. In addition to establishing treatment standards for 
    hazardous waste prior to land disposal, Part 268 requires generators 
    and TSDFs to determine if their waste needs to be treated before land 
    disposal, and requires notices and/or certifications to be sent with 
    the waste shipments to TSDFs. Generators and TSDFs must keep records of 
    their waste determinations, notifications, certifications, and other 
    paperwork for three years.
        The LDR paperwork requirements account for nearly one-third of all 
    the burden for the RCRA program. Since the passage of the Paperwork 
    Reduction Act, we have reduced LDR paperwork substantially--
    particularly with the May 12, 1997 Land Disposal Restrictions rule. 
    Before this rule, generators and treaters that sent their hazardous 
    waste offsite had to send a notification with each shipment of waste. 
    This rule changed these requirements so that the notification need only 
    be sent with the initial waste shipment, so long as the waste and the 
    receiving facility remained unchanged. This paperwork change resulted 
    in a savings of 1,630,000 burden hours annually. We are now evaluating 
    the LDR paperwork requirements for even more burden reduction.
        Based on our review of the LDR paperwork requirements, as well as 
    conversations with the regulated community, we believe that some of the 
    Part 268 requirements for waste determinations, notifications, and 
    certifications could be reduced or eliminated altogether. We have 
    summarized these requirements as they currently exist in the following 
    paragraphs:
        Section 268.7(a)  Generator Paperwork Requirements.
        Hazardous waste generators must determine if their waste meets the 
    applicable LDR treatment standards. They may either test the waste or 
    use their knowledge of it to make the determination (268.7(a)(1)). If 
    the waste does not meet the applicable standards, the generator must 
    send a one-time notification to the treatment facility indicating this. 
    And, when the waste does meets the treatment standards, the generator 
    must also send a one-time certification with the initial shipment. 
    These one-time notifications and certifications must be placed in the 
    generator's files. No further notification is required, except if the 
    waste or receiving facility changes, in which case a new notification 
    must be sent and a copy placed in the generator's files (268.7(a)(2)-
    (3)). Generators must keep copies of all waste determinations, 
    notifications and certifications for at least three years 
    (268.7(a)(8)).
        Section 268.7(b)  Treatment Facility Paperwork Requirements.
        Treatment facilities must test their waste according to the 
    frequencies established in their waste analysis plans to determine 
    whether their waste complies with applicable LDR treatment standards 
    (268.7(b)(1)-(2)). In addition, treatment facilities must send a one-
    time notice to the disposal facility that provides specified 
    information on the waste. The treatment facility must also send a one-
    time certification to the disposal facility that the treatment 
    technology used was operated properly. No further notification or 
    certification is required, except if the waste or receiving facility 
    changes, in which case a new notification and certification must be 
    sent and a copy placed in the treatment facility's files (268.7(b)(3)-
    (4)). Where a waste is a recyclable material used in a manner 
    constituting disposal (and meets other criteria), the treatment 
    facility/recycler need not notify the receiving facility. It still must 
    send a notice and certification with each shipment to EPA. It must also 
    keep records of who received the hazardous waste-derived product 
    (268.7(b)(6)).
        Section 268.7(d)  Paperwork Requirements for Hazardous Debris.
        Generators or treatment facilities who claim that their hazardous 
    debris is excluded from the definition of a hazardous waste, such as 
    debris treated by a specified extraction or destruction technology, 
    must send a one-time notification to EPA and keep a copy in their 
    files. The notification must be updated under specified circumstances 
    such as if the waste is shipped to a different facility. In addition, 
    treatment facilities must certify compliance with the treatment 
    standards by keeping specified records such as inspections and, for 
    each shipment of treated debris, place a signed certification of 
    compliance in their files.
        Section 268.9  Paperwork Requirements for Characteristic Waste.
        Generators of characteristic hazardous wastes must determine the 
    underlying hazardous constituents (268.2(i)) in their characteristic 
    waste. They may either test the waste or use knowledge of it to make 
    the determination. (268.7(a)(1)). Generators or treatment facilities 
    who treat their characteristic hazardous wastes to meet the treatment 
    standards at 40 CFR Section 268.48 and render the waste non-hazardous 
    must place a one-time notification and certification in their files. 
    They must also send a copy to EPA. The generator or treatment facility 
    must update the notification and certification in their files if the 
    operation generating the waste changes and/or if the facility receiving 
    the waste changes. The generator or treatment facility must update EPA 
    on an annual basis if such changes occur.
    Possible Changes to LDR Paperwork Requirements
        We are evaluating the following changes to the LDR program:
        Change 1: Eliminate 268.7(a)(1) Generator Waste Determinations.
        We are assessing whether a separate waste determination under 
    268.7(a) is needed. Currently, generators are required to determine 
    whether they have a hazardous waste under section 262.11. And, treaters 
    are required to obtain a detailed chemical and physical analysis under 
    section 264.13, which provides all the information required to comply 
    with Part 268. Under section 268.40, hazardous waste is prohibited from 
    land disposal unless it meets the requirements in the Table of 
    Treatment Standards (which requires knowledge of EPA hazardous waste 
    code, waste constituents, wastewater and nonwastewater classification, 
    and treatability group).
        We believe that the section 262.11 waste determination, along with 
    the determinations required under sections 264.13 and 268.40, would be 
    sufficient to assure that a waste is properly characterized for 
    achieving compliance with the LDRs. In addition, we believe that a TSDF 
    may continue to use generator-supplied information, if available, to 
    meet 264.13 and 269.40 obligations, even if the waste determination 
    requirement under 268.7
    
    [[Page 32865]]
    
    is removed. Therefore, we are considering whether the 268.7(a) waste 
    determination should be eliminated.
        Change 2: Eliminate 268.7(b)(6) Recycler Notifications and 
    Certifications.
        We believe it may be unnecessary for treatment facilities or 
    recyclers to send these notifications and certifications to EPA, as 
    long as the information contained in them is kept in facility records. 
    We note that this kind of reporting relief is not new to the RCRA 
    program. RCRA regulations currently allow waste handlers making a claim 
    (or taking other action) to keep records on site and not submit them. 
    For example, under 261.2(f), a person can accumulate materials before 
    recycling without being subject to RCRA if it can be proved that the 
    materials are potentially recyclable and have a feasible means of being 
    recycled. Submittal of this proof is not required.
        Change 3: Eliminate 268.7(d) Hazardous Debris Notifications.
        We believe it may be unnecessary for generators and treaters of 
    excluded debris to send these notifications to EPA, as long as the 
    information contained in them is kept in facility records. Our 
    reasoning is set out in Change 2 above.
        Change 4: Eliminate 268.9(a) Characteristic Waste Determinations 
    and Streamline 268.9(d) Notification Procedures.
        We are reconsidering whether a separate waste determination under 
    268.9(a) is needed. Generators are required to determine whether they 
    have a hazardous waste under section 262.11. Treaters are required to 
    obtain a detailed chemical and physical analysis under section 264.13 
    which provides all information required to comply with Part 268 (among 
    other requirements). And under section 268.40, hazardous waste is 
    prohibited from land disposal unless it meets the requirements in the 
    Table of Treatment Standards (which requires knowledge of the EPA 
    hazardous characteristic waste code, underlying hazardous constituents, 
    wastewater and nonwastewater classification, and treatability group).
        We believe that the section 262.11 waste determination, along with 
    the determinations required under sections 264.13 and 268.40, would be 
    sufficient to assure a waste is properly characterized for achieving 
    compliance with the LDRs. Therefore, we are considering whether the 
    268.9(a) waste determination should be eliminated.
        Under section 268.9(d), once a characteristic waste is treated so 
    it is no longer characteristic, a one-time notification and 
    certification must be placed in the generators' or treaters' files and 
    sent to EPA. We are reevaluating whether these records need to be sent 
    to EPA when they are required to be kept on site in the facility's 
    files. Our reasoning is set out in Change 2 above.
    Comments/Questions
        We are soliciting comment on whether we should modify any of these 
    LDR requirements for waste determinations or notifications. Please let 
    us know if the contemplated modifications would eliminate information 
    waste handlers need to manage wastes properly. And, please let us know 
    if the reduced tracking requirements would weaken waste handlers' 
    accountability.
    
    F. Should We Reduce Amount of Data Collected by the Biennial Report?
    
    Existing Reporting Requirements for the Biennial Report
        RCRA requires hazardous waste generators and TSDFs to submit a 
    report every other year on the quantity, composition, and disposition 
    of hazardous wastes they generate or receive for treatment, storage, or 
    disposal. Congress required that these reports be submitted to EPA or 
    an authorized state.
        To implement these provisions, we issued the Biennial Report 
    regulations for large quantity generators and TSDFs, which are found in 
    40 CFR 262.41, 264.75, and 265.75. Generators and TSDFs must submit the 
    Biennial Report forms by March 1 of every even numbered year for their 
    hazardous waste activities in the previous (odd numbered) year. Through 
    these forms and their instructions, we tell generators and TSDFs what 
    information they should provide.
        Over the years, we have changed the Biennial Report forms and 
    instructions. For example, in the 1997 Biennial Report, we eliminated 
    the entire Waste Treatment, Disposal, or Recycling Process System (PS) 
    form and the waste minimization questions. In doing so, we decreased 
    the amount of burden associated with the Biennial Report.
    Possible Changes to the Biennial Report
        We are evaluating whether we should revise the Biennial Report 
    forms and instructions to further reduce burden. Potentially, these 
    changes could be implemented for the 2001 Biennial Report cycle.
        Change 1: Remove Optional Data Elements from the Current BRS Forms.
        The current Biennial Report forms include data elements required by 
    EPA and those that are optionally reported by respondents. These 
    optional elements include state hazardous waste code, SIC code, origin 
    code, source code, point of measurement, and form code. We are 
    evaluating whether to remove some or all of these optional data 
    elements from the Biennial Report forms. Since not all respondents 
    complete the optional elements, we have incomplete information in our 
    national database for these elements. We have proposed eliminating 
    these elements before, and have received mixed feedback from states and 
    the regulated community.
        Change 2: Eliminate Reporting of RCRA Hazardous Wastes That Are 
    Managed in Units Exempt From RCRA Permitting.
        Currently, the Biennial Report covers all hazardous wastes that are 
    generated by LQGs and managed by TSDFs. However, many RCRA hazardous 
    wastestreams are managed in units that are subject to other 
    environmental laws, such as the Clean Water Act and the Safe Drinking 
    Water Act. These particular waste streams are typically high volume 
    industrial wastewaters. We are considering whether to continue asking 
    for the reporting of any wastewater or nonwastewater wastestream 
    managed in exempt units in future Biennial Reports. We have also 
    proposed this idea before, and received mixed feedback.
    Questions/Comments
        We would like to know how you use Biennial Report data. We would 
    also like comments on these and other possible changes to the Biennial 
    Report. We want to know what impacts these changes might have on how 
    your facility would be characterized, as well as the characterization 
    of your waste streams. Would hazardous waste generation and management 
    data collected through a data set that excluded hazardous wastes 
    managed in units exempt from RCRA permitting meet the needs of Biennial 
    Report users? Would Biennial Report data that does not have optional 
    data elements be useful? Conversely, if optional data elements are 
    retained, how will that affect the usefulness and quality of the data 
    for analysis? As with other sections in today's NODA, do you have 
    additional ideas for reducing burden associated with the Biennial 
    Report?
    
    III. What Other Burden Reduction Efforts Are Taking Place in RCRA
    
        In addition to the proposals listed in today's NODA, there are 
    other efforts in EPA to identify and streamline RCRA paperwork 
    requirements. Because these projects are being conducted as separate
    
    [[Page 32866]]
    
    efforts from this particular burden reduction project, we are not 
    seeking detailed comments on them in this Notice, except for the BRS/
    TRI integration idea.
    
    A. Changes to the Hazardous Waste Manifest
    
    Existing Manifest Requirements
        RCRA directs us to develop a manifest system to ensure that offsite 
    shipments of hazardous waste arrive at a designated treatment, storage, 
    or disposal facility. The manifest system requirements are in 40 CFR 
    Parts 262, 263, 264, and 265. Under Part 262, hazardous waste 
    generators generally must complete a manifest for each shipment of 
    hazardous waste offsite. The manifest consists of a minimum of four 
    copies to facilitate recordkeeping by multiple parties. Generators must 
    keep a copy of the manifest signed by the transporter and, 
    subsequently, by the designated TSDF who must return a copy to the 
    generator. Part 263 requires hazardous waste transporters to sign and 
    date the manifest at pickup, carry it to the designated TSDF, and keep 
    a copy. Parts 264 and 265 require designated TSDFs to sign and date the 
    manifest, note any significant discrepancies, return a copy to the 
    generator, and keep a copy.
    Proposed Changes to Manifest System
        Based on recent analyses, we estimate that waste handlers take 
    about 4.2 million hours each year to comply with EPA and State 
    manifesting requirements. We are evaluating modifications to the 
    manifest system which could substantially reduce this burden, 
    including:
        Modifying the manifest form.
        We are considering further standardizing the manifest form and 
    allowing generators to obtain the form from multiple sources. We are 
    also thinking about ways to reduce the burden associated with a 
    generator's waste minimization certification requirements.
        Providing manifesting relief to utilities.
        Electric and gas utilities have told us they have difficulty 
    complying with some of the manifest procedures at their remote sites 
    (such as substations and manholes). We are evaluating whether to 
    streamline manifesting procedures for these sites.
        Allowing automation of manifesting activities.
        We are considering standards to enable industry to automate their 
    manifesting. To study this, we developed the Hazardous Waste Manifest 
    Automation Pilot Project, which is looking at both Electronic Data 
    Interchange (EDI) and the Internet as mechanisms for automation. We 
    have tested EDI with waste handlers and hazardous waste agencies in 
    three states. Generators initiated the EDI manifests from their 
    personal computers and transmitted them through a network to 
    transporters, waste management facilities, and state agencies. Each 
    facility signed their manifests with a unique identification number. 
    Plans for the rest of 1999 include testing a digital signature in an 
    EDI system and testing use of the Internet to transmit manifests.
        Addressing other technical concerns.
        We are also evaluating improvements to other areas of the manifest 
    system. These include reducing inconsistencies between EPA and DOT 
    shipping requirements and improving the tracking of problem shipments 
    such as rejected loads and container residues.
        If adopted, these changes could result in 600,000 hours of burden 
    reduction. These changes are scheduled to be published in a proposed 
    rule in June 2000.
    
    B. Is There a Way To Decrease Burden Reduction of Biennial Reporting 
    System (BRS) Through Integration With the Toxics Release Inventory 
    (TRI)?
    
        An area for potential burden reduction that comes up frequently is 
    minimizing the overlap of reporting requirements for facilities that 
    file both the Biennial Report and the Toxic Release Inventory. EPA is 
    aware of the differences between these two information systems, 
    including the universe covered, the frequency of reporting, what is 
    reported, and the definition of facilities. However, a 1995 study of 
    facilities showed that 43% of facilities reporting under BRS also 
    reported to TRI and these facilities produced over 90% of the hazardous 
    waste volumes reported to BRS. With recent changes to TRI, the 
    percentage of BRS facilities that also report to TRI are expected to be 
    even higher. Given this overlap, EPA believes it should assess burden 
    reduction opportunities in this area. Comment is requested on the 
    following ideas:
        Change 1: Pre-population of electronic forms with redundant data 
    elements.
        Some burden reduction may be achieved by ensuring that similar data 
    elements are uniformly defined so that an electronic reporting format 
    for pre-populating a facility's TRI report with similar data elements 
    from that facility's BRS submission (or a BRS submission with TRI data) 
    could be implemented. These include the name of the facility, street 
    and mailing addresses of the facility, contact names and telephone 
    numbers, SIC Code, and EPA ID Number.
        Change 2: Eliminate Biennial Reporting for wastes covered under 
    TRI.
        Studies have shown that facilities which report under the Biennial 
    Report and also report to the Toxics Release Inventory are likely 
    generating 90% of the wastes that are reported to BRS. Although BRS 
    collects data on hazardous waste quantities and not the toxic chemical 
    quantities reported to TRI, we are studying ways to match hazardous 
    waste streams with the chemicals reporting in TRI . To the extent these 
    matches can be made clearly and accurately, we could potentially 
    eliminate whole categories of hazardous waste from being reported in 
    the Biennial Report.
        Change 3: Limit the Biennial Report to 100 top generators; rely on 
    TRI for other RCRA facilities.
        A small number of facilities are responsible for the majority of 
    the waste reported in BRS. This option would require the top 100 (or 
    some other number) facilities as measured by waste volume reported to 
    BRS to continue reporting under BRS. No other facilities would have to 
    report to BRS. All of these other facilities who reported to TRI in the 
    past would still report to TRI in this option.
        Note that only facilities in certain North American Industrial 
    Classification System (NAICS--the replacement for SIC) codes are 
    required to report under TRI. Under this option, many generators who 
    now report under BRS would not be required to report under TRI. This 
    would include business services (NAICS 5414), automotive repair and 
    services (NAICS 8111), health services (NAICS 621), national security 
    (NAICS 928), and wholesale/retail trade sectors. Furthermore, under 
    this option, we would no longer obtain information on off-site waste 
    shipments, since this is not covered in TRI.
        Change 4: Collect all information under TRI.
        Under this option, the TRI form would be modified to take data 
    elements currently only collected in BRS, such as waste code 
    description, waste code number, RCRA permitting information and put 
    them on the TRI form. There would be no more Biennial Report. The TRI 
    reporting universe would remain the same under this option.
        EPA is aware that these options could pose concerns to both states 
    and the regulated community, especially given the investments that have 
    been made in BRS. We welcome comment on impacts should any of these 
    options be
    
    [[Page 32867]]
    
    implemented, and whether they would reduce the paperwork burden on the 
    public and regulated community.
    
    C. Other RCRA Initiatives
    
        We are not taking comments on the following initiatives. They are 
    being presented for informational purposes.
         EPA and the States have recognized the need to reassess 
    the information collected and managed to implement the RCRA hazardous 
    waste program. To meet this need, the Waste Information Needs (WIN) 
    Initiative was established to plan for and implement necessary 
    information management changes. One of the key principles of the WIN 
    Initiative is to identifying opportunities for reducing reporting 
    burden.
        The Initiative is evaluating what information is needed to 
    implement and manage the hazardous waste program. Once these needs have 
    been identified, the Initiative will determine what information should 
    be available in a national database. The project has five phases: 
    Planning, analysis, design, construction, and implementation. Currently 
    the project is in the analysis and design phases.
        For the analysis phase we divided the hazardous waste program into 
    five areas, which are called Program Area Analyses (PAA). Three PAAs 
    are active:
    
    --Program Evaluation: The information needed to plan and evaluate the 
    hazardous waste program against its goals and objectives.
    --Universe Identification: Who is regulated and what we need to know to 
    categorize and track them.
    --Waste Activity Monitoring: The information needed on 
    characterization, generation, movement, and management of hazardous 
    wastes.
    
        More information on the WIN/INFORMED Initiative is available on the 
    Internet at: http://www.eps.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/data.
         EPA is drafting streamlined permitting procedures for 
    facilities that generate hazardous waste and manage it on-site in 
    tanks, containers, or containment buildings. We expect a proposed rule 
    on this subject to be published this summer.
         EPA proposed in a rulemaking in February of this year to 
    allow generators of the RCRA hazardous waste F006 (wastewater treatment 
    sludges from electroplating) up to 180 days (or 270 days, if 
    applicable) accumulation time without obtaining a hazardous waste 
    storage permit or interim status if certain conditions are met. This is 
    an extension by 90 days of the time period to store hazardous waste 
    without a permit.
         EPA is working to streamline RCRA Appendix VIII of 40 CFR 
    261. This is a list of over 480 chemicals used to define hazardous 
    waste as well as the constituents which must be monitored during waste 
    treatment. To reduce the burden to Appendix VIII users, EPA is 
    reconfiguring and modifying Appendix VIII entries based on the 
    probability of occurrence of certain constituents in particular types 
    of waste.
         A number of years ago, we reexamined the regulatory 
    standards for used oil handlers. We decided to remove used oil handlers 
    entirely from the hazardous waste regulatory realm. They are now 
    covered under their own regulatory authority, which provides hazardous 
    waste regulatory-level environmental protection with a much lower level 
    of reporting and record keeping. At the time these standards were 
    established, EPA learned that most of the recordkeeping requirements 
    established in the new regulatory scheme were already standard industry 
    practices. Because substantial changes have already been implemented by 
    this program, we have not included any used oil ideas in today's 
    Notice.
         Likewise, a number of years ago we reexamined the 
    regulations governing the collection and management of universal 
    waste--batteries, thermostats, and certain pesticides. We decided to 
    reduce the reporting requirements for these wastes at that time. For 
    example, Biennial Report requirements do not apply to large quantity 
    and small quantity handlers of universal waste, and a manifest is not 
    required to accompany off-site shipments.
         The Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards has 
    enacted burden reduction for the RCRA air regulations (40 CFR Parts 264 
    and 265 subparts AA: Process vents, BB:Equipment leaks, and CC: Tanks, 
    surface impoundments, containers, and miscellaneous units). This 
    eliminated much of the overlap between the RCRA air regulations and the 
    Clean Air Act standards. Now TSDFs and large quantity generators can 
    demonstrate compliance with the RCRA air regulations by simply 
    documenting that affected units are operating with air emission 
    controls that are in accordance with applicable Clean Air Act standards 
    under 40 CFR 60, 61, or 63.
        For any RCRA unit in compliance with such Clean Air Act 
    regulations, these provisions would reduce the reporting and record 
    keeping burden of the RCRA air regulations by nearly 100%. EPA is 
    currently in the process of quantifying the burden reduction savings of 
    these provisions. We expect that the majority of large-quantity 
    generators and TSDFs are subject to one or more regulations under 40 
    CFR 60, 61 or 63. In addition to these compliance exemptions, EPA has 
    also published other amendments to the Subparts AA, BB and CC air 
    regulations that significantly reduce reporting and record keeping.
    
    IV. What Are Other Agency Burden Reduction Initiatives?
    
        We are not taking comments on the following initiatives. They are 
    being presented for informational purposes.
         The Agency's The Next Generation in Permitting Plan, which 
    was announced in February of this year, combines permitting system 
    improvements underway in the individual program offices (such as 
    hazardous waste, air, and water) with improvements developed by an 
    Agency workgroup. The goal is to increase flexibility, encourage 
    pollution reduction, improve public participation in permitting 
    decisions, and reduce paperwork burden.
         The different designs of Agency information collection 
    systems have caused facilities to be identified inconsistently across 
    program offices. This makes it difficult to link and analyze all the 
    information collected by EPA. The Agency's Facility Identification 
    Initiative hopes to standardize identification information for all 
    facilities subject to federal environmental reporting requirements.
         The One Stop Reporting Program's mission is to reinvent 
    environmental reporting to: reduce industry reporting burden, foster 
    multimedia and place-based (a specific area of contamination, an 
    ecological area, or a political jurisdiction) approaches to 
    environmental problem solving, and provide the public with easy access 
    to environmental information. Recognizing the importance of states as 
    primary collectors of environmental data, One-Stop is working with them 
    to implement data reporting and management reforms. To date, the One 
    Stop Program has awarded demonstration grants to 21 states to work 
    towards achieving these goals.
         The Common Sense Initiative (CSI), which began in1994, has 
    tested the possibilities of replacing a single-media approach to 
    regulation and reporting with a multimedia approach focusing on 
    industrial sectors. One of the industries that has been looked at is 
    the metal finishing industry. From this examination, several 
    recommendations were made: We should promote electronic reporting (one 
    of the recommendations in today's NODA), replace RCRA IDs with a common 
    identification that could be used across
    
    [[Page 32868]]
    
    multi-media programs, and eliminate redundancy in the Toxics Release 
    Inventory, the Hazardous Waste Manifest, and the Biennial Report.
        The CSI CURE (Consolidated Uniform Report for the Environment) 
    project was developed for the computer and electronics industry sector 
    between 1995-99 by the state of Texas. CSI CURE examined consolidating 
    environmental reporting at the facility level and eliminating 
    redundancies.
         In February 1998, the EPA Administrator issued the 
    Reinventing Environmental Information Action Plan. The Plan commits 
    EPA, in partnership with the states, to implement core data standards 
    and make electronic reporting available in the Agency's major national 
    systems within five years.
         Finally, in partnership with industry associations, 
    environmental groups, universities, and other government agencies, EPA 
    has created nine Compliance Assistance Centers. The Centers help small 
    and medium sized businesses and local governments better understand and 
    comply with federal environmental requirements. Each center is targeted 
    to a specific industry sector and explains relevant federal 
    environmental regulations.
    
    V. Technical Background Information Containing Specific Burden 
    Reduction Ideas
    
    A. Is There a Description of Burden Reduction Ideas Not in Today's 
    NODA?
    
        We have put a document entitled ``Burden Reduction Ideas'' in the 
    RCRA Information Center and on the Internet: http://www.epa.oswer/
    hazwaste/data/burdenreduction. In it, we describe some sections of the 
    RCRA regulations that require paperwork and propose ideas for reducing 
    this burden.
        We seek your comments on the merits or disadvantages of any of 
    these ideas and our estimates of burden savings. As with other sections 
    of this NODA, if you have additional ideas, we welcome them.
    
    B. What Are the RCRA Hazardous Waste Reporting Requirements?
    
        We have put a document entitled ``RCRA Hazardous Waste Reporting 
    Requirements'' in the RCRA Docket and on the Internet. In this 
    document, we list all the RCRA hazardous waste reporting requirements. 
    For each reporting requirement, we provide specific information on each 
    requirement, including a description of the requirement, its regulatory 
    citation(s), the approved EPA ICR that covers the reporting 
    requirement, the current baseline burden estimate, frequency of its 
    reporting, and whether the requirement applies to generators, TSDFs, or 
    both. We organize and display the reporting requirements in six 
    categories: Notifications; reports; certifications; variances, 
    exemptions, demonstrations, and extensions; permits; and plans. Within 
    these categories, we sorted the requirements by regulatory citation.
        As noted earlier in the NODA, we are evaluating whether we should 
    turn some of the RCRA hazardous waste reporting requirements into 
    recordkeeping requirements. We recognize that some of this information 
    will still need to be reported to EPA or a state. We seek your comments 
    on this concept, what criteria should be used in determining whether 
    reporting requirements can be turned into recordkeeping requirements, 
    any potential impacts there would be if this information is not 
    submitted, and whether this will result in burden reduction.
    
    C. What Are the Accounting Changes for OSW ICRs?
    
        We have put a document entitled ``Accounting Changes'' in the RCRA 
    Docket and on the Internet. In this document, we list accounting 
    changes for some OSW ICRs that could be implemented through ICR 
    renewals. Accounting changes are not changes to paperwork requirements 
    but rather changes to the way we measure burden in our ICRs. They are 
    our efforts to better estimate the actual burden to the public and 
    regulated community. For example, we could make it a rule throughout 
    all ICRs that we only assign burden for reading regulations to new 
    facilities. The presumption here is that existing facilities know the 
    regulations and do not have to read them each time they do an activity. 
    While not regulatory changes, these accounting changes reduce the 
    amount of paperwork burden OSW has in its individual ICRs.
        In this document, we list proposed accounting changes for reducing 
    burden associated with specific paperwork requirements and ICRs. Each 
    idea includes a brief summary, the affected regulatory citations, 
    comments on implementing these ideas, the ICR in which the paperwork 
    requirement can be found, an estimate of the burden savings that might 
    be achieved if it were implemented, and a description of the 
    assumptions used in calculating the potential burden hour savings. In 
    most cases, we used our best judgment to estimate the savings, while in 
    others, we were able to make specific calculations.
        In reviewing this document, we ask you to comment on whether these 
    are realistic assumptions and the accuracy of our estimates of burden 
    savings.
    
    D. What Are OSW's Burden Hours ?
    
        We have put a document in the RCRA docket and on the Internet which 
    lists OSW's ICRs and their burden hours as of 1995 and today.
    
        Dated: June 8, 1999.
    Elizabeth Cotsworth,
    Acting Director, Office of Solid Waste.
    [FR Doc. 99-15544 Filed 6-17-99; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    
    
    

Document Information

Published:
06/18/1999
Department:
Environmental Protection Agency
Entry Type:
Notice
Action:
Notice of data availability and request for comment.
Document Number:
99-15544
Dates:
Written comments must be received by September 20, 1999.
Pages:
32859-32868 (10 pages)
Docket Numbers:
FRL-6363-8
RINs:
2050-AE50: Office of Solid Waste Burden Reduction Initiative
RIN Links:
https://www.federalregister.gov/regulations/2050-AE50/office-of-solid-waste-burden-reduction-initiative
PDF File:
99-15544.pdf