Page 1 of 12

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Final Plan for Periodic Retrospective Reviews of Existing Regulations

EO 13563 Progress Report, July 2015 

Agency Title of Initiative / Rule / ICR RIN Summary of Initiative Status of Initiative Target Completion Date Does the Initiative include regulatory flexibilities? What methods will you engage in to Identify Improvements? If available, anticipated or realized savings in costs and/or 

burdens

EPA/OAR Equipment and leak detection and 

repair: reducing burden

RIN 2060-

AP66

This rule would apply to equipment such as pipes, valves, and 

flanges used to convey fluids at a variety of stationary sources, 

including petroleum refineries and chemical manufacturing plants. 

EPA intends to reduce burden on industry and streamline leak 

detection and repair (LDAR) by using an optical gas imaging 

instrument to find leaks. 

Ongoing. EPA is developing a protocol for using the optical gas imaging 

(OGI) instrument for the Alternative Work Practices for Leak 

Detection and Repair, but EPA expects that the revisions to the 

AWP will not occur until after the OGI protocol is finalized. See 

progress update for 2.1.2(b). A draft AWP is not expected until at 

least late 2017. 

This project will streamline requirements by allowing the use of 

advanced imaging technology to identify leaks.

The proposed rule will be published and open for public comment. Using the OGI instrument where permissible, may reduce 

monitoring time since the instrument can image multiple pieces 

of equipment simultaneously from a distance, which also 

removes the need to designate equipment as unsafe-to-monitor 

or difficult-to-monitor. 

EPA/OAR Equipment and leak detection and 

repair: reducing burden

RIN 2060-

AR00

This rule would apply to equipment such as pipes, valves, and 

flanges used to convey fluids at a variety of stationary sources, 

including petroleum refineries and chemical manufacturing plants. 

EPA intends to reduce burden by developing and consolidating stateof-the-art uniform standards for controlling equipment leaks that 

will then become applicable when they are referenced in other 

regulatory actions. 

Ongoing. EPA proposed the Uniform Standards for Equipment Leaks and 

Ancillary Systems on March 26, 2012. 

The Uniform Standards proposal included the option to use OGI in 

lieu of the more traditional Method 21 for detecting equipment 

leaks. Due to resource constraints, the EPA does not have a 

timeline to finalize these Uniform Standards. However, EPA is 

moving forward with research and pilot studies using OGI under 

varying conditions. This information will then be used to develop 

the OGI protocol, tentatively targeted for proposal in early 2016. 

Where the EPA has an active rulemaking underway for a specific 

source category, if the EPA believes that the use of OGI as an 

alternative to Method 21 is appropriate for that source category, 

the EPA may propose the option to use OGI once the protocol is 

final. For example, EPA proposed to allow OGI (once the protocol 

is finalized) in the Refinery MACT amendments (79 FR 36879, June 

30, 2014), to be finalized in September 2015.

This project will streamline requirements by allowing the use of 

advanced imaging technology to identify leaks.

The proposed rule was open for public comment for over 90 days. Burden reduction associated with the OGI will be dependent 

upon the requirements for using OGI that will be housed within 

the protocol under development., Once the protocol is final, the 

EPA will be able to estimate burden reductions for source 

categories where EPA plans to allow the OGI method in lieu of 

Method 21.

EPA/OCSPP Modernizing science and technology 

methods in the chemical regulation 

arena: reducing whole animal testing, 

reducing costs and burdens and 

improving efficiencies

N/A EPA seeks ways to more efficiently assess the health and 

environmental hazards, as well as the exposure potential, of 

chemicals while reducing costs and burdens. A new work plan would 

develop new science-based approaches like computational 

toxicology tools (e.g., in vitro and in silicomethods) to prioritize 

chemicals and focus on effects of concern for risk 

assessment/management purposes and to develop tools that allow 

the agency to base these risk management decisions on sufficient, 

credible data. 

Ongoing. EPA is finalizing and applying these methods in a step-wise 

process, with frequent peer-review and public consultation, to 

prioritize, screen and test thousands of chemicals in the Endocrine 

Disruptor Screening Program (EDSP). EPA began implementing 

these new computational toxicology tools in FY2012, and has 

documented progress at multiple FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel 

(SAP) meetings (Jan 2013, May 2013, June 2013, July 2013, July 

2014 & Dec 2014). The FIFRA SAP is established under the Federal 

Advisory Committee Act (FACA) to provide advice to EPA on 

science issues related to pesticide chemicals, and also provides 

scientific peer review to the EDSP. 

EPA anticipates additional external peer reviews (FIFRA SAP 

meetings) in FY2016 and FY2017 to demonstrate further use of 

advanced computational methods that screen and test more 

chemicals in less time, use fewer animals and reduce costs for 

everyone (http://www.epa.gov/endo). 

For FIFRA SAP materials: 

http://www.epa.gov/scipoly/sap/index.htm 

For PPDC: 

http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/ppdc/testing/index.html.

EPA's policies that will reduce animal testing are available at 

http://www.epa.gov/oppfead1/cb/csb_page/updates/2013/newtesting-approach.html.

Although this effort does not involve regulations per se, it will 

enhance the availability of additional regulatory and nonregulatory flexibilities these tools may be considered in 

implementing our chemical regulatory programs. 

The alternative, cutting-edge methods EPA is introducing for 

endocrine screening represent the first steps in a paradigm shift 

for chemical safety testing. These new tools provide a robust 

scientific basis for assessing and managing chemical safety and 

efficiently quantifying risk to human health and the 

environment for thousands of chemicals. 

Scientific peer-review and public consultation are key components of 

this effort. For more details on all of the activities related to the 

EDSP, please go to http://www.epa.gov/endo/.

Similar to the EDSP, EPA is developing alternative computational 

toxicology tools and applications for pesticide safety testing, and has 

established a stakeholder workgroup under the Pesticide Program 

Dialogue Committee (PPDC) that is addressing communication and 

transition issues as EPA phases these new test methods into its 

pesticide registration and review programs. This PPDC workgroup 

has been meeting since 2013, and in July 2013 held a workshop 

entitled "Where Vision Meets Action: Practical Application of 21st 

Century Methods" providing an opportunity for dialogue between 

the Agency and stakeholders on applying new science to evaluate 

the risks of pesticides, and examining the challenges and benefits of 

making this transition.

The initial benefits for the EDSP will be to decrease the time it 

takes to collect the necessary information to make decisions 

from years to months. The cost savings will come from reduced 

data generation and review times.

For example, using ToxCast data in FY2015 for estrogen 

screening results in a cost reduction of 90% per chemical saves 

over 45,000 animals for the 1,800 chemicals already screened 

for the estrogen pathway. These new technologies involve the 

use of robotics to rapidly and simultaneously perform tests on 

thousands of chemicals, and this provides 100 times faster 

screening than conventional methods without the use of 

animals. EPA is rapidly developing additional high throughput 

assays and computational models to further predict endocrine 

disruption potential, providing rapid alternatives for additional 

EDSP tests for thousands of chemicals. Over time, we expect 

similar applications to our pesticides and industrial/commercial 

chemical programs, with even larger savings in costs and 

burdens for chemical safety testing.
Page 2 of 12

Agency Title of Initiative / Rule / ICR RIN Summary of Initiative Status of Initiative Target Completion Date Does the Initiative include regulatory flexibilities? What methods will you engage in to Identify Improvements? If available, anticipated or realized savings in costs and/or 

burdens

EPA/OW National Pollutant Discharge 

Elimination System (NPDES): 

coordinating permit requirements and 

removing outdated requirements

RIN 2040-

AF25

EPA intends to review the regulations that apply to the issuance of 

NPDES permits, which are the wastewater permits that facility 

operators must obtain before they discharge pollutants to any water 

of the United States. EPA intends to revise or repeal outdated or 

ineffective regulatory requirements for wastewater facilities.

Ongoing. EPA expects to propose modifications to NPDES permit regulations 

in winter 2016 and a final rule is expected in winter 2017.

The rule would remove outdated provisions that may be 

confusing for stakeholders. The rule would streamline 

application requirements by conforming them to current agency 

data standards. 

EPA expects to conduct additional outreach with stakeholder groups, 

including state permitting authorities, environmental groups, and 

regulated entities. EPA will solicit public comments on the proposed 

rule.

EPA estimates that public notice of draft permits in newspapers 

for NPDES major facilities, sewage sludge facilities and general 

permits currently costs approximately $1.6 million per year (this 

excludes the costs of preparing the content of the NPDES public 

notice, and the costs of the other methods to provide notice 

besides newspaper publication, such as direct mailing). Any 

savings from EPA's planned rule, however, are likely to be less 

than this amount. The new rule would allow, but not require 

states and the Federal Government to use electronic public 

notice instead of newspaper publication. Some states would 

continue to publish at least some notifications in newspapers. In 

addition, there would be offsetting costs to provide electronic 

notice, and EPA does not currently have estimates of those 

costs.

EPA/OW National primary drinking water 

regulations - Long Term 2 Enhanced 

Surface Water Treatment: evaluating 

approaches that may maintain, or 

provide greater, public health 

protection

N/A EPA intends to evaluate effective and practical approaches that may 

maintain or provide greater protection from Cryptosporidium and 

other pathogens in the water treated by public water systems for 

protection and stored prior to distribution to consumers. EPA plans 

to conduct this review expeditiously to protect public health while 

considering innovations and flexibility.

Ongoing. The review process for LT2 will be completed in conjunction with 

the 6-year review process, no later than March 2016. 

The National Primary Drinking Water Regulations: Long Term 2 

Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule RIN 2040--AD37 was 

promulgated, January 5, 2006.

The review process for LT2 will be completed in conjunction 

with the 6-year review process, no later than March 2016. If 

regulatory revisions are determined appropriate, a formal 

rulemaking will be initiated and options will be evaluated. If a 

formal rulemaking is initiated, regulatory flexibilities will be 

considered once options have been agency approved.

EPA held a stakeholder meeting on LT2 on December 7, 2011, which 

focused on analytical methods. The agency held a second 

stakeholder meeting on April 24, 2012, which focused on uncovered 

finished water reservoirs. EPA held a third stakeholder meeting on 

November 15, 2012, which focused on source water monitoring data 

and current LT2 treatment technique requirements (e.g., binning, 

microbial tool box options). EPA continues to collect and evaluate 

information/data pertinent to the review. EPA will consider input 

provided by stakeholders and any additional information/data 

collected by EPA as the agency determines options to enhancing 

protection from pathogens in drinking water. 

EPA/OAR New Source Performance Standards 

(NSPS) reviews and revisions under 

the CAA: 

RIN 2060-

AO60 and 

RIN 2060-

AQ20

In this action, EPA is prioritizing reviews of existing NSPS to focus on 

those that, in keeping with EO 13563, promote innovative 

technologies while upholding EPA’s mission to protect human health 

and the environment. 

Ongoing. EPA issued an advanced notice of proposed rulemaking in October 

2011 (76 FR 65653) asking for public comment on prioritizing 14 

potential NSPS reviews. 

Subsequently, EPA conducted reviews of NSPS for 5 categories of 

sources that involve phosphate processing and proposed 

amendments on November 7, 2014 (79 FR 66511). A final rule is 

expected in July of 2015. The remaining 9 potential reviews are on 

hold at this time. will be addressed at a later date.

This project will streamline requirements and reduce burden by 

avoiding amendments that would have no environmental 

benefit.

The project was initiated with a broad invitation to the public (in the 

form of an ANPRM) to comment on our NSPS regulations. The 

public's response to this solicitation provided information that 

helped us prioritize our work.

This strategy will reduce the resource burden to the government 

and stakeholders by eliminating the need for costly and time 

consuming reviews of certain standards, which are not expected 

to result in any environmental benefits. This burden reduction 

will allow the government and stakeholders to focus on those 

NSPS with greater opportunities for meaningful improvements 

in air quality and public health.

EPA/OAR CAA Title V Permit programs: 

simplifying and clarifying 

requirements

RIN 2060-

AS61

EPA is reviewing the Title V implementation process to determine 

whether changes can be made to simplify and clarify the process for 

industry, the public, and government resources. The changes will 

include a rulemaking to revise the Title V petition process.

Ongoing. EPA will propose a rule clarifying and revising the petition process 

in 2015.

The petition process rulemaking is expected to be consistent 

with the Digital Government Strategy issued by the White 

House in 2012 that calls for the EPA to take advantage of new 

technology and improve transparency for our stakeholders, and 

to support E-enterprise, a U.S. EPA-state initiative to improve 

environmental performance and enhance services to the 

regulated community, environmental agencies, and the public. 

This rule will provide increased transparency and clarity 

regarding the petition process and is anticipated to increase 

process efficiency.

Stakeholders will be able to comment on the draft rule once it has 

been proposed.

The petitions rulemaking will revise part 70 to clarify and 

streamline the process by which EPA receives and reviews title V 

petitions, thereby increasing transparency and efficiency.
Page 3 of 12

Agency Title of Initiative / Rule / ICR RIN Summary of Initiative Status of Initiative Target Completion Date Does the Initiative include regulatory flexibilities? What methods will you engage in to Identify Improvements? If available, anticipated or realized savings in costs and/or 

burdens

EPA/OAR New Source Performance Standards 

(NSPS) under the CAA for grain 

elevators, amendments: updating 

outmoded requirements and relieving 

burden

RIN 2060-

AP06

The NSPS for Grain Elevators was promulgated in 1978 with the 

latest amendments made in 1984. Since that time there have been a 

number of changes in the technology used for storing and 

loading/unloading grain at elevators. The rule has seen increased 

activity of late, due to the increase in ethanol production that has 

lead to larger crops of corn being grown, which, in turn, has led to a 

need for increased grain storage. For these reasons a review and 

potential change in certain definitions is necessary to ensure the 

appropriate standards are being applied consistently throughout the 

industry.

Ongoing. The proposed amendments were published on 7/9/2014 - 79 FR 

39241. The comment period initially closed on October 7, 2014 

but was extended to Dec. 22, 2014. The final rule is expected in 

Fall 2015.

The grain elevator trade coalition petitioned EPA in early February 

2012 to review and repeal the NSPS. The Agency is evaluating the 

petition in conjunction with this lookback exercise. Numerous 

meetings with the industry trade coalition were held throughout 

2012 and 2013 to update them on the progress of the rulemaking 

and hear their concerns as we proceed. Comments on the proposed 

rule were received from numerous trade groups and individual 

industry members. Also, comments from approximately 10 states 

regulatory agencies were received, and all are being considered as 

we develop the final rule.

The industry will realize some benefits in regulatory certainty 

moving forward as the current regulation is being interpreted 

differently across the country. EPA is proposing revisions to the 

standards that will clarify issues related to temporary grain 

storage. 

EPA/OW Water quality standard regulations: 

simplifying and clarifying 

requirements

RIN 2040-

AF16

EPA has reviewed the water quality standard (WQS) regulations to 

identify ways to improve the Agency’s effectiveness in helping 

restore and maintain the Nation’s waters and to simplify standards. 

EPA intends for the revision to provide a better-defined pathway for 

states and authorized tribes to develop and implement WQS and to 

protect water quality. 

Ongoing. EPA proposed a targeted set of revisions to the WQS regulation 

9/4/2013 (78 FR 54517). The comment period for the proposed 

rule closed 1/2/2014. EPA expects to issue a final rule in June 

2015. 

The revisions will enable states and authorized tribes to address 

complex water quality challenges to protect existing water 

quality and facilitate environmental improvements. In addition, 

the revisions will lead to better understanding and proper use of 

available CWA tools by promoting transparent and engaged 

public participation. The rule uses state flexibilities related to 

the clarification for antidegradation, designated uses, WQS 

variances, and compliance schedule authorizing provisions. For 

example, WQS variances and compliance schedule authorizing 

provisions are discretionary portions of the regulation, and the 

rule provides a clear pathway to retain the use of these tools. 

With regard to the antidegradation clarifications, the rule 

retains state flexibility to choose an approach to identify their 

high quality waters, and allows selection of any alternative from 

a range. Similarly, the rule retains flexibility for states on how to 

articulate a highest attainable use and provides several 

examples.

More information on this action, including the public listening 

sessions, public webinars, and public meeting held throughout the 

rulemaking can be found at 

http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/lawsguidance/wqs_index.cfm.

States, tribes, stakeholders, and the public will benefit from the 

clarifications of the WQS regulations by ensuring better 

utilization of available WQS tools (variances & designated use 

change) that allow states and tribes the flexibility to implement 

their WQS in an efficient manner while providing transparency 

and open public participation. Although associated with 

potential administrative burden and costs in some areas, the 

proposal has the potential to partially offset these costs by 

reducing regulatory uncertainty and consequently increasing 

overall program efficiency. Furthermore, more efficient and 

effective implementation of state and tribal WQS has the 

potential to provide a variety of economic benefits associated 

with cleaner water including the availability of clean, safe, and 

affordable drinking water, water of adequate quality for 

agricultural and industrial use, and water quality that supports 

the commercial fishing industry and higher property values. 

Nonmarket benefits of the proposal include the protection and 

improvement of public health and greater recreational 

opportunities. 

EPA/OAR State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

process: reducing burden

N/A EPA intends to take a number of actions to reduce SIP backlog and 

ensure that future SIPs are processed in a timely manner. All 10 

regions have completed 4-year plans for reducing SIP backlog. 

Among the measures to be explored are reducing use of paper 

copies, assuring that hearings are held only when needed, 

minimizing expensive newspaper advertisements providing public 

notice, and exploring the potential for certain regulatory changes to 

be made with less process.

Ongoing. The nature of the project is one of steady progress, and does not 

generally proceed via milestones with projected dates. Significant 

progress in reducing SIP backlog and in the areas mentioned is 

expected in 2015.

The project will afford significant state flexibilities and 

streamlined requirements, as outlined in the summary column 

of this report.

EPA is working with ECOS/NACAA SIP Reform Work Group to clear 

the SIP backlog and to improve SIP processing. All 10 EPA Regions 

are involved.

The benefits of this project include reducing SIP backlog, making 

it easier and less time-consuming to process SIPs, and moving 

the SIP system toward electronic processing. The improvements 

to the SIP development process will result in a noticeable cost 

and burden reduction for states. EPA Regions 3 and 5 estimate 

that such changes will result in approximately $165,000 to 

$180,000 per year in cost savings to their states.

EPA/OW National primary drinking water 

regulations for lead and copper: 

simplifying and clarifying assumptions

RIN 2040-

AF15

Efforts to revise the Lead and Copper Rule (LCR) have been ongoing. 

This review is part of the Retrospective Review Plan because, in 

addition to improving public health protection, EPA is seeking ways 

to simplify and clarify requirements imposed on drinking water 

systems to maintain safe levels of lead and copper in drinking water.

Ongoing. EPA currently expects to issue a proposed rulemaking in late 2016.

The 1991 National Primary Drinking Water Regulations for Lead 

and Copper RIN 2010-AB51, has been previously reviewed and 

revised in 2000 RIN 2140-AC27, and 2007 RIN 2040-AE83.

The agency is currently awaiting input on potential revisions to 

the LCR from the NDWAC working group and recommendations 

from the full NDWAC, which are anticipated in late 2015. 

Regulatory flexibilities will be considered once options are 

agency approved. 

A Small Business Advocacy Review Panel to obtain advice and 

recommendations of representatives of the small entities potentially 

subject to the rule’s requirements was completed on April 16, 2013. 

EPA conducted stakeholder engagement through a NDWAC working 

group. The NDWAC working group will provide input to the full 

NDWAC on 5 key issues of the LCR revisions. EPA expects to receive 

recommendations from the NDCWA in late 2015. 

EPA/OCSPP Certification of pesticide applicators: 

eliminating uncertainties and 

improving efficiencies

RIN 2070-

AJ20

A review of EPA's regulations on certification and training of 

pesticide applicators will help clarify requirements and modify 

potentially redundant or restrictive requirements. 

Ongoing. EPA intends to propose improvements to these regulations in 

2015. 

Yes. NPRM is pending, so details will be added once that is 

issued.

Improvements are based on extensive stakeholder engagement over 

several years. In addition, we will engage stakeholders during the 

public comment period; consult our FACAs; etc. 

Savings may result from streamlining activities which could 

reduce the burden on the regulated community by promoting 

better coordination among the state, federal, and tribal 

partnerships; clarifying requirements; and modifying the 

regulation.
Page 4 of 12

Agency Title of Initiative / Rule / ICR RIN Summary of Initiative Status of Initiative Target Completion Date Does the Initiative include regulatory flexibilities? What methods will you engage in to Identify Improvements? If available, anticipated or realized savings in costs and/or 

burdens

EPA/OSWER Management Standards for 

Hazardous Waste Pharmaceuticals

RIN 2050-

AG39

EPA intends to review the data and information in our possession 

about pharmaceutical products that may become wastes to address 

these issues as part of a rulemaking on pharmaceutical waste 

management.

Ongoing. EPA expects to publish a proposed rulemaking in summer 2015. This rule is expected to propose two conditional exemptions 

that provide regulatory relief: (1) for the hazardous wastes that 

are also DEA controlled substances, and (2) for certain types of 

containers that once held pharmaceuticals.

EPA has been and plans to continue conducting outreach on the 

pharmaceuticals proposed rule. This outreach includes site visits, 

participation in conferences, and engaging stakeholders, including 

states and industry. EPA will also analyze public comments on the 

proposed rule.

There will be cost savings in certain areas, including cost savings 

associated with longer accumulations times and the potential 

for burden reduction associated with changing how generator 

categories are defined, A benefit of the rule will be to ensure 

these pharmaceutical hazardous wastes are managed and 

disposed of safely. Another benefit will be to eliminate overlap 

in EPA and DEA regulations. 

EPA/OW National Primary Drinking Water 

Regulations: Group Regulation of 

Carcinogenic Volatile Organic 

Compounds (VOCs)

RIN 2040-

AF29

EPA intends to coordinate drinking water regulatory requirements 

and regulate more cost-effectively by addressing contaminants as 

groups. The plan is to group contaminants into one regulation, 

which will utilize the same analytical methods for measurement 

and/or can be removed by the same treatments or control 

processes. 

Ongoing. EPA expects to issue a proposed rulemaking in 2018.

This action may revise drinking water standards for up to 8 VOCs. 

The standards for the 8 regulated VOCs were promulgated in 

phases. Phase I: July 8, 1987(Vol 52, No. 130) includes: TCE, 1,2-

dichloroethane, vinyl chloride, benzene, carbon tetrachloride. 

Phase II&IIB: January 20, 1991(Vol 56, No 20) & July 1, 1991(Vol 52, 

No 126) includes: PCE and 1,2-dichloropropane. Phase V: July 17, 

1992(Vol 57, No 138) includes: dichloromethane. 

Regulatory flexibilities will be considered once options are 

established (during 2016-17) and are agency approved. 

EPA decided to wait for UCMR3 monitoring data on three cVOCs that 

are being considered for the group, before continuing regulatory 

development of the group. UCMR3 monitoring will be completed 

December 2015. EPA presented potential group MCL approaches to 

the NDWAC for consideration at its November 2014 meeting. 

EPA/OSWER Hazardous waste export-import 

revisions

2050-AG77 To help meet the objectives of EO 13659 "Streamlining 

Export/Import Process for America's Businesses", this action would 

propose revisions to the hazardous waste export-import 

requirements under RCRA to improve consistency with those for the 

Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) 

members; enable electronic submittal of all export and importrelated documents; and enable electronic validation of export 

shipment data prior to export.

Ongoing. EPA expects to publish a proposed rulemaking in October 2015. This information will be available upon publication of the 

proposed rule.

EPA will conduct target outreach to those businesses involved in or 

associated with import/exports of hazardous wastes. We will also 

notify foreign governments of the proposed changes through our 

regular communications channels.

TBD as ICR for the proposal is under development.

EPA/OCSPP Confidential Statement of Product 

Specification for Pesticides

N/A Under the aegis of the US-Canada Regulatory Cooperation Council, 

EPA and Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) 

have developed an action plan to, among other things, address 

obstacles to joint pesticide registrations. As part of that plan, EPA 

and PMRA launched an effort to harmonize the product specification 

forms and facilitate joint submissions of the harmonized form. The 

harmonized EPA-PMRA Confidential Statement of Product 

Specifications (CSPS) will reflect the current level of information 

already submitted to either agency and allow applicants to submit 

the same form to both Agencies with potentially much of the same 

information and reduce the number of errors received. EPA will also 

investigate whether and how product specification forms could be 

submitted electronically.

Ongoing. To be determined, subject to completion of discussions with 

PMRA and approval of an information collection request by OMB 

under the Paperwork Reduction Act.

EPA and PMRA are in the process of developing software that 

will enable applicants to submit the CSPS electronically.

EPA is working with 9 stakeholders to test the new electronic 

module and to develop an implementation/release strategy 

based on comments and test results. Once the ICR is approved 

by OMB, the new electronic form will be launched as an 

optional program to other registrants. The current paper form 

will remain available for registrants to complete while the new 

optional electronic form is being made available. 

EPA plans on soliciting comments from 9 registrants on the 

electronic form. This will inform our finalization of the electronic 

form. 

Over time, EPA anticipates being able to reduce the amount of 

contractor support needed for manually keying in Confidential 

Statement of Formula (CSF) data. The return on investment is 

anticipated to be 15.6 months. EPA and PMRA receive many of 

the same errors on numerous product chemistry forms 

(Confidential Statement of Formula). These errors result in the 

form being sent back to the registrants for revisions. The 

availability of a joint electronic CSPS is expected to sharply 

curtail or eliminate the need for registrants to engage in 

extensive and time-consuming revisions to the specification 

forms submitted in both countries. 
Page 5 of 12

Agency Title of Initiative / Rule / ICR RIN Summary of Initiative Status of Initiative Target Completion Date Does the Initiative include regulatory flexibilities? What methods will you engage in to Identify Improvements? If available, anticipated or realized savings in costs and/or 

burdens

EPA/OCSPP FIFRA Pesticide Import Revisions Rule; 

preproposal stage

N/A Section 17(c) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide 

Act (7 U.S.C 136o(c)) governs the importation of pesticides and 

devices. Under the current Customs and Border Protection 

regulations in 19 CFR part 12 that implement FIFRA section 17(c)(1), 

prior to a pesticide or device being imported into the U.S., importers 

or their broker submit to EPA a paper Notice of Arrival (NOA) form. 

EPA reviews and evaluates the information on the NOA and 

determines the disposition of the shipment upon its arrival in the 

U.S. The determination is indicated on the NOA form, which is signed 

and returned to the importer. Upon arrival of the shipment, the 

importer must present the signed NOA form to CBP. CBP will, in 

consultation with EPA, propose revisions to the current regulations 

that would modernize the existing pre-arrival notice import 

procedures for pesticides and devices. Such revisions are necessary 

to fully implement International Trade Data System and leverage the 

Automated Commercial Environment. 

Ongoing. The EPA 

regulatory 

development 

component of this 

rulemaking was 

completed with 

signed off to CBP for 

further development/ 

completion. 

Publication of CBP's proposed rule is anticipated by December 

2015. Promulgation of CBP's final rule is anticipated by December 

2016, consistent with EO 13659, entitled Streamlining the 

Export/Import Process for America’s Businesses, which requires 

the Federal government to create, make available, and utilize a 

single system for the sharing of export and import data from 

industry and Federal agencies. 

The EPA transmitted the referral package to CBP in May 2015. 

CBP is currently reviewing the package. Details will be added 

once CBP determines what it will propose.

EPA consulted stakeholders and may conduct further consultations 

during the public comment period once CBP issues their NPRM.

TBD once CBP decides on what they will propose. 

EPA expected benefits of this rule include the following: will 

make the import requirements more consistent and efficient, 

facilitate submittal of the Notice of Arrival (NOA) electronically 

through ACE, and thereby streamlining information 

management and communications for CBP transparency and 

data quality.

EPA/OCSPP TSCA Chemical Import Revisions Rule; 

preproposal stage

N/A Section 13 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (15 U.S.C. 2612) 

governs the importation of chemicals, mixtures, and articles 

containing a chemical substance or mixture. Under the current CBP 

regulations in 19 CFR part 12 that implement TSCA section 13, an 

importer of a chemical substance imported in bulk or as part of a 

mixture, or as part of an article where specified by an appropriate 

TSCA rule promulgated by EPA, or the authorized agent of such an 

importer, must certify either that the chemical shipment is subject 

to TSCA and complies with all applicable rules and orders 

thereunder, or that the chemical shipment is not subject to TSCA. 

CBP will, in consultation with EPA, propose revisions to the current 

regulations that would modernize the existing chemical import 

procedures. Such revisions are necessary to fully implement 

International Trade Data System and leverage the Automated 

Commercial Environment. 

Ongoing. The EPA 

regulatory 

development 

component of this 

rulemaking was 

completed with 

signed off to CBP for 

further development/ 

completion. 

Publication of CBP's proposed rule is anticipated by September 

2015. Promulgation of CBP's final rule is anticipated by November 

2016, consistent with EO 13659, entitled Streamlining the 

Export/Import Process for America’s Businesses, which requires 

the Federal government to create, make available, and utilize a 

single system for the sharing of export and import data from 

industry and Federal agencies by December 2016.

The EPA transmitted the referral package to CBP in May 2015. 

CBP is currently reviewing the package. Details will be added 

once CBP determines what it will propose.

EPA consulted stakeholders and may conduct further consultations 

during the public comment period once CBP issues their NPRM.

TBD once CBP decides on what they will propose. 

EPA expected benefits of this rule include the following: will 

make the import requirements more consistent and efficient, 

facilitate submittal of the TSCA certifications electronically 

through ACE, and thereby streamlining information 

management and communications for CBP transparency and 

data quality.

EPA/OCSPP Lead-based Paint Program; 

Amendment to Jurisdictions and 

Renovator Refresher Training 

Requirements

 2070-AK02 EPA proposed several minor amendments to the EPA lead-based 

paint program that would improve efficiencies and save resources 

for those involved. These revisions are based on our implementation 

experiences. Under the EPA renovation, repair and painting rule, 

renovators must take a certification training course every 5 years. 

The renovator refresher training requires an hour of hands-on 

learning and therefore cannot be completed online. Currently, with 

the initial online course, students take the classroom portion online 

and then travel to a training facility to complete the hands-on skill 

portion of the training. EPA proposed modifying the "hands-on" 

component for the refresher training requirements. In addition, 

under the lead-based paint abatement program, firms, training 

providers and individuals must apply for and be certified or 

accredited in each jurisdiction where they work (i.e., state, tribe or 

territory where EPA runs the abatement program). Each individual 

certification or accreditation must be approved by the regional office 

that oversees that jurisdiction. EPA anticipates the elimination of 

jurisdictions, and instead allowing these entities to operate under a 

single EPA-approved certification or accreditation wherever EPA 

administers the program.

Ongoing. The proposed rule published on January 14, 2015. Promulgation of 

the final rule is anticipated later in 2015.

Yes. NPRM reflects streamlined requirements, added state 

flexibilities and use of similar strategies to reduce burden while 

maintaining protections.

Stakeholder consultations led to NPRM. Public comment period 

closed on February 13, 2015. 

As proposed, changing the hands-on training requirement is 

estimated to reduce the tuition for renovator refresher training 

courses by an average of $37; and is also expected to make 

online renovator refresher training more attractive to training 

providers and renovators. If renovators become recertified 

solely by taking an e-learning course (i.e., without an in-person 

component) they are estimated to save an additional $165 by 

avoiding the time and associated expenses needed to travel to a 

training site. EPA estimates savings of more than $9 million per 

year. 

In addition, EPA estimates that removing the $35 jurisdiction fee 

will result in total estimated cost savings of approximately 

$15,000 per year to entities that apply for additional 

jurisdictions. 
Page 6 of 12

Agency Title of Initiative / Rule / ICR RIN Summary of Initiative Status of Initiative Target Completion Date Does the Initiative include regulatory flexibilities? What methods will you engage in to Identify Improvements? If available, anticipated or realized savings in costs and/or 

burdens

EPA/OAR SNAP Submittal Review Process 

Improvements

N/A Through it's Significant New Alternatives Program (SNAP), EPA 

reviews potential alternatives to ozone-depleting chemicals that 

manufacturers could use in consumer products such as aerosol cans, 

adhesives, cleaning solvents, refrigeration and air conditioning 

systems. The potential chemical alternatives are submitted by the 

producing manufacturers, and EPA reviews and approves those that 

have lower detrimental impacts on the ozone while reducing the 

overall risk to human health and the environment. It is in the 

interest of both the environment and the industries that this review 

and approval process proceed expeditiously. In this project, EPA will 

undertake a number of process improvements to reduce the time it 

takes to get potential chemical alternatives approved. Examples 

include use of case managers responsible for specific submissions, 

training for staff on relevant technical topics, improving 

effectiveness of meetings with submitters, clarifying steps for 

reviews, creating and using templates for correspondence and listing 

decisions, updating submission forms and instructions to reduce 

requests for further information and clarification, improving tracking 

of submittals received to ensure prompt processing and 

communication with submitters, and working together more closely 

and more systematically with EPA’s Office of Chemical Safety and 

Pollution Prevention (OCSPP) on SNAP submittals that are also 

submitted to OCSPP through pre-manufacture notices for new 

chemicals.

Ongoing. December 2015. The project streamlines and clarifies the SNAP process in a 

number of ways, as discussed in the summary column of this 

report.

EPA will reach out to submitters and potential submitters to solicit 

proposed alternatives.

We are confident the improvements will reduce EPA’s review 

time for SNAP submittals from an average of 65 weeks to an 

average of 19-24 weeks (60-70% improvement); even greater 

reductions are likely as the process improvements are fully 

implemented.

EPA/OSWER Improvements to the Hazardous 

Waste Generator Regulatory Program 

(Parts 261-265)

2050-AG70 The Hazardous Waste Generator Improvements Proposed Rule will 

provide a much needed face lift to the regulations in order to keep 

pace with the needs of today’s regulated community. For example 

EPA expects to update the RCRA emergency preparedness and 

response regulations to fit in with current emergency response 

infrastructure and to request comment on how next generation 

compliance can be used to assist with compliance. Through the rule, 

we seek to improve understanding of the regulations, for example, 

by updating the biennial reporting and hazardous waste 

determination provisions to reflect current EPA guidance and 

instructions. Additionally, we expect to reorganize the regulations to 

make it easier for the regulated community to find applicable 

regulations and to reduce onerous cross-referencing. 

Ongoing. EPA expects to publish a proposed rulemaking in summer 2015. The Hazardous Waste Generator Improvements Proposed Rule 

will propose a number of regulatory changes and improvements 

to the generator program, including regulatory relief and 

burden reduction associated with changing how generator 

categories are defined. 

EPA published an ANPRM (69 FR 21800, April 22, 2004) that solicited 

public comment on the effectiveness of the generator program. EPA 

also held four public meetings during this time. Over the last decade, 

EPA has issued several guidance documents and website updates to 

address public comments received on the ANPRM. However, some 

comments received on the NODA can only be resolved through 

rulemaking. The Hazardous Waste Generator Improvements 

Proposed Rule will request public comment on a number of 

regulatory changes and improvements to the generator program. 

EPA plans to conduct outreach on the proposed rule, which includes 

meetings, participation in conferences and targeted outreach. EPA 

will also analyze public comments on the proposed rule.

There will be cost savings associated with certain provisions of 

the Hazardous Waste Generator Improvements rule that 

provide additional flexibilities for generators managing 

hazardous waste. 

EPA/OW Reinterpreting Treatment in a Manner 

Similar to a State For Clean Water Act 

Regulatory Programs

N/A The purpose of this action is to request comments on a proposed 

reinterpretation of the tribal authority provision of the Clean Water 

Act. This section authorizes EPA to treat eligible tribes in a similar 

manner as a state for administering specified Clean Water Act 

programs. The reinterpretation would reflect changes since 1991 in 

case law and EPA’s experience. The reinterpretation would remove 

the current requirement for applicant tribes to show inherent 

regulatory authority; however, it would retain the requirement for 

tribes to identify water bodies for which jurisdiction is being 

asserted.

Ongoing. Proposal summer 2015. EPA proposes to streamline how tribes apply for TAS for the 

water quality standards program and other Clean Water Act 

regulatory programs. 

EPA conducted consultation and coordination with federally 

recognized tribes and with states (including intergovernmental 

associations) during April-September 2014. The input received 

helped EPA shape the proposal to answer common questions and 

concerns. EPA will accept comments on the proposal for 60 days 

following publication in the Federal Register and will offer an 

informational webinar within the first month to assist the comment 

process. At the same time, EPA will offer further consultation and 

coordination opportunities to tribes and states.

The proposal would reduce the administrative costs for an 

applicant tribe by an estimated 39% and advance cooperative 

federalism by facilitating tribal involvement in the protection of 

reservation water quality as intended by Congress.

EPA/OAR Public Notice Provisions in CAA 

Permitting Programs (SAN 5594.1)

2060-AS59 This action proposes to enable the public notification process for 

CAA permitting programs to proceed electronically rather than via 

the print medium. 

New/Ongoing. EPA plans to propose this action August 2015. The E-Notice rulemaking will significantly reduce permitting 

burden by moving the public notification process from paper to 

electronic media.

EPA is consulting with stakeholders as we design the rules to effect 

these changes, and the public will be able to comment on the draft 

rules once it they haves been proposed.

The E-Notice rule will enable state/local permitting authorities 

and EPA to post public notice permit actions electronically and 

will be significantly more cost effective than use of newspapers. 

Preliminary estimates suggest that modifying the public notice 

requirements for Title V, PSD, and NNSR permits to remove the 

mandatory use of newspaper notices and provide for 

alternatives such as the use of electronic media noticing (enotice), could save about $8.75 million per year nationally for all 

CAA permits issued by EPA and the State/Local/Tribal programs.
Page 7 of 12

Agency Title of Initiative / Rule / ICR RIN Summary of Initiative Status of Initiative Target Completion Date Does the Initiative include regulatory flexibilities? What methods will you engage in to Identify Improvements? If available, anticipated or realized savings in costs and/or 

burdens

EPA/OAR Regional Haze Regulations – Revision 

to SIP Submission Date and 

Requirements for Progress Reports 

(SAN 5806)

2060-AS55 This action will propose to revise several process requirements of 

the visibility protection rules pertaining to state plans to improve 

and protect visibility in national parks and other designated Class I 

areas. The EPA will propose (1) to allow an additional 3 years (from 

2018 to 2021) for states to submit their next plan for additional 

emission reductions to improve visibility leves, (2) to remove the 

requirement that progress reports be submitted as formal plan 

revisions thus reducing required administrative steps at the state 

level, (3) to make the schedule for progress reports useful, (4) to 

remove the requirement dating from 1980 that states assess 

whether there is reasonably attributable visibility impairment on a 

repeating 10-year cycle, and (5) to extend to all states the existing 

opportunity for federal land management agencies such as the 

National Part Service to notify a state that reasonably attributable 

visibility impairment is occurring due to one or a small number of 

sources. Additionally, proposed guidance would be issued in 

conjunction with the notice of proposed rulemaking to be finalized 

along with the final rulemaking. This guidance would clarify the 

regulatory elements which states must address in their regional haze 

SIP submittals. The substantive requirements of the existing rule will 

not be amended.

New/Ongoing. EPA plans to propose this action in January, 2016, with final 

rulemaking and guidance planned for Summer 2016.

This action would remove certain existing requirements entirely 

for all affected states. It would allow a state to choose when, by 

July 31, 2021, to submit its next plan to improve visibility in 

Class I areas. Under the CAA and existing regulations, states 

already have considerable discretion to determine what 

emission reductions are necessary to make reasonable progress 

towards the goal of natural conditions of visibility.

The EPA has already held several meetings and conference calls with 

states on the topics to be addressed in the rulemaking. EPA 

managers discussed rule revision and guidance concepts with 

members of the Western States Air Resources Council at several of 

its semi-annual meetings over the two years. EPA hosted a 2-day 

meeting of states, multi-state organizations, federal land managers 

and HQ and regional office EPA staff and managers on March 3 and 

4, 2015 to discuss issues and options, and three extended 

conference calls in July 2015. The proposed rule and guidance will be 

published and open for public comment.

Extending the submittal deadline until 2021 will reduce 

regulatory burden on states since they will have additional time 

to coordinate their regional haze plans with other obligations to 

prepare emission reductions plans. Changing the progress 

report requirements will reduce state administrative burden by 

eliminating the formal regulatory steps involved in submitting 

an approvable plan while maintaining the right of federal land 

management agencies and the public to review and comment 

on the reports. Removing the requirement for states to 

periodically assess whether reasonably attributable visibility 

impairment is occurring will eliminate an administrative 

exercise, mandated in 1980, that in practice typically has 

accomplished little in light of the more comprehensive and 

specific obligations established through the 1999 Regional Haze 

Rule.

EPA/OAR Exceptional Events 

Treatment of Data Influenced by 

Exceptional Events – Rule Revisions 

Guidances -Draft Guidance on the 

Preparation of Exceptional Event 

Demonstrations for Fire Events that 

May Influence Ozone Concentrations, 

and Analyses for Purposes Other than 

Determinations of Current 

Attainment of the NAAQS

RIN 2060-

AS02

The EPA plans to propose revisions to the 2007 Exceptional Events 

Rule, under which states may request that EPA set aside air quality 

data that have been affected by an exceptional event. An 

exceptional event is a natural event or a manmade event that is 

unlikely to recur in the location. for both types of events, the event 

must have been not reasonably controllable or preventable and it 

must be shown that the event is the cause of the exceedance or 

violation that the state seeks to have omitted. These changes to the 

Exceptional Events Rule are intended to resolve a number of issues 

that have arisen since 2007, having to do with the resources 

required to prepare an approvable justification for data exclusion 

and extended EPA review times. The changes will simplify the 

documentation that states must submit when they request that the 

EPA exclude event-affected data from regulatory determinations 

such as the designation of an area as nonattainment for a national 

ambient air quality standard. Various process simplifications will also 

be included, including the removal of the deadlines for certain state 

submittals in order to allow more appropriate schedules to be 

negotiated for specific cases. The changes will clarify that a state 

does not always have to fully quantify the impact of an exceptional 

event in order to convincingly show that the event has caused an 

exceedance or violation of an air quality standard. Along with these 

rule changes, the EPA will issue technical guidance to assist states in 

preparing documentation for requests to exclude fire-affected ozone 

data. 

New/Ongoing. Propose rulemaking action in late 2015, with final rulemaking and 

guidance planned for 2016. 

Yes. The revisions would remove some of the fixed deadlines for 

submissions by states. They would also provide states the 

option in certain cases of relying on emission controls that were 

adopted and approved by EPA several years prior to the event 

occurrence, without re-justification of their current sufficiency.

This rule and guidance development effort has been informed by 

several years of close engagement with state air agencies about the 

difficulties they have encountered in implementing the existing rule. 

The EPA has already had in-person and conference call discussions 

with states on the topics to be addressed in the rulemaking. This has 

included attendance by EPA managers at semi-annual meetings of 

state organizations over the past 4 years, monthly conference calls 

with committees of state air officials, extended conference calls 

around the time of the development and release of interim guidance 

documents in 2013 as well as a formal public comment process on 

those documents, and most recently phone calls with several 

individual western states in the winter of 2014/2015 to discuss their 

implementation experiences. The proposed rule and guidance will be 

published and open for public comment.

 States will be able to prepare shorter documents to support 

requests for regulatory relief in some cases, requiring fewer 

types of technical analysis and with less narrative. States have 

reported spending in excess of $100,000 for preparation of some 

of past demonstration documents. The savings to state air 

agencies are not quantifiable, because exceptional events are 

unpredictable and require different irreducible levels of analysis. 

Also, EPA has been working with states to narrow the types of 

information included in demonstrations even within the 

provisions of the current rule, so the baseline for measuring the 

savings from the proposed rule changes is not stable.

EPA/OAR Clean Air Act Stationary Source EreportingRIN 2060-

AP63

EPA intends to revise the new source performance standards for 

stationary sources to require affected facilities to submit specified 

air emissions data reports to the EPA electronically and to allow 

facilities to maintain electronic records of these reports. All reports 

are currently required to be submitted in hard copy. EPA also 

intends to take similar action with respect to the regulations for 

sources of hazardous air pollutants at a later date.

New/Ongoing. EPA proposed this rulemaking on March 20, 2015. The comment 

period ended on June 18, 2015. EPA anticipates being able to 

finalize the action by early 2016. The action on regulations for 

sources of hazardous air pollutants will follow this action.

This project will streamline recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements through the use of electronic recordkeeping and 

reporting. Reporting is streamlined through standardized forms 

that clearly outline required data elements. Electronic reporting 

eliminates redundant submittals of reports by allowing multiple 

agencies to access the same report. It streamlines report 

reviews through the use of a standardized report format and 

the ability to download data in order to electronically analyze it 

without re-entering it. In addition, this project will reduce 

burden as a result of allowing electronic reporting. We estimate 

a savings of about 160,000 hours after the program is fully 

implemented.

The proposed rule was open for public comment for 90 days. EPA anticipates affected facilities will see reduced costs as a 

result of electronic reporting standardized reporting forms. 

Standardizing reporting formats will help ensure completeness 

of the data, allow for accurate assessment of data quality and 

result in elimination of re-reporting data that has been 

previously submitted. EPA estimated a cost savings to industry 

of approximately $300,000 per year over a 20-year period.
Page 8 of 12

Agency Title of Initiative / Rule / ICR RIN Summary of Initiative Status of Initiative Target Completion Date Does the Initiative include regulatory flexibilities? What methods will you engage in to Identify Improvements? If available, anticipated or realized savings in costs and/or 

burdens

EPA/OSWER RCRA Corrective Action: Lean Exercise N/A RCRA Corrective Action (CA) involves the cleanup of facilities 

contaminated with hazardous waste. Responsibly overseeing and 

prompting cleanups requires diligence and scrutiny by federal and 

state regulators, but administrative procedures can become 

redundant or otherwise inefficient over time, slowing down the 

process without adding benefit, resulting in unnecessary 

owner/operator expenditures unrelated to cleanup work and delay 

for communities and stakeholders awaiting the benefits of cleanup. 

Two EPA Regions jointly led two events applying Lean Six Sigma 

techniques to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the facility 

investigation and remedy selection phases of the CA process. From 

these they developed and are piloting the “RCRA Facilities 

Investigation Remedy Selection Track (RCRA FIRST) Toolbox” and 

accompanying training, to share efficiencies identified at the events 

and highlight opportunities to streamline the phases. 

New/Ongoing. The RCRA First Toolbox is projected to be completed by late in 

calendar year 2015. Many trainings and workshops will continue 

well past this date in order to disseminate the tool and to 

encourage and enable its use. 

The toolbox and overall project enable full and productive use 

of the underutilized flexibilities in existing CA regulations so that 

the program can achieve the same goals – responsible cleanup 

– more efficiently and effectively. The toolbox was designed 

with a suite of options and ideas for streamlining the 

investigation and remedy selection phases of a RCRA cleanup. 

However, Regions, states, and their project managers, as well as 

responsible parties have full control in choosing which, if any, of 

the ideas from the toolbox they may wish to use/apply. 

Improvements were identified through the application of Lean SixSigma Techniques at two Lean events jointly led by two EPA Regions, 

with participation by states and other stakeholders. Additional 

potential improvements will be identified through workshops, 

trainings, and other means of encouraging implementation of the 

options laid out in the toolbox and others developed through the 

use of the toolbox and application of its approaches, including in the 

regular, established communications between headquarters, regions 

and states. 

Participants in the Lean exercises project that, if implemented, 

the ideas available in the toolbox could cut the avg. time for a 

Remedial Investigation from 10 to 5.1 yrs. (or by 49%), and 

reduce the average time for Remedy Selection from 6 yrs. down 

to as much as 1 to 2 yrs. (or by roughly 75%). Such 

improvements hasten cleanup, stemming contaminant 

migration and stimulating facility reuse, providing significant 

economic and societal benefits.

EPA/OSWER Revision to the research, 

development, and demonstration 

(RD&D) permits rule for municipal 

solid waste landfill bioreactors

RIN 2050-

AG75

EPA is considering a proposal to increase the allowable permit term 

for municipal solid waste landfills that add liquids (bioreactors) 

operating under Research, Development, and Demonstration 

(RD&D) permits in order to provide more time to support research 

into the performance of these types of units. 

New/Ongoing. EPA expects to publish a proposed rulemaking in December 2015. EPA expects to propose to increase the maximum permit term 

for municipal solid waste landfills units operating under RD&D 

permits to allow for the addition bulk liquids to the disposal 

unit. The addition of liquids is generally prohibited by existing 

regulations for MSW landfills.

The Agency also expects to gather information about facilities 

operating under RD&D permits. The goal is to evaluate that data 

and consider whether and how to propose to revise the regulations 

to cover municipal solid waste landfills that add liquids. EPA plans 

to conduct outreach on the RD&D proposed rule that will include 

engaging stakeholders and participation in conferences and similar 

forums. The Agency will also analyze public comments received in 

response to the proposed rule.

In 2009, SWANA estimated 28 active “bioreactor” projects. In 2014, 

an EPA ORD report estimated there may be as many as 40 

bioreactor projects in the US; however, that report indicates 

uncertainty as to the number of projects. As part of our information 

gathering, EPA anticipates refining these estimates.

The Agency anticipates there will be savings in costs associated 

with bioreactor landfills, including (1) acceleration of landfill gas 

generation, thereby increasing the potential for capture and use 

of landfill gas as a source of fuel and reducing greenhouse gas 

emissions; (2) reduction in the need for post-closure care 

leachate control due to accelerated biodegradation of waste 

materials; and (3) increased efficiency in utilization of landfill 

space due to acceleration of waste settlement and airspace 

reclamation. 

The Agency believes that cost savings will come from the sale of 

increased methane gas generation, not treating leachate 

generated from the landfill, and increased landfill space from 

rapid settlement.

 

 The increased volume of gas makes converting methane gas to 

electric energy an easier decision because the higher volume of 

gas reduces the cost of the equipment per unit cost of gas.

 Landfill space settlement occurs rapidly at a bioreactor and 

allows more waste to be placed in the landfill without increasing 

its height.

EPA/OAR Gasoline and diesel regulations: 

reducing reporting and 

recordkeeping. Vehicle regulations: 

harmonizing criteria air pollutant 

requirements with CARB

RIN 2060-

AQ86

As part of the Tier 3 vehicle and fuel standards rule, EPA reviewed 

existing gasoline and diesel regulations that apply to fuel producers, 

ethanol blenders, fuel distributors, and others for areas where 

recordkeeping and reporting obligations can be modified to reduce 

burden. In regard to vehicle regulations, EPA is assessing 

opportunities to harmonize testing and compliance requirements 

with CARB’s vehicle emission standards. 

Completed. Final rule published 4/28/2014 (79 FR 23413). 

http://www.epa.gov/otaq/tier3.htm 40 CFR Part 80 - Regulation of 

Fuels and Fuel Additives. Subpart D - Reformulated Gasoline (80.40 

through 80.89) Subpart E - Anti-Dumping (Conventional Gasoline) 

(80.90 through 80.124) Subpart H - Gasoline Sulfur (80.180 through 

80.415)

Subpart J - Gasoline Toxics (MSAT1) (80.800 - 80.1045)

Subpart L - Gasoline Benzene (MSAT2) (80.1200 - 80.1363)

A Small Business Advocacy Review Panel to obtain advice and 

recommendations of representatives of the small entities potentially 

subject to the rule’s requirements was completed on October 3, 

2011. 

EPA/OECA and 

EPA/OW

Regulatory certainty for farmers: 

working with the U.S. Department of 

Agriculture (USDA) and states

EPA worked with USDA and state governments to explore flexible, 

voluntary approaches for farmers to achieve water quality 

improvements.

Completed. January 2013. In October, 2012, EPA met with Chesapeake Bay State Agriculture 

and Environment Directors. In November, 2012, EPA met with Bay 

state officials and key stakeholder groups. An anticipated outcome 

is that one or more of these states adopt certainty programs that 

encourage more farmers to adopt BMPs to reduce runoff of excess 

nutrients and sediment. In January, 2012, EPA signed an agreement 

with Minnesota on "Engaging in a State and Federal Partnership in 

Support of the Minnesota Agricultural Water Quality Certification 

Program." EPA and USDA have met with officials from Vermont and 

communicated with Maryland and Delaware who have indicated 

their intentions to move forward with certainty programs. EPA's 

Region 3 office will provide support to that effort. We will 

coordinate with USDA as needed as they work with their state 

partners to develop agricultural certainty programs.

Anticipated benefits include increased adoption of best 

management practices (BMPs) that reduce runoff of excess 

nutrients and sediment. 
Page 9 of 12

Agency Title of Initiative / Rule / ICR RIN Summary of Initiative Status of Initiative Target Completion Date Does the Initiative include regulatory flexibilities? What methods will you engage in to Identify Improvements? If available, anticipated or realized savings in costs and/or 

burdens

EPA/OCSPP Electronic online reporting of health 

and safety data under TSCA, FIFRA 

and FFDCA: reducing burden and 

improving efficiencies. Quick changes 

to some TSCA reporting requirements; 

reducing burden.

RIN 2070-

AJ75

EPA explored transitioning from paper-based reporting to electronic 

reporting for industries regulated under TSCA, FIFRA, and FFDCA. 

Online electronic reporting can reduce burden and costs for 

regulated entities. The changes to TSCA reporting requirements are 

intended to reduce reporting burdens and to clarify reporting 

requirements. Considerations include the submission of an 

electronic copy in the place of 6 paper copies, the additional 

requirement of including "Robust Summaries" of test results with 

test data, and the use of the Inventory Update Reporting Form to 

format submission of preliminary assessment information. 

Completed. EPA issued a final rule related to Electronic reporting under TSCA 

on December 4, 2013. (78 FR 72818)

With regard to electronic reporting under FIFRA & FFDCA, on 

October 14, 2011, EPA implemented an electronic submission 

option via CD/DVD that covers many aspects of the pesticides 

registration processes. EPA provided detailed guidance and a 

down-loadable tool to facilitate electronic submission via CD/DVD 

of registration and endocrine disruptor screening program orders.

Online electronic reporting is expected to reduce burden and 

costs for the regulated entities by eliminating the costs 

associated with printing and mailing reports to EPA, many of 

which are required in multiple copies, completing the forms 

through look-up features and error checks, and maintaining 

paper records. It is also providing the opportunity for increased 

efficiencies in terms of record retrieval and information sharing 

within the company. At the same time, it will improve EPA’s 

efficiency in reviewing the submissions, in particular for lengthy 

scientific studies. 

The regulated community has indicated that these savings could 

be substantial, but there may be an initial offset from burden 

related to initial registration into the system that will be used for 

the online reporting portal.

EPA/OSWER National Priorities List rules: 

improving transparency

EPA improved transparency in the NPL listing process by considering 

ways for states, local governments, and tribes to have meaningful 

input to listing decisions.

Completed. January 2013. See: 

http://www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/query/queryhtm/nplstcor.ht

m

EPA is initiating a more structured approach for the process by 

which state and tribal input on NPL listing decisions is solicited. 

A model letter has been developed for use when requesting 

state and tribal support for NPL listing. The model letter 1) 

explains the concerns at the site and the EPA’s rationale for 

proceeding; 2) requests an explanation of how the state intends 

to address the site if placement on the NPL is not favored; and 

3) emphasizes the transparent nature of the process by 

informing states that information on their responses will be 

publicly available.

EPA/OW Integrated planning for municipal 

wastewater and stormwater sources.

N/A When EPA requested public comments on how we should meet the 

Executive Order 13563, several commenters raised concerns that 

EPA, states and municipalities often focus on Clean Water Act

requirements applicable to municipalities, including requirements 

for CSOs, SSOs and other wet weather discharges, individually, 

assessing and implementing the best alternative to solve one 

problem at a time without adequate consideration of the entire 

water quality challenge facing a community. This review is included 

in the Plan so that EPA can gather additional information on how to 

better promote green infrastructure, to promote more cost-effective 

remedies to CSO, SSO and other wet weather violations and to 

identify additional approaches that balance competing CWA 

requirements and allows municipalities to develop a comprehensive 

plan that addresses CSOs, SSOs, stormwater and other municipal 

CWA requirements in a way that focuses their resources on the most 

pressing public health and environmental protection issues first. 

Completed. EPA issued the Integrated Municipal Stormwater and Wastewater 

Planning Approach framework document on June 5, 2012 that 

more fully describes the integrated planning concept. 

http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/npdes/stormwater/upload/integra

ted_planning_framework.pdf

This effort gives municipalities the opportunity to develop and 

implement plans that will help them meet their water quality 

objectives in the most cost-effective way. It allows 

municipalities to take advantage of some innovative practices, 

such as green infrastructure, that can be used to address several 

issues, such as CSOs, SSOs, and stormwater discharges.

Green infrastructure offers municipalities other benefits as well, 

such as making their communities more livable, reducing the 

urban heat island effect, and saving energy.

EPA/OAR Vehicle Regulations: harmonizing 

requirements for GHG and Fuel 

Economy Standards

RIN 2060-

AQ54

The National Program for greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) and fuel 

economy standards was developed jointly by the Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) and the National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration (NHTSA) and applies to light duty cars and trucks in 

model years 2012-2016 (first phase) and 2017-2025 (second phase).

Completed. Final joint rulemaking published 10/15/2012 - 77 FR 62623.

http://www.epa.gov/otaq/climate/regs-light-duty.htm

The rulemaking is directly responsive to requests from the auto 

industry to harmonize DOT's fuel economy standards, EPA's 

greenhouse gas standards and CARB's greenhouse gas 

standards. This will allow the auto manufacturers to more 

efficiently produce one vehicle fleet to meet the requirements 

of the "National Program." 

EPA/OAR Multiple air pollutants: coordinating 

emission reduction regulations and 

using innovative technologies

RIN 2060-

AQ41

EPA intends to explore ways to reduce emissions of multiple air 

pollutants through the use of technologies and practices that 

achieve multiple benefits, such as controlling hazardous air pollutant 

emissions while also controlling particulate matter and its precursor 

pollutants. An early example of this approach is a rule amending 

pollution-control requirements for the pulp and paper industry.

Completed. Final rule issued 9/11/2012 - 77 FR 55698. Market analysis found that the proposal is likely to induce 

minimal changes in the average national price of paper and 

paperboard products. The control costs for the proposed rule 

amendments are estimated to be approximately $4.1M per year 

with associated emission reductions of approximately 4,100 tons 

per year of HAP. Total industry costs (repeat testing/monitoring 

and incremental reporting/recordkeeping requirements in 

addition to controls) are estimated to be approximately $2.1M 

per year. 
Page 10 of 12

Agency Title of Initiative / Rule / ICR RIN Summary of Initiative Status of Initiative Target Completion Date Does the Initiative include regulatory flexibilities? What methods will you engage in to Identify Improvements? If available, anticipated or realized savings in costs and/or 

burdens

EPA/OP Innovative technology: seeking to 

spur new markets and utilize 

technology

N/A EPA assessed technology during retrospective reviews and new 

rulemakings to help encourage development of innovative 

technologies that reduce costs. EPA also plans to update monitoring 

and testing protocols to allow the use of new methods and 

technologies, where feasible. Support for the newly formed regional 

water technology innovation cluster will continue.

Completed. EPA completed the pilot(s) in 2012. The DfE market analysis pilot 

was completed in 2012 and was focused on understanding the 

drivers, needs, barriers, and selection criteria used by a company 

when an alternative flame retardant is considered or employed. A 

second pilot study was completed in December 2012 with OW 

focused on mountain top mining water pollution technologies.

This action was not designed to reduce costs or information 

burdens; its desired outcome is to stimulate the incorporation of 

the most up to date technology in regulatory programs. EPA 

hopes to explore the potential for expanding alternative 

technologies and processes in the market that will offer new 

possibilities for reducing environmental and health impacts.

EPA/OP The costs of regulations: improving 

cost estimates

N/A The goals of the Retrospective Cost Study are to evaluate whether exante and ex-post cost estimates of regulations differ substantially 

and, if so, to explore the reasons causing the divergence. If 

systematic differences in between ex ante and ex post cost 

estimates are detected, we hope to identify the source of the 

differences and determine if there are defensible means of 

correcting for them in our ex-ante cost estimation methodology.

Completed. After incorporating comments received from an SAB-EEAC review 

of EPA's Interim Report, EPA released "Retrospective Study of the 

Costs of EPA Regulations: A Report of Four Case Studies" in August 

2014. The final report is available at: 

http://yosemite.epa.gov/ee/epa/eerm.nsf/vwAN/EE0575.pdf/$file/EE-0575.pdf

The ultimate goals of this effort are to improve our ex-ante cost 

modeling and to inform future revisions to EPA’s Guidelines for 

Preparing Economic Analyses.

EPA/OAR Vehicle fuel vapor recovery systems: 

eliminating redundancy

RIN 2060-

AQ97

EPA intends to seek burden reductions for gas stations by 

eliminating regulatory requirements that call for the use of 

redundant technology.

Completed. Final rule published 5/16/2012 - 77 FR 28772. The EPA projects that during 2013-2015, gasoline-dispensing 

facilities (GDFs) in up to 19 states and the District of Columbia 

could seek to decommission and remove Stage II systems from 

their dispensers. There are about 30,600 GDFs with Stage II in 

these 20 areas. If the states submit and EPA approves SIP 

revisions to remove Stage II systems from these GDFs, the EPA 

projects savings of about $10.2 million in the first year, $40.5 

million in the second year, and $70.9 million in the third year. 

Long-term savings are projected to be about $91 million per 

year, compared to the current use of Stage II systems in these 

areas.

EPA estimates the long-term cost savings associated with this 

rule to be approximately $91million per year (2011$).

EPA/OSWER E-Manifest: reducing burden RIN 2050-

AG20

This rule establishes the legal and policy framework for collecting 

hazardous waste shipment data electronically, thereby replacing the 

current, burdensome paper manifest system that requires 6-copy 

forms to be completed, carried and signed manually.

Completed. The final rule was published on February 7, 2014 (79 FR 7517). Implementation of e-Manifest could result in annual cost savings 

exceeding 75 million, and annual burden reductions of between 

370,000 and 700,000.

EPA/OSWER Electronic hazardous waste Site ID 

form: reducing burden

N/A EPA explored ways to reduce burden for hazardous waste 

generators, transporters, and holders of waste permits. 

Completed. eSiteID was deployed and initial CROMERR approval from the 

Office of Environmental Information was provided to the Office of 

Resource Conservation and Recovery on 2/22/13.

Electronically submitting Site ID forms would: 1) save in mailing 

costs; 2) enable better data quality as the data would be 

entered by the facility itself; 3) increase efficiency of the 

notification process as the facility could easily submit updates of 

past submissions (rather than repeatedly filling out the form 

again and again); and 4) enable states and EPA to receive the 

updated data faster.

EPA/OW Consumer confidence reports for 

primary drinking water regulations: 

providing for the open exchange of 

information

N/A EPA explored ways to promote greater transparency and public 

participation in protecting the nation’s drinking water, while at the 

same time looking for opportunities to reduce utility burden.

Completed. On January 3, 2013, EPA released an interpretive memo allowing 

for electronic delivery of CCRs and a document summarizing CCR 

issues and recommended next steps for utilities to enhance public 

access to information on drinking water quality.

In FY 2012, EPA began review of the CCR, including an internal 

comparison of the statute and CCR rule language and formation of 

an EPA workgroup. EPA determined that the current rule language 

will allow for additional delivery options (e.g., electronic delivery). 

To gather information from stakeholders, a Listening Session was 

held on February 23, 2012. The web-based dialogue was opened for 

two weeks allowing for states, utilities, and consumers to provide 

feedback on CCR delivery and on other issues. EPA held a public 

meeting in October 2012 to obtain feedback on its draft framework 

for electronic delivery of CCRs. The draft was available for a 30-day 

public comment period. On January 3, 2013, EPA released an 

interpretive memo on CCR delivery options, with an attachment 

describing electronic delivery considerations for states and utilities, 

and a summary of issues raised by stakeholders.

EPA estimated a cost savings of approximately $1,000,000 

(2010$) per year, based on the anticipated reduction in postage 

and paper costs for systems serving ≥10,000 customers. EPA 

developed estimated cost savings to utilities for several different 

electronic delivery scenarios.
Page 11 of 12

Agency Title of Initiative / Rule / ICR RIN Summary of Initiative Status of Initiative Target Completion Date Does the Initiative include regulatory flexibilities? What methods will you engage in to Identify Improvements? If available, anticipated or realized savings in costs and/or 

burdens

EPA/OW Reporting requirements under 

Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act 

(CWA) reducing burden

N/A EPA explored ways to reduce the burden on state governments 

when reporting on the quality of the nation’s water bodies.

Completed. The report for this effort was completed in April 2013. See 

http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/lawsguidance/cwa/tmdl/guidance.

cfm

Burden reduction is anticipated through clarifying processes and 

providing opportunities for States and EPA Regions to be more 

efficient in handling data.

Accomplishments include: completion of a LEAN event; completion 

of four workgroups that focused on identifying minimum data 

elements, improving data flows, improving measures, and 

streamlining state assessment of monitoring data; discussions 

underway as part of an Integrated Project Team, which is 

coordinating with the Exchange Network; and transition to 

catchment-based indexing for performance measures and 

processing.

Not available at this time. 

EPA/OCSPP Export notification for chemicals and 

pesticides: reducing burden and 

improving efficiencies

N/A EPA evaluated options to reduce regulatory burden on pesticide 

exporters and foreign countries monitoring these exports, as 

industry suggests that these requirements do not appear to provide 

comparable benefits to public health or the environment.

Completed. In 2009/2010, EPA’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) conducted 

an evaluation entitled, “EPA Needs to Comply with the Federal 

Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act and Improve its 

Oversight of Exported Never-Registered Pesticides (Report No. 10-

P-0026).” EPA evaluated the OIG report and in response to the 

audit, developed a “Corrective Action Plan,” which has since been 

implemented. 

EPA/OSWER Adjusting threshold planning 

quantities (TPQs) for solids in 

solution: reducing burden and relying 

on scientific objectivity

RIN 2050-

AF08

EPA is reviewed the manner by which the regulated community 

would apply the threshold planning quantities (TPQs) for those 

extremely hazardous substances (EHSs) that are non-reactive solid 

chemicals in solution. This would allow facilities reporting EHSs for 

the first time to have larger quantities on-site and not be subject to 

the reporting requirements.

Completed. Final rule published 3/22/2012 (77 FR 16679). EPA has revised the manner by which the regulated community 

would apply the threshold planning quantities (TPQs) for those 

extremely hazardous substances (EHSs) that are non-reactive 

solid chemicals in solution. This allows facilities reporting EHSs 

for the first time to have larger quantities on-site and not be 

subject to the emergency planning notification reporting 

requirements. This final rule allows facilities to have larger 

amounts of EHS solids in solution on site than before without 

being subject to certain emergency planning notification 

requirements. In addition, the changes in reporting will allow 

state and local emergency planners to better focus limited 

resources on amounts of chemicals that will potentially cause 

the greatest harm and to spend fewer resources on those that 

pose less harm when released.

EPA/OCSPP Integrated pesticide registration 

reviews: reducing burden and 

improving efficiencies

N/A EPA reviewed the pesticide registration review process, as well as 

other FIFRA requirements.

Completed. The new procedure were put in place in March 2013. This is an 

ongoing program, so the efforts and commitments described apply 

to future activities. 

EPA has bundled several sets of chemicals together as part of 

registration review, including the organophosphates, the 

carbamates, the pyrethroids, the nonicotinoid insecticides, and the 

sulfonylurea herbicides. In addition, to enhance label clarity and 

potentially reduce regulatory burdens on industry refining data 

requirements to support pesticide re-evaluation, EPA began holding 

"Focus meetings." "Focus meetings" ensured hat EPA and all 

interested stakeholders begin communicating early in the process to 

ensure the accuracy of information about pesticide use, as well as 

early identification of data needs to support re-evaluation decisions.

EPA/OSWER Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) 

reforms: improving efficiencies and 

effectiveness

N/A EPA examined existing PCB guidance and regulations to harmonize 

regulatory requirements related to harmful PCB uses and to PCB 

cleanup. The disposal and cleanup requirements for PCBcontaminated building material depend on whether the material is 

classified as PCB bulk product waste or PCB remediation waste. The 

Agency intends to issue a Federal Register notice that solicits 

comment on guidance that reinterprets the definition of PCB bulk 

product waste. EPA believes that this proposed reinterpretation 

would allow for accelerated cleanups of PCB-contaminated building 

material by providing a more straightforward path for disposal 

pursuant to the regulations. Speeding up removal and disposal of the 

PCB-contaminated material is critical for reducing exposure 

potential, such as in schools or other locations where such PCBcontaminated building materials are currently in place. 

Completed. On October 24, 2012, OSWER released the final PCB Bulk Waste 

Reinterpretation. The reinterpretation is available to the public at 

http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/hazard/tsd/pcbs/pubs/caulk/reint

erpret.htm

Increased number and speed of cleanups of PCB caulk and PCB 

paint contamination
Page 12 of 12

Agency Title of Initiative / Rule / ICR RIN Summary of Initiative Status of Initiative Target Completion Date Does the Initiative include regulatory flexibilities? What methods will you engage in to Identify Improvements? If available, anticipated or realized savings in costs and/or 

burdens

EPA/OSWER Hazardous waste requirements for 

retail products: clarifying and making 

the program more effective

N/A EPA intended to review its regulations to determine whether to 

issue guidance in the short term concerning certain pharmaceutical 

containers. One of the top priorities identified through further 

conversations with retailers was clarity on how to manage 

containers such as pill bottles that once contained a p-listed 

pharmaceutical hazardous waste since the containers usually have 

some sort of residue. Under the RCRA regulations these containers 

are NOT considered empty unless they are triple rinsed. EPA 

committed to investigate whether guidance in this area was feasible 

and appropriate. 

Completed. EPA decided that guidance was needed to provide clarity and 

national voice on how to manage these containers that once held 

p-listed hazardous waste pharmaceuticals. States had taken a wide 

variety of approaches and stakeholders beyond retailers were 

asking for assistance on this issue. After talking with various 

stakeholders including Walmart and gathering limited available 

data on the p-listed pharmaceutical residues inside these 

containers, EPA issued a guidance memorandum on November 4, 

2011.

The guidance on how to manage containers that contain 

residues from pharmaceuticals that were p-listed hazardous 

waste when discarded provides regulated entities with various 

options on how to approach the management of these 

containers. We anticipate that some generators, who were 

becoming large quantity generators due to counting the residue 

and container weight towards their generator status, will be 

able to maintain a lower generator status by managing their 

containers according to the memo, resulting in costs savings 

associated with paperwork and training.

EPA/OSWER Hazardous Waste Requirements for 

Retail Products

RIN 2050-

AG72

This NODA is part of the Agency’s effort to better understand 

concerns from all stakeholders about RCRA’s applicability to the 

retail sector, what materials may be affected, what the full scope of 

the issues are, and what options may exist for addressing the issues.

Completed. EPA published a Notice of Data Availability (NODA) on February 14, 

2014 (79 FR 8926). EPA anticipates publishing two proposed rules, 

the Hazardous Waste Generator Improvements Rule and the 

Pharmaceuticals Rule, (which are specific listed items in this 

report), in summer 2015. These rules respond to many of the 

comments received in the NODA. In addition, EPA is developing a 

retail sector strategy to address other comments from the NODA. 

EPA expects to make this strategy publicly available in spring 2015. 

There will be regulatory relief associated with the Hazardous 

Waste Generator Improvements Rule and Pharmaceuticals 

proposed rule in terms of burden reduction associated with 

changing how generator categories are defined.

Prior to publishing the NODA, EPA previously conducted outreach 

activities with various stakeholders in the retail community to gather 

additional information regarding the hazardous waste issues they 

are facing and to better understand challenges faced by the retail 

sector in complying with the RCRA hazardous waste generator 

regulations. EPA plans to conduct outreach on the proposed rules 

and is developing a strategy to engage the regulated community on 

remaining issues. This strategy includes site visits, meetings, 

participation in conferences and targeted outreach. EPA will also 

analyze public comments on the proposed rules. 

There will be cost savings associated with the Hazardous Waste 

Generator Improvements and Pharmaceuticals proposed rules in 

terms of burden reduction associated with changing how 

generator categories are defined. 

EPA/OP Section 610 reviews: coordinating 

requirements

N/A To the extent practicable, EPA will coordinate Section 610 reviews 

with other statutorily or Presidentially mandated retrospective 

reviews.

Completed. The list of rules for which upcoming 610 reviews are required are 

posted on EPA's Small Entities and Rulemaking website 

(http://www.epa.gov/rfa/section-610.html). Other required 

retrospective reviews for each rule will be indicated. EPA is 

committed to maintaining the public list and coordinating reviews 

when practicable.

Each specific Section 610 review that can be coordinated with 

another review requirement will save Agency resources and 

reduce burden on the public responding to and commenting on 

reviews.