*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

1

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

6560-50-P

EO12866_2050-HW Generator_AG70_NPRM_2015.06.26 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 260, 261, 262, 263, 264, 265, 268, 270, 273, and 279

[EPA-HQ-RCRA-2012-0121; FRL 9924-07-OSWER]

RIN 2050–AG70 

Hazardous Waste Generator Improvements Rule

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or the Agency) is proposing to revise 

the hazardous waste generator regulations under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act 

(RCRA) to improve compliance and thereby enhance protection of human health and the 

environment. Specifically, EPA proposes to revise certain components of the hazardous waste 

generator regulatory program; address gaps in the regulations; provide greater flexibility for 

hazardous waste generators to manage their hazardous waste in a cost-effective and protective 

manner; reorganize the hazardous waste generator regulations to make them more user-friendly 

and thus improve their usability by the regulated community; and make technical corrections and 

conforming changes to address inadvertent errors, remove obsolete references to programs that 

no longer exist, and improve the readability of the regulations. 

These proposed changes are both a result of EPA’s experience in implementing and 

evaluating the hazardous waste generator program over the last 30 years, as well as a response to 

concerns and issues identified by the states and regulated community. 

DATES: Comments must be received on or before [INSERT DATE 60 DAYS AFTER DATE 

OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER].

Deleted: Billing Code: 

Formatted: Centered

Deleted: 2050–

Deleted: 3

Deleted: 1

Deleted: 6560-50-P

Formatted: Font: 12 pt

Deleted: XXXX-X

Deleted: 9

Deleted: Insert date 90 days after publication in the Federal 

Register
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 2 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-RCRA-2012-

0121, to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. Comments may not be edited once submitted, and may 

publish in the docket without changes by the EPA. Do not submit electronically any information 

you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. If you need to include CBI as part of your comment, please 

visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets/comments for instructions. Multimedia submissions (audio, 

video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make.

For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, and general guidance 

on making effective comments, please visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets/comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim O’Leary, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery, (MC: 5304P),, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20460, (703) 308-8827, (oleary.jim@epa.gov) or Kathy Lett, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery, (MC: 

5304P), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20460, (703) 605-0761,

(lett.kathy@epa.gov). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

Does this Action Apply to Me? 

Entities potentially affected by this action include between 353,000 and 543,000 

industrial entities that generate hazardous waste regulated under the RCRA Subtitle C 

regulations. Of this universe, between 293,000 and 470,000 are conditionally exempt small 

Deleted: 4
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 3 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ quantity generators (CESQGs) that will only be affected if they choose to take advantage of two 

voluntary programs being proposed. Entities potentially affected by this proposed rule include 

practically every industrial sector, including printing, petroleum refining, chemical 

manufacturing, plastics and resin manufacturing, pharmaceutical manufacturing, paint and 

coatings, iron and steelmaking, secondary smelting and refining, metal manufacturing, 

electroplating, circuit board manufacturing, and automobile manufacturing, among other 

industries.

As discussed in section XVIII , the Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) for this action, 

available in the docket for this action, estimates the future annualized cost to industry to comply 

with the proposed requirements is between $6.2 and $17.4 million (at a 7% discount rate). The

annualized benefits for entities opting to take advantage of two voluntary programs in the 

proposed rule (e.g., consolidation of CESQG waste by large quantity generators (LQGs) under 

the same ownership, and generators who change regulatory status episodically) is between $6.2

and $12.2 million (at a 7% discount rate) resulting in a net annualized cost of between $0.1 

million and $5.2 million. 

The proposed Hazardous Waste Generator Improvements Rule is expected to yield a 

variety of benefits as generators change several of their waste management practices to comply 

with the proposed regulations. These benefits reflect the rule’s focus on enhancing protection of 

human health and the environment while improving the efficiency of the RCRA hazardous waste 

generator standards. Ideally, the Agency would prefer to quantify and monetize the rule’s total 

benefits. However, only some categories of benefits are quantifiable. For the majority of 

benefits, sufficient data are not available to support a detailed quantitative analysis. For example, 

the added flexibility from allowing a large quantity generator accumulating ignitable or reactive 

hazardous waste to obtain a waiver from the local fire department for 50-foot property line 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 4 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

requirement at 40 CFR 265.176 (provided other safety requirements are met) is difficult to 

quantify. In addition, quantifying the benefits associated with emergency response due to 

changes in container labeling would require data on the annual number of emergencies at 

generator sites, the current risks associated with these incidents, the extent to which more 

detailed labeling would affect the procedures of emergency responders, and the reduction in risk 

associated with these changes. Detailed data on these items are not readily available. In this and 

in similar cases, the benefits are described qualitatively. 

II. Statutory Authority 

These regulations are proposed under the authority of sections 2002, 3001, 3002, 3003, 

3004, 3007, and 3010 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act of 1965, as amended by the Resource 

Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA), as amended by the Hazardous and Solid 

Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA), 42 U.S.C. 6921, 6922, 6923, and 6924. This statute is 

commonly referred to as “RCRA.”

III. What is the Intent of this Proposal? 

EPA is proposing to revise the hazardous waste generator regulations under RCRA to 

improve compliance by the regulated community and support the efficient implementation of the 

hazardous waste generator regulations by EPA and the states and, thereby enhance protection of 

human health and the environment. Specifically, EPA proposes to (1) revise certain components 

of the hazardous waste generator regulatory program, primarily at 40 CFR 261.5 and 40 CFR 

part 262; (2) address identified gaps in the regulations; (3) provide greater flexibility for 

hazardous waste generators to manage their hazardous waste in a cost-effective and protective 

manner; (4) reorganize the hazardous waste generator regulations to make them more userfriendly and thus improve their usability by the regulated community; and (5) make technical 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 5 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

corrections and conforming changes to address inadvertent errors, remove obsolete programs, 

and improve the readability of the regulations. 

These proposed changes are a result of EPA’s experience in implementing and evaluating 

the hazardous waste generator program over the last 30 years, as well as a response to concerns 

and issues identified by the states and regulated community.

The hazardous waste generator regulatory program was originally promulgated in 1980. 

Over the course of the last 30 plus years, the Agency, through experience with implementing the 

program, and in various meetings, correspondence, and discussions with the states and the 

regulated community, has become aware of ambiguities, inconsistencies, gaps, and a lack of 

flexibility in the regulations, which, if revised, could result in a program that is more effective in 

protecting human health and the environment. Many of these problems were identified in a 2004 

program evaluation of the hazardous waste generator program conducted by EPA.1In 2013, a 

separate EPA program evaluation addressing hazardous waste determinations also identified a 

number of problems related to generators being able to make a proper hazardous waste 

determination.2 Several of the proposed provisions are also responsive to the 2014 Notice of 

Data Availability that EPA issued on the retail sector asking for comment on hazardous waste 

management practices in that sector and on challenges they face in complying with RCRA (79 

FR 8926, February 14, 2014). 

Many of the changes in this proposal are revisions to existing rules designed to improve 

generator compliance without any increase in burden. For example, the Agency has 

inconsistently addressed the situation where a generator generates both acute and non-acute 

hazardous waste in a calendar month. This inconsistency has resulted in uncertainty for the 

 

1 Summary of Hazardous Waste Generator Regulatory Program Evaluation, November 2004. See also public 

comments in Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-RCRA–2003–0014.

2 Hazardous Waste Determination Program Evaluation, IEc, April 2013. 

http://www.epa.gov/evaluate/pdf/waste/haz-waste-determination.pdf.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 6 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ generator regarding what generator category, and thus which regulatory provisions, would apply 

during that calendar month. This proposal addresses the problem. The Agency is also proposing 

to replace the phrase “conditionally exempt small quantity generator” (CESQG) with the phrase 

“very small quantity generator” (VSQG) so as to be consistent with the other two generator 

categories—large quantity generators (LQGs) and small quantity generators (SQGs).

Another area of the program that needs revision is the closure regulations for hazardous 

waste generators under § 262.34(a)(1). The regulations do not expressly specify whether closure 

provisions apply to generators accumulating hazardous waste in containment buildings only or 

also to hazardous waste accumulated in containers, tanks and on drip pads. This notice proposes 

to revise the closure provisions to address these and other concerns. 

The Agency is also proposing changes to improve flexibility for generators of hazardous 

wastes. One example is the proposal to enhance flexibility by allowing conditionally exempt 

small quantity generators (CESQGs) to send hazardous waste to an LQG that is under the control 

of the same person, provided certain conditions are met. Numerous situations exist in industry, 

government, and academia where an organization with satellite locations that qualify as CESQGs 

could take advantage of this provision in order to consolidate and manage the hazardous waste in 

an environmentally sound manner. In addition, this proposal addresses the concern that some 

generators, such as generators located in urban environments, may find it difficult to meet the 

independent requirement that containers holding ignitable or reactive waste must be placed 15 

meters (50 feet) from the site’s property line. To build in flexibility, while maintaining protection 

of human health and the environment, we are proposing to allow generators to apply for a waiver 

from this requirement from their local fire department or emergency response organization, and 

if approved, maintain documentation of that agreement. 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 7 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ The Agency is also proposing to reorganize the hazardous waste generator regulations to 

make them more user-friendly for various stakeholders. For example, the current CESQG 

regulations are found at § 261.5, while the regulations for SQGs and LQGs are found in 40 CFR 

part 262. For convenience and ease of use, the Agency is proposing to move all the generator 

regulations into 40 CFR part 262. As a result of this reorganization, EPA is proposing to make a 

number of conforming changes to other parts of the regulations that cite particular sections of the 

part 262 regulations.

Lastly, the Agency is proposing to make several technical corrections that address 

inadvertent errors in the regulations, obsolete programs, and outdated citations.

IV. What is the Scope of this Proposal?

EPA is proposing to revise the hazardous waste generator regulations, primarily at 40 

CFR 261.5 and throughout 40 CFR part 262. The Agency is also proposing some changes to 

parts 260, 263, 264, 265, 268, 270, 273, and 279 mostly for the purposes of maintaining 

consistency with the proposed changes in part 262. 

The preamble discussion of these proposed changes is organized by where the existing 

regulations currently appear in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). The preamble to this 

proposed rule first addresses changes to the substance of the existing generator provisions, as 

well as a number of related changes (sections VI through XII). These proposed revisions are 

discussed using existing regulatory citations to make the discussion easier to understand by those 

already familiar with the hazardous waste generator regulations. In the cases where the Agency 

is proposing to revise a regulation and is also proposing to move it as part of the reorganization, 

the new citation for the provision in the proposed regulatory text is provided at the end of that 

section of preamble discussion. 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 8 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ Following those sections, a discussion of the proposed reorganization of the hazardous 

waste generator regulations is presented (section XIII), including where the existing regulatory 

sections would be located in the proposed reorganization. As part of this discussion, we have 

provided a crosswalk table that compares where a particular regulatory section is currently in the 

regulations and where it would appear under the proposed reorganization.

Finally, a number of technical corrections are discussed (section XIV).

A. Proposed Revisions to 40 CFR Part 260—Hazardous Waste Management System: General

EPA is proposing to revise the definition of “small quantity generator” and add 

definitions for the other two generator categories as well as a definition for “central accumulation 

area” in § 260.10. In addition, we propose to change the name of the “conditionally exempt small 

quantity generator” category to “very small quantity generator” or VSQG.3 These proposed 

changes are discussed in section VI of this preamble. 

B. Proposed Revisions to 40 CFR Part 261—Identification and Listing of Hazardous Waste

EPA is proposing four changes to the regulations currently in 40 CFR part 261. First, 

EPA is proposing to add a new provision that would explain what generator category would 

apply to a generator that generates both acute and non-acute hazardous waste in the same 

calendar month. Second, the Agency is proposing to revise the regulations at §§ 261.5(h) and (i) 

and 261.3 that address the mixing of a non-hazardous waste with a hazardous waste. Third, to 

make waste management more efficient in some cases and improve environmental protection, 

the Agency is proposing to amend §§ 261.5(f)(3) and (g)(3) to allow CESQGs to send their 

hazardous waste to LQGs that are operated under control of the same person. Under this 

proposal, a CESQG that wants to take advantage of this provision would need to comply with the 

 

3 Despite this proposed change, in the preamble, EPA will continue refer to this category as CESQGs to make it 

easier to follow the other changes to the generator being proposed. We will use the term “VSQG” when directly 

quoting proposed regulatory text. This change is discussed fully in section VI of this preamble.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 9 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ proposed requirements. Finally, the Agency is proposing to amend § 261.6(c) to require biennial 

reporting for owners or operators of facilities that recycle but do not store hazardous waste 

before the recycling.

These proposed changes are discussed in section VII of this preamble. 

C. Proposed Revisions to 40 CFR Part 262—Standards Applicable to Generators of Hazardous 

Waste

EPA is proposing a number of changes to the regulations for generators of hazardous 

waste at 40 CFR part 262 to improve the understanding of the RCRA generator regulations in 

order to encourage increased compliance by the regulated community. These proposed changes 

include the following:

 Revising the scope and applicability section to distinguish between independent 

requirements and conditions for exemption for generators of hazardous waste. 

 Revising the regulations for making hazardous waste determinations; 

 Requiring re-notification by SQGs and LQGs; 

 Revising the regulations for labeling and marking of containers, tanks, drip pads, and 

containment buildings when accumulating hazardous wastes; 

 Revising the closure provisions for LQGs; 

 Updating the preparedness, prevention, planning and emergency procedures provisions 

for SQGs and LQGs; 

 Revising the provisions for satellite accumulation areas (SAA) for SQGs and LQGs; 

 Revising the SQG regulations for accumulating hazardous waste on drip pads; 

 Deleting obsolete regulations that refer to the Performance Track program;

 Revising the biennial reporting provisions for LQGs; 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 10 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

 Adding a provision that hazardous waste generators are prohibited from disposing liquid 

hazardous waste in landfills.

These proposed changes to the generator regulations in part 262 are discussed in section 

VIII of this preamble. 

D. Proposed Addition to 40 CFR Part 262 for Generators that Temporarily Change Generator 

Category as a Result of an Episodic Event

To provide greater program flexibility, EPA is proposing to allow a CESQG or an SQG 

to maintain its existing generator category in the event of either a planned or unplanned episodic 

event in which the CESQG or SQG generates a quantity of hazardous waste in a calendar month 

that would otherwise bump the CESQG or SQG into a more stringent generator regulatory 

category (e.g., CESQG to either an SQG or an LQG, or alternatively an SQG to an LQG), 

provided certain conditions are met. Because these events would be temporary and episodic in 

nature, the generator would only be allowed to take advantage of this provision once every 

calendar year. Generators may also petition EPA or the authorized state to request permission to 

initiate a second episodic event during a calendar year.

This proposed addition to the regulations is discussed in section IX of this preamble. 

E. Proposed Revisions to 40 CFR Part 263—Standards Applicable to Transporters of Hazardous 

Waste

To improve environmental protection, EPA is proposing to revise the marking and 

labeling standards for transporters to be consistent with the proposed marking and labeling 

standards for containers for SQGs, LQGs, and satellite accumulation areas elsewhere in this 

proposal. 

These proposed changes are discussed in section X of this preamble. 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 11 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ F. Proposed Revisions to 40 CFR Parts 264 and 265—Standards for Owners and Operators of 

Hazardous Waste TSDFs and Interim Status Standards for Owners and Operators of Hazardous 

Waste TSDFs

The Agency is proposing modifications to the biennial reporting provisions in 40 CFR 

parts 264 and 265 to specifically include facilities receiving hazardous wastes without a permit, 

such as reclaimers that do not store incoming materials and reclaimers operating under a 

variance. EPA is also proposing to modify the special conditions for ignitable and reactive 

wastes at § 265.176 to allow LQGs to apply for a waiver from their local fire departments if they 

are unable to meet the condition that hazardous waste be stored at least 15 meters (50 feet) from 

the site’s boundary. 

These proposed changes are discussed in section XI of this preamble.

G. Proposed Revisions to 40 CFR Part 268—Land Disposal Restrictions

EPA is proposing to revise the marking and labeling requirements at § 268.50 to be 

consistent with the proposed marking and labeling standards for containers at SQGs, LQGs, and 

satellite accumulation areas elsewhere in this proposal. These proposed changes are discussed in 

section XII of this preamble. 

H. Proposed Reorganization of Hazardous Waste Generator Regulations

In addition to the proposed program changes outlined in this notice, EPA is proposing to 

reorganize the regulations for hazardous waste generators to consolidate most of the generator 

regulations into 40 CFR part 262 and reduce cross-referencing where possible. EPA believes this 

reorganization will assist CESQGs, SQGs, and LQGs in understanding their regulatory 

responsibilities.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 12 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ The reorganization is discussed after completion of the other proposed changes in this 

proposal so that readers can more easily compare the existing regulatory framework with this 

proposal. 

The reorganization is discussed in section XIII of this preamble. 

I. Technical Corrections and Conforming Changes to 40 CFR Parts 260–265, 270, 273, and 279

The Agency is proposing a number of technical corrections and conforming changes to 

correct existing errors in the hazardous waste generator regulations, as well as in other areas of 

the hazardous waste regulations, such as typographical mistakes, incorrect or outdated citations, 

and omissions of text. In addition, EPA is proposing technical changes to address the impacts of 

reorganizing the hazardous waste regulations. 

These changes are discussed in section XIV of this preamble. 

J. Request for Comment on Use of Electronic Tools to Streamline Hazardous Waste Reporting 

and Recordkeeping Requirements

As part of this proposed rule, the Agency is also exploring the feasibility of using 

electronic tools to streamline the hazardous waste recordkeeping and reporting requirements. 

EPA requests comment on the usefulness of such tools to help the regulated community comply 

with the recordkeeping and reporting requirements in the RCRA hazardous waste regulations.

This request for comment is discussed in section XV of this preamble.

V. Background

A. History of the Hazardous Waste Generator Program

As originally promulgated in 1980, the basic regulatory framework for hazardous waste 

generators consisted of two categories: small quantity generators (SQGs) and large quantity 

generators (LQGs). Since then, there have been three major changes. First, as a result of the 

Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984, a rule was promulgated that created 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 13 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

a third generator category by splitting the SQG category in two and creating conditionally 

exempt small quantity generators (CESQGs). (51 FR 10146, March 24, 1986).4

Second, also as a result of HSWA, the Land Disposal Restriction (LDRs) regulations 

required hazardous waste generators to ensure that their hazardous waste either met a specified 

treatment standard or performance standard, or, if not, was treated to specified concentrations or 

performance standards prior to land disposal.5

Third, the Agency modified the Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest regulations and 

associated manifest document used to track hazardous waste from a generator’s site to its 

ultimate disposition (70 FR 10776, March 4, 2005; 70 FR 35034, June 16, 2005). The revisions 

to the Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest standardized the content and appearance of the 

manifest form, made the forms available from a greater number of sources, and adopted new 

procedures for tracking certain types of hazardous waste shipments with the manifest. Otherwise, 

the changes that have occurred to the hazardous waste generator regulatory program have been, 

for the most part, relatively minor.

B. The Current Hazardous Waste Generator Regulations

1. Determining Generator Category

The hazardous waste generator regulatory program is structured around the quantity of 

hazardous waste a person (or generator) generates in a calendar month (by site). The quantity of 

hazardous waste generated determines a generator’s category for the month, which in turn 

determines what requirements are applicable to the generator (including determining how the 

generator can qualify for an exemption from other regulations, such as having to get a storage 

permit). 

 

4 Known as the Small Quantity Generator rule.

5 Land Disposal Restrictions, http://www.epa.gov/osw/hazard/tsd/ldr/index.htm.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 14 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ The three generator categories—LQG, SQG, and CESQG— are based on the quantities 

of acute and non-acute hazardous waste generated by the generator. 

For non-acute hazardous waste, the thresholds are as follows: 

- LQGs generate 1,000 kilograms or greater of hazardous waste in a calendar month.

- SQGs generate greater than 100 kilograms but less than 1,000 kilograms of hazardous 

waste in a calendar month; and

- CESQGs generate no more than 100 kilograms of hazardous wastes in a calendar 

month.

For acute hazardous waste, the regulations at 40 CFR 261.5(e) state that if a generator 

generates acute hazardous waste in a calendar month in quantities greater than a total of one 

kilogram of acute hazardous waste listed in §§ 261.31 or 261.33(e) or a total of 100 kilograms of 

any residue or contaminated soil, waste, or other debris resulting from the cleanup of a spill of 

any acute hazardous waste listed in §§ 261.31 or 261.33(e), then all quantities of that acute 

hazardous waste are subject to the full set of LQG requirements.6

In order to determine what requirements are applicable, a generator must first identify all 

the hazardous waste it generates subject to regulation using the four-step process below:

1. Determine whether the material is a solid waste subject to RCRA regulations at § 

261.2; 

2. If the material is a solid waste, then determine whether the solid waste is specifically 

excluded from regulation by examining the exclusions at § 261.4(a) and (b);

 

6 One of the technical corrections EPA is proposing with this rulemaking is to replace the word “waste” in this 

definition with the word “water.” This would return the definition to what it read before it was changed, we 

believe accidentally, in 1985. See section XIV of this preamble for a discussion of the proposed technical 

corrections. 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 15 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ 3. If not excluded, then determine whether the solid waste is a hazardous waste at § 

262.11; and 

4. If the material is a hazardous waste, then determine whether it is exempt from being 

counted towards its generator category by reviewing the exemptions at § 261.5(c) and 

(d).

Once that is completed, the generator must count the amount of regulated hazardous waste 

generated during the calendar month to determine its generator category.

Once a generator determines its generator category for the month, it then must manage 

the hazardous waste it generates and accumulates in a manner that complies with specified 

requirements, including requirements that qualify the generator for an exemption from having to 

obtain a permit.7 Therefore, determining a generator’s category is essential to determining the 

part 262 requirements a generator must comply with.

2. Types of Generator Standards: Requirements and Conditions

When RCRA was enacted in 1976, the law did not explicitly address whether a permit 

would be required for generators accumulating hazardous wastes. However, it was clear in the 

legislative history of RCRA that Congress did not want to interfere with commerce and impose 

permitting requirements on every generator who accumulated hazardous wastes. Therefore, 

Congress deferred to EPA in how it would reconcile this issue. When EPA developed the 

regulations applicable to generators, it established two types of requirements for 

them: (1) independent requirements that would apply to generators regardless of whether or not 

they choose to obtain an exemption from the permit requirement and from other applicable 

 

7 Note that the exemptions provided by the regulations are not just for a permit exemption. The exemption is also 

from RCRA section 3004(a)(1)-(6) regulations; i.e., the regulations in 262 and 264, 267, etc.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 16 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

requirements (“independent requirements”); and (2) requirements to meet in order to achieve the 

specific purpose of obtaining such an exemption from permitting and from other applicable 

requirements (“conditions for exemption”).

An “independent requirement” in the context of the RCRA hazardous waste generator 

regulations is an unqualified standard. For example, the requirements of 40 CFR part 262 subpart 

D (Recordkeeping and Reporting), and the requirements in §§ 262.30 through 262.33, are among 

the independent requirements applicable to generators. If a generator violates an independent 

requirement, it may be subject to an enforcement action under section 3008 of RCRA. Unlike 

conditions for an exemption, independent requirements have no direct relationship to the 

option of obtaining or maintaining an exemption from certain RCRA regulations.

8

A “condition for exemption,” on the other hand, is a prerequisite that is necessary to 

occur or be met in order for something else to take legal effect. Thus, in the context of the RCRA 

hazardous waste generator regulations, a RCRA “condition for exemption” is a requirement that 

a generator must comply with in order to obtain or maintain an exemption from RCRA 

permitting requirements in part 270 and the requirements in part 264 or part 265. For example, a 

conditionally exempt small quantity generators (CESQGs) must meet a condition for exemption

in order for its hazardous waste to be exempt from the requirements in parts 124, 262 through 

266, 268, or 270, or from any requirement for notification under section 3010 of RCRA for its 

hazardous waste. A CESQG that fails to meet all of the conditions for an exemption for CESQGs 

in § 261.5 would now be subject to all these requirements. 

 

8 EPA is proposing to make the distinction between “independent requirement” and “condition for exemption” more 

clear by placing definitions of these terms in the regulations at § 262.1. See section VIII.A.1 for additional 

discussion. 

Deleted: , or 124,
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 17 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ The conditions for exemption available to large and small quantity generators are found 

in the current regulations at § 262.34.9 Should a small quantity generator or large quantity 

generator fail to meet all the conditions for an exemption, it would not only be subject to having 

to obtain a permit under part 270 but also to the requirements in part 264 or part 265.

As stated above, complying with the conditions for exemption is not required because it 

is not mandatory for a generator to obtain and maintain an exemption from RCRA permitting 

requirements. Instead, when a generator does not comply with a certain condition or conditions 

for exemption, the consequence is that the generator either fails to obtain—or loses—the 

exemption from the RCRA permitting requirements (unless it has complied with all of the 

conditions for a different applicable exemption from those requirements). This means that, 

because there is no exemption, permitting requirements become applicable to the generator for 

the same time period that the generator is out of compliance with the conditions for exemption. 

3. Types of Conditional Exemptions

The current RCRA regulations afford generators two types of conditional exemptions: (1) 

an exemption from most of the 40 CFR part 262 requirements, available to farmers and to 

CESQGs, and (2) an exemption from 40 CFR parts 124, 264–268, 270, and 279 requirements, 

and from the notification requirements of section 3010 of RCRA, available to SQGs and LQGs 

that accumulate hazardous waste. 

The first conditional exemption is available only to farmers and CESQGs. With respect to 

farmers, this conditional exemption is found in part 262 subpart G and is limited to waste 

pesticides that are RCRA hazardous wastes that the farmer generates, provided the farmer triple 

rinses each emptied pesticide container in accordance with § 261.7(b)(3) and disposes of the 

 

9 Under this proposed rule these conditions for exemption would be moved to proposed sections §§ 262.14 through 

262.17.

Deleted: , and 124
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 18 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ pesticide residues on his own farm in a manner consistent with the disposal instructions on the 

pesticide label. This exemption from part 262 relieves farmers and CESQGs from the 

requirements related specifically to the generation, management, and transportation of hazardous 

wastes provided such waste meets certain conditions, including that the waste is treated or 

disposed of on site or is delivered to an off-site treatment, storage, or disposal facility which is 

located in the United States and is one of seven specified types of facilities. Provided the farmer 

and/or CESQG meets these conditions, they are not subject to the 40 CFR part 262, as well as 

other hazardous waste management requirements.

The second type of conditional exemption relieves generators that accumulate hazardous 

waste from the permitting and other requirements applicable to treatment, storage, and disposal 

facilities and makes temporary accumulation of hazardous waste possible for generators and is 

found in § 262.34. In EPA’s experience, virtually every generator accumulates or stores its 

hazardous waste on site for some period before sending it to either an on-site or off-site 

permitted or interim status treatment storage or disposal facility (TSDF) or other RCRAauthorized disposal site. However, provided the generator meets the conditions in this 

exemption, they would not be subject to the permitting requirements and operations requirements 

applicable to a hazardous waste management facility for storage, or a “storage facility.” 10

The generator regulations in part 262, therefore, are made up of both independent 

requirements and conditions for exemptions. All generators are subject to at least one 

requirement in part 262 (i.e., making a hazardous waste determination); however, the total 

number of part 262 requirements applicable to a generator depends on the total quantity of 

hazardous waste it generates each calendar month and therefore what generator category it is for 

that month. All generators can choose the extent of their regulation under RCRA by either 

 

10 See 40 CFR 270.2 (“hazardous waste management facility”). 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 19 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

meeting, or failing to meet, all of the conditions for an exemption from regulation as a storage Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

facility.

Of all the generators, LGQs are subject to the most independent requirements. The 

current regulations at § 262.34(a) are quite clear for LQGs where they state that a generator may 

accumulate hazardous waste on-site for 90 days or less without a permit or without having 

interim status, provided that it meets the listed conditions for the exemption. These conditions 

relate to the technical requirements for containers, tanks, drip pads, and containment buildings, 

in addition to marking and labeling of containers, closure, personnel training, emergency 

response procedures, and contingency planning. In effect, should an LQG not meet any one of 

these conditions, it would be operating illegally without a permit. The same regulatory 

framework applies to CESQGs and SQGs, but with different conditions.

SQGs have fewer independent requirements and conditions for exemption than LQGs. In 

particular, SQGs have longer accumulation time limits than LQGs (up to 180 days, or 270 days, 

if the hazardous waste is shipped greater than 200 miles) and have fewer regulations related to 

personnel training, contingency planning, and emergency response procedures. SQGs also do not 

have to submit biennial reports. However, like LQGs, SQGs must obtain an EPA ID number, 

meet the technical standards for containers and tanks, comply with manifesting regulations, and 

send their hazardous waste to a RCRA permitted hazardous waste TSDF. In addition, SQGs may 

not accumulate more than 6,000 kilograms of hazardous waste at any one time.

CESQGs have very few conditions. Specifically, in order for CESQGs to be excluded 

from 40 CFR parts 124, 262 through 266, 268, and 270 and the notification requirements of 

section 3010 of RCRA, they must (1) make correct hazardous waste determinations;11 (2) 

 

11 Making a correct hazardous waste determination is a condition for the exemption for CESQGs but an independent 

requirement for SQGs and LQGs.

Deleted: , “Except as provided in paragraphs (d), (e), and (f) of 

this section,

Deleted: :” and goes on to list the

Deleted: , and 124
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 20 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

accumulate no more than 1,000 kilograms of hazardous waste at any one time or accumulate no 

more than the quantities of acute hazardous wastes set forth in § 261.5(e)(1) or (e)(2) at any one 

time; and (3) send hazardous waste to one of seven specified types of facilities described in §§ 

261.5(e)(3) and 261.5(g)(3).12 All other regulations applicable to LQGs and SQGs are not 

applicable to CESQGs that comply with these conditions.

Table 1 below provides a summary of requirements that represent conditions for an 

exemption for CESQGs, SQGs and LQGs. As noted in the table, the category “Conditions for 

Exemption” applies to such requirements as the quantity generated and accumulated, 

accumulation time, the technical standards for containers, tanks, drip pads and containment 

buildings, marking and labeling, personnel training, contingency planning and emergency 

procedures. It is important to note that a waste determination is an independent requirement for 

SQGs and LQGs, whereas it is a condition for exemption for CESQGs as defined at § 261.5(f)(1) 

and (g)(1).13

Table 1 – Summary of Generator Regulations

CESQGs SQGs LQGs

Generator Category

≤100 kg/month

≤1 kg/month of acute 

hazardous waste

≤100 kg/month of acute spill 

residue or soil

§§ 261.5(a) and (e)

>100 and <1,000 kg/month

≤1 kg/month of acute 

hazardous waste

≤100 kg/month of acute spill 

residue or soil

§ 262.34(d) and § 261.5(e)

≥1,000 kg/month

>1 kg/month of acute 

hazardous waste

>100 kg/month of acute spill 

residue or soil

Part 262.34 (a) and § 261.5(e)

 

12 A CESQG may send hazardous waste to the following types of facilities: (1) a hazardous waste facility permitted 

by EPA; (2) an interim status hazardous waste facility; (3) a hazardous waste facility permitted by an authorized 

state; (4) a facility permitted, licensed or registered by a state to manage municipal solid waste; (5) a facility 

permitted, licensed or registered by a state to manage non-municipal non-hazardous solid waste; (6) a facility which 

beneficially uses or reuses or legitimacy recycles or reclaims its wastes or treats its waste prior to beneficial use or 

reuse or legitimacy recycling or reclamation; or (7) universal waste handler or destination facility subject to the 

requirements in 40 CFR part 273. As discussed below, the Agency is proposing an eighth location where CESQGs 

would be allowed to send their hazardous wastes (e.g., an LQG within the same company provided specified 

conditions are met).

13 Note that state hazardous waste programs may be more stringent than the federal program and also broader in 

scope.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 21 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

Conditions for Exemption

Hazardous Waste 

Determination

§ 262.11 N/A N/A

On-Site 

Accumulation 

Quantity

≤1,000 kg

≤1 kg acute

≤100 kg of acute spill residue 

or soil

§§261.5(f)(2) and (g)(2)

≤6,000 kg

§ 262.34(d)(1)

No limit

Satellite 

accumulation 

Not applicable § 262.34 (c)(1) and (2) § 262.34 (c)(1) and (2)

Accumulation Time 

Limits

None ≤180 days or ≤270 days (if 

greater than 200 miles)

§ 262.34(d)(2) and (3)

≤90 days

§ 262.34(a)

Accumulation

Conditions

§ 261.5 (f)(1)-(2); § 261.5 

(g)(1) and (2)

Reduced standards for the 

management of hazardous 

waste in containers and tanks

§§ 262.34(d)(2) and (3)

Full compliance for 

management of hazardous 

waste in containers, tanks, drip 

pads, or containment buildings

§ 262.34(a)

Sent To: 

One of seven state approved 

or RCRA permitted/interim 

status facilities

§§ 261.5(f)(3) and (g)(3)

RCRA permitted/interim status 

facility

RCRA permitted/interim status 

facility

Personnel Training Not required Reduced training standards

§ 262.34(d)(5)(iii)

Full compliance with § 265.16 

§ 262.34(a)(4)

Marking and 

labeling

Not required § 262.34 (a)(2) and (3) § 262.34 (a)(2) and (3)

Contingency Plan Not required Reduced standards 

§ 262.34(d)(5)(i)

Full compliance with part 265 

subparts C and D 

§ 262.34(a)(4)

Emergency 

Procedures 

Not required Part 265 subpart C

§ 262.34(d)(5)(iv)

Full compliance with part 265 

subparts C and D 

§ 262.34(a)(4)

Closure

Not required Not required § 262.34 (a)(1) (iv)/

§§265.111 and 265.114.

Land Disposal 

Restrictions

Not required 40 CFR 262.34 (a)(4)/40 CFR 

part 268

40 CFR 262.34 (a)(4)/40 CFR 

part 268

C. Hazardous Waste Generator Demographics 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 22 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

In 2011, 16,447 generators reported generating approximately 34.4 million tons of 

hazardous waste.14 Of the 16,447 generators, 14,262 were LQGs and 2,185 were non-LQGs, 

meaning these entities submitted a biennial report but did not report generating sufficient 

amounts of hazardous waste to be categorized as an LQG. 

The fifty largest hazardous waste generators reported generating 28.7 million tons, or 83 

percent of the total. Additionally, 3,148 generators, or approximately 19 percent of the total 

reporting universe, reported generating only one hazardous waste stream, while 8,435 generators, 

or 51 percent of the total reporting universe, reported generating between one and five hazardous 

waste streams. 15 At the other extreme were 843 generators, or 5 percent of the total reporting 

universe, that reported generating 41 or more hazardous waste streams. These generators 

included sites from the waste treatment industry as well as academic and industrial laboratories.

Of the 34.4 million tons of hazardous waste generated in 2011, 30.5 million tons, or 89 

percent, were generated in just five industrial sectors: Basic Chemical Manufacturing (which 

alone accounted for 55 percent of the hazardous waste generated); Petroleum and Coal Products 

Manufacturing, Waste Treatment and Disposal; Pesticide, Fertilizer, and Other Chemical 

Manufacturing; and Iron and Steel Mills and Ferroalloy Manufacturing. 

Unlike LQGs, who must submit a biennial report every two years describing the types 

and quantities of hazardous waste generated and its subsequent disposition, SQGs are not 

required to provide such information to the Agency. Consequently, the Agency lacks the level of 

detail for SQGs that is available for LQGs. However, based on a review of biennial report data 

provided by treatment, storage, and disposal facilities (which must report waste received from all 

 

14 EPA’s National Biennial RCRA Hazardous Waste Report (Based on 2011 Data) 

http://www.epa.gov/osw/inforesources/data/br11/index.htm.

15 Summary of the number of GM forms submitted by LQGs in 2011 Biennial Report. 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 23 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ hazardous waste generators) and site identification data (from SQGs obtaining an EPA ID 

number), EPA estimates the number of SQGs to range from 45,762 to 59,702.16

Because CESQGs are not required to obtain a RCRA ID, the information available to the 

Agency is limited to those states that require their CESQGs to obtain a RCRA ID. Therefore, in 

estimating the size of the CESQG universe, the Agency developed a methodology that 

extrapolated the size of the CESQG universes based on the data available in those states that 

require CESQGs to obtain a RCRA ID. We first established a ratio of SQGs to CESQGs in those 

states where information was available on the CESQG universe and then used that ratio to 

estimate the size of a state’s CESQG universe where CESQG information was unavailable. 

Using this methodology, EPA currently estimates the size of the CESQG universe to range from 

302,807 to 425,752.17 However, we believe this range most likely underestimates the true 

number of CESQGs because we believe there are many more facilities unaware of their 

obligations under the RCRA hazardous waste regulations and the need to conduct correct 

hazardous waste determinations. 

D. 2004 Hazardous Waste Generator Program Evaluation

On April 22, 2004, EPA published the “Hazardous Waste Generator Program 

Evaluation” Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (69 FR 21800). The purpose of the April 

2004 notice was to seek information from stakeholders in order to evaluate the effectiveness of 

 

16 Estimate of Total Number of SQGs and CESQGs, July 2013. We estimated this range by doing the following: (1) 

identifying hazardous waste generators who shipped hazardous waste off site in 2007, 2009, and 2011 using the 

Biennial Report’s WR form and (2) cross walking that universe with data received from Site ID forms to identify the 

“active” SQG universe. The high-end estimate represents SQGs who shipped hazardous waste off site in any one of 

the three Biennial Report cycles, since many hazardous waste generators fluctuate in the regulatory status from year 

to year. The estimate also includes new SQGs who notified after the 2011 biennial report. The low-end represents 

SQGs who shipped hazardous waste off site in 2011 only as well as new SQG notifiers. A copy of the results can be 

found in the docket to this proposal.

17 Methodology to Estimate the National Number of CESQGs, July 2013.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 24 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

the RCRA hazardous waste generator program, as well as to identify areas for potential 

improvement. 

Specifically, the April 2004 notice requested that stakeholders answer a series of 

questions in a number of areas of the hazardous waste generator regulatory program, including 

program effectiveness, improvements, redundancy, innovation, performance, burden reduction, 

pollution prevention and recycling, and priorities. Questions included whether the existing 

RCRA hazardous waste generator regulatory program is meeting its goal of protecting human 

health and the environment and whether the regulations are easy to understand, including 

questions asking which specific regulations are unclear or have been interpreted inconsistently. 

EPA also included in the April 2004 notice a list of program areas that had previously 

been identified by stakeholders as needing improvement. These program areas included waste 

accumulation times, waste generation quantity thresholds and counting rules for LQGs, SQGs, 

and CESQGs, episodic generator provisions, waste sampling and testing, waste management 

standards, satellite accumulation, generator accumulation and treatment in containers or tanks, 

closure standards for generators, co-generator standards, RCRA identification numbers, waste 

minimization, and land disposal restriction requirements applicable to generators. During the 

comment period, EPA also held four public meetings in May 2004 in Boston, MA, Chicago, IL, 

Washington, DC, and Seattle, WA.

In response to the April 2004 notice and the May 2004 public meetings, EPA received 

over 500 comments from 55 organizations and individuals, including 9 states, 5 federal agencies, 

2 universities, 12 trade associations, and 22 companies.18 Overall, EPA’s effort to seek 

 

18 Public comments can be found in Docket ID No. RCRA–2003–0014.

Deleted: .

Deleted: .
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 25 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

information regarding the effectiveness of the hazardous waste generator regulatory program 

received a favorable response. 

Many commenters agreed that implementation of the generator regulations has made 

significant improvements in managing hazardous waste and has resulted in fewer releases of 

hazardous waste to the environment. However, many commenters identified several 

improvements they believed needed to be made to regulations. Specifically, they suggested the 

following:

 Simplify the regulations to make them more user-friendly and easy to understand, 

such as eliminating cross-referencing and codifying guidance into regulations, 

where applicable.

 Improve the efficiency of the program by clearing up ambiguities and removing 

potential redundancies, such as defining what constitutes a closed container and 

clarifying parts of the satellite accumulation regulations.

 Provide greater flexibility in the regulations, such as regulations that allow for 

episodic generation and that allow wastes to be shipped from remote locations to 

a centralized location to enable better waste management.

 Require re-notification to ensure better data quality to support compliance 

monitoring of SQG facilities (state commenters). 

 Improve regulations on hazardous waste determinations, including when it is 

appropriate to use generator knowledge instead of analytical testing (Industry 

commenters).

In response to the comments on the April 2004 notice, EPA took several actions to help 

improve the hazardous waste generator program in order to foster better compliance. Actions 

Deleted: 2004 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 26 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

included (1) improving EPA’s website for the hazardous waste generator regulatory program,19

(2) developing an online guide to the hazardous waste generator regulations,20 (3) releasing 

guidance for management of hazardous waste in closed containers,21 (4) issuing a technical 

corrections direct final rule,22 and (5) conducting an evaluation of the hazardous waste 

determination program.23 While these actions have helped to improve the hazardous waste 

generator program, the Agency recognizes that many of the changes identified by commenters 

can only be made through rulemaking. Thus, this proposed rule requests comment on a number 

of changes to the hazardous waste generator regulations.

VI. Proposed Revisions to 40 CFR Part 260—Hazardous Waste Management System: 

General

A. Generator Category Definitions (40 CFR 260.10)

EPA is proposing to codify definitions for the three categories of hazardous waste 

generators (CESQG, SQG and LQG). The term “small quantity generator” is codified in the 

regulations, but is outdated, whereas “conditionally exempt small quantity generator” and “large 

quantity generator” have been used within the RCRA hazardous waste community for several 

decades, but their exact definitions have not been codified. The regulations differentiate between

the categories by stating the quantity of hazardous waste generated in a calendar month in each 

instance. 

 

19 http://www.epa.gov/osw/hazard/generation/index.htm.

20 “Hazardous Waste Generator Regulations: A User-Friendly Reference Document” 

(http://www.epa.gov/osw/hazard/downloads/tool2012.pdf).

21 Memorandum from Betsy Devlin, Acting Director of EPA’s Waste Recovery and Waste Management Division, to 

RCRA Division Directors, “Closed Container Guidance: Questions and Answers (Qs & As), November 3, 2011, 

incorporating Memorandum from Robert Dellinger, Director of EPA’s Materials Recovery and Waste Management. 

Division, to RCRA Division Directors, “Guidance on 40 CFR 264.173(a) and 265.173(a): Closed Containers,” 

December 3, 2009, RCRA Online 14826.

22 75 FR 12989, March 18, 2010.

23 Hazardous Waste Determination Program Evaluation, April 2013 (http://www.epa.gov/evaluate/pdf/waste/hazwaste-determination.pdf).
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 27 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

As the terms are most commonly used, Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ CESQGs are generators that generate 100 

kilograms or less of non-acute hazardous waste and 1 kilogram or less of acute hazardous waste 

in a calendar month; SQGs are generators that generate greater than 100 kilograms of non-acute 

hazardous waste but less than 1,000 kilograms of non-acute hazardous waste and 1 kilogram or 

less of acute hazardous waste in a calendar month; and LQGs are generators that generate 1,000 

kilograms or greater of non-acute hazardous waste and/or greater than 1 kilogram of acute 

hazardous waste in a calendar month. However, generators often fail to consider residues from 

the cleanup of a spill of acute hazardous waste or do not count both the non-acute and acute 

hazardous waste they generate in a calendar month. The proposed definitions have been drafted 

to incorporate all the various categories of hazardous wastes—that is, acute hazardous waste, 

non-acute hazardous waste, and residues for the cleanup of a spill of acute hazardous wastes.

Considering the significance a generator’s category has in determining the appropriate set 

of regulations that the generator must comply with, the Agency believes it is necessary to define 

the specific hazardous waste generator categories in the regulations. 

The proposed generator category definitions are based solely on the amount of hazardous 

waste generated. While EPA acknowledges that accumulation limits may trigger different 

generator regulations, those accumulation limits do not affect a generator’s generation category, 

which is based on how much hazardous waste is generated in a calendar month. 

Therefore, EPA is proposing to add the following definitions to § 260.10:

Very small quantity generator is a generator who generates less than or equal to 

the following amounts in a calendar month: (1) 100 kilograms (220 lbs) of non- acute 

hazardous waste; and (2) 1 kilogram (2.2 lbs) of acute hazardous waste listed in § 261.31 

or § 261.33(e); and (3) 100 kilograms (220 lbs) of any residue or contaminated soil, 

Deleted: A

Deleted: B

Deleted: C
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 28 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

water, or other debris resulting from the cleanup of a spill, into or on any land or water, Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

of any acute hazardous waste listed in sections § 261.31 or § 261.33(e); 24

Small quantity generator is a generator who generates the following amounts in a 

calendar month: (1) greater than 100 kilograms (220 lbs) but less than 1000 kilograms 

(2200 pounds) of non-acute hazardous waste; and (2) less than or equal to 1 kilogram (2.2 

lbs) of acute hazardous wastes listed in § 261.31 or § 261.33(e); and (3) less than or equal 

to 100 kilograms (220 lbs) of any residue or contaminated soil, water, or other debris 

resulting from the cleanup of a spill, into or on any land or water, of any acute hazardous 

waste listed in § 261.31 or § 261.33(e);

Large quantity generator is a generator who generates any of the following 

amounts in a calendar month: (1) greater than or equal to 1000 kilograms (2200 lbs) of 

non-acute hazardous waste; or (2) greater than 1 kilogram (2.2 lbs) of acute hazardous 

waste listed in § 261.31 or § 261.33(e); or (3) greater than 100 kilograms (220 lbs) of any 

residue or contaminated soil, water, or other debris resulting from the cleanup of a spill, 

into or on any land or water, of any acute hazardous waste listed in § 261.31 or § 

261.33(e).

EPA is also proposing to add definitions to § 260.10 for the terms “acute 

hazardous waste” and “non-acute hazardous waste,” which are both used in the above 

definitions for generator categories. The term acute hazardous waste is used for 

hazardous wastes that are particularly dangerous to human health and is defined as those 

hazardous wastes that meet the listing criteria in § 261.11(a)(2) and are therefore listed in 

 

24 As part of this rulemaking, EPA is proposing to change the name of “conditionally exempt small quantity 

generator (CESQG)” to “very small quantity generator (VSQG).” This change is discussed in section VI.B. For the 

sake of a consistent discussion, however, EPA is using the term CESQG throughout the preamble unless directly 

stating the content of the proposed regulatory text. 

Deleted: A

Deleted: B

Deleted: C

Deleted: A

Deleted: B

Deleted: C
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 29 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ § 261.31 and assigned the hazard code of (H) or are listed in § 261.33(e), also known as 

the RCRA P-list. In this proposal, any distinctions between acute and non-acute 

hazardous wastes are only being made in the context of determining generator category. 

Generally the term “hazardous waste” refers to both acute and non-acute hazardous 

waste. 

As previously stated, the definitions of generator categories are based solely on 

the amount of hazardous waste generated in a calendar month and are generally 

consistent with how the regulated community understands the various categories based 

on EPA’s references in existing publications to how much hazardous waste is generated 

in a calendar month. Additionally, these definitions reflect that a generator may only have 

one generator category in a calendar month even if the generator generates both acute 

hazardous waste and non-acute hazardous waste in the same calendar month, a topic 

discussed further in section VII.A.

In practice, five waste generation scenarios exist with different combinations of acute 

hazardous waste, non-acute hazardous waste, and residues from the cleanup of spills of acute 

hazardous waste generated in a calendar month. These scenarios are summarized below in Table 

2. 25

Table 2

Generator Categories Based on Quantity of Waste Generated

#

Quantity of acute 

hazardous waste 

generated in a calendar 

month

Quantity of nonacute hazardous 

waste generated 

in a calendar 

month

Quantity of 

residues from the 

cleanup of acute 

hazardous waste 

generated in a 

calendar month

Generator 

Category

1 > 1 kg Any amount Any amount LQG

 

25 EPA is proposing to include this table in the regulations as Table 1 in § 262.13. 

Deleted: se

Deleted: of acute hazardous waste
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 30 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

2 Any amount ≥ 1,000 kg Any amount LQG

3 Any amount Any amount > 100 kg LQG

4 ≤ 1 kg > 100 kg and < 

1,000 kg

≤ 100 kg SQG

5 ≤ 1 kg ≤ 100 kg ≤ 100 kg VSQG/(CESQ

G)

Note: When calculating generator categories, the quantities of acute hazardous waste and 

non-acute hazardous waste are considered separately.

In three of the scenarios in Table 2, the generator would be an LQG, in one scenario the 

generator would be an SQG, and in one scenario the generator would be a CESQG. In the first 

three scenarios, the generator is an LQG if it generates any of the following in a calendar month, 

regardless of the amounts of hazardous waste generated in the other categories: more than 1 

kilogram of acute hazardous waste, 1,000 kilograms or more of non-acute hazardous waste, or 

more than 100 kilograms of residues from the cleanup of a spill of acute hazardous waste. This is 

made clear in the proposed regulatory definition of “LQG” by use of the word “any” and by the 

use of the word “or” between (1), (2), and (3). In these scenarios, the generator would need to 

comply with the independent requirements and conditions for the exemption for LQGs (specified 

in proposed § 262.17), as well as any applicable regulations for SAAs at § 262.15.

In the fourth scenario, the generator would be an SQG if, in a calendar month, it 

generates greater than 100 kilograms and less than 1,000 kilograms of non-acute hazardous 

waste and also 1 kilogram or less of acute hazardous waste and 100 kilograms or less of residues 

from the cleanup of a spill of acute hazardous waste.26 The proposed regulatory text expresses 

this scenario by using the word “and” between (1), (2), and (3) in the definition of SQG. As a 

result, the generator would need to comply with the independent requirements and conditions for 

 

26 Amount of hazardous waste accumulated on site at any given time can also impact what regulations the SQG must 

comply with. 

Deleted: A

Deleted: B

Deleted: C

Deleted: A

Deleted: B

Deleted: C
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 31 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

the exemption for SQGs (specified in proposed § 262.16), as well as any applicable regulations 

for SAAs at § 262.15.

Finally, in the fifth scenario, if a generator generates 1 kilogram or less of acute 

hazardous waste and 100 kilograms or less of non-acute hazardous waste and 100 kilograms or 

less of residue from the cleanup of a spill of acute hazardous waste, then the generator is a 

CESQG for that calendar month. The proposed regulatory text expresses this scenario by using 

the word “and” between (1), (2), and (3) in the definition. As a result, the generator would need 

to comply with the conditions for the exemption for CESQGs (specified in proposed § 262.14).27

EPA requests comment on these proposed changes.

Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is not affected by the 

proposed reorganization. 

B. Renaming CESQG to VSQG (40 CFR 260.10)

Currently only one of the three generator categories—CESQG—uses the words 

“conditionally exempt” in its title; however both SQGs and LQGs, which typically accumulate 

hazardous waste on site, are also conditionally exempt from obtaining a RCRA permit or 

complying with the interim status standards in 40 CFR parts 264 and 265, respectively, provided 

they meet certain conditions. In addition, while CESQGs are subject to few conditions for 

exemption, they are still considered hazardous waste generators, and must comply with the 

relevant regulations. If a CESQG does not comply, it would be out of compliance with the 

hazardous waste regulations and potentially subject to enforcement action. This inconsistency in 

terminology has caused some confusion throughout the regulated community. Therefore, EPA is 

proposing to change the name of the category from “conditionally exempt small quantity 

 

27 EPA is proposing to move the CESQG regulations from § 261.5 to § 262.14. See section XIII of this preamble for 

more information.

Deleted: A

Deleted: B

Deleted: C
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 32 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ generator (CESQG)” to “very small quantity generator (VSQG).” EPA notes that this change is 

consistent with some states, such as Minnesota, which are already using the VSQG term. All 

regulations applicable to a CESQG would apply to a VSQG.

EPA requests comment on this proposed change.

Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is not affected by the proposed 

reorganization.

C. Definition of Central Accumulation Area (40 CFR 260.10)

The Agency is also proposing to define the term “central accumulation area” in § 260.10 

to mean any on-site hazardous waste accumulation area with hazardous waste accumulating in 

units subject to either § 262.16 (for small quantity generators) or § 262.17 (for large quantity 

generators). 28 The definition also states that a central accumulation area at an eligible academic 

entity that chooses to be subject to part 262 subpart K must also comply with § 262.211 when 

accumulating unwanted material and/or hazardous waste.

LQGs may accumulate hazardous waste on site without a permit or complying with the 

interim status standards for up to 90 days provided they comply with § 262.34(a) and SQGs may 

do the same for up to 180 days, provided they comply with § 262.34(d)–(f).29 Over the years, 

stakeholders have used different terms to refer to these on-site generator accumulation areas, 

including “generator accumulation areas,” “less-than-90-day areas,” and “less-than-180-day 

areas.” In December 2008, EPA promulgated a definition of “central accumulation area” in 

subpart K of part 262 to refer to these types of areas (“Academic Labs Rule”; 73 FR 72912, 

December 1, 2008). As explained in the preamble to the proposed Academic Labs Rule, EPA 

 

28 This proposed definition includes citations to new sections of part 262 that we are proposing to include as part of 

the reorganization of the generator regulations. The existing small quantity generator regulations are at §§

262.34(d)–(f) and the existing large quantity generator regulations are at § 262.34(a). For a full discussion of the 

proposed reorganization, see section XIII of the preamble. 

29 As noted previously, SQGs can accumulate hazardous waste for up to 270 days if they ship the hazardous waste 

greater than 200 miles. 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 33 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

codified the term “central accumulation area” for the sake of convenience to distinguish these 

types of accumulation areas from satellite accumulation areas and laboratories, which are both 

subject to different regulations than central accumulation areas are. At the time, EPA 

promulgated the term in § 262.200 and indicated that the definition only applied to part 262 

subpart K. Since then, the term has become more widely used and EPA is now proposing to 

define the term “central accumulation area” in § 260.10 to allow its use when referring to 

generator accumulation areas that are not operating under part 262 subpart K.

EPA emphasizes that we are proposing to define the term “central accumulation area” 

only as a matter of convenience. It is helpful for both the regulated community and the 

implementers to have a common term to use when referring to locations where generators 

accumulate hazardous waste other than satellite accumulation areas. Furthermore, the term is 

helpful for EPA to use when writing regulations, preamble, and guidance. The addition of the 

term does not establish any new regulatory standards or burden on generators. Generators may 

continue to have more than one central accumulation area on site; the use of the word “central” 

does not limit a generator to one area. 

We have rephrased the proposed definition from how it currently appears in part 262 

subpart K to make this clearer. The definition, as it appears in part 262 subpart K, currently states 

that a central accumulation area means an on-site hazardous waste accumulation area. We are 

proposing to revise the definition to say that a central accumulation area means any on-site 

hazardous waste accumulation area. Further, the use of the word “central” does not indicate that 

the generator must establish the central accumulation area in a location that is centrally located 

within the site. The use of the word “central” is used because many generators use a central 

accumulation area to consolidate or centralize their hazardous waste from multiple satellite 

accumulation areas prior to shipment off-site.

Deleted: “

Deleted: ...” 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 34 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ Because the proposed definition to be added to § 260.10 will now reference part 262 

subpart K (the definition states that a central accumulation area at an eligible academic entity 

that chooses to be subject to part 262 subpart K must also comply with § 262.211 when 

accumulating unwanted material and/or hazardous waste), we are proposing to remove the 

definition of central accumulation area from part 262 subpart K. 

Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is affected by the proposed 

reorganization. The definition of “central accumulation area” references other regulatory 

citations that are part of the proposed reorganization. The reorganization is discussed in section 

XIII of this preamble.

VII. Proposed Revisions to 40 CFR Part 261—Identification and Listing of Hazardous 

Wastes

EPA is proposing four changes to the regulations currently in 40 CFR part 261. First, the 

Agency is proposing to add a new provision that would explain what generator category would 

apply to a hazardous waste generator that generates both acute and non-acute hazardous waste in 

the same calendar month. Second, EPA is proposing to modify the regulations at §§ 261.5(h) and 

(i) and 261.3 that address the mixing of a non-hazardous waste with a hazardous waste. Third, 

the Agency is proposing to amend §§ 261.5(f)(3) and (g)(3) to allow a CESQG to send its 

hazardous waste to an LQG under control of the same person. Finally, the Agency is proposing 

to amend § 261.6(c) to require biennial reporting for owners or operators of facilities that recycle 

hazardous waste without storing them before they are recycled. 

A. Generators that Generate Both Acute and Non-acute Hazardous Waste in the Same Calendar 

Month (40 CFR 261.5)

When a generator is determining what category it belongs in, it must consider three 

relevant categories of hazardous waste: hazardous waste (or non-acute hazardous waste, for 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 35 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ purposes of this discussion), acute hazardous waste, and residues from the cleanup of a spill of 

acute hazardous waste. EPA is proposing regulations that make clear what a generator’s category 

is for a calendar month when it generates any combination of non-acute hazardous waste, acute 

hazardous waste, and residues from the cleanup of a spill of acute hazardous waste in the same 

calendar month and which set of regulations apply. Currently, the RCRA hazardous waste 

regulations do not address situations involving combinations of wastes and Agency statements 

about this issue have been inconsistent. 

According to the November 19,1980, FR notice discussing changes to § 261.5, “the 

regulation is revised to clarify that the lower exclusion levels for acutely hazardous waste apply 

only to generators who otherwise are deemed small quantity generators.30 The Agency believes 

that a generator who produces more than 1,000 kilograms of hazardous waste a month and is 

therefore subject to full regulation should handle his acutely hazardous wastes in the same 

manner as his other wastes” (45 FR 76622). 

In other words, if a generator generates 1,000 kilograms or more of non-acute hazardous 

waste in a calendar month, it would be considered an LQG for that month and therefore should, 

for both practical and environmental reasons, manage the acute hazardous wastes under the same 

regulations as an LQG (even if the amount of acute hazardous waste generated in a calendar 

month is less than 1 kilogram). However, a provision regarding how to determine one’s 

generator category when generating a combination of non-acute hazardous waste, acute 

hazardous waste, and residues from the cleanup of a spill of acute hazardous waste was not 

included in the regulatory language. 

 

30 Note: Prior to 1986, there were only two categories of generators: large quantity generators and small quantity 

generators. When the small quantity generator regulations were promulgated in 1986, a third category of generators, 

conditionally exempt small quantity generators, was established.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 36 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ Conversely, in a September 2, 1987, letter concerning the accumulation time for acute 

hazardous waste and non-acute hazardous waste in the same month, the Agency stated, “Acute 

hazardous wastes are counted and managed separately from hazardous wastes (§261.5(e)). In the 

example given, the generator would have 90 days to send the acute hazardous waste off site, but 

would have 180 days for the non-acute hazardous waste.”31 These different Agency 

interpretations have ultimately led to confusion regarding which regulations apply to hazardous 

waste generators that generate different categories of hazardous waste in the same calendar 

month. 

The Agency believes the more practical approach is for a generator to be in only one 

generator category in a calendar month, the approach outlined in the 1980 Federal Register 

discussion. When a generator generating only non-acute hazardous wastes counts its waste, it 

must consider the total amount of all its different kinds of non-acute hazardous waste, not the 

amount of each type of hazardous waste (such as, type of waste identified by individual EPA 

hazardous waste number) separately. Considering the combination of acute hazardous wastes, 

non-acute hazardous wastes, and residues from the cleanup of a spill of acute hazardous waste 

generated in a calendar month when determining what category a generator belongs to follows 

the same logic. In addition, many of the regulations for LQGs are site-wide, such as submitting 

the biennial report, developing a contingency plan, and conducting training, and therefore a 

generator would still have to comply with these conditions and would not gain a significant 

economic advantage by having more than one generator category. We note that many EPA 

 

31 Letter from Marcia E. Williams, Director of EPA’s Office of Solid Waste, to Fred Hutchison, University of Idaho,

September 2, 1987, RCRA Online 11288. Deleted: #
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 37 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ Regions and states have taken this same approach in implementing the RCRA hazardous waste 

program. 

This is why EPA is proposing to expressly state in the definitions which generator 

category would apply to hazardous waste generators that generate a combination of non-acute 

hazardous waste, acute hazardous waste, and/or residues from the cleanup of spills of acute 

hazardous waste in a calendar month as discussed in section VI of this preamble. In conjunction 

with these changes, EPA is proposing a new section § 262.13 explaining how a generator 

determines which generator category applies to it. This topic is fully discussed in section VIII of 

this preamble. The Agency is soliciting comment on the proposal to revise the existing 

regulations to indicate that a generator can only have one generator category in a calendar month, 

according to the quantity of acute and non-acute hazardous waste it generates. 

Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is affected by the proposed 

reorganization. All the proposed definitions of generator categories would be found in § 260.10. 

The reorganization is discussed in section XIII of this preamble.

B. Generators that Mix a Non-hazardous Waste with a Hazardous Waste 

EPA is proposing to modify how mixtures of non-hazardous waste and hazardous waste 

would affect the generator categories of CESQGs and SQGs. Additionally, EPA is proposing to 

add a reference in 40 CFR part 262 that assists LQGs with finding the regulations applicable to 

mixing hazardous waste with non-hazardous waste.

1. CESQGs that Mix a Non-hazardous Waste with a Hazardous Waste (40 CFR 261.5(h) and (i)) 

With the partitioning of the original 1980 SQG regulations into two sets of regulations for 

CESQGs and SQGs in 1986, potential confusion surrounds the current reading and 

implementation of § 261.5(h) and (i). When the regulations at § 261.5(h) and (i) were 

promulgated on November 19, 1980 (45 FR 76623), the title of § 261.5 was “Special 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 38 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

requirements for hazardous waste generated by small quantity generators.” At that time, there 

were only two hazardous waste generator categories: LQGs and SQGs. Prior to the promulgation 

of the new SQG regulations on March 24, 1986 (52 FR 10146), an SQG was a generator who 

generates less than 1,000 kilograms of hazardous waste in a calendar month; the regulations did 

not make a distinction between SQGs and CESQGs at that time. Prior to 1986, paragraphs (h) 

and (i) of section 261.5 read as follows: 

“(h) Hazardous waste subject to the reduced requirements of this section may be mixed 

with non-hazardous waste and remain subject to these reduced requirements even though the 

resultant mixture exceeds the quantity limitations identified in this section, unless the mixture 

meets any of the characteristics of hazardous waste identified in subpart C.

(i) If a small quantity generator mixes a solid waste with a hazardous waste that exceeds a 

quantity exclusion level of this section, the mixture is subject to full regulation.”

With the promulgation of the SQG regulations in 1986, SQGs were broken into two 

classes of generators: (1) CESQGs (generators who generate up to 100 kilograms of hazardous 

waste in a calendar month) and (2) SQGs (generators who generate greater than 100 kilograms 

and less than 1,000 kilograms of hazardous waste in a calendar month). The regulations for 

CESQGs were established at § 261.5, while those for SQGs were moved to § 262.34 (d)–(f). 

Similarly the title of § 261.5 was changed to read, “Special requirements for hazardous waste 

generated by conditionally exempt small quantity generators” [emphasis added]. The language of 

§ 261.5(h) did not change when the SQG regulations were promulgated, while paragraph (i) was 

modified slightly to read: “If any person mixes a solid waste with a hazardous waste that exceeds 

a quantity exclusion level of this section, the mixture is subject to full regulation.” The phrase 

“any person” was substituted for the phrase “small quantity generator.” 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 39 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ EPA believes that the readability of these regulations could be improved, particularly for 

paragraph (i), to expressly state whether the regulation applies to situations where the hazardous 

waste being mixed exceeds the CESQG quantity exclusion level or to situations where the

mixture exceeds the CESQG quantity exclusion level. Additionally, “full regulation,” could be 

interpreted as regulation commensurate with an LQG, even if the resultant mixture exceeds 

CESQG quantity levels, but not SQG quantity levels.

For these reasons, EPA is proposing to modify the language regarding mixing of nonhazardous waste with hazardous waste by CESQGs (which is currently located at § 261.5 (h) and 

(i)) to read as follows: 

Mixing hazardous waste with non-hazardous waste. A very small quantity generator may mix 

listed or characteristic hazardous waste with non-hazardous waste and remain eligible for the 

conditional exemption applicable to a very small quantity generator provided that either 

paragraph (1) or (2) below is met:32

(1) The mixture does not exhibit any of the characteristics of hazardous waste identified 

in subpart C of part 261 of this chapter; or

(2) If the mixture does exhibit one or more characteristics of a hazardous waste identified 

in subpart C of part 261 of this chapter, the mixture does not cause the generator to exceed the 

very small quantity generator calendar month quantity limits identified in the definition of very 

small quantity generator at § 260.10.33 If the mixture does exceed the quantity limit for a very 

small quantity generator, the very small quantity generator, to remain exempt from the 

permitting and interim status standards, must meet the conditions for exemption applicable to 

either a small quantity generator or large quantity generator according to the quantity of the 

 

32 EPA is proposing to use the term “very small quantity generator (VSQG)” in place of “conditionally exempt small 

quantity generator.” See section VI.B of this preamble for more information.

33 This regulatory citation is the proposed new location for the definition of a VSQG. See section VI.B of this 

preamble for more information.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 40 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ hazardous waste it generated in a calendar month, including the resultant mixture and the total 

quantity the very small quantity generator accumulated on site.

For example, if a CESQG mixed 50 kilograms of characteristic hazardous waste with 100 

kilograms of non-hazardous waste and the resultant 150 kilograms mixture did not retain the 

characteristics of hazardous waste, then the generator could still comply with the CESQG 

conditions. However, if a CESQG mixed 50 kilograms of characteristic hazardous waste with 

100 kilograms of non-hazardous waste and the resultant 150 kilograms mixture did retain the 

characteristics of hazardous waste, then the generator would no longer be a CESQG, but an

SQG, and the generator would need to comply with all applicable regulations for an SQG for that 

calendar month. Similarly, if a CESQG mixed 50 kilograms of characteristic hazardous waste 

with 1,000 kilograms of non-hazardous waste and the resultant 1,050 kilograms mixture retained 

the characteristics of hazardous waste, then the generator would no longer be a CESQG, but an 

LQG, and the generator would need to comply with all applicable regulations for an LQG for 

that calendar month.34

EPA notes that the regulations covering mixing of hazardous and non-hazardous waste

would apply regardless of when the initial wastes are generated. In other words, when a 

generator mixes a hazardous waste with a non-hazardous waste, the generator may have changed 

the properties of the hazardous waste and thus must make a hazardous waste determination on 

the resultant mixture. For example, if a CESQG mixed 50 kilograms of characteristic hazardous 

waste that it generated at different points over the last three months with 100 kilograms of nonhazardous waste and the resultant mixture did retain the characteristics of hazardous waste, then 

the generator would no longer be a CESQG at the point that the mixture was generated, but an 

 

34 Additionally, the generator would have to comply with the SQG or LQG regulations for as long as its total 

quantity of hazardous waste accumulated on-site was greater than or equal to the CESQG accumulation limit of 

1000 kg.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 41 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ SQG, and the generator would need to comply with all applicable regulations for an SQG for that 

calendar month during which the mixing occurred. The time period for the accumulation of 

wastes begins at the point the mixture is generated and the generator becomes a SQG.

In modifying the language, the Agency is not changing the intent of the existing 

hazardous waste regulations, but is improving the readability of the regulatory text. Thus, this 

change in language does not impose any additional burden on CESQGs. 

Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is affected by the proposed 

reorganization. The reorganization of the generator regulations would move these provisions to 

262.14(b). The reorganization is discussed in section XIII of this preamble. 

2. LQGs and SQGs that Mix a Non-hazardous Waste with a Hazardous Waste (40 CFR 261.3)

LQGs and SQGs are subject to the mixture rule in § 261.3. In short, the mixture rule has 

three parts: (1) if non-hazardous waste is mixed with listed hazardous waste, then the mixture is 

considered the listed hazardous waste (§§ 261.3(a)(2)(iv) and 261.3(b)(2)); (2) if non-hazardous 

waste is mixed with listed hazardous waste that is listed solely for exhibiting an ignitability, 

corrosivity, or reactivity characteristic in part 261 subpart C (such as F003 hazardous waste), 

then the mixture is considered hazardous waste only if it exhibits a characteristic (§ 

261.3(g)(2)(i)); and (3) if non-hazardous waste is mixed with characteristic hazardous waste, 

then the mixture is considered hazardous waste only if the mixture exhibits a characteristic of 

hazardous waste (§ 261.3(b)(3)) (45 FR 33066, May 19, 1980; 66 FR 27266, May 16, 2001). 

However, because the mixture rule appears in § 261.3 and the SQG and LQG regulations 

appear in 40 CFR part 262, the regulated community may not totally appreciate how the mixture 

rules apply to SQGs and LQGs. Therefore, EPA is proposing to include references in §§ 

262.16(c) and 262.17(f) that assist SQGs and LQGs with finding the regulations applicable to the 

mixing of hazardous waste with non-hazardous waste. Additionally, EPA wants to modify the 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 42 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

regulations to improve understanding of what circumstances an SQG may mix hazardous waste 

with non-hazardous waste and still remain subject to the SQG requirements.

Specifically, EPA is proposing to add a provision for SQGs as follows: Mixing hazardous 

waste with non-hazardous waste. A small quantity generator may mix its hazardous waste with 

non-hazardous waste and remain eligible for the conditional exemption applicable to a small 

quantity generator provided that either paragraph (1) or (2), below, is met. 

(1) The mixture is not a hazardous waste according to the mixture rules in §§ 

261.3(a)(2)(iv), 261.3(b)(2), 261.3(b)(3), and 261.3(g)(2)(i); or

(2) If the mixture is a hazardous waste, the mixture does not cause the generator to 

exceed the small quantity generator quantity limits for a calendar month, as identified in the 

definition of small quantity generator at § 260.10.35 If the mixture does exceed the small quantity 

generator quantity limits then to remain exempt from the permitting and interim status standards, 

a small quantity generator must meet the conditions for exemption applicable to a large quantity 

generator.

For example, if an SQG mixed 100 kilograms of listed hazardous waste (that was not 

listed solely for the ignitability, corrosivity and/or reactivity characteristic) with 1,000 kilograms 

of non-hazardous waste, then the resultant 1,100 kilogram mixture would be considered a listed 

hazardous waste and the generator would no longer be an SQG, but rather an LQG. The 

generator would then need to comply with all applicable regulations for an LQG for that month 

during which the SQG mixed the waste.36

However, if an SQG mixed 100 kilograms of either characteristic hazardous waste or 

listed hazardous waste (that was listed solely for the ignitability, corrosivity and/or reactivity 

 

35 This regulatory citation is the proposed new location for the definition of SQG. See section VIII of this preamble 

for more information.

36 Additionally, a generator would have to comply with the LQG regulations for as long as its total quantity of 

hazardous waste accumulated on-site was greater than or equal to the SQG accumulation limit of 6000 kg.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 43 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

characteristic) with 1,000 kilograms of non-hazardous waste and the resultant 1,100 kilograms 

mixture did not retain the characteristics of hazardous waste, then the generator could still 

comply with the SQG regulations because the resulting mixture would no longer be considered a 

hazardous waste (although it would still be subject to applicable land disposal restriction 

requirements in 40 CFR part 268).

EPA is also proposing to add a provision for LQGs that reads as follows: Mixing 

hazardous waste with non-hazardous waste. Mixtures of hazardous waste with non-hazardous 

waste are subject to the mixture rule in §§ 261.3(a)(2)(iv), §261.3(b)(2), 261.3(b)(3), and 

261.3(g)(2)(i).

In modifying the language, the Agency is not changing the existing hazardous waste 

regulations, but is improving the readability of the regulatory text. Thus, this change does not 

impose any additional burden on SQGs and LQGs

Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is affected by the proposed 

reorganization. EPA is proposing to address the mixing regulations for SQGs at § 262.16(c) and 

the mixing regulations for LQGs at § 262.17(f). The reorganization is discussed in section XIII 

of this preamble.

3. Request for Comment

The Agency requests comment on whether the proposed language for CESQGs and 

SQGs improves the understanding of the regulations regarding how mixtures of non-hazardous 

waste and hazardous waste would affect the generator category for CESQGs and SQGs. 

Additionally, EPA requests comment on whether the proposed language for LQGs assists LQGs 

in more easily finding the applicable mixture regulations.

C. Allowing CESQGs to Send Hazardous Waste to LQGs Under the Control of the Same Person
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 44 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ EPA is proposing to allow CESQGs to send their hazardous waste to an LQG that is 

under the control of the same person, as defined at § 260.10, provided both the CESQG and LQG 

comply with specified conditions.37

1. Purpose 

Under the existing regulations at § 261.5(f)(3) for acute hazardous waste, and § 

261.5(g)(3) for non-acute hazardous waste, a CESQG may either treat or dispose of its hazardous 

waste on site or ensure delivery to an off-site treatment, storage, or disposal facility, which can 

include RCRA-permitted hazardous waste facilities, interim status hazardous waste facilities, 

municipal solid waste facilities, non-municipal non-hazardous waste facilities, recycling 

facilities, and universal waste handlers. The existing CESQG regulations do not allow a 

generator to send its hazardous waste off site to another generator, unless the receiving generator 

has a storage permit or is otherwise one of the types of facilities cited above. Thus, persons

looking to reduce their overall environmental liability across multiple sites are prohibited from 

managing their CESQG hazardous waste at one or more of their LQG sites without first 

obtaining a permit or complying with the interim status standards, both of which would increase 

regulatory burden and costs.

EPA believes that allowing CESQGs to send their hazardous waste to an LQG that is 

under the control of the same person would provide an additional option for CESQGs to manage

their hazardous waste. It may also improve the management of that hazardous waste for four 

main reasons. 

First, LQGs are subject to more stringent management conditions, such as accumulation 

time, labeling, training, emergency planning, and containment standards, as compared to 

 

37 EPA is also proposing to rename “CESQG” to “VSQG” (very small quantity generator) (see section VIII.A.1 of 

the preamble for more information). However, for this discussion, we continue to use CESQG as this term is most 

familiar to the regulated community.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 45 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ CESQGs. In addition, LQGs may only transport hazardous waste to a RCRA-permitted or 

interim status hazardous waste TSDF, which in turn, is subject to more stringent management 

standards than the municipal or non-municipal solid waste facilities that CESQGs are allowed to 

use. Therefore, allowing hazardous waste generated by a CESQG to be sent to an LQG under the 

control of the same person could improve overall oversight and management of the hazardous 

waste and enable more effective environmental protection. Furthermore, a company, because of 

economies of scale, may reduce its overall waste management costs, as well as its potential 

financial liabilities for hazardous waste it generates at CESQG facilities, as it would be handled 

under the more comprehensive LQG and TSDF regulatory programs. 

Second, whereas LQGs have up to 90 days to accumulate hazardous waste in compliance 

with all the LQG conditions for exemption without having to obtain a RCRA storage permit or 

comply with all the other standards otherwise applicable, CESQGs may accumulate up to 1,000 

kilograms of non-acute hazardous waste or up to 1 kilogram of acute hazardous waste or up to 

100 kilograms of residues from the cleanup of a spill of acute hazardous waste without any time 

constraint. Even though the amount of hazardous waste allowed on site by CESQGs at any one 

time is limited, the longer that hazardous waste is accumulated on site the greater the risk of 

adverse impacts to human health and the environment. Allowing CESQGs to send their 

hazardous waste to an LQG under the control of the same person may reduce the overall time 

that the CESQG accumulates hazardous waste on site, which would further reduce the potential 

risk to human health and the environment.

Third, this proposed change would allow consolidation by an LQG of hazardous waste 

generated by several CESQGs under its control, which increases the potential opportunities for 

hazardous waste recycling by the LQG.

Deleted: (

Deleted: )
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 46 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ Fourth, this proposed change would give companies flexibility in allocating labor and 

resources required to manage the company’s total quantity of hazardous waste generated, as the 

company would be allowed to consolidate its hazardous waste from CESQG facilities at its LQG 

sites. 

EPA has received requests over the years from industry for the regulations to allow 

CESQGs to send their hazardous waste to LQGs for consolidation. EPA believes that such a 

change in the regulations would enable generators to employ greater control over the 

management of their hazardous waste, thereby resulting in improved efficiency and reduced 

liability for the generator. EPA believes numerous situations exist where CESQGs and LQGs 

under the same ownership could take advantage of this proposed change. For example, Army 

National Guard and Reserve units that may be CESQGs would have the opportunity to send their 

hazardous waste to an active Army base that is an LQG. The same situation applies to Air Force, 

Navy, and Marine Corps reserve units as well. Additionally, many universities have engineering, 

medical, and science laboratories located on campus, with each laboratory building possibly 

qualifying as a CESQG. Allowing different laboratory buildings within a university or industrial 

environment that are CESQGs to send their hazardous waste to another university or industrial 

entity that is an LQG would provide both economic and environmental benefits. Furthermore, 

utilities, retailers, and remote oil and gas production facilities also represent examples of 

industrial sectors that may realize benefits from the intra-company transfer of hazardous waste 

from CESQGs to LQGs. 

2. Scope 

As discussed above, EPA is proposing to amend the regulations under the existing 

regulatory framework at §§ 261.5(f)(3) and (g)(3) to allow CESQGs to send hazardous waste to 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 47 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

an LQG under the control of the same person.38 “Person” is defined in § 260.10 to mean an 

individual, trust, firm, joint stock company, federal agency, corporation (including a government 

corporation), partnership, association, state, municipality, commission, political subdivision of a 

state or any interstate body. For the purposes of this section, “control” would mean the power to 

direct the policies of the facility, whether by the ownership of stock, voting rights, or otherwise, 

except that contractors who operate facilities on behalf of a different person shall not be deemed 

to “control” such facilities. 

The Agency believes limiting transfers to facilities under control of the same person is 

appropriate because it ensures common control is maintained over both facilities and takes 

advantage of strong incentives to ensure the hazardous waste is safely managed. Additionally, if 

a CESQG sends hazardous waste to an LQG under the control of the same person, the LQG is 

likely to be familiar with the type of hazardous waste generated by the CESQG. Furthermore, 

questions regarding liability and responsibility for such hazardous waste are likely to be clearer 

than is the case with facilities from unrelated companies.

EPA is also proposing some labeling and marking standards for CESQG waste being 

transferred to LQGs under the control of the same person under this provision. Note that aside 

from these two conditions, the same standards for management of CESQG waste apply to 

materials going to an LQG under this provision as to other CESQG waste, including the 

exemption from the requirement to ship using a hazardous waste manifest. DOT shipping 

requirements do still apply. 

3. Conditions for Exemption

Condition for Exemption for CESQGs

 

38 EPA is proposing to reorganize the regulations for CESQGs by moving provisions from § 261.5 to § 262.14. The 

proposed revision to allow CESQGs to send hazardous waste to LQGs under control of the same person can be 

found at § 262.14(b)(3)(viii).

Deleted: “

Deleted: ”

Deleted: 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 48 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

As part of this provision, CESQGs would be required to meet the following Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶conditions 

for exemption, proposed at § 262.14(a)(viii).

Under control of the same person. As described above, the CESQG and the LQG would have to 

be under control of the same person, according to the existing definitions in § 260.10.

Labeling and marking of containers. The Agency is proposing that a CESQG transferring waste 

to an LQG under the control of the same person label its containers with (1) the words “Very 

small quantity generator hazardous waste”; (2) other words that identify the contents of the 

containers (e.g., the name of the chemical(s), such as “acetone” or “methylene dichloride” or the 

type or class of chemical, such as “organic solvents” or “halogenated organic solvents” or, as 

applicable, the proper shipping name and technical name markings used to comply with 

Department of Transportation (DOT) requirements at 49 CFR part 172 subpart D); (3) an 

indication of the hazards of the contents of the container, such as the applicable hazardous waste 

characteristic(s) (i.e., ignitable, corrosive, reactive, toxic); a hazard class label consistent with the 

DOT requirements at 49 CFR part 172 subpart E (labeling); a label consistent with the 

Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Hazard Communication Standard at 29 

CFR 1920.1200; a chemical hazard label consistent with the National Fire Protection Association 

(NFPA) code 704; a hazard pictogram consistent with the United Nations’ Globally Harmonized 

System (GHS); or any other marking and labeling commonly used nationwide in commerce that 

would alert workers and emergency responders to the nature of the hazards associated with the 

contents of the containers; and (4) the applicable EPA hazardous waste number(s) (EPA 

hazardous waste code) in subparts C and D of part 261 to assist the receiving LQG in managing 

the hazardous waste received. This condition is also consistent with the changes proposed for 

labeling and marking of containers in the revisions to 40 CFR parts 262, 263, and 268 discussed 

in various sections elsewhere in this preamble. A generator subject to DOT shipper/carrier 

Deleted: Department of Transportation (

Deleted: )
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 49 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ packaging requirements should be familiar with and aware of the marking requirements at 49 

CFR 172.301 and 49 CFR 172.304, as well as prohibited labeling and label visibility 

requirements at 49 CFR 172.401 and 172.406, respectively. 

Because the hazardous waste generated and accumulated by a CESQG will be 

subsequently sent off site to an LQG under the same company in compliance with DOT 

hazardous material regulations, the CESQG may choose to use an appropriate DOT proper 

shipping name found in the 49 CFR 172.101 hazardous materials table to identify the contents of 

the container while hazardous waste is accumulating on site. That way, the generator will fulfill 

EPA and DOT requirements simultaneously; however, EPA is not proposing to require the use of 

the DOT shipping names while the hazardous waste is accumulating on site. We only suggest 

that the DOT shipping name may be one way that some generators may choose to identify the 

contents of the container. 

EPA believes use of the DOT marking requirement should be sufficient in many 

situations involving DOT Class 9 hazardous materials that are also hazardous waste, with the 

DOT shipping name ending in N.O.S. (not otherwise specified). As noted at 49 CFR 172.301 (b), 

generators using a DOT shipping name ending in N.O.S. must also provide the technical name of 

the hazardous material in association with the proper shipping name. However, the Agency is 

requesting comment on examples of when the DOT shipping name would not meet EPA’s intent 

of “identifying the contents of the container” and suggestions for addressing this situation.

EPA believes that CESQGs should label and mark containers of hazardous waste sent to 

LQGs in order to communicate the contents of the containers to facility personnel that can then 

safely manage the hazardous waste in compliance with the LQG regulations. Since CESQGs 

already must make a hazardous waste determination to determine if and what types of hazardous 

waste they generate, the Agency does not believe this condition will pose an undue burden. In 

Deleted: nd

Deleted: 

Deleted: In some cases, the DOT shipping name may not be 

sufficient to identify the contents of the container. For example, if a 

hazardous waste is a DOT Class 9 hazardous material, and the DOT 

shipping name ends isn N.O.S. (not otherwise specified), the DOT 

proper shipping name may not be sufficient. The Agency is 

requesting comment on other examples of when the DOT shipping 

name would not meet EPA’s intent of “identifying the contents of 

the container” and suggestions for addressing this situation.¶
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 50 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

fact, if the CESQG was not required to provide this information, the burden to the LQG 

receiving the hazardous waste may increase because the LQG would then have to do so. 

Conditions for Exemption for LQGs

EPA is proposing that LQGs receiving hazardous waste from CESQGs under the control 

of the same person comply with the following conditions for exemption, all proposed at § 

262.17(g). 

a. Notification. EPA is proposing that LQGs receiving hazardous waste from CESQGs under the 

control of the same person submit a notification to EPA or their authorized state using EPA form 

8700-12 (i.e., the Site Identification (Site ID) form) 30 days prior to receiving the first shipment 

of hazardous waste from the CESQG. LQGs would be required to identify in the Comments 

section of the Site ID form the name(s), site address(es), and contact information for the 

CESQG(s) that will be transferring hazardous waste to the LQG. LQGs would also be required to 

submit an updated Site ID form within 30 days should the name, site address, or contact 

information for the CESQG change.

Notification in this instance serves to inform the regulatory authorities of which LQGs are 

receiving hazardous waste from which CESQGs under control of the same person. The Agency 

believes notification is necessary in order to communicate to inspectors the origin of the 

hazardous waste received by the LQG and to ensure that the received shipment is managed in 

compliance with the conditions of the provision. EPA also believes that notification by the LQG, 

rather than notification by the CESQG, is more efficient and less burdensome, because LQGs are 

already required to submit Site ID forms as part of obtaining a RCRA Identification Number and 

as part of the biennial reporting process. Additionally, it is more efficient for one LQG to notify 

on behalf of many CESQGs.

Deleted: that fact would most likely increase 

Deleted: that is under control of the same person 

Deleted: y

Deleted: ¶
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 51 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ EPA has recently made available an electronic interface for states and the regulated 

community to use to submit Site ID forms electronically, which will further reduce burden on 

LQGs. Facilities should check with their states regarding whether their state will use EPA’s 

electronic submittal process.

b. Recordkeeping. LQGs would be required to maintain records for three years from the date the 

hazardous waste was received from the CESQG with the following information:

- The name, site address, and contact information for each CESQG; and

- A description of each waste shipment received from the CESQG, including the 

quantity, EPA hazardous waste number(s) of each waste received, and the date the 

hazardous waste was received. 

EPA believes recordkeeping is necessary to ensure the requirement that the CESQG and 

LQG are under control of the same person is met, as well as to ensure that the hazardous waste 

from the CESQG is managed according to the other conditions for exemption of this provision, 

such as that LQGs are receiving shipments of hazardous waste from CESQGs in quantities 

commensurate with the CESQG’s generator category. EPA believes this recordkeeping condition 

could be fulfilled through routine business records, such as a bill of lading, and would not 

present undue burden to the LQG. Additionally, the LQG could use this information in order to 

report the hazardous waste from the CESQG on its biennial report forms.

c. Labeling and marking of containers. The Agency is proposing that LQGs comply with the 

labeling and marking conditions for exemption under proposed § 262.17(a)(5), including the date 

accumulation started (i.e., the date the hazardous waste was received from the CESQG). (Note: 

These are the same proposed standards that CESQGs must comply with in labeling and marking 

containers that they send to LQGs, as discussed above.) If the LQG is consolidating incoming 

hazardous waste from a CESQG with either its own hazardous waste or with hazardous waste 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 52 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

from another CESQG, the LQG would be required to mark each container with the earliest date 

any hazardous waste in the container was accumulated on site. 

Because the LQG must manage the hazardous waste it receives from CESQGs according 

to the LQG regulations, EPA believes that the same labeling and marking regulations should 

apply to hazardous waste from a CESQG that is accumulated and managed by an LQG. EPA 

believes that it is important that employees, transporters, downstream handlers, emergency 

personnel, EPA, and the states know as much as possible about the potential hazards of the 

contents in containers that LQGs accumulate, transport, and manage.

d. Waste management. Under this proposal, an LQG would be required to manage all incoming 

hazardous waste from a CESQG in compliance with the regulations applicable to its LQG 

generator category. In other words, there would be no difference in how the hazardous waste 

from a CESQG was managed relative to the management of the LQG’s own hazardous waste, 

although hazardous waste from a CESQG would not be eligible for management under the 

satellite accumulation regulations (proposed § 262.15).

4. Biennial Reporting

An LQG would also be required to report the hazardous waste it receives from CESQGs 

on its biennial report, as required under § 262.41. EPA plans to include a new source code in the 

biennial report instructions (if this provision is made final) that LQGs would use to identify the 

hazardous waste as being received from a CESQG (to differentiate from hazardous waste the 

LQG generates on site). Generators would be required to report hazardous waste they receive

from CESQGs by type of hazardous waste. In other words, if an LQG receives the same type of 

hazardous waste from multiple CESQGs, it would only need to report the total quantity of that 

hazardous waste received from all CESQGs. This provision is consistent with the existing 

provision that LQGs must report information on the quantities and types of hazardous waste they 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 53 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ generate as part of the biennial reporting process. It will also enable states and EPA to better 

understand the additional volumes and types of hazardous wastes managed at an LQG, which 

will assist in prioritizing compliance assistance. 

5. No Maximum Limit of Hazardous Waste LQGs Receive from CESQGs

Because LQGs currently have no maximum limit on the amount of hazardous waste they 

can accumulate, and because the regulations that are applicable to LQGs are protective, the 

Agency believes there is no need to establish a maximum limit on the amount or types of 

hazardous waste that an LQG could receive from CESQGs. In fact, we believe the more 

hazardous waste that is shipped to LQGs, the greater potential for reduced risk, since these 

hazardous wastes would be managed under the more comprehensive hazardous waste 

regulations, as opposed to potentially being sent to non-hazardous waste disposal facilities.

6. Enforcement

EPA believes the proposed conditions to allow CESQGs to send their hazardous waste to 

an LQG under the control of the same person are necessary to ensure protection of human health 

and the environment. Failure to meet one or more of the conditions could lead to potential 

mismanagement of the hazardous waste, potentially resulting in a release of hazardous waste or 

hazardous waste constituents to the environment. Persons taking advantage of the proposed 

provision that fail to meet one or more of the conditions for exemption would be subject to an 

enforcement action under RCRA section 3008 for violations of applicable independent 

requirements in part 264, 265, 267, 268, and 270. EPA and authorized states would also have the 

authority to cease certain transfers of hazardous waste from CESQGs to an LQG in the context 

of an enforcement action. EPA also notes that failure on the part of the LQG to meet one of the

conditions for exemption would not mean that the CESQG is subject to permitting or other
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 54 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

standards in 264, 265, and 270, provided that the CESQG met its conditions for exemption and 

vice versa.

7. Interstate Shipments

Under RCRA, authorized state programs may be more stringent than the federal program 

and thus states may choose not to adopt the proposed provision allowing CESQGs to send their 

hazardous waste to an LQG under the control of the same person. In the case of interstate 

shipments where a CESQG wants to transfer its waste to an LQG located in a different state than 

the CESQG, the CESQG must ensure that both states have adopted the provision in order to ship 

the hazardous waste to an LQG. Additionally, if a CESQG wants to transfer its waste through 

states that have not adopted the proposed provision, these transit states may also impose state 

requirements on the shipment while it is being transported through the state. Therefore, EPA 

recommends that generators contact any states through which the hazardous waste will be 

shipped to ascertain their policy about such shipments.

8. Request for Comment

EPA requests comment regarding its proposal to allow CESQGs to ship their hazardous 

waste to an LQG under the control of the same person.

EPA is also requesting comment on whether to establish a process that would allow an

entity (whether CESQG or LQG) to request approval from its EPA Regional Administrator or 

the authorized state to transfer hazardous waste from CESQGs to LQGs that are not under the 

control of the same person. For example, such inter-company transfers could occur between high 

school laboratories and university laboratories or other waste management companies, such as 

those assisting with school chemical clean-outs. While the Agency believes that this should not 

be allowed as a general matter, we also recognize that there may be instances where such an 

arrangement may be appropriate, and thus, are taking comment on allowing such arrangements 

Deleted: 9

Deleted: ies

Deleted: petition 

Deleted: their
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 55 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ on a case-by-case basis. EPA is interested in whether such inter-company transfers would 

produce the same benefits as for intra-company transfers in enabling greater control over the 

management of CESQG hazardous waste, thereby resulting in improved efficiency and reduced 

liability for the generator. 

The request for approval submitted to the state or Regional office would have to include 

the name, address, and contact information for each entity involved in the arrangement, how the 

entities will assign responsibility for the safe management of the hazardous waste during 

transport to and accumulation by the LQG, as well as a description of the actual practices that 

will be followed by the CESQG and LQG to ensure the safe management of the hazardous 

waste. EPA does not believe that these requests for approval would need publication in the 

Federal Register and, instead, would either be approved or denied by the EPA Regional 

Administrator or the authorized state. If a request is granted by the EPA Regional Administrator 

or the authorized state, the CESQG(s) and LQG would need to comply with the conditions 

discussed above for those CESQGs and LQGs that are “under control” of the same person. In 

addition, the LQG would need to keep a copy of the request for approval, as well as EPA’s or the 

state’s approval for as long as the CESQG sends their hazardous waste to the LQG.

EPA is requesting comment on an additional variation for allowing LQGs to consolidate 

CESQG hazardous waste when the generators are not under the control of the same person with a 

self-implementing request for approval. Under this variation, the implementing agency would 

have sixty days from the date the request was sent to approve or deny it. After sixty days, the 

generator may start consolidating regardless of whether it has heard back from the implementing 

agency. This option provides the state or Regional office the ability to deny requests that pose a 

risk to human health or the environment or that come from entities that have a history of not 

Deleted: petition 

Deleted: petitions 

Deleted: petition 

Deleted: petition
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 56 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

managing waste responsibly, but puts a limit on how long a generator mus Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶t wait for a response to 

its request for approval.

Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is affected by the proposed 

reorganization. The reorganization of the generator regulations would move the conditions for 

CESQGs from § 261.5 to § 262.14 and the conditions for LQGs from § 262.34 to § 262.17. The 

reorganization is discussed in section XIII of this preamble. 

D. Requiring Biennial Reporting for Owners or Operators of Facilities that Recycle Hazardous 

Waste Without Storing It (40 CFR 261.6(c)(2))

EPA is proposing to modify 40 CFR 261.6(c)(2) to require owners or operators of 

facilities that recycle hazardous waste without storing it prior to recycling to comply with the 

biennial reporting requirements at 40 CFR 265.75. Because these entities receive hazardous 

waste using a hazardous waste transporter and hazardous waste manifest, similar to a permitted 

TSDF or a facility with interim status, the Agency is proposing to amend its regulations and 

instructions to specify that such facilities must complete and submit a biennial report to EPA. 

Without this information, the Agency and states may have an incomplete picture of which 

facilities recycle hazardous waste and the quantities of regulated hazardous wastes that are 

recycled, impeding their ability to provide adequate oversight for those facilities. 

The Agency believes that only a few recycling facilities will be affected by this change.

Additionally, considering that most facilities already have sophisticated information systems to 

manage and track incoming shipments of hazardous waste, we believe the burden imposed on 

such facilities should be minimal. 

The Agency requests comment on this proposed change. Additionally, the EPA is 

interested in information regarding whether these facilities already routinely submit biennial 

reports or are required by the states to submit biennial reports.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 57 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is not affected by the proposed 

reorganization.

VIII. Proposed Revisions to 40 CFR Part 262—Standards Applicable to Generators of 

Hazardous Waste

A. Proposed Addition of Terms Used in this Part and Changes to Purpose, Scope, and 

Applicability (40 CFR 262.1 & 262.10) 

As previously discussed, one of the objectives of this proposal is to revise the hazardous 

waste generator regulations to make them more user-friendly and easily understood by both the 

regulated community and federal and state regulators. Currently, the hazardous waste generator 

regulations are located primarily in three different parts of the CFR (40 CFR part 261, 262, and 

265). In some cases, it is difficult to determine what components of the regulations apply to 

different categories of hazardous waste generators. 

The proposed reorganization will address many of these problems by moving the 

regulations at § 261.5 and some of the technical standards of part 265 into part 262 and by 

organizing the regulations based on a generator’s category so generators can more easily 

determine which regulations they are subject to. That is, EPA is proposing that § 262.14 contain 

conditions for exemption for conditionally exempt small quantity generators, that § 262.15 

contain conditions for exemption for satellite accumulation areas, that § 262.16 contain 

conditions for exemption for small quantity generators, and that § 262.17 containing conditions 

for exemption for large quantity generators.

In concert with the reorganization of the generator conditions for exemption, EPA is 

proposing to add some regulatory language to more clearly explain how the regulations work for 

generators and to lay out which provisions the various categories of generators are responsible 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 58 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

for complying with. The proposed addition of § 262.1 and the proposed revisions to § 262.10 are 

meant to achieve these goals. 

1. Proposed Addition of 40 CFR 262.1

One concern regarding the current generator regulations is that they are not sufficiently 

clear about the distinction between the two types of generator requirements: those that a 

generator must meet because it is an entity that generates hazardous waste—independent 

requirements—and those that a generator must meet only if it wants the benefits of an exemption

from RCRA permitting—conditions for exemption. In order to make the regulations clearer 

regarding this distinction, EPA is proposing to include definitions for these terms in a new 

section of the regulations at § 262.1.

The difference between independent requirements and conditions for exemption, as 

discussed previously in this preamble, lies in the nature of each, and in the consequences that 

result when each is not met. An independent requirement is an unqualified or unconditional 

requirement imposed without reference or regard to obtaining an optional exemption from 

regulation. That is, independent requirements must be met whether or not the generator 

accumulates hazardous waste. An independent requirement is applicable and enforceable, 

independent of whether the generator is attempting to obtain an exemption. 

A condition for exemption, on the other hand, is a requirement that is contingent in 

nature, in that it is only necessary to meet in order to obtain an optional exemption from other 

requirements. As an example, the regulations in § 262.34(a) introduce the conditions of the LQG

exemption by stating that the LQG may accumulate hazardous waste on site for 90 days or less 

without a permit or without having interim status, provided that it meets the conditions listed in 

that paragraph.

Deleted: state, “Except as provided in paragraphs (d), (e), and (f) 

of this section, a generator

Formatted: Font: Not Italic

Deleted: ”

Deleted: (emphasis added) and then goes on to list 

Deleted: of the exemption.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 59 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ This distinction is relevant because while an entity can “violate” and be penalized for 

violating an independent requirement, an entity cannot be penalized for not complying with a 

condition for an optional exemption. Instead, if the entity does not comply with the conditions of 

the exemption, that exemption no longer applies and the entity becomes subject to full 

regulation. Violation of an independent requirement, such as an SQG failing to obtain an EPA 

identification number, can result in a notice of violation and enforcement action for that 

particular provision. Noncompliance with a condition for exemption, such as an LQG 

accumulating hazardous waste for more than 90 days, however, can result in an entity losing its 

conditional status and becoming the operator of a non-exempt storage facility subject to the 

applicable requirements for storage facilities in parts 124, 264, 265, 267, 268, 270, and for

generators in part 262.

EPA is proposing to define an “independent requirement” as a requirement of any of part 

262 that states an event, action, or standard that must occur or be met and that applies without 

relation to, or irrespective of, the purpose of obtaining a conditional exemption from a permit or 

having interim status under section 262.14, 262.15, 262.16, or 262.17. 

EPA is proposing to define a “condition for exemption” as any requirement in sections

262.14, 262.15, 262.16, or 262.17, that states an event, action, or standard that must occur or be 

met in order to obtain a conditional exemption from any requirement in parts 124, 262 through 

268, or 270, or from any requirement for notification under section 3010 of RCRA. 

We will be using these terms throughout this preamble to distinguish between these two 

types of provisions for generators. 

EPA is requesting comment on this proposed change to the regulations, particularly 

whether it clarifies implementation of the generator regulations by industry and the regulating 

entities. 

Deleted: 124,

Deleted: , or 124
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 60 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

 Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is not affected by the proposed 

reorganization.

2. Proposed Changes to 40 CFR 262.10(a)

As part of the reorganization of the generator regulations, § 262.10(a), which addresses 

the purpose, scope, and applicability of the hazardous waste generator regulations, will list which 

generator provisions are independent requirements and which are conditions for a generator

exemption from 124, from the applicable standards of parts 264–268, from the permitting 

requirements of part 270, and from section 3010 of RCRA. 

Specifically, EPA is proposing two changes to § 262.10(a): (1) stating that a hazardous 

waste generator is subject to all the applicable independent requirements of part 262 and listing 

those independent requirements and (2) stating that a generator that accumulates hazardous waste 

on site is also considered to be a facility storing hazardous waste unless it meets the conditions 

for one of the generator exemptions in §§ 262.14, 262.15, 262.16, or 262.17. 

a. Independent requirements. As stated above, under the RCRA hazardous waste program, 

certain regulations are independent requirements and certain regulations are conditions for 

exemption from RCRA permitting and the interim status standards. 

To be clear about the distinctions between these types of standards, EPA is proposing to 

state at § 262.10(a)(1) that a person who generates a hazardous waste as defined by 40 CFR part 

261 is subject to all the applicable independent requirements in the subparts and sections listed, 

unless the person is a conditionally exempt small quantity generator (or “very small quantity 

generator,” in the terminology of the proposed rule) that meets the conditions for exemption in § 

262.14. This new addition will reinforce to generators that they must meet these independent 

requirements whether or not they accumulate hazardous waste on site. 

Deleted: and 

Deleted: from 124,
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 61 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ b. Conditional exemption for CESQG, SQG, and LQG. The RCRA hazardous waste 

generator regulations provide generators that accumulate hazardous waste on site with

exemptions from the hazardous waste permitting standards and compliance with interim status 

standards in 40 CFR parts 264 and 265, provided certain conditions are met. 

Therefore, EPA is proposing to state at § 262.10(a)(2) that a generator that accumulates 

hazardous waste on site is also considered a facility that stores hazardous waste, unless it is 

excluded because it meets the conditions of being a generator. The paragraph then lists the 

generator categories and where to find the relevant conditions for each, in § 262.14, § 262.16, or 

§ 262.17.

These proposed changes to § 262.10 do not constitute substantive changes to the 

hazardous waste generator regulations. Rather, these changes simply reorganize the independent 

requirements and conditions for exemption applicable to all hazardous waste generators based on 

their generator category into one section of the regulations. EPA also believes these changes will 

reduce confusion for the regulated community in the context of enforcement actions. It has been 

the Agency’s longstanding position that generators that do not comply with a condition of a 

generator exemption fail to qualify for the exemption and, if they have not qualified for any other 

exemption, they would be considered an operating TSDF without a permit and/or in violation of 

the storage facility operating standards in parts 264 or 265. The Agency believes this proposed 

reorganization will improve the use of and compliance with the regulations.

EPA is requesting comment on these proposed changes.

Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is affected by the proposed 

reorganization. The reorganization is discussed in section XIII of this preamble.

3. Proposed Deletion of § 262.10(c)

Deleted: ,
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 62 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ Section 262.10(c) of the hazardous waste regulations is a provision that describes the 

requirements for a generator who treats, stores, or disposes of hazardous waste on-site and 

includes a list of provisions these generators must comply with. EPA believes that this provision 

in the regulation is outdated and confusing and can be removed. EPA is proposing to delete and 

reserve this paragraph. 

When § 262.10(c) was initially promulgated on February 26, 1980, the hazardous waste 

generator regulations distinguished between the generators that sent hazardous waste to be 

managed off site and those that managed their hazardous waste on site. Generators that sent 

hazardous waste off site could manage it for 90 days in an accumulation area, but generators that 

managed hazardous waste on site were expected to manage it under their permits or under 

interim status regulations. The purpose of § 262.10(c) was to provide the list of requirements that 

generators managing hazardous waste were required to follow in addition to those permits or 

interim status requirements. 

This distinction meant that the two types of generators had very different standards for 

the areas where newly generated hazardous waste was managed. Significantly, generators 

sending hazardous waste off site could easily make physical changes to their accumulation areas, 

whereas a similar generator managing hazardous waste on site under a permit had to go through 

the permit modification process to make the same kind of changes. EPA effectively eliminated 

the distinctions by revising these regulations (45 FR 76624, November 19, 1980 and 47 FR 1248, 

January 11, 1982). The final rule promulgated in January 11, 1982, made a change to §262.10(c) 

that added the generator accumulation provisions at § 262.34 to the list of things a generator who

treats, stores, or disposes of hazardous waste on site must comply with. Currently, the Agency

does not make this distinction between generators that send waste for treatment off site and those Deleted: any such
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 63 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

that manage waste on site. This revision is therefore outdated and not well understood and can be 

deleted and reserved without disruption to the generator hazardous waste regulations. 

EPA seeks comment on whether anyone is using this provision or has objection to its 

removal and what the reasoning for that objection is. 

Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This proposed deletion is not affected by the 

proposed reorganization. 

4. Generators Are Subject to Enforcement of Applicable Requirements and Penalties Under

Section 3008 of RCRA if They Fail to Meet the Independent Requirements Made Applicable by 

the Failure to Obtain a Conditional Exemption (40 CFR 262.10(g))

The existing regulation at § 262.10(g) states that a generator is subject to the compliance 

requirements and penalties prescribed in section 3008 of [RCRA] if it does not comply with the 

requirements of that part. However, this paragraph does not expressly state that a generator that 

is not meeting the conditions of its exemption—and is, therefore, an illegal TSDF—is liable 

under section 3008 of RCRA for failing to meet the requirements for TSDFs in parts 124, 264–

268, and 270. 

Therefore, EPA is proposing to revise § 262.10(g) to state that a generator is subject to 

enforcement of the applicable requirements and penalties under section 3008 of RCRA if it fails 

to meet its applicable independent requirements under part 262: § 262.11 (Hazardous waste 

determinations and recordkeeping), § 262.12 (Obtaining an EPA identification number), part 262 

subpart B (Manifest), §§ 262.30–260.33 (Pre-transport) and part 262 subpart D (Recordkeeping 

and reporting). The new language would further explain that a generator is subject to 

enforcement of the applicable requirements and penalties under section 3008 of RCRA if it fails 

to meet the applicable requirements of parts 124, 263–268, and 270, including such requirements 

made applicable when such person is not meeting the conditions of the generator exemption. 

Deleted: “

Deleted: he 

Deleted: this 

Deleted: ”

Deleted: , and 124

Deleted: , and 124,
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 64 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ EPA is requesting comment on these proposed changes.

Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is not affected by the proposed 

reorganization. 

5. Proposed Deletion of Laboratory XL Project Regulations (40 CFR 262.10(j) and Part 262 

Subpart J)

The Laboratory XL Project was created for Boston College, the University of 

Massachusetts, and the University of Vermont, and was finalized in the Federal Register on 

September 28, 1999 (64 FR 53292). Originally, the program was to expire on September 30, 

2003. But on June 21, 2006, EPA extended the program and the new expiration date was 

changed to April 15, 2009 (71 FR 35550). Since the program has now expired, EPA is proposing 

to remove paragraphs (j) in § 262.10, as well as part 262 subpart J. 

EPA is requesting comment on this proposed change.

Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is not affected by the proposed 

reorganization. 

6. Generators Shall Not Transport to a Non-Designated Facility

The Agency is proposing to add a new provision at § 262.10(a)(3) that would clearly and 

succinctly state that a generator cannot offer or otherwise cause its waste to be sent to a facility 

that is not authorized to accept it. 

As the Agency has stated numerous times in the development and implementation of the 

RCRA hazardous waste program, a fundamental aspect of the program is the responsibility 

placed on the generator of hazardous waste to ensure its hazardous waste is properly managed 

from cradle to grave. Numerous existing regulatory provisions are designed to ensure that 

generators send their hazardous waste only to authorized TSDFs or other authorized facilities.

See for example, §§ 262.12(c), 262.20(b), 262.40(a). However, from experience with the 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 65 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ program, the Agency has found situations where a generator failed to send its hazardous waste to 

a facility authorized to receive that waste, thus creating both regulatory and potential hazardous 

waste mismanagement problems. The Agency believes this provision is necessary to ensure 

generators understand they have this obligation and, for that reason, is placing it in the initial 

provisions of the generator regulations. 

This provision is being added to the regulatory framework and not replacing §§ 

262.12(c), 262.20(b), 262.40(a), as those provisions are aimed at other aspects of the generator 

program (for example, ensuring manifests are properly completed). 

The Agency requests comment on adding this new provision. 

B. Waste Determinations (40 CFR 262.11)

EPA is proposing to revise the hazardous waste determination regulations at § 262.11 in 

order to provide a more complete explanation of the regulation and improve compliance by 

hazardous waste generators. The proposed changes are intended to provide more information 

about when a waste determination must be made, as well as to better explain the methods and 

procedures for generators to determine whether they have a listed hazardous waste or a 

characteristic waste. The proposed changes also address some deficiencies in the current 

recordkeeping regulations. 

Specifically, the proposed changes discussed in this section are the following: (1) 

confirming that a generator’s waste must be classified at its point of generation and, for wastes 

potentially exhibiting a hazardous characteristic, at any time during the course of its management 

when the properties of the wastes may change; (2) revising the language on making a 

determination for a listed hazardous waste in § 262.11 to explain more fully how generators can 

make this kind of determination, including use of acceptable kinds of generator knowledge; (3) 

explaining more completely in the regulations in § 262.11 how a generator should evaluate its 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 66 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

waste for hazardous characteristics; (4) moving the independent recordkeeping and retention Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

requirements for hazardous waste determinations currently found at § 262.40(c) into § 262.11 to 

integrate this provision more directly into the hazardous waste determination regulations; (5) 

revising the hazardous waste determination recordkeeping regulations to require that SQGs and 

LQGs maintain records of any test results, waste analyses, or other determinations made in 

accordance with § 262.11 for at least three years, including waste determinations where a solid 

waste (as defined in § 261.2) is found not to be a RCRA hazardous waste (as defined in § 261.3);

(6) revising the hazardous waste determination regulations by copying § 262.40(d) into § 262.11 

to address situations where an enforcement action has been initiated and the period of record 

retention (e.g., three years from when the record was generated) must be extended automatically 

during the course of any unresolved enforcement action regarding the regulated activity or as 

requested by the Administrator; and (7) making clear at the very beginning of § 262.11 that the 

hazardous waste determination must be accurate. 

In addition, EPA is asking for comment in this section on two additional potential 

changes regarding the accuracy of hazardous waste determinations and the length of time records 

must be maintained. 

Finally, EPA discusses the potential development of an electronic decision making tool 

for hazardous waste determinations and takes comment on whether that would be a helpful tool 

to generators. 

The revisions proposed at § 262.11 are designed to improve compliance by generators in 

making a hazardous waste determination for their solid wastes. To a great extent, the success of 

the RCRA hazardous waste regulatory program begins with and relies on generators making this 

determination. Failure to make an accurate hazardous waste determination may lead to 

mismanagement of the waste, with potential adverse consequences to human health and the 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 67 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

environment. As described below, generators may have a difficult time making an accurate 

hazardous waste determination for a variety of reasons. 

Many of the proposed changes at § 262.11 derive from policy statements and 

clarifications the Agency has made through the years in FR notices, guidance documents, and 

policy letters to help explain how hazardous waste determinations should be made. The proposed 

changes also derive from issues identified in EPA’s 30 years of experience implementing the 

RCRA hazardous waste program. 

1. Background

The regulations at § 262.11 require generators of solid waste (as defined at § 261.2) to 

determine whether their waste is also a hazardous waste. Under RCRA, a solid waste may be 

hazardous if it is either listed as hazardous or exhibits a hazardous waste characteristic. Listed 

hazardous wastes are wastes that the Agency has specifically evaluated and determined may 

present a risk to human health and the environment, if improperly managed. Such wastes can be 

generated by specific processes of particular industries or by many different types of industry 

(e.g., spent degreasing solvents) or hazardous commercial chemical products being discarded as 

surplus, off specification, or for another reason. Wastes that exhibit any of the four hazardous 

characteristics (ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, toxicity) are also classified as hazardous. 

Hazardous wastes are subject to a number of handling and disposal requirements intended to 

prevent them from damaging human health or the environment. 

Once a generator has determined from § 261.2 that it has generated a solid waste, the 

regulations at § 262.11 currently provide the following method for a generator to determine if a 

waste is a hazardous waste: 

(a) It should first determine if the waste is excluded from regulation under the exclusions 

found in 40 CFR 261.4.

Deleted: state the 

Deleted: “A person who generates a solid waste, as defined in 40 

CFR 261.2, must determine if that waste is a hazardous waste using 

the following method:¶

Deleted: He
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 68 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(b) It must then determine if the waste is listed as a hazardous waste in subpart D of 40 

CFR part 261. Note that even if the waste is listed, the generator still has an opportunity under 40 

CFR 260.22 to demonstrate to the Administrator that the waste from his particular facility or 

operation is not a hazardous waste.

(c) For purposes of compliance with the land disposal restrictions in 40 CFR part 268, or 

if the waste is not listed in subpart D of 40 CFR part 261, the generator must then determine 

whether the waste is identified in subpart C of 40 CFR part 261 by either:

(1) Testing the waste according to the methods set forth in subpart C of 40 CFR part 261, 

or according to an equivalent method approved by the Administrator under 40 CFR 260.21; or

(2) Applying knowledge of the hazard characteristic of the waste in light of the materials 

or the processes used.

(d) Finally, if the waste is determined to be hazardous, the regulations state that the 

generator must refer to parts 261, 264, 265, 266, 267, 268, and 273 of this chapter for possible 

exclusions or restrictions pertaining to management of the specific waste.

A generator’s responsibility begins with applying due diligence through knowledge of its 

processes, feedstocks, and wastes generated, and/or testing to make an accurate hazardous waste 

determination for the solid waste it has generated (see § 261.2). The Agency considers the 

application of the above information (e.g., knowledge of the production processes, feedstocks, 

and wastes generated and/or information from testing) to be acceptable types of generator 

knowledge. Failure to consider any relevant types of knowledge could be viewed critically if a 

situation arose in which a particular generator’s waste determination came under scrutiny. Once 

a determination has been made that a generator’s solid waste is a hazardous waste, then the 

generator can initiate the process of quantifying the total amount of hazardous waste generated in 

a calendar month to determine its generator category, and from that, determine the regulations 

Deleted: He

Deleted: Note: 

Deleted: E

Deleted: I

Deleted: ”

Deleted: of

Deleted: counting 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 69 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

with which it must comply. If an incorrect hazardous waste determination is made (i.e., a Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

hazardous waste is identified as non-hazardous), there is a strong possibility that the waste will 

not be managed appropriately, potentially leading to environmental releases and damage. 

From experience with the waste determination program, the Agency has found that there 

are a number of situations in which generators may misclassify their wastes. In some cases, 

generators overlook certain wastes that are unrelated to their production processes, discarding 

them in the trash without realizing that they have discarded a hazardous waste. In other cases, 

generators may not understand how the hazardous waste characteristics or listings regulations 

may apply to the waste. There are also instances in which generators have not even known that 

RCRA and its regulations apply to their wastes.

States have also identified difficulties generators have in making hazardous waste 

determinations as a concern. A study conducted by the State of New Hampshire found that 

generators often overlooked hazardous wastes they had generated apart from their main 

production operations, for example, solvent-contaminated wipes and aerosol cans.39 40

The Georgia Department of Natural Resources (GADNR) has also highlighted this 

problem in one of its publications, stating “Many solid waste streams at facilities tend to be 

overlooked as hazardous wastes because the solid waste usually does not resemble what one 

would think a hazardous waste looks like [i.e., wastes that are not a liquid chemical waste (rags, 

absorbents, or filters); or wastes that are not directly generated in manufacturing process 

(universal wastes, computers, electronics, or sludge in drains or sumps); wastes that are newly 

regulated (electronics); or wastes that are similar to household hazardous wastes (mercury 

 

39 A final rule for solvent-contaminated wipes was published in the Federal Register on July 31, 2013. This rule 

provides an exclusion from the definition of solid waste for solvent-contaminated wipes that are recycled and an 

exemption from the definition of hazardous waste for discarded wipes provided specific conditions are met (78 FR 

46447). 

40 Summary of Waste Determination Meetings with VT and NH State Officials on September 27-28, 2010.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 70 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

thermometers, aerosol cans, batteries, and lamps), which are excluded as hazardous waste in 

accordance with §261.4(b)(1).].”41

The importance of generators making an accurate hazardous waste determination cannot 

be over-emphasized. In 2013, a contractor for EPA completed a third-party program evaluation 

of the hazardous waste determination regulations to better understand the reasons generators may 

have difficulty making reliable hazardous waste determinations.42 This study involved examining 

national compliance statistics associated with hazardous waste determinations and meeting with 

representatives of three state programs—Texas, Minnesota, and Colorado—and the regulated 

community in those states. Questions focused on rates of non-compliance with the hazardous 

waste determination regulations, obstacles to generator compliance, the role of state waste 

management programs and the role of third parties, such as environmental services companies or 

industry trade organizations. The interviewers also solicited stakeholder recommendations for 

improvement of the waste determination regulations. 

The evaluation reported the following findings. First, the average non-compliance rate 

with the RCRA hazardous waste determination regulations across the United States is 

approximately 34 percent. This figure is based on an analysis of hazardous waste determination 

violations during EPA compliance inspections recorded in EPA’s RCRAInfo data system from 

2001 to 2011.43 These results are supported by the results of other EPA analyses. For example, in 

a review of inspection reports of the foundry sector by EPA’s Office of Compliance, EPA found 

26 of 69 facilities, or 38 percent, with hazardous waste determination violations.44 Additionally, 

 

41 “10 Most Common Hazardous Waste (RCRA) Violations in Georgia: 40 CFR 262.11 “Hazardous Waste 

Determination,” Georgia Department of Natural Resources 

https://epd.georgia.gov/sites/epd.georgia.gov/files/related_files/site_page/guidehwdet.pdf

42 Hazardous Waste Determination Program Evaluation, IEc, April 2013. 

http://www.epa.gov/evaluate/pdf/waste/haz-waste-determination.pdf

43 RCRAInfo is EPA’s national repository for hazardous waste generation and management data.

44 “Review of RCRA Inspection Report Practices,” May 2007.

Formatted: Font: Italic

Deleted: http://www.georgiaepd.org/Documents/commonhwviols.

html
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 71 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

an EPA analysis of inspections at CESQG facilities conducted by the State of Kansas inspectors 

for the 2009–2012 time period found a waste determination non-compliance rate of 21 percent, 

and an EPA analysis of inspections of Iowa CESQG facilities conducted by EPA Region 7 

inspectors for the same time period found a waste determination violation rate of 36 percent. 45,46

Probably the most comprehensive analysis involved examining all compliance evaluation 

inspections of LQGs, SQGs, and CESQGs conducted by both the EPA Regions and the states for 

fiscal years 2008–2012.47 Of the 62,003 compliance evaluation inspections conducted during that 

time period, EPA and the states found 8,148 waste determination violations, resulting in a noncompliance rate of 13.1 percent. While the estimates of waste determination violation rates vary 

somewhat across the studies examining them, all of them identify violation rates that are 

significant. 

The evaluation also discussed a number of implementation challenges that lead to noncompliance with the hazardous waste determination regulations. The evaluation identified 30 

recurring themes that describe various obstacles, challenges, and factors that influence hazardous 

waste generators’ compliance with the hazardous waste determination regulations. These 30 

themes fall into three overarching categories: (1) challenges related to the regulations; (2) 

challenges related to generators; and (3) challenges related to regulatory agencies.48 

The Agency is proposing changes intended to address the two challenges identified that 

are related to the regulations. These are (1) difficulty understanding the regulations as written 

and (2) difficulty interpreting and applying the regulations to specific circumstances. The 

proposed changes to § 262.11 are intended to elaborate on the meaning and intent of these 

 

45 EPA administers Iowa’s hazardous waste program.

46 Iowa CESQG Inspections 2009–2012, October 2012; Kansas CESQG Inspections 2009–2012, December 2012.

47 State Compliance Evaluation Inspections (CEI) for FY 2008–2012.

48 Hazardous Waste Determination Program Evaluation, IEc, April 2013.

http://www.epa.gov/evaluate/pdf/waste/haz-waste-determination.pdf

Deleted: 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 72 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

regulations to make them easier for generators to understand. We believe the better 

understanding resulting from these changes will also make it easier to appropriately apply the 

requirements to a broader range of specific circumstances. 

2. Improvements to the Existing Hazardous Waste Determination Regulations

EPA’s evaluation of the waste determination regulatory program noted that improving 

compliance in making accurate waste determinations is a multi-faceted problem. The Agency 

believes improving the clarity of the regulatory text is an important step because it represents the 

foundation from which all subsequent EPA and state outreach, technical assistance and 

enforcement efforts begin. In this regard, EPA identified several particular areas for possible 

improvements to the current regulations: 

- Confusion about where and when to make a hazardous waste determination, 

particularly when further management of that material may result in a change in the 

hazardous waste determination. 

- § 262.11(b), which relates to whether or not a solid waste is a listed hazardous waste, 

does not describe how a generator should determine if the material in question is a 

listed hazardous waste. 

- § 262.11(c) states that a generator can either test its waste or use process knowledge 

or knowledge about its waste to determine whether a solid waste is a characteristic 

hazardous waste. However, there is little guidance in the regulation on using 

knowledge to classify waste. 

- The existing regulatory text notes that test methods are included in the hazardous 

characteristic definitions in subpart C of part 261,but does not note that tests are not 

provided for all aspects of the hazardous characteristics identified there. 

Deleted: , and 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 73 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ The Agency has provided guidance on these issues over the past 30 years and through 

these proposed regulatory revisions intends to incorporate key aspects of that guidance into the 

regulatory language. 

Finally, EPA is proposing to address deficiencies in the recordkeeping for hazardous 

waste determinations. These deficiencies include both a lack of specificity regarding what 

materials used in a hazardous waste determination must be maintained and lack of a specific 

statement that the independent requirement to maintain records is extended when there is an 

unresolved enforcement action. In addition, there are large number of hazardous waste 

determinations for which records are not being kept because the generator determines that the 

material in question is not a hazardous waste. Failure to maintain records in these cases makes it 

difficult for regulatory agencies to determine how a generator made the determination and to 

quickly assess whether the determination is accurate. 

3. When and Where to Make a Hazardous Waste Determination

To respond to generator concerns about identifying the most appropriate point at which to 

make a hazardous waste determination, EPA is proposing to revise § 262.11 to add a paragraph 

(a), which would state that a hazardous waste determination must be made at the point of waste 

generation (i.e., when the material becomes a solid waste).49 The RCRA statute makes clear that 

the term ‘‘hazardous waste generation’’ means the act or process of producing hazardous 

waste.50 By requiring that the initial hazardous waste determination be made at the point of 

generation, the regulation clarifies that the determination cannot be made downstream in the 

process where other materials could be mixed with the waste or where the waste changed its 

physical characteristics simply as a result of time elapsing affecting the hazardous waste 

 

49 A material must be a solid waste before it can be a hazardous waste under RCRA.

50 See Solid Waste Disposal Act, Sec. 1004, page 9.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 74 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ determination. This standard must be met even in instances in which another entity, such as a 

waste management facility, makes the waste determination on behalf of the generator. 

The 1980 preamble to the original hazardous waste regulations explicitly discussed this 

scenario, stating that a solid waste which is a hazardous waste because it is listed in part 261 

subpart D must begin to be managed as a hazardous waste when it first meets the subpart D 

listing description. The preamble explains that most of the hazardous wastes listed in §§ 261.31 

and 261.32 of subpart D (the F-list and the K-list) are process residues, emission control dusts, or 

wastewater treatment sludges and the point in time when they are created is generally well 

defined. For other hazardous wastes, such as spent solvents or those hazardous wastes listed in § 

261.33, the point at which they meet the listing description is somewhat less well defined, but 

generally occurs when their intended use has ceased and they begin to be accumulated or stored 

for disposal, re-use, or reclamation. The preamble then goes on to provide several examples 

illustrating how this provision would operate in practice (45 FR 33095–96, May 19, 1980).

The 1980 regulatory preamble also addressed this issue for characteristic hazardous 

waste. In defining what waste is considered hazardous, § 261.3(b)(3) states that “ a solid waste 

becomes a hazardous waste ...when the waste exhibits any of the characteristics.” EPA 

elaborated on this regulatory definition in 1980 by noting that “paragraph (b) provides that a 

solid waste is a hazardous waste whenever it exhibits one or more of the characteristics. As a 

practical matter, this means that persons handling solid waste must determine whether they meet 

the characteristics whenever the management of the waste would be subject to EPA’s part 262–

265 regulations” (45 FR 33095, May 19, 1980). 

This implies that a generator’s waste characterization obligations may continue beyond 

the determination made at the initial point of generation. In the case of a non-hazardous waste 

that may, at some point in the course of its management, exhibit a hazardous waste characteristic, 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 75 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

there is an ongoing responsibility to monitor and reassess its regulatory status if changes occur 

that may cause the waste to become hazardous. Thus, the generator must monitor the waste for 

potential changes if there is reason to believe that the waste may physically or chemically change 

during management in a way that might cause the waste, or a portion of the waste, to become 

hazardous. 

The preamble to the final rule for the toxicity characteristic reiterated that the current 

rules require that the determination of whether a waste is hazardous is to be made at the point of 

its generation (i.e., when the material becomes a solid waste).51 In the preamble to that rule, EPA 

stated that it believes that the determination of the regulatory status of a waste at the point of 

generation continues to be appropriate and that EPA was retaining the existing approach of 

requiring that a determination be made at the point of generation (55 FR 11830, March 29, 

1990).

Thus, for determining whether a waste exhibits a hazardous characteristic, generators of 

solid waste are required to make a hazardous waste determination at the initial point of 

generation, in the form the waste is generated in (i.e., “as is”), following the procedure described 

in § 262.11, which allows use of generator knowledge and/or testing, as appropriate. A 

generator's hazardous waste determination at the initial point of generation is critical to ensure 

proper management of the waste not only by the generator, but also by transporters and TSDFs 

who rely upon the generator's determination to allow them to safely manage the waste and 

provide appropriate treatment.52

 

51 A material must be a solid waste before it can be a hazardous waste under RCRA. 

52 Note that making a solid and hazardous waste determination is also applicable for the exemptions identified at §§ 

261.2 and 261.4 since such exemptions negate the determination.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 76 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

As an example, in a letter regardin Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ g a waste consisting of solvents mixed with water that 

separates and becomes biphasic over time, the Agency stated that in this situation, the generator 

must make the hazardous waste determination not only at the initial point of generation, but also 

after the waste separates into phases. This letter went on to say that a generator’s responsibility 

to make a hazardous waste determination may continue beyond the determination made at the 

initial point of generation. In the case of a nonhazardous waste that may, at some point in the 

future, exhibit a hazardous waste characteristic, there is an ongoing responsibility to monitor and 

reassess if changes occur that may cause the waste to become hazardous. 

Again, if there is reason to believe that the waste may physically or chemically change 

during management in a way that might cause the waste, or portion of the waste, to become 

hazardous, the generator must monitor the waste for these changes. The generator should also 

notify any subsequent handlers of the waste so they are aware that they should also monitor the 

waste for changes. This is analogous to and consistent with situations the Agency has discussed 

in the past such as when, over time, sludges that exhibit the characteristic of toxicity settle out of 

nonhazardous wastewaters managed in surface impoundments.53

Therefore, to clarify that hazardous waste determination must be made at the point of 

generation, the Agency is proposing to revise the regulations at 40 CFR 262.11 by adding a new 

paragraph (a) that would state that a hazardous waste determination for each solid waste must be 

made at the point of waste generation, before any dilution, mixing, or other alteration of the 

waste occurs, and at any time in the course of its management that it has, or may have, changed 

its properties as a result of exposure to the environment or other factors that may change the 

properties of the waste.

 

53 Letter from Betsy Devlin, Director of EPA’s Materials Recovery and Waste Management Division, to Gary Jones, 

Printing Industries of America, November 20, 2012, RCRA Online 14834.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 77 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ This addition of paragraph (a) would change current § 262.11(a) into § 262.11(b) and 

bump all subsequent paragraphs in that section. 

EPA requests comments on the proposed changes to § 262.11 and in particular is 

soliciting comment on whether the proposed new language is sufficient to improve the existing 

regulatory text and better assist generators in making effective hazardous waste determinations. 

Additionally, EPA is interested in comments regarding improvements the Agency could make to 

the proposed regulatory text. 

Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is not affected by the proposed 

reorganization.

4. Determining Whether a Waste is a Listed Hazardous Waste

a. Identifying listed hazardous wastes. As a general matter, determining whether a waste is a 

listed hazardous waste consists of comparing the waste that the generator generates to the 

hazardous waste listing descriptions in §§ 261.31–33. For many wastes, identifying the origin of 

the waste is sufficient to determine whether it is a listed waste and this determination is rather 

straightforward. However, this is not always the case. Sometimes additional information about 

the waste, the process that generated it (including production feedstocks), and the listing 

regulations is needed to make a reliable determination, including the following: (1) the 

regulatory language of the hazardous waste listing; (2) the regulatory intent of the original 

hazardous waste listing (as evidenced by FR notices and technical support documents and 

interpretative letters from the original listings); and (3) facts specific to the waste stream at 

issue.54

 

54 Note that once listed at §§ 261.31–33 wastes remain listed as hazardous wastes unless and until they are delisted 

in accordance with §§260.20 and 260.22 or unless they are specifically excluded from § 261.3, regardless of their 

actual composition and constituent concentrations even if the manufacturing and/or treatment processes do not use 

any of the constituents for which the wastes were listed.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 78 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ These three types of information can be considered as acceptable types of generator

knowledge about a waste stream for making a hazardous waste determination. A November 20, 

1997, Federal Register notice elaborates on the use of knowledge to make a listing 

determination—that is, determining whether a waste is a listed hazardous waste can be 

accomplished by comparing information on the waste stream origin with the RCRA listings set 

forth in 40 CFR part 261 subpart D. These listings are separated into four major categories or 

lists and are identified by EPA hazardous waste numbers starting with the letters K, F, P, or U, 

depending on the category of the waste. The hazardous waste numbers are associated with a 

specific waste description, specific processes that generate the wastes, or certain chemical 

compounds. For example, EPA hazardous waste number K103 is defined as “Process residues 

from aniline extraction from the production of aniline.” A generator that produces such residues 

should know, without any sampling or analysis, that these wastes are “listed” RCRA hazardous 

wastes by examining the K103 hazardous waste description in the hazardous waste lists and 

comparing this with the production process that generated the waste.

Other hazardous waste listings describe wastes generated from generic processes that are 

common to various industries and activities. They include, for example, waste solvents (e.g., 

EPA hazardous waste numbers F001–F005), which are often used in the degreasing or cleaning 

processes of manufacturing operations, and thus are widely generated. EPA hazardous waste 

number F001 is a listed waste from a non-specific source that is defined by providing a list of 

spent halogenated solvents at a particular concentration before use and stating that they are F001 

when used in degreasing. Because this listed waste is from a non-specific source, the generator 

would compare this listing description to any industry operation where solvent degreasing is 

conducted to determine whether this waste meets the specific listing description. 

Deleted: a part of the 

Deleted: ’s

Formatted: Indent: First line: 0.5"

Deleted: ¶

Deleted: defined as follows: “The following spent halogenated 

solvents used in degreasing: Tetrachloroethylene, trichloroethylene, 

methylene chloride, 1,1,1-trichlorethane, carbon tetrachloride, and 

chlorinated fluorocarbons; all spent solvent mixtures/blends used in 

degreasing containing, before use, a total of ten percent or more (by 

volume) of one or more of the above halogenated solvents or those 

solvents listed in F002, F004, and F005; and still bottoms from the 

recovery of these spent solvents and spent solvent mixtures.” 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 79 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Note that these spent solvents are regulated as hazardous under RCRA, but only if Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶the 

total of all the solvent constituents before use is greater than or equal to ten percent of the 

material’s volume. This adds a layer of complexity to the hazardous waste determination and 

requires that the generator have knowledge of the composition of the unused solvent before the 

waste is generated.

Finally, the hazardous waste regulations include the “derived from” and “mixture” rules, 

which state that any solid waste derived from the treatment, storage, or disposal of a listed 

RCRA hazardous waste, or any solid waste mixed with a listed RCRA hazardous waste, 

respectively, is itself a listed RCRA hazardous waste until delisted (see § 261.3(a)(2)(iv) and § 

261.3(c)(2)(i), respectively) (62 FR 62082, November 20, 1997). The exception to these rules is 

when the waste is listed solely because it exhibits a hazardous waste characteristic, but the 

particular waste in question no longer exhibits any hazardous characteristic (§ 261.3(g)).

b. Proposal to provide further explanation in regulatory text about listed waste determinations.

The current regulation at § 262.11(b) provides minimal information to generators for 

determining whether their waste is a listed hazardous waste. EPA is proposing that this 

paragraph be expanded and that it be bumped down to become § 262.11(c) to make room for 

existing § 262.11(a), which becomes (b) under the proposed new regulatory framework at § 

262.11 and which addresses the generator determination of whether the solid waste it has 

generated is excluded from regulation under 40 CFR 261.4. 

The new § 262.11(c) would identify the types of acceptable information that the 

generator could consider in evaluating its waste against the hazardous waste listing descriptions 

and would assist them in determining if they have generated a listed hazardous waste. This 

proposed paragraph would state that if the waste is not excluded under 40 CFR 261.4, the person 

must then use knowledge of the waste to determine if the waste meets any of the listing 

Deleted: one or more of the new or unused solvents contain a total 

of at least ten percent for the specific waste listing

Deleted: ,

Deleted: know

Deleted: “

Deleted: ”

Deleted: their 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 80 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ descriptions under subpart D of 40 CFR part 261. Acceptable knowledge that may be used in 

making an accurate determination as to whether the waste is listed includes, but is not limited to,

waste origin, composition, the process producing the waste, feedstock, and other relevant 

information. If the waste is listed, the person may file a delisting petition under 40 CFR 260.20 

and 260.22 to demonstrate to the Administrator that the waste from this particular site or 

operation is not a hazardous waste.

EPA requests comments on these proposed modifications to § 262.11(c). 

Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is not affected by the proposed 

reorganization, but the contents of the current § 262.11(b) are proposed to be revised and moved 

to § 262.11(c) to account for the proposed inclusion of a new § 262.11(a). 

5. Determining Whether a Waste is a Characteristic Hazardous Waste

The RCRA hazardous waste regulations identify four characteristics that can result in a 

hazardous waste classification: ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, and toxicity. Wastes 

exhibiting any of these characteristics have EPA hazardous waste numbers starting with the letter 

“D” and the regulations defining these characteristics are at § 261.20–24. The current § 262.11 

regulations identify two methods for determining whether a solid waste is hazardous because it 

exhibits a hazardous characteristic: (1) testing of the waste or (2) using knowledge of the hazard 

characteristic and the materials and processes used in generating the waste. Further, even if a 

waste is a listed hazardous waste, the regulations require the generator to determine whether it 

also exhibits a hazardous characteristic to ensure that all waste treatment obligations under part 

268 are met. This ensures that the waste can be treated to mitigate hazards posed by chemicals or 

properties for which it was listed, and also any characteristic hazards, which may be different 

from hazards that are the basis for listing.

Deleted: Making a

Deleted: requires the person to apply knowledge of the waste, 

Deleted: ing

Deleted: , to the listing descriptions in subpart D of 40 CFR part 

261
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 81 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ a. Use of testing to identify waste exhibiting a hazardous characteristic. The current regulations

at § 261.20–24 describe two different ways to determine whether a solid waste is a hazardous 

waste because it exhibits certain characteristics. In some cases, the regulations identify specific 

test methods, the results of which can be used directly to determine whether the waste exhibits 

that characteristic (although testing is not required, and knowledge may be used). These include 

for example, the pH test for the corrosivity characteristic, the flashpoint test for liquids for the 

ignitability characteristic, and the toxicity characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP) for the 

toxicity characteristic. Other hazardous characteristics are defined narratively, such as the 

definitions for ignitable solids or oxidizers in the ignitability characteristic, and the reactivity 

characteristic. When there is no regulatory test, then knowledge of the waste’s origin, production 

processes, feedstocks, chemical composition, and other relevant information is acceptable and

necessary for determining whether wastes exhibit one of these characteristics. Testing that may 

illustrate and support identification of the properties of the waste (even though it is not part of 

the regulation) can be part of the generators’ knowledge of the waste.

The proposed language associated with testing at § 262.11(d)(1) specifies that generators 

testing their waste must obtain a representative sample for testing, as defined at § 260.10 and as 

required by all of the hazardous characteristic regulations. For those characteristics that include a 

specific test as part of the regulation, the results of that test, when properly performed and 

compared with regulatory thresholds, are definitive for determining whether the waste is 

hazardous. The tests specified by the regulations are available in EPA’s “Test Methods for 

Evaluation Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods,” EPA Publication SW-846. This document 

which contains all of OSWER’s analytical methods, is available on EPA’s website at: 

http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/hazard/testmethods/index.htm . 

Deleted: use of

Deleted: and regulations is
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 82 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

W Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ hen evaluating a waste for one of the hazardous characteristics for which there is a 

regulatory test, generators are not required to use the test provided the generators’ knowledge 

about the waste is adequate to make a reliable determination about the RCRA status of the waste, 

as discussed in the next section. However, if a disagreement arises between a generator and an 

inspector about whether a particular waste is hazardous, we would recommend that the generator 

use the regulatory test, since the results of the test, when properly performed, should resolve such 

a disagreement.

For those characteristics that do not include a specific test, but provide a narrative 

definition, the generator can use appropriate tests, such as those identified in SW- 846 that 

identify hazardous properties as part of their knowledge about the waste to help determine 

whether the waste exhibits the hazardous waste characteristic. In addition, test methods used by 

DOT, the National Fire Protection Association, or other third-party testing organizations may be 

useful or relevant for evaluating a particular waste. However, the generator would need to show

the relevance of the test to the waste evaluation. 

The Agency has discussed the use or requirement of testing in various Federal Register 

notices, guidance documents, and letters. In promulgating the toxicity characteristic regulations 

in 1990, EPA considered whether to require TCLP testing. However, the Agency determined that 

the flexibility of the current approach resulted in a more effective and practical program overall

and that liability for incorrect determinations would provide a strong incentive for generators to 

not misclassify their wastes as non-hazardous (55 FR 11829–30, March 29, 1990). In a 1992 

letter, the Agency re-emphasized that generators are not required to test their waste to determine 

whether it is hazardous. As part of that letter, the Agency made clear that to ensure proper 

handling and treatment, the generator must identify all the hazardous characteristics a waste may 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 83 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

exhibit as identified in part 261 subpart C.55 In another letter, the Agency discussed the 

importance of testing a representative sample of the waste, as required by the hazardous 

characteristics regulations.56 The introductory chapters (1–13) of SW-846 provide guidance on a 

number of important analytical issues, including development of sampling plans and sampling 

methods, as well as quality control and an overview of the different types of methods in the 

guidance.

b. Use of knowledge to identify waste exhibiting a hazardous characteristic. As we discussed 

previously with respect to the identification of listed hazardous wastes, EPA is also proposing to 

modify § 262.11 to include the acceptable types of information that a generator can consider 

when applying generator knowledge for making hazardous waste determinations for potentially 

characteristic hazardous waste. Much of this information has been discussed in Federal Register 

notices and other guidance documents over the past 30 years. 

Specifically, several FR notices discuss what constitutes “process knowledge” for making 

a hazardous waste determination and include the following potential sources: (1) waste analysis 

data or studies on wastes generated from processes similar to that which generated the original 

waste;57 (2) waste analysis data obtained by TSDFs from the specific generators that generated 

the waste and sent it off site, and (3) waste analysis data obtained by generators or TSDFs from 

other generators, TSDFs, or areas within a facility that test chemically identical wastes.58 In 

addition, information about chemical and physical properties of manufacturing feedstocks or 

product contained in Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS), or Safety Data Sheets (SDS) under 

OSHA’s regulations implementing the UN Global Harmonized System of Classification and 

 

55 Letter from Sylvia Lowrance, Director of EPA’s Office of Solid Waste to Basil Constantelos, Safety-Kleen, 

October 28, 1992, RCRA Online 13570.

56Letter from Sylvia Lowrance, Director of EPA’s Office of Solid Waste to James Maes, Blue Beacon International, 

Inc., May 1, 1991, RCRA Online 11603.

57 62 FR 62081–2, November 20, 1997; 58 FR 48111–12, September 14, 1993. 

58 62 FR 62081–2, November 20, 1997. 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 84 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ Labelling of Chemicals (GHS), or other reliable data sources may be used to assist the generator 

in determining whether any of the product’s constituents or properties would make it a 

characteristic waste, when discarded.59 Also, an FR notice from 2003 identifies still other 

information that the Agency has considered appropriate and useful in using knowledge to 

classify waste, including special handling of waste by the generator to temporarily prevent it 

from exhibiting a hazardous characteristic (e.g., keeping it either wet or dry to prevent reaction to 

air or water, respectively); testing using non-regulatory tests that may illustrate some of the 

waste’s properties; classification under certain Department of Transportation hazardous material 

designations that may be similar to or overlap with RCRA hazardous characteristics, as well as 

identification of environmental damage attributable to mismanagement or disposal of the waste.

60,61 All of the above examples are considered as acceptable types of knowledge that can be used 

by a generator. 

Some states have also provided guidance to their generators on some of the challenges of 

only using process knowledge. For example, the Connecticut Department of Energy and 

Environmental Protection notes that although knowledge of process information can be very 

useful (especially in identifying hazardous constituents that are known to be present), it may not 

always be adequate to fully and properly characterize a waste. In particular, knowledge of the 

process may not account for factors such as trace contaminants that may not be listed on an 

MSDS (only chemicals present at concentrations greater than 1% are typically identified), 

 

59 Letter from Matt Hale, Director of EPA’s Office of Solid Waste, to Michael Beckel, 3E Company, June 6, 2008, 

RCRA Online 14790, and 68 FR 59940, October 20, 2003.

60 68 FR 59939–40, October 20, 2003.

61 Test methods developed by the UN Committee on Transport of Dangerous Goods, the National Fire Protection 

Association, or others may be useful and relevant for evaluating a particular waste. However, the generator must 

show the relevance of the test to waste evaluation.

Deleted: 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 85 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

contaminants introduced during use, and cross-contamination from other wastes. As a result, 

some sampling may be required by the state to properly characterize a waste.62

Similarly, the Georgia DNR has highlighted some of the challenges of only using process 

knowledge. In particular, a GADNR publication states, “Using [process] knowledge alone to 

make a hazardous waste determination may not always be adequate due to the variability of the 

waste, or the lack of knowledge of chemical processes in generating the waste. In those cases 

where the waste generated is variable, generators may choose to make a determination that the 

waste is hazardous waste rather than testing the waste each time it is generated. In addition, in 

the case of a hazardous waste that is always hazardous, but is characteristic for certain 

constituents at times, but not at others, the generator may choose to be inclusive of all potential 

waste codes, rather than test the waste each time it is generated. If the generator with a variable 

waste chooses not to treat the waste as described above in this paragraph, the waste must be 

tested as generated.”63

The Georgia DNR has also issued useful guidance for its generators regarding the testing 

and recordkeeping for waste, stating that, “If test methods are used to determine if the waste 

exhibits a characteristic, a description of how the waste was sampled to obtain a representative 

sample and copies of the analytical results for that sample should be included as documentation 

of the hazardous waste determination. The generator may apply knowledge of the waste and the 

generation process to determine which constituents/parameters to include in analyses, as well as 

where and when sampling is most appropriate. However, if the full suite of analyses is not 

 

62 See Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection website, Hazardous Waste Determinations/Knowledge 

of Process at http://www.ct.gov/deep/cwp/view.asp?a=2718&q=325422&deepNav_GID=1967

.

63 “10 Most Common Hazardous Waste (RCRA) Violations in Georgia: 40 CFR 262.11 “Hazardous Waste 

Determination,” Georgia Department of Natural Resources 

https://epd.georgia.gov/sites/epd.georgia.gov/files/related_files/site_page/guidehwdet.pdf Deleted: “10 Most Common Hazardous Waste (RCRA) Violations 

in Georgia,” Georgia Department of Natural Resources. 

http://www.georgiaepd.org/Documents/commonhwviols.html.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 86 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

applied, the generator must have sufficient documentation to demonstrate why only certain 

analyses were applied, and not all. Adequate documentation includes a list of 

constituents/chemicals that make up the waste, their physical and chemical properties, the effects 

of the process on the product/materials in the waste, and whether the product/material picks up 

additional hazardous constituents (contaminants) in the process; all of which provide knowledge 

as to what constituents should be included in the analyses.”64 Other states have also issued

guidance illustrating the need for generators to understand the wastes they generate and to 

consider all factors affecting waste composition and properties in making hazardous waste 

determinations. 

c. Proposal on using process knowledge. In consideration of the above discussion and to better 

assist generators in making hazardous waste determinations, EPA is proposing to revise the 

regulations associated with using knowledge to identify waste exhibiting a hazardous 

characteristic currently found at § 262.11(c)(2). Under this proposed rule, § 262.11(c)(2) would 

move to § 262.11(d)(2) and would identify various types of information that EPA has identified 

in the past as potentially relevant and acceptable for making a RCRA waste determination, 

including information about chemical feedstocks and other inputs to the production process; 

knowledge of products, by-products, and intermediates produced by the manufacturing process; 

chemical or physical characterization of wastes; information on the chemical and physical 

properties of the chemicals used or produced by the processor or otherwise contained in the 

waste; testing that illustrates the properties of the waste; or other reliable and relevant 

information about the properties of the waste or its constituents. 

 

64 “10 Most Common Hazardous Waste (RCRA) Violations in Georgia: 40 CFR 262.11 “Hazardous Waste 

Determination,” Georgia Department of Natural Resources 

https://epd.georgia.gov/sites/epd.georgia.gov/files/related_files/site_page/guidehwdet.pdf.

Deleted: to 

Deleted: “10 Most Common Hazardous Waste (RCRA) Violations 

in Georgia,” Georgia Department of Natural Resources. 

http://www.georgiaepd.org/Documents/commonhwviols.html
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 87 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

A test other than a test method set forth in subpart C of 40 CFR part 261, or an equivalent Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

method approved by the Administrator under 40 CFR 260.21, is also acceptable and may be used 

as part of a person’s knowledge to determine whether a solid waste exhibits a characteristic of 

hazardous waste. However, such tests do not, by themselves, provide definitive results and the 

generator may need to identify why the test is relevant.

The Agency requests comments on the proposed changes associated with revising § 

262.11(c) and moving it to § 262.11(d). In particular, EPA requests comment on whether the 

proposed language is sufficient to improve the existing regulatory text and better assist 

generators in making more effective hazardous waste determinations or whether other 

improvements should be made to the proposed regulatory text.

Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is not affected by the proposed 

reorganization, but the contents of current § 262.11(c) are being revised and bumped to 

§262.11(d) to account for the new § 262.11(a).

6. Documenting and Maintaining Records for Hazardous Waste Determinations 

The Agency is proposing to make one organizational change and several revisions to the 

recordkeeping provisions associated with making a hazardous waste determination, a provision 

found currently at §262.40(c). Section 262.40(c) currently states that a generator must keep 

records of any test results, waste analyses, or other determinations made in accordance with 

§ 262.11 for at least three years from the date that the waste was last sent to on-site or off-site 

treatment, storage, or disposal. This independent recordkeeping requirement is applicable to 

SQGs and LQGs only. CESQGs are not affected by this section.

First, the Agency is proposing that this paragraph be moved to § 262.11(e) to integrate 

this provision with the hazardous waste determination regulations in that section. Additionally, 

EPA is proposing to revise the wording to better articulate the types of information acceptable to 

Deleted: a

Deleted: reads

Deleted: , “(c) A

Deleted: ”

Deleted: waste determination 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 88 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

making an accurate hazardous waste determination Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶that must be maintained and to emphasize the 

importance of this section. 

These records must include, but are not limited to, the following types of information that 

have been used by the generator in making the waste determination: the results of any tests, 

sampling, or waste analyses; records documenting the tests, sampling, and analytical methods 

used and demonstrating the validity (or quality assurance/quality control) and relevance of such 

tests; records consulted in order to determine the process by which the waste was generated, 

information on the composition of the waste and the properties of the waste; and records which 

explain the basis for the generator’s determination as described at § 262.11(d)(2).

Second, the Agency is also restating that these records must be maintained for at least 

three years from the date that the waste was last generated by the facility and also stating that 

should the generator be involved in any unresolved enforcement action regarding a waste 

determination, then the periods of record retention are extended automatically or if requested by 

the Administrator. An “unresolved enforcement action” means any formal administrative, civil 

or criminal enforcement action which has been filed or issued against a generator by EPA or 

authorized state pursuant to RCRA subchapter III or VII and for which all rights of appeal have 

not been exhausted. 

Additionally, EPA is proposing to revise the wording of the section to better articulate 

the types of waste determination information that must be maintained and to emphasize the 

importance of this section. In an effort to improve compliance with the hazardous waste 

determination regulations, and therefore improve environmental protection, EPA is proposing to 

revise the recordkeeping regulations to require small and large quantity generators making a 

waste determination to document and maintain records of all their hazardous waste 

determinations, including determinations where a solid waste is found not to be a hazardous 

Deleted: s
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 89 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

waste.65 Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶In many respects, this proposed change also relates to the above proposed change in the 

regulations to clarify that generators must use due diligence in making a hazardous waste 

determination by applying process knowledge and/or testing results to the solid waste they 

generated. The Agency believes it is very important that generators make accurate hazardous 

waste determinations to avoid potential adverse impacts to human health and the environment 

from the possible mismanagement of hazardous waste. Therefore, we believe the benefits to 

human health and the environment far outweigh the minimal costs of requiring SQGs and LQGs 

to document hazardous waste determinations, including determinations where the solid waste 

was found not to be a hazardous waste. 

CESQGs would not be affected by this change. However, maintaining a copy of their 

hazardous waste determinations may be beneficial to a CESQG to support any questions posed 

during an inspection by EPA or state inspector, as well as to support their waste generator 

category. In analyzing Kansas and Iowa inspection data of CESQG facilities, instances were 

found where the generator failed to make an accurate hazardous waste determination resulting in 

the generator moving into a higher generator category and becoming subject to the regulations of 

either an SQG or LQG. 

The hazardous waste determination process is the gateway to the hazardous waste 

generator regulatory program and, to a great extent, its ultimate success. If a generator can 

accurately identify the types of hazardous wastes it generates, it can then identify the applicable 

regulations it must comply with to ensure safe management of that waste. Conversely, if a 

generator fails to make an accurate hazardous waste determination, that failure can potentially 

lead to the mismanagement of hazardous waste and environmental damages. In addition, the 

 

65 As will be discussed later in this section, the Agency does not intend for this provision to apply to those 

generators that generate a solid waste that clearly has no potential to be a hazardous waste.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 90 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ generator could then be cited in an enforcement action not only for that violation, but also for 

failing to comply with other generator regulations, including operating without a RCRA permit 

(see § 262.34(a) and (d)).

The Agency made this point clear when it initially promulgated the hazardous waste 

generator rules in February 1980, where it stated, “The determination is the crucial, first step in 

the regulatory system, and the generator must undertake this responsibility seriously” (45 FR 

12727, February 26, 1980). Unfortunately, as previously discussed, there is a high rate of 

noncompliance with the hazardous waste determination regulations. 

Under the current regulations at § 262.40(c), a generator is required to document and 

maintain records of any test results, waste analyses, or other determinations made in accordance 

with § 262.11 for at least three years from the date that the waste was last sent to on-site or offsite treatment, storage, or disposal. When an inspector sees a container or other waste 

management unit, that inspector has the authority to ask the generator how it determined the 

regulatory status of the waste, and the generator should be able to articulate how that 

determination was made. In many instances, the inspector will also ask to see any documentation 

supporting a questionable determination that a material is not a hazardous waste in order to 

understand how the generator applied process knowledge or the results of testing the waste to

support its non-hazardous waste determination. 

The Agency strongly believes that documentation must be maintained for waste 

determinations, not only when a solid waste is a hazardous waste but also when a solid waste is 

determined by the generator to not be a hazardous waste. The primary obligation for generators 

is to accurately determine whether or not a solid waste is a hazardous waste. Requiring 

documentation of this determination, regardless of the outcome, is critical in ensuring 

compliance with the current hazardous waste determination regulations.

Deleted: “

Deleted: ”
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 91 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ The requirement that a generator maintain records of determinations that a solid waste is 

not a hazardous waste was originally discussed in the preamble to the 1978 proposed rule for the 

hazardous waste regulatory program. In fact, the Agency proposed the following at 40 CFR 

250.10 (d)(1)(iii): “Generators who determine that their waste is not hazardous shall retain

copies of the evaluation performed and shall repeat the necessary evaluation or testing when 

there is a significant change in their feed material or operations which may alter the test results.” 

(43 FR 58955, December 18, 1978). In the February 26, 1980, final rule for hazardous waste 

generators, however, the Agency did not make this requirement final. Rather, the Agency simply 

promulgated the provision stating that a generator must keep records of any test results, waste 

analyses, or other determinations made in accordance with § 262.11 for at least three years from 

the date the waste was last sent to on-site or off-site treatment, storage or disposal (45 FR 

12734), which could be interpreted to mean either that a generator was required to keep records 

or that a generator was not required to keep records of solid wastes that were not hazardous

wastes. (This provision is currently located at § 262.40.) 

The Agency next discussed this issue in a March 29, 1990, Federal Register notice which 

clarified the rules by stating that recordkeeping for determinations that a solid waste was not a 

hazardous waste was not necessary. Specifically, the preamble to this final rule stated, “If a 

waste is determined to be hazardous, the generator must keep records establishing the basis for 

that determination (40 CFR 262.40(c)). These records must be maintained for at least 3 years 

after the generator no longer handles the waste in question. Neither of these recordkeeping 

requirements, however, applies to solid waste generators who do not generate hazardous wastes” 

(55 FR 11829, March 29, 1990). 

At the time the 1980 rules were finalized, the Agency had no experience with their 

implementation and whether documentation associated with determinations that a waste was not 

Deleted: “A

Deleted: ”

Deleted: 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 92 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

a hazardous waste was necessary. The Agency now believes that the original approach was 

insufficient. We now have 30 years of experience and compliance data to support an independent 

requirement that, as part of their obligation to determine whether a waste is hazardous under § 

262.11, generators need to keep records and documentation of their waste determinations, 

including determinations that a solid waste is not a hazardous waste. 

As an example, Georgia DNR requires that, in using generator knowledge, the 

determination must be valid, correct, and supported by documentation, especially when that 

determination is that the waste is not a hazardous waste or does not carry certain waste codes 

(contain certain contaminants).66 Even in cases where state regulations do not explicitly require 

documentation supporting a determination that a solid waste is not a hazardous waste, they will 

seek documentation supporting that determination when evidence suggests the material is a 

hazardous waste. Should documentation not be presented, EPA and the states will often take a 

sample to answer their own questions about waste status. 

The Agency does not believe requiring generators to retain documents used to make their 

non-hazardous waste determinations will pose an undue burden. In a review of 26 state waste 

determination regulations as well as discussions with several state agencies, the Agency found 

that 17 states already require documentation and recordkeeping of a solid waste that is not a 

hazardous waste.67 In EPA’s discussions with states, several states mentioned that they interpret 

the term “other determinations” at § 262.40(c) to mean determinations that a solid waste is not a 

hazardous waste. Further, generators should already have this information collected as part of 

their compliance with other parts of § 262.11.

 

66 “10 Most Common Hazardous Waste (RCRA) Violations in Georgia: 40 CFR 262.11 “Hazardous Waste 

Determination,” Georgia Department of Natural Resources 

https://epd.georgia.gov/sites/epd.georgia.gov/files/related_files/site_page/guidehwdet.pdf

67 As an example, some states interpret the term “other determinations” at 40 CFF 262.40 (c) to mean determinations 

that a solid waste is not a hazardous waste.

Deleted: “10 Most Common Hazardous Waste (RCRA) Violations 

in Georgia,” Georgia Department of Natural Resources 

http://www.georgiaepd.org/Documents/commonhwviols.html.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 93 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

An examination of biennial report data for a sm Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶all sample of LQGs for both 2009 and 

2011 reporting cycles demonstrated that the majority of generators generate the same hazardous 

waste streams from year to year. In other words, the Agency believes that, for the most part, 

SQGs and LQGs will make a hazardous waste determination once and will not need to make a 

new solid waste determination unless something changes in their process, thereby reducing the 

need to document waste determinations. This suggests that the burden of documenting a nonhazardous waste determination should be relatively minimal.68

In light of the importance of making accurate hazardous waste determinations, and 

because of the high rates of non-compliance with § 262.11 among generators, the Agency is 

proposing to modify § 262.11 to specifically require that SQGs and LQGs document and 

maintain records of all determinations, including determinations that their solid waste is not a 

hazardous waste. Again, the Agency is not proposing to apply this independent requirement to 

CESQGs. 

A key issue with this provision will be defining the scope of applicable entities for this 

requirement. First, documentation will not be required for entities that do not generate a solid 

waste, as defined by § 261.2, or that generate a solid waste that has been excluded or exempted 

from RCRA Subtitle C controls. However, all potential entities, with the exception of 

households, must determine whether they generate a solid waste as defined by § 261.2 for 

purposes of the existing RCRA hazardous waste regulations. Solid wastes under § 261.2 include 

spent materials, sludges, by-products, scrap metal, and commercial chemical products (CCPs) 

that are discarded. Specifically:

 

68 Assessment of the Potential Costs, Benefits, and Other Impacts of the Improvements to the Hazardous Waste 

Generator Regulatory Program, As Proposed, August 2014, page 3-8.

. 

Deleted: Draft Report, 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 94 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

 Spent materials as defined in § 261.1(c)(1), include any material that has been 

used and as a result of contamination can no longer serve the purpose for which it 

was produced without processing. 

 Sludge, as defined in § 260.10, means any solid, semi-solid, or liquid waste 

generated from a municipal, commercial, or industrial wastewater treatment plant, 

water supply treatment plant, or air pollution control facility. 

 A by-product, as defined in § 261.1(c)(3), is a material that is not one of the 

primary products of a production process and is not solely or separately produced 

by the production process. Examples are process residues such as slags or 

distillation column bottoms. The term does not include a co-product that is 

produced for the general public’s use and is ordinarily used in the form it is 

produced by the process. 

 Scrap metal, as defined in §261.1(c)(6), is bits and pieces of metal parts (e.g., 

bars, turnings, rods, sheets, wire) or metal pieces that may be combined together 

with bolts or soldering, which when worn or superfluous can be recycled. 

 CCPs are those materials listed in §261.33 or those CCPs which exhibit one or 

more of the hazardous waste characteristics. The tern CCP includes those 

chemical substances which are manufactured or formulated for commercial or 

manufacturing use and consist of commercially pure grades of the chemical 

substance, any technical grades of the chemical substance that are produced or 

marketed, and all formulations in which the chemical substance is the sole active 

ingredient. CCPs do not include or refer to wastes, such as a manufacturing 

process residue, that contain any of the chemical substances.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 95 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Where there is a potential for a discarded material to be a hazardous waste listed under Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

part 261 subpart D or when the material may contain hazardous constituents that would exhibit a 

characteristic of hazardous waste (i.e., ignitability, reactivity, corrosivity or toxicity) under part 

261 subpart C, these entities must make a hazardous waste determination and document that 

determination, including for those solid wastes that are not hazardous wastes. 

If an entity is generating a hazardous waste (and is, therefore, a hazardous waste 

generator) and if it is generating sufficient amounts of hazardous waste in a calendar month to be 

considered an SQG or an LQG, then these generators would be responsible for documenting 

determinations under this proposed revision. 

We would note that the existing hazardous waste regulations already require every 

generator to make a waste determination and that the only additional provision that this proposal 

is addressing is that they document that waste determination, including for those wastes that are 

not hazardous waste. The focus of this provision is on solid wastes that have the potential to be 

hazardous wastes. Thus, for the purposes of this proposed provision, the Agency is not interested 

in entities that generate solid wastes that clearly have no potential to be hazardous, such as food 

waste, restroom waste, or paper products. There are literally hundreds of thousands of entities 

who generate such wastes. In addition, lawyers and accountants, business offices, religious 

organizations, governmental organizations, engineering and architectural firms, among other 

sectors, are not meant to be impacted by this provision for everyday municipal waste that does 

not have the potential to be hazardous. Most elementary schools also should not be affected by 

this provision unless they have laboratories that use large amounts of hazardous chemicals where 

greater than 100 kilograms of non-acute hazardous waste (or 1 kilogram of acute hazardous 

waste) is discarded monthly or another source of potentially hazardous waste. 

Deleted: L

Deleted: In additio

Deleted: , grocery stores, small dentist and doctors’ offices
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 96 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

In addition, as noted previously, for the purposes of this proposed provision, the Agency 

is not interested in entities that generate 100 kilograms or less of non-acute hazardous waste or 1 

kilogram or less of acute hazardous waste in a calendar month (e.g., CESQGs). The Agency 

requests comment on verifying the above sectors and identifying other industrial or nonindustrial sectors where the probability is high that generators either do not generate solid wastes 

that would be identified or characterized as hazardous under RCRA, or if they do, they generate 

small enough amounts to most likely qualify as a CESQG. 

The Agency does not believe the cost of documenting a waste determination, whether 

non-hazardous waste or hazardous waste, will be substantial. As previously discussed, generators 

may use either the results of testing their waste or process knowledge to make a hazardous waste 

determination. If a generator tests its waste or hires a third party to do so, then the written results 

of those tests will be the documentation. Similarly, if generator knowledge is used to make the 

waste determination, then a statement describing what the basis of that knowledge was (e.g., 

information about chemical feedstocks and other inputs to the production process and how those 

chemical feedstocks may change when introduced into the production process; knowledge of 

products, by-products, and intermediates produced by the manufacturing process; chemical or 

physical characterization of wastes; information on the chemical and physical properties of the 

chemicals used or produced by the processor or otherwise contained in the waste; testing that 

illustrates the properties of the waste; or other reliable and relevant information about the 

properties of the waste or its constituents) will most likely be sufficient. 

In estimating the impact of requiring SQGs and LQGs to document their non-hazardous 

waste determinations, the Agency examined the relationship of the number of hazardous wastes 

generated per facility to non-hazardous waste generated per facility and established an 

approximate relationship of 60% to 40%. As part of this analysis, the Agency also found from 

Deleted: should 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 97 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

examining the biennial report data that 50 percent of LQGs generate from one to five hazardous 

waste streams annually and that many of these generators continue to generate the same waste 

streams from year to year.69 Therefore, for most LQGs, the incremental cost to document their 

non-hazardous waste determinations should be minimal. The Agency believes that many SQGs 

also generate the same waste streams from year to year.

However, from examining biennial report data, the Agency is also aware of situations 

where a generator generates many different hazardous waste streams each year. Examples 

include academic and industrial laboratories, chemical manufacturers, and TSDFs. As an 

example, an analysis of the 2011 Biennial Report identified 843 LQGs reporting that they 

generated 41 or more hazardous waste streams. This analysis derived an average of 17 hazardous 

waste streams being generated by LQGs. EPA can infer that these entities also generate 

numerous types of solid, but not hazardous, waste streams.70

Although TSDFs and chemical manufacturers may generate many different types of 

hazardous waste, many of them also have sophisticated protocols and testing procedures in place 

to make a hazardous waste determination. These processes should be sufficient to provide the 

proposed documentation to verify that the solid waste is or is not a hazardous waste. Other 

organizations may not and the Agency is interested in how best to address this important subject.

The Agency believes that requiring SQGs and LQGs to document their non-hazardous 

waste determinations is important to the success of RCRA hazardous waste program in 

protecting human health and the environment. Additionally, the Agency believes the proposed 

change will encourage generators to develop better internal processes and improve overall 

 

69 Assessment of the Potential Costs, Benefits, and Other Impacts of the Improvements to the Hazardous Waste 

Generator Regulatory Program, As Proposed, August 2014, page 3-8.

70 A more detailed discussion of this analysis can be found in the Regulatory Impact Analysis that accompanies this 

preamble and that can be found in the docket to this rulemaking. 

Deleted: Ibid,

Deleted: , Draft Report

Deleted: February
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 98 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

compliance with the RCRA hazardous waste regulations. At issue is how best to implement this 

provision in the most cost-effective manner possible. Therefore, the Agency seeks comment on 

how to balance the burden of recordkeeping with the benefits from ensuring waste is properly 

identified and managed. 

The Agency seeks comment from those generators that generate many new wastes each 

year, on ways that could be used to reduce burden while maintaining sufficient protection. The 

Agency also seeks comment on whether there are particular industrial sectors where many, if not 

most, solid wastes generated could be clearly determined not to be hazardous wastes and whether 

there are families of solid wastes where it is clear that they will not be hazardous wastes and thus

can be eliminated from this provision. 

Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is affected by the proposed 

reorganization and is located at § 262.11(e) of the proposed regulation. The proposed 

reorganization is discussed in section XIII of this preamble. 

7. Specifically Stating that the Hazardous Waste Determination Must be Accurate

Generators have an obligation to apply due diligence in making an accurate hazardous 

waste determination by using either knowledge of their processes and waste and/or testing of 

their waste. As discussed above, RCRA inspectors often cite generators for “failing to make a 

waste determination” at § 262.11. By that we mean the generator failed to accurately identify a 

material that could be a solid waste, or failed to accurately make a hazardous waste 

determination. In both cases, the generator’s failure to make accurate solid and hazardous waste 

determinations may result in adverse impacts to human health and the environment.

As previously stated, at the core of the RCRA hazardous waste program is the need for 

generators to make an accurate hazardous waste determination. Therefore, to emphasize this 

point the Agency is modifying the regulatory text at 40 CFR 262.11 to emphasize and make clear 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 99 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

that a generator who generates a solid waste, as defined in 40 CFR 261.2, must accurately 

determine if that waste is a hazardous waste.

A 1993 FR notice states that in the case where a generator sends waste off site for 

treatment, storage, or disposal, the TSDF may rely on process knowledge supplied by the 

generator as a basis for the TSDF's waste characterization (40 CFR 264.13). The notice points 

out that while using process knowledge is “seemingly attractive because of the potential savings 

associated with using existing information (such as published data), the facility must ensure that 

this information accurately characterizes applicable wastes” (58 FR 48111, September 14, 1993).

Generators often rely on a third party, such as a TSDF, to help them make a hazardous 

waste determination. Whether the generator uses a third party or not, the generator is responsible 

for that determination. As such, the generator should still apply its due diligence to ensure a solid 

waste is not a hazardous waste, and if a hazardous waste, that it is characterized accurately. 

Also with respect to characterizing a hazardous waste accurately, a generator identifying 

all possible RCRA waste numbers (or RCRA hazardous waste codes) on its manifest or container 

marking does not satisfy the requirement to make an accurate waste determination. First, the 

TSDF will not be able to treat the waste effectively or efficiently to comply with land disposal 

restriction requirements because it will not know precisely what waste it needs to treat. Second, 

the generator clearly did not apply its due diligence seriously. 

The Agency also realizes that generators, whether inadvertently or intentionally, often 

make a hazardous waste determination when the material is actually a non-hazardous solid 

waste. The intent of this proposed change would not impact such determinations. The generator 

is always free to manage its solid waste as a hazardous waste if it so desires. However, the 

Agency is concerned about other related situations, such as when a generator applied due 

diligence but still made an incorrect hazardous waste determination potentially posing a risk to 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 100 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

the environment, or where a generator intentionally tried to circumvent waste determination 

requirements.

EPA specifically requests comment on reasons why it may not be feasible to require a 

generator’s solid and hazardous waste determinations to be accurate and how best the Agency 

can make clear that generators are responsible for making an accurate hazardous waste 

determination. EPA also requests comment regarding ways the proposed regulatory text could be 

improved to better assist generators in making more effective hazardous waste determinations. 

Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is not affected by the proposed 

reorganization.

8. Taking Comment on Maintaining Records Until the Generator Closes

EPA is also using this notice to take comment on an additional revision to the hazardous 

waste determination regulations at § 262.11, but is not proposing any regulatory text for this 

change. The Agency requests comment on requiring SQGs and LQGs to maintain records of 

their waste determinations until the generator closes its site, rather than for at least three years 

from the date that the waste was last sent to on-site or off-site treatment, storage and disposal.

Because an inspector may not be able to inspect every SQG and LQG within three years from 

when the solid or hazardous waste was first generated, a generator may discard its waste 

determination records prematurely. For practical reasons, the Agency believes a generator will 

want to maintain records of its solid and hazardous waste determinations to support and respond 

to any questions an inspector may have about a particular waste determination—even if it is 

more than three years from when it was first generated. Similarly, the Agency believes 

generators that generate large numbers of solid and hazardous waste streams annually will 

computerize their records, making it easy to store and retrieve them when necessary. For these 

Deleted: “

Deleted: ”
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 101 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

reasons, the Agency does not believe requiring SQGs and LQGs to maintain records of their 

active solid and hazardous waste streams should be overly burdensome. 

Finally, while the Agency is not proposing that CESQGs maintain documentation of their 

non-hazardous waste determinations, the Agency does seek comment on the economic costs and 

environmental benefits of potentially requiring CESQGs to maintain documentation of their 

hazardous waste determinations, including their non-hazardous waste determinations. The 

Agency realizes that the total number of CESQGs is very large—ranging from an estimated 

293,000 to 463,000; however, the Agency believes that based on the number of waste streams 

generated by SQGs and LQGs that such generators should only be generating a few solid waste 

streams and in many cases using their knowledge of the process and process materials in making 

hazardous waste determinations. In other words, the burden of documenting their hazardous 

waste determination should not be that costly for each CESQG. 

Conversely, the costs of not making an accurate hazardous waste determination could be 

significant environmentally and financially to the CESQG. For example, in the case that a 

CESQG fails to make an accurate hazardous waste determination, resulting in the CESQG 

actually being either a SQG or LQG, hazardous wastes will likely be illegally managed. 

Hazardous wastes that should have been sent to a RCRA-permitted treatment, storage or disposal 

facility would instead be sent to a municipal solid waste landfill, potentially posing future 

environmental problems for that landfill and community. EPA requests comment on the potential 

environmental benefits that could be achieved if the Agency were to require that CESQGs 

document determinations that their solid waste is or is not a hazardous waste.

9. Hazardous Waste Determination Electronic Decision Tool

Building upon the above discussion and the importance of making accurate hazardous 

waste determinations, the Agency also seeks comment on the feasibility of developing a userDeleted: 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 102 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

friendly electronic hazardous waste determination decision tool that generators could use to 

assist them in making a hazardous waste determination. This electronic tool would guide 

generators through a series of analytical decision-type (Yes or No) questions to assist them in 

determining whether the solid waste they have generated is also a hazardous waste subject to the 

applicable RCRA hazardous waste regulations. As part of this decision tool, generators would be 

able to document reasons why the solid waste is a hazardous waste, or conversely, why the solid 

waste is not a hazardous waste. 

Given the large number and great variety of hazardous waste streams, a key challenge 

would be to determine how best to design this decision tool if the Agency went forward in 

developing it. Potential approaches include designing the tool conceptually around the following: 

(1) industrial sectors; (2) families of industrial materials (i.e., solvents, acids, metals, etc.); (3) 

broad type of hazardous secondary material (i.e., spent material, by-product, sludge, etc.); (4) 

listed hazardous waste organized by specific industrial sector or non-specific sectors (e.g., 

solvents, electroplating wastes, and characteristic hazardous waste), or (5) an eclectic approach 

that combined different aspects of the approaches in (1)–(4). 

This decision tool could assist generators to make the following determinations under § 

262.11:

 whether the waste is excluded from regulation under § 261.4 [§ 262.11(a)]

 whether the waste meets any of the hazardous waste listing descriptions in part 

261 subpart D [§ 262.11(b)]

 whether the waste exhibits one or more hazardous characteristics of hazardous 

waste, as identified in part 261 subpart C [§ 262.11(c)]

 what are all applicable EPA hazardous waste codes for wastes determined to be 

hazardous [§ 262.11(f)]
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 103 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

An electronic decision tool could also possibly provide a way for SQGs and LQGs to maintain Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

records supporting their waste determinations [§ 262.11(e)]. 

Developing this decision tool would be a major investment on the part of the Agency and 

could take several years to fully develop, test, and make operational, with different components 

produced for use over time. However, even when completed (assuming it was a worthwhile 

Agency investment to pursue), this decision tool would never be able to account for all the 

industrial sector/family of industrial materials/type of hazardous secondary material possibilities 

that exist in industry. Therefore, scoping such a decision tool to capture as much of the most 

likely industrial sector/family of industrial materials/type of hazardous secondary material 

possibilities would be the Agency’s goal. 

Additionally, if such a decision tool were to be developed, the generator would still be 

ultimately responsible for making the hazardous waste determination, since no decision tool 

could ever account for its site-specific circumstances. 

Hazardous waste determination software or tools could be web-based, off-the-shelf, or 

both. The software or tools could be developed by EPA, by authorized states and tribes, by 

private parties, or by public and private sector collaboration. 

The Agency particularly requests comment on the feasibility of the private sector 

developing electronic application software (apps). An initial search for preexisting hazardous 

waste determination software identified no relevant, privately-developed, off-the-shelf software 

products to assist generators in making accurate waste determinations. However, EPA did 

identify a variety of state and academic internet-based hazardous waste determination tools and 

workbooks.71 At issue is whether there is a market for such an app and what EPA could do to 

 

71 See, for example, the Washington Department of Ecology created an Excel program titled “Designation Tool 2.0 

for Excel 2007,” to help business make accurate waste designations in the state of Washington. 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 104 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

facilitate software development. The Agency estimates the universe of hazardous waste 

generators to be approximately 400,000 to 500,000, with a large majority being conditionallyexempt small quantity generators that generate up to 220 pounds in a calendar month. 

EPA is seeking comment on whether development of an electronic hazardous waste 

determination decision tool is feasible and by whom. The Agency requests comment on what 

circumstances would encourage the private sector to develop such a tool or app and on what

generators would like to see in terms of components and organization that would facilitate a 

generator using it.

C. SQG and LQG Re-notification (40 CFR 262.12)

1. Background

Under existing 40 CFR 262.12, SQGs and LQGs are required to notify EPA using EPA 

form 8700-12 (Site ID form) in order to obtain an EPA identification number (EPA ID). Without 

such identification, a generator cannot treat, store, dispose of, or transport, its hazardous waste. 

Once a generator applies for and receives an EPA ID, information provided by the generator 

(e.g., name, address, contact, industrial sector, EPA hazardous waste numbers) is entered into the 

state system and/or EPA’s national data system (RCRAInfo) to support program management 

activities. 

Subsequent to obtaining an EPA ID, there is no federal regulation requiring LQGs or 

SQGs to re-notify EPA to update their site information or confirm the information remains 

accurate. However, LQGs do update their site information as part of the biennial report.

 

http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/hwtr/manage_waste/des_intro.html; the Texas Commission on Environmental 

Quality created an online hazardous waste determination tool, the “Waste Designation Decision Matrix.” 

http://www.tceq.texas.gov/assistance/waste-matrix/matrixenter.html, and The Connecticut Department of Energy 

and Environmental Protection’s RCRA Help page provides a guide designed to help businesses and individuals 

figure out which hazardous waste requirements apply and how to comply with them. 

http://www.ct.gov/deep/cwp/view.asp?a=2718&q=434308&deepNav_GID=1967%20
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 105 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ EPA believes that about half the states require annual reporting by LQGs and some 

require periodic reporting by SQGs in order to determine user fees based on the amount of 

hazardous waste they generate. However, the data from these annual reports may not always be 

submitted to EPA’s national RCRA database. Additionally, although many LQGs currently 

submit a Site ID form as part of their biennial report, this independent requirement does not 

apply to SQGs or to entities that initially notified as an LQG, but were an SQG during the 

biennial reporting year and, thus, were not required to submit a biennial report.

2. Problems with Outdated Information

The lack of re-notification at the federal level greatly impairs EPA’s and the states’ 

ability to use the information for compliance monitoring and programmatic purposes. This is 

because a one-time notification provides no assurance that the information collected in EPA’s 

and the states’ databases over time will accurately reflect which facilities are generating 

hazardous waste. For example, a recent examination of EPA’s data reveals that there are 

thousands of SQGs who last notified over 20 years ago.72 EPA is concerned that the probability a 

generator that last notified prior to 1990 is still active and still an SQG is quite small. Because of 

the outdated information, it is difficult for EPA to ascertain even simple statistics, such as the 

number of SQGs currently operating, let alone information that can be reliably used for 

programmatic and compliance monitoring purposes. 

Because of the lack of integrity in the data, the Agency and states must spend their 

limited resources to ‘clean up’ the data every time regulatory authorities try to use it, for 

example, to estimate regulatory burden and benefits to the regulated community, offer

compliance assistance, or produce public reports on hazardous waste generation. Furthermore, 

regulatory authorities may waste time and resources monitoring compliance at entities that no 

 

72 Count of SQGs by Year of Last Notification Received, December 12, 2012.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 106 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

longer generate hazardous waste. This inefficient use of resources lowers the effectiveness of 

regulators to monitor compliance overall and could potentially increase the risk of environmental 

damage from mismanagement of hazardous waste. In summary, the Agency and many states 

have, for the most part, an outdated, incomplete, and inaccurate understanding of the LQG and 

SQG universe. Consequently, over time, this undermines the ability of EPA or the states to make 

effective programmatic decisions. 

3. Proposed Periodic Re-notification 

EPA is proposing to add an explicit independent requirement to the regulations that both 

LQGs and SQGs re-notify EPA using the Site ID form (EPA form 8700-12). 73 The intent of this 

re-notification provision is to provide basic information to the regulatory agencies about who is 

generating and managing hazardous waste. The information required in the Site ID form 

includes:

 Site name, address, contact information, and EPA ID number

 NAICS (North American Industry Classification System) code

 Information regarding the entity’s legal owner and operator

 Type of regulated waste activity (e.g., hazardous waste generator category and 

whether the entity is a transporter, treater, storer, disposer, or recycler of hazardous 

waste)

 Universal waste activities

 Used oil activities

 Notification for opting into or withdrawing from managing laboratory hazardous 

waste under 40 CFR part 262 subpart K

 

73 To the extent that other parts of the RCRA regulations require the submittal of EPA form 8700-12, for example, 

used oil generators or handlers, the proposed re-notification provision would not impact them, unless they were also 

an LQG or SQG of hazardous waste. 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 107 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

 Description of hazardous waste, including a list of applicable federal and state 

hazardous waste numbers

 Notification of hazardous secondary material activity managed under certain 

definition of solid waste exclusions.

 Certification signed by the entity’s legal owner, operator, or authorized 

representative.

The specific information included in the notification will enable regulatory agencies to 

monitor compliance adequately and to ensure hazardous wastes are managed according to the 

appropriate RCRA hazardous waste regulations. The information can be used to assist RCRA 

inspectors in determining which facilities may warrant greater oversight and provides a basis for 

setting enforcement priorities. Notification information is collected in EPA’s RCRAInfo 

database, which is the national repository of all RCRA Subtitle C site identification information, 

whether collected by a state authority or EPA. EPA provides public access to this information 

through EPA’s public website at http://www.epa.gov/enviro/html/.

Once an initial notification (to obtain an EPA ID number) is submitted, to re-notify, a 

generator need only review the previous notification and either make changes if necessary or 

confirm that the information remains accurate. Furthermore, EPA has recently made available an 

electronic system for the regulated community to use to submit Site ID forms electronically, 

which will further reduce burden on generators. Facilities should check with their states 

regarding whether their state will use EPA’s electronic submittal process.

The proposed rule would require LQGs, having first obtained an EPA ID number, to renotify EPA using the Site ID form prior to March 1 of each even-numbered year. This time 

frame is the same as that for the biennial reports in 40 CFR 262.41. Adding this provision to § 

262.12 in the existing regulations (which is § 262.18 in the proposed reorganization in this
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 108 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ proposed rule) reflects existing processes by which LQGs already submit Site ID forms as part of 

the biennial reporting process. EPA also believes that the requirement to re-notify is particularly 

important considering generators may change regulatory status from LQGs to SQGs and vice 

versa.

EPA is also proposing that SQGs, having first obtained an EPA ID number, must renotify EPA using the Site ID form prior to February 1 of each even-numbered year. We propose 

the two-year time frame to mimic the current biennial reporting process for LQGs; however, we 

propose to require that SQG re-notifications (due by February 1 of each even-numbered year) to 

occur one month prior to the due date for LQG re-notifications (due by March 1 of each evennumbered year) to help reduce the burden on states that must process the re-notifications. We are 

also taking comment on whether re-notifying every four years would be appropriate for SQGs.

EPA also considered whether to require SQGs to re-notify on alternate years— that is, by 

March 1 of each odd-numbered year, from LQGs, in order to further reduce the burden on states. 

However, this may complicate the regulations because a generator can change its generator 

category year-to-year. For example, it is possible that a generator who is an LQG during the 

SQG-reporting year and an SQG during the LQG-reporting year would not have to submit any 

notification to EPA. Furthermore, requiring SQG and LQG re-notifications during the same year 

enables EPA to include information regarding SQGs in its National Biennial RCRA Hazardous 

Waste Report. 

EPA believes that requiring a set due date (i.e., February 1) will ease implementation and 

compliance with the re-notification provision. However, one alternative that the Agency seeks 

comment on is to allow for ‘rolling’ notifications, in that generators could re-notify at any time 

of the year as long as they re-notified within two years of the date of their last notification. EPA 

understands that this alternative may further reduce burden on the states that would process the 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 109 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

re-notifications, in that the state would receive the notifications throughout the year rather than 

all at once; however, it may also complicate compliance by the regulated community, as well as 

compliance monitoring by the states and EPA, as each LQG and SQG would have a unique ‘due 

date’ that must be individually tracked.

Another alternative to requiring periodic notification (e.g., every two years) that the 

Agency seeks comment on would be for EPA to require an SQG or LQG to re-notify only in the 

event of a change to certain information, such as (1) change in ownership and (2) change in 

generator category.74 The Agency believes that updating this specific information is particularly 

important because: 

 Re-notifying when a generator has a change of ownership is important so that 

EPA and the states understand who is legally responsible for managing the 

generated hazardous waste.

 Re-notifying due to a change in generator category provides EPA and the state 

with information regarding what regulations apply to the generator and thus assist 

with compliance assistance and monitoring activities. 

EPA notes that, because an EPA ID number is specific to a site location, a change in site 

address for an entity already requires the entity to apply for a new EPA ID number using the Site 

ID form.

In this case, EPA would require re-notification within 30 days of when the change 

occurred. Re-notification in the event of change to these two items may further reduce burden on 

LQGs and SQGs, because EPA assumes that these changes would happen fairly infrequently. 

However, EPA also notes that although LQGs and SQGs would only have to re-notify in the 

 

74 EPA is also proposing a notification requirement for (1) generators undergoing closure (section VIII.G.); (2) 

LQGs that receive hazardous waste from CESQGs (section VII.C) and (3) episodic generators (section IX), which 

are discussed in other parts of this preamble. 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 110 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

event of a change in its ownership or generator category, re-notification would require a 

complete submittal of all information included in the Site ID form. EPA understands that this 

alternative may also increase the complexity of implementing the regulation because it would be 

difficult for regulatory authorities to ensure that re-notifications were received according to the 

regulations. For example, if a facility last notified ten years ago, it would be difficult for EPA 

and the states to ascertain whether the generator has failed to re-notify in compliance with the 

regulations or that the generator’s information simply hasn’t changed since its last notification.

Additionally, EPA notes that re-notification based on a change does not result in data that is as 

reliable as data provided in periodic re-notifications because it provides no information on 

generators that have stopped operations.

4. Request for Comment

EPA requests comment on its proposed change to require re-notification for SQGs and 

LQGs, including information regarding the benefits and burden of such a provision. EPA also 

requests comment on whether such re-notification should be every two years or one of the other 

alternatives discussed above. Finally, EPA requests comment on any other alternatives for an 

independent re-notification requirement, including suggestions that would reduce the burden on 

states that must process re-notifications.

Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is affected by the proposed 

reorganization. EPA is proposing to move § 262.12 (EPA identification numbers) to § 262.18 

and is proposing to revise the title of the section to read “EPA identification numbers and renotification for large quantity generators and small quantity generators.”

D. Determining Generator Category (proposed new section 262.13)

EPA is proposing a new section § 262.13, which would describe how a generator 

determines which generator category it would be subject to. Proposed § 262.13 discusses the 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 111 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

framework for making a generator determination in paragraph (a) and stresses that the 

calculation is made monthly and that the generator category can change from month to month. 

The proposed regulatory text would state that a generator’s category is determined each month 

by the amount of hazardous waste it generates and may change from month to month. The 

regulation sets forth procedures to determine whether a generator is a very small quantity 

generator, a small quantity generator, or a large quantity generator for a particular month, as 

defined in § 260.10.

The discussion in § 262.13(a) is not a new requirement for generators, but these steps are

not currently laid out in the regulations in as succinct a manner. EPA believes that the addition of 

the definitions of generator categories to § 260.10 and this paragraph on how to make a generator 

category determination should provide specific instructions on this matter for the regulated 

community and thereby improve compliance with the generator regulations. 

Proposed paragraph (b) of § 262.13 would specifically address the situation in which a 

generator generates any combination of non-acute hazardous waste, acute hazardous waste, and 

the residues from the cleanup of a spill of acute hazardous waste. This paragraph presents a 

series of steps for a generator to follow when determining its generator category to ensure that it 

selects the appropriate category for the total amount and types of hazardous waste generated. 

Proposed §§ 262.13(c) and (d) are existing provisions that we are proposing to 

move from §§ 261.5(c) and (d) of the existing regulations with a few small wording 

changes to reinforce that category determinations are made monthly and do not otherwise 

represent a change in the generator regulations.

EPA is requesting comment on the proposal to add this description of how a generator is 

to determine its generator category to the regulations. 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 112 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is partially affected by the proposed 

reorganization. Some of the language proposed for § 262.13 on what materials to count when 

determining generator category are moved from existing § 261.5, but much of this proposed 

regulation is new text.

E. Requiring Hazardous Waste Numbers When Marking of Containers Prior to Shipping 

Hazardous Waste Off Site to a Designated RCRA Facility (40 CFR 262.32)

The Agency is proposing to modify 40 CFR 262.32 to require SQGs and LQGs to mark 

their containers with the applicable EPA hazardous waste number (RCRA hazardous waste code) 

prior to transporting their hazardous waste off site to a designated RCRA facility for subsequent 

management. EPA is proposing this revision so that TSDFs can readily identify the contents of 

hazardous waste containers they are receiving from generators and effectively treat the wastes to 

meet land disposal restriction requirements (LDRs). As described elsewhere in this proposal, the 

Agency is proposing revisions to the marking and labeling of containers and other waste 

accumulation units in order for employees, inspectors, emergency responders, and waste 

handlers to better understand the potential hazards associated with the contents of hazardous 

waste contained in a unit.

This proposed provision should not increase burden on generators as it reaffirms 

commonly used waste management practices. Most generators, or their designated waste 

handlers, already mark their containers with the applicable EPA hazardous waste numbers prior 

to transporting their hazardous waste off site. In fact, requiring that applicable EPA hazardous 

waste numbers be marked on containers decreases overall burden because it avoids the need for a 

TSDF to identify the hazardous waste or send it back to the generator for proper identification. 

The Agency requests comment on this proposed change. 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 113 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is not affected by the proposed 

reorganization.

F. Modifications to Management of Containers, Tanks, Drip Pads, and Containment Buildings 

(40 CFR 262.34(a)(2) and(3) and 40 CFR 262.34(a)(1))

The existing regulations for LQGs that address the conditions for exemption related to 

marking and labeling are at § 262.34(a)(2) and (a)(3) for containers and at § 262.34(a)(3) for 

tanks. The marking and labeling condition for SQGs who accumulate hazardous waste in both 

tanks and containers are at § 262.34(d)(4), which references paragraphs § 262.34 (a)(2) and 

(a)(3). For practical reasons, there are no requirements to mark drip pads or containment 

buildings that accumulate hazardous waste other than requiring that documentation must exist 

that describes the procedures to ensure that each waste volume remains in the unit for no more 

than 90 days.

EPA is proposing to modify § 262.34(a)(2) to strengthen the marking and labeling 

conditions for exemption for containers and to modify § 262.34(a)(3) to strengthen and 

consolidate the marking and labeling conditions for exemption for hazardous waste tanks, drip 

pads, and containment buildings by LQGs. The Agency is also proposing to modify § 262.34(d) 

to strengthen the marking and labeling conditions of containers, tanks, drip pads, and 

containment buildings by SQGs. 

The proposed changes are consistent with the applicable discussion of marking and 

labeling of containers in SAAs in section VIII.I. Where differences may occur is when the 

container may be shipped off-site as opposed to when the contents of the container are managed 

on-site, or temporarily managed on-site (e.g., when the container is moved from the SAA to a 

central accumulation area and then shipped off-site to a TSDF). 

1. Container Marking and Labeling for LQGs and SQGs (40 CFR 262.34(a)(3))
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 114 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ Currently, § 262.34(a)(3) requires each container and tank to be labeled or marked clearly 

with the words, “Hazardous Waste.” However, while the words “Hazardous Waste” on 

containers and tanks provide some measure of information regarding the contents of these units, 

this information fails to describe the specific hazards of the contents and what risk these wastes 

could pose to human health and the environment. EPA believes it is important that employees, 

transporters, downstream handlers, emergency personnel, and EPA and state inspectors know as 

much as possible about the potential hazards of the contents in containers being accumulated, 

transported, and managed, whether on-site and/or off-site, so that the hazardous wastes are 

managed in an environmentally sound manner.

The Agency is proposing two modifications that would strengthen the labeling and 

marking conditions for LQGs and SQGs accumulating hazardous waste in containers. These 

changes are similar to those proposed for containers stored in satellite accumulation areas (see 

section VIII.I.) First, the Agency is proposing that SQGs and LQGs accumulating hazardous 

waste in containers mark their containers with both the words “Hazardous Waste” and other 

words that identify the contents of the containers that a third party, such as an emergency 

responder, co-worker unfamiliar with the material, or even the general public may recognize. 

Although the words “Hazardous Waste” are important to convey that the container contains a 

waste, as opposed to a product, and that a hazardous waste determination has been made for the 

contents, it does not convey more practical information regarding the contents of the container. 

Examples of other words that identify the contents of the container may include, but are not 

limited to the name of the chemical(s), such as “acetone” or “methylene dichloride”; or the type 

or class of chemical, such as “organic solvents” or “halogenated organic solvents.” Another 

option for complying with this provision is to use the proper shipping name and technical name 

markings used to comply with DOT requirements at 49 CFR part 172 subpart D. The Agency 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 115 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ does not consider chemical formulas, such as CH2Cl2 for methylene dichloride, to be “words that 

identify the contents of the container” since chemical formulas may not be widely known among 

emergency responders, workers, and hazardous waste handlers other than chemists.

If the hazardous waste will subsequently be sent off-site for treatment and disposal, an 

SQG or LQG may choose to use an appropriate DOT proper shipping name found on the 

hazardous materials table at 49 CFR 172.101 to identify the contents of the container while it is 

accumulating on-site. That way, the generator will fulfill EPA and DOT requirements 

simultaneously; however, EPA is not proposing to require the use of the DOT shipping names 

while the hazardous waste is accumulating on-site. We only suggest that the DOT shipping name 

may be one way that some generators may choose to identify the contents of the container. 

EPA also believes use of the DOT marking requirement should be sufficient in many 

situations involving DOT Class 9 hazardous materials that are also hazardous waste, with the 

DOT shipping name ending in N.O.S. (not otherwise specified). As noted at 49 CFR 172.301 

(b), generators using a DOT shipping name ending in N.O.S. must also provide the technical 

name of the hazardous material in association with the proper shipping name. However, the 

Agency is requesting comment on examples of when the DOT shipping name would not meet 

EPA’s intent of “identifying the contents of the container” and suggestions for addressing this 

situation. EPA notes that additional pre-transport requirements, other than the DOT shipping 

name, apply when shipping hazardous waste off-site. We are not proposing to change EPA’s 

existing requirements for pre-transport requirements that are currently found in §§ 262.30–33. 

Similarly, for packages subject to 49 CFR, the generator or shipper/carrier should be familiar 

with and aware of the marking requirements at 49 CFR 172.304 and prohibited labeling and label 

visibility requirements at 49 CFR 172.401 and 172.406, respectively. 

Deleted: In some cases, the DOT shipping name may not be 

sufficient to identify the contents of the container. For example, if a 

hazardous waste is a DOT Class 9 hazardous material, and the DOT 

shipping name ends ins N.O.S. (not otherwise specified), the DOT 

proper shipping name may not be sufficient. The Agency requests 

comment on other examples of when the DOT shipping name would 

not meet EPA’s intent of “identifying the contents of the container.”
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 116 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ The second modification we are proposing for labeling containers in central accumulation 

areas is to add a provision that SQGs and LQGs mark and label their containers with an 

indication of the hazards of the contents of the containers. SQGs and LQGs will have flexibility 

in how to comply with this new provision. That is, generators can indicate the hazards of the 

contents of the container using any of several established methods, including, but not limited to 

an EPA hazardous waste characteristic(s) (ignitable, corrosive, reactive or toxic); a hazard class 

label consistent with the DOT requirements at 49 CFR part 172 subpart E (labeling); a label 

consistent with the OSHA Hazard Communication Standard at 29 CFR 1920.1200; a chemical 

hazard label consistent with NFPA code 704; or a hazard pictogram consistent with the United 

Nations’ Global Harmonized System (GHS). Generators also may use any other marking or 

labeling commonly used nationwide in commerce that would alert workers and emergency 

responders to the nature of the hazards associated with the contents of the containers.

EPA believes that placing both the appropriate label and marking on containers during 

hazardous waste accumulation will enable persons who may come in contact with it to be aware 

of the hazardous contents of the container with little or no additional cost to generators. In many 

instances, this proposed condition will already have been satisfied if the generator elects to move 

a container accumulating hazardous waste in a satellite accumulation area to a central 

accumulation area. 

In summary, EPA is proposing to modify § 262.34(a)(3) and require LQGs and SQGs to 

mark containers with the following: (1) the words “Hazardous Waste,” (2) other words that 

identify the contents of the containers, and (3) an indication of the hazards of the container’s 

contents. We are not proposing to change §262.34(a)(2), which requires LQGs and SQGs to 

mark clearly and visibly the date accumulation began on each container and make that marking

visible for inspection. 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 117 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ The Agency requests comment on the proposed changes for container marking and 

labeling for LQGs and SQGs. 

Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is affected by the proposed 

reorganization in that the labeling and marking regulations would be moved from § 262.34 to § 

262.16(b)(6) (for SQGs) and to § 262.17(a)(5) (for LQGs). The reorganization is discussed in 

section XIII of this preamble.

2. Tank Marking and Labeling for LQGs and SQGs (40 CFR 262.34(a)(3))

The Agency is proposing to modify the regulations at § 262.34(a)(3) to require LQGs and 

SQGs to use inventory logs, monitoring equipment, or records indicating the date the hazardous 

waste first entered the tank in order to support a generator’s determination that it has not 

exceeded its 90 day accumulation time limit, or in the case of an SQG, its 180-day time 

limitation. Exceeding the 90- or 180- day time limitation for LQGs and SQGs, respectively,

would be a violation of a condition for an exemption from permitting requirements. Records 

from tank level sensors also may be used which could be either automatically logged from the 

sensors to a computer record, or recorded as part of a tank’s operational daily inspection (see 40 

CFR 265.195). Generators may also use any other methods that clearly demonstrate the date 

hazardous waste first entered the tank and show that the hazardous waste was subsequently 

emptied within 90 days of the date it first entered that tank, or 180 days in the case of an SQG 

(unless the hazardous waste must travel greater than 200 miles to a TSDF in which case 270 days 

is allowed). The generator must also use inventory logs to identify the hazardous waste contents 

and hazards of the tank. 

With respect to the accumulation start date, in the preamble to the promulgation of the 

SQG regulations (51 FR 10160, March 24, 1986), EPA stated that § 262.34 contains the

conditions for exemption for generators that accumulate hazardous waste on site. Under § 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 118 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ 262.34(a), an LQG may accumulate hazardous waste on site in tanks or containers in any 

quantity for up to 90 days (and up to 180 days for a SQG unless the hazardous waste must travel 

greater than 200 miles to a TSDF in which case 270 days is allowed) without the need to have 

interim status or obtain a storage permit under RCRA, provided the generator complies with the 

conditions of § 262.34, which include marking the date upon which the period of accumulation 

begins. While the preamble mentions marking tanks and containers, the final regulation at § 

262.34(a)(2) requires generators to mark the date upon which each period of accumulation 

begins only on containers.

As part of EPA’s Hazardous Waste Technical Corrections and Clarifications Direct Final 

Rule (75 FR 12989, March 18, 2010), the Agency sought to correct this oversight by including 

what it thought to be the appropriate clarifying language. The proposed regulatory language 

required generators to mark the date upon which each period of accumulation begins on each 

container and tank, which would bring the regulation in line with the preamble to the 1986 rule. 

However, EPA received numerous adverse comments regarding this change and as a result

withdrew that proposed change. The comments stated, among other things, that, unlike 

containers, the Agency failed to realize that generators do not actually mark their tanks with the 

date upon which each period of accumulation begins because the tank is often a fixture that is 

used and emptied repeatedly. Commenters argued that marking tanks would cause confusion 

since there would be numerous markings all over the tank making it difficult for the generator 

and inspector to identify when the last period of accumulation began or could cause an extra 

effort of removing the old marking before applying a new one. 

Deleted: “

Deleted: ”

Deleted: “

Deleted: ”
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 119 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

At Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶least one commenter also cited an EPA letter clarifying § 262.34(a)(l)(ii) in 

connection with the turnover of hazardous waste stored in generator accumulation tanks.75 In that 

letter, EPA stated that “LQGs utilizing a batch process must meet the requirements of § 

262.34(a)(l)(ii). For example, the use of inventory records in conjunction with tank markings 

may provide confirmation that the tank has been emptied within an appropriate time period. 

Specifically, the inventory records typically show the dates and quantity of hazardous waste 

entering the tank, as well as the dates the tank was emptied. Shipping or hazardous waste 

manifest records also may be used to verify when the tank was emptied. Likewise, tanks 

accumulating hazardous wastes may have information indicating the time and date hazardous 

waste first entered the tank.” The Agency went on to say that there may be other methods to 

demonstrate that a tank has been emptied, but any method used to confirm compliance with § 

262.34(a)(l)(ii) must be reasonable and easily discernible to EPA or an authorized state.

Later in this letter, EPA stated that LQGs accumulating hazardous wastes through a 

continuous flow process must “demonstrate that the hazardous waste has not been stored for 

more than 90 days...For example, a generator could confirm that the volume of a tank has been 

emptied every 90 days by recording the results of monitoring equipment both entering and 

leaving a tank. This recordkeeping, in conjunction with the tank volume, would enable 

inspectors, as well as [site] personnel, to demonstrate compliance with § 262.34(a)(l)(ii). 

Likewise, in marking the tank, a generator could mark both the tank volume and estimated daily 

throughput to allow inspectors to determine the number of days that hazardous wastes resides in 

a tank to determine compliance with § 262.34(a)(l)(ii). As noted above, there may be other 

 

75 Letter from Matt Hale, Director of EPA’s Office of Solid Waste to John Hopewell, National Paint and Coatings 

Association, February 16, 2007, RCRA Online 14764.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 120 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

methods to demonstrate that the tank has been emptied, but any method or demonstration to Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

confirm compliance must be reasonable and easily discernible to EPA or an authorized state.”

Subsequent to withdrawing the provision at § 262.34(a)(2) as part of EPA’s Hazardous 

Waste Technical Corrections and Clarifications Direct Final Rule due to adverse comment, EPA 

also confirmed with state officials that current operating practices do not include generators 

physically marking their tanks. Instead, generators are able to use inventory logs, monitoring 

equipment, or other methods to demonstrate that a tank has been emptied within 90 days of the 

date hazardous waste first entered the tank. 

Therefore, with respect to the accumulation start date for tanks, EPA is proposing that 

generators may use inventory logs, monitoring equipment or records indicating the date the 

hazardous waste first entered the tank, as long as this information is immediately accessible for 

inspection. Records from tank level sensors also may be used that are either automatically logged 

from the sensors to a computer record or recorded as part of a tank’s operational daily inspection 

(required by 40 CFR 265.195). Generators may also use any other methods that clearly 

demonstrate the date hazardous waste first entered the tank and was subsequently emptied within 

90 days of the date hazardous waste first entered that tank.

The same issue potentially applies to a generator physically marking and labeling the 

contents of the tank and its associated hazards. If the contents and associated hazards frequently 

change, then physically marking the tank could result in numerous markings and labels on the 

tank, making it difficult for employees and others to identify its contents. Therefore, following 

the same logic, the Agency is proposing that generators use inventory logs or records to identify 

the contents of the tank and its associated hazards. The Agency is also proposing that such tank 

logs be immediately accessible by the generator should the need arise. 

Deleted: “

Deleted: ”

Deleted: ing
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 121 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ The Agency requests comment on the feasibility and effectiveness of using inventory 

logs or records to identify the contents and hazards of a hazardous waste tank. The Agency also 

requests comment on alternative methods of identifying the contents and hazards of a hazardous 

waste tank in a more cost-effective manner. 

Consistent with the existing regulations for tanks at § 262.34(a)(3), the Agency will 

continue to require that hazardous waste tanks be labeled with the words “Hazardous Waste.”

Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is affected by the proposed 

reorganization. The labeling and marking regulations would be moved from § 262.34 to § 

262.16(b)(6) (for SQGs) and to § 262.17(a)(5) (for LQGs). The reorganization is discussed in 

section XIII of this preamble.

3. Drip Pad and Containment Building Marking and Labeling for LQGs and SQGs (40 CFR 

262.34(a)(3))76

The existing regulations for drip pads at § 262.34 (1)(iii)(A) and (B) require generators to 

produce a description of the procedures that will be followed to ensure that all wastes are 

removed from the drip pad and associated collection system at least every 90 days, and to 

produce documentation of each waste removal, including the quantity of waste removed from the 

drip pad and the sump or collection system and the date and time of removal. Likewise, the 

existing regulations for containment buildings at § 262.34(1)(iv)(A) and (B) require the 

generator to produce a written description of the procedures to ensure that each waste volume 

remains in the containment building for no more than 90 days, a written description of the waste 

generation and management practices for the facility showing that they are consistent with 

respect to the 90-day limit, and documentation that the procedures are complied with. However, 

 

76 Note: Under a separate provision discussed in section VIII.J, the Agency is proposing to allow hazardous waste to 

be accumulated by SQGs in drip pads and containment buildings.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 122 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

in both instances, the existing regulation explicitly fails to account for when the hazardous waste 

is first placed in or on the unit, which raises questions as to how a generator documents that it 

has met the 90-day limit. 

Therefore, to address this shortcoming, and because the risks for accumulating hazardous 

wastes on drip pads and containment buildings are similar to those accumulating in tanks, and for 

purposes of consistency and uniformity with the marking and labeling provisions for tanks, the 

Agency is proposing the same marking and labeling regulatory framework for hazardous wastes 

accumulated on drip pads and in containment buildings that it is proposing for tanks. 

Specifically, the Agency is proposing that hazardous waste accumulated on drip pads and 

in containment buildings be labeled in a conspicuous place near these units with the words 

“Hazardous Waste.” The Agency is also proposing to revise the existing marking regulations and 

clarify that LQGs and SQGs document the date that the hazardous waste was first placed on the 

drip pad and the sump or collection system in order to verify that the removal or turnover of the 

hazardous wastes on the drip pad took place within 90 days or less in order to support a 

generator’s determination that it has not exceeded its 90-day accumulation time limitation. 

Exceeding the 90-day time limitation for LQGs and SQGs, respectively would be a violation of a 

condition for an exemption from permitting requirements. Note that this is also important 

because, as described in section VIII.J below, SQGs may move their wastes from one type of 

unit to another (e.g., drip pad to containers), and without knowing the start and end dates, the 

generator will not be able to confirm that it met the appropriate accumulation time limitations. 

Consistent with current drip pad regulations in 40 CFR 262.34(a)(1)(iii)(A) and (B), these 

provisions will continue to include a description of the procedures to be followed by both SQGs 

and LQGs to ensure that all wastes are removed from the drip pad and associated collection 

system at least once every 90 days as well as documentation of each waste removal.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 123 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ Finally, the Agency is proposing that generators use inventory logs or records to identify 

the contents of the drip pad and its associated hazards and that such logs and records be 

immediately accessible. The Agency believes that these requirements are necessary to ensure 

that workers and emergency responders handling or coming in contact with the waste understand 

the hazards and dangers that they may be exposed to. 

In addition, as with the proposed changes for hazardous wastes accumulated in tanks and 

on drip pads, the Agency is proposing to clarify that LQGs and SQGs may use inventory logs, 

monitoring equipment, or any other effective means to document the date the hazardous waste 

was first placed in the containment building and the date when the hazardous waste was removed 

to verify that the waste was accumulated no more than 90 days at any one time.

Consistent with the existing regulation at § 262.34(a)(1)(iv)(A) and (B) for containment 

buildings, the proposed regulation for both LQGs and SQGs will state that the generator must 

maintain the following records and that they can do so by using inventory logs, records from 

monitoring equipment, or any other effective means: 

(i) A professional engineer certification that the building complies with the design 

standards specified in 40 CFR 265.1101 in the facility's operating record prior to 

operation of the unit; and 

(ii) A written description of procedures to ensure that each waste volume remains in 

the unit for no more than 90 days by identifying the date hazardous waste first 

started to be accumulated, a written description of the waste generation and 

management practices for the site showing that they are consistent with respecting 

the 90 day limit, and documentation that the procedures are complied with; or

(iii) Documentation that the unit is emptied at least once every 90 days. 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 124 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ Finally, the Agency is proposing that generators use inventory logs or records to identify 

the contents of the containment building and its associated hazards and that such logs and 

records be immediately accessible. As with the proposed changes to the marking and labeling of 

drip pads, the Agency believes that these requirements are necessary to ensure that workers and 

emergency responders handling or coming in contact with the waste understand the hazards and 

dangers that they may be exposed to. 

As with the proposed changes to the tank marking and labeling regulations at § 

262.34(a)(3), the Agency requests comment on the necessity and effectiveness of explicitly 

requiring generators to use inventory logs or records to identify the contents and hazards of 

hazardous waste accumulated on a drip pad or in a containment building. The Agency also 

requests comment on alternative methods of identifying the contents and hazards of a hazardous

waste on a drip pad or in a containment building in a more cost-effective manner. Lastly, the 

Agency requests comment on how a generator can more effectively mark or label a drip pad or 

containment building with the words “Hazardous Waste.” 

Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is affected by the proposed 

reorganization. The labeling and marking regulations would be moved from § 262.34 to § 

262.16(b)(6) (for SQGs) and § 262.17(a)(5) (for LQGs). The reorganization is discussed in 

section XIII of this preamble.

4. Request for Comment on Documentation of Waste Accumulation Unit Inspections

a. Container inspections at §§ 262.34. The Agency is requesting comment in this proposal on 

requiring both LQGs and SQGs, as a condition for exemption to record the results of their 

required “at least weekly” inspections to emphasize the importance of these inspections in 

preventing releases into the environment and to provide a measure of accountability that a 

generator inspection of its containers actually took place.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 125 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

As part of the proposed reorganization to make the generator regulations more user Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶-

friendly, the Agency is proposing to incorporate parts of the existing regulatory text at 

§ 265.174 (Container Inspections) into § 262.34 (§ 262.16(b)(2) for SQGs and § 262.17(a)(1) for 

LQGs under the proposed reorganization) and to revise these paragraphs to incorporate the 

existing regulatory text at § 265.171 for remedial action that is required if deterioration or leaks 

are detected.

The requirement for container inspections at § 265.174 states that the owner or operator 

must inspect areas where containers are stored at least weekly and that the owner or operator 

must look for leaking containers and for deterioration of containers caused by corrosion or other 

factors. 

Currently, neither SQGs nor LQGs are required to record the results of their weekly 

inspections. As a result, EPA and some states have no reliable way to verify that such inspections 

took place unless, by the rare chance, an inspector is inspecting a generator site at the same time 

that the “at least weekly” inspection occurs or an inspector notices a release from a container 

during an inspection. This problem is compounded by the fact that generators accumulating 

hazardous wastes in containers are not required to have any type of secondary containment for 

their containers. Therefore, should a release occur, these problems could be compounded if the 

“at least weekly” inspection fails to occur.

A review of state programs found that many states already require generators 

accumulating hazardous waste in containers to maintain records of their weekly inspections. 

Many of these states provide templates for generators to use to assist them in recording the 

results of their inspections.77

 

77 See Sample of States With Container Documentation Requirements in the docket for this rulemaking. 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 126 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ EPA does not believe the burden imposed upon generators to record the results of its 

weekly inspections would be significant, particularly if generators use a template of some type to 

document the results of inspections (see examples of templates provided by states to generators 

to assist them in recording the results of inspections in the docket to this proposal).

The Agency also believes that best management practices for generators would already 

include documenting the results of their weekly inspections to not only prevent any releases, but 

also identify situations, such as a damaged container, that could lead to a potential release to the 

environment. That is, the Agency believes that the incremental cost of documenting the results of 

weekly inspections would be less than the costs of having to clean up after a release. 

The Agency is also seeking comment on modifying the generator accumulation 

conditions (the proposed language at § 262.16(b)(2)(iv) and § 262.17(a)(1)(v) under the 

reorganization) to add a provision that generators document their weekly inspections of 

containers in central accumulation areas and keep the log of the inspections at the site for at least 

three years. The record of each inspection would document the following: the visual inspection 

of containers to identify any hazardous wastes accumulated in rusting, bulging, or leaking 

containers; a description of any discrepancies or problem areas encountered in the inspection and 

corrective actions taken; and the signature or initials of the inspector and the date of the 

inspection.

In requesting comment on documenting the results of “at least weekly” container 

inspections, the Agency is interested in the environmental and economic impacts of requiring all 

generators accumulating hazardous waste in containers to document weekly container inspection, 

as a condition for exemption. Additionally, the Agency requests comment on whether to require 

documentation of such inspections if the generator has a secondary containment system to 

control leaks in the event of a release of hazardous wastes or other such incidents. The Agency 

Deleted: 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 127 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

also requests comment on whether this documentation requirement should be limited to those 

generators that accumulate a certain amount of hazardous waste at any one time or generators 

that accumulate more than a certain number of containers in a central accumulation area at any 

one time. Lastly, the Agency also seeks comment from generators in states who already must 

maintain records of their container inspections on their experience with this provision and 

whether there are effective alternative options worth considering that achieve the same goals. 

b. Tank inspections for SQGs at § 262.34(d)(3) with cross-reference to §§ 265.201(c) and (d). 

The Agency also requests comment on requiring small quantity generators accumulating 

hazardous waste in tank systems to document the results of their tank inspections in order to 

emphasize the importance of these inspections in preventing releases into the environment and to 

provide a measure of accountability that a generator inspection of its tanks actually took place.

Unlike LQGs accumulating hazardous wastes in tanks, who must document the results of their 

inspections, SQGs have no such provision in part 262. EPA proposes to incorporate the 

regulatory text of 265.201(c) and (d) into 262.16. 

The regulations at §§ 265.201(c)(1)–(5) state that SQGs must inspect discharge 

equipment, data from monitoring equipment, and levels of waste in a tank daily, unless the tanks 

have secondary containment and leak detection equipment or procedures, in which case these can 

be inspected at least weekly. In addition, SQGs must inspect the construction of tanks and of 

discharge confinement structures like dikes and the areas immediately surrounding them at least 

weekly. 

Section 265.201(d) also requires that SQGs with full tank secondary containment to 

document in the facility’s operating record when an alternative inspection schedule is used. 

However, neither §§ 265.201(c) nor (d) contains a requirement to document the results of any 

inspection findings. Therefore, the Agency requests comment on adding a paragraph to § 262.16 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 128 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

that would require that generators record in a log the daily and weekly results of inspecting their 

tanks and maintain a record of those inspections on site for at least three years. 

Similarly, the Agency requests comment on adding a similar provision to § 262.16 to 

address tanks with secondary containment and leak detection systems or practices to ensure that 

leaks that are identified, that the generator would be required to record in a log the results of 

inspecting these areas, including any leakage that may occur and maintain a record of those 

inspections on site for at least three years. 

In commenting on this matter, please consider, in particular, whether it is 

environmentally and economically worthwhile to require SQGs accumulating hazardous waste in 

tanks to document the results of daily and weekly tank inspections. The Agency also requests 

comment on whether to require the documentation of such inspections if the SQG has a 

secondary containment system to control leaks in the event of the release of hazardous wastes. 

Additionally, the Agency requests comment on whether this documentation requirement should 

be limited to those generators that accumulate a certain amount of hazardous waste at any one 

time or generators that accumulate hazardous waste in more than a certain number of tanks in a 

central accumulation area. Lastly, the Agency also seeks comment from SQGs in states who 

already must maintain records of their tank inspections on their experience with this requirement 

and whether there are effective alternative options worth considering that achieve the same goal. 

c. Drip pad inspections for both SQGs and LQGs at §§ 262.34. The Agency also requests 

comment on requiring both LQGs and SQGs accumulating hazardous waste on drip pads to 

document the results of their drip pad inspections. The current regulation in § 262.34(a)(1)(iii) 

references subpart W of part 265. Section 265.444 in subpart W currently requires that after 

installation, liners and covers must be inspected to ensure tight seams and joints and the absence 

of tears, punctures, or blisters and that while a drip pad is in operation, it must be inspected 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 129 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

weekl Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ y and after storms to detect evidence of various types of damage to the drip pad or the 

systems that prevent and detect run-off and leakage. 

As with hazardous waste accumulated in containers by LQGs and SQGs and hazardous 

waste accumulated in tank systems by SQGs, there is no regulation requiring them to document 

the results of drip pad inspections. Therefore, the Agency requests comment on modifying the 

generator accumulation conditions (§§ 262.16(b)(4) and 262.17(a)(3) in the proposed 

reorganization) to add a condition that the generator record in a log the results of weekly 

inspections and inspections after storms and that the records address deterioration, malfunctions 

or improper operation of run-on and run-off control systems; the presence of leakage in and 

proper functioning of leakage detection systems; and deterioration or cracking of the drip pad 

surface. The generator would be required to keep a record of the inspections on site for at least 

three years from the date of the last inspection.

In commenting, please consider whether it is environmentally and economically 

worthwhile to require SQGs accumulating hazardous waste on drip pads to document the results 

of weekly drip pad inspections. Additionally, the Agency requests comment on whether this 

documentation requirement should be limited to those generators that accumulate a certain 

amount of hazardous waste at any one time. The Agency also seeks comment from SQGs and 

LQGs in states who already must maintain records of their drip pad inspections on their 

experience with this provision, including whether it makes environmental and economic sense to 

ensure releases do not occur and whether there are effective alternative options that achieve the 

same goals.

G. Generator Closure Regulations

EPA is proposing three changes to the closure conditions for exemption from permitting 

for LQGs in 262.34(a)(1)(iv)(B). First, EPA is proposing to consolidate the closure regulations 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 130 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

for LQGs accumulating hazardous waste at § 262.17(a)(8). This consolidation would include 

both the general performance requirements found at §§ 265.111 and 265.114 for containers, 

tanks, drip pads, and containment buildings, and the unit specific requirements found at § 

265.197 for tanks, § 265.445 for drip pads, and § 265.1102 for containment buildings. 

Second, EPA is proposing to strengthen the closure regulations for LQGs accumulating 

hazardous waste in containers in central accumulation areas that plan to stop hazardous waste 

accumulation in those containers by requiring them to meet the same type of closure regulations 

that apply for tanks, drip pads and containment buildings, including in those situations where a 

generator is not able to demonstrate that its contaminated soils can be practicably removed or 

decontaminated. 

Third, EPA is proposing to require an LQG to notify EPA or the authorized state using 

EPA form 8700-12 at least 30 days prior to closing the generator’s site or when the generator 

closes a unit accumulating hazardous waste. Additionally, EPA is proposing that an LQG notify 

EPA or their authorized state within 90 days after closing the site or the unit accumulating the 

hazardous waste. This notification would state that the LQG has clean closed or failed to clean 

close and therefore must close as a landfill. 

1. Consolidation of Closure Regulations for LQGs in Part 262

EPA is proposing to consolidate all of the closure regulations for LQGs accumulating 

hazardous waste in tanks, drip pads, and containment buildings in the generator accumulation 

conditions (§ 262.17(a)(8) under the proposed reorganization). EPA believes that the current 

structure of these regulations can be confusing and difficult to follow. 

Currently, the closure regulations for LQGs are found at § 262.34(a)(1). These 

regulations refer to the general performance requirements for closure at §§ 265.111 and 265.114. 

Section 265.111 references the unit specific closure regulations found at subpart J of part 265 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 131 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(for tanks), subpart W of part 265 (for drip pads) and subpart DD of part 265 (for containment 

buildings). The closure regulations for LQGs refer to the TSDF regulations because the waste 

accumulation units at LQGs (tanks, drip pads, and containment buildings) are similar to those at 

TSDFs and, thus, present the same potential for adverse impacts to human health and the 

environment if closure is not conducted properly. 

However, while §§ 265.111 and 265.114 cite the specific closure regulations for different 

types of units, missing from § 265.111 is a reference to drip pads and missing from § 265.114 is 

a reference to both drip pads and containment buildings. The Agency believes these are 

inadvertent oversights where EPA failed to make the appropriate conforming changes when the 

regulations for drip pads and containment building were promulgated in 1990 and 1992, 

respectively. 78

Furthermore, as with other parts of the hazardous waste generator regulations, the 

accumulation regulations at § 262.34 often reference the detailed technical regulations of part 

265 to reduce duplication. Part 265 describes the technical regulations for interim status TSDFs. 

Usually, the technical requirements in part 265 are clear in distinguishing the generator standards 

from standards for interim status TSDFs (e.g., § 265.201 specifies that the provisions of that 

paragraph are only for SQGs); however, this is not the case for the LQG closure regulations.

Finally, EPA believes the closure regulations are unnecessarily confusing. For example, 

the tank system regulations for LQGs at § 262.34(a)(1)(ii) make clear that the requirements of § 

265.197(c) do not apply to LQGs. Yet, LQGs must comply with § 265.111, which in turn, at 

 

78 Memo from Robert Springer, Director of EPA’s Office of Solid Waste, to RCRA Directors, September 24, 2003, 

RCRA Online 14681; Drip Pad Closure Notification and Certification Requirements, November 1, 1997, RCRA 

Online 14130; and RCRA/Superfund Hotline Monthly Report, December 1998, RCRA Online 14321, that states:

“LQGs are subject to the most stringent requirements, which include general closure provisions and unit-specific 

ones. The general closure requirements appear in Section 265.111 and Section 265.114 (Section 262.34(a)(1)).” 

Additionally, the report states: “LQGs storing or treating waste in tanks, on drip pads, or in containment buildings 

are also subject to closure requirements specific to these types of units.”
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 132 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ paragraph §265.111(c) requires LQGs to comply with § 265.197, which includes paragraph (c). 

One commenter wrote about this confusion when the Agency proposed to clarify the closure 

regulations for LQGs as part its March 18, 2010, Hazardous Waste Technical Corrections and 

Clarifications Direct Final Rule (75 FR 12989). 79 The Agency has made clear in guidance that 

generators are not subject to § 265.111(c), except if the facility cannot clean close its waste 

accumulation unit(s), but we believe that a regulatory change would make this even more clear.80

Therefore, as a first step in improving the usefulness of the closure regulations for LQGs 

accumulating hazardous waste in containers, tanks, drip pads, and containment buildings, EPA is 

proposing to consolidate and integrate all relevant closure provisions for LQGs accumulating 

hazardous waste in tanks, drip pads, and containments buildings at § 262.17(a)(8). The closure 

regulations include the following: (1) the general closure performance standards found at § 

265.111(a) and (b); (2) a modified version of the standards found at § 265.114 (Disposal or 

decontamination of contaminated equipment, structures, and soils) that incorporates regulatory 

language applicable to containers, tanks, drip pads, and containment buildings undergoing 

closure; (3) the unit-specific closure regulations relevant to tanks, drip pads, and containment 

buildings found at §§ 265.197(a) and (b), 265.445(a) and (b), and 265.1102(a) and (b), 

respectively; 81 (4) a provision addressing the disposition of any hazardous waste generated in 

the process of closing either the generator’s site or unit(s) accumulating hazardous waste, and (5) 

a provision addressing the situation when a waste accumulation unit or site cannot clean close 

 

79 Comments from the National Mining Association, May 3. 2010. Docket ID No: ID EPA–HQ–RCRA–2008–0678.

80 RCRA/Superfund Hotline Monthly Report, December 1998, RCRA Online 14321.

81 Note: During the partial and final closure periods, all contaminated equipment, structures and soil must be 

properly disposed of, or decontaminated unless specified otherwise in §§ 265.197, 265.228, 265.258, 265.280, or 

265.310. By removing all hazardous wastes or hazardous constituents during partial and final closure, the owner or 

operator may become a generator of hazardous waste and must handle that hazardous waste in accordance with all 

applicable requirements of part 262 of this chapter.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 133 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

and must close as a landfill. This includes situations where an LQG accumulating hazardous 

wastes in containers cannot clean close. More specifically, the proposed new closure regulations 

in the generator accumulation conditions at § 262.17(a)(8)(ii) would require LQGs at closure to

close the waste accumulation unit or site in a manner that achieves all of the following: 

(1) minimizes the need for further maintenance by controlling, minimizing, or 

eliminating, to the extent necessary to protect human health and the environment, the postclosure escape of hazardous waste, hazardous constituents, leachate, contaminated run-off, or 

hazardous waste decomposition products to the ground or surface waters or to the atmosphere;

(2) properly disposes of or decontaminates all contaminated equipment, structures and 

soil and any remaining hazardous waste residues from waste accumulation units including 

containment system components (pads, liners, etc.), contaminated soils and subsoils, bases, and 

structures and equipment contaminated with waste. Any hazardous waste residues remaining in 

the unit(s) being closed must be removed from the unit(s). Any leakage must also be 

decontaminated or removed and managed as a hazardous waste unless § 261.3(d) applies; 

(3) manages any hazardous waste generated in the process of closing either the 

generator’s site or unit(s) accumulating hazardous waste in accordance with all applicable 

requirements of parts 260 through 270 of this chapter, including removing any hazardous waste 

contained in these units within 90 days of generating it and managing these wastes in a RCRA 

Subtitle C hazardous waste permitted or interim status treatment, storage and disposal facility or 

interim status facility; and

(4) ensures that if the generator demonstrates that all contaminated soils cannot be 

practicably removed or decontaminated as required in this section, then the generator must close 

the waste accumulation unit(s) and perform post-closure care in accordance with the closure and 

post-closure care regulations that apply to landfills (§ 265.310). In addition, for the purposes of 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 134 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

closure, post-closure, and financial responsibility, such a waste accumulation unit is then 

considered to be a landfill, and the generator must meet all of the standards for landfills specified 

in subparts G and H of part 265.

2. Closure Regulations for LQGs Accumulating Hazardous Waste in Containers

As an additional condition to qualify to accumulate hazardous waste without a permit or 

interim status, EPA is proposing to require LQGs accumulating hazardous wastes in containers

in central accumulation areas that plan to stop hazardous waste accumulation in those containers 

to meet the same type of closure regulations discussed above—that is, the closure regulations for 

tanks, drip pads, and containment buildings. This includes situations where an LQG 

accumulating hazardous wastes in containers can demonstrate that any contaminated soils cannot 

be practicably removed or decontaminated and as a result, the generator must close the waste 

accumulation unit(s) and perform post-closure care in accordance with the closure and postclosure care requirements that apply to landfills (§ 265.310). In addition, for the purposes of 

closure, post-closure, and financial responsibility, such a waste accumulation unit is then 

considered to be a landfill, and the generator must meet all of the requirements for landfills 

specified in subparts G and H of part 265. 

Supporting these proposed regulations are damage cases by generators who accumulated 

hazardous wastes in containers. An examination of Superfund removal actions shows LQGs 

accumulating hazardous waste in containers have sometimes closed their doors or abandoned 

their sites, resulting in environmental problems.82 Most LQGs use containers to accumulate 

hazardous wastes. Some LQGs may generate relatively small quantities of hazardous waste and 

therefore may not need many containers to accumulate their hazardous wastes, but other 

generators generate a sufficient quantity of hazardous waste to require the use of a large number 

 

82 See EPA’s On Scene Coordinator (OSC) website: http://www.epaosc.org.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 135 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ of containers each day. Not ensuring that these sites are closed properly increases the risk of 

more damage cases.

For LQGs that accumulate hazardous waste in containers or container units, EPA is 

proposing closure regulations that replicate the regulations in paragraphs § 262.17(a)(8)(ii), 

mentioned above. The Agency believes the closure regulations are applicable to LQGs who have 

accumulated hazardous waste in containers as well as to LQGs who have accumulated hazardous 

waste in tanks, drip pads and containment buildings in order to prevent adverse impacts to 

human health and environment. Therefore, as with LQGs that accumulate hazardous wastes in 

tanks, drip pads, and containment buildings, should a generator decide to close a container or 

stop accumulating hazardous waste in containers at the site altogether, it would be responsible 

for complying with the regulations proposed at § 262.17(a)(8)(ii) and removing all relevant 

hazardous wastes accumulated within 90 days of generating it and any hazardous wastes that also 

may have been accumulated in SAAs. Otherwise, the generator would fail to meet the conditions 

for the exemption from permitting and would be subject to the requirements of 40 CFR parts 

264, 265, 267 and the permit requirements of part 270. 

3. Notification by LQGs Upon Closure of their Hazardous Waste Accumulation Units 

EPA is also proposing that an LQG notify either EPA or its authorized state at least 30 

days prior to closure of a hazardous waste accumulation unit, such as a container, tank, drip pad, 

or containment building, or closure of the site altogether. EPA is also proposing that such 

generators subsequently notify EPA or its authorized state no later than 90 days after closure of 

the site or a hazardous waste accumulation unit that they have either clean closed (e.g., complied 

with the applicable generator closure regulations) or, if they cannot clean close, that they must 

close as a landfill. If these changes are finalized, EPA will amend EPA form 8700-12 to 

incorporate collection of this information.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 136 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ The hazardous waste regulatory program is a “cradle to grave” system in which any 

hazardous waste generated by an LQG (or SQG) must be subsequently managed, either on site or 

off site at an appropriate RCRA destination facility. Missing from the current regulatory 

framework is knowledge by the regulatory authority that the LQG, upon closing either a waste 

accumulation unit or closing the site altogether, properly closed the accumulation unit in 

compliance with the applicable closure regulations. Without this knowledge, regulatory 

authorities do not know whether generators have abandoned the site, leaving behind hazardous 

waste that could subsequently result in a release to the environment and adverse impacts to 

human health and the environment. Thus, these closure notifications are important to ensure that 

LQGs close their waste accumulation unit, or site, in compliance with the applicable closure 

regulations. Fail to properly close would be a violation of the waste accumulation exemption.

4. Request for Comment

EPA requests comment regarding its proposal to consolidate the closure regulations for 

hazardous waste generated by LQGs in § 262.17(a)(8) and whether this approach would improve 

the readability/understandability of the rules, and thus, improve compliance. EPA also requests 

comment on whether parts of the proposed closure regulations at § 262.17(a)(8) should be 

modified.

EPA also requests comment regarding its proposal to strengthen the closure regulations 

for LQGs accumulating hazardous waste in containers. 

In addition, EPA requests comment on whether it should require LQGs to notify EPA 

regarding closure both prior to closure (e.g., at least 30 days prior to closure) and after closure 

(e.g., notify no later than 90 days after the site has closed one or all of its hazardous waste 

accumulation units either by clean closure or closed as a landfill) or whether EPA should just 

require notification only once—that is, after closure (e.g., no later than 90 days after closure). 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 137 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ Requiring notification only after closure of the hazardous waste accumulation unit or site reduces 

the generator’s paperwork burden in half and allows EPA and the state to focus on results. 

However, requiring notification both before and after closure creates greater visibility for this 

important activity. The notification creates an incentive for the generator to take all appropriate 

actions once the unit or site is closed and also provides notice to EPA and the state to be aware of 

this important activity and to plan for a possible inspection to verify clean closure has 

successfully occurred or determine if additional closure efforts are needed. EPA is currently of 

the opinion that the additional environmental benefits accrued from requiring both notifications 

will exceed the additional paperwork costs to the generator. In conjunction with an LQG 

notifying EPA no later than 90 days after closure, EPA is also requesting comment on whether, 

as part of the closure notification requirements, LQGs should be required to certify that they 

have clean closed or failed to clean close all applicable hazardous waste accumulation units. This 

type of notification would have the added benefit of ensuring EPA knows that an LQG 

performed their due diligence in closing and can certify to either clean closing or closing as a 

landfill. 

Because there are no federal regulations for closure of a waste accumulation unit or site 

closure by SQGs, SQGs are not required to comply with the clean closure regulations, as well as 

notify when they close any or all waste accumulation units. Unlike LQGs, which have no waste 

accumulation limits as long as they remove any hazardous waste within 90 days of generating it, 

SQGs do have a waste accumulation quantity limitation of 6,000 kilograms. Given this waste 

accumulation quantity limitation, EPA sees no reason at this time to propose requiring SQGs to 

clean close or close as a landfill if they cannot clean close. However, EPA sees a potential 

benefit in having SQGs notify EPA when SQGs close to allow the regulatory authority to followup and ensure that all hazardous waste was removed and properly managed. Therefore, EPA is 

Deleted: EPA 

Deleted: having to 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 138 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

requesting comment regarding whether SQGs that stop accumulating and close any or all of their

hazardous waste accumulation units should notify EPA within 60 days after closing.

Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is affected by the proposed 

reorganization. The LQG closure regulations would move to § 262.17(a)(8). The reorganization 

is discussed in section XIII of this preamble.

H. Changes to the Preparedness, Prevention, and Emergency Procedures Provisions (40 CFR 

262.34(a)(4) and 262.34(d)(4) and (5))

EPA is proposing a number of modifications to the conditions for exemption for both 

SQGs and LQGs regarding preparedness, prevention and emergency procedures. The conditions

for SQGs are found at §§ 262.34(d)(4) and (5) (which refer to the technical standards at 40 CFR 

part 265 subpart C) and the conditions for LQGs are found at § 262.34(a)(4) (which refers to the 

technical standards at part 265 subparts C and D). 

The proposed revisions are organized in this section as follows: (1) revising the scope of 

the contingency planning and emergency procedures regulations; (2) revising § 265.37(a) to state 

that when making arrangements with local authorities regarding emergency procedures, an SQG

or LQG must first attempt to make emergency preparedness and procedures agreements with its 

Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC), and, if this attempt is not successful (or there is 

no LEPC in the area), the generator must make an arrangement with its local fire department and 

other emergency responders; (3) modifying the regulations for contingency plans for LQGs in §§ 

265.52 and 265.53 to add an executive summary to the plan that a new LQG would submit to the 

LEPC and to adjust the content of an element of the required contingency plan; (4) making two 

revisions to the technical standards regarding required equipment that are part of the 

preparedness and prevention regulations in part 265 subpart C that are applicable to both SQGs 

and LQGs; (5) modifying the preparedness and prevention provisions for SQGs at § 262.34(d)(5) 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 139 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

regarding posted emergency coordinator information and responsibility for cleaning up a spill; 

(6) modifying the personnel training provision for LQGs; (7) taking comment on what personnel 

should have mandated personnel training, and (8) taking comment on whether any of these 

proposed revisions would be appropriate for TSDFs in addition to generators. 

Recent catastrophic chemical accidents in the United States, such as the 2013 West, 

Texas, fire and explosion that killed 15 people, the 2010 explosion and fire at Tesoro Refinery in 

Anacortes, Washington, that killed seven employees, and the 2012 Chevron Refinery 

hydrocarbon fire in Richmond, California, that affected 15,000 people in the surrounding area, 

highlight the need for continued improvement in a number of areas related to chemical facility 

safety. To address these concerns, the President issued Executive Order 13650—Improving 

Chemical Facility Safety and Security (EO) on August 1, 2013.83 The EO directed the 

Department of Homeland Security, EPA, the Department of Labor, the Department of Justice, 

the Department of Agriculture, and the Department of Transportation to identify ways to 

improve operational coordination with state, local, tribal, and territorial partners; enhance federal 

agency coordination and information sharing; modernize policies, regulations, and standards to 

enhance safety and security in chemical facilities; and work with stakeholders to identify best 

practices to reduce safety and security risks in the production and storage of potentially harmful 

chemicals. 

One of the key goals the EPA is addressing through this effort is enhancing and providing 

additional support to State Emergency Response Commissions (SERCs) and LEPCs to assist 

them in collecting and analyzing the chemical information they receive from local facilities and 

developing local emergency response plans to mitigate or prevent a devastating chemical 

 

83 http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/08/01/executive-order-improving-chemical-facility-safetyand-security

Formatted: Font: 10 pt
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 140 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ disaster. Several of the proposed requirements are aligned with these EO efforts and will assist in 

furthering this goal and with those of the EO in general because they update the regulations to 

make them compatible with the current infrastructure of emergency planning and response by 

referencing LEPCs. Additionally, these revisions would provide a more usable contingency plan 

to emergency responders en route to a time-sensitive emergency at a generator of hazardous 

waste. Before finalizing these provisions, EPA will ensure that they are aligned with the efforts 

to improve chemical plant safety and security under the EO. 

This preamble also discusses how EPA might incorporate modern technology into the 

emergency planning and procedures regulations for generators in order to provide information 

more quickly to emergency responders when faced with an event at a generator. 

In addition to the changes listed above, as part of the reorganization of the preamble 

discussed in section XIII, EPA is proposing to copy the preparedness and prevention regulations 

for SQGs into § 262.16 and to create a new subpart in part 262—subpart M—that would contain 

the more extensive preparedness, prevention, and emergency procedures regulations for LQGs. 

Copying a version of these regulations into part 262 allows most of the preparedness, prevention, 

and emergency procedures regulations for generators to be easily found without accessing part 

265 and with minimal cross-referencing.84

As part of this reorganization, our proposed regulation has replaced the word “facility” in 

the regulations with “site” because “facility” is defined in § 260.10 as specific to TSDFs. 

Another small revision that we propose because of the reorganization of these regulations is 

folding the “comment” in § 265.55 into the body of the corresponding proposed regulation at § 

 

84 Note that throughout this section, although we are referring to the regulations by their current citations, the fact 

that we are also proposing in most cases to reorganize those requirements and copy them into the generator 

requirements in part 262 means that the revisions discussed in this section would not automatically apply to interim

status TSDFs, as the proposed revisions only apply to the version of these regulations that is being proposed to be in 

part 262. 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 141 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ 262.264. We are proposing this because Federal Register style no longer permits this kind of 

comment in new regulations. 

1. Areas Subject to Preparedness, Contingency Planning, and Emergency Procedures

Regulations 

The current preparedness and emergency procedures regulations do not clearly state 

whether they are applicable to the entire generator site or only to areas where hazardous waste is 

generated and accumulated on site (or where allowable treatment may occur in accumulation 

units) and when transported off site for subsequent treatment, storage, and disposal. EPA is 

proposing that the regulations for preparedness and prevention and for contingency planning and 

emergency procedures apply only to those areas of a generator’s site where hazardous waste is 

generated and accumulated and, where applicable, to those areas where allowable treatment may 

occur in accumulation units. 

The Agency is proposing to explicitly state that the RCRA preparedness and emergency 

procedures regulations are limited strictly to areas where hazardous waste is generated and

accumulated. 

The Agency has previously signaled that these requirements do not apply to the entire 

generator site. In a November 7, 2006, letter, EPA stated that the 40 CFR part 265 regulations for 

LQGs set forth in § 262.34(a)(4) apply to units accumulating hazardous wastes. The letter states 

that in order to comply with the part 265 requirements referenced in § 262.34(a)(4), LQGs only 

need to address those tanks, containers, drip pads, and containment buildings that accumulate 

hazardous wastes and are subject to the 90-day generator accumulation provision. As an 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 142 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

example, the letter states that when developing a contingency plan, LQGs would only need to 

include those 90-day accumulation units involving the on-site management of hazardous waste.85

It makes sense to limit the applicability of these regulations only to these areas because

several other statutes already address the development and implementation of contingency plans 

associated with other areas of a generator site, such as the storage of chemical materials other 

than hazardous wastes. We also note that considerable overlap exists in the requirements in the 

various statutes and, since 1997, the federal government has encouraged facilities to develop 

integrated contingency plans and has provided guidance for doing so in the Federal Register. The 

integrated contingency plan is discussed further in section VIII.H.3, below.

The language EPA is proposing to change currently appears in §§ 265.30 and 265.50, 

though we are proposing to move it to a new part 262 subpart M to make it specific to 

generators. EPA proposes that subpart M apply only to those areas of a large quantity generator 

where hazardous waste is generated and accumulated on site in accordance with the conditions in 

§ 262.17. This proposal includes a parallel change for the emergency procedures regulations for 

small quantity generators in § 262.16. 

The Agency requests comment on making it explicit in the regulations that the 

preparedness, prevention, and emergency procedures regulations apply only to those areas of the 

generator’s site where hazardous waste is generated and accumulated, and where applicable, 

those areas where allowable treatment may occur in accumulation units. 

Effect of Proposed Reorganization: This section is affected by the proposed 

reorganization. The proposed revisions would appear at § 262.250 in a new subpart M of part 

 

85 Memorandum from Matt Hale, Director of EPA’s Office of Solid Waste, to RCRA Division Directors, November 

7, 2006, RCRA Online 14758.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 143 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ 262 and would not appear in part 265. The reorganization is discussed in section XIII of this 

preamble. 

2. Making Arrangements with the Local Emergency Planning Committee 

Sections 262.34(a)(4) and 262.34(d)(4) set forth conditions for LQGs and SQGs that 

accumulate without a permit. Both these paragraphs include references to part 265 subpart C, 

which contains a reference to § 265.37. Section 265.37(a) states that “The owner or operator 

must attempt to make the following arrangements, as appropriate for the type of waste handled at 

his facility and the potential need for the services of these organizations” and goes on to list the 

types of local emergency officials that should be informed about hazardous waste at a facility, 

such as fire departments and emergency response teams, and the information the generator 

should provide them. 

The Agency is proposing to revise this provision for generators to state that SQGs and 

LQGs must first attempt to enter into agreements with their LEPC, but if there is no LEPC in the 

area or if the LEPC does not respond or is unwilling to enter an agreement, the generator must 

enter into an agreement(s) with the local fire department and other emergency responders. This

proposed revision would add to the regulations both a reference to LEPCs and an explicit 

statement that generators must enter into an agreement with emergency planning officials, rather 

than just attempt to enter into an agreement. 

a. Local emergency planning committees. The Agency is proposing to revise regulations that 

were finalized in 1980. The national and local infrastructure for emergency planning and 

response has changed significantly since that time, but these regulations have not been updated 

to reflect those changes. The proposed revision to specifically name LEPCs in this regulation 

addresses that deficiency. 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 144 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ The Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) was enacted in 1986. Title 

III of SARA is also known as the Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act 

(EPCRA). EPCRA helps increase the public's knowledge and access to information regarding 

chemicals at individual facilities, their uses, and releases into the environment. States and 

communities, working with facilities, can use the information to improve chemical safety and 

protect public health and the environment. EPCRA requires both small and large entities to 

report chemical information to the SERC, the LEPC, the local fire department, and tribal nations. 

EPCRA requires LEPCs to prepare a comprehensive plan for local communities designed 

to help them prepare for and respond to emergencies involving extremely hazardous substances

(EHS). Facilities covered by EPCRA planning provisions are required to cooperate in emergency 

plan preparation and designate a facility emergency coordinator to participate in the planning 

process as well as notify their SERC and LEPC within 60 days of becoming subject to the 

emergency planning requirements (when an EHS is first present at the facility from a shipment 

or production). Additionally, as part of the community-right-to-know provisions of EPCRA, 

facilities that have hazardous chemicals for which they must have or prepare an MSDS or SDS 

and have at or above the threshold amount of those chemicals must also annually complete and 

submit an Emergency and Hazardous Chemical Inventory form (also known as a Tier II) to the 

LEPC, to the SERC, and to the local fire department by March 1. These facilities must send 

copies of their MSDS, SDS, or a list of hazardous chemicals to the LEPC, to the SERC, and to 

the fire department.86

In turn, LEPCs must develop an emergency response plan, review it at least annually, and 

provide information about chemicals in the community to citizens. These plans are developed by 

 

86 The regulations implementing the emergency planning and notification requirements of EPCRA can be found at 

40 CFR part 355. 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 145 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ LEPCs with stakeholder participation. There are more than 3,000 designated local emergency 

planning districts, although not all of these districts have functioning LEPCs. The LEPC 

membership must include (at a minimum) elected state and local officials; police, fire, civil 

defense, and public health professionals; environment, transportation, and hospital officials; 

facility representatives; and representatives from community groups and the media. Although in 

many areas the LEPCs are the main organizing entities for emergency response, the RCRA 

hazardous waste regulations do not mention them or their role in contingency planning. 

The proposed language directly references LEPCs, stating that the generator must make 

arrangements with the Local Emergency Planning Committee for the types and quantities of 

hazardous waste handled at the site. 87 This modification merely updates the RCRA hazardous 

waste regulations to match the current emergency planning landscape. 

Consistent with this proposed modification at § 265.37, the Agency is also proposing that 

when the language in current § 265.52(c) is copied into part 262, it state that the plan must 

describe arrangements agreed to with the Local Emergency Planning Committee. Should there 

be no Local Emergency Planning Committee, should it not respond, or should the Local 

Emergency Planning Committee determine that it is not the appropriate organization to make 

arrangements with, then the large quantity generator must make arrangements with its local fire 

department and other relevant emergency responders (e.g., police and hospitals) to coordinate 

emergency services, pursuant to § 262.256.

The Agency requests comment on this proposal to modify the language in §§ 265.37(a) 

and 265.52(c) when they are copied into part 262.

 

87 Although much of the discussion of these provisions for the purposes of this rule revolves around hazardous waste 

generators, because the provisions are located in part 265 for interim status hazardous waste TSDFs, they will refer 

to the persons regulated as “owner or operator” and the entity being regulated as the “facility.”
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 146 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ Effect of Proposed Reorganization: These sections are affected by the proposed 

reorganization. The proposed regulation would appear in the SQG standards at § 262.16(b)(8)(vi) 

and in the new part 262 subpart M for LQGs at § 262.256 for arrangements and § 262.261(c) for 

the content of the contingency plan. The reorganization is discussed in section XIII of this 

preamble. 

b. Making required arrangements. The other proposed modification to the language currently in 

§265.37(a) when it is copied into part 262 addresses the ambiguity of the current language, 

which requires only that the owner or operator “attempt to make” arrangements with local 

emergency response authorities. 

Section 265.37(a) states that the owner or operator must attempt to make arrangements 

with local fire and emergency organizations, as appropriate for the type of waste handled at the 

facility and the potential need for the services of these organizations. Paragraph (a)(1) makes 

clear that these arrangements involve familiarizing these organizations with the layout of the 

facility, properties of the hazardous waste handled at the facility and associated hazards, places 

where facility personnel would normally be working, entrances to roads inside the facility, and 

possible evacuation routes. Because an SQG is not required to submit a contingency plan, this 

language suggests that SQGs need only invite local officials to visit and familiarize themselves 

with the site as compared to LQGs, which are required to develop a written contingency plan and 

provide it to local officials.

Given the importance of emergency preparedness and planning, EPA is proposing to 

require that an SQG or an LQG must make direct arrangements with its LEPC as part of this 

condition. The Agency believes the LEPCs, in turn, will work with their local responders to 

integrate the activities of SQGs and LQGs into the overall emergency response plan. 

Deleted: “

Deleted: ”
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 147 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Many Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ SQGs and LQGs may already have arrangements with their LEPCs because most 

SQGs and LQGs either have EHSs that require reporting to the LEPC, which triggers EPCRA 

emergency planning requirements, or use chemicals that require an SDS, triggering the EPCRA 

community right-to-know requirement to report to LEPCs. However, in the case that a hazardous 

waste generator does not have a relationship with the LEPC, that LEPC may view working with 

non-EPCRA facilities as outside the scope of their authority. Alternatively, there may be a 

hazardous waste generator in a location where there is no organized LEPC. Therefore, as part of 

this regulation, EPA proposes to require that an SQG or LQG attempt to make formal 

arrangements with its LEPC unless there is no LEPC, the LEPC does not respond, or the LEPC 

determines that it is not the appropriate organization to make an arrangement with. In this case, 

the SQG or LQG would be required to make arrangements with its local fire department, as well 

as with other relevant emergency responders, such as the police department and local hospitals.

The proposed regulatory text for this condition would state that the generator must make 

arrangements with the Local Emergency Planning Committee for the types and quantities of 

hazardous waste handled at the site, as well as the potential need for the services of the local 

police department, other emergency response teams, emergency response contractors, equipment 

suppliers, and local hospitals.88 Should there be no Local Emergency Planning Committee, 

should it not respond, or should the Local Emergency Planning Committee determine that it is 

not the appropriate organization to make arrangements with, then the generator must make 

arrangements with the local fire department and other relevant emergency responders (e.g., 

police and hospitals).

 

88 This condition is being proposed at § 262.16(b)(8)(vi)(A) for SQGs and § 262.256 for LQGs due to the proposed 

reorganization.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 148 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ EPA is also proposing regulatory text that describes procedures for how a facility that is 

not able to make arrangements with the LEPC would make such arrangements with the fire 

department and other local emergency services. Much of this language corresponds with the 

existing standards for making arrangements with emergency responders. These mandated steps 

are not necessary in the case of arrangements with the LEPC because that group is likely to have 

standardized procedures of its own to follow to make these arrangements with facilities. 

The Agency requests comment on its proposal to require an SQG or an LQG to enter into 

arrangements with its LEPC unless there is no LEPC, the LEPC does not respond, or the LEPC 

determines that it is not the appropriate organization to make arrangements with, in which case 

the SQG or LQG would enter into an arrangement with its local emergency responders. 

EPA is also proposing to add new language to supplement this condition because current 

§ 265.37(a) does not specify the frequency that hazardous waste generators must make 

arrangements with local authorities. For example, should arrangements be updated according to a 

set schedule or only when modification is needed. Considering that some SQGs and LQGs may

already coordinate with their LEPCs annually as part of their EPCRA requirements, the Agency 

is of the opinion that it is not necessary to include time frames for updating in this rule. The 

Agency requests comments on whether the regulations should mandate how frequently a 

generator must communicate with its LEPC or local fire department if it has not otherwise 

communicated with them.

Effect of Proposed Reorganization: This section is affected by the proposed reorganization. The 

proposed regulation would appear in the SQG standards at § 262.16(b)(8)(vi) and in the new part 

262 subpart M for LQGs at § 262.256. The reorganization is discussed in section XIII of this 

preamble. 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 149 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

c. Documenting arrangements. As noted above, the EPA thinks it is important for both SQGs 

and LQGs to make arrangements with their LEPCs. In addition, EPA believes that

documentation of these arrangements would be useful in ensuring that generators have taken the 

necessary steps to prepare for an emergency and have a clearly defined plan with the LEPC for 

emergency response. Therefore, when EPA copies this condition into part 262, EPA is proposing 

to modify the language to state that the generator shall maintain records documenting the 

arrangements with the Local Emergency Planning Committee, or if appropriate, with the local 

fire department as well as any other organization necessary to respond to an emergency. This 

documentation may include a certified letter or any other documentation that confirms such 

arrangements actively exist.

One alternative suggested as part of the 2004 Program Evaluation of the hazardous waste 

generator regulatory program would be to require hazardous waste generators to list the 

emergency response agencies that have agreed to respond in the event of an emergency with 

some documentation confirming that the arrangements exist. In addition to helping generators 

prepare for emergencies, documentation of these arrangements would provide the necessary 

information for inspectors when determining compliance. The Agency believes this alternative 

may be the most effective approach to addressing the ambiguity that exists with the existing 

regulations at § 265.37(b). 

The Agency seeks comment on this proposed change to documentation, in particular 

whether local ordinances already require generators to have documentation of arrangements with 

local emergency response organizations.

Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is affected by the proposed 

reorganization. The proposed regulation would appear in the SQG standards at § 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 150 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ 262.16(b)(8)(vi) and in the new part 262 subpart M for LQGs at § 262.256(b). The 

reorganization is discussed in section XIII of this preamble. 

d. Request for comment on emergency procedures at large facilities with internal emergency 

teams. Many large organizations, particularly those that operate 24 hours a day, such as airports 

and military bases, have their own emergency response capabilities. This raises the question of 

whether and under what circumstances arrangements with local authorities would not be needed 

to ensure effective emergency response. The Agency seeks comment on the feasibility of 

providing a waiver from requiring either an SQG or LQG to enter into arrangements with an 

LEPC or, if appropriate, other local authorities when they have 24-hour on-site emergency 

response capabilities, particularly under what circumstances a waiver would be granted.

3. Changes to Contingency Plan Regulations for LQGs

Under §262.34(a)(4), LQGs are required to comply with 40 CFR part 265 subpart D, §§ 

265.50–265.56, which describes the regulations on contingency planning and emergency 

procedures. These regulations address the purpose of the contingency plan, what it must contain, 

who receives copies, how to amend the contingency plan, and responsibilities of the facility’s 

emergency coordinator and emergency procedures. One important thing to note is that the owner 

or operator of the facility can develop one contingency plan that meets all the regulatory 

standards for the various statutory and regulatory provisions for contingency planning: 

 EPA's Oil Pollution Prevention Regulation (SPCC and Facility Response Plan 

Requirements) at 40 CFR part 112.7(d) and 112.20–21; 

 EPA's Risk Management Programs Regulation at 40 CFR part 68; 

 EPA's Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Contingency Planning Requirements 

at 40 CFR part 264 subpart D, 40 CFR part 265 subpart D, and 40 CFR 279.52; 

Deleted: C
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 151 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

 Department of Interior’s Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE)

Facility Response Plan Regulation at 30 CFR part 254;

 Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) Response Plans 

for Onshore Oil Pipelines at 49 CFR part 194;

 U.S. Coast Guard’s (USCG) Facility Response Plan Regulation at 33 CFR part 154 

subpart F;

 OSHA’s Emergency Action Plan Regulation at 29 CFR 1910.38(a); 

 OSHA's Process Safety Standard at 29 CFR 1910.119; and 

 OSHA's HAZWOPER Regulation at 29 CFR 1910.120

EPA recommends that generators base their contingency plan on the National Response Team’s 

Integrated Contingency Plan Guidance (One Plan), discussed in the Federal Register on June 5, 

1996, at 61 FR 28642. 

In this action, EPA is proposing three modifications to the contingency planning 

regulations for generators: one is meant to improve the ability of emergency response teams to 

respond to an emergency at an LQG and the other two are technical changes to the content of the 

contingency plan. 

a. Submitting a contingency plan executive summary to emergency management authorities. The 

Agency is proposing to require that a new LQG, as of the effective date of the rule, submit an 

executive summary of its contingency plan to the emergency management authorities. As part of 

this revision, EPA proposes to change the language of the regulation to include LEPCs, as 

discussed above in section VIII.H.2.

The current regulations at § 265.53 state that a copy of the contingency plan must be 

submitted to all local police departments, fire departments, hospitals, and state and local 

emergency response teams that may be called upon to provide emergency services. 

Deleted: Minerals Management Service’s (MMS)

Deleted: Research and Special Programs Administration’s (RSPA) 

Pipeline 

Deleted: Regulation
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 152 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

In discussions with EPA, emergency management professionals indicated that the length 

of the facility contingency plans prevents first responders from being able to fully review a 

facility’s contingency plan when responding to an emergency.89 Instead, they need readily 

available information that describes what they must confront when they arrive at the scene. Once 

the incident is under control, the first responders can then review the detailed contingency plan to 

determine their next steps, if applicable. Thus, the Agency believes that a shorter document, such 

as an executive summary of the contingency plan would be more effective for an emergency 

responder when responding to an incident at a facility accumulating hazardous waste. As 

currently happens in practice, once the incident is under control, then the emergency responders 

can review the more detailed contingency plan if necessary for long-term responses.

A review of the information required as part of a RCRA contingency plan in § 265.52, as 

well as information required by the local fire department, identified certain components that 

would be useful in an executive summary and EPA used this information in developing this 

proposed regulation. Specifically, the Agency is proposing to require that the following 

information be included in an executive summary to assist emergency responders in the event of 

an incident: (1) the types/names of hazardous wastes in layman’s terms and the associated hazard 

associated with each waste present at any one time (e.g., toxic paint wastes, spent ignitable 

solvent, corrosive acid); (2) the estimated maximum amount of each waste that may be present at 

any one time; (3) the identification of any hazardous wastes where exposure would require a 

unique or special treatment by medical or hospital staff; (4) a map of the site showing where 

hazardous wastes are generated and accumulated and routes for accessing these wastes; (5) a 

street map of the facility in relation to surrounding businesses, schools, and residential areas to 

 

89 Notes from discussion with Phil Oakes and Jim Narva, International Association of Fire Marshalls, concerning 

Contingency Planning and Emergency Response Regulations, July 2012.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 153 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ understand how best to get to the facility and also evacuate citizens and workers; (6) the 

locations of water supply (e.g., fire hydrant and its flow rate, drafting locations); (7) the 

identification of on-site notification systems (e.g., a fire alarm that rings off-site, smoke alarms); 

and (8) the name of the emergency coordinator and 24/7 emergency telephone number.

EPA believes these are the appropriate elements for the executive summary but is taking 

comment on them. In addition, for identification of the hazardous waste under element (1), EPA 

is taking comment on whether providing the name of the waste in layman’s terms is sufficient for 

ensuring that first responders will be able to identify the appropriate actions to take in response. 

A reference to the material in the North American Emergency Response Guide, where 

appropriate, would likely reduce the time it takes for first responders to get the necessary 

information for managing the situation. EPA is interested in whether this type of reference would 

be useful to first responders and whether generators can easily access this information to add to 

their contingency plans. 

EPA is also taking comment on whether the executive summary should add to element 

(3) a requirement that the generator provide information on the medical information for exposure 

to those hazardous wastes that do require special treatment. EPA is specifically interested in 

whether this information is readily available to the generator to be included in the executive 

summary of the contingency plan and whether first responders would find this additional 

information useful for responses. 

Under the proposed condition for contingency plans at LQGs, EPA is proposing that an 

LQG that becomes subject to this rule after the rule’s effective date be required to develop and 

submit an executive summary of its contingency plan to the LEPC in addition to the full 

contingency plan. The Agency is not proposing to require that an LQG that has already 

developed and submitted a contingency plan to local emergency responders develop an executive 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 154 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

summary because of the additional burden that would be imposed on existing LQGs to go back 

to their contingency plans and develop this summary. The Agency has determined that 

developing the executive summary during the initial writing of the contingency plan would not 

be a significant extra step. However, we recommend that an LQG that is not required to develop 

an executive summary of its contingency plan may want to do so and submit that executive 

summary to the LEPC when doing a periodic update on its contingency plan to ensure that the 

emergency responders have the appropriate information on hand in the event of an emergency. 

EPA, therefore, is proposing to modify the condition regarding copies of the contingency 

plan to require the following: 

(a) A copy of the contingency plan and all revisions to the plan must be 

maintained at the large quantity generator’s site and

(b)(1) The large quantity generator must submit a copy of the contingency plan to 

the Local Emergency Planning Committee. Should there be no Local Emergency 

Planning Committee, should it not respond, or should the Local Emergency Planning 

Committee determine that it is not the appropriate organization to make arrangements 

with, the facility must submit the copy to the local emergency responders. 

(2) A generator becoming subject to these provisions after [insert date six months 

after the publication of final rule in the Federal Register] must submit an executive 

summary of the contingency plan to the Local Emergency Planning Committee. Should 

there be no Local Emergency Planning Committee, should it not respond, or should the 

Local Emergency Planning Committee determine that it is not the appropriate 

organization to make arrangements with, the generator must submit the copy to the local 

emergency responders. We are proposing to list here the eight elements described above 

as the most valuable items for emergency responders.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 155 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ The Agency requests comment on this proposed revision. In addition, EPA 

requests comment on whether an existing LQG that has already provided its full 

contingency plan should also be required to submit an executive summary to the LEPC 

or, if appropriate, the fire department or other emergency responders.

The Agency also requests comment on whether an SQG should be required to develop an 

executive summary of a contingency plan. The major differences between the preparedness, 

prevention, and emergency procedures regulations applicable to SQGs and those applicable to 

LQGs are the development and implementation of a contingency plan and more rigorous 

responsibilities for the LQG emergency coordinator. Realizing that many SQGs may already 

have developed contingency plans to comply with other statutory and regulatory requirements, 

however, many of the elements of an executive summary may already be available and that the 

only addition would be summary information on the types and quantities of hazardous waste on 

site, their associated risks, and their location within the facility. Therefore, requiring SQGs to 

provide an executive summary of a contingency plan to first responders could provide 

information that is critical during emergencies with little extra effort by the SQGs. 

Effect of Proposed Reorganization: This section is affected by the proposed reorganization. 

These proposed regulations would appear in the new part 262 subpart M for LQGs at §§ 

262.261–262. The reorganization is discussed in section XIII of this preamble. 

b. Eliminating employee personal information in LQG contingency plans. As stated above, the 

condition for exemption for LQGs at § 262.34(a)(4) references part 265 subpart D, which 

includes a list of what the contingency plan must contain. The Agency is also proposing to 

modify the language currently at § 265.52(d) when it is copied into part 262 to now allow an 

LQG the flexibility to eliminate unnecessary employee personal information that is currently 

required in the contingency plan. This would protect those individuals’ privacy, but still provide 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 156 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ necessary information to address emergencies. Section 265.52(d) currently states that the plan 

must list names, addresses, and phone numbers (office and home) of all persons qualified to act 

as emergency coordinator (see § 265.55), and requires that this list be kept up to date. It specifies 

that where more than one person is listed, one must be named as primary emergency coordinator 

and others must be listed in the order in which they will assume responsibility as alternates. The 

proposed revision would remove the unnecessary references to addresses in this language and 

change the reference to home and office telephone numbers to “emergency telephone number.”

Also as part of this revision, the Agency is proposing revisions to address situations 

where the facility has an emergency coordinator on duty 24 hours every day of the week. In 

those situations, the plan may list the staffed position (e.g., operations manager, shift 

coordinator, shift operations supervisor), as well as an emergency telephone number that can be 

guaranteed to be answered 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year. The EPA proposes to 

add language stating that in situations where the generator site has an emergency coordinator 

continuously on duty because it operates 24/7/365, the plan may list the staffed position (e.g., 

operations manager, shift coordinator, shift operations supervisor, or some other similar position) 

as well as an emergency telephone number that can be guaranteed to be answered 24/7/365.

The Agency requests comment on this proposed modification.

Effect of Proposed Reorganization: This section is affected by the proposed 

reorganization. The proposed regulation would appear in the new part 262 subpart M for LQGs 

at § 262.261(d). The reorganization is discussed in section XIII of this preamble. 

c. Request for comment to include alternative evacuation routes in contingency plan (40 CFR 

265.52(f)). The Agency also requests comment on modifying the condition on alternative 

evacuation routes in a contingency plan, currently found at § 265.52(f). This paragraph currently 

states that the plan must include an evacuation plan for facility personnel where there is a 

Deleted: reads

Deleted: , “T

Deleted: must 

Deleted: W

Deleted: ”

Deleted: reads

Deleted: , “T
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 157 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ possibility that evacuation could be necessary and that this plan must describe signal(s) to be 

used to begin evacuation, evacuation routes, and alternate evacuation routes (in cases where the 

primary routes could be blocked by releases of hazardous waste or fires).

At issue is whether a contingency plan must contain information about alternative 

evacuation routes or whether a different approach for addressing alternative evacuation routes 

would be more effective. As part of the 2004 Program Evaluation of the hazardous waste 

generator regulatory program, the Agency received a comment stating that it does not make 

sense to include in the contingency plan the hundreds of possible evacuation routes that may be 

present at a facility depending on its configuration. The commenter argued that the regulation 

should be modified to require that evacuation routes be posted and drills be conducted but that 

the regulations should not require the routes to be in the contingency plan.90

The Agency does not believe the current regulation requires all potential evacuation 

routes be identified and believes emergency responders may need this type of information in 

order to determine the most efficient and timely approach to reach the facility, which raises the 

question of whether the regulation should be modified in this way. However, the Agency seeks 

comment on whether the commenter’s proposal to require the posting of evacuation routes and 

holding annual evacuation training and drills would be an effective substitute to maintaining 

alternative evacuation routes in the contingency plan. The Agency also seeks comment on 

whether this paragraph of the regulations should discuss shelter-in-place as part of contingency 

plans.

Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is affected by the proposed 

reorganization. Under the reorganization, the proposed regulation would appear in the new part 

 

90 Summary of Hazardous Waste Generator Regulatory Program Evaluation, November 2004. See also public 

comments in Docket ID No. RCRA–2003–0014.

Deleted: . T

Deleted: ”
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 158 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ 262 subpart M for LQGs at § 262.261(f). The reorganization is discussed in section XIII of this 

preamble. 

d. Request for comment on the usefulness of a potential electronic RCRA contingency planning 

application

The Agency requests comment on whether contingency plans should be submitted 

electronically to emergency responders to enhance their ability to respond safely and effectively 

to an emergency at an LQG and what EPA’s role should be in electronic submittals. Currently 

EPA makes numerous electronic databases and tools available for helping first responders with 

emergency management. These tools include CAMEO (Computer-Aided Management of 

Emergency Operations), which assists with data management requirements under EPCRA, such 

as the required annual submittal of an Emergency Hazardous Chemical Inventory Form to the 

LEPC. EPA is taking comment on whether an additional tool to manage contingency plans under 

RCRA would be a useful addition to this software suite and whether it would assist LEPCs by 

integrating the contingency plan with their existing data on facilities, making the information 

available to the first responders in the most usable way. 

Specifically, we request comment on the feasibility and effectiveness of private sector 

parties or non-profit or governmental entities developing software that LQGs could use to 

provide important information to emergency responders in responding to an emergency. Building 

on the concept of a standard list of information to be included in a contingency plan executive 

summary that was discussed above, private sector or non-profit parties could design electronic 

software to identify the appropriate information emergency responders quickly need to assess an 

emergency. In turn, LQGs would then input that information into the application and provide that 

information to their local LEPC or emergency response organization for use should an 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 159 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

emergency arise. The objective would be to allow emergency responders to more quickly and 

effectively analyze and respond to emergencies rather than having to review a lengthy document. 

4. Technical Changes Applicable to Both SQGs and LQGs 

The Agency is proposing two additional clarifications and modifications to the existing 

preparedness, prevention, and emergency procedures regulations for SQGs and LQGs and is 

taking comment on one more.

The Agency is proposing revisions based on 30 years of experience with these rules, 

feedback from stakeholders as part of the Agency’s 2004 Program Evaluation of the hazardous 

waste generator regulatory program and discussions and communication with stakeholders. EPA 

believes these clarifications will foster improved compliance without adversely affecting the 

protection of human health and the environment. 

a. Proposed technical changes to introductory paragraph on required equipment. Sections 

262.34(a)(4) and 262.34(d)(4) include the condition that LQGs and SQGs comply with part 265 

subpart C, which includes § 265.32. Section 265.32 requires that all facilities must be equipped 

with certain types of equipment unless none of the hazards posed by waste handled at the facility 

could require that particular kind of equipment. The paragraph goes on to list required equipment 

such as an internal communications system, a telephone or radio, fire extinguishers, and access 

to adequate water. The existing regulation is not clear as to whether the required equipment must 

be placed in those areas of operation where hazardous waste is generated and accumulated, (or 

treated, stored and disposed in the case of an interim status TSDF) or whether other parts of the 

facility could store this equipment—that is, where hazardous waste is not generated or 

accumulated.

The Agency believes it may not always be appropriate or safe to have this equipment 

stored in the actual waste generation or accumulation area and instead, we are proposing that the 

Deleted: The introductory paragraph to §

Deleted: “

Deleted: A

Deleted: with the following,

Deleted: a

Deleted: specified below” and

Deleted: t
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 160 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

regulation state that the hazardous waste generator should have this equipment located where it 

can be immediately accessed without jeopardizing a timely and effective response to any 

emergency. For example, the waste generation area may be in an enclosed room. Should a fire 

occur in the enclosed room, it might be more appropriate to exit the room and call the fire 

department rather than stay inside and be exposed to smoke inhalation and other risks. EPA 

believes the existing regulatory text should be revised to explain that while this equipment 

applies to only those areas applicable to the generation and accumulation (and treatment, as 

appropriate) of hazardous waste, the generator has the flexibility to store this equipment in other 

areas of the facility to address those situations where it is infeasible or inappropriate for safety 

reasons to have the equipment immediately next to hazardous waste generation and accumulation 

areas. 

Therefore, EPA is proposing to modify the introductory paragraph to provide generators 

subject to subpart C of part 265 the flexibility to determine the most appropriate locations within 

the facility to locate equipment necessary to prepare for and respond to emergencies. 

The proposed regulation would state that all areas where hazardous waste is either 

generated or accumulated must be equipped with the listed types of equipment (unless none of 

the hazards posed by waste handled at the site could require a particular kind of equipment or the 

actual waste generation or accumulation area does not lend itself for safety reasons to have a 

particular kind of equipment). It would also state that a generator may determine the most 

appropriate locations within its generator site to locate equipment necessary to prepare for and 

respond to emergencies.

The Agency requests comment on its proposal to modify § 265.32. 

Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is affected by the proposed 

reorganization. The proposed regulation would appear in the SQG standards at § 262.16(b)(8)(ii) 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 161 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

wi Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶th some changes to make it specific to SQGs and in the new part 262 subpart M for LQGs at § 

262.252. The reorganization is discussed in section XIII of this preamble. 

b. The meaning of “immediate access.” Sections 262.34(a)(4) and 262.34(d)(4) include the

condition that LQGs and SQGs comply with part 265 subpart C, which also includes § 265.34.

Section 265.34(a) states that whenever hazardous waste is being poured, mixed, spread, or 

otherwise handled, all personnel involved in the operation must have immediate access to an 

internal alarm or emergency communication device, either directly or through visual or voice 

contact with another employee, unless such a device is not required under § 265.32. At issue is 

whether the phrase “immediate access” is clearly understood or whether additional clarity is 

necessary. As part of the Agency’s 2004 Program Evaluation of the hazardous waste generator 

program, stakeholders raised a concern about whether the regulated community has a sufficient 

understanding about what this phrase means and we are proposing to address that concern here. 

In the interest of clarity, the Agency is proposing to modify this language to read, 

“immediate access (e.g., direct or unimpeded access)” The Agency believes that adding this 

parenthetical example provides further guidance on the meaning of “immediate access.” This 

phrase is used again in the next paragraph in a similar context and EPA is proposing to add the 

words “(direct or unimpeded access)” in that case as well. 

The Agency requests comment on the usefulness of modifying this language. 

Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is affected by the proposed 

reorganization. The proposed regulation would appear in the SQG standards at § 262.16(b)(8)(iv) 

and in the new part 262 subpart M for LQGs at § 262.254. The reorganization is discussed in 

section XIII of this preamble. 

5. Technical Changes Applicable to SQGs 

Deleted: reads, “W

Deleted: ”

Deleted: ...

Deleted: ....
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 162 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ Current preparedness and prevention standards for SQGs are found at § 262.34(d)(5). SQGs 

must comply with the following: 

 § 262.34(d)(5)(i)—have at least one employee either on the premises or on call with 

the responsibility for coordinating all emergency response measures (e.g., the 

emergency coordinator); 

 § 262.34(d)(5)(ii)—post specified information next to the telephone, including the 

name and telephone number of the emergency coordinator; the location of fire 

extinguishers and spill control material, and, if present, fire alarm; and the telephone 

number of the fire department, unless the facility has a direct alarm; 

 § 262.34(d)(5)(iii)— ensure that all employees are thoroughly familiar with proper 

waste handling and emergency procedures, relevant to their responsibilities during 

normal facility operations and emergencies; and 

 § 262.34(d)(5)(iv)— have the emergency coordinator or his designee follow the 

specified procedures in the event of a fire, spill, or explosion.

EPA is proposing changes to two of these provisions. 

a. Require certain information be posted “next to the telephone” (40 CFR 262.34(d)(5)(ii)). The 

Agency is proposing to revise § 262.34(d)(5)(ii) in order to facilitate improved compliance on 

the part of SQGs. This language requires, among other items, that certain information be posted 

“next to the telephone,” such as the name and telephone number of the emergency coordinator 

and the location of fire extinguishers and spill control material. Based on experience and 

feedback received from the regulatory community, the Agency believes it is unclear in this 

description where in the facility this information should be posted. A facility may have many 

operations and components that have no relationship with the generation and accumulation of 

hazardous waste. 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 163 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ Stakeholders have recommended deletion of § 262.34(d)(5)(ii) because, in this age of 

near-universal 911 availability, they state it is simply not important from a regulatory point of 

view to have emergency telephone numbers posted. They argue that locations of fire 

extinguishers, spill control material, fire alarms, etc., should be conveyed to relevant employees 

and displayed in a worker break area rather than the facility office and that posting the name and 

telephone number of the emergency coordinator is also not necessary. For the majority of the 

SQG universe, the emergency coordinator is the owner or shop supervisor.

91

EPA disagrees with eliminating this provision because we believe that posting this 

information is important for workers and others to have readily available information so that they 

would know what to do and where to go in the case of an emergency. However, the Agency 

believes that the regulation should be modified to state clearly that the pertinent information 

should be posted where hazardous waste is generated and accumulated, since facility personnel 

can quickly seek assistance from it there. 

Also unstated is whether the telephone number refers to the emergency coordinator’s 

home phone or business phone. Over the years the Agency has received requests that we modify 

this provision to ensure that personal information not be used or distributed, particularly to 

individuals or organizations that could use such information to cause harm to the individual.92

With cell phones and other means of instant communication now prevalent, EPA is proposing to 

clarify this provision to provide the hazardous waste generator with the necessary flexibility to 

allow its emergency coordinator to perform specified responsibilities effectively using the 

emergency telephone number of the emergency coordinator.

 

91 Summary of Hazardous Waste Generator Regulatory Program Evaluation, November 2004. See also public 

comments in Docket ID No. RCRA–2003–0014.

92 Letter to Jim O’Leary from Derek Swick, American Petroleum Institute, September 28, 2011. 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 164 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ Therefore, EPA is proposing that § 262.34(d)(5)(ii) be modified to state that the small 

quantity generator must post the name and emergency telephone number of the emergency 

coordinator next to telephones or in areas directly involved in the generation and accumulation of 

hazardous waste. Subparagraphs 262.34(d)(5)(ii)(B) and (C) are unchanged. 

EPA requests comment on this proposed change. 

Effect of the Reorganization: This section is affected by the reorganization and would 

move to § 262.16(b)(9)(ii)(A). The reorganization is discussed in section XIII of this preamble.

b. Allow containment and cleanup to be conducted by a contractor (40 CFR 262.34(d)(5)(iv)(B)).

Section 262.34(d)(5)(iv)(B) currently reads, “In the event of a spill, contain the flow of 

hazardous waste to the extent possible, and as soon as is practicable, clean up the hazardous 

waste and any contaminated materials or soil.” If such a spill were considered an emergency 

under OSHA’s regulations in 29 CFR 1910.120, an SQG would be required to take a minimum 

of eight hours of initial training with an annual refresher, and in certain circumstances additional 

hours of training. Feedback from stakeholders suggests that most SQGs would hire a spill 

cleanup contractor to provide such services, if needed, rather than train employees to perform the 

response. We would agree that allowing an SQG to hire a contractor that is trained to address 

hazardous waste spills would certainly be appropriate. However, the regulations in § 

262.34(d)(5)(iv)(B) arguably do not provide this flexibility.

93

Therefore, the Agency is proposing to modify § 262.34(d)(5)(iv)(B) and place the 

responsibility on the SQG to either perform the necessary cleanup of hazardous wastes or 

contract out the cleanup. The proposed language would state that in the event of a spill, the small 

quantity generator is responsible for containing the flow of hazardous waste to the extent 

 

93 Summary of Hazardous Waste Generator Regulatory Program Evaluation, November 2004.See also public 

comments in Docket ID No. RCRA–2003–0014.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 165 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ possible, and as soon as is practicable, cleaning up the hazardous waste and any contaminated 

materials or soil. The proposal would allow such containment and cleanup to be conducted either 

by the small quantity generator or by a contractor on behalf of the small quantity generator.

The Agency requests comment on the proposed revision to § 262.34(d)(5)(iv)(B) and 

whether any unintended consequences arise from providing SQGs with this flexibility.

Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is affected by the proposed 

reorganization and would move to § 262.16(b)(9)(iv)(B). The reorganization is discussed in 

section XIII of this preamble.

6. Technical Changes on Personnel Training Applicable to LQGs

The Agency is proposing to modify the condition regarding personnel training for LQGs, 

currently found at § 262.34(a)(4), which refers to § 265.16. The proposed modification would 

allow a generator to use online computer training, in addition to classroom instruction and onthe-job training, to complete the personnel training requirements. Since the personnel training 

regulations were promulgated in the 1980s, use of computerized training has become a common 

practice for generators to teach their workers about the management of hazardous waste. In fact, 

many generators already use this method for training workers and this modification would 

simply bring the hazardous waste personnel training regulations up to date with existing industry 

practices. 

The proposal would modify the first sentence of this provision by adding the words 

“online training” and would state that site personnel must successfully complete a program of 

classroom instruction, online training, or on-the-job training that teaches them to perform their 

duties in a way that ensures compliance with this part.

The Agency requests comment on the proposed modification. 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 166 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section would be affected by the proposed 

reorganization. Under the reorganization this provision would be found at § 262.17(a)(7)(i)(A). 

The proposed reorganization is discussed in section XIII of this preamble.

7. Taking Comment on Applicability of Personnel Training

The Agency seeks comment on clarifying what positions within an LQG must be 

responsible for receiving training associated with the management of hazardous waste, as well as 

identifying those positions for which a written job description is necessary. Under the current 

regulations, LQGs are responsible for complying with § 262.34(a)(4), which references, among 

other technical requirements, the personnel training provisions in § 265.16. Under the proposed 

reorganization discussed in section XIII, this condition for LQGs would move into 40 CFR 

262.17.

The current regulations are not specific about which personnel at an LQG must complete 

the hazardous waste training. Other than stating that under §265.16(a)(3) personnel must be able 

to respond effectively to emergencies by familiarizing them with emergency procedures, 

emergency equipment, and emergency systems, no other areas of hazardous waste management 

are cited. 

At issue is the scope of these training standards and the applicability of the training 

provision to employees that are not assigned to work in the 90-day accumulation areas. The 

Agency is considering whether to require training and a written job description for specific types 

of employees working in areas of hazardous waste management related to 90-day accumulation 

areas. This clarification would have the benefit of assisting LQGs in determining more readily 

the scope of their hazardous waste training program.

Deleted: in 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 167 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ The Agency, with the assistance of staff from the states of Vermont, Connecticut and 

New York,94 have identified the following areas of hazardous waste management for which 

personnel training and a written job description should be required: anyone who (1) completes 

and/or signs the hazardous waste manifest, (2) manages hazardous waste in areas where 

hazardous wastes are accumulated, (3) maintains hazardous waste inventory, (4) conducts daily 

or weekly inspections of areas where hazardous wastes are accumulated, and (5) plans or

responds to emergencies that involve hazardous wastes. 

The Agency seeks comment on whether the regulations should specifically identify 

positions at LQGs where hazardous waste training would be required and for which a written job 

description is necessary and what those areas should be. In addition, the Agency seeks comment 

on whether personnel involved in handling or managing hazardous wastes in SAAs should be 

required to undergo hazardous waste training. Current Agency guidance excludes staff working 

in satellite accumulation areas from the training requirements.

95 The Agency is of the opinion 

that such personnel have a similar need to know the risks associated with hazardous wastes as 

personnel working in central accumulation areas. 

8. Taking Comment on Applying Emergency Planning and Procedures Revisions to Parts 264 

and 265

The proposed revisions discussed throughout this section of the preamble on the 

emergency planning and procedure regulations would only pertain to generators, as the proposed 

language would be found in the expanded generator regulations in part 262. However because 

 

94 Correspondence between Steve Simoes, State of Vermont, with Ross Bunnell and Bill Yeman, from Connecticut 

and New York, respectively, a copy of which is found in the docket to this proposal. 

95 Memorandum from Robert Springer, Director of the Office of Solid Waste to RCRA Directors, EPA Regions 1-

10, “Frequently Asked Questions about Satellite Accumulation Areas,” March 17, 2004, RCRA Online 14703

http://yosemite.epa.gov/osw/rcra.nsf/0c994248c239947e85256d090071175f/0ac9e15424b2897d8525770600609793

!OpenDocument

Deleted: .
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 168 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

many of the preparedness Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶and emergency procedure provisions discussed in this section are 

taken from part 265 with only slight revisions, we are taking comment on whether these same 

proposed revisions should also be made in the applicable paragraphs of parts 264 and/or 265 as 

well to ensure consistency between the generator regulations and those for permitted facilities or 

facilities operating under interim status. The Agency requests comment on whether these 

revisions for consistency would be helpful and appropriate for facilities operating under part 264 

or part 265 or whether the regulations should remain unchanged despite the result that generators 

and TSDFs would be left with some regulations that are very similar but not exactly the same. 

I. Revisions to Satellite Accumulation Area Regulations for SQGs and LQGs (40 CFR 262.34(c))

The Agency is proposing a number of changes that would revise and strengthen the 

conditions for exemption for satellite accumulation areas (SAA) at § 262.34(c). These include 

(1) requiring SQGs and LQGs accumulating hazardous waste in SAAs to comply with the 

special requirements for incompatible wastes found at § 265.177; (2) providing limited 

exceptions to the regulation requiring generators to keep containers closed at all times; (3) 

strengthening the marking and labeling standards for SAAs (note these marking and labeling 

changes are the same as those proposed for containers in central accumulation areas); (4) 

confirming that three days means three consecutive calendar days, not business days; (5) 

providing a maximum weight for the accumulation of acute hazardous waste in SAAs in addition 

to a volume; (6) rewording the regulations for when the maximum volume or weight is exceeded 

in an SAA; (7) rescinding a guidance memo regarding the accumulation of reactive (D003) 

hazardous waste away from the point of generation, and (8) providing examples in the preamble 

to help generators better understand the term “under the control of the operator,” which is used in 

the SAA regulations.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 169 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

In addition to these proposed changes, the SAA regulations would be moved as part of 

the proposed reorganization. These regulations would all be found together in §262.15. The 

reorganization is discussed in section XIII of this preamble. 

Using an SAA is not required of hazardous waste generators, but the regulations allowing 

them and setting the conditions for their use are designed to assist generators who generate and 

accumulate small amounts of hazardous waste in different parts of their facilities. SQGs and 

LQGs, however, may choose to accumulate hazardous waste only in central accumulation areas 

(CAAs) rather than SAAs or they may accumulate up to 55 gallons of non-acute hazardous waste 

and/or one quart of acute hazardous waste within each facility’s SAAs and once that threshold 

has occurred, ship the hazardous waste to a designated facility. A generator may also accumulate 

hazardous waste within an SAA(s) and never move the waste to a CAA once the 55 gallons limit 

is reached, but instead, ship the waste directly to a RCRA designated facility. 

1. Requiring SQGs and LQGs to Comply with the Special Requirements for Incompatible 

Wastes for Containers Accumulating Hazardous Wastes in SAAs

Under the current regulations in § 262.34(c)(1)(i), generators accumulating hazardous 

waste in SAAs must meet the conditions for exemption, including complying with the container 

requirements at §§ 265.171, 265.172, and 265.173(a). These container requirements include 

accumulating hazardous waste in containers of good condition, ensuring the waste is compatible 

with, or will not react with, the contents of the container, and ensuring that the container 

accumulating hazardous waste is closed, except when it is necessary to add or remove waste. We 

are proposing to modify this part of the SAA container management standards by requiring that 

hazardous wastes not be mixed or be placed in the same container with other hazardous waste 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 170 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

that are incompatible and could potentially result in fires, explosions, gaseous emissions, 

leaching, or other discharge of hazardous waste or hazardous waste constituents.96

The Agency believes that in developing the regulations for SAAs, it inadvertently failed 

to account for the potential for accumulating incompatible wastes, especially since the current 

regulations already prohibit placing hazardous waste in containers that it may react with and that 

impair the containers ability to contain the hazardous waste. Therefore, the Agency is proposing 

that SQGs and LQGs accumulating hazardous waste in SAAs also comply with the part 265 

subpart I container management standards for incompatible hazardous wastes at § 265.177. The 

Agency believes most generators already are aware of and comply with this best management 

practice at their SAAs since they must comply with this regulation when they move the SAA 

container(s) into a 90-day or 180-day central accumulation area. 

The Agency requests comment on this proposed modification.

Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is affected by the proposed 

reorganization. The SAA regulations are currently at § 262.34(c). We are proposing to move this 

provision to § 262.15(a)(1)(iii). The reorganization is discussed in section XIII of this preamble.

2. Limited Exceptions to Keeping Containers Closed at all Times in SAAs

As noted in the previous section, the current regulation in § 262.34(c)(1)(i) for generators 

accumulating hazardous waste in SAAs requires containers accumulating hazardous waste to be 

kept closed, except when it is necessary to add or remove waste. The SAA regulations reference 

the requirement in § 265.173(a) that containers be closed while accumulating hazardous wastes 

at interim status treatment, storage and disposal facilities. We are proposing to modify this 

provision from § 262.34(c)(1)(i) in the new section for SAA conditions at § 262.15, but only as it 

pertains to SAAs; it will not affect the requirements for container management at interim status 

 

96 See Comment in § 265.177.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 171 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

treatment, storage and disposal facilities. Because this modification is only meant to apply to 

containers accumulating hazardous waste in SAAs, and not to containers being stored at interim 

status treatment, storage, or disposal facilities, we are proposing to modify this requirement by 

eliminating the reference in the SAA regulations in part 262 to the container management 

standards for interim status treatment, storage or disposal facilities at § 265.173(a) and 

incorporating the closed container provision directly into the SAA regulations in § 262.15, under 

the proposed reorganization.

Specifically, we are proposing to modify the standard in order to allow containers of 

hazardous waste in SAAs to remain open under limited circumstances. Specifically, we are 

proposing that containers of hazardous waste in SAAs may be open when it is necessary either 

for the operation of equipment to which the SAA container is attached or to prevent dangerous 

situations, such as the build-up of extreme pressure or heat because closing a container can be 

more dangerous than keeping it open temporarily in those situations. Stakeholders have 

identified situations where keeping SAA containers closed can interfere with the operation of 

equipment when the container is attached directly to the equipment via piping or tubing. 

Stakeholders have also identified situations in which closing a container can be more dangerous 

than keeping it open temporarily; for example, when the hazardous waste is very hot.

Therefore, EPA is proposing to modify the regulations to allow containers to be vented in 

such situations. However, we are also proposing that when the danger passes (e.g., the contents 

cool), then the requirement to keep the container closed applies and when the equipment is not in 

operation, the requirement to keep the container closed applies. 

As noted above, the flexibility proposed for containers to remain open in specific 

situations applies only to containers in SAAs since that is where hazardous waste initially 

Deleted: proposed 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 172 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

accumulates. The Agency does not anticipate that it is necessary to extend this flexibility to 

containers of hazardous waste in central accumulation areas.

The Agency requests comment on this proposed modification.

Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is affected by the proposed 

reorganization. The SAA regulations are currently at § 262.34(c). We are proposing to move this 

provision to § 262.15(a)(1)(iv). The reorganization is discussed in section XIII of this preamble.

3. Strengthening the Marking and Labeling Provisions for Containers in SAAs

Currently, the regulations for SAAs in § 262.34(c)(1)(ii) require a generator to mark “his 

containers either with the words ‘Hazardous Waste’ or with other words that identify the 

contents of the containers” [emphasis added]. The Agency is proposing two modifications that 

would strengthen the labeling and marking regulations for containers accumulating hazardous 

waste in SAAs. First, EPA is proposing to change the “or” to an “and” and thus require that 

generators mark containers in the SAA with both the words “Hazardous Waste” and other words

to identify the contents of the container that are accumulated in SAAs. 

Second, EPA is proposing that generators also indicate the hazards of the contents of the 

containers. EPA believes these proposed changes will alert workers, emergency responders, and 

others to the potential hazards posed by its contents. Identifying the hazard increases awareness 

to workers and others who might come into contact with the hazardous waste container and 

reduces potential risks to human health and the environment from container mismanagement. As 

discussed previously in section VIII.E, these changes are similar to those proposed for containers 

stored in central accumulation areas.

Specifically, EPA is proposing to modify the marking and labeling regulations for SAAs 

to require LQGs and SQGs to mark containers with the following: (1) the words “Hazardous 

Waste”; (2) other words that identify the contents of the containers. Examples may include, but 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 173 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

are not limited to the name of the chemical(s), such as “acetone” or “methylene dichloride,” or 

the type or class of chemical, such as “organic solvents” or “halogenated organic solvents” or, as 

applicable, the proper shipping name and technical name markings used to comply with DOT 

requirements at 49 CFR part 172 subpart D; and (3) an indication of the hazards of the contents 

of the container. Examples of hazards include, but are not limited to, the applicable hazardous 

waste characteristic(s) (i.e., ignitable, corrosive, reactive, toxic); a hazard class label consistent 

with the DOT requirements at 49 CFR 172 part 172 subpart E (labeling); a label consistent with 

the OSHA Hazard Communication Standard at 29 CFR 1920.1200; a chemical hazard label 

consistent with the NFPA code 704; or a hazard pictogram consistent with the United Nations’ 

GHS. Generators also may use any other marking and labeling commonly used nationwide in 

commerce that would alert workers and emergency responders to the nature of the hazards 

associated with the contents of the containers.

The pre-transport requirements of part 262 subpart C already require hazardous waste 

generators to comply with the DOT labeling/marking requirements of 49 CFR part 172. By 

requiring generators to include other words that identify the contents of the containers, the 

Agency is proposing that generators perform a task that is already required when preparing the 

container prior to transporting the hazardous waste off site for subsequent waste management. In 

addition, the Agency is proposing to modify the marking and labeling of containers prior to 

shipping the hazardous waste. We are proposing that SQGs and LQGs can use the DOT hazard 

class labels to comply with the new labeling and marking regulation for containers in SAA. 

Alternatively, they may choose another method to indicate the hazards of the container that suits 

them better, as noted above. 

The Agency requests comment on these proposed changes.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 174 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is affected by the proposed 

reorganization. The SAA regulations are currently at § 262.34(c). We are proposing to move this 

provision to § 262.15(a)(1)(v). The reorganization is discussed in section XIII of this preamble.

4. Clarify What is Meant by “Three Days”

The current regulations at § 262.34(c)(2) state that a generator who accumulates either 

hazardous waste or acutely hazardous waste must, with respect to that amount of excess waste, 

comply “within three days” with paragraph (a) of that section or other applicable provisions of 

the chapter. The Agency is proposing to state in the regulations that the term “three days” means 

three consecutive calendar days, not three business days or three working days. The Agency has 

already clarified this term in a memo, which was based on preamble discussions from the 

proposed and final SAA regulations. 97,98 As stated in the memo, “Originally, the Agency had 

proposed to use 72 hours as the time limit but realized that determining when 72 hours had 

elapsed would have required placing both the date and time of day on containers. In the final rule 

the Agency switched to using three days so that generators only need to date containers that hold 

the excess of 55 gallons of non-acute hazardous waste (or 1 quart of acute hazardous waste).”

The Agency requests comment on this codification of an existing interpretation.

Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is affected by the proposed 

reorganization. The SAA regulations are currently at § 262.34(c). We are proposing to move this 

provision to § 262.15(a)(2)(i). The reorganization is discussed in section XIII of this preamble.

5. Providing a Maximum Weight for the Accumulation of Acute Hazardous Waste in Containers 

at SAAs

 

97 Memorandum from Robert Springer, Director of EPA’s Office of Solid Waste, to RCRA Regional Directors, 

“Frequently Asked Questions About Satellite Accumulation Areas,” March 17, 2004, RCRA Online 14703.

98 Proposed rule: January 3, 1983 48 FR 118; Final rule: December 20, 1984; 49 FR 49569.

Deleted: , “A

Deleted: ...

Deleted: this

Deleted: is

Deleted: ”
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 175 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ Currently, the regulations at § 262.34(c)(1) impose maximum volumes of hazardous 

waste that may be accumulated in an SAA without requiring a permit, complying with interim 

status standards, or complying with the generator accumulation standards. For non-acute 

hazardous waste, the maximum volume is 55 gallons. For acute hazardous waste, the maximum 

volume is 1 quart. When the SAA regulations were finalized, EPA explained that 55 gallons was 

selected for non-acute hazardous waste in part because it is the size of the most commonly used 

accumulation container.99 EPA also explained that 1 quart was chosen for acute hazardous waste 

because it is the volumetric equivalent to 1 kilogram of acute hazardous waste used elsewhere in 

the regulations and commenters expressed opposition to using a weight measure. Since then, 

however, stakeholders have indicated that the 1-quart volume maximum is not a practical way to 

measure the accumulation of some wastes, particularly non-liquid acute hazardous wastes. 

Therefore, we are proposing to add a weight measurement to the SAA regulations for the 

maximum accumulation of acute hazardous wastes. Specifically, we are proposing that 1 quart or 

1 kilogram (2.2 pounds) of acute hazardous waste may be accumulated in an SAA. Generators 

that accumulate acute hazardous waste in SAAs will have the choice of whether to use 1 quart or 

1 kilogram, but they will be required to identify which metric they choose to use.

We are not proposing to add a similar weight equivalent to the 55-gallon threshold for 

non-acute hazardous waste since stakeholders have not expressed a similar need. However, we 

request comment on whether it would be useful to have a maximum weight for the accumulation 

of non-acute hazardous waste in SAAs.

Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is affected by the proposed 

reorganization. The SAA regulations are currently at § 262.34(c). We are proposing to move this 

provision to § 262.15(a)(1). The reorganization is discussed in section XIII of this preamble.

 

99 December 20, 1984; 49 FR 49569–70.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 176 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ 6. Modifying the Language for When the Maximum Volume or Weight is Exceeded in an SAA

Currently, the regulation at § 262.34(c)(2) states that when the maximum volumes are 

exceeded in an SAA, a generator “must, with respect to that amount of excess waste, comply 

within three days with paragraph (a) of this section or other applicable provisions of this 

chapter.” The Agency is rewording this regulation in order to more clearly state the generator’s 

options for managing the materials that exceed the limit. The proposed regulatory text states that 

a generator who accumulates either non-acute hazardous waste or acute hazardous waste listed in 

§ 261.31 or § 261.33(e) in excess of the amounts listed in paragraph (a)(1) of this section at or 

near any point of generation must remove the excess from the satellite accumulation area within 

three calendar days either to a central accumulation area, an on-site interim status or permitted 

treatment, storage, or disposal facility, or an off-site designated facility. Similarly, during the 

three-calendar-day period the generator must continue to comply with paragraphs (a)(1)(i)–(iv) 

of this section and must mark the container(s) holding the excess accumulation of hazardous 

waste with the date the excess amount began accumulating.

The Agency does not view this as a substantive change to the SAA regulations. 

Nevertheless, the Agency solicits comments on this proposed change.

Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is affected by the proposed 

reorganization. The SAA regulations are currently at § 262.34(c). We are proposing to move this 

provision to § 262.15(a)(6). The reorganization is discussed in section XIII of this preamble.

7. Rescinding a Memo Regarding Accumulating Reactive Hazardous Waste Away From the 

Point of Generation

In a memo dated January 13, 1988, EPA wrote that a storage shed that is outside of a 

building where a reactive hazardous waste (D003) is initially generated, could be considered an 

Deleted: hazardous 

Deleted: 2
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 177 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ SAA.100 EPA is proposing to revoke this interpretation. EPA acknowledges that in some 

instances it is safer to accumulate hazardous waste away from the initial point of generation, 

such as with hazardous wastes that are explosive. However, because SAAs are subject to less 

stringent conditions than CAAs, EPA believes it is not appropriate for such dangerous hazardous 

wastes to be stored in SAAs. Rather, EPA believes that if a generator accumulates hazardous 

waste that is so dangerous it needs to be accumulated away from the point of generation, it 

should be accumulated under the more rigorous accumulation standards for central accumulation 

areas.

The Agency requests comment on proposing to revoke this interpretation of the SAA 

regulations.

8. Examples of the Meaning of “Under the Control of the Operator”

The SAA regulation at § 262.34(c)(1) uses the term “under the control of the operator.” 

EPA has not defined this term in the regulations, nor have we discussed it in preamble or 

guidance letters. However, over the years, the Agency has received inquiries about what 

constitutes “under the control of the operator.” In an effort to assist generators to better 

understand this term and to foster improved compliance with the SAA provisions, the Agency is 

providing examples in this preamble of what constitutes “under the control of the operator.” For

example, EPA would consider waste to be “under the control of the operator” if the operator

controlled access to an area, building, or room that the SAA is in, such as with entry by access 

card, key or lock box. Another example would be if the operator accumulates waste in a locked 

cabinet and controlled access to the key, even if the cabinet is stored inside a room to which 

access is not controlled. 

 

100 Letter from Marcia E. Williams, Director of EPA’s Office of Solid Waste, to Michael E. Young, Atlantic 

Research Corporation, January 13, 1988, RCRA Online 11317.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 178 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ The Agency requests comment on additional practices that would constitute “under the 

control of the operator.” 

J. SQGs Accumulating Hazardous Waste on Drip Pads and in Containment Buildings (40 CFR 

262.34(d)) 

EPA is proposing to modify the regulations at § 262.34(d) to require SQGs that 

accumulate hazardous waste for 90 days or less on drip pads without a permit or interim status to 

comply with the technical standards of 40 CFR part 265 subpart W and with all other conditions 

for an exemption associated with the accumulation of hazardous waste by an SQG.

Additionally, EPA is proposing to modify the conditions for an exemption currently at § 

262.34(d) to require SQGs that accumulate hazardous waste for 90 days or less in a containment 

building without a permit or interim status to comply with the technical standards of 40 CFR part 

265 subpart DD and with all other conditions for exemption associated with the accumulation of 

hazardous waste by an SQG.

1. Accumulation of Hazardous Waste on Drip Pads

On December 30, 1988, EPA issued a proposed rule listing three additional hazardous 

wastes from wood preserving operations that use chlorophenolic, creosote, and/or inorganic 

(arsenic and chromium) preservatives, and listing one hazardous waste from surface protection 

processes that use chlorophenolics (53 FR 53282). As part of this rule, the Agency proposed 

additional standards “applicable to drip pads in treated wood storage yards and in kick back areas 

used in managing hazardous wastes at wood preserving and surface protection facilities. These 

standards are intended to provide for proper handling of treated wood drippage” (53 FR 53308). 

In terms of the types of RCRA facilities this regulation would apply to, the proposed rule 

identified and discussed the regulatory requirements for two groups: hazardous waste TSDFs 

subject to the part 264 permitting standards and LQGs subject to the part 265 interim status drip 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 179 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ pad standards. More specifically, the preamble stated that “in the event that drippage is collected 

and is moved from the drip pad within 90 days following generation, generators may avail 

themselves of the 90-day accumulation standards of 40 CFR 262.34, and would not need Part B 

permits for their drip pads or tanks (consistent with § 264.1(g)(3), 265.1(c)(7), and 

270.1(c)(2)(i)) provided that they comply with the Part 265 standards, as required by 40 CFR 

262.34” (53 FR 53309).

When EPA promulgated the final rule for these hazardous wastes (55 FR 50450, 

December 6, 1990), the discussion addressed the same universe of facilities (i.e., hazardous 

waste TSDFs subject to the part 264 permitting standards and LQGs subject to the part 265 

interim status drip pad standards). 

Pursuant to § 262.34(a), LQGs may accumulate the hazardous waste they generate 

without having to obtain a RCRA permit provided they comply with several specified conditions, 

including the technical standards for containers, tanks, drip pads, or containment buildings found 

at part 265 subparts I, J, W, and DD, respectively. Similarly, pursuant to § 262.34(d), SQGs may 

accumulate the hazardous waste they generate without having to obtain a permit, provided they 

comply with several specified conditions, including the technical standards for containers and 

tanks found at part 265 subparts I and J, respectively. Although there is no explicit condition for 

SQGs accumulating and managing their hazardous waste on drip pads, EPA intended SQGs 

accumulating hazardous wastes on drip pads either to comply with all of the conditions for 

exemption, as well as any associated independent requirements for LQGs at part 265 subpart W,

or else obtain a Part B permit for their drip pads (consistent with §§ 264.1(g)(3), 265.1(c)(7), and 

270.1(c)(2)(i)).

EPA has consistently interpreted this regulatory requirement to apply to SQGs. For 

example, as stated in the wood preserving technical guidance document issued by EPA in 1996, 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 180 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

a copy of which is found in the docket, “this 90-day limit applies to both large quantity and small 

quantity generators. While small quantity generators may normally accumulate hazardous waste 

in accumulation units for up to 180 days, this is not the case for small quantity generators 

accumulating waste on Subpart W drip pads. Owners/operators of wood preserving facilities who 

generate between 100–1,000 kilograms of hazardous waste per calendar month and who

accumulate the waste on drip pads are not eligible for the reduced standards normally provided 

for small quantity generators. Instead, these generators must comply with all the management 

conditions for large quantity generators accumulating hazardous waste on drip pads.” 101

Similarly, the RCRA training module for drip pads, a copy of which is found in the

docket to this proposal, reinforced this principle by stating the following: “Under § 262.34(d), 

small quantity generators (SQGs) are subject to a reduced set of requirements when 

accumulating hazardous wastes in tanks or containers meeting the interim status unit standards. 

SQGs who accumulate wood-preserving wastes on drip pads do not qualify for this partial 

exemption. Consequently, all generators of more than 100 kilograms of waste per month who 

manage wood-preserving wastes on drip pads must comply with the requirements applicable to 

LQGs in §262.34(a). As a result, the maximum generator accumulation time period on drip pads 

is 90 days.” 102

At the end of the same paragraph, the document states, “Generators using drip pads must 

also comply with the requirements that apply to large quantity generators for personnel training,

development of a full contingency plan, and biennial reporting,” suggesting that SQGs 

 

101

“Wood Preserving Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Compliance Guide—A Guide to Federal 

Environmental Regulation,” U.S. EPA, EPA-305-B-96-001, June 1996, Section 5-8.

102 “Introduction to Drip Pads (40 CFR Parts 264/265, Subpart W),” RCRA, Superfund & EPCRA Call Center 

Training Module, U.S. EPA, EPA530-K-02-008I, October 2001, page 7.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 181 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

accumulating hazardous waste on drip pads must comply with all of the conditions and 

independent requirements for LQGs, and not just the accumulation time limits.

Because of this statement, the Agency believes that confusion may potentially exist about 

the applicability of the regulations. As stated above, if an SQG accumulates hazardous waste in 

containers, it can comply with a reduced set of regulations, including accumulation of 

hazardous waste for up to 180 days, whereas if the SQG accumulates hazardous waste on drip 

pads, it must comply with the regulations for LQGs. The Agency believes a more effective and 

efficient approach is to require SQGs accumulating hazardous waste on drip pads to comply 

with the technical standards of part 265 subpart W, including compliance with the LQG 90-day 

accumulation limit (as opposed to the SQG 180-day accumulation limit), but to otherwise 

comply with less stringent conditions for SQGs found at 40 CFR 262.34(d). EPA notes that 

hazardous waste that is generated elsewhere at the wood preserving facility and accumulated in 

tanks or containers (i.e., not accumulated on drip pads) will remain subject to the SQG 

accumulation limits. Only waste that is accumulated on drip pads must comply with the LQG 

accumulation limits.103

Because both the monthly generation quantities (e.g., greater than 100 kg and less than 

1,000 kg) and accumulation total (e.g., not to exceed 6,000 kg at any one time) for SQGs are 

significantly less than the generation and accumulation quantities for LQGs, the Agency 

believes that SQGs complying with the less stringent conditions at § 262.34(d) (e.g., personnel 

training, contingency plan) will be protective of human health and the environment. Other than 

complying with the management standards at 40 CFR part 265 subpart W, the Agency sees no 

difference in the risks associated with hazardous wastes accumulated in tanks or containers. 

 

103

“Wood Preserving Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Compliance Guide—A Guide to Federal 

Environmental Regulation,” U.S. EPA, EPA-305-B-96-001, June 1996, Section 5-8.

Deleted: 103
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 182 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ Therefore, EPA is proposing to modify the SQG regulations to require SQGs who accumulate 

hazardous waste on drip pads to comply with the technical standards of 40 CFR part 265 

subpart W, with the 90-day accumulation limit for that hazardous waste, and with all of the 

other hazardous waste accumulation standards for an SQG currently found at § 262.34(d). 

Situations may also occur where an SQG initially accumulates hazardous waste on a drip 

pad but subsequently transfers this waste to a container or tank for subsequent management. 

Similarly, the opposite situation may occur where hazardous wastes are generated and first 

accumulated by an SQG in a tank or in containers and then transferred to a drip pad. The 

Agency is proposing that the SQG have up to a total of 180 days to accumulate the hazardous 

wastes, which includes both the time the waste is on a drip pad and when it is in a tank or 

container, but that the total amount of time to accumulate the hazardous waste on the drip pad 

must not exceed 90 days. For example, if an SQG accumulates hazardous wastes on a drip pad 

for 80 days prior to transferring its waste to a tank, the SQG would be able to accumulate waste

up to 100 days in the tank before it would be required to send it off-site for subsequent waste 

management, or conversely, treat and dispose of the waste on-site in compliance with all 

applicable RCRA regulations under parts 262–268 and 270. 

In the case of an SQG first accumulating a hazardous waste in a tank or container and 

then transferring the waste to a drip pad, the generator would still have up to a total of 180 days,

depending on the circumstances, to send the waste off-site for subsequent waste management, 

or conversely, treat and dispose of the waste on-site in compliance with all applicable RCRA

regulations under parts 262–268 and 270. However, under the proposal, the amount of time 

allowed for the SQG to accumulate the hazardous waste on a drip pad may not exceed 90 days. 

For example, if an SQG first accumulated hazardous wastes in a tank or container for 100 days 

and then transferred the waste to a drip pad, the SQG would be able to accumulate up to 80 days 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 183 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

more (for a total of 180 days) to accumulate the waste on the drip pad before the generator Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

would be required to send the waste off-site for subsequent waste management, or conversely, 

treat and dispose of the waste on-site in compliance with all applicable RCRA regulations under 

parts 262–268 and 270. 

However, if an SQG first accumulated hazardous wastes in a tank or container for 80 

days and then transferred the waste to a drip pad, the SQG would only have 90 days more (or a 

total of 170 days) to accumulate the waste on the drip pad before the generator sent the waste 

off-site for subsequent waste management, or conversely, treat and dispose of the waste on-site 

in compliance with all applicable RCRA regulations under parts 262–268 and 270. 

EPA solicits comments on these proposed revisions. In particular, EPA requests comment 

on whether SQGs accumulating hazardous waste on drip pads should be subject to the 

accumulation time limit of 180 days, similar to SQGs accumulating hazardous wastes in 

containers and tanks. Conversely, EPA is seeking comment on whether SQGs accumulating 

hazardous waste on drip pads should be subject to all applicable conditions and requirements for 

LQGs, and not just the 90-day accumulation time limit.

The Agency also requests comment on the procedures for documenting and ensuring 

hazardous wastes are removed from the sump or collection system 90 days or less from being 

first placed on the drip pad and also for situations where hazardous waste accumulation involves 

both drip pads and containers or tanks.

Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is affected by the proposed 

reorganization. As part of the reorganization in this action, EPA is proposing to move the 

conditions for exemption for SQGs accumulating hazardous waste from § 262.34 to § 262.16. 

The proposed drip pad conditions for SQGs can be found at § 262.16(b)(4). The reorganization is 

discussed in section XIII of this preamble.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 184 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ 2. Accumulation of Hazardous Waste in Containment Buildings

Consistent with the changes proposed for hazardous wastes accumulated on drip pads by 

SQGs, the Agency is also proposing that SQGs that accumulate hazardous waste in containment 

buildings for 90 days or less without a permit or interim status must comply with the technical 

standards of part 265 subpart DD and with all other conditions associated with the accumulation 

of hazardous waste by SQGs currently found at § 262.34(d). 

Similar to the drip pad regulations, the containment building regulations promulgated in 

1992 (August 18, 1992, 57 FR 37194) did not discuss the possibility of an SQG accumulating 

hazardous wastes in a containment building, but instead only discussed TSDFs and LQGs 

accumulating hazardous waste in containment buildings (57 FR 37212). Thus, under the current 

regulations, SQGs that choose to manage hazardous wastes in containment buildings can only do 

so if they comply with the LQG requirements or obtain a Part B permit for their containment 

building. 

EPA is proposing to modify the regulations to allow SQGs to accumulate hazardous 

wastes in containment buildings for 90 days or less without a permit or without having interim 

status provided they comply with the technical standards of part 265 subpart DD and comply 

with all other conditions associated with the accumulation of hazardous waste by an SQG found 

at § 262.34(d). As with wastes accumulated by SQGs on drip pads, the Agency believes that 

SQGs complying with the less stringent conditions at § 262.34(d) (e.g., personnel training, 

contingency plan) will be protective of human health and the environment and other than 

complying with the management standards at 40 CFR part 265 subpart DD, the Agency sees no 

difference in the risks associated with hazardous wastes accumulated in tanks or containers.

As with drip pads, situations may potentially arise where hazardous wastes are first 

accumulated in a containment building and then transferred to containers for subsequent 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 185 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

accumulation, or vice-versa. The Agency is proposing the same framework as described in the 

discussion on drip pads above for how long SQGs may accumulate hazardous wastes in a 

containment building to maintain their hazardous waste accumulation exemption. 

EPA solicits comments on this proposed revision. In particular, EPA requests comment 

regarding whether SQGs accumulating hazardous waste in containment buildings should be 

subject to the accumulation time limit of 180 days, similar to SQGs accumulating hazardous 

wastes in containers and tanks or, conversely, whether SQGs accumulating hazardous waste in 

containment buildings should be subject to all applicable conditions for an exemption and 

independent requirements for LQGs, and not just the 90-day accumulation time limit. EPA also 

seeks comment on situations where hazardous waste accumulation involves both containment 

buildings and containers or tanks.

Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is affected by the proposed 

reorganization. As part of the reorganization in this action, EPA is proposing to move the 

conditions for exemption for SQGs accumulating hazardous waste from § 262.34 to § 262.16. 

The proposed containment building regulations for SQGs can be found at § 262.16(b)(5). The 

proposed containment building regulations for LQGs can be found at § 262.17(a)(4). The 

reorganization is discussed in section XIII of this preamble.

K. Deletion of Performance Track Regulations

EPA launched The National Environmental Performance Track in 2000 to provide

regulatory and administrative benefits to Performance Track members. Performance Track was a 

public-private partnership that encouraged continuous environmental improvement through use 

of environmental management systems, community outreach, and measurable results. In order to 

provide regulatory benefits to members, EPA made changes to the RCRA hazardous waste 

regulations, among others, that specifically referenced members of Performance Track.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 186 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ EPA terminated the Performance Track program in 2009. Therefore, EPA is proposing to 

remove obsolete references to Performance Track in the RCRA hazardous waste regulations as a 

part of this rulemaking. In some cases, a whole paragraph of regulation will be removed and in 

other instances we will remove just the part of the paragraph that references Performance Track. 

The deleted paragraphs would then be reserved to reduce the possibility of confusion by 

replacing them with other regulations. The references that would be removed would be the 

following: 

 § 260.10: definition of Performance Track member facility;

 §§ 262.34(j), (k), and (l): regulations for accumulation of hazardous waste by LQGs in 

Performance Track; 

 § 262.211(c): two parenthetical references to §§ 262.34 (j) and (k) in the regulations 

for academic labs in subpart K of part 262;

 §§ 264.15(b)(4) and 265.15(b)(4): references to the requirements for inspection of 

areas of the facility subject to spills in §§ 264.15(b)(5) and 265.15(b)(5), respectively;

 §§ 264.15(b)(5) and 265.15(b)(5): requirements for Performance Track member 

facilities that reduce inspection frequency for areas subject to spills; 

 §§ 264.174 and 265.174: references to Performance Track requirements for 

inspections of areas where containers are stored; 

 §§ 264.195(e), 265.195(d), and 265.201(e): requirements for Performance Track 

member facilities for inspections of tank systems; 

 §§ 264.1101(c)(4) and 265.1101(c)(4): requirements for Performance Track member 

facilities for reduced inspections of containment buildings; 

 § 270.42(l): procedures for permit modifications for Performance Track member 

facilities; and
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 187 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

 Appendix 1 to § 270.42—Classification of Permit Modification, Section O.1: 

Indication that a permit modification for reduced inspections for a Performance Track 

member facility is a Class 1 permit modification. 

The provisions that EPA is proposing to remove were added to the regulations in the 

National Environmental Performance Track Program final rule, dated April 22, 2004 (69 FR 

21737), the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Burden Reduction Initiative final rule, 

dated April 4, 2006 (71 FR 16862), and the Academic Laboratories final rule, dated December 1, 

2008 (73 FR 72912). The Agency is requesting comment on whether there are additional 

references to the Performance Track program in the RCRA hazardous waste regulations that 

should be removed as a part of this rulemaking. 

Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is not affected by the proposed 

reorganization.

L. Clarification of Biennial Reporting Requirements (40 CFR 262.41)

EPA is proposing to modify the biennial reporting regulations for generators found at 40 

CFR 262.41 in order to make the regulations consistent with Agency guidance, including its 

biennial report instructions and forms. More specifically, the Agency is proposing the following 

revisions: (1) only LQGs need to submit biennial reports; (2) LQGs must report all of the 

hazardous waste they generate for the entire reporting year, not just the month(s) the generator 

was an LQG; (3) LQGs completing a biennial report must report all hazardous wastes they 

generated in the reporting year, regardless of whether they transferred the waste off site during 

the reporting year; and (4) a reference to the biennial report form (EPA form 8700-13) at § 

262.41 rather than the list of specific data elements in currently at that citation.

Deleted: to require that

Deleted: replace the list of specific data elements in § 262.41 with 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 188 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Additionally, EPA is proposing to modify the title of subpart D from “Recordkeeping and Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

Reporting” to “Recordkeeping and Reporting Applicable to Small and Large Quantity 

Generators” in order to highlight which entities need to comply with this subpart.

1. Biennial Report Requirements are Only Applicable to LQGs 

The first proposed change is to modify the biennial reporting regulations in § 262.41 to 

make these only applicable to LQGs (and thus not applicable to SQGs and CESQGs). Currently, 

the biennial report regulations at § 262.41(a) and § 262.41(b) refer to “a generator” and “any 

generator,” but do not further specify which categories of generators must complete and submit a 

biennial report. However, current EPA guidance, as well as a 1986 FR notice, states that only 

LQGs must complete and submit a biennial report to EPA. 104,105 To reduce confusion between 

the regulations and EPA’s current guidance regarding the applicability of biennial reporting 

requirements, EPA is proposing to modify § 262.41 to state that only LQGs are required to 

complete and submit a biennial report. This proposed change would not result in a substantive 

change to the existing regulations, but would make clear who is required to submit the biennial 

report. Additionally, EPA is proposing to modify the phrase “prepare and submit” which is the 

existing language in § 262.41, to “complete and submit” because the Agency believes that

“complete and submit” more accurately reflects that LQGs must complete all applicable 

elements of the biennial report forms.

 

104 The Federal Register notice states, “the Agency is today finalizing the proposed exemption from the biennial 

report requirements of § 262.41 for generators of 100-1000 kg/mo, including an exemption from the provisions of 

this section requiring a description of efforts taken during the reporting year to minimize waste generation.” (51 FR 

10160, March 24, 1986). Additionally, EPA’s Hazardous Waste Report Instructions and Forms specify that only 

LQGs (as well as facilities that treat, store, or dispose of RCRA hazardous waste on-site) must complete and file the 

biennial report (http://www.epa.gov/osw/inforesources/data/biennialreport/index.htm).

105 Both EPA and the states have received questions from generators regarding whether they must submit a biennial 

report.

Deleted: reads: “A generator who ships any hazardous waste offsite to a treatment, storage or disposal facility within the United 

States must prepare and submit a single copy of a Biennial Report to 

the Regional Administrator by March 1 of each even numbered 

year.” Similarly, § 262.41(b) reads, “Any generator who treats, 

stores, or disposes of hazardous waste on-site must submit a biennial 

report covering those wastes.” In both cases, the regulatory text does 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 189 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is not affected by the proposed 

reorganization.

2. LQGs Must Report All Hazardous Waste Generated During the Reporting Year, Not Just for 

the Month(s) the Generator was an LQG

The second proposed change is to modify the biennial reporting regulations to require 

LQGs to report all of the hazardous waste they generate for the entire reporting year, not just the 

month(s) the generator was actually an LQG. (Additionally, if EPA were to make final the 

proposed provision allowing an LQG to receive hazardous waste from a CESQG under control 

of the same person, an LQG would also have to report the waste it received during the reporting 

year. See section VII.C of the preamble for discussion of this provision.) The Agency is 

proposing this change since there have been different positions provided by EPA regarding 

whether LQGs must report on the amount of hazardous waste generated and managed for the 

entire reporting year or only for those months they were an LQG, and, thus, were subject to the 

LQG standards, including biennial reporting. In addition, although the vast majority of states 

require LQGs to report the total amount of hazardous waste they generate for the entire reporting 

year, even if they were an LQG for only one calendar month, there are at least two states that 

only require LQGs to report the amount of hazardous waste generated and managed for those 

months they were an LQG.106

Specifically, in a 1980 Federal Register notice, the Agency stated, “The recordkeeping 

and reporting requirements of Part 262 apply, however, only to those periods in which the 

generator's hazardous waste is subject to full regulation under Part 262. Thus, for example, the 

annual report of a generator whose waste is subject to full regulation under Part 262 for three 

 

106 Relatedly, EPA is also proposing to allow CESQGs and SQGs that generate additional amounts of hazardous 

waste in response to an episodic event that would have required a bump up in generator category to maintain their 

generator category provided certain conditions are met. See section IX of this preamble for more information.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 190 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

months in a year would cover the generator's activity only for those three months” (45 FR 76621 Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶, 

November 19, 1980). However, current EPA guidance in the Hazardous Waste Report 

Instructions and Forms instructs generators to report the total quantity of hazardous waste 

generated during the reporting year. The regulations in § 262.41 are silent on this issue.

In the interest of national consistency, EPA proposes to modify the regulations at § 

262.41 to require LQGs to report the total amount of hazardous waste generated during the entire 

reporting year. EPA believes that this change will ensure a more complete and reliable estimate 

on the total amount of hazardous waste generated in order to support various RCRA program 

development and implementation efforts by EPA and the states. 

The Agency does not anticipate significant added burden from this provision. First, EPA 

knows of only two states (Idaho and Kentucky) that currently require generators to report only 

those hazardous wastes generated during the months the generator was an LQG. Thus, this 

modification will only affect a small percentage of the LQG universe that in certain months are 

not LQGs. Second, these LQGs are already completing a biennial report, so the change in burden 

will be in reporting the additional amounts of hazardous waste they generate for the remaining 

months of the reporting year that they were not an LQG. Third, generators are already required 

under § 261.5(c) and (d) to count the amount of hazardous waste they generate monthly to 

determine their regulatory status and thus would be counting hazardous waste during months 

they are not LQGs. Fourth, most generators transfer the hazardous waste they generate off site 

and, thus, should be able to use their hazardous wastes manifests to calculate the total amount of 

hazardous wastes they generate annually. 

Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is not affected by the proposed 

reorganization.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 191 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ 3. LQGs Must Report All Hazardous Waste Generated During the Reporting Year, Regardless of 

When the Waste was Transferred Off Site 

The third proposed change requires LQGs completing a biennial report to report all 

hazardous wastes they generated during the reporting year, regardless of when the hazardous 

waste was transported off site. Although the current biennial report instructions clearly state that 

LQGs should report the total quantity of hazardous waste that was generated during the reporting 

year, the regulations do not address cases in which the generator generates hazardous waste 

during the reporting year, but ships the waste off site during the next calendar year.

For purposes of completeness and to be consistent and avoid confusion with the current 

biennial report and its instructions, the Agency is proposing to state in § 262.41 that LQGs must 

report all hazardous wastes they generate in the reporting year, regardless of when the generated 

hazardous waste was transferred off site. The Agency believes that this change will not pose a 

significant burden since the information is already available; it is simply stating clearly in which 

year the data is reported.

Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is not affected by the proposed 

reorganization.

4. Replace the List of Specific Data Elements with an Independent Requirement to Complete and 

Submit All Data Elements Required in the Biennial Report Form (EPA Form 8700-13).

EPA is proposing to modify the regulations at 40 CFR 262.41 to eliminate the specific 

list of data elements and to require the completion and submission of all data elements contained 

in the biennial report form (EPA form 8700-13).

Section 262.41(a) currently requires that the biennial report include a specific list of data 

elements, including the name, address, and EPA ID number of the generator and each transporter 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 192 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

and TSDF, the EPA hazardous waste number for each hazardous waste shipped off site, and a 

signed certification, among other things.

In the nearly three decades since the biennial report regulations were first promulgated, 

EPA’s biennial report form and instructions have evolved to enable better data analysis and to 

reduce burden, where possible. Thus, the regulations at § 262.41 no longer accurately reflect the 

data elements currently listed in EPA’s biennial report instructions and forms. For example, 

current EPA guidance for biennial reporting requires generators to identify their hazardous 

wastes using not only the EPA hazardous waste number, but also using source, form, and 

management method codes. Additionally, EPA no longer requires the collection of the name and 

EPA identification number of each transporter in the biennial report. In order to maintain 

consistency between the regulations at § 262.41 and the EPA biennial report instructions and 

forms, EPA is proposing to remove the list of specific data elements currently in the regulations 

and to simply require completion and submission of all the data elements required in EPA form 

8700-13. This change eliminates the need to update the list of data elements in the regulations, 

which would require periodic rulemakings, every time that changes were made to the 

information to be provided.

At least every three years, EPA’s biennial report instructions and forms are reviewed and 

approved through the information collection request (ICR) process under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act (PRA). The PRA requires EPA to issue proposed and final notices in the Federal 

Register and to provide opportunity for public comment, thus ensuring that the regulated 

community is informed and has the opportunity to comment on the report instructions and form. 

The PRA also requires approval by the Office of Management and Budget. Eliminating the list of 

specific data elements currently in the regulations therefore does not eliminate public input and

avoids duplication with the review and approval processes established under the PRA.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 193 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ EPA does not believe this change in any way affects the enforceability of the biennial 

reporting regulations. Generators must complete and submit all information required by EPA 

form 8700-13. EPA also notes that this approach is similar to the current regulations at § 262.12, 

which require generators to obtain an EPA identification number using EPA form 8700-12 (Site 

ID form). Section 262.12 does not contain an itemized list of specific data elements contained in 

EPA form 8700-12. Instead, it requires the completion and submission of the specified form. 

EPA also notes that some states develop their own biennial report forms, based on the 

federal forms. EPA does not believe this proposed change would impact the biennial reporting 

processes in these states. Authorized states that use a different form for collecting biennial report 

information would simply refer to their authorized state form in their state regulations.

5. Request for Comment

The Agency requests comment on the proposed changes to § 262.41. EPA also 

specifically requests whether commenters believe the proposed change to eliminate the specific 

data elements in § 262.41 will ease compliance and understanding of the current biennial 

reporting procedures.

M. Provision Prohibiting Generators from Disposing of Liquids in Municipal Solid Waste 

Landfills (Proposed § 262.14 and § 262.35)

EPA is proposing to add a paragraph at § 262.14 (for CESQGs) and § 262.35 (for SQGs 

and LQGs) that hazardous waste generators are prohibited from disposing of liquid hazardous 

wastes in landfills. This is not a new requirement; it is a reflection of existing regulations found 

at § 258.28 for municipal solid waste landfills (MSWLFs), and §§ 264.314 and 265.314 for 

permitted and interim status hazardous waste landfills. The Agency believes it is important to 

emphasize that the responsibility for complying with this provision not only resides with 

Deleted: al
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 194 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

municipal and hazardous waste haulers and landfill operators, but also with hazardous waste Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

generators.

The restriction for disposal of liquid hazardous waste in MSWLFs has been in place since 

1991 at § 258.28 and specifically restricts “bulk or noncontainerized liquid wastes, except (1) 

household wastes (other than septic wastes), and (2) leachate and gas condensate that is derived 

from the MSWLF unit where the unit is equipped with a composite liner and a leachate 

collection system...designed and constructed to maintain less than 30 centimeters of leachate 

over the liner” (56 FR 51055, October 9, 1991).107

In the same preamble, EPA went on to state that liquids restrictions are necessary because 

the disposal of liquids into landfills can be a significant source of leachate generation and that 

restricting the introduction of liquids into landfills would minimize the leachate generation 

potential of landfills and reduce the risk of liner failure and subsequent contamination of the 

ground water.108 The special requirements for bulk and containerized liquids in part 264 address 

similar concerns about the management of liquids in landfills.109

Under current practices and operations, the primary onus for seeing that hazardous waste 

liquids are restricted from landfills generally resides with the hauler. Should a random inspection 

at a landfill of the hauler’s waste find liquid hazardous waste, the landfill operator cannot accept 

the hauler’s waste without violating its landfill permit. As a result, the hauler would be required 

to transport its waste back to the generator or to a RCRA-permitted treatment facility and pay the 

significantly higher tipping fees for any required treatment prior to disposal. While the waste 

management hauler or transporter can provide a measure of oversight, ultimately the hauler must 

rely on the due diligence and waste management practices of the hazardous waste generator to 

 

107 The prohibition on liquid wastes in MSWLFs applies to all liquid wastes and not just liquid hazardous wastes.

108 56 FR 51055, October 9, 1991

109 40 CFR 264.314(a) and 265.314(a)
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 195 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

avoid such an outcome. In other words, the hazardous waste generator is responsible for ensuring 

that hazardous waste liquids are not disposed of in landfills. 

Considering the importance of restricting liquid hazardous wastes in landfills, the Agency 

believes including a mirror provision in the 40 CFR part 262 hazardous waste generator 

regulations would increase awareness, and thus compliance, by generators with the liquids 

restriction that currently exists in §§ 258.28, 264.314(a) and 265.314(a) Therefore, the Agency is 

proposing to incorporate this provision into the generator regulations at part 262. 

Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is affected by the proposed 

reorganization in that we are proposing to include the provision as a condition in § 262.14 for 

CESQGs, as well as in § 262.35 for SQGs and LQGs.

N. Extending Time Limit for Accumulation Under Alternative Requirements for Laboratories 

Owned by Eligible Academic Facilities (40 CFR Part 262 Subpart K)

The Agency is proposing to extend the accumulation time for unwanted material by 

eligible academic entities with laboratories operating under 40 CFR part 262 subpart K from six 

months to one year. 

Under 40 CFR part 262 subpart K eligible academic entities have the choice of operating 

their laboratories under the alternative subpart K standards instead of the satellite accumulation 

area regulations at 40 CFR 262.34(c). Currently, if the eligible academic entity chooses to 

operate its laboratories under subpart K, the entity must remove the unwanted material from each 

laboratory under the following two circumstances: (1) every 6 months; or (2) within 10 days, if 

the laboratory accumulates more than 55 gallons of unwanted material or 1 quart of reactive 

acutely hazardous unwanted material.

Operating under the SAA regulations, an eligible academic entity has no time limit for 

accumulation. Therefore, for smaller eligible academic entities that do not accumulate 55 gallons 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 196 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

in a laboratory, subpart K’s six month accumulation time limit can mean a shorter, more 

stringent, accumulation time than they have under the satellite accumulation area 

regulations. Eligible academic entities have cited this shorter accumulation time as a disincentive 

for opting into the alternative standards in subpart K. The Agency therefore requests comment 

regarding its proposal to increase the accumulation time limit in an eligible academic entity’s 

laboratory to 12 months.

Lengthening the time would yield a cost savings for those operating under subpart K 

compared to the costs they have now. The longer accumulation time would come with no 

increased risk because the volume limits—which are the same as the SAA volume limits—would 

continue to be in place for the rare cases where labs do accumulate 55 gallons of unwanted 

material or 1 quart of reactive acutely hazardous unwanted material.

The Agency requests comment on extending the accumulation time for unwanted 

material by eligible academic entities with laboratories operating under 40 CFR part 262 subpart 

K, from six months to one year. 

Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is not affected by the proposed 

reorganization.

IX. Proposed Addition to 40 CFR Part 262 for Generators that Temporarily Change 

Generator Category as a Result of an Episodic Event

EPA is proposing to allow a CESQG or an SQG to maintain its existing generator 

category if, as a result of a planned or unplanned episodic event, the generator would generate a 

quantity of hazardous waste in a calendar month sufficient to bump the facility into a more 

stringent generator category (i.e., CESQG to either an SQG or an LQG; or an SQG to an LQG). 

This proposed change would allow a CESQG or SQG to generate additional quantities of 

Deleted: 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 197 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ hazardous waste—exceeding its normal generator category limits temporarily—and still 

maintain its existing regulatory category provided it complies with specified conditions 

discussed below. Because these events are considered to be temporary and episodic in nature, the 

hazardous waste generator would only be allowed to take advantage of this provision once every 

calendar year. Also as explained below, a CESQG or SQG could petition EPA to manage one 

additional episodic event per calendar year.

A. Background

Under the current RCRA regulatory framework for hazardous waste generators, a 

generator’s category is determined by the quantity of hazardous waste it generates in a calendar 

month. For example, if a generator generates less than or equal to 100 kilograms of non-acute 

hazardous waste and 1 kilogram of acute hazardous waste in a calendar month, then it can 

comply with the regulations applicable to a CESQG.110 However, if that same generator 

generates more than 100 kilograms but less than 1,000 kilograms of non-acute hazardous waste 

and less than or equal to 1 kilogram of acute hazardous waste in the following calendar month, 

then it must comply with all applicable regulations associated with an SQG.

At issue is when the generator generates an additional quantity of hazardous waste in a 

calendar month as a result of an episodic event—(planned or unplanned)—only to revert back to 

its normal waste generation quantities in the following month. For example, a CESQG plans a 

short-term demolition project that generates an additional 500 kilograms of hazardous waste in 

the calendar month, resulting in the CESQG becoming an SQG for that calendar month. 

However, once the demolition project has been completed, the generator’s waste generation 

drops such that it again qualifies as a CESQG. Other examples of planned episodic events 

 

110 Note: Besides the generation of non-acute hazardous waste, a generator’s category is also determined by the 

quantities of acute hazardous waste it generates in a calendar month. 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 198 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

include tank cleanouts, short-term construction projects, site remediation, equipment 

maintenance during plant shut downs, and removal of excess chemical inventories. 

Unplanned episodic events, which may be less frequent, include production process 

upsets, product recalls, excess inventory, accidental spills, or “acts of nature,” such as a tornado, 

hurricane, or flood. For example, an SQG suffers an unplanned disruption in production that 

results in the generation of 3,000 kilograms of an off-specification product that cannot be sold 

and must be discarded, therefore bumping the generator from an SQG to an LQG for that 

calendar month. 

Currently, for the one month the hazardous waste generator was subject to more stringent 

regulations, the generator has two options: (1) temporarily change its waste management 

practices to comply with those of the more stringent generator category for the duration of the 

event or (2) permanently adjust and manage all subsequent quantities it generates in the more 

stringent generator category (even though it is in a less stringent generator category in 

subsequent months). Generators that do not comply will be out of compliance with the applicable 

regulations.

Under the current regulatory framework, a CESQG must comply with minimal conditions 

for an exemption. For non-acute hazardous waste, these include the following: making a 

hazardous waste determination; counting the amount of hazardous waste it generates to ensure it 

is a CESQG (e.g., generates less than or equal to 100 kilograms of non-acute hazardous waste 

and 1 kilogram of acute hazardous waste in a calendar month); accumulating no more than 1,000 

kilograms on site at any one time; and sending its hazardous waste for subsequent off-site waste 

management to one of several specified designation facilities.111 However, if an episodic event 

 

111 A CESQG may send its hazardous waste to (1) a hazardous waste facility permitted by EPA; (2) an interim status 

hazardous waste facility; (3) a hazardous waste facility permitted by an authorized state; (4) a facility permitted, 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 199 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

were to occur, such as the generation of an additional 500 kilograms of non Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶-acute hazardous 

waste resulting from a disruption in production process, the generator would need to comply 

with the SQG regulations that include both independent requirements and conditions for 

exemption. Having to obtain a RCRA identification number would be an example of an 

independent requirement, whereas managing its hazardous wastes in containers or tanks subject 

to the applicable 40 CFR part 265 subparts I and J regulations, and marking and labeling the 

containers would be examples of conditions for exemption. EPA believes requiring a CESQG to 

comply with the additional SQG or LQG regulations or an SQG to comply with the LQG 

regulations for the month its hazardous waste exceeded the quantity limits based on an episodic 

event (planned or unplanned) may be unnecessary to protect human health and the environment. 

Instead, the Agency is proposing a more practical approach to ease compliance for episodic 

generators and still protect human health and the environment. By complying with the specified 

conditions, the generator would be able to maintain its current generator category and would not 

be required to comply with the more stringent site-wide regulations applicable to the higher 

generator category. 

Although EPA does not have specific information regarding the number of generators 

that may take advantage of its proposed alternative episodic standards, we can make certain 

estimates using data collected through the biennial report. EPA currently estimates that 1,270–

2,550 generators could potentially take advantage of this provision if it is finalized. 112 However, 

EPA believes that the potential universe of generators that may want to take advantage of the

 

licensed or registered by a state to manage municipal solid waste; (5) a facility permitted, licensed or registered by a 

state to manage non-municipal non-hazardous solid waste; (6) a facility which beneficially uses or reuses or 

legitimacy recycles or reclaims its wastes or treats its waste prior to beneficial use or reuse or legitimacy recycling 

or reclamation; or (7) universal waste handler or destination facility subject to the requirements in 40 CFR part 273.

112 Assessment of the Potential Costs, Benefits, and Other Impacts of the Improvements to the Hazardous Waste 

Generator Regulatory Program, As Proposed, August 2014. Deleted: Draft Report, 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 200 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

episodic event standards may be significantly higher and is seeking comment on what a more 

reliable estimate might be. For example, there may be certain industrial sectors in which 

generators have a higher probability of being episodic generators than in others (e.g., retail, oil 

and gas exploration, utilities, and military bases). 

On February 14, 2014, EPA published a Notice of Data Availability for the Retail Sector 

in which the Agency requested, among other topics, comments from retailers on issues they face 

in complying with the RCRA regulations. Some commenters mentioned the challenge posed by 

complying with the hazardous waste regulations when an irregular event causes them to exceed 

the threshold of their normal generator category for a single month. This provision would 

provide a way for retailers and others to manage that challenge. 

B. Proposed Conditions for Episodic Generators

Under the proposed framework, a CESQG or an SQG generating an increased quantity of 

hazardous waste because of an episodic event that resulted in a temporary change in a 

generator’s category would be able to maintain its existing generator category provided specified 

conditions are met as the waste is accumulated. We believe these conditions will be sufficient to 

ensure these additional hazardous wastes are managed in an environmentally sound manner. 

Similar to the existing hazardous waste regulatory framework, should a CESQG fail to meet the 

specified conditions, it would immediately lose the CESQG accumulation exemption and be the 

operator of a non-exempt storage facility unless it also immediately complied with all of the 

conditions for exemption for an SQG or LQG. If an SQG failed to meet any specified condition 

for exemption, it would immediately lose its exemption and be the operator of a non-exempt 

storage facility unless it had immediately complied with all of the conditions for an exemption 

for an LQG. 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 201 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ For both CESQGs and SQGs taking advantage of this provision, the following conditions 

must be met: 

(1) Episodic events are limited to one per calendar year; 

(2) The generator must notify EPA at least 30 calendar days prior to initiating a planned 

episodic event or within 24 hours after an unplanned episodic event or as soon as possible; 

identify the start and end dates, which may be no more than 45 days apart, as well as other 

information about the event; and identify a facility contact and/or emergency coordinator with 

24-hour telephone access to discuss notification submittal or respond to emergency; 

(3) The generator must obtain an EPA ID number (CESQGs); 

(4) The generator must comply with specified hazardous waste management conditions 

as the waste is accumulated on-site; 

(5) The generator must use a hazardous waste manifest and hazardous waste transporter 

to ship the waste generated by the episodic event to a RCRA-designated facility within 45 

calendar days from the start of the episodic event; 

(6) The generator must complete and maintain specified records.

EPA is also proposing a petition process to allow hazardous waste generators to request 

from EPA one additional episodic event within the same calendar year and/or an extension of up 

to 30 calendar days to complete an episodic event and still be eligible to maintain its generator 

category. An example of how the implementation of these provisions would work in practice, 

particularly the start and end dates in conjunction with normal waste generation and 

accumulation operations, follows a discussion of these requirements. 

The proposed regulations for episodic generators are located at a new part 262 subpart L, 

§§ 262.230–232. 

1. Number of Episodic Events per Calendar Year

Deleted: and its local fire department 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 202 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ The Agency is proposing that a CESQG or a SQG be allowed to exceed its generator 

category limits only once per calendar year without affecting its generator category.113114 EPA 

has several reasons for this restriction. First, if a CESQG or SQG exceeds its generator category 

limits more frequently than once per calendar year, EPA is concerned that these generators are 

more likely to be routinely generating greater amounts of hazardous waste and thus it may be 

more appropriate for the generator to comply with the regulations applicable to the higher 

generator category, at least for the months they exceed the quantity limits for their generator 

category. Second, EPA believes most hazardous waste generators experience an episodic event 

infrequently, such as once every few years, and these events are typically planned maintenance 

projects. Third, the Agency does not consider an episodic event to be limited to one project 

within the generator’s site. In fact, a generator could start and complete multiple projects (e.g., a 

small demolition project, a tank cleanout, and removal of excess chemicals) at different dates 

within the 45 day time limit so long as it stayed within the 45 day start and end dates identified 

on the notification form with all hazardous waste generated considered part of the same episodic 

event. 

2. Notification

A SQG or CESQG would have to notify EPA no later than 30 days prior to initiating a 

planned episodic event using EPA form 8700-12 (Site ID form). Should EPA finalize this 

provision, EPA will provide instructions in the Site ID form on how to report an episodic event 

(for example, using the notes section of the form). The hazardous waste generator would be 

required to identify the dates the episodic event will begin and end—a time frame not to exceed 

 

113 As discussed later, the length of a generator’s episodic event may overlap two calendar years in which case 

discretion would be provided to EPA or the authorized state as to how it would address a request for another 

episodic event in the second year by a generator. 

114 EPA is proposing a process to petition the Agency for an additional event, if warranted. 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 203 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ 45 calendar days—as well as describe the reason for the event and the types and estimated 

quantities of hazardous wastes that would be generated during the event. Should an unplanned 

event occur, the generator would be required to notify EPA as soon as possible via phone or 

email, but must submit EPA form 8700-12 (Site ID form) within 24 hours of the unplanned 

event, or as soon as possible depending upon the circumstances. Unless notified by EPA or an 

authorized state, a CESQG or SQG would be allowed to begin its episodic event on the date 

identified on its form 8700-12. 

The date identified on the notification form as the start date for the episodic event is 

assumed to be the date the generator initiates physical action in generating and accumulating the 

hazardous waste. Whether such action actually occurs on that date or after by the generator will 

have no impact in changing the end date of the episodic event identified on the notification form. 

No matter what, the end date must be no later than 45 calendar days from the date 

identified on the notification form as the start date of the episodic event. The end date will be the 

date on which all hazardous waste generated from the episodic event, and possibly other 

hazardous waste also generated during that time period as part of normal operations, will have 

had to be removed and sent to a RCRA designation facility as verified by the hazardous waste 

manifest. The Agency does not see any reason to preclude a generator taking advantage of this 

provision to also dispose of other hazardous wastes generated during the time of the episodic 

event. 

As part of the notification form, a CESQG would have to notify its local fire department 

that it was taking advantage of an episodic event. The notice would need to include the start and 

end dates and identify the types and quantities of hazardous wastes that would be generated. 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 204 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ EPA believes notification is essential to inform regulatory authorities of the facility’s 

activities in order to enable adequate compliance monitoring of the facility with the conditions of 

the alternative standards. 

3. EPA ID Number 

A CESQG generating and accumulating quantities of hazardous waste that would 

otherwise result in a higher generator category because of an episodic event (whether planned or 

unplanned) would be required, under the proposed regulations, to obtain an EPA ID number 

using EPA form 8700-12 if one had not previously been assigned. A generator cannot initiate a 

hazardous waste shipment to a RCRA-designated facility without an EPA ID number. (SQGs are 

already required to obtain an EPA ID number.)

4. Waste Management Standards

a. Accumulation standards for CESQGs. Under the current regulations, a CESQG must not 

accumulate more than 1,000 kilograms of non-acute hazardous waste at any one time, but 

otherwise does not have any on-site waste management standards when accumulating hazardous 

waste, primarily because the quantities generated every month are so small. EPA is proposing to 

require a CESQG that generates episodic hazardous waste that would cause the CESQG to 

exceed its generator category limit for the calendar month to comply with the following 

accumulation standards for containers and tanks that manage the episodic wastes if it wants to 

take advantage of the episodic generator provision (CESQGs are prohibited from using a drip 

pad or a containment building). EPA believes that these standards are necessary because the 

quantity of hazardous waste that is accumulated during this episodic period requires standards 

for safe management in order to adequately protect human health and the environment.

When accumulating hazardous waste in containers, the CESQG would be required to 

mark its containers with the following: (1) the words “Episodic Hazardous Waste”; (2) other 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 205 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

words that identify the contents of the containers— Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶examples may include, but are not limited to 

the name of the chemical(s), such as “acetone” or “methylene dichloride,” or the type or class of 

chemical, such as “organic solvents” or “halogenated organic solvents” or, as applicable, the 

proper shipping name and technical name markings used to comply with DOT requirements at 

49 CFR part 172 subpart D; and (3) an indication of the hazards of the contents of the 

container—examples of hazards include, but are not limited to, the applicable hazardous waste 

characteristic(s) (i.e., ignitable, corrosive, reactive, toxic). In the case of hazardous wastes 

ultimately treated and disposed of off-site, the generator could use a hazard class label consistent 

with the DOT requirements at 49 CFR part 172 subpart E (labeling), use a label consistent with 

the OSHA Hazard Communication Standard at 29 CFR 1920.1200, or use a chemical hazard 

label consistent with the NFPA code 704; or a hazard pictogram consistent with the United 

Nations’ GHS. Generators also may use any other marking or labeling commonly used 

nationwide in commerce that would alert workers and emergency responders to the nature of the 

hazards associated with the contents of the containers.

These marking standards are the same as those for LQGs and SQGs accumulating 

hazardous wastes in containers in the course of normal business operations and are necessary to 

protect human health and the environment. In addition to these, the CESQG would be required to 

mark the date that the episodic event began clearly on each container. 

For tanks, the CESQG would have to mark or label the tank containing hazardous waste 

accumulated during the event with the words “Episodic Hazardous Waste” and would be 

required to use inventory logs, monitoring equipment, or other records to identify the contents of 

the tank, the quantity accumulated as a result of the episodic event, and the associated hazards 

and to identify the date that the episodic event began. The records containing this information 

would have to be immediately accessible by the generator. 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 206 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

In addition, the generator would be required to manage the hazardous waste in a manner 

that minimizes the possibility of an accident or release. Management standards are critical to 

ensure the hazardous waste does not pose a risk to human health and the environment. A CESQG 

may use best management practices to comply with this condition. In practice, this includes 

managing the hazardous waste in containers that are in good condition and chemically 

compatible with any hazardous waste accumulated therein and keeping the containers closed 

except to add or remove waste. Complying with the standards in part 265 subpart I would satisfy 

this condition. 

With respect to tanks, the following standards are proposed: (1) having procedures in 

place to prevent overflow (e.g., the tank is equipped with a means to stop inflow with systems 

such as a waste feed cutoff system or bypass system to a standby tank when hazardous waste is 

continuously fed into the tank); (2) inspecting the tank(s) at least once each operating day during 

the episodic event to ensure all applicable discharge control equipment, such as waste feed cutoff 

systems, bypass systems, and drainage systems, are in good working order and (3) using 

appropriate controls and practices to prevent spills and overflows from tank or secondary 

containment systems including at a minimum spill prevention controls (e.g., check valves, dry 

disconnect couplings), overfill prevention controls (e.g., level sensing devices, high level alarms, 

automatic feed cutoff, or bypass to a standby tank), maintenance of sufficient freeboard in 

uncovered tanks to prevent overtopping by wave or wind action or by precipitation. Such 

practices are necessary to prevent the release of the hazardous waste or hazardous constituents to 

air, soil, or water, which could threaten human health and the environment.

As mentioned above, an emergency coordinator (in compliance with proposed § 

262.16(b)(9)(i)) must be identified for the duration of the episodic event on the notification form. 

A CESQG taking advantage of this provision would also need to notify the local fire department 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 207 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ of who their emergency coordinator was if they had not done so already for other emergency 

preparedness and planning reasons. An emergency coordinator is needed because the CESQG 

will be generating greater amounts of hazardous waste than normal and, should an accident 

occur, the emergency coordinator would need to be prepared to handle the situation.

EPA believes these management standards are necessary to adequately protect human 

health and the environment because of the additional quantities of hazardous waste generated 

and accumulated as a result of an episodic event. The Agency, however, seeks comment on these 

proposed management standards. In particular, the Agency is aware of concerns expressed by 

generators in the past that the marking and labeling of tanks with the date the generator first 

began accumulating hazardous waste could prove problematic since the tank could have 

numerous markings on it. (See comments found in RCRA Docket EPA-HQ-RCRA-2008-0678 in 

response to EPA’s Technical Corrections Direct Final rule, 75 FR 12989.) The Agency has 

responded to this concern by allowing generators to use log books and other means to identify 

the hazardous waste accumulation start date. However, the Agency is proposing that CESQGs 

(and SQGs) label their tanks with the words “Episodic Hazardous Waste” so that emergency 

responders and others are readily aware of the tank’s contents and situation. The Agency 

requests comment on whether this requirement could also prove problematic, and if so, why, and 

what cost-effective alternatives exist to address those concerns and still allow emergency 

responders, inspectors, workers, etc. to be readily aware of the tank’s hazardous waste contents. 

Under the existing regulations, CESQGs may not treat hazardous waste generated on site 

in a manner equivalent to SQGs and LQGs under § 262.34, except in an on-site elementary 

neutralization unit. Elementary neutralization units, as defined in § 260.10, are exempt from 

RCRA treatment, storage, and disposal standards and permitting requirements. The elementary 

neutralization unit exclusion does not preclude a CESQG from treating waste in the exempt unit 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 208 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

as long as the generator meets the criteria outlined in §§ 264.1(g)(6), 265.1(c)(10), and 

270.1(c)(2)(v). Specifically, the elementary neutralization unit must meet the definition of a 

container, tank, tank system, transport vehicle, or vessel, and must be used for neutralizing 

wastes that are hazardous only because of the corrosivity characteristic.115

Considering that CESQGs will be required to meet additional waste management 

requirements under this proposed rule for episodic generation, the Agency seeks comment on 

whether CESQGs taking advantage of this provision should be allowed to treat their episodic 

hazardous waste on site in a manner equivalent to SQGs and LQGs at § 262.34. In particular, the 

Agency seeks comment on whether the volume of hazardous waste generated from an episodic 

event exceeds the capacity and expertise of CESQGs, which are accustomed to managing smaller 

quantities of hazardous waste, and whether the Agency should identify a select list of allowable 

types of treatment that would not pose a risk to human health and the environment.

b. Manifest use by CESQGs and management at a RCRA-designated facility. EPA is proposing 

to require CESQGs to manifest the hazardous waste generated from an episodic event and send it 

to a RCRA-designated facility. Under current regulations, CESQGs are not required to manifest 

their hazardous waste to a RCRA-designated facility, but can ship them without a manifest and 

to one of seven types of facilities listed in § 261.5(f)(3). Because the CESQG will be generating 

quantities of hazardous waste that exceed its normal generator category thresholds, the Agency 

believes the use of a hazardous waste manifest and the shipment of the hazardous waste to a 

RCRA-designated facility is necessary to protect human health and the environment. However, 

the condition to manifest the hazardous waste and send it off site to a RCRA-designated facility 

would only apply to the hazardous waste generated as a result of the episodic event. The 

condition would not apply, unless if for economic or logistical reasons, the CESQG desired to 

 

115 RCRA Hotline Q & A, February 1996, RCRA Online 13778

Formatted: Font: Times New Roman, Not Superscript/

Subscript

Deleted: #
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 209 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

ship off site to a RCRA-designated facility all hazardous waste generated and accumulated either 

as a result of the episodic event, independent of the episodic event, or prior to the event. 

c. Accumulation standards for SQGs. Under the current regulations, SQGs must comply with the 

waste accumulation, waste management, employee training, and emergency preparedness and 

prevention conditions at 40 CFR 262.34 (d)–(f) with references to 40 CFR 265 subparts C, I, and 

J in order to accumulate hazardous waste without a RCRA storage permit or compliance with 

interim status standards. SQGs may not take advantage of this proposed episodic generation 

provision for wastes accumulated on drip pads or in containment buildings although EPA does 

seek comment on allowing episodic event wastes to be accumulated in these units prior to 

sending the hazardous waste off-site for treatment and disposal to a RCRA designated facility. 

Under this proposed rule, EPA is proposing to require an SQG that generates episodic hazardous 

waste that would cause the SQG to exceed their generator category limits for the calendar month 

to comply with certain standards for containers and tanks if it desires to take advantage of the 

episodic generator provision.

When accumulating hazardous waste generated as a result of an episodic event in 

containers, the SQG would be required to mark its containers with the following: (1) the words 

“Episodic Hazardous Waste”; (2) other words that identify the contents of the containers—

examples may include, but are not limited to the name of the chemical(s), such as “acetone” or 

“methylene dichloride,” or the type or class of chemical, such as “organic solvents” or 

“halogenated organic solvents” or, as applicable, the proper shipping name and technical name 

markings used to comply with DOT requirements at 49 CFR part 172 subpart D; and (3) an 

indication of the hazards of the contents of the container— examples of hazards include, but are 

not limited to, the applicable hazardous waste characteristic(s) (i.e., ignitable, corrosive, reactive, 

toxic). In the case of hazardous wastes ultimately treated and disposed of off-site, the generator 

Deleted: -
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 210 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

could use a hazard class label consistent with the DOT requirements at 49 CFR part 172 subpart 

E (labeling), a label consistent with the OSHA Hazard Communication Standard at 29 CFR 

1920.1200, a chemical hazard label consistent with the NFPA code 704, or a hazard pictogram 

consistent with the United Nations’ GHS. Generators also may use any other marking or labeling 

commonly used nationwide in commerce that would alert workers and emergency responders to 

the nature of the hazards associated with the contents of the containers.

These standards are the same as those for SQGs accumulating hazardous wastes in 

containers in the course of normal business operations and are necessary to protect human health 

and the environment. In addition to these, the SQG would be required to mark the date that the 

episodic event began clearly on each container. 

For tanks, the SQG would be required to mark or label the tank containing hazardous 

waste accumulated during the event with the words “Episodic Hazardous Waste” and would be 

required to use inventory logs, monitoring equipment, or other records to identify the contents of 

the tank and the associated hazards and to identify the date that the episodic event began and 

ended. The generator would need to have records containing this information immediately 

accessible. 

In addition, the SQG would need to comply with all the conditions of the exemption in § 

262.34 (d)–(f) with references to 40 CFR 265 subparts C, I, and J, part 268 land disposal 

restrictions (§262.16 under the proposed reorganization)—that is, the waste accumulation, waste 

management, employee training, and emergency preparedness and prevention conditions. 

d. Manifest use by SQGs. As under the current regulations, EPA is proposing that SQGs manifest 

the hazardous waste generated from an episodic event and send it to a RCRA-designated facility, 

unless the waste is managed on site. The Agency believes the use of a hazardous waste manifest 

and shipment of the hazardous waste to a RCRA-designated facility is necessary to protect 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 211 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ human health and the environment. However, unlike CESQGs, the use of the hazardous waste 

manifest would apply not only to the wastes generated from the episodic event, but all other 

hazardous wastes the SQG generates within its generator category. 

5. Forty-five (45) Days or Less Would be Allowed to Treat and Dispose of Hazardous Wastes 

On Site (SQGs) or Manifested and Shipped Off Site (CESQGs or SQGs) to a RCRA-Designated 

Facility 

The Agency is proposing to allow SQGs and CESQGs 45 calendar days to initiate and 

complete an episodic event, which includes generation, accumulation and management (e.g., 

recycling, treatment and disposal—either on site, such as waste neutralization in a container, or 

off site at a RCRA-designated facility) of all hazardous waste resulting from the episodic event. 

The Agency believes 45 days is sufficient time for a generator to complete management of the 

hazardous waste from the time that the generator begins generating and accumulating the 

hazardous waste. However, as discussed below, a CESQG or SQG can petition the Agency for 

additional time to complete the generation and removal of the hazardous waste during the 

episodic event, if necessary. 

6. Recordkeeping

Finally, generators would need to keep the following information in their records: (1) 

beginning and end dates of the episodic event; (2) a description of the episodic event; (3) a 

description of the types and quantities of hazardous wastes generated during the episodic event; 

(4) a description of how the hazardous waste was managed as well as the name of the RCRA 

designated facility that received the hazardous waste; (5) name(s) of hazardous waste 

transporters, as appropriate; (6) an approval letter from EPA, if the generator successfully 

petitioned to conduct an additional episodic event during the calendar year; and (7) an approval 

letter from EPA, if the generator successfully petitioned for an additional 30 calendar day 

Deleted: (SQGs only)
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 212 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

extension. These records would need to be maintained on site by the generator for three years 

from the completion date of each episodic event. 

EPA believes the recordkeeping condition is critical to enable effective and credible 

oversight. We also believe that the information to be maintained is the minimum information 

necessary to determine that any hazardous waste generated during the episodic event is managed 

properly.

7. Petitions

a. Petition to request one additional episodic event 

While the Agency believes that most generators will experience an episodic event 

infrequently, we also recognize that there may be situations, often unexpected, where a 

hazardous waste generator may have more than one episodic event within a calendar year, such 

as an unexpected product recall, a major spill, or an act of nature. Therefore, the Agency is 

proposing to allow CESQGs and SQGs to petition EPA (at least 30 days before initiating a 

planned episodic event and within 24 hours after an unplanned event) for permission to manage 

one additional episodic event without impacting the hazardous waste generator category. The 

petition must include (1) the reason why an additional episodic event is needed and the nature of 

the episodic event; (2) the estimated amount of hazardous waste to be managed from the event; 

(3) how the hazardous waste is to be managed; (4) the estimated length of time needed to 

complete management of the hazardous waste generated from the episodic event—not to exceed 

45 days and (5) information regarding previous episodic event(s) managed by the generator and 

whether it complied with the proposed conditions. EPA will then evaluate this and other sitespecific information to determine whether a generator should be allowed to initiate a second 

episodic event under the proposed alternative standards. The petition by the generator may be 

made via fax, email, or letter. The generator may not manage hazardous waste for an additional 

Deleted: R

Deleted: O

Deleted: A

Deleted: E

Deleted: E
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 213 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

episodic event until written approval by EPA (or the authorized state) has been received. The 

generator must retain written approval in its records for three years from the date the episodic 

event ended. 

b. Petition to request additional time to complete an episodic event

Events may arise, particularly unplanned events, such as an “act of nature,” where 45 

days is insufficient to complete the event. The Agency is proposing to allow generators to 

petition EPA for an additional 30 days to complete the generation and removal of hazardous 

waste, if needed. The petition must include (1) the nature of the episodic event; (2) the estimated 

amount of hazardous waste to be managed from the event; and (3) and the generator’s rationale 

for needing an extension for an additional 30 days beyond the 45-day limit to complete the 

episodic event. EPA will then evaluate the generator’s request to determine whether it should be 

allowed up to an additional 30 days to complete the episodic event. For example, a situation may 

exist where a hazardous waste transporter cannot arrive and remove hazardous waste generated 

until the 46th day because of unforeseen problems with its truck or the generator did not foresee 

problems with completing a tank cleanout because cleanout equipment failed to operate. These 

are all site-specific situations that EPA or authorized state would evaluate when making its 

decision. The generator cannot go beyond the 45-day limit unless written approval by EPA has 

been received. 

The generator would need to petition EPA for approval at least 15 days before the 

original end date of the episodic event. The petition by the generator may be made via fax, email, 

or letter. The generator must retain written approval in its records for three years from the date 

the episodic event ended. 

Should the generator request an extension from the Agency or authorized state with less 

than 15 days remaining and be denied the extension, then the generator would have to remove all 

Deleted: R

Deleted: A

Deleted: T

Deleted: C

Deleted: E

Deleted: E
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 214 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ hazardous wastes generated as a result of the episodic event as of the specified end date in its 

notification or be in violation of its exemption. 

Unlike rulemaking petitions in part 260 subpart C of the hazardous waste regulations, the 

Agency is not proposing to have a notice and comment period for granting an episodic event or 

an extension. The Agency believes a generator’s actions and performance will dictate approval 

or disapproval of a generator’s request. In addition, in some cases a timely response to these 

requests is critical, especially with requests for extension. Taking notice and comment would 

delay that response. 

8. Tracking and Accounting for Hazardous Waste Generation and Accumulation as a Result of 

an Episodic Event along with Normal Production Operations

In practice, a generator taking advantage of this rule, in particular a CESQG or SQG, 

must track and monitor the start and end dates of the episodic event in conjunction with the date 

the calendar month ends to ensure compliance with all RCRA regulatory provisions associated 

with waste generation and management. An example may be the best way of explaining how this 

rule would work. 

A CESQG could have a number of facility operations (e.g., tank cleanouts, disposal of 

off-spec products it cannot sell or reclaim, repair work involving the removal of lead paint chips) 

that will often result in a temporary change in its regulatory category. The CESQG decides to 

notify its authorized state two months prior (as well as identifying a point of contact and 

emergency coordinator) that it will initiate the planned episodic event on July 20 and take 

advantage of the full 45 days allowed to conduct the event and end on September 2. Beginning 

on July 20, the generator must comply with all of the regulatory standards of subpart L discussed 

above to maintain its exemption as a CESQG. Under this example, if the generator complies with 

subpart L, it need not be concerned about the total amount of hazardous waste it will generate in 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 215 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

the calendar months of July and August (e.g. 100 kg or less) or whether it will exceed the 

hazardous waste accumulation total of less than 1,000 kilograms associated with a CESQG. 

However, on or before September 2, the generator must remove and dispose of all the 

hazardous wastes it generated over the course of the last 45 days that represented the episodic

event. Provided the generator meets that deadline, that waste would not count when determining 

the generator’s status. In this example, the generator chooses to also dispose of waste generated 

from its normal operations by September 2. In this case, it would then not count that waste in 

determining its generator status for July, August, and September. The CESQG would then 

estimate the quantity of hazardous waste it generates and accumulates for the remainder of 

September (starting on September 3 until the end of the month) to determine its regulatory 

category.

If the generator decides to separate out normal production operations from episodic event 

operations, then the waste from normal operations is counted each month to determine the 

generator’s status. For example, assume the generator at the beginning of the episodic event had 

accumulated 950 kg of hazardous waste and proceeds to accumulate another 75 kg over the 

course of the 45-day episodic event that is associated with normal operations.116 On September 3, 

if the generator had not disposed of that 1,025 kg of hazardous waste along with all of the 

episodic event hazardous wastes it generated and accumulated, then it would have violated the 

accumulation provision of a CESQG at 40 CFR 261.5(g)(2) (e.g., less than 1,000 kg) and would 

be in violation of the conditions of the CESQG exemption. A similar concern might occur if the 

generator generated 101 kg of hazardous wastes on September 1 and 2 from normal operations 

and did not dispose of it by September 2 with the waste from the episodic event. The generator 

 

116 Note that it would not matter how much the CESQG had generated during a calendar month in which the 

episodic event begins because all of that hazardous waste is now folded into the hazardous waste generated as a 

result of the episodic event. Otherwise, the rule would not work from a practical viewpoint. 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 216 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

would Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ not be in compliance with the CESQG threshold for the calendar month and would be 

required to comply with the SQG conditions for exemption or be in violation of the exemption. 

There are numerous variations on the above example (e.g., request to extend the length of 

time for the episodic event, etc.) that a generator would have to be aware of when it ended its 

episodic event to avoid exceeding waste generation totals for the calendar month or waste

accumulation limitation totals.

9. An Episodic Event Involving Two Calendar Years

An episodic event may also involve overlapping two calendar years. The Agency is 

proposing that the generator count all the waste from the episodic event in the year with the most 

days involved in the episodic event. In other words, if the episodic event begins on December 16 

of year 1 and ends on January 30 of year 2, the waste would count in year 2. 

C. Request for Comment

The Agency requests comment on its proposed approach for addressing hazardous waste 

generated during an episodic event. Specifically, the Agency requests comment on whether the 

overall approach proposed would assist generators and allow a CESQG or SQG to maintain its 

generator category and not be bumped up into a more stringent generator category temporarily. 

EPA also requests comment on the number of episodic events that would be allowed 

under these proposed alternative regulations. As stated above, we are proposing to allow 

CESQGs and SQGs to take advantage of this alternative regulatory framework for one episodic 

event per calendar year, with the ability to petition EPA for one additional event per calendar 

year. EPA is interested in ideas on how best to structure this alternative framework in terms of 

identifying a reasonable number of episodic events allowed per year and identifying an 

appropriate time period allowed to conduct and manage the hazardous waste from an episodic 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 217 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

event in a way that would be effective while still ensuring protection of human health and the 

environment.

Additionally, the Agency requests comment regarding its proposed conditions for 

CESQGs and SQGs managing hazardous waste generated from the episodic event, such as the 

proposed 45-day limit to generate and manage the waste and the ability for CESQGs and SQGs 

to petition the Agency for one additional episodic event per calendar year or an additional 30 

days to complete an episodic event. The Agency also requests comment on whether the proposed 

conditions for CESQGs and SQGs are reasonable and sufficient to protect human health and the 

environment.

Finally, the Agency requests comment on whether to allow a CESQG or SQG to 

accumulate hazardous waste either on a drip pad or in a containment building in compliance with 

40 CFR part 265 subparts W and DD, respectively, as a result of an episodic event. As proposed, 

the Agency has focused on hazardous wastes accumulated in containers or tanks as a result of an 

episodic event since almost all CESQGs and SQGs accumulate waste in containers with a small 

percentage accumulated in tanks. However, there may be circumstances that lend themselves to a 

CESQG or SQG accumulating hazardous wastes on a drip pad or in a containment building. 

Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is not affected by the proposed 

reorganization.

X. Proposed Revisions to 40 CFR Part 263—Standards Applicable to Transporters of 

Hazardous Waste

The current regulations at § 263.12 for transporters handling hazardous waste at a transfer 

facility for ten days or less state that the transporter is not subject to the storage regulations in 40 

CFR parts 264, 265, 267, 268 and 270. In addition, the regulation stipulates that containers that 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 218 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ hold hazardous waste must meet the provisions in § 262.30 that reference DOT’s packaging 

regulations at 49 CFR parts 173, 178, and 179. 

The Agency is proposing to change the marking and labeling requirements for 

transporters handling hazardous waste at transfer facilities, found at § 263.12, to be consistent 

with the proposed changes for marking and labeling conditions for containers for SQGs, for 

LQGs, and in SAAs.117 In addition to these proposed changes, EPA is also proposing to require 

that containers of hazardous waste at transfer facilities be labeled prior to being transported off 

site to a RCRA-designated facility with the applicable EPA hazardous waste number(s) (EPA 

hazardous waste codes), which will help the TSDF receiving the hazardous waste comply with 

the LDR regulations in 40 CFR part 268. The Agency is proposing these modifications to ensure 

that hazardous wastes are appropriately labeled and marked throughout transportation to a 

RCRA-permitted or interim status TSDF or to another transfer facility.

Specifically, EPA is proposing that transporters storing hazardous wastes in containers at 

transfer facilities mark the containers with the following: (1) the words “Hazardous Waste”; (2) 

the applicable EPA hazardous waste number(s) (EPA hazardous waste codes) in subparts C and 

D of part 261; (3) other words that identify the contents of the containers—examples may 

include, but are not limited to the name of the chemical(s), such as “acetone” or “methylene 

dichloride”; or the type or class of chemical, such as “organic solvents” or “halogenated organic 

solvents” or, as applicable, the proper shipping name and technical name markings used to 

comply with DOT requirements at 49 CFR part 172 subpart D; and (4) an indication of the 

hazards of the contents of the container—examples of which include, but are not limited to, the 

 

117 EPA is proposing to move these provisions as a part of the reorganization of the generator regulations. They can 

be found in the proposed regulatory text at the following citations: SAAs—§ 262.15(a)(1)(iv); SQGs—§ 

262.16(b)(6)(i); and LQGs—§ 262.17(a)(5). 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 219 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

applicable hazardous waste characteristic(s) (i.e., ignitable, corrosive, reactive, toxic); a hazard 

class label consistent with the DOT requirements at 49 CFR part 172 subpart E (labeling); a label 

consistent with the OSHA Hazard Communication Standard at 29 CFR 1920.1200; a chemical 

hazard label consistent with the NFPA code 704; or a hazard pictogram consistent with the 

United Nations’ GHS. Transfer facilities also may use any other marking and labeling commonly 

used nationwide in commerce that would alert workers and emergency responders to the nature 

of the hazards associated with the contents of the containers. 

A transfer facility may choose to use an appropriate DOT proper shipping name found in 

the 49 CFR 172.101 hazardous materials table to identify the contents of the container. That way, 

the transfer facility will fulfill EPA and DOT requirements simultaneously; however, EPA is not 

proposing to require the use of the DOT shipping names while the hazardous waste is 

accumulating on-site. We only suggest that the DOT shipping name may be one way that some 

generators may choose to identify the contents of the container.

As previously discussed, the Agency believes providing this information on the container 

will alert workers and other handlers to the contents of the container and the potential hazards of 

the materials therein. This information increases the awareness of workers and others who might 

come into contact with the hazardous waste in the containers and reduces potential adverse

impacts from container mismanagement. The Agency does not believe this proposed change will 

adversely impact transfer facility operations since similar marking and labeling standards are 

proposed for hazardous waste generators. One difference, however, is the inclusion of the EPA 

hazardous waste number in the list of labeling requirements. Although generators are not 

required to have the EPA hazardous waste number on the hazardous waste while accumulating it, 

we are proposing in this rulemaking that generators must include the EPA hazardous waste 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 220 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ number on the label before transporting the hazardous waste off site, so when a container arrives 

at the transfer facility it should already have the EPA hazardous waste number on its label.

Given that containers received by the transfer facility will already be marked and labeled 

by the generator, the Agency believes the additional burden on the transfer facility will be 

minimal. However, there may be situations where the transporter would be required to mark and 

label a container. One example of when a transfer facility would be required to mark and label its 

containers would be when it consolidates two containers with the same hazardous waste into a 

new container or when it is able to combine and consolidate two different hazardous wastes that 

are compatible with each other and are able to be subsequently managed consistently in 

compliance with the applicable regulations in parts 264, 265, 267, 268 and 270 of this chapter.

The Agency requests comment on this proposed change, particularly the identification of 

any unintended problems from this requirement. 

Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is not affected by the proposed 

reorganization.

XI. Proposed Revisions to 40 CFR Parts 264 and 265—Standards for Owners and 

Operators of Hazardous Waste Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities and Interim 

Status Standards for Owners and Operators of Hazardous Waste Treatment, Storage, and 

Disposal Facilities

The Agency is proposing to modify the biennial report requirements for facilities subject 

to 40 CFR 264.75 and 40 CFR 265.75 and the special requirements for ignitable and reactive 

wastes at 40 CFR 265.176. 

A. Proposed Changes to Biennial Reporting Requirements (40 CFR 264.75 and 40 CFR 265.75)
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 221 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ EPA is proposing to modify the regulations at §§ 264.75 and 265.75 to eliminate the list 

of specific data elements and to require the completion and submission of all data elements in the 

biennial report form (EPA form 8700-13).

Section 264.75 currently requires that the biennial report include a specific list of data 

elements, including the name, address, and EPA ID number of the generator and each transporter 

and TSDF, the EPA hazardous waste number for each hazardous waste shipped off site, and a 

signed certification, among other things.

Section 265.75 includes the above data elements as well as requiring monitoring data 

under § 265.94(a)(2)(ii) and (iii), and (b)(2), where required.

Similar to the approach EPA is proposing for the biennial reporting requirements for 

LQGs in § 262.41, EPA believes removing the specific data elements in the regulations and 

replacing it with a requirement to complete and submit all the data elements required in the 

biennial report form will ensure that the regulations and forms remain consistent. For example, 

the existing regulations require closure cost information and, at § 265.75(f), groundwater 

monitoring data under § 265.94(a)(2)(ii) and (iii), and (b)(2) to be submitted as part of the 

biennial report; however, these data elements are not collected on EPA’s current biennial 

reporting form 8700-13.118 Thus, EPA believes removing this list from the regulations will help 

TSDFs understand what EPA currently requires to be submitted as part of the biennial report. 

This approach eliminates the need to update the list of specific required data elements through 

 

118 Closure cost estimates must be submitted in accordance with §§ 264.142 or 265.142 which requires owners or 

operators using the financial test or corporate guarantee to update closure costs for inflation within 30 days after the 

close of the firm’s fiscal year and before submission of updated information to the Regional Administrator under § 

264.143(f)(3) or 265.143(e)(3), respectively. Additionally, disposal facilities must submit the most recent postclosure cost estimate under §§ 264.144 or 265.144, which requires owners or operators using the financial test or 

corporate guarantee to update for inflation within 30 days after the close of the firm’s fiscal year and before the 

submission of updated information to the Regional Administrator. Groundwater monitoring data must be submitted 

in accordance with § 265.94(b)(2), which requires the owner or operator to submit annually, until final closure of the 

facility, to the Regional Administrator a report containing the results of the groundwater quality assessment program 

no later than March 1 following each calendar year.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 222 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

rulemaking and reduces duplication with review and approval processes established under the 

PRA.

EPA does not believe this change in any way affects the enforceability of the biennial 

report regulations. Owners and operators must complete and submit EPA form 8700-13. 

EPA also notes that some states develop their own state biennial report forms. EPA does 

not believe this proposed change would impact a state’s ability to use their own biennial report 

forms or to collect more information than is required by the federal forms. Authorized states that 

use a different form for collecting biennial report information would simply refer to their 

authorized state form in their state regulations. Additionally, EPA is aware that some states use 

their state biennial report form as a vehicle for collecting closure cost data, required to be 

submitted under § 264.142, and groundwater monitoring data, required to be submitted under § 

264.97(j). Because the existing federal regulations already specify collection of this information, 

EPA would not consider states that continue collecting this data using their state authorized 

biennial report form to be more stringent than the federal program.

Additionally, as discussed in section VIII.L of this preamble, EPA is proposing to modify 

the phrase “prepare and submit,” which is the existing language in §§ 264.75 and 265.75, to 

“complete and submit” because the Agency believes that “complete and submit” more accurately 

reflects that facilities must complete all applicable elements of the biennial report forms.

The Agency requests comment on these proposed changes to §§ 264.75 and 265.75. EPA 

also specifically requests whether commenters believe the proposed change to eliminate the 

specific data elements in these regulations will ease compliance and understanding of the current 

biennial reporting procedures.

Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is not affected by the proposed 

reorganization.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 223 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ B. Special Requirements for Ignitable and Reactive Wastes 

Sections 262.34(a)(1)(i) and 262.34(d)(2) contain conditions for exemptions for LQGs 

and SQGs that accumulate hazardous waste on site for up to 90 or 180 days without a permit. 

These regulations both reference part 265 subpart I, which contains regulations for owners and 

operators of interim status hazardous waste facilities that store hazardous waste in containers.

The LQG conditions in § 262.34(a)(1)(i) reference § 265.176. Section 265.176 states that

containers holding ignitable or reactive waste must be located at least 15 meters (50 feet) from 

the facility's property line. SQGs are not required to comply with this provision. 

In some cases, to comply with this standard for ignitable and reactive wastes, LQGs may 

modify their production feedstocks or production processes to generate a waste that is not an 

ignitable or reactive hazardous waste or reexamine the site’s layout to identify alternative 

accumulation areas. However, there are some cases where it may not be physically possible to 

meet this standard, particularly if the width of the site is 100 feet or less or when the generator’s 

operations have expanded such that it no longer has the ability to accumulate ignitable or 

reactive waste at least 15 meters (50 feet) from the site’s property line. Insurance companies and 

local fire departments often assist hazardous waste generators in minimizing their environmental 

hazards and liabilities, but site dimensions may sometimes physically prevent a facility from 

complying with this condition. 

Therefore, the Agency is proposing to modify the regulatory text for generators to allow 

LQGs to apply for a site-specific waiver from their local fire department if they are unable to 

meet the hazardous waste accumulation property line condition.119 The proposed change would 

require LQGs to obtain a waiver from this provision, in writing, from local fire departments. 

 

119 The Agency is not proposing to modify § 265.176 to allow interim status facilities to apply for a site-specific waiver from 

their local fire department if they are unable to meet the hazardous waste accumulation property line condition.

Deleted: reads,

Deleted: “C

Deleted: ”
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 224 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ LQGs would then be required to keep the written waiver in their records. In addition, as part of 

the reorganization of the generator regulations, discussed in section XIII of the preamble, we are 

also including this provision directly in the LQG accumulation regulations.

Because it is the local fire department that has the expertise to address this problem when 

it arises, EPA is relying on those local fire departments to work with the generators on any 

waivers that may be requested and on finding the most appropriate place on site to accumulate 

this hazardous waste.

Section 265.176 contains a comment that references § 265.17(a) and states that there are 

additional requirements in that section, which also contains provisions for ignitable, reactive, and 

incompatible wastes. The Agency is also proposing to incorporate the language from existing § 

265.17(a) into § 262.17(a)(1)(vi)(B) of the generator regulations. EPA is proposing to replace the 

words “owner and operator” with “large quantity generator” as part of this revision. By 

eliminating the cross-references, generators should be able to more easily discern what 

provisions are applicable and therefore should be better able to properly manage any ignitable or 

reactive hazardous waste.

The Agency seeks comment on the proposed addition of this language to the generator 

conditions for exemption, as well as the change to allow LQGs to seek a waiver from the 

provision that containers holding hazardous waste must be located at least 15 meters (50 feet) 

from the property line. Specifically, EPA requests comment on whether this waiver option 

provides a sufficient level of protection for the facility and the surrounding community and 

whether generators would benefit from the increased flexibility. Additionally, EPA requests 

comment on whether it is appropriate to delegate the responsibility for issuing waivers in this 

case to the fire department and whether EPA should promulgate criteria that must be met as a 

condition of the waiver as part of this provision. For example, conditions may include a limit on 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 225 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

the amount of ignitable or reactive hazardous waste that could be accumulated at any time or a 

requirement that the facility have certain technical controls, such as fire suppression devices or 

walls that meet a certain fire-resistance rating. Furthermore, EPA requests comment on whether 

the insertion of the language from § 265.17(a) in this section is helpful.

Finally, EPA requests comment on whether including a waiver to the provision for 

ignitable and reactive wastes would also be appropriate for interim status facilities or for 

permitted facilities in § 264.176 and § 265.176. 

Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is affected by the proposed 

reorganization. The revised language would appear directly in § 262.17(a)(1)(vi) as a condition 

for exemption for LQGs, rather than being located in 40 CFR part 265 subpart I and referenced 

from the generator regulations. The reorganization is discussed in section XIII of this preamble.

XII. Proposed Revisions to 40 CFR Part 268—Land Disposal Restrictions

The Agency is proposing to change the regulations on marking and labeling of containers 

by the owner/operator of a hazardous waste TSDF in § 268.50 to be consistent with the proposed 

marking and labeling changes for LQGs, for SQGs, for SAAs, and for transfer facilities.

120 EPA 

is also proposing to require that containers be labeled with the applicable EPA hazardous waste 

number(s) (EPA hazardous waste codes), which help the TSDF comply with the LDR 

regulations. More specifically, the Agency is proposing to modify § 268.50(a)(2)(i), which states 

that one of the requirements for storing hazardous wastes restricted from land disposal is that 

each container is clearly marked to identify its contents and the date each period of accumulation 

begins.

 

120 EPA is proposing to move some of these provisions as a part of the reorganization of the generator regulations. 

They can be found in the proposed regulatory text at the following citations: SAAs—§ 262.15(a)(1)(iv); SQGs— 

§ 262.16(b)(6)(i); and LQGs—§ 262.17(a)(5)(i).

Deleted: “E

Deleted: ”
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 226 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ Consistent with the other proposed changes that clarify the contents and hazards posed by 

the contents of hazardous waste in containers, the Agency is proposing to modify this language

to state that each container must be clearly marked with (1) the words “Hazardous Waste”; (2) 

the applicable EPA hazardous waste number(s) (EPA hazardous waste codes) in subparts C and 

D of part 261; (3) other words that identify the contents of the containers—examples may 

include, but are not limited to the name of the chemical(s), such as, “acetone” or “methylene 

dichloride”; or the type or class of chemical, such as “organic solvents” or “halogenated organic 

solvents” or, as applicable, the proper shipping name and technical name markings used to 

comply with DOT requirements at 49 CFR part 172 subpart D; (4) an indication of the hazards of

the contents of the container (examples include, but are not limited to, the applicable hazardous 

waste characteristic(s) (i.e., ignitable, corrosive, reactive, toxic); a hazard class label consistent 

with the Department of Transportation requirements at 49 CFR part 172 subpart E (labeling); a 

label consistent with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration Hazard Communication 

Standard at 29 CFR 1920.1200; a chemical hazard label consistent with the National Fire 

Protection Association code 704; or a hazard pictogram consistent with the United Nations’ 

Globally Harmonized System); or any other marking or labeling commonly used nationwide in 

commerce that would alert workers and emergency responders to the nature of the hazards 

associated with the contents of the containers. The Agency will continue to require each 

container to be clearly marked with the date each period of accumulation begins.

The Agency believes this proposed change will not adversely impact facility operations. 

In fact, because these are consistent with the requirements for marking and labeling that are 

proposed elsewhere in the regulations, we believe it will be easier for all those who manage the 

hazardous waste to know and comply with the consistent system of marking and labeling. In 

addition, a clear description of what material is in each container makes the facility safer for 

Deleted: )
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 227 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

employees, first responders, and the public. The Agency requests comment on this proposed 

change. 

Effect of the Proposed Reorganization: This section is not affected by the proposed 

reorganization.

XIII. Proposed Reorganization of Hazardous Waste Generator Regulations 

EPA is proposing to reorganize the hazardous waste generator regulations to make them 

more user-friendly, which should facilitate better generator compliance. As part of the Agency’s 

2004 Program Evaluation of the hazardous waste generator program, the most frequent comment 

by stakeholders was to improve the user-friendliness of the regulations. 

Although many existing generators are familiar with the current regulations, every year 

many generators either enter the hazardous waste generator program or switch their generator 

category and therefore need to become familiar with their obligations. Similarly, an existing 

generator may need to examine a particular regulatory citation to ensure it is complying with the 

regulations correctly. The Agency believes that providing these generators with a user-friendly 

regulatory framework is an effective way to make the regulations easier to understand for those 

who need to comply with them. 

Therefore, in response to these concerns, EPA is proposing the following organizational 

changes: 

(1) integrate the generator regulations in § 261.5 into the generator regulations at part 262 

by moving § 261.5 (which contains the regulations applicable to CESQGs, counting of 

hazardous waste, and mixing of hazardous wastes with non-hazardous wastes); 

(2) move the existing regulations at § 262.34 for SQGs and LQGs into three new 

sections:
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 228 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(a) satellite accumulation areas regulations for small and large quantity 

generators,

(b) conditions for exemption for an SQG that accumulates hazardous waste; and 

(c) conditions for exemption for an LQG that accumulates hazardous waste; 

(3) use subtitles in these new sections; and 

(4) where reasonable, incorporate regulations that currently cross reference part 265 into 

these new sections.

A. Moving and Integrating Regulations from 40 CFR 261.5 into 40 CFR Part 262

Currently, certain hazardous waste generator regulations are located in a different part of 

the regulations (40 CFR 261.5) from the rest of the generator regulations (40 CFR part 262). 

Stakeholders have stated that this current organization is confusing and not user friendly and 

have asked EPA to move the CESQG regulations in § 261.5 into part 262 so that all the 

generator regulations are in the same place. The Agency believes this reorganization would 

alleviate much confusion in the regulated community and, in the process, would foster greater 

compliance with the regulations. 

Specifically, EPA is proposing to move the definition of a CESQG that generates nonacute hazardous waste at § 261.5(a) into the CESQG definition at § 260.10, move §§ 261.5(c)–

(e) to a new section at § 262.13 titled “Generator category determination” and move § 261.5(b) 

and (f)–(j) to a new section at § 262.14 titled “Conditions for exemption for a very small quantity 

generator.”121

1. Hazardous Waste Generation Quantity Limits for CESQGs (40 CFR 261.5(a) and (e))

 

121 EPA is proposing to rename CESQGs to VSQGs (very small quantity generators). For a detailed discussion on 

this proposed change see section VI.B of this preamble.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 229 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ Currently § 261.5(a) sets forth the non-acute hazardous waste quantity limits for a 

CESQG and § 261.5(e) provides quantity limits for generating acute hazardous waste and any 

residue or contaminated soil, waste, or other debris resulting from the cleanup of a spill of acute 

hazardous waste. As mentioned previously, EPA is now proposing to define each category of 

generator at § 260.10, and, thus, under the reorganization, § 261.5(a) and (e) will be incorporated 

into those definitions.

2. Determining Generator Category (40 CFR 261.5(c)–(d)) 

Sections 261.5(c)–(d) set forth the provisions for a hazardous waste generator to use in 

making its generator category determination. Every hazardous waste generator must determine 

its generator category so it knows what regulations are applicable to it. Since these regulations 

are applicable to all hazardous waste generators, it makes sense to move them into 40 CFR part 

262 along with the other hazardous waste generator regulations. To further aid in making the 

regulations more user friendly, the Agency is proposing to make a new section for generator 

category determination at § 262.13, titled “Generator category determination.” This new section

is appropriate because, after a generator of a solid waste determines it has generated a hazardous 

waste (§ 262.11), the generator must then determine its hazardous waste generator category for 

the calendar month. Table 3 provides a summary of the crosswalk between the existing and 

proposed regulatory citations for determining a generator’s category. 

Table 3: Crosswalk of Existing Citations to Proposed Citations for Determining 

Generator Category

Regulation Existing Citation Proposed Citation Comment

Definitions of Generator 

Categories

§§ 260.10, 261.5 and 

262.34

§ 260.10

Current definition of SQG in 

§ 260.10 is outdated. 

Current usage of generator 

categories is based on §§ 

261.5 and 262.34. 

Hazardous Waste Limits for § 261.5(a) and (e)

§ 260.10

Deleted: Non-acute 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 230 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

CESQGs Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

Purpose, Scope, and 

Applicability § 262.10 § 262.10 Not moved, but expanded significantly

Hazardous Waste Determination 

and Recordkeeping §§ 262.11 and 

262.40(c) § 262.11

Content in § 262.11 is 

expanded and § 262.40(c) is 

incorporated

Generator Category 

Determination § 261.5(c)–(e) § 262.13

3. CESQG Conditions for Exemption (40 CFR 261.5(b) and (f)-(j))

Sections 261.5(b) and (f)–(j) establish a CESQG’s conditions for exemption from 

regulation as an SQG or LQG. More specifically, these conditions for exemption establish the 

regulations for accumulating acute and non-acute hazardous waste, where the acute and nonacute hazardous waste may be managed off-site, and what the implications are when hazardous 

waste is mixed with solid waste or used oil. Since these regulations set forth conditions for 

exemption for CESQGs, just as the regulations found in existing § 262.34 set forth conditions for 

exemption for SQGs and LQGs, EPA is proposing to move § 261.5(b) and (f)–(j) to the newly 

created § 262.14 titled, “Conditions for exemption for a very small quantity generator.” All these 

regulations would then be located parallel to one another in part 262. Section 262.14 would also 

include the CESQG landfill ban for liquids. In addition, CESQGs who episodically generate 

higher amounts of hazardous waste could follow the newly proposed standards for episodic 

generation in part 262 subpart L in order to maintain their CESQG status while managing these 

higher amounts of hazardous waste. Table 4 provides a crosswalk between the existing and 

proposed CESQG conditions for exemption. 

Table 4: Crosswalk of Existing Citations to Proposed Citations for CESQGs

Regulation Existing Citation Proposed Citation Comment

CESQG Definition § 261.5(a) § 260.10
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 231 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

Conditions for Exemption for a 

Very Small Quantity Generator § 261.5(b) and (f)–(j) § 262.14

CESQG Consolidation by LQGs 

Within the Same Company N/A § 262.14(a)(3)(viii)

Proposed new provision

Landfill Ban for Liquids § 258.28 § 262.14(d)

Episodic Generation N/A Part 262 subpart L Proposed new provision

B. SQG and LQG Conditions for Exemption (40 CFR 262.34)

SQGs and LQGs may accumulate their hazardous waste on site without a permit or 

without having interim status provided they follow all of the conditions for exemption 

established in § 262.34. Section 262.34 can be difficult to navigate because the SQG and LQG 

conditions for exemption are intertwined and there are many references to sections in 40 CFR 

part 265. Therefore the Agency is proposing to break § 262.34 into three new sections at § 

262.15, § 262.16 and § 262.17. Section 262.15 would establish the conditions for exemption for 

SQGs and LQGs who wish to operate an SAA, § 262.16 would establish conditions for 

exemption for SQGs, and § 262.17 would establish the conditions for exemption for LQGs.

1. Satellite Accumulation Area Conditions for Exemption for SQGs and LQGs (40 CFR 262.15)

Many generators use an SAA at their sites. These areas allow generators to accumulate 

hazardous waste near the point of generation, which provides for efficiencies and greater safety 

in the handling of hazardous waste. When the generator has accumulated 55 gallons of hazardous 

waste (or one quart of acutely hazardous waste) in the SAA, the generator must then move the 

hazardous waste to the 90- or 180-day central accumulation area within three days. Currently the 

conditions for exemption for operating an SAA are located at § 262.34(c). The location of this 

provision in the regulations creates confusion as to whether it applies to LQGs only or both 

SQGs and LQGs because it is located between the hazardous waste accumulation conditions for 

LQGs and those for SQGs. Therefore, the Agency is proposing to move 40 CFR 262.34(c) into 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 232 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

its own section at § 262.15 titled, “Satellite accumulation area regulations for small and large 

quantity generators.”

Additionally, the Agency is proposing to duplicate §§ 265.171, 265.172 and 265.173(a) 

(which are currently referenced from § 262.34(c)(1)(i)) into § 262.15 in order to eliminate crossreferencing and improve the user friendliness of the regulations. Table 5 provides a summary of 

the crosswalk between existing and proposed regulations for SAAs. 

Table 5: Crosswalk of Existing Citations to Proposed Citations for SAAs

Regulation Existing Citation Proposed Citation Comment

Satellite Accumulation Area 

Provisions § 262.34(c) § 262.15

Selected Part 265 Subpart I 

Provisions § 265.171 § 262.15(a)(1)(i)

Selected Part 265 Subpart I 

Provisions § 265.172 § 262.15(a)(1)(ii)

Selected Part 265 Subpart I 

Provisions § 265.173(a) § 262.15(a)(1)(iii)

2. Conditions for Exemption for an SQG Accumulating Hazardous Waste (§ 262.16)

As previously mentioned, the Agency is proposing to create 40 CFR 262.16 titled, 

“Conditions for exemption for a small quantity generator that accumulates hazardous waste.” 

This reorganization would move § 262.34(d)–(f) and (m) into § 262.16. Specifically, the Agency 

proposes to move the bulk of § 262.34(d) to § 262.16(b),122 move § 262.34(e) to § 262.16(d), 

move § 262.34(f) to § 262.16(e) and move § 262.34(m) to § 262.16(f). Paragraph (c) of § 262.16, 

which covers the mixing of hazardous waste, is a new paragraph that EPA is proposing to add in 

 

122 The portions of § 262.34(d) that state what the generation limits are for this category of generator would be moved to the 

definition of “small quantity generator” in § 262.10.

Deleted: is 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 233 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

this rulemaking.123 EPA is also proposing to add subtitles and eliminate several cross-references 

to 40 CFR part 265 in order to make the regulations easier to navigate. 

a. Addition of subtitles. EPA is proposing to add subtitles to § 262.16 to highlight to the reader 

the topic of each section or paragraph. Every subtitle is italicized after the regulatory citation. 

For example § 262.16(b)(2) addresses “Accumulation in Containers.” 

b. Incorporating 40 CFR part 265 subpart I, § 265.201, and part 265 subpart C into 40 CFR 

262.16. EPA is proposing to integrate three sections of 40 CFR part 265—subpart I, § 265.201 

and subpart C—into § 262.16. First, at § 262.34(d)(2), the regulations state an SQG must comply 

with subpart I of part 265 except for §§ 265.176 and 265.178. Therefore, EPA is proposing to 

incorporate the text of the appropriate subpart I regulations at § 262.16(b)(2). Second, at § 

262.34(d)(3) the regulation states that an SQG must comply with § 265.201 in subpart J when 

using a tank. Thus, EPA is proposing to incorporate the text of all of § 265.201 except for 

paragraph (a) at § 262.16(b)(3). Paragraph (a) of § 265.201 is not necessary because it describes 

what is already stated in §262.16—the requirements for an SQG accumulating hazardous waste 

in a tank for less than 180 days and accumulating no more than 6,000 kg on site at any time. 

Third § 262.34(d)(4) states an SQG must comply with subpart C of part 265. Therefore, EPA is 

proposing to incorporate the text of subpart C—Preparedness and Prevention—at § 262.16(b)(8). 

c. Other part 262 provisions for SQGs. In addition, part 262 subpart L would contain the newly 

proposed standards for SQGs who episodically generate higher amounts of hazardous waste to 

maintain their designation as SQGs during these episodic events. Also, § 262.35 would include 

the landfill ban for liquids that applies to SQGs and LQGs. 

Table 6 provides a summary of changes between the existing and proposed citations for 

SQGs.

 

123 For a detailed discussion of this proposed addition please see section VII.B of this preamble.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 234 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ Table 6: Crosswalk of Existing Citations to Proposed Citations for SQGs

Regulation Existing Citation Proposed Citation Comment

Definition of Small Quantity 

Generator § 262.34(d) § 260.10

Accumulation Time Limit § 262.34(d) § 262.16(b)

Accumulation Limit § 262.34(d)(1) & 

§ 262.34(f)

§ 262.16(a) & § 

262.16(e)

Accumulation in Containers § 262.34(d)(2) references 

part 265 subpart I

§ 262.16(b)(2)

Accumulation in Tanks § 262.34(d)(3) references 

part 265 subpart J

§ 262.16(b)(3)

Marking of Tanks and 

Containers

§ 262.34(d)(4) references 

§262.34(a)(2) and (3)

§262.16(b)(6)

Preparedness and Prevention §262.34(d)(4) references 

part 265 subpart C & § 

262.34(d)(5)

§262.16(b)(8) & (9)

Land Disposal Restrictions § 262.34(d)(4) references 

part 268

§ 262.16(b)(7)

Transporting Over 200 Miles § 262.34(e) § 262.16(d)

Accumulation Time Limit 

Extension § 262.34(f) § 262.16(e)

Episodic Generation N/A Part 262 subpart L Proposed new 

provision

Landfill Ban for Liquids 258.28 § 262.35

3. Conditions for Exemption for an LQG Accumulating Hazardous Waste (40 CFR 262.17)

As previously mentioned the Agency is proposing to create 40 CFR 262.17 titled, 

“Conditions for exemption for a large quantity generator that accumulates hazardous waste.” The 

Agency is proposing to move § 262.34(a),(b),(g)–(i) and (m) into § 262.17. Specifically, the 

Agency is proposing to move § 262.34(a) to § 262.17(a), move § 262.34(b) to § 262.17(b), move 

§ 262.34(g) to § 262.17(c), move § 262.34(h) to § 262.17(d), move § 262.34(i) to § 262.17(e), 

and move § 262.34(m) to § 262.16(g). EPA is additionally proposing to delete paragraphs (j)–(l), 

which deal with Performance Track, since the program is no longer in operation.124 Paragraph (f) 

of § 262.17, which deals with the mixing of hazardous waste, is a new paragraph being proposed 

 

124 For a detailed discussion of this proposed deletion please see section VIII.K of this preamble.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 235 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

in this rulemaking.125 EPA is also proposing to add subtitles and eliminate some cross-references 

to part 265 in order to make the regulations easier to navigate.

a. Addition of subtitles. EPA is proposing to add subtitles to § 262.17 to highlight to the reader 

the central concept addressed by each section or paragraph. Every subtitle is italicized after the 

regulatory citation. For example § 262.17(a)(1) addresses “accumulation in containers.”

b. Incorporating 40 CFR part 265 subpart I into 40 CFR 262.17. EPA is proposing to 

incorporate the 40 CFR part 265 subpart I regulations, which are currently referenced at § 

262.34(a)(1)(i), into the proposed § 262.17(a)(1). EPA also considered incorporating the text of 

other subparts of part 265 that contain technical standards for LQGs and that are currently 

referenced in § 262.34 into the new section § 262.17 (i.e., part 265 subparts J, W, AA, BB, and 

CC), but ultimately decided not to incorporate these due to the length of these subparts. 

Section 262.35 would also include the landfill ban for liquids that applies to SQGs and 

LQGs. EPA requests comment on the proposed changes. 

c. Emergency planning and procedures regulations for LQGs in part 265 subpart M.

EPA is proposing to remove the reference to part 265 subparts C and D for the preparedness, 

prevention, and emergency procedure regulations for LQGs and instead incorporate those 

regulations in part 262 with the other generator regulations. However, due to the length of these 

subparts, rather than copying the text of these subparts to § 262.17, EPA is proposing to copy

these into a new subpart M in part 262. EPA believes that including these provisions in part 262, 

along with the rest of the generator regulations, will make the regulations easier to navigate. EPA 

requests comment on this proposed change.

 

125 For a detailed discussion of this proposed addition please see section VII.A.2 of this preamble.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 236 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ d. Other part 262 provisions for LQGs. In addition, § 262.17(g) would contain the newly 

proposed standards for LQGs who accept and consolidate hazardous waste from CESQGs. Also, 

§ 262.35 would include the landfill ban for liquids that applies to SQGs and LQGs.

Table 7 provides a summary of changes between the existing and proposed citations for 

LQGs.

Table 7: Crosswalk of Existing Citations to Proposed Citations for LQGs

Regulation Existing Citation Proposed Citation Comment

Definition of Large 

Quantity Generator N/A § 260.10

Accumulation Time 

Limit § 262.34(a) § 262.17(a)

Accumulation in 

Containers

§ 262.34(a)(1)(i) references 

part 265 subparts I, AA, BB, 

and CC

§ 262.17(a)(1) & § 

262.17(a)(1) references 

part 265 subparts AA, 

BB, CC

There is still a crossreference to part 265 

subparts AA, BB, and 

CC because of the 

length of these 

regulations.

Accumulation in Tanks

§ 262.34(a)(1)(ii) references 

part 265 subparts J, AA, BB, 

and CC

§ 262.17(a)(2) 

references part 265 

subparts J, AA, BB, CC

There is still a 

reference to part 265 

because of the length of 

these regulations..

Accumulation on Drip 

Pads

§262.34(a)(1)(iii) & 

§ 262.34(a)(1)(iii) references 

part 265 subpart W

§ 262.17(a)(3) &

§ 262.17(a)(3) 

references part 265 

subpart W

Recordkeeping 

provisions move to part 

262.17 and the 

extensive technical 

standards remain in 

part 265.

Accumulation in 

Containment Buildings

§262.34(a)(1)(iv) & 

§ 262.34(a)(1)(iv) references 

part 265 subpart DD

§ 262.17(a)(4) &

§ 262.17(a)(4) 

references part 265 

subpart DD

Recordkeeping 

provisions move to part 

262.17 and the 

extensive technical 

standards remain in 

part 265.

Marking and Labeling § 262.34(a)(2) & (3) § 262.17(a)(5)

Preparedness, Prevention, 

and Emergency 

Procedures

§ 262.34(a)(4) references part 

265 subparts C and D

§ 262.17(a)(6) 

references part 262 

subpart M

Cross-references 

remain but to a subpart 

of the generator 

regulations

Personnel Training § 262.34(a)(4) § 262.17(a)(7)

Land Disposal 

Restrictions

§ 262.34(a)(4) references 

applicable parts of part 268 § 262.17(a)(6)(ii)

Extension of 

Accumulation Times § 262.34(b) § 262.17(b)

Accumulation of F006 § 262.34(g)–(i) § 262.17(c)–(e)

Accepting waste from 

CESQGs to consolidate 

before sending to TSDF

N/A § 262.17(g) Proposed new 

provision
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 237 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Rejected Loads Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ § 262.34(m) § 262.17(h)

Landfill Ban for Liquids 258.28 § 262.35

EPA requests comment on the proposed reorganization to the hazardous waste generator 

regulations and, in particular, on whether the proposed changes would improve the user 

friendliness and utility of the regulations. 

C. EPA Identification Number (40 CFR 262.12) 

In the interest in keeping the generator regulations in a logical order, EPA is proposing to 

move existing § 262.12—EPA identification number—to § 262.18. Section 262.12 would then 

be reserved. EPA believes this will improve the flow of the hazardous waste generator 

regulations as it places the section addressing EPA identification number after section 262.13, 

which addresses how a generator determines its generator category. This proposed sequence is 

appropriate because a hazardous waste generator must first determine what generator category it 

belongs to in order to determine which regulations—including the requirement to obtain an EPA 

ID number—it must comply with. (For example, SQGs and LQGs must obtain an EPA 

identification number, but a CESQG does not).

EPA is requesting comment on these proposed changes.

XIV. Technical Corrections and Conforming Changes to 40 CFR Parts 260–265, 270, 273, 

and 279 

The Agency is also proposing a number of technical corrections and conforming changes 

to the hazardous waste generator regulations. This proposed rule eliminates the regulatory text 

for discontinued programs, identifies areas where conforming changes are necessary, updates 

existing regulatory text to account for new programs, improves the readability of certain 

paragraphs, and corrects typographical errors. Specifically, the Agency is proposing the 

following changes, in order of the existing regulations:
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 238 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(1) Revise § 260.3, which currently reads, “As used in parts 260 through 265 and 268 of 

this chapter.” This text fails to account for additional parts of the regulations that were 

promulgated after 1986, such as parts 266, 267, and 270 through 273. The Agency is proposing 

to revise this to read, “As used in parts 260 through 273 of this chapter.”

(2) Modify the definitions of “Treatability Study,” “Universal Waste Handler,” 

“Universal Waste Transporter” in § 260.10 to only capitalize the first word (e.g., “Universal”) in 

order to match the formatting in the rest of this section. 

(3) Remove the closed parenthesis after “(e.g.,)” from § 261.1(c)(6).

(4) Improve the readability of § 261.4(a)(7), which currently reads, “Spent sulfuric acid 

used to produce virgin sulfuric acid, unless it is accumulated speculatively as defined in § 

261.1(c) of this chapter.” The Agency is proposing to revise the language to read “Spent sulfuric 

acid used to produce virgin sulfuric acid provided it is not accumulated speculatively as defined 

in § 261.1(c) of this chapter.”

(5) Make conforming changes to citations that reference § 261.5 to reflect EPA’s 

proposal to move these regulations. The citations where references to §261.5 are to be revised 

include all the following: §§ 262.10(b), 262.10(l)(2), 262.201(b), 262.204(a), 262.210(b)(3), 

262.210(d)(2), 262.211(e)(3), 262.213(a)(2), 262.213(a)(3), 262.213(b)(2), 262.216(b), 

264.1(g)(1), 268.1(e)(1), 270.1(c)(2)(iii) and 279.10(b)(3). In sections 261.33(e) and (f), EPA is 

proposing to altogether remove the references to §§ 261.5(e) and 261.5(a) and (g), respectively, 

because the quantity limits for hazardous wastes are contained in EPA’s proposed definitions for 

very small quantity generator, small quantity generator, and large quantity generator.

(6) Replace the word “waste” with “water” in § 261.5(e)(2), which reads, “A total of 100 

kg of any residue or contaminated soil, waste, or other debris resulting from the clean-up of a 

spill, into or on any land or water....” Prior to 1985, the word “waste” was “water” and the 

Deleted: acute and non-acute 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 239 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Agency is unable to determine why this change occurred. (In the proposed reorganization, this Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

language is moved to § 260.10 and is contained in the definitions of large quantity generator, 

small quantity generator and very small quantity generator.)

(7) Revise § 261.420 to clarify that the requirement in § 261.411(c) that all employees be 

familiar with proper waste handling and emergency procedures relevant to their responsibilities 

applies to facilities that generate or accumulate more than 6,000 kg of hazardous materials as 

well as to facilities that generate or accumulate less than that amount.

(8) Remove Notes 1 and 2 from § 262.10. Note 1 states that the provisions of § 262.34 

are applicable to the on-site accumulation of hazardous waste by generators. Therefore, the 

provisions of § 262.34 only apply to owners or operators who are shipping hazardous waste 

which they generated at that facility. Note 2 states that a generator who treats, stores, or disposes 

of hazardous waste on site must comply with the applicable standards and permit requirements 

set forth in 40 CFR parts 264, 265, 266, 268, and 270. These notes are no longer necessary 

should EPA finalize the changes in this proposed rule, which include replacing § 262.34 with a 

new reorganization of the regulations that address Note 1and proposing regulations in § 262.10 

that address Note 2.

(9) Remove the extra period in the last line of the paragraph at § 262.10(l).

(10) Make conforming changes to sections that reference § 262.34 to reflect EPA’s 

proposal to move these regulations. The citations where references to § 262.34 are to be revised 

include the following: §§ 262.10(l)(1), 262.201(a), 262.201(a), 262.216(a), 264.1(g)(3), 

264.71(c), 264.1030(b)(2), 264.1050(b)(2), 265.1(c)(7), 265.71(c), 265.1030(b)(2) and (b)(3), 

268.7(a)(5) and 270.1(c)(2)(i).

(11) Make conforming change to remove and reserve § 262.40(c) because this section 

(regarding records for waste determinations) is proposed to move to § 262.11.

Deleted: 7

Deleted: reads, “

Deleted: T

Deleted: ”

Deleted: reads,

Deleted: “A

Deleted: ”

Deleted: 8

Deleted: 9

Deleted: 0
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 240 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(12) Correct the statutory citation at § 262.43 that currently refers to sections 2002(a) and 

3002(6) of the Act. The reference to 3002(6) should be to 3002(a)(6). Additionally, the word 

“he” is removed in order to be gender neutral.

(13) Remove references to Project XL programs that have been discontinued. These 

include the New York State Public Utilities Project XL program at subpart I of 40 CFR part 262 

and the University Laboratories Project XL program at subpart J of 40 CFR part 262. We have 

also removed and reserved the reference at § 262.10(j) to the University Laboratories Project XL. 

(14) Make two conforming changes to the definition of “central accumulation area” in § 

262.200 in subpart K. We are proposing to move this definition from this location to § 260.10 

with the following revisions. First, because of the reorganization of the regulations in 40 CFR 

part 262, we are proposing to change the references to the applicable regulations for the central 

accumulation areas that are used in the definition of central accumulation area in § 262.200. For 

LQGs, we are proposing that the reference to § 262.34(a) be changed to § 262.17 and for SQGs, 

we are proposing that the reference to § 262.34(d)–(f) be changed to § 262.16. Second, we are 

proposing to remove the reference to Performance Track in the definition of “central 

accumulation area” in § 262.200 of subpart K because the Performance Track program has been 

terminated (74 FR 22741; May 14, 2009). Both of these conforming changes are reflected in the 

proposed definition of “central accumulation area” being added in § 260.10.

(15) Make conforming changes to citations that use the term “conditionally exempt small 

quantity generator” to reflect EPA’s proposed change to the term “very small quantity 

generator.” The citations where “conditionally exempt small quantity generator” is to be replaced 

with “very small quantity generator” include: §§ 262.200, 262.201(b), 262.202(b), 262.203(a), 

262.203(b)(2), 262.204(a), 262.209(b), 262.210(d)(2), 262.213(a)(3), 268.1(e)(1), 

270.1(c)(2)(iii), 273.8, 273.8(a)(2), 273.81(b), 279.10(b)(3).

Deleted: 1

Deleted: reads, “The Administrator, as he deems necessary under 

Deleted: ...

Deleted: ”

Deleted: 2

Deleted: 3

Deleted: 4
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 241 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(16) Improve the readability of § 264.170, which currently reads, “The regulations in this 

subpart apply to owners and operators of all hazardous waste facilities that store containers of 

hazardous waste....” The Agency is proposing to revise this language to read, “The regulations 

in this subpart apply to owners and operators of all hazardous waste facilities that store 

hazardous waste in containers....”

(17) Improve the readability of the first sentence in § 264.191(a), which currently reads,

“For each existing tank system...the owner or operator must determine that the tank system is 

not leaking or is unfit for use.” The Agency is proposing to revise this language to read, “For 

each existing tank system...the owner or operator must determine that the tank system is not 

leaking or is fit for use.”

(18) Improve the readability of § 265.1(c)(7), which currently reads, “A generator 

accumulating waste on-site in compliance with § 262.34 of this chapter, except to the extent the 

requirements are included in § 262.34 of this chapter.” The Agency is proposing to revise the 

sentence to read, “A generator accumulating waste on site except to the extent the requirements 

are included in §§ 262.16, and 262.17 of this chapter.”

(19) Correct the list of Federal Register notices in § 265.54 to be consistent with the list 

of references in § 264.54. The reference to 53 FR 37935, September 28, 1988, is missing from § 

265.54.

(20) Add to § 265.111(c) a missing regulatory citation to § 265.445 applicable to drip 

pads. Section 265.111(c) would then read, “Complies with the closure requirements of this 

subpart, including, but not limited to, the requirements of §§ 265.197, 265.228, 265.258, 

265.280, 265.310, 265.351, 265.381, 265.404, 265.445, and 265.1102.”

(21) Add to § 265.114 a missing regulatory citation to § 265.445 applicable to drip pads 

and § 265.1102 applicable to containment buildings. Section 265.114 would then read, “During 

Deleted: 5

Deleted: 6

Deleted: 7

Deleted: 8

Deleted: 19

Deleted: 0
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 242 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

the partial and final closure periods, all contaminated equipment, structures and soil must be 

properly disposed of, or decontaminated unless specified otherwise in §§ 265.197, 265.228, 

265.445, 265.258, 265.280, 265.310 or 265.1102....” 

(22) Make a conforming change to remove and reserve § 265.201 (Special requirements 

for generators of between 100 and 1,000 kg/mo that accumulate hazardous waste in tanks). EPA 

is proposing to move this section into proposed § 262.16. 

(23) Add a missing reference to 40 CFR part 268 in § 270.1(a)(3), which currently reads, 

“The RCRA permit program...in 40 CFR parts 264, 266, and 267.” Therefore, the Agency is 

revising this to read, “The RCRA permit program . . . in 40 CFR parts 264, 266, 267, and 268.”

XV. Request for Comment on Use of Electronic Tools to Streamline Hazardous Waste 

Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements

As part of this proposed rule, the Agency is also exploring the feasibility of using 

electronic tools to streamline hazardous waste reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Two 

examples previously discussed include requesting comment on an electronic hazardous waste 

determination decision tool and development of an electronic application containing information 

from the executive summaries of contingency plans that emergency responders can use in 

responding to an emergency. 

Information technology can be an important step toward improving RCRA 

implementation. Many aspects of our lives can currently be managed electronically. We bank 

from home, send pictures from phones, and track packages across the country from our desks.

Yet, much of the information reported to EPA and states by generators is still submitted on 

paper, which requires government staff or contractors to manually enter the data into federal and 

state data systems. Delays in data processing can cause important information to go unnoticed. In 

Deleted: 1

Deleted: 2
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 243 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

addition, errors introduced through manual data entry can require aggravating and timeconsuming correction processes by both regulated entities and the government. 

Use of electronic tools can provide the regulated community, regulators, and the public 

with more accurate, complete, and timely information on regulated activities, pollution, and 

compliance. Software that allows for self-correction by flagging potential errors, as is done by 

EPA’s Toxics Release Inventory—Made Easy web tool or the Greenhouse Gas Reporting 

system, can even help prevent mistakes before they happen, saving both regulated entities and 

regulators time and money. Electronic reporting also creates greater transparency as greater 

information accessibility can inspire better compliance by facilities. 

Electronic reporting, in this context, is not simply emailing files to the government. 

Rather, it would be a system that begins with an electronic “smart” form or web tool to guide the 

regulated entity thru recordkeeping and reporting processes, such as waste determinations. The 

system would also include data standards, identity proofing, and a government database to 

receive data. Error prevention and compliance assistance could be integrated into the reporting 

tool. For example, forms can be configured to self-populate with data from prior forms (e.g., 

names and addresses), to question entries that appear erroneous (e.g., entries an order of 

magnitude or more above or below data from prior years or above or below reasonable levels) 

and to prevent submission before required data fields are completed. 

The Agency believes electronic tools have the potential to greatly assist generators in 

complying with the existing and proposed hazardous waste regulations. For example, EPA 

believes that electronic tools could help generators make more accurate hazardous waste 

determinations. As previously discussed, an app could be used as a decision support tool to help 

guide generators through the hazardous waste determination process for each waste stream they 

generate. This tool could walk generators through a series of question and answer steps, identify 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 244 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

relevant sources in making the determination, electronically generate and store all of the 

associated data and records that generators may be required to maintain, and provide assistance 

on proper management of the identified wastes. 

Other examples include using electronic tools to file notifications required under the rule, 

such as notifications for episodic generators, for LQGs that desire to take advantage of 

consolidating waste from CESQGs that are within the same company, and for generators that 

close a unit that accumulated hazardous waste. In this case, the electronic tools could be useful in 

submitting required reports, and in electronically generating, storing, and filing all reports. 

Other areas of the RCRA regulations where electronic tools may assist with compliance 

include the following: 

 determining monthly generator category;

 maintaining records of shipments;

 maintaining contingency planning and emergency procedures recordkeeping and 

reporting requirements;

 maintaining inventory logs for documenting accumulation time in tanks, drip 

pads, and containment buildings; and 

 maintaining personnel training documents and records. 

EPA believes the use of electronic tools would help hazardous waste generators improve 

and maintain compliance with the RCRA regulations, thereby reducing violations and increasing 

environmental benefits. EPA also believes the costs of receiving and evaluating reports from 

generators could be greatly reduced for EPA and state/tribal agencies. For example, when the 

Toxics Release inventory switched from paper reporting to e-reporting, costs of managing the 

data went down by 99% and accuracy was increased. 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 245 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ EPA is not aware of any existing electronic tools that would specifically assist generators 

with meeting the RCRA regulatory requirements. However, EPA did identify a variety of state 

and academic internet-based hazardous waste determination tools and workbooks (as discussed 

in section VIII.B.8.).

EPA is considering a range of electronic reporting options. The Agency may explore 

developing certain tools for use by the regulated community or may invite third-party vendors to 

provide such tools. The latter option could be similar to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) 

model for electronic tax preparation. The IRS model uses third-party software providers for tax 

data collection and transmission (e.g., TurboTax, TaxACT, or others) from private citizens and 

businesses. Under this option, the Agency would not purchase services from any provider. All 

financial transactions would be between the providers and members of the regulated community. 

EPA would specify the required data for collection and the requirements necessary for 

exchanging data (e.g., data delivery protocols, standards, guidelines, and procedures compliant 

with EPA’s Cross-Media Electronic Reporting Regulation (CROMERR) (see 40 CFR part 3)).

EPA welcomes public comment on specific reports and data types that could be reported 

electronically if the Agency were to move forward with exploring electronic reporting, including 

what the quality assurance and quality control procedures should be with respect to data 

timeliness, accuracy, completeness, and consistency. EPA also asks for comment on which 

reports commenters think should be highest priority for electronic reporting. EPA solicits 

comment on the option of allowing software vendors to offer their clients federal electronic 

reporting services compliant with the final rule and on potential methods for determining 

whether third-party software vendors meet the minimum federal electronic data requirements. 

EPA would need to certify or approve the methods used by the software to authenticate, encrypt, 

and possibly send compliance monitoring and other data. EPA would also like to hear from 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 246 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

authorized RCRA programs that have experience in implementing electronic reporting, 

especially their experience with phasing in implementation. EPA also requests comment on 

whether electronic tools should be provided by EPA and/or states and tribes. 

XVI. Enforceability

Persons that generate hazardous waste must comply with all the applicable independent 

requirements of the RCRA hazardous waste regulations, unless they obtain a conditional 

exemption from those requirements, provided by § 262.14 (formerly § 261.5), or by §§ 262.15, 

262.16, or 262.17 (formerly all contained in § 262.34), or by § 262.70. If a person violates 

independent requirements or fails conditions for exemption, EPA may bring an enforcement 

action under section 3008 of RCRA for violations of the independent requirements. Where a 

generator does not comply with conditions for an exemption and is therefore no longer exempt, 

the enforcement action will allege violations of those independent requirements from which the 

generator was attempting to remain exempt. States may choose to enforce against violations of 

state hazardous waste requirements under state authorities.

As with any violation, EPA and authorized states have enforcement mechanisms 

available that range in severity. In addition, EPA and authorized states have flexibility in 

applying these mechanisms to the various responsible parties as appropriate to the specific 

circumstances. Some of the enforcement mechanisms include sending a notice of violation, 

ordering compliance, ordering that the operations cease, or assessing penalties as appropriate. 

Nothing in this proposal affects any of these enforcement mechanisms EPA or the states may 

utilize nor the manner in which enforcement cases will be initiated or pursued.

XVII. State Authorization

A. Applicability of Rules in Authorized States
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 247 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Under section 3006 of RCRA, EPA may authorize states to administer the RCRA Subtitle Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

C hazardous waste program. Following authorization, the authorized state program operates in 

lieu of the federal regulations. EPA retains enforcement authority to enforce the authorized state 

Subtitle C program, although authorized states have primary enforcement authority. EPA also 

retains its authority under RCRA sections 3007, 3008, 3013, and 7003. The standards and 

requirements for state authorizations are found at 40 CFR part 271.

Prior to enactment of the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA), a 

state with final RCRA authorization administered its hazardous waste program entirely in lieu of 

EPA administering the federal program in that state. EPA did not issue permits for any facilities 

in that state, since the state was now authorized to issue RCRA permits. When new, more 

stringent federal requirements were promulgated, the state was obligated to enact equivalent 

authorities within specified time frames. However, the new requirements did not take effect in an 

authorized state until the state adopted the equivalent state requirements.

In contrast, under RCRA section 3006(g) (42 U.S.C. 6926(g)), which was added by 

HSWA, new requirements and prohibitions imposed under HSWA authority take effect in 

authorized states at the same time that they take effect in unauthorized states. While states must 

still adopt HSWA related provisions as state law to retain authorization, EPA implements the 

HSWA provisions in authorized states, including the issuance of any permits pertaining to 

HSWA requirements, until the state is granted authorization to do so. 

Authorized states are required to modify their programs only when EPA promulgates 

federal requirements that are more stringent or broader in scope than existing federal 

requirements.126 RCRA section 3009 allows the states to impose standards more stringent than 

 

126 EPA notes that decisions regarding whether a state rule is more stringent or broader in scope than the federal 

program are made when the Agency authorizes state programs.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 248 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

those in the federal program (see 40 CFR 271.1). Therefore, authorized states may, but are not 

required to, adopt federal regulations, both HSWA and non-HSWA, that are considered less 

stringent than previous federal regulations.

B. Effect on State Authorization of Proposed Rule

This notice proposes regulations that amend certain sections of the hazardous waste 

generator regulations in 40 CFR 260–265, 268, 270, 273, and 279. These regulations were 

promulgated under the authority of sections 2002, 3001, 3002, 3003, 3004, 3007, and 3010 of 

RCRA). This notice proposes changes to the RCRA Subtitle C program under non-HSWA 

authority. 

Thus, the standards, if finalized, would be applicable on the effective date only in those 

states that do not have final authorization of their base RCRA programs. Moreover, authorized 

states are required to modify their programs only when EPA promulgates federal regulations that 

are more stringent or broader in scope than the authorized state regulations. For those changes 

that are less stringent, states are not required to modify their programs. This is a result of section 

3009 of RCRA, which allows states to impose more stringent regulations than the federal 

program.

Several of the revisions to the proposed hazardous waste generator regulations are more 

stringent than those promulgated in various rules that went into effect when the RCRA hazardous 

waste regulations were first initiated (e.g., 1980–1986). These include the following: (1) 

requiring both SQGs and LQGs to document their non-hazardous waste determinations when 

they have generated a solid waste (section VIII.B of this preamble); (2) requiring SQGs to renotify every two years if they have not done so otherwise through an alternative process (section 

VIII.C of this preamble); (3) requiring SQGs and LQGs to better define the contents and 

 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 249 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

associated risks of hazardous wastes accumulated in tanks, containers, drip pads, and 

containment buildings, as well as when hazardous waste is accumulated in satellite accumulation 

areas (sections VII.E., VIII.F and VIII.I of this preamble); (4) requiring LQGs to notify EPA or 

their authorized state when they plan to close either a hazardous waste accumulation unit or their 

generator site (section VIII.G of this preamble); (5) requiring new LQGs to prepare an executive 

summary of their contingency plans to assist responders in an emergency (section VIII.H of this 

preamble); (6) requiring LQGs to submit a biennial report that identifies all of the hazardous 

wastes generated in the calendar year, not just for the months the facility was an LQG (sections 

VIII.L of this preamble); (7) requiring transfer facilities to identify the contents and associated 

risks of containers that have been consolidated with other hazardous wastes (section X of this 

preamble); and (8) promulgating prohibitions on storage of restricted wastes (section XII of this 

preamble). Therefore, states that have adopted the base RCRA program would be required to 

modify their hazardous waste programs to incorporate equivalent provisions if these standards 

are finalized. 

On the other hand, three of the proposed revisions would be considered less stringent 

than the current hazardous waste regulations. These revisions include the following: (1) allowing 

CESQGs to voluntarily send hazardous waste to LQGs under the control of the same person to 

facilitate the cost-effective management of hazardous wastes within the same company (section 

VII.C of this preamble); (2) allowing CESQGs and SQGs to voluntarily maintain their existing 

regulatory status if they have an episodic event that generates additional amounts of hazardous 

waste which would have resulted in them moving into a higher generator category for a short 

period of time, so long as they comply with specified conditions (section IX of this preamble); 

and (3) allowing LQGs to voluntarily apply for a waiver from their local fire department to 

accumulate ignitable and reactive wastes within the 50 foot facility boundary provision (section 

Deleted: s
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 250 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

XI.B Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ of this preamble). Thus, authorized states may, but would not be required to, adopt these 

changes.

This proposed rule also includes several revisions that are neither more nor less stringent, 

such as (1) mixing a non-hazardous waste with a hazardous waste (section VII.B of this 

preamble); (2) defining central accumulation area (section VI.C of this preamble); (3) prohibiting 

generators from sending hazardous liquids to landfills (section VIII.M of this preamble); (4) 

reorganizing the hazardous waste generator regulations to make them more user-friendly (section 

XIII of this preamble); (5) deleting the performance track regulations (section VIII.K of this 

preamble); (6) replacing the list of specific data elements with a requirement to complete and 

submit all data elements required in the biennial report form (section VIII.L of this preamble); 

and (7) technical corrections and conforming changes to various parts of the RCRA regulations

(section XIV of this preamble). Thus, authorized states may, but would not be required to, adopt 

these changes.

XVIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive Order 13563: 

Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is a 

“significant regulatory action” in that it may raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal 

mandates, the President’s priorities, or the principles set forth in the Executive Order. 

Accordingly, EPA submitted this action to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for

review under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011) and any

changes made in response to OMB recommendations have been documented in the docket for 

this action.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 251 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

In addition, EPA prepared an analysis of the potential costs and benefits associated with 

this action. This analysis is contained in EPA’s Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) document 

titled ‘‘EPA’s 2014 Proposed Improvements to the Hazardous Waste Generator Regulatory 

Program.” A copy of the analysis is available in the docket for this action and the analysis is 

briefly summarized here. 

Based on the impact estimates presented in the RIA, EPA does not expect that this action 

will be “economically significant” because the estimated annualized cost for compliance with the

proposed changes to the hazardous waste generator regulatory program is significantly less than 

the $100 million annual effect threshold of Section 3(f)(1) of Executive Order 12866. The RIA 

estimates the affected universe is between 353,000 and 543,000 entities. Of this universe, 

between 293,000 and 469,000 CESQGs will only be affected if they choose to take advantage of 

two voluntary programs being proposed. 

EPA estimates the future annualized cost to industry to comply with the requirements of 

this proposed action at between $6.2 and $17.4 million (at 7% discount rate). Similarly, the 

annualized net cost savings or benefits for facilities opting to take advantage of two voluntary 

programs in the rule (e.g., consolidation of CESQG waste by large quantity generators under the 

same ownership, and generators who would not be required to change generator status as a result 

of an episodic event) is between $6.2 and $12.2 million (at 7% discount rate) resulting in a net 

annualized cost of between $0.1 million and $5.2 million. 

In addition to estimating the cost for this proposed rule, the RIA also provides both 

quantitative and qualitative (i.e., non-monetized) descriptions of future expected benefits for this

action primarily consisting of improved industry environmental compliance.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 252 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ The information collection activities in this proposed rule have been submitted for 

approval to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the PRA. The Information 

Collection Request (ICR) document that the EPA prepared has been assigned EPA ICR number 

2513.01. You can find a copy of the ICR in the docket for this rule, and it is briefly summarized 

here. 

The proposed rule is necessary for EPA and authorized states to oversee the generation 

and management of hazardous waste. EPA is proposing the establishment of these information 

collection requirements under the authority of RCRA Subtitle C. There are several provisions to 

this rule that will require respondents to either submit information to EPA or authorized state, or 

maintain records at their facility. For example, generators will have to notify EPA or their 

authorized state they plan to take advantage of two voluntary provisions that will provide greater 

flexibility in how they manage hazardous waste (i.e., CESQG consolidation of their hazardous 

waste by a LQG under the same person or company; and episodic generation of hazardous waste 

resulting in a temporary change in regulatory status). 

Similarly, SQGs will have to re-notify EPA or their authorized state every other year that 

they have not changed their regulatory category to support effective inspections and program 

management activities. In an effort to improve program compliance, both SQGs and LQGs will

be required to maintain records supporting the basis for their non-hazardous waste 

determinations (i.e., a generator generated a solid waste but not a hazardous waste). Similarly, 

new LQGs will be required to develop and submit an executive summary of their emergency 

response plan to their Local Emergency Planning Committee to effectively assist emergency 

responders responding to an emergency.

EPA and state agencies will use the collected information to ensure that hazardous wastes 

are managed in a cost-effective manner that minimizes risks to human health and the 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 253 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

environment. Local emergency response organizations will also use the collected information to 

prepare contingency plans to reduce risks to emergency responders and bystanders. EPA does 

not expect confidentiality to be an issue in generators either providing information to EPA or an 

authorized state or in maintaining the necessary records supporting a non-hazardous waste 

determination. The statutory authority to collect the proposed information is found at RCRA 

3002 (42 USC 6922) and RCRA 3003 (42 USC 6923).

Respondents/affected entities: Private sector. 

Respondent’s obligation to respond: Mandatory per RCRA 3002 (42 USC 6922) and RCRA 

3003 (42 USC 6923).

Estimated number of respondents: 96,375

Frequency of response: On occasion.

Total estimated burden: 304,318 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).

Total estimated cost: $16.8 million (per year), includes $3.9 million annualized capital or 

operation & maintenance costs. 

An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a 

collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB 

control numbers for EPA’s regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. 

Submit your comments on the Agency’s need for this information, the accuracy of the 

provided burden estimates and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden to the 

EPA using the docket identified at the beginning of this rule. You may also send your ICRrelated comments to OMB’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs via email to 

oria_submissions@omb.eop.gov, Attention: Desk Officer for the EPA. Since OMB is required to 

make a decision concerning the ICR between 30 and 60 days after receipt, OMB must receive 

Deleted: 213,892

Deleted: $9,500,000

Deleted: $3,100,000
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 254 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

comments no later than [insert date 30 days after publication in the Federal Register]. The 

EPA will respond to any ICR-related comments in the final rule.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

EPA certifies that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities under the RFA. The small entities directly regulated by this proposed 

rule include entities that generate hazardous waste across various industries, including, but not 

limited to, printing, petroleum refining, chemical manufacturing, plastics and resin 

manufacturing, pharmaceutical manufacturing, paint and coating, iron and steel mills, metal and 

metal product manufacturing, electroplating, printed circuit board manufacturing, semiconductor 

manufacturing, motor vehicle parts manufacturing, research and development, hazardous waste 

treatment and disposal, academic institutions, and hospitals. We have determined that between 

25,550 and 33,800 small entities impacted will experience an impact of less than 1% of annual 

sales for all affected small entities. 

Although this proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities, EPA nonetheless has tried to reduce the impact of this rule on small 

entities. Many of the changes in this proposed rulemaking come from outreach efforts to 

generators of hazardous waste, including small entities, and are designed to make the generator 

regulations more accessible and user friendly. As part of the proposal, EPA is including several 

provisions that would provide increased flexibility for small entities in managing hazardous 

waste, such as the ability for hazardous waste generators to use the episodic generator provisions 

if they have a distinct event that would otherwise cause them to have to bump up to a higher 

generator category. We continue to be interested in the potential impacts of the proposed rule on 

small entities and welcome comments on issues related to such impacts.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 255 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ This rule does not contain an unfunded mandate of $100 million as described in UMRA, 

2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The RIA 

estimates that the state government share of future average annualized direct costs for the 

proposed rule requirements to range between $1.2 million and $2.3 million per year. Thus, this 

proposed rule is not subject to the requirements of sections 202 or 205 of UMRA. 

This rule is also not subject to the requirements of section 203 of UMRA because it 

contains no regulatory requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments. The rule proposes clarifications and modifications to the hazardous waste 

generator regulations, which impacts only those entities that generate hazardous waste. Small 

governments would only be subject to the changes in the proposed rule if they generated 

hazardous waste subject to the RCRA hazardous waste requirements.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have substantial direct 

effects on the states, on the relationship between the national government and the states, or on 

the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as 

specified in Executive Order 13132. The proposed rule simply proposes clarifications and 

modifications to the existing hazardous waste generator regulations. Thus, Executive Order 

13132 does not apply to this action. Although section 6 of Executive Order 13132 does not apply 

to this action, EPA did consult with state officials in developing this action. 

In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, and consistent with EPA policy to promote 

communications between EPA and state and local governments, EPA specifically solicits 

comment on this proposed action from state and local officials.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 256 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ This action may have tribal implications. However, it will neither impose substantial 

direct compliance costs on tribal governments, nor preempt tribal law. Under the RCRA statute, 

the federal government implements hazardous waste regulations directly in Indian Country. 

Thus, the proposed changes to the hazardous waste regulations would not impose any direct 

costs on tribal governments. 

The EPA consulted with tribal officials under the EPA Policy on Consultation and 

Coordination with Indian Tribes early in the process of developing this regulation to permit them 

to have meaningful and timely input into its development. A summary of that consultation is 

provided in the docket for this action. 

As required by section 7(a), the EPA’s Tribal Consultation Official has certified that the 

requirements of the executive order have been met in a meaningful and timely manner. A copy 

of the certification is included in the docket for this action.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 

Risks

This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is not economically 

significant as defined in Executive Order 12866, and because the Agency does not believe the 

environmental health or safety risks addressed by this action present a disproportionate risk to 

children. The Agency does not believe that this action presents risks to the public. In fact, there 

are several components to this proposed rule that modify the existing hazardous waste generator 

regulations to enhance environmental protection in the local community. Examples include (1) 

requiring LQGs and SQGs to document and maintain records of their waste determinations, 

including determinations that a solid waste is a non-hazardous waste; (2) requiring LQGs and 

SQGs to provide more detailed marking and labeling information for containers, tanks, drip pads,

and containment buildings accumulating hazardous wastes; (3) requiring LQGs to notify EPA or 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 257 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

an authorized state when they plan to close either a hazardous waste accumulation unit or their 

site; (4) requiring LQGs and SQGs to re-notify EPA or the authorized state on a periodic basis of 

their hazardous waste generator activities; and (5) improving emergency preparedness and 

response regulations on the part of SQGs and LQGs.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy 

Supply, Distribution or Use

This action is not a “significant energy action” as defined in Executive Order 13211 (66 

FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)), because it is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the

supply, distribution, or use of energy. This rule does not involve the supply, distribution, or use 

of energy.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

This rulemaking does not involve technical standards. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority 

Populations and Low-Income Populations

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes federal executive policy 

on environmental justice. Its main provision directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent 

practicable and permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission by 

identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or

environmental effects of their programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and lowincome populations in the United States. 

EPA has determined that this proposed rule increases the level of environmental 

protection for all affected populations and thus will not have disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects on minority, low-income or indigenous populations. 

Specifically, there are several components to this proposed rule that modify the existing 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 258 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ hazardous waste generator regulations to assist generators in understanding and facilitating 

improved compliance with the hazardous waste regulations. Examples include modifying 

regulations regarding mixing of non-hazardous waste with a hazardous waste by a generator, or 

when a hazardous waste generator generates both acute and non-acute hazardous waste in the 

same calendar month. Additionally, EPA is proposing to reorganize the hazardous waste 

generator rules to make them more user-friendly and therefore assist generators in understanding 

their responsibilities in managing the hazardous waste they generate safely, which support better 

environmental protection. 

Still other components of this proposed rule enhance environmental protection in the 

local community, and therefore foster improved environmental protection, including for minority 

populations and low-income populations. They include, for example, (1) requiring LQGs and 

SQGs to document and maintain records of their waste determinations, including determinations

that a solid waste is a non-hazardous waste; (2) requiring LQGs and SQGs to provide more 

detailed marking and labeling information for containers, tanks, drip pads, and containment 

buildings accumulating hazardous wastes; (3) requiring LQGs to notify EPA or an authorized 

state when they plan to close either a hazardous waste unit or their site; (4) requiring LQGs and 

SQGs to re-notify EPA or the authorized state on a periodic basis of their hazardous waste 

generator activities; and (5) improving emergency preparedness and response regulations on the 

part of SQGs and LQGs.

Furthermore, EPA is also proposing to allow CESQGs to ship their hazardous waste to an 

LQG under the control of the same person. As described in section VII.C of the preamble, this 

may increase environmental protection in the local community because hazardous waste

generated by CESQGs would be subject to more stringent requirements upon receipt by the 

LQG, including ultimate management by a RCRA permitted TSDF (as opposed to being 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 259 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

managed possibly in a municipal solid waste landfill). Although this proposed change could Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

result in an increase in traffic for certain communities, EPA believes the increase would not be 

significant given that CESQGs currently may send their hazardous waste to a number of 

destinations, including municipal and non-municipal solid waste management facilities. 

Lastly, EPA is proposing alternative standards for CESQGs and SQGs that would allow 

these entities to maintain their generator category if generating hazardous waste from an episodic 

event. Although these generators would be allowed to temporarily manage a greater amount of 

hazardous waste than their normal generator category allows, EPA is proposing conditions under 

which the hazardous waste generated from an episodic event must be managed in order to 

maintain protection of human health and the environment. Therefore, EPA does not anticipate 

disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority, lowincome or indigenous populations from these proposed alternative standards.

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 260

Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business 

information, Hazardous waste, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

40 CFR Part 261

Environmental protection, Hazardous waste, Recycling, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements.

40 CFR Part 262

Environmental protection, Exports, Hazardous materials transportation, Hazardous waste, 

Imports, Labeling, Packaging and containers, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

40 CFR Part 263
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 260 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ Environmental protection, Hazardous materials transportation, Hazardous waste, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements.

40 CFR Part 264

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hazardous waste, Insurance, Packaging and 

containers, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Surety bonds.

40 CFR Part 265

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hazardous waste, Insurance, Packaging and 

containers, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Surety bonds, Water 

supply.

40 CFR Part 268

Environmental protection, Hazardous waste, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

40 CFR Part 270

Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business 

information, Hazardous materials transportation, Hazardous waste, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Water pollution control, Water supply.

40 CFR Part 273

Environmental protection, Hazardous materials transportation, Hazardous waste.

40 CFR Part 279

Environmental protection, Petroleum, Recycling, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated:

Gina McCarthy,

Administrator.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 261 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I of the Code of Federal Regulations is 

proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 260— HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM: GENERAL

 1. The authority citation for part 260 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), 6921–6927, 6930, 6934, 6935, 6937, 6938, 6939, 

and 6974.

 2. Section 260.3 is amended by revising the introductory paragraph to read as follows:

§ 260.3 Use of number and gender.

As used in parts 260 through 273 of this chapter:

* * * * *

 3. Amend § 260.10 by:

 a. Removing the definition for “Performance Track member facility”; 

 b. Revising the definition of “Small quantity generator”; 

 c. Adding in alphabetical order the definitions “Acute hazardous waste,” “Central 

accumulation area,” “Non-acute hazardous waste,” “Large quantity generator,” and 

“Very small quantity generator”; and 

 d. Making a grammatical correction to the definitions of “Treatability study,” 

“Universal waste handler,” and “Universal waste transporter.” 

 The revised and added text to read as follows:

§ 260.10 Definitions.

* * * * *

Deleted: [#]. 

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: The introductory language in 

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: Section

Deleted: is amended 

Deleted: r

Deleted: r

Deleted: a

Deleted: of

Deleted: m
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 262 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ Acute hazardous waste means hazardous wastes that meet the listing criteria in § 261.11(a)(2) 

and therefore are either listed in § 261.31 of this chapter with the assigned hazard code of (H) or 

are listed in § 261.33(e) of this chapter.

* * * * * 

Central accumulation area means any on-site hazardous waste accumulation area with 

hazardous waste accumulating in units subject to either § 262.16 (for small quantity generators) 

or § 262.17 (for large quantity generators). A central accumulation area at an eligible academic 

entity that chooses to be subject to part 262 subpart K must also comply with § 262.211 when 

accumulating unwanted material and/or hazardous waste.

* * * * *

Non-acute hazardous waste means all hazardous wastes that are not acute hazardous waste, as 

defined in this section.

* * * * * 

Large quantity generator is a generator who generates any of the following amounts in a 

calendar month: (1) greater than or equal to 1000 kilograms (2200 lbs) of non-acute hazardous 

waste; (2) greater than 1 kilogram (2.2 lbs) of acute hazardous waste listed in § 261.31 or § 

261.33(e); or (3) greater than 100 kilograms (220 lbs) of any residue or contaminated soil, water, 

or other debris resulting from the cleanup of a spill, into or on any land or water, of any acute 

hazardous waste listed in § 261.31 or § 261.33(e).

* * * * *

Small quantity generator is a generator who generates the following amounts in a calendar 

month: (1) greater than 100 kilograms (220 lbs) but less than 1000 kilograms (2200 lbs) of nonacute hazardous waste; (2) less than or equal to 1 kilogram (2.2 lbs) of acute hazardous waste 

listed in §§ 261.31 or § 261.33(e); and (3) less than or equal to 100 kilograms (220 lbs) of any 

Deleted: A

Deleted: B

Deleted: C

Deleted: A

Deleted: B

Deleted: C
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 263 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

residue or contaminated soil, water, or other debris resulting from the cleanup of a spill, into or 

on any land or water, of any acute hazardous waste listed in § 261.31 or § 261.33(e).

* * * * *

Treatability study means a study in which a hazardous waste is subjected to a treatment process 

to determine: (1) Whether the waste is amenable to the treatment process, (2) what pretreatment 

(if any) is required, (3) the optimal process conditions needed to achieve the desired treatment, 

(4) the efficiency of a treatment process for a specific waste or wastes, or (5) the characteristics 

and volumes of residuals from a particular treatment process. Also included in this definition for 

the purpose of the §261.4(e) and (f) exemptions are liner compatibility, corrosion, and other 

material compatibility studies and toxicological and health effects studies. A “treatability study” 

is not a means to commercially treat or dispose of hazardous waste.

* * * * * 

Very small quantity generator is a generator who generates less than or equal to the following 

amounts in a calendar month: (1) 100 kilograms (220 lbs) of non-acute hazardous waste; and (2) 

1 kilogram (2.2 lbs) of acute hazardous waste listed in § 261.31 or § 261.33(e); and (3) 100 

kilograms (220 lbs) of any residue or contaminated soil, water, or other debris resulting from the 

cleanup of a spill, into or on any land or water, of any acute hazardous waste listed in § 261.31 or 

§ 261.33(e).

* * * * *

Universal waste handler:

(1) Means:

(i) A generator (as defined in this section) of universal waste; or

(ii) The owner or operator of a facility, including all contiguous property, that receives 

universal waste from other universal waste handlers, accumulates universal waste, and sends 

Deleted: 

Deleted: A

Deleted: B

Deleted: C
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 264 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ universal waste to another universal waste handler, to a destination facility, or to a foreign 

destination.

(2) Does not mean:

(i) A person who treats (except under the provisions of 40 CFR 273.13(a) or (c), or 

273.33(a) or (c)), disposes of, or recycles universal waste; or

(ii) A person engaged in the off-site transportation of universal waste by air, rail, highway, 

or water, including a universal waste transfer facility.

Universal waste transporter means a person engaged in the off-site transportation of universal 

waste by air, rail, highway, or water.

* * * * * 

PART 261— IDENTIFICATION AND LISTING OF HAZARDOUS WASTE

 4. The authority citation for part 261 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), 6921, 6922, 6924(y), and 6938. 

§ 261.1 [Amended]

 5. Section 261.1, paragraph (c)(6) is amended by removing “(e.g.,)” and inserting “(e.g.,” 

in its place.

 6. Section 261.4 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(7) to read as follows:

§ 261.4 Exclusions.

(a) * * *

(7) Spent sulfuric acid used to produce virgin sulfuric acid provided it is not accumulated 

speculatively as defined in § 261.1(c) of this chapter.

* * * * *

 7. Remove and reserve § 261.5.

§ 261.5 [Reserved]

Deleted: 

Deleted: 

Deleted: ¶

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: Purpose and Scope

Deleted: ¶

Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.25", Hanging: 0.44"

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: as follows:¶

<#>§ 261.1 Purpose and Scope¶

<#>* * * * *¶

<#>(c) * * * ¶

<#>(6) “Scrap metal” is bits and pieces of metal parts (e.g., bars, 

turnings, rods, sheets, wire) or metal pieces that may be combined 

together with bolts or soldering (e.g., radiators, scrap automobiles, 

railroad box cars), which when worn or superfluous can be recycled.¶

* * * * *

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: (a)(7) 

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: Section 

Deleted: is deleted and reserved as follows:
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 265 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

 8. Section 261.6 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(2)(iv) to read as follows:

§ 261.6 Requirements for recyclable materials.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(2) * * *

(iv) Section 265.75 of this chapter (biennial reporting requirements).

* * * * * 

 9. Section 261.33 is amended by revising paragraphs (e) first paragraph and (f) first 

paragraph to read as follows:

§ 261.33 Discarded commercial chemical products, off-specification species, container 

residues, and spill residues thereof.

* * * * *

(e) The commercial chemical products, manufacturing chemical intermediates or offspecification commercial chemical products or manufacturing chemical intermediates referred to 

in paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section, are identified as acute hazardous wastes (H).

* * * * *

(f) The commercial chemical products, manufacturing chemical intermediates, or offspecification commercial chemical products referred to in paragraphs (a) through (d) of this 

section, are identified as toxic wastes (T).

* * * * *

 10. Section 261.420 is amended by adding paragraph (g) to read as follows: 

§ 261.420 Contingency planning and emergency procedures for facilities generating or 

accumulating more than 6000 kg of hazardous secondary material.

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: is added 

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: The first sentence in s

Deleted: (e)

Deleted: ed

Deleted: ¶

Deleted: <#>[#]. The first sentence in section 261.33(f) is revised 

as follows:¶
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 266 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

* * * * *

(g) Personnel Training. All employees must be thoroughly familiar with proper waste 

handling and emergency procedures relevant to their responsibilities during normal facility 

operations and emergencies.

PART 262— STANDARDS APPLICABLE TO GENERATORS OF HAZARDOUS 

WASTE

 11. The authority citation for part 262 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6906, 6912, 6922–6925, 6937, and 6938.

Subpart A— General

 12. Section 262.1 is added to read as follows:

§ 262.1 Terms used in this part.

As used in this part:

Independent requirement means a requirement of part 262 that states an event, action, or 

standard that must occur or be met; and that applies without relation to, or irrespective of, the 

purpose of obtaining a conditional exemption from a permit or having interim status under §§

262.14, 262.15, 262.16, or 262.17.

Condition for exemption means any requirement in §§ 262.14, 262.15, 262.16, or 262.17, 

that states an event, action, or standard that must occur or be met in order to obtain a conditional 

exemption from any requirement in parts 124, 262 through 268, or 270, or from any requirement 

for notification under section 3010 of RCRA. 

 13. Section 262.10 is amended by:

 a. Revising paragraphs (a),(b), (g), and (l);

 b. Removing and reserving paragraphs (c) and (j) in their entirety; and 

Formatted: Font: Italic

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: (a) 

Deleted: , i

Deleted: section 

Deleted: (b) As used in this part, c

Deleted: section

Deleted: , or 124

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: r

Deleted: , d

Deleted: eleting

Deleted: ,
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 267 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

 c. Removing Notes 1 and 2. 

 The revised text reads as follows:

§ 262.10 Purpose, scope, and applicability.

(a) The regulations in this part establish standards for generators of hazardous waste as 

defined by 40 CFR 260.10.

(1) A person who generates a hazardous waste as defined by 40 CFR part 261 is subject 

to all the applicable independent requirements in the subparts and sections listed below, unless 

the person is a very small quantity generator that meets the conditions for exemption in §

262.14.

(i) Independent requirements of a small quantity generator.

(A) Section 262.11 Hazardous waste determination and recordkeeping;

 (B) Section 262.13 Generator category determination;

 (C) Section 262.18 EPA identification numbers and re-notification for large quantity 

generators and small quantity generators;

 (D) Part 262 subpart B—The manifest;

 (E) Part 262 subpart C—Pre-transport requirements;

 (F) Section 262.40 Recordkeeping;

 (G) Section 262.44 Special independent requirements for small quantity generators; 

 (H) Part 262 subpart E–subpart F—Imports and exports of hazardous waste;

(I) Part 262 subpart G—Farmers; and

(J) Part 262 subpart H—Transfrontier shipments of hazardous waste for recovery within 

the OECD. 

(ii) Independent requirements of a large quantity generator.

(A) Section 262.11 Hazardous waste determination and recordkeeping;

Deleted: deleting

Deleted: and Table 1

Deleted: A

Deleted: §

Deleted: §

Deleted: §

Deleted: §

Deleted: §

Deleted: §
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 268 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

 (B) Section 262.13 Generator category determination;

 (C) Section 262.18 EPA identification numbers and re-notification for large quantity 

generators and small quantity generators;

 (D) Part 262 subpart B—The manifest;

 (E) Part 262 subpart C—Pre-transport requirements;

 (F) Part 262 subpart D—Recordkeeping and reporting, except § 262.44;

 (G) Part 262 subpart E-subpart F— Imports and exports of hazardous waste;

(H) Part 262 subpart G—Farmers; and

(I) Part 262 subpart H—Transfrontier shipments of hazardous waste for recovery within 

the OECD.

(2) A generator that accumulates hazardous waste on site is a facility that stores 

hazardous waste and is subject to the applicable requirements of parts 124, 263–270, and section 

3010 of RCRA, unless it is one of the following: 

(i) A very small quantity generator that meets the conditions for exemption in § 262.14;

(ii) A small quantity generator that meets the conditions for exemption in §§ 262.15 and 

262.16; or 

(iii) A large quantity generator that meets the conditions for exemption in §§ 262.15 and 

262.17.

(3) A generator shall not transport, offer its waste for transport, or otherwise cause its 

waste to be sent to a facility that is not a designated facility, as defined in § 260.10, or not 

otherwise authorized to receive the generator’s waste. 

(b) Determining generator category. A generator must use 40 CFR 262.13 to determine 

which provisions of this part are applicable to the generator based on the quantity of hazardous 

waste generated per calendar month.

Deleted: §

Deleted: §

Deleted: 124,
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 269 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(c) [Reserved] 

* * * * * 

(g)(1) A generator’s violation of an applicable requirement in 40 CFR parts 124, 262 

through 268, or 270, or of applicable notification requirements of section 3010 of RCRA, is 

subject to penalty and injunctive relief under section 3008 of RCRA.

(2) A generator’s noncompliance with a condition for exemption in this part is not subject 

to penalty or injunctive relief under section 3008 of RCRA as a violation of a 40 CFR part 262 

condition for exemption. Noncompliance with a condition for exemption in this part results in 

failure to obtain, or to maintain, such exemption. Failure to obtain or maintain the exemption 

results in a violation of one or more applicable independent requirements in 40 CFR parts 124, 

262 through 268, or 270, or of the notification requirements of section 3010 of RCRA. A 

generator’s violation of an independent requirement is subject to penalty and injunctive relief 

under section 3008 of RCRA. 

* * * * * 

(j) [Reserved]

* * * * *

(l) The laboratories owned by an eligible academic entity that chooses to be subject to the 

requirements of subpart K of this part are not subject to (for purposes of this paragraph, the terms 

“laboratory” and “eligible academic entity” shall have the meaning as defined in § 262.200 of 

subpart K of this part):

(1) The independent requirements of § 262.11 or the regulations in § 262.15 for large 

quantity generators and small quantity generators, except as provided in subpart K, and

(2) The conditions of § 262.14, for very small quantity generators, except as provided in 

subpart K.

Deleted: , or 124

Deleted: , or 124

Deleted: (h) * * *¶

(i) * * *

Deleted: (k) 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 270 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

 14. Revise § 262.11 and its section heading to read as follows:

§ 262.11 Hazardous waste determination and recordkeeping.

A person who generates a solid waste, as defined in 40 CFR 261.2, must make an 

accurate determination of whether that waste is a hazardous waste using the following steps:

(a) A hazardous waste determination for each solid waste must be made at the point of 

waste generation, before any dilution, mixing, or other alteration of the waste occurs, and at any 

time in the course of its management that it has, or may have, changed its properties as a result of 

exposure to the environment or other factors that may change the properties of the waste.

(b) A person must determine if the solid waste is excluded from regulation under 40 CFR 

261.4.

(c) If the waste is not excluded under 40 CFR 261.4, the person must then use knowledge 

of the waste to determine if the waste meets any of the listing descriptions under subpart D of 40 

CFR part 261. Acceptable knowledge that may be used in making an accurate determination as 

to whether the waste is listed includes, but is not limited to, waste origin, composition, the 

process producing the waste, feedstock, and other relevant information. If the waste is listed, the 

person may file a delisting petition under 40 CFR 260.20 and 260.22 to demonstrate to the 

Administrator that the waste from this particular site or operation is not a hazardous waste.

(d) If the waste is not listed in subpart D of 40 CFR part 261 or if it is a listed waste, 

which must meet the land disposal restrictions under 40 CFR part 268, the person then must also 

determine whether the waste exhibits one or more hazardous characteristics as identified in 

subpart C of 40 CFR part 261 by following the procedures in either paragraph (1) or (2) of this 

paragraph. 

Deleted: 

Formatted: Bulleted + Level: 1 + Aligned at: 0.25" +

Indent at: 0.5"

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: Section

Deleted: is amended by revising the introduction and paragraphs 

(a)–(d) and adding paragraphs (e)–(g),

Deleted: Making a 

Deleted: requires the person to apply knowledge of the waste, 

Deleted: ing

Deleted: , to the listing descriptions in subpart D of 40 CFR part 

261
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 271 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(1) The person must test the waste according to the methods set forth in subpart C of 40 

CFR part 261 or according to an equivalent method approved by the Administrator under 40 

CFR 260.21 and in accordance with the following:

(i) Persons testing their waste must obtain a representative sample of the waste for the 

testing, as defined at 40 CFR 260.10.

(ii) Where a test method is specified in the regulation, the results of the regulatory test, 

when properly performed, are definitive for determining the regulatory status of the waste.

(2) The person must apply knowledge of the hazard characteristic of the waste in light of 

the materials or the processes used. Acceptable knowledge may include process knowledge (e.g., 

information about chemical feedstocks and other inputs to the production process); knowledge of 

products, by-products, and intermediates produced by the manufacturing process; chemical or 

physical characterization of wastes; information on the chemical and physical properties of the 

chemicals used or produced by the processor or otherwise contained in the waste; testing that 

illustrates the properties of the waste; or other reliable and relevant information about the 

properties of the waste or its constituents. A test other than a test method set forth in subpart C of 

40 CFR part 261, or according to an equivalent method approved by the Administrator under 40 

CFR 260.21, may be used as part of a person’s knowledge to determine whether a solid waste 

exhibits a characteristic of hazardous waste. However, such tests do not, by themselves, provide 

definitive results.

(e) Recordkeeping for small and large quantity generators. A small or large quantity 

generator must maintain records supporting its solid and hazardous waste determinations, 

including records that identify a material as a solid waste, as defined by 40 CFR 261.2, and 

records identifying whether that solid waste is or is not also a hazardous waste, as defined by 40 

CFR 261.3. Generators may wish to segregate any of their municipal solid waste from other solid 

Deleted: K
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 272 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

and hazardous wastes to avoid potential co-mingling. Records must be maintained for at least 

three years from the date that the waste was last generated. These records must comprise the 

generator’s knowledge of the waste and support the generator’s determination, as described at 40 

CFR 262.11(c) and (d). The records must include, but are not be limited to, the following types 

of information: the results of any tests, sampling, or waste analyses; records documenting the 

tests, sampling, and analytical methods used and demonstrating the validity and relevance of 

such tests; records consulted in order to determine the process by which the waste was generated, 

the composition of the waste, and the properties of the waste; and records which explain the 

knowledge basis for the generator’s determination, as described at 40 CFR 262.11(d)(2). The 

periods of record retention referred to in this section are extended automatically during the 

course of any unresolved enforcement action regarding the regulated activity or as requested by 

the Administrator.

(f) If the waste is determined to be hazardous, all applicable EPA hazardous waste 

numbers (EPA hazardous waste codes) in subparts C and D of part 261 must be identified.

(g) If the waste is determined to be hazardous, the generator must refer to parts 261, 264, 

265, 266, 267, 268, and 273 of this chapter for other possible exclusions or restrictions pertaining 

to management of the specific waste.

§ 262.12 [Reserved]

 15. Remove and reserve § 262.12 .

 16. Add §§ 262.13 through 262.18 to read as follows:

§ 262.13 Generator category determination.

(a) Monthly determination. A generator’s category is determined each month by the 

amount of hazardous waste it generates and may change from month to month. This section sets 

Deleted: ¶

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: Section

Deleted: is removed and reserved

Deleted: § 262.12 [Reserved]

Deleted: 

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: Section

Deleted: is added 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 273 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

forth procedures to determine whether a generator is a very small quantity generator, a small 

quantity generator, or a large quantity generator for a particular month, as defined in § 260.10. 

(b) Generators of both acute and non-acute hazardous wastes. A generator who 

generates both acute hazardous waste and non-acute hazardous waste in the same calendar month 

shall determine its generator category for that month by doing the following:

(1) counting separately the total amount of acute hazardous waste and the total amount of 

non-acute hazardous waste generated in the calendar month; 

(2) subtracting from each total any amounts of waste exempt from counting as described 

in paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section;

(3) determining separately the resulting generator categories for the quantities of acute 

and non-acute hazardous waste generated; and 

(4) comparing the resulting generator categories from (3) and applying the more stringent 

generator category to the accumulation and management of both non-acute hazardous waste and 

acute hazardous waste generated for that month.

TABLE 1—GENERATOR CATEGORIES BASED ON QUANTITY OF WASTE GENERATED IN A

CALENDAR MONTH

#

Quantity of acute 

hazardous waste 

generated in a calendar 

month

Quantity of nonacute hazardous 

waste generated in a 

calendar month

Quantity of residues 

from a cleanup of 

acute hazardous 

waste generated in a 

calendar month

Generator 

Category

1 > 1 kg Any amount Any amount Large 

quantity 

generator

2 Any amount ≥ 1,000 kg Any amount Large 

quantity 

generator

3 Any amount Any amount > 100 kg Large 

quantity 

generator

4 ≤ 1 kg > 100 kg and < 1,000 

kg

≤ 100 kg Small 

quantity 

Deleted: all 

Formatted: Font: Bold, Small caps

Formatted: Font: Bold, Small caps

Formatted: Small caps

Deleted: of acute hazardous waste
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 274 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

generator

5 ≤ 1 kg ≤ 100 kg ≤ 100 kg Very small 

quantity 

generator

(c) When making the monthly quantity-based determinations required by this part, the 

generator must include all hazardous waste that it generates, except hazardous waste that:

(1) Is exempt from regulation under 40 CFR 261.4(c) through (f), 261.6(a)(3), 

261.7(a)(1), or 261.8; 

(2) Is managed immediately upon generation only in on-site elementary neutralization 

units, wastewater treatment units, or totally enclosed treatment facilities as defined in 40 CFR 

260.10; 

(3) Is recycled, without prior storage or accumulation, only in an on-site process subject 

to regulation under 40 CFR 261.6(c)(2); 

(4) Is used oil managed under the requirements of 40 CFR 261.6(a)(4) and 40 CFR part 

279; 

(5) Is spent lead-acid batteries managed under the requirements of 40 CFR part 266 

subpart G; 

(6) Is universal waste managed under 40 CFR 261.9 and 40 CFR part 273;

(7) Is a hazardous waste that is an unused commercial chemical product (listed in 40 CFR 

part 261 subpart D or exhibiting one or more characteristics in 40 CFR part 261 subpart C) that is 

generated solely as a result of a laboratory clean-out conducted at an eligible academic entity 

pursuant to § 262.213. For purposes of this provision, the term eligible academic entity shall 

have the meaning as defined in § 262.200; or

(8) Is managed under an episodic event in compliance with the conditions of subpart L of 

this part. 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 275 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(d) In determining the quantity of hazardous waste generated in a calendar month, a 

generator need not include:

(1) Hazardous waste when it is removed from on-site accumulation; or

(2) Hazardous waste generated by on-site treatment (including reclamation) of the 

generator’s hazardous waste, so long as the hazardous waste that is treated was previously 

counted once; or

(3) Spent materials that are generated, reclaimed, and subsequently reused on site, so long 

as such spent materials have been previously counted once.

§ 262.14 Conditions for exemption for a very small quantity generator. 

(a) Hazardous waste generated by a very small quantity generator is not subject to the 

independent requirements of this part, except the paragraphs of § 262.11 specified below or the 

requirements of parts 124, 264 through 268, and 270 of this chapter, and the notification 

requirements of section 3010 of RCRA. A very small quantity generator may accumulate 

hazardous waste on site without a permit or interim status, and without complying with all the 

independent requirements of the above-mentioned parts and the notification requirements of 

section 3010, provided that it meets all the conditions for exemption listed in this section: 

(1) In a calendar month the very small quantity generator generates less than or equal to 

the amounts specified in the definition of “very small quantity generator” in § 260.10 of this 

chapter;

(2) The very small quantity generator complies with § 262.11(a) through (d) of this 

chapter;

(3) Accumulation conditions for exemption. 

(i) Acute hazardous waste. If the very small quantity generator accumulates at any time 

greater than 1 kilogram (2.2 lbs) of acute hazardous waste or 100 kilograms (220 lbs) of any 

Deleted: <#>[#]. Section 262.14 is added as follows:¶

Deleted: , and 124

Deleted: section 

Deleted: –
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 276 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

residue or contaminated soil, water, or other debris resulting from the cleanup of a spill, into or 

on any land or water, of any acute hazardous waste listed in §§ 261.31 or 261.33(e), all quantities 

of that acute hazardous waste are subject to full hazardous waste regulation under parts 124, 262 

through 268 and part 270 of this chapter, and the notification requirements of section 3010 of 

RCRA. The 90-day accumulation time limit of § 262.17 begins on the date when the 

accumulated wastes exceed the above waste quantity limits;

(ii) Non-acute hazardous waste. If the very small quantity generator accumulates at any 

time 1,000 kilograms (2,200 lbs) or greater of non-acute hazardous waste, all quantities of that 

hazardous waste are subject to full hazardous waste regulation under parts 124, 262 through 268 

and part 270 of this chapter, and the notification requirements of section 3010 of RCRA. The 

180-day and 270-day accumulation time limits of § 262.16 begin on the date when the 

accumulated wastes equal or exceed 1000 kilograms (2,200 lbs).

(4) A very small quantity generator that accumulates hazardous waste within the limits in 

§ 262.14(a)(3)(i) and (ii) must either treat or dispose of its hazardous waste in an on-site facility 

or ensure delivery to an off-site treatment, storage, or disposal facility, either of which, if located 

in the U.S., is:

(i) Permitted under part 270 of this chapter;

(ii) In interim status under parts 270 and 265 of this chapter;

(iii) Authorized to manage hazardous waste by a State with a hazardous waste 

management program approved under part 271 of this chapter;

(iv) Permitted, licensed, or registered by a state to manage municipal solid waste and, if 

managed in a municipal solid waste landfill is subject to part 258 of this chapter;

Deleted: s

Deleted: and 124

Deleted: s

Deleted: and 124

Deleted: 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 277 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(v) Permitted, licensed, or registered by a state to manage non-municipal non-hazardous 

waste and, if managed in a non-municipal non-hazardous waste disposal unit, is subject to the 

requirements in §§257.5 through 257.30 of this chapter; 

(vi) A facility which:

(A) Beneficially uses or reuses, or legitimately recycles or reclaims its waste; or

(B) Treats its waste prior to beneficial use or reuse, or legitimate recycling or 

reclamation; 

(vii) For universal waste managed under part 273 of this chapter, a universal waste 

handler or destination facility subject to the requirements of part 273 of this chapter; 

(viii) A large quantity generator under the control of the same person as the very small 

quantity generator, provided the following conditions are met:

(A) The very small quantity generator and the large quantity generator are under the 

control of the same person as defined in § 260.10. “Control,” for the purposes of this section, 

means the power to direct the policies of the generator site, whether by the ownership of stock, 

voting rights, or otherwise, except that contractors who operate generator sites on behalf of a 

different person as defined in § 260.10 shall not be deemed to “control” such generator sites.

(B) The very small quantity generator marks its container(s) of hazardous waste with:

( 1 ) The words “Very Small Quantity Generator Hazardous Waste,” 

( 2 ) Other words that identify the contents of the containers (examples may include, but 

are not limited to, the name of the chemical(s), such as “acetone” or “methylene dichloride” or 

the type or class of chemical, such as “organic solvents” or “halogenated organic solvents” or, as 

applicable, the proper shipping name and technical name markings used to comply with 

Department of Transportation requirements at 49 CFR part 172 subpart D);
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 278 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

( 3 ) An indication of the hazards of the contents (examples include, but are not limited 

to, the applicable hazardous waste characteristic(s) (i.e., ignitable, corrosive, reactive, toxic); a 

hazard class label consistent with the Department of Transportation requirements at 49 CFR part 

172 subpart E (labeling); a label consistent with the Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration Hazard Communication Standard at 29 CFR 1920.1200; a chemical hazard label 

consistent with the National Fire Protection Association code 704; a hazard pictogram consistent 

with the United Nations’ Globally Harmonized System; or any other marking or labeling 

commonly used nationwide in commerce that identifies the nature of the hazards associated with 

the contents of the waste accumulation unit); and

( 4 ) The applicable EPA hazardous waste number(s) (hazardous waste codes) in part 261 

subparts C and D.

(b) Mixing hazardous waste with non-hazardous waste. A very small quantity generator

may mix listed or characteristic hazardous waste with non-hazardous waste and remain eligible 

for the conditional exemption applicable to a very small quantity generator provided that either 

paragraph (1) or (2) below is met: 

(1) The mixture does not exhibit any of the characteristics of hazardous waste identified 

in subpart C of part 261 of this chapter; or

(2) If the mixture does exhibit one or more characteristics of a hazardous waste identified 

in subpart C of part 261 of this chapter, the mixture does not cause the generator to exceed the 

very small quantity generator calendar month quantity limits identified in the definition of very 

small quantity generator at § 260.10. If the mixture does exceed the quantity limit for a very 

small quantity generator, the very small quantity generator, to remain exempt from the 

permitting and interim status standards, must meet the conditions for exemption applicable to 

either a small quantity generator or large quantity generator according to the quantity of the 

Deleted: ¶

(ix) For episodic hazardous waste managed under part 262 subpart 

L, a very small quantity generator must manifest its episodic 

hazardous waste and send it to a RCRA-designated facility. 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 279 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ hazardous waste it generated in a calendar month, including the resultant mixture and the total 

quantity the very small quantity generator accumulated on site.

(c) If a very small quantity generator's wastes are mixed with used oil, the mixture is 

subject to 40 CFR part 279. Any material produced from such a mixture by processing, blending, 

or other treatment is also regulated under 40 CFR part 279.

(d) The placement of bulk or non-containerized liquid hazardous waste or hazardous 

waste containing free liquids (whether or not sorbents have been added) in any landfill is 

prohibited.

(e) A very small quantity generator experiencing an episodic event may accumulate

hazardous waste in accordance with subpart L of this part in lieu of §§ 262.15, 262.16, and

262.17. 

§ 262.15 Satellite accumulation area regulations for small and large quantity generators. 

(a) A generator may accumulate as much as 55 gallons of non-acute hazardous waste 

and/or one quart or 1 kg (2.2 lbs) of acute hazardous waste listed in § 261.31 or § 261.33(e) in 

containers at or near any point of generation where wastes initially accumulate which is under 

the control of the operator of the process generating the waste, without a permit or interim status 

and without complying with § 262.16(b) or § 262.17(a) of this part provided the generator 

complies with the following conditions for exemption: 

(1) If a container holding hazardous waste is not in good condition, or if it begins to leak, 

the generator must transfer the hazardous waste from this container to a container that is in good 

condition and does not leak, or transfer and manage the waste in a central accumulation area. 

(2) The generator must use a container made of or lined with materials that will not react 

with, and are otherwise compatible with, the hazardous waste to be accumulated, so that the 

ability of the container to contain the waste is not impaired.

Deleted: of this chapter

Deleted: <#>[#]. Section 262.15 is added as follows: ¶
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 280 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(3) Special standards for incompatible wastes.

(i) Incompatible wastes, or incompatible wastes and materials, (see appendix V of part 

265 for examples) must not be placed in the same container, unless § 265.17(b) is complied with.

(ii) Hazardous waste must not be placed in an unwashed container that previously held an 

incompatible waste or material (see appendix V of part 265 for examples), unless § 265.17(b) is 

complied with.

(iii) A container holding a hazardous waste that is incompatible with any waste or other 

materials accumulated nearby in other containers, piles, open tanks, or surface impoundments 

must be separated from the other materials or protected from them by means of a dike, berm, 

wall, or other device.

(4) A container holding hazardous waste must be closed at all times during accumulation, 

except: 

(i) When adding, removing, or consolidating waste, or

(ii) When venting of a container is necessary

(A) For the proper operation of equipment, or

(B) To prevent dangerous situations, such as build-up of extreme pressure. 

(5) A generator must mark its container with the following:

(i) The words “Hazardous Waste,” and

(ii) Other words that identify the contents of the containers (examples may include, but 

are not limited to the name of the chemical(s), such as “acetone” or “methylene dichloride”; or 

the type or class of chemical, such as “organic solvents” or “halogenated organic solvents” or, as 

applicable, the proper shipping name and technical name markings used to comply with 

Department of Transportation requirements at 49 CFR part 172 subpart D); and

Deleted: 2
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 281 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(iii) An indication of the hazards of the contents. (examples include, but are not limited 

to, the applicable hazardous waste characteristic(s) (i.e., ignitable, corrosive, reactive, toxic); a 

hazard class label consistent with the Department of Transportation requirements at 49 CFR part 

172 subpart E (labeling); a label consistent with the Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration Hazard Communication Standard at 29 CFR 1920.1200; a chemical hazard label 

consistent with the National Fire Protection Association code 704; or a hazard pictogram 

consistent with the United Nations’ Globally Harmonized System; or any other marking or 

labeling commonly used nationwide in commerce that identifies the nature of the hazards 

associated with the contents of the waste accumulation unit).

(6) A generator who accumulates either non-acute hazardous waste or acute hazardous 

waste listed in § 261.31 or § 261.33(e) in excess of the amounts listed in paragraph (a) of this 

section at or near any point of generation must do the following:

(i) Remove the excess from the satellite accumulation area within three calendar days to 

either

(A) A central accumulation area; 

(B) An on-site interim status or permitted treatment, storage, or disposal facility, or

(C) An off-site designated facility.

(ii) During the three-calendar-day period the generator must continue to comply with 

paragraphs (a)(1) through (5) of this section. The generator must mark the container(s) holding 

the excess accumulation of hazardous waste with the date the excess amount began 

accumulating.

§ 262.16 Conditions for exemption for a small quantity generator that accumulates 

hazardous waste.

Deleted: –

Deleted: <#>[#]. Section 262.16 is added as follows.¶
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 282 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

A small quantity generator may accumulate hazardous waste on Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶-site without a permit or 

interim status, and without complying with the independent requirements of parts 124, 264 

through 268, and 270 of this chapter, provided that all the conditions for exemption listed in this 

section are met:

(a) Generation. The generator generates in a calendar month no more than the amounts 

specified in the definition of “small quantity generator” in § 260.10 of this chapter.

(b) Accumulation. The generator accumulates hazardous waste on site for no more than 

180 days, unless in compliance with the conditions for exemption for longer accumulation in §§

262.16(c) and (d) below. The following accumulation conditions also apply:

(1) Accumulation limit. The quantity of hazardous waste accumulated on site never 

exceeds 6,000 kilograms (13,200 pounds);

(2) Accumulation in Containers.

(i) Condition of containers. If a container holding hazardous waste is not in good 

condition, or if it begins to leak, the small quantity generator must transfer the hazardous waste 

from this container to a container that is in good condition, or manage the waste in some other 

way that complies with the conditions for exemption of this section.

(ii) Compatibility of waste with container. The small quantity generator must use a 

container made of or lined with materials that will not react with, and are otherwise compatible 

with, the hazardous waste to be accumulated, so that the ability of the container to contain the 

waste is not impaired.

(iii) Management of containers.

(A) A container holding hazardous waste must always be closed during accumulation, 

except when it is necessary to add or remove waste.

Deleted: , and 124

Deleted: section 

Deleted: sections 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 283 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(B) A container holding hazardous waste must not be opened, handled, or accumulated in 

a manner that may rupture the container or cause it to leak. 

(iv) Inspections. At least weekly, the small quantity generator must inspect central 

accumulation areas. The small quantity generator must look for leaking containers and for 

deterioration of containers caused by corrosion or other factors. See paragraph (a)(2)(i) of this 

section for remedial action required if deterioration or leaks are detected.

(v) Special conditions for accumulation of incompatible wastes. 

(A) Incompatible wastes, or incompatible wastes and materials, (see appendix V of part 

265 for examples) must not be placed in the same container, unless § 265.17(b) is complied with.

(B) Hazardous waste must not be placed in an unwashed container that previously held an 

incompatible waste or material (see appendix V of part 265 for examples), unless § 265.17(b) is 

complied with.

(C) A container accumulating hazardous waste that is incompatible with any waste or 

other materials accumulated or stored nearby in other containers, piles, open tanks, or surface 

impoundments must be separated from the other materials or protected from them by means of a 

dike, berm, wall, or other device.

(3) Accumulation in Tanks.

(i) [Reserved]

(ii) A small quantity generator of hazardous waste must comply with the following 

general operating conditions:

(A) Treatment or accumulation of hazardous waste in tanks must comply with § 

265.17(b).
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 284 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(B) Hazardous wastes or treatment reagents must not be placed in a tank if they could 

cause the tank or its inner liner to rupture, leak, corrode, or otherwise fail before the end of its 

intended life.

(C) Uncovered tanks must be operated to ensure at least 60 centimeters (2 feet) of 

freeboard, unless the tank is equipped with a containment structure (e.g., dike or trench), a 

drainage control system, or a diversion structure (e.g., standby tank) with a capacity that equals 

or exceeds the volume of the top 60 centimeters (2 feet) of the tank.

(D) Where hazardous waste is continuously fed into a tank, the tank must be equipped 

with a means to stop this inflow (e.g., waste feed cutoff system or by-pass system to a stand-by 

tank). 

(iii) Except as noted in paragraph (a)(3)(iv) of this section, a small quantity generator that 

accumulates hazardous waste in tanks must inspect, where present:

(A) Discharge control equipment (e.g., waste feed cutoff systems, by-pass systems, and 

drainage systems) at least once each operating day, to ensure that it is in good working order;

(B) Data gathered from monitoring equipment (e.g., pressure and temperature gauges) at 

least once each operating day to ensure that the tank is being operated according to its design;

(C) The level of waste in the tank at least once each operating day to ensure compliance 

with paragraph (a)(3)(ii)(C) of this section;

(D) The construction materials of the tank at least weekly to detect corrosion or leaking 

of fixtures or seams; and

(E) The construction materials of, and the area immediately surrounding, discharge 

confinement structures (e.g., dikes) at least weekly to detect erosion or obvious signs of leakage 

(e.g., wet spots or dead vegetation). As required by § 265.15(c), the small quantity generator 

must remedy any deterioration or malfunction it finds.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 285 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(iv) A small quantity generator accumulating hazardous waste in tanks or tank systems 

that have full secondary containment and that either use leak detection equipment to alert 

personnel to leaks, or implement established workplace practices to ensure leaks are promptly 

identified, must inspect at least weekly, where applicable, the areas identified in paragraphs 

(a)(3)(iii)(A) through (E) of this section. Use of the alternate inspection schedule must be 

documented in the site's operating record. This documentation must include a description of the 

established workplace practices at the site.

(v) [Reserved.]

(vi) A small quantity generator accumulating hazardous waste in tanks must, upon 

closure of the site, remove all hazardous waste from tanks, discharge control equipment, and 

discharge confinement structures. At closure, as throughout the operating period, unless the 

small quantity generator can demonstrate, in accordance with § 261.3(c) or (d) of this chapter, 

that any solid waste removed from its tank is not a hazardous waste, then it must manage such 

waste in accordance with all applicable provisions of parts 262, 263, and 265 of this chapter.

(vii) A small quantity generator must comply with the following special conditions for 

accumulation of ignitable or reactive waste:

(A) Ignitable or reactive waste must not be placed in a tank, unless:

( 1 ) The waste is treated, rendered, or mixed before or immediately after placement in a 

tank so that the resulting waste, mixture, or dissolution of material no longer meets the definition 

of ignitable or reactive waste under § 261.21 or § 261.23 of this chapter and § 265.17(b) is 

complied with; or

( 2 ) The waste is accumulated or treated in such a way that it is protected from any 

material or conditions that may cause the waste to ignite or react; or

( 3 ) The tank is used solely for emergencies.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 286 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(B) A small quantity generator which treats or accumulates ignitable or reactive waste in 

covered tanks must comply with the buffer zone requirements for tanks contained in Tables 2–1 

through 2–6 of the National Fire Protection Association's “Flammable and Combustible Liquids 

Code,” (1977 or 1981) (incorporated by reference, see § 260.11).

(C) A small quantity generator must comply with the following special conditions for 

incompatible wastes:

( 1 ) Incompatible wastes, or incompatible wastes and materials, (see part 265 appendix V 

for examples) must not be placed in the same tank, unless § 265.17(b) is complied with.

( 2 ) Hazardous waste must not be placed in an unwashed tank that previously held an 

incompatible waste or material, unless § 265.17(b) is complied with.

(4) Accumulation of hazardous waste on drip pads. A small quantity generator may 

accumulate hazardous waste on drip pads for 90 days or less without a permit or without having 

interim status provided that it complies with 40 CFR part 265 subpart W. The generator must 

maintain at the facility the following records by use of inventory logs, monitoring equipment, or 

any other effective means:

(i) A written description of procedures that will identify the date hazardous waste first 

entered the drip pad and ensure that all wastes are removed from the drip pad and associated 

collection system at least once every 90 days; and

(ii) Documentation of each waste removal, including the quantity of waste removed from 

the drip pad and the sump or collection system and the date and time of removal. 

(5) Accumulation of hazardous waste in containment buildings. A small quantity 

generator may accumulate hazardous waste in containment buildings for 90 days or less without 

a permit or without having interim status provided that it complies with 40 CFR part 265 subpart 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 287 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

DD. The generator must also maintain the following records by use of inventory logs, monitoring Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

equipment records, or any other effective means:

(i) The professional engineer certification that the building complies with the design 

standards specified in 40 CFR 265.1101. This certification must be in the facility's operating 

record prior to operation of the unit; and

(ii) A written description of procedures to ensure that each waste volume remains in the 

unit for no more than 90 days, a written description of the waste generation and management 

practices for the site showing that they are consistent with maintaining the 90 day limit, and 

documentation that the procedures are complied with; or

(iii) Documentation that the unit is emptied at least once every 90 days. 

(6) Labeling and marking of containers, tanks, drip pads, and containment buildings.

(i) A small quantity generator must mark its containers with the following:

(A) The words “Hazardous Waste”; 

(B) Other words that identify the contents of the containers (examples may include, but 

are not limited to, the name of the chemical(s), such as “acetone” or “methylene dichloride”; or 

the type or class of chemical, such as “organic solvents” or “halogenated organic solvents or, as 

applicable, the proper shipping name and technical name markings used to comply with 

Department of Transportation requirements at 49 CFR part 172 subpart D);”

(C) An indication of the hazards of the contents (examples include, but are not limited to, 

the applicable hazardous waste characteristic(s) (i.e., ignitable, corrosive, reactive, toxic); a 

hazard class label consistent with the Department of Transportation requirements at 49 CFR part 

172 subpart E (labeling); a label consistent with the Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration Hazard Communication Standard at 29 CFR 1920.1200; a chemical hazard label 

consistent with the National Fire Protection Association code 704; a hazard pictogram consistent 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 288 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

with the United Nations’ Globall Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ y Harmonized System; or any other marking or labeling 

commonly used nationwide in commerce that identifies the nature of the hazards associated with 

the contents of the waste accumulation unit); and

(D) The date upon which each period of accumulation begins clearly visible for 

inspection on each container. 

(ii) A small quantity generator accumulating hazardous waste in tanks, drip pads and 

containment buildings must do the following: 

(A) Mark or label its waste accumulation units with the words “Hazardous Wastes.” In 

the case of hazardous wastes accumulated in drip pads and containment buildings, generators 

must label their drip pads and containment buildings with the words “Hazardous Wastes” in a 

conspicuous place easily visible to employees, visitors, emergency responders, waste handlers, 

or other persons on site;

(B) Use inventory logs, monitoring equipment, or records to identify the contents of the 

tank, drip pad or containment building and its associated hazards;

(C) Use inventory logs, monitoring equipment or records to identify the date upon which 

each period of accumulation begins; and 

(D) Keep inventory logs or records with the above information in close proximity to the 

tank, drip pad, or containment building.

(7) Land Disposal Restrictions. The generator complies with all the applicable 

requirements under 40 CFR part 268.

(8) Preparedness and Prevention.

(i) Maintenance and operation of site. A small quantity generator must maintain and 

operate its site to minimize the possibility of a fire, explosion, or any unplanned sudden or nonDeleted: .

Deleted: .
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 289 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

sudden release of hazardous waste or hazardous waste constituents to air, soil, or surface water 

which could threaten human health or the environment.

(ii) Required equipment. All areas where hazardous waste is either generated or 

accumulated must be equipped with the items in paragraphs (A) through (D) of this section

(unless none of the hazards posed by waste handled at the site could require a particular kind of 

equipment specified below or the actual waste generation or accumulation area does not lend 

itself for safety reasons to have a particular kind of equipment specified below). A small quantity 

generator may determine the most appropriate locations within its generator site to locate 

equipment necessary to prepare for and respond to emergencies.

(A) An internal communications or alarm system capable of providing immediate 

emergency instruction (voice or signal) to site personnel;

(B) A device, such as a telephone (immediately available at the scene of operations) or a 

hand-held two-way radio, capable of summoning emergency assistance from local police 

departments, fire departments, or State or local emergency response teams;

(C) Portable fire extinguishers, fire control equipment (including special extinguishing 

equipment, such as that using foam, inert gas, or dry chemicals), spill control equipment, and 

decontamination equipment; and

(D) Water at adequate volume and pressure to supply water hose streams, or foam 

producing equipment, or automatic sprinklers, or water spray systems.

(iii) Testing and maintenance of equipment. All communications or alarm systems, fire 

protection equipment, spill control equipment, and decontamination equipment, where required, 

must be tested and maintained as necessary to assure its proper operation in time of emergency.

(iv) Access to communications or alarm system.

Deleted: –

Deleted: below 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 290 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(A)Whenever hazardous waste is being poured, mixed, spread, or otherwise handled, all 

personnel involved in the operation must have immediate access (e.g., direct or unimpeded 

access) to an internal alarm or emergency communication device, either directly or through 

visual or voice contact with another employee, unless such a device is not required under 

paragraph (a)(8)(ii) of this section.

(B) In the event there is just one employee on the premises while the site is operating, the 

employee must have immediate access (e.g., direct or unimpeded access) to a device, such as a 

telephone (immediately available at the scene of operation) or a hand-held two-way radio, 

capable of summoning external emergency assistance, unless such a device is not required under 

paragraph (a)(8)(ii) of this section.

(v) Required aisle space. The small quantity generator must maintain aisle space to allow 

the unobstructed movement of personnel, fire protection equipment, spill control equipment, and 

decontamination equipment to any area of site operation in an emergency, unless aisle space is 

not needed for any of these purposes.

(vi) Arrangements with local authorities.

(A) The small quantity generator must make arrangements with the Local Emergency 

Planning Committee for the types and quantities of hazardous waste handled at the site, as well 

as the potential need for the services of the local police department, other emergency response 

teams, emergency response contractors, equipment suppliers and local hospitals. Should there be 

no Local Emergency Planning Committee, should it not respond, or should the Local Emergency 

Planning Committee determine that it is not the appropriate organization to make arrangements 

with, then the small quantity generator must make arrangements with the local fire department 

and other relevant emergency responders, (e.g., police and hospitals). 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 291 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

( 1 ) A small quantity generator that must make arrangements with its local fire 

department must determine the potential need for the services of the local police department, 

other emergency response teams, emergency response contractors, equipment suppliers and local 

hospitals. 

( 2 ) As part of this coordination, the small quantity generator shall make arrangements, 

as necessary, to familiarize the above organizations with the layout of the site, the properties of 

hazardous waste handled at the site and associated hazards, places where site personnel would 

normally be working, entrances to roads inside the site, and possible evacuation routes as well as 

the types of injuries or illnesses that could result from fires, explosions, or releases at the site. 

( 3 ) Where more than one police or fire department might respond to an emergency, the 

small quantity generator shall enter into agreements designating primary emergency authority to 

a specific fire or police department, and agreements with any others to provide support to the 

primary emergency authority. 

(B) A small quantity generator shall maintain records documenting the arrangements with 

the Local Emergency Planning Committee, or if appropriate, with the local fire department as 

well as any other organization necessary to respond to an emergency. This documentation must 

include a certified letter or any other documentation that confirms such arrangements actively 

exist.

(9) Emergency Procedures. 

The small quantity generator complies with the following conditions for those areas of 

the generator site where hazardous waste is generated and accumulated:

(i) At all times there must be at least one employee either on the premises or on call (i.e.,

available to respond to an emergency by reaching the site within a short period of time) with the 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 292 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

responsibility for coordinating all emergency response measures specified in paragraph (iv) of 

this section. This employee is the emergency coordinator.

(ii) The small quantity generator must post the following information next to telephones 

or in areas directly involved in the generation and accumulation of hazardous waste:

(A) The name and emergency telephone number of the emergency coordinator;

(B) Location of fire extinguishers and spill control material, and, if present, fire alarm; 

and

(C) The telephone number of the fire department, unless the site has a direct alarm.

(iii) The small quantity generator must ensure that all employees are thoroughly familiar 

with proper waste handling and emergency procedures, relevant to their responsibilities during

normal site operations and emergencies;

(iv) The emergency coordinator or his designee must respond to any emergencies that 

arise. The applicable responses are as follows:

(A) In the event of a fire, call the fire department or attempt to extinguish it using a fire 

extinguisher;

(B) In the event of a spill, the small quantity generator is responsible for containing the 

flow of hazardous waste to the extent possible, and as soon as is practicable, cleaning up the 

hazardous waste and any contaminated materials or soil. Such containment and cleanup can be 

conducted either by the small quantity generator or by a contractor on behalf of the small 

quantity generator;

(C) In the event of a fire, explosion, or other release that could threaten human health 

outside the site or when the small quantity generator has knowledge that a spill has reached 

surface water, the small quantity generator must immediately notify the National Response 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 293 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ Center (using their 24-hour toll free number 800/424–8802). The report must include the 

following information:

( 1 ) The name, address, and U.S. EPA Identification Number of the small quantity 

generator;

( 2 ) Date, time, and type of incident (e.g., spill or fire);

( 3 ) Quantity and type of hazardous waste involved in the incident;

( 4 ) Extent of injuries, if any; and

( 5 ) Estimated quantity and disposition of recovered materials, if any.

(c) Mixing hazardous waste with non-hazardous waste. A small quantity generator may 

mix its hazardous waste with non-hazardous waste and remain eligible for the conditional 

exemption applicable to a small quantity generator provided that either paragraph (1) or (2), 

below, is met. 

(1) The mixture is not a hazardous waste according to the mixture rules in §§ 

261.3(a)(2)(iv), 261.3(b)(2), 261.3(b)(3), and 261.3(g)(2)(i); or

(2) If the mixture is a hazardous waste, the mixture does not cause the generator to 

exceed the small quantity generator quantity limits for a calendar month, as identified in the 

definition of small quantity generator at § 260.10. If the mixture does exceed the small quantity 

generator quantity limits, a small quantity generator, to remain exempt from the permitting and 

interim status standards, must meet the conditions for exemption applicable to a large quantity 

generator. 

(d) Transporting over 200 miles. A small quantity generator who must transport its waste, 

or offer its waste for transportation, over a distance of 200 miles or more for off-site treatment, 

storage or disposal may accumulate hazardous waste on site for 270 days or less without a permit 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 294 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ or without having interim status provided that the generator complies with the conditions of 

paragraph (a) of this section.

(e) Accumulation time limit extension. A small quantity generator who accumulates 

hazardous waste for more than 180 days (or for more than 270 days if it must transport its waste, 

or offer its waste for transportation, over a distance of 200 miles or more) is an operator of a 

storage facility and is subject to the requirements of 40 CFR parts 264, 265 and 267, 268, and 

270 and the permit requirements of 40 CFR part 270 unless it has been granted an extension to 

the 180-day (or 270-day if applicable) period. Such extension may be granted by EPA if 

hazardous wastes must remain on site for longer than 180 days (or 270 days if applicable) due to 

unforeseen, temporary, and uncontrollable circumstances. An extension of up to 30 days may be 

granted at the discretion of the Regional Administrator on a case-by-case basis.

(f) Rejected load. A small quantity generator who sends a shipment of hazardous waste to 

a designated facility with the understanding that the designated facility can accept and manage 

the waste and later receives that shipment back as a rejected load or residue in accordance with 

the manifest discrepancy provisions of § 264.72 or § 265.72 of this chapter may accumulate the 

returned waste on site in accordance with paragraphs (a), (c) and (d) of this section. Upon receipt 

of the returned shipment, the generator must:

(i) Sign Item 18c of the manifest, if the transporter returned the shipment using the 

original manifest; or

(ii) Sign Item 20 of the manifest, if the transporter returned the shipment using a new 

manifest.

(g) A small quantity generator experiencing an episodic event may accumulate hazardous 

waste in accordance with subpart L of this part in lieu of § 262.17.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 295 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

§ 262.17 Conditions for exemption for a large quantity generator that accumulates 

hazardous waste.

A large quantity generator may accumulate hazardous waste on-site without a permit or 

interim status, and without complying with the independent requirements of parts 124, 264 

through 268, and 270 of this chapter, provided that all of the conditions for exemption listed in 

this section are met:

(a) Accumulation. A large quantity generator accumulates hazardous waste on site for no 

more than 90 days, unless in compliance with the accumulation time limit extension or F006 

accumulation conditions for exemption in §§ 262.17(b) through (e) below. The following 

accumulation conditions also apply:

(1) Accumulation in containers. If the hazardous waste is placed in containers, the large 

quantity generator must comply with the following: 

(i) Air emission standards. The applicable requirements of subparts AA, BB, and CC of 

40 CFR part 265;

(ii) Condition of containers. If a container holding hazardous waste is not in good 

condition, or if it begins to leak, the large quantity generator must transfer the hazardous waste 

from this container to a container that is in good condition, or manage the waste in some other 

way that complies with the conditions for exemption of this section;

(iii) Compatibility of waste with container. The large quantity generator must use a 

container made of or lined with materials that will not react with, and are otherwise compatible 

with, the hazardous waste to be stored, so that the ability of the container to contain the waste is 

not impaired;

(iv) Management of containers. 

Deleted: <#>11. Section 262.17 is added to read as follows:¶

Deleted: , and 124

Formatted: Font: Times New Roman, 12 pt

Deleted: –

Deleted: .

Deleted: .
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 296 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(A) A container holding hazardous waste must always be closed during accumulation, 

except when it is necessary to add or remove waste.

(B) A container holding hazardous waste must not be opened, handled, or stored in a 

manner that may rupture the container or cause it to leak. 

(v) Inspections. At least weekly, the large quantity generator must inspect central 

accumulation areas. The large quantity generator must look for leaking containers and for 

deterioration of containers caused by corrosion or other factors. See paragraph (a)(1)(ii) of this 

section for remedial action required if deterioration or leaks are detected.

(vi) Special conditions for accumulation of ignitable and reactive wastes. 

(A) Containers holding ignitable or reactive waste must be located at least 15 meters (50 

feet) from the site's property line unless a written waiver is obtained from the local fire 

department allowing hazardous waste accumulation to occur within this restricted area. Record 

of this approval must be maintained as long as ignitable or reactive hazardous waste is 

accumulated in this area. 

(B) The large quantity generator must take precautions to prevent accidental ignition or 

reaction of ignitable or reactive waste. This waste must be separated and protected from sources 

of ignition or reaction including but not limited to the following: open flames, smoking, cutting 

and welding, hot surfaces, frictional heat, sparks (static, electrical, or mechanical), spontaneous 

ignition (e.g., from heat-producing chemical reactions), and radiant heat. While ignitable or 

reactive waste is being handled, the large quantity generator must confine smoking and open 

flame to specially designated locations. “No Smoking” signs must be conspicuously placed 

wherever there is a hazard from ignitable or reactive waste.

(vii) Special conditions for accumulation of incompatible wastes.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 297 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(A) Incompatible wastes, or incompatible wastes and materials, (see appendix V of part 

265 for examples) must not be placed in the same container, unless § 265.17(b) is complied with.

(B) Hazardous waste must not be placed in an unwashed container that previously held an 

incompatible waste or material (see appendix V of part 265 for examples), unless § 265.17(b) is 

complied with.

(C) A container holding a hazardous waste that is incompatible with any waste or other 

materials accumulated or stored nearby in other containers, piles, open tanks, or surface 

impoundments must be separated from the other materials or protected from them by means of a 

dike, berm, wall, or other device. 

(2) Accumulation in tanks. If the waste is placed in tanks, the large quantity generator 

must comply with the applicable requirements of subparts J, AA, BB, and CC of 40 CFR part 

265 except §§ 265.197(c) of Closure and post-closure care and 265.200—Waste analysis and 

trial tests.

(3) Accumulation on drip pads. If the waste is placed on drip pads, the large quantity 

generator must comply with subpart W of 40 CFR part 265 and maintain at the facility the 

following records by use of inventory logs, monitoring equipment records, or any other effective 

means:

(i) A written description of procedures that will identify the date hazardous waste first 

entered the drip pad and ensure that all wastes are removed from the drip pad and associated 

collection system at least once every 90 days; and

(ii) Documentation of each waste removal, including the quantity of waste removed from 

the drip pad and the sump or collection system and the date and time of removal.

(4) Accumulation in Containment Buildings. 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 298 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(i) If the waste is placed in containment buildings, the large quantity generator must 

comply with subpart DD of 40 CFR part 265 and must place its professional engineer 

certification that the building complies with the design standards specified in 40 CFR 265.1101 

in the generator’s files prior to operation of the unit. 

(ii) The large quantity generator shall maintain the following records by use of inventory 

logs, monitoring equipment records, or any other effective means:

(A) A written description of procedures to ensure that each waste volume remains in the 

unit for no more than 90 days, a written description of the waste generation and management 

practices for the site showing that they are consistent with respecting the 90 day limit, and 

documentation that the procedures are complied with; or

(B) Documentation that the unit is emptied at least once every 90 days.

(5) Labeling and marking of containers, tanks, drip pads, and containment buildings.

(i) Containers. A large quantity generator must mark its containers with the following:

(A) The words “Hazardous Waste”; 

(B) Other words that identify the contents of the containers (examples may include, but 

are not limited to the name of the chemical(s), such as “acetone” or “methylene dichloride”; or 

the type or class of chemical, such as “organic solvents” or “halogenated organic solvents or, as 

applicable, the proper shipping name and technical name markings used to comply with 

Department of Transportation requirements at 49 CFR part 172 subpart D)”;

(C) An indication of the hazards of the contents (examples include, but are not limited to, 

the applicable hazardous waste characteristic(s) (i.e., ignitable, corrosive, reactive, toxic); a 

hazard class label consistent with the Department of Transportation requirements at 49 CFR part 

172 subpart E (labeling); a label consistent with the Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration Hazard Communication Standard at 29 CFR 1920.1200; a chemical hazard label 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 299 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

consistent with the National Fire Protection Association code 704; a hazard pictogram consistent 

with the United Nations’ Globally Harmonized System; or any other marking or labeling 

commonly used nationwide in commerce that identifies the nature of the hazards associated with 

the contents of the waste accumulation unit); and

(D) The date upon which each period of accumulation begins clearly visible for 

inspection on each container. 

(ii) Tanks, drip pads, and containment buildings. A large quantity generator accumulating 

hazardous waste in tanks, drip pads, and containment buildings must do the following: 

(A) Mark or label its waste accumulation units with the words “Hazardous Waste.” In the 

case of hazardous wastes accumulated in drip pads and containment buildings, generators must 

label their drip pads and containment buildings with the words “Hazardous Waste” in a 

conspicuous place easily visible to employees, visitors, emergency responders, waste handlers, 

etc.

(B) Use inventory logs, monitoring equipment, or records to identify the contents of the 

tank, drip pad or containment building and its associated hazards.

(C) Use inventory logs, monitoring equipment or records to identify the date upon which 

each period of accumulation begins; and 

(D) Keep inventory logs or records with the above information in close proximity to the 

tank, drip pad, or containment building.

(6) Emergency Procedures. The large quantity generator complies with the standards in 

subpart M of this part, Preparedness, Prevention and Emergency Procedures for Large Quantity 

Generators.

(7) Personnel Training.

Deleted: (i)

Deleted: , and (ii) all applicable requirements under 40 CFR part 

268
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 300 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(i)(A) Site personnel must successfully complete a program of classroom instruction, 

online training, or on-the-job training that teaches them to perform their duties in a way that 

ensures compliance with this part. The large quantity generator must ensure that this program 

includes all the elements described in the document required under paragraph (a)(7)(iv) of this 

section.

(B) This program must be directed by a person trained in hazardous waste management 

procedures, and must include instruction which teaches site personnel hazardous waste 

management procedures (including contingency plan implementation) relevant to the positions in 

which they are employed.

(C) At a minimum, the training program must be designed to ensure that site personnel 

are able to respond effectively to emergencies by familiarizing them with emergency procedures, 

emergency equipment, and emergency systems, including where applicable:

( 1 ) Procedures for using, inspecting, repairing, and replacing site emergency and 

monitoring equipment;

( 2 ) Key parameters for automatic waste feed cut-off systems;

( 3 ) Communications or alarm systems;

( 4 ) Response to fires or explosions;

( 5 ) Response to ground-water contamination incidents; and

( 6 ) Shutdown of operations.

(D) For site employees that receive emergency response training pursuant to 

Occupational Safety and Health Administration regulations 29 CFR 1910.120(p)(8) and 

1910.120(q), the large quantity generator is not required to provide separate emergency response 

training pursuant to this section, provided that the overall site training meets all the conditions of 

exemption in this section.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 301 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(ii) Site personnel must successfully complete the program required in paragraph (a)(7)(i) 

of this section within six months after the effective date of these regulations or six months after 

the date of their employment or assignment to the site, or to a new position at the site, whichever 

is later. Employees hired after the effective date of these regulations must not work in 

unsupervised positions until they have completed the training standards of paragraph (a)(7)(i) of 

this section.

(iii) Site personnel must take part in an annual review of the initial training required in 

paragraph (i) of this section.

(iv) The large quantity generator must maintain the following documents and records at 

the site:

(A) The job title for each position at the site related to hazardous waste management, and 

the name of the employee filling each job;

(B) A written job description for each position listed under paragraph (a)(7)(iv)(A) of this 

section. This description may be consistent in its degree of specificity with descriptions for other 

similar positions in the same company location or bargaining unit, but must include the requisite 

skill, education, or other qualifications, and duties of site personnel assigned to each position;

(C) A written description of the type and amount of both introductory and continuing 

training that will be given to each person filling a position listed under paragraph (a)(7)(iv)(A) of 

this section;

(D) Records that document that the training or job experience, required under paragraphs 

(a)(7)(i), (ii), and (iii) of this section, has been given to, and completed by, site personnel.

(v) Training records on current personnel must be kept until closure of the site. Training 

records on former employees must be kept for at least three years from the date the employee last 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 302 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

worked at the Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶site. Personnel training records may accompany personnel transferred within the 

same company.

(8) Closure.

A large quantity generator accumulating hazardous wastes in containers, tanks, drip pads, 

and containment buildings, prior to closing a unit that accumulates hazardous waste at the site or 

prior to closing the site must meet the following conditions:

(i) Notification. 

(A) Notify EPA no later than 30 days prior to closing a unit that accumulates hazardous 

waste at the site or prior to closing the site. 

(B) Notify EPA within 90 days after closure of a unit that accumulates hazardous waste 

at the site or prior to closing the site that it has either clean closed (e.g., complied with the 

applicable closure performance standards of § 262.17(a)(8)(ii)) or, if it cannot clean close, notify 

as a landfill under § 265.310. 

(ii) Closure Performance Standards.

(A) At closure, the generator must close the waste accumulation unit or site in a manner 

that:

( 1 ) Minimizes the need for further maintenance by controlling, minimizing, or 

eliminating, to the extent necessary to protect human health and the environment, the postclosure escape of hazardous waste, hazardous constituents, leachate, contaminated run-off, or 

hazardous waste decomposition products to the ground or surface waters or to the atmosphere,

( 2 ) Properly disposes of or decontaminates all contaminated equipment, structures and 

soil and any remaining hazardous waste residues from waste accumulation units including 

containment system components (pads, liners, etc.), contaminated soils and subsoils, bases, and 

structures and equipment contaminated with waste. Any hazardous waste residues remaining in 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 303 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

the unit(s) being closed must be removed from the unit(s). Any leakage must also be 

decontaminated or removed and managed as a hazardous waste unless § 261.3(d) applies.

( 3 ) Any hazardous waste generated in the process of closing either the generator’s site 

or unit(s) accumulating hazardous waste must be managed in accordance with all applicable 

standards of parts 260 through 270 of this chapter, including removing any hazardous waste 

contained in these units within 90 days of generating it and managing these wastes in a RCRA 

Subtitle C hazardous waste permitted treatment, storage and disposal facility or interim status 

facility.

( 4 ) If the generator demonstrates that any contaminated soils and wastes cannot be 

practicably removed or decontaminated as required in paragraph (a)(8)(ii)(A)( 2 ) of this section, 

then the waste accumulation unit is considered to be a landfill and the generator must close the 

waste accumulation unit and perform post-closure care in accordance with the closure and postclosure care requirements that apply to landfills (§ 265.310). In addition, for the purposes of 

closure, post-closure, and financial responsibility, such a waste accumulation unit is then 

considered to be a landfill, and the generator must meet all of the requirements for landfills 

specified in subparts G and H of part 265.

(9) Land Disposal Restrictions. The large quantity generator complies with all applicable 

requirements under 40 CFR part 268.

(b) Accumulation time limit extension. A large quantity generator who accumulates 

hazardous waste for more than 90 days is an operator of a storage facility and is subject to the 

requirements of 40 CFR parts 264, 265, and 267, 268, and the permit requirements of 40 CFR 

part 270 unless it has been granted an extension to the 90-day period. Such extension may be 

granted by EPA if hazardous wastes must remain on site for longer than 90 days due to 

Deleted: (B)

Formatted: Highlight

Formatted: Indent: First line: 0.5"

Formatted: Font: Italic

Deleted: or acute hazardous waste 

Deleted: and 270 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 304 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ unforeseen, temporary, and uncontrollable circumstances. An extension of up to 30 days may be 

granted at the discretion of the Regional Administrator on a case-by-case basis.

(c) Accumulation of F006. A large quantity generator who also generates wastewater 

treatment sludges from electroplating operations that meet the listing description for the EPA 

hazardous waste number F006, may accumulate F006 waste on site for more than 90 days, but 

not more than 180 days without a permit or without having interim status provided that it 

complies with all of the following conditions:

(1) The large quantity generator has implemented pollution prevention practices that 

reduce the amount of any hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants entering F006 or 

otherwise released to the environment prior to its recycling;

(2) The F006 waste is legitimately recycled through metals recovery;

(3) No more than 20,000 kilograms of F006 waste is accumulated on site at any one time; 

and

(4) The F006 waste is managed in accordance with the following:

(i)(A) If the F006 waste is placed in containers, the large quantity generator must comply 

with the applicable conditions for exemption in § 262.17(a)(1); and/or

(B) If the F006 is placed in tanks, the large quantity generator must comply with the 

applicable conditions for exemption of § 262.17(a)(2); and/or

(C) If the F006 is placed in containment buildings, the large quantity generator must 

comply with subpart DD of 40 CFR part 265, and has placed its professional engineer 

certification that the building complies with the design standards specified in 40 CFR 265.1101 

in the site’s files prior to operation of the unit. The large quantity generator must maintain the

following records:
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 305 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(1) A written description of procedures to ensure that the F006 waste remains in the unit 

for no more than 180 days, a written description of the waste generation and management 

practices for the site showing that they are consistent with the 180-day limit, and documentation 

that the large quantity generator is complying with the procedures; or

(2) Documentation that the unit is emptied at least once every 180 days.

(ii) The large quantity generator is exempt from all the requirements in subparts G and H 

of 40 CFR part 265, except for those referenced in § 262.17(a)(8).

(iii) The date upon which each period of accumulation begins is clearly marked and must 

be clearly visible for inspection on each container;

(iv) While being accumulated on site, each container and tank is labeled or marked 

clearly with:

(A) The words “Hazardous Waste”; 

(B) Other words that identify the contents of the container or tank; and 

(C) An indication of the hazards of the contents (examples include, but are not limited to, 

the applicable hazardous waste characteristic(s) (i.e., ignitable, corrosive, reactive, toxic); a 

hazard class label consistent with the Department of Transportation requirements at 49 CFR part 

172 subpart E (labeling); a label consistent with the Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration Hazard Communication Standard at 29 CFR 1920.1200; a chemical hazard label 

consistent with the National Fire Protection Association code 704; a hazard pictogram consistent 

with the United Nations’ Globally Harmonized System; or any other marking or labeling 

commonly used nationwide in commerce that identifies the nature of the hazards associated with 

the contents of the waste accumulation unit); and

(v) The large quantity generator complies with the requirements in §§ 262.17(a)(6) and 

(7).
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 306 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(d) F006 transported over 200 miles. A large quantity generator who also generates 

wastewater treatment sludges from electroplating operations that meet the listing description for 

the EPA hazardous waste number F006, and who must transport this waste, or offer this waste 

for transportation, over a distance of 200 miles or more for off-site metals recovery, may 

accumulate F006 waste on site for more than 90 days, but not more than 270 days without a 

permit or without having interim status if the large quantity generator complies with all of the 

conditions for exemption of paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(4) of this section.

(e) F006 accumulation time extension. A large quantity generator accumulating F006 in 

accordance with paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section who accumulates F006 waste on site for 

more than 180 days (or for more than 270 days if the generator must transport this waste, or offer 

this waste for transportation, over a distance of 200 miles or more), or who accumulates more 

than 20,000 kilograms of F006 waste on site is an operator of a storage facility and is subject to 

the requirements of 40 CFR parts 264, 265 and 267, and the permit requirements of 40 CFR part 

270 unless the generator has been granted an extension to the 180-day (or 270-day if applicable) 

period or an exception to the 20,000 kilogram accumulation limit. Such extensions and 

exceptions may be granted by EPA if F006 waste must remain on site for longer than 180 days 

(or 270 days if applicable) or if more than 20,000 kilograms of F006 waste must remain on site 

due to unforeseen, temporary, and uncontrollable circumstances. An extension of up to 30 days 

or an exception to the accumulation limit may be granted at the discretion of the Regional

Administrator on a case-by-case basis. 

(f) Mixing hazardous waste with non-hazardous waste. Mixtures of hazardous waste with 

non-hazardous waste are subject to the mixture rule in §§ 261.3(a)(2)(iv), 261.3(b)(2), 

261.3(b)(3), and 261.3(g)(2)(i).
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 307 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(g) Consolidation of hazardous waste received from very small quantity generators. 

Large quantity generators may receive hazardous waste from very small quantity generators 

under control of the same person (as defined in § 260.10), provided that they comply with the 

following conditions. “Control,” for the purposes of this section, means the power to direct the 

policies of the generator site, whether by the ownership of stock, voting rights, or otherwise, 

except that contractors who operate generator sites on behalf of a different person shall not be 

deemed to “control” such generator sites. 

(1) The large quantity generator notifies EPA thirty (30) days prior to receiving the first 

shipment from a very small quantity generator(s) using EPA form 8700-12; and

(i) Identifies on the form the name(s) and site address(es) for the very small quantity 

generator(s) as well as the name and business telephone number for a contact person for the very 

small quantity generator(s); and

(ii) Submits an updated Site ID form (EPA form 8700-12) within 30 days after a change 

in the name, site address, or contact information for the very small quantity generator.

(2) The large quantity generator maintains records of shipments for three years from the 

date the hazardous waste was received from the very small quantity generator. These records 

must identify the name, site address, and contact information for the very small quantity 

generator and include a description of the hazardous waste received, including the quantity, all 

applicable EPA hazardous waste number(s) (EPA hazardous waste codes) in subparts C and D of 

part 261 for the hazardous waste, and the date the waste was received.

(3) The large quantity generator manages all hazardous waste received from a very small 

quantity generator in compliance with the independent requirements in § 262.10(a)(1)(ii) and 

conditions for exemption in § 262.17 applicable to a large quantity generator. For purposes of the 

labeling and marking regulations in § 262.17(a)(5), the large quantity generator must label the 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 308 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

container or unit with the date accumulation started (i.e., the date the hazardous waste was 

received from the very small quantity generator). If the large quantity generator is consolidating 

incoming hazardous waste from a very small quantity generator with either its own hazardous 

waste or with hazardous waste from other very small quantity generators, the large quantity 

generator must label each container or unit with the earliest date any hazardous waste in the 

container was accumulated on site.

(h) Rejected load. A large quantity generator who sends a shipment of hazardous waste to 

a designated facility with the understanding that the designated facility can accept and manage 

the waste and later receives that shipment back as a rejected load or residue in accordance with 

the manifest discrepancy provisions of § 264.72 or § 265.72 of this chapter may accumulate the 

returned waste on site in accordance with paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section. Upon receipt of 

the returned shipment, the generator must:

(1) Sign Item 18c of the manifest, if the transporter returned the shipment using the 

original manifest; or

(2) Sign Item 20 of the manifest, if the transporter returned the shipment using a new 

manifest.

§ 262.18 EPA identification numbers and re-notification for small quantity generators and 

large quantity generators.

(a) A generator must not treat, store, dispose of, transport, or offer for transportation, 

hazardous waste without having received an EPA identification number from the Administrator. 

(b) A generator who has not received an EPA identification number may obtain one by 

applying to the Administrator using EPA form 8700-12. Upon receiving the request the 

Administrator will assign an EPA identification number to the generator.

Deleted: <#>[#]. Section 262.18 is added as follows.¶
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 309 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(c) A generator must not offer its hazardous waste to transporters or to treatment, storage, 

or disposal facilities that have not received an EPA identification number.

(d) Re-notification. 

(i) A small quantity generator must notify EPA by February 1 of each even-numbered 

year thereafter using EPA Form 8700-12. 

(ii) A large quantity generator must notify EPA by March 1 of each even-numbered year 

thereafter using EPA Form 8700-12. A large quantity generator may submit this re-notification 

as part of its biennial report required under § 262.41.

 17. Amend part 262 by revising the title heading for subpart B to read as follows:

Subpart B— Manifest Requirements Applicable to Small and Large Quantity Generators

 18. Amend part 262 by revising the title heading for subpart C to read as follows:

Subpart C— Pre-Transport Requirements Applicable to Small and Large Quantity 

Generators

 19. Amend § 262.32 by adding paragraph (c) to read as follows:

* * * * * 

(c) Before transporting or offering hazardous waste for transportation off site, a generator 

must mark each container with the applicable EPA hazardous waste numbers (EPA hazardous 

waste codes) in subparts C and D of part 261.

§ 262.34 [Removed and reserved]

 20. Remove and reserve § 262.34.

 21. Add § 262.35 to read as follows:

§ 262.35 Liquids in landfills prohibition.

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: The title for 40 CFR part 262 

Deleted: is amended

Deleted: .

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: The title for 40 CFR part 262 

Deleted: is amended

Deleted: .

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: Paragraph (c) is added to

Deleted: .

Deleted: ¶

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: is removed and reserved as follows

Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.69", Space After: 0 pt, No

bullets or numbering

Deleted: § 262.34 [Reserved] ¶

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: is added

Deleted: .
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 310 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ The placement of bulk or non-containerized liquid hazardous waste or hazardous waste 

containing free liquids (whether or not sorbents have been added) in any landfill is prohibited.

 22. Amend part 262 by revising the title heading for subpart D to read as follows:

Subpart D –Recordkeeping and Reporting Applicable to Small and Large Quantity 

Generators

§ 262.40 [Amended]

23. Amend § 262.40 by removing and reserving paragraph (c).

24. Section 262.41 and its section heading are revised to read as follows:

§ 262.41 Biennial report for large quantity generators.

(a) A generator who is a large quantity generator for at least one month of the reporting 

year must complete and submit EPA form 8700-13 to the Regional Administrator by March 1 of 

each even numbered year for all hazardous wastes generated during the previous calendar year. 

This requirement also applies to generators who treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste on 

site in accordance with the provisions of 40 CFR parts 264, 265, 266, 267, and 270 and to large 

quantity generators that receive hazardous waste from very small quantity generators pursuant to 

§ 262.17(g).

(b) Exports of hazardous waste to foreign countries are not required to be reported on the 

Biennial Report form. A separate annual report requirement is set forth at 40 CFR 262.56 for 

hazardous waste exporters.

25. Section 262.43 is revised to read as follows:

§ 262.43 Additional reporting.

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: The title for 40 CFR

Deleted: is amended

Deleted: .

Deleted: Recordkeeping.¶

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: The

Deleted: is removed and reserved as follows

Deleted: § 262.40 Recordkeeping.

Deleted: * * * * *¶

(c) [Reserved]¶

* * * * *¶

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: The title for §

Deleted: paragraphs § 262.41(a) and (b) are amended

Deleted: .

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: §

Deleted: amended

Deleted: .
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 311 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ The Administrator, as deemed necessary under sections 2002(a) and 3002(a)(6) of the 

Act, may require generators to furnish additional reports concerning the quantities and 

disposition of wastes identified or listed in 40 CFR part 261.

 26. Section 262.44 is amended by revising the introductory paragraph and section 

heading to read as follows:

§ 262.44 Recordkeeping for small quantity generators.

A small quantity generator is subject only to the following independent requirements in 

this subpart:

* * * * * 

Subparts I and J [Removed and reserved]

 27. Remove and reserve subparts I and J of part 262.

Subpart K – Alternative Requirements for Hazardous Waste Determination and 

Accumulation of Unwanted Material for Laboratories Owned by Eligible Academic 

Entities

 28. Section 262.200 is amended by removing the the definition “central accumulation 

area” and revising the definition “Trained professional”to read as follows:

§ 262.200 Definitions for this subpart.

* * * * *

Trained professional means a person who has completed the applicable RCRA training 

requirements of § 262.17 for large quantity generators, or is knowledgeable about normal 

operations and emergencies in accordance with § 262.16 for small quantity generators and very 

small quantity generators. A trained professional may be an employee of the eligible academic 

entity or may be a contractor or vendor who meets the requisite training requirements.

* * * * * 

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: The title of §

Deleted: and

Deleted: sentence are amended

Deleted: .

Deleted: ¶

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: Part 262

Deleted: are removed and reserved

Deleted: Subpart I [Reserved]¶

Subpart J [Reserved]¶

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: T

Deleted: of

Deleted: is removed and 

Deleted: t

Deleted: in § 262.200 is amended

Deleted: .
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 312 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

 29. Section 262.201 is revised to read as follows:

§ 262.201 Applicability of this subpart.

(a) Large quantity generators and small quantity generators. This subpart provides 

alternative requirements to the requirements in §§ 262.11 and 262.15 for the hazardous waste 

determination and accumulation of hazardous waste in laboratories owned by eligible academic 

entities that choose to be subject to this subpart, provided that they complete the notification 

requirements of § 262.203.

(b) Very small quantity generators. This subpart provides alternative requirements to the 

conditional exemption in § 262.14 for the accumulation of hazardous waste in laboratories 

owned by eligible academic entities that choose to be subject to this subpart, provided that they 

complete the notification requirements of § 262.203.

 30. Section 262.202 is revised to read as follows:

§ 262.202 This subpart is optional.

(a) Large quantity generators and small quantity generators. Eligible academic entities 

have the option of complying with this subpart with respect to its laboratories, as an alternative 

to complying with the requirements of §§ 262.11 and 262.15.

(b) Very small quantity generators. Eligible academic entities have the option of 

complying with this subpart with respect to laboratories, as an alternative to complying with the 

conditional exemption of § 262.14. 

 31. Section 262.203 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) and (b)(2) to read as 

follows:

§ 262.203 How an eligible academic entity indicates it will be subject to the requirements of 

this subpart.

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: §

Deleted: (a) and (b) are amended 

Deleted: .

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: §

Deleted: (a) and (b) are amended 

Deleted: .

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: §

Deleted: are revised 

Deleted: .
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 313 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(a) An eligible academic entity must notify the appropriate EPA Regional Administrator 

in writing, using the RCRA Subtitle C Site Identification Form (EPA Form 8700-12), that it is 

electing to be subject to the requirements of this subpart for all the laboratories owned by the 

eligible academic entity under the same EPA Identification Number. An eligible academic entity 

that is a very small quantity generator and does not have an EPA Identification Number must 

notify that it is electing to be subject to the requirements of this subpart for all the laboratories 

owned by the eligible academic entity that are on site, as defined by § 260.10. An eligible 

academic entity must submit a separate notification (Site Identification Form) for each EPA 

Identification Number (or site, for very small quantity generators) that is electing to be subject to 

the requirements of this subpart, and must submit the Site Identification Form before it begins 

operating under this subpart.

(b) * * *

(2) Site EPA Identification Number (except for very small quantity generators).

* * * * *

 32. Section 262.204 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:

§ 262.204 How an eligible academic entity indicates it will withdraw from the requirements 

of this subpart.

(a) An eligible academic entity must notify the appropriate EPA Regional Administrator 

in writing, using the RCRA Subtitle C Site Identification Form (EPA Form 8700-12), that it is 

electing to no longer be subject to the requirements of this subpart for all the laboratories owned 

by the eligible academic entity under the same EPA Identification Number and that it will 

comply with the requirements of §§ 262.11 and 262.15 for small quantity generators and large 

quantity generators. An eligible academic entity that is a very small quantity generator and does 

not have an EPA Identification Number must notify that it is withdrawing from the requirements 

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: §

Deleted: is amended 

Deleted: .
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 314 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ of this subpart for all the laboratories owned by the eligible academic entity that are on site and 

that it will comply with the conditional exemption in § 262.14. An eligible academic entity must 

submit a separate notification (Site Identification Form) for each EPA Identification Number (or 

site, for very small quantity generators) that is withdrawing from the requirements of this subpart 

and must submit the Site Identification Form before it begins operating under the standards in §§ 

262.11 and 262.15 for small quantity generators and large quantity generators or § 262.14 for 

very small quantity generators.

* * * * *

§ 262.206 [Amended]

 33. Amend § 262.206 in paragraph (b)(3)(iii) by removing the period at the end of the 

sentence and inserting “:” in its place. 

 34. Section 262.207 is amended by revising paragraph (d) to read as follows:

§ 262.207 Training.

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(2) Make the hazardous waste determination, pursuant to § 262.11(a) through (d), for 

unwanted material.

 35. Section 262.208 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) to read as 

follows:

§ 262.208 Removing containers of unwanted material from the laboratory.

(a) * * *

Formatted: Left

Deleted: Labeling and management standards for containers 

of unwanted material in the laboratory.

Deleted: ¶

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: is amended as follows.

Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.69", No bullets or numbering

Deleted: § 262.206 Labeling and management standards for 

containers of unwanted material in the laboratory.

Deleted: 

Deleted: * * * * * ¶

(b) * * * ¶

(3) * * *¶

(iii) When venting of a container is necessary: ¶

* * * * * ¶

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: §

Deleted: is amended

Deleted: .

Deleted: –

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: §

Deleted: are amended 

Deleted: .
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 315 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(1) Remove all containers of unwanted material from each laboratory on a regular 

interval, not to exceed 12 months; or

(2) Remove containers of unwanted material from each laboratory within 12 months of 

each container’s accumulation start date.

* * * * *

 36. Section 262.209 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:

§ 262.209 Where and when to make the hazardous waste determination and where to send 

containers of unwanted material upon removal from the laboratory.

* * * * *

(b) Very small quantity generators – an eligible academic entity must ensure that a 

trained professional makes a hazardous waste determination, pursuant to § 262.11(a) through (d), 

for unwanted material in the laboratory before the unwanted material is removed from the 

laboratory, in accordance with § 262.210.

 37. Section 262.210 is amended to revise paragraphs (a), (b)(3), and (d)(2) to read as 

follows:

§ 262.210 Making the hazardous waste determination in the laboratory before the 

unwanted material is removed from the laboratory.

* * * * *

(a) A trained professional must make the hazardous waste determination, pursuant to § 

262.11(a) through (d), before the unwanted material is removed from the laboratory.

(b) * * *

(3) Count the hazardous waste toward the eligible academic entity’s generator category, 

pursuant to § 262.13, in the calendar month that the hazardous waste determination was made.

(c) * * * * * 

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: §

Deleted: is amended

Deleted: .

Deleted: –

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: §

Deleted: are amended 

Deleted: .

Deleted: –
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 316 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(d) * * *

(2) Very small quantity generators must ensure it is taken directly from the 

laboratory(ies) to any of the types of facilities listed in § 262.14.

* * * * *

 38. Section 262.211 is amended by revising paragraphs (c), (d), and (e)(3) to read as 

follows:

§ 262.211 Making the hazardous waste determination at an on-site central accumulation 

area.

* * * * *

(c) The unwanted material becomes subject to the generator accumulation regulations of 

§ 262.16 for small quantity generators or § 262.17 for large quantity generators as soon as it 

arrives in the central accumulation area, except for the “hazardous waste” labeling conditions of 

§ 262.16(b)(6) and § 262.17(a)(5).

(d) A trained professional must determine, pursuant to § 262.11(a) through (d), if the 

unwanted material is a hazardous waste within 4 calendar days of the unwanted materials’ arrival 

at the on-site central accumulation area. 

(e) * * *

(3) Count the hazardous waste toward the eligible academic entity’s generator category, 

pursuant to § 262.13 in the calendar month that the hazardous waste determination was made, 

and

* * * * *

 39. Section 262.212 is amended by revising paragraph (d) to read as follows:

§ 262.212 Making the hazardous waste determination at an on-site interim status or 

permitted treatment, storage, or disposal facility.

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: §

Deleted: are amended

Deleted: .

Deleted: –

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: §

Deleted: is amended

Deleted: .
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 317 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ * * * * * 

(d) A trained professional must determine, pursuant to §262.11(a) through (d), if the 

unwanted material is a hazardous waste within 4 calendar days of the unwanted materials’ arrival 

at an on-site interim status or permitted treatment, storage, or disposal facility.

* * * * * 

 40. Section 262.213 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(2), (a)(3), and (b)(2) to 

read as follows:

§ 262.213 Laboratory clean-outs.

(a) * * *

(2) For the purposes of on-site accumulation, an eligible academic entity is not required 

to count a hazardous waste that is an unused commercial chemical product (listed in 40 CFR part 

261, subpart D or exhibiting one or more characteristics in 40 CFR part 261, subpart C) 

generated solely during the laboratory clean-out toward its hazardous waste generator category, 

pursuant to § 262.13. An unwanted material that is generated prior to the beginning of the 

laboratory clean-out and is still in the laboratory at the time the laboratory clean-out commences 

must be counted toward hazardous waste generator category, pursuant to § 262.13, if it is 

determined to be hazardous waste; and

(3) For the purposes of off-site management, an eligible academic entity must count all 

its hazardous waste, regardless of whether the hazardous waste was counted toward generator 

category under paragraph (a)(2) of this section, and if it generates more than 1 kg/month of acute 

hazardous waste or more than 100 kg/month of non-acute hazardous waste (i.e., the very small 

quantity generator limits as defined in § 260.10), the hazardous waste is subject to all applicable 

hazardous waste regulations when it is transported off site; and

* * * * *

Deleted: –

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: §

Deleted: are amended

Deleted: .

Formatted: Justified

Deleted: ¶

Deleted: (4) 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 318 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(b) * * *

(2) The requirement to count all hazardous waste, including unused hazardous waste, 

generated during the laboratory clean-out toward its hazardous waste generator category, 

pursuant to § 262.13.

* * * * *

 41. Section 262.214 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(5) to read as follows:

§ 262.214 Laboratory management plan.

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(5) Describe its intended best practices for making hazardous waste determinations, 

including specifying the duties of the individuals involved in the process (see the required 

standards at §262.11(a) through (d) and §§262 209 through 262.212).

* * * * * 

 42. Section 262.216 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) and (b) to read as follows:

§ 262.216 Non-laboratory hazardous waste generated at an eligible academic entity.

* * * * *

(a) Remains subject to the generator requirements of §§ 262.11 and 262.15 for large 

quantity generators and small quantity generators (if the hazardous waste is managed in a 

satellite accumulation area), and all other applicable generator requirements of 40 CFR part 262, 

with respect to that hazardous waste; or

(b) Remains subject to the conditional exemption of § 262.14 for very small quantity 

generators, with respect to that hazardous waste.

 43. Subpart L is added to read as follows:

Subpart L— Alternative Standards for Episodic Generation

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: §

Deleted: is amended

Deleted: .

Deleted: –

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: §

Deleted: are amended

Deleted: .

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: 40 CFR part 262

Deleted: .
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 319 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ Sec.

262.230 Applicability.

262.231 Definition of an episodic event.

262.232 Conditions for a generator managing hazardous waste from an episodic event.

262.233 Petition to manage one additional episodic event per calendar year.

262.234 Petition for a 30-day extension to an episodic event.

Subpart L— Alternative Standards for Episodic Generation

§ 262.230 Applicability.

This subpart is applicable to very small quantity generators and small quantity generators 

as defined in § 260.10.

§ 262.231 Definition of an episodic event.

An episodic event is an activity or activities, either planned or unplanned, that does not 

normally occur during generator operations, resulting in an increase in the generation of 

hazardous wastes that exceeds the calendar month quantity limits for the generator’s usual 

category. 

§ 262.232 Conditions for a generator managing hazardous waste from an episodic event.

(a) Very small quantity generator. A very small quantity generator may maintain its 

existing generator category during an episodic event provided that the generator complies with 

the following conditions: 

(1) The very small quantity generator is limited to one episodic event per calendar year 

unless a petition is granted under § 262.233;

Formatted: Underline
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 320 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(2) The very small quantity generator must notify EPA no later than thirty (30) calendar 

days prior to initiating a planned episodic event using EPA form 8700-12. In the event of an 

unplanned episodic event, the generator must notify EPA within 24 hours of the unplanned event 

or as soon as possible via phone or email and subsequently submit EPA form 8700-12. The 

generator shall include the start date of the episodic event, the reason(s) for the event, types and 

estimated quantities of hazardous waste expected to be generated as a result of the episodic 

event, and shall identify a facility contact and emergency coordinator with 24-hour telephone 

access to discuss the notification submittal or respond to an emergency; 

(3) The very small quantity generator must have an EPA identification number or obtain 

an EPA identification number using EPA form 8700-12;

(4) Accumulation. A very small quantity generator is prohibited from accumulating 

hazardous waste generated from an episodic event on drip pads and in containment buildings. 

When accumulating hazardous waste in containers and tanks the following conditions apply:

(i) Containers. A very small quantity generator accumulating in containers must mark its 

containers with the following: 

(A) The words “Episodic Hazardous Waste;”

(B) Other words that identify the contents of the containers (examples may include, but 

are not limited to the name of the chemical(s), such as “acetone” or “methylene dichloride”; or 

the type or class of chemical, such as “organic solvents” or “halogenated organic solvents” or, as 

applicable, the proper shipping name and technical name markings used to comply with 

Department of Transportation requirements at 49 CFR part 172 subpart D); 

(C) An indication of the hazards of the contents (examples include, but are not limited to, 

the applicable hazardous waste characteristic(s) (i.e., ignitable, corrosive, reactive, toxic); a 

hazard class label consistent with the Department of Transportation requirements at 49 CFR part 

Deleted: and its local fire department 

Deleted: .
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 321 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ 172 subpart E (labeling); a label consistent with the Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration Hazard Communication Standard at 29 CFR 1920.1200; a chemical hazard label 

consistent with the National Fire Protection Association code 704; or a hazard pictogram 

consistent with the United Nations’ Globally Harmonized System; or any other marking or 

labeling commonly used nationwide in commerce that identifies the nature of the hazards 

associated with the contents of the waste accumulation unit); and

(D) The date upon which the episodic event began, clearly visible for inspection on each 

container.

(ii) Tanks. A very small quantity generator accumulating episodic hazardous waste in 

tanks must do the following: 

(A) Mark or label the tank with the words “Episodic Hazardous Waste;” 

(B) Use inventory logs, monitoring equipment, or records to identify the contents of the 

tank and its associated hazards;

(C) Use inventory logs, monitoring equipment or records to identify the date upon which 

each episodic event begins; and 

(D) Keep inventory logs or records with the above information in close proximity to the 

tank.

(iii) Hazardous waste must be managed in a manner that minimizes the possibility of a 

fire, explosion, or release of hazardous waste or hazardous waste constituents to the air, soil, or 

water;

(A) Containers must be in good condition and compatible with the hazardous waste being 

accumulated therein. Containers must be kept closed except to add or remove waste. 

(B) Tanks must be in good condition and compatible with the hazardous waste

accumulated therein. Tanks must have procedures in place to prevent the overflow (e.g., be 

Deleted: s
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 322 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

equipped with a means to stop inflow with systems such as a waste feed cutoff system or bypass 

system to a standby tank when hazardous waste is continuously fed into the tank). Tanks must be 

inspected at least once each operating day to ensure all applicable discharge control equipment, 

such as waste feed cutoff systems, bypass systems, and drainage systems are in good working 

order and to ensure the tank is operated according to its design by reviewing the data gathered 

from monitoring equipment such as pressure and temperature gauges from the inspection.

(5) The very small quantity generator must comply with the hazardous waste manifest 

provisions of 40 CFR part 262 subpart B when it sends its episodic event hazardous waste off 

site to a RCRA-designated facility. 

(6) The very small quantity generator has up to forty-five (45) calendar days from the start of 

the episodic event to manifest and send its hazardous waste generated from the episodic event to 

a RCRA-designated facility unless an extension is granted pursuant to § 262.233.

(7) Very small quantity generators must maintain the following records for three (3) years 

from the end date of the episodic event: 

(i) Beginning and end dates of the episodic event;

(ii) A description of the episodic event;

(iii) A description of the types and quantities of hazardous wastes generated during the 

event; 

(iv) A description of how the hazardous waste was managed as well as the name of the 

RCRA designated facility that received the hazardous waste;

(v) Name(s) of hazardous waste transporters; 

(vi) An approval letter from EPA if the generator petitioned to conduct one additional 

episodic event per calendar year; and 

Deleted: T

Deleted: apply 

Deleted: a very small quantity generator
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 323 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(vii) An approval letter from EPA if the generator petitioned for an additional thirty (30) 

calendar day extension.

(b) Small quantity generators. A small quantity generator may maintain its existing 

generator category during an episodic event provided that the generator complies with the 

following conditions:

(1) The small generator is limited to one episodic event per calendar year unless a 

petition is granted under § 262.233;

(2) The small quantity generator must notify EPA no later than thirty (30) calendar days 

prior to initiating a planned episodic event using EPA form 8700-12. In the event of an 

unplanned episodic event, the small quantity generator must notify EPA within 24 hours of the 

unplanned event or as soon as possible via phone or email and subsequently submit EPA form 

8700-12. The small quantity generator shall include the start date of the episodic event and the 

reason(s) for the event, types and estimated quantities of hazardous wastes expected to be 

generated as a result of the episodic event, and identify a facility contact and emergency 

coordinator with 24-hour telephone access to discuss the notification submittal or respond to 

emergency;.

(3) The small quantity generator must have an EPA identification number or obtain an 

EPA identification number using EPA form 8700-12.

(4) Accumulation by small quantity generators. A small quantity generator is prohibited 

from accumulating hazardous wastes generated from an episodic event waste on drip pads and in 

containment buildings. When accumulating hazardous waste generated from an episodic event in 

containers and tanks, the following conditions apply:
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 324 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(i) Containers. A small quantity generator accumulating episodic hazardous waste in 

containers that meet the standards at part 265 subpart I, except §§ 265.176 and 265.178, must 

mark its containers with the following: 

(A) The words “Episodic Hazardous Waste”;

(B) Other words that identify the contents of the containers (examples may include, but 

are not limited to the name of the chemical(s), such as “acetone” or “methylene dichloride”; or 

the type or class of chemical, such as “organic solvents” or halogenated organic solvents” or, as 

applicable, the proper shipping name and technical name markings used to comply with 

Department of Transportation requirements at 49 CFR part 172 subpart D);

(C) An indication of the hazards of the contents (examples include, but are not limited to, 

the applicable hazardous waste characteristic(s) (i.e., ignitable, corrosive, reactive, toxic); a 

hazard class label consistent with the Department of Transportation requirements at 49 CFR part 

172 subpart E (labeling); a label consistent with the Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration Hazard Communication Standard at 29 CFR 1920.1200; a chemical hazard label 

consistent with the National Fire Protection Association code 704; or a hazard pictogram 

consistent with the United Nations’ Globally Harmonized System; or any other marking or 

labeling commonly used nationwide in commerce that identifies the nature of the hazards 

associated with the contents of the waste accumulation unit); and 

(D) The date upon which the episodic event began, clearly visible for inspection on each 

container.

(ii) Tanks. A small quantity generator accumulating episodic hazardous waste in tanks 

that meet the standards at § 265.201 in subpart J must do the following: 

(A) Mark or label its tank with the words “Episodic Hazardous Waste;” 

Deleted: t

Deleted: s
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 325 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(B) Use inventory logs, monitoring equipment, or records to identify the contents of the 

tank and its associated hazards;

(C) Use inventory logs, monitoring equipment or records to identify the date upon which 

each period of accumulation begins and ends; and 

(D) Keep inventory logs or records with the above information immediately accessible.

(iii) Comply with the applicable conditions listed in § 262.16.

(5) The small quantity generator must treat hazardous waste generated from an episodic 

event on site or manifest and ship such hazardous waste off site to a RCRA-designated facility 

within forty-five (45) calendar days from the start of the episodic event, unless an extension is 

granted pursuant to § 262.233.

(6) The small quantity generator must maintain the following records for three (3) years 

from the end date of the episodic event: 

(i) Beginning and end dates of the episodic event;

(ii) A description of the episodic event;

(iii) A description of the types and quantities of hazardous wastes generated during the 

event; 

(iv) A description of how the hazardous waste was managed as well as the name of the 

RCRA designated facility that received the hazardous waste;

(v) Name(s) of hazardous waste transporters; 

(vi) An approval letter from EPA if the generator petitioned to conduct one additional 

episodic event per calendar year; and

(vii) An approval letter from EPA if the generator petitioned for an additional thirty (30) 

calendar day extension.

§ 262.233 Petition to manage one additional episodic event per calendar year.

Deleted: S

Deleted: s

Deleted: S

Deleted: s
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 326 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(a) A very small quantity generator or a small quantity generator may petition EPA for one 

additional episodic event per calendar year without it impacting its generator category. The 

petition must include the following:

(1) The reason(s) why an additional episodic event is needed and the nature of the episodic 

event; 

(2) The estimated amount of hazardous waste to be managed from the event; 

(3) How the hazardous waste is to be managed; 

(4) The estimated length of time needed to complete management of the hazardous waste 

generated from the episodic event—not to exceed 45 days; and 

(5) Information regarding the previous episodic event managed by the generator, including 

the nature of the event and whether it was a planned or unplanned event. 

(b) The petition must be made via fax, email, or letter. 

(c) The generator cannot manage the hazardous waste generated from an additional episodic 

event under subpart L until written approval by EPA, including email, has been received. 

(d) The generator must retain written approval in its records for three years from the date the 

episodic event ended.

§ 262.234 Petition for a 30-day extension to an episodic event.

(a) The very small quantity generator or a small quantity generator may petition EPA for a 

thirty (30) calendar day extension to complete the management of hazardous waste generated by 

an episodic event. The petition must include the following:

(1) The nature of the episodic event; 

(2) The estimated amount of additional hazardous waste to be managed from the episodic 

event if the extension is granted; and 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 327 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(3) The generator’s rationale for needing an extension of an additional 30 days beyond the 

45-day limit to complete management of the hazardous waste generated from the episodic event. 

(b) The generator must petition EPA via fax, email, or letter within fifteen (15) calendar days 

of the event ending. 

(c) The generator cannot go beyond the 45-day limit unless written approval from EPA has 

been received. 

(d) The generator must retain written approval in its records for three years from the date the 

episodic event ended.

 44. Subpart M is added to read as follows:

Part 262 Subpart M—Preparedness, Prevention, and Emergency Procedures for Large 

Quantity Generators

Sec.

262.250 Applicability.

262.251 Maintenance and operation of facility.

262.252 Required equipment.

262.253 Testing and maintenance of equipment.

262.254 Access to communications or alarm system.

262.255 Required aisle space.

262.256 Arrangements with local authorities.

262.260 Purpose and implementation of contingency plan.

262.261 Content of contingency plan.

262.262 Copies of contingency plan.

262.263 Amendment of contingency plan.

262.264 Emergency coordinator.

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: 40 CFR part 262 

Deleted: .

Formatted: Underline

Formatted: Font: Times New Roman, Bold

Formatted: Font: Times New Roman, Bold
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 328 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

262.265 Emergency procedures.

Part 262 Subpart M—Preparedness, Prevention, and Emergency Procedures for Large 

Quantity Generators

§ 262.250 Applicability.

The regulations of this subpart apply to those areas of a large quantity generator where 

hazardous waste is generated or accumulated on site in accordance with the conditions in § 

262.17. 

§ 262.251 Maintenance and operation of facility.

A large quantity generator must maintain and operate its site to minimize the possibility 

of a fire, explosion, or any unplanned sudden or non-sudden release of hazardous waste or 

hazardous waste constituents to air, soil, or surface water which could threaten human health or 

the environment.

§ 262.252 Required equipment.

All areas where hazardous waste is being either generated or accumulated must be 

equipped with the items in paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section (unless none of the hazards 

posed by waste handled at the site could require a particular kind of equipment specified below 

or the actual waste generation or accumulation area does not lend itself for safety reasons to have 

a particular kind of equipment specified below). A large quantity generator may determine the 

most appropriate locations within its generator site to locate equipment necessary to prepare for 

and respond to emergencies:

(a) An internal communications or alarm system capable of providing immediate 

emergency instruction (voice or signal) to site personnel;

Deleted: –

Deleted: below
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 329 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(b) A device, such as a telephone (immediately available at the scene of operations) or a 

hand-held two-way radio, capable of summoning emergency assistance from local police 

departments, fire departments, or state or local emergency response teams;

(c) Portable fire extinguishers, fire control equipment (including special extinguishing 

equipment, such as that using foam, inert gas, or dry chemicals), spill control equipment, and 

decontamination equipment; and

(d) Water at adequate volume and pressure to supply water hose streams, or foam 

producing equipment, or automatic sprinklers, or water spray systems.

§ 262.253 Testing and maintenance of equipment.

All communications or alarm systems, fire protection equipment, spill control equipment, 

and decontamination equipment, where required, must be tested and maintained as necessary to 

assure its proper operation in time of emergency.

§ 262.254 Access to communications or alarm system.

(a) Whenever hazardous waste is being poured, mixed, spread, or otherwise handled, all 

personnel involved in the operation must have immediate access (e.g., direct or unimpeded 

access) to an internal alarm or emergency communication device, either directly or through 

visual or voice contact with another employee, unless such a device is not required under § 

265.252.

(b) In the event there is just one employee on the premises while the site is operating, the 

employee must have immediate access (e.g., direct or unimpeded access) to a device, such as a 

telephone (immediately available at the scene of operation) or a hand-held two-way radio, 

capable of summoning external emergency assistance, unless such a device is not required under 

§ 265.252.

§ 262.255 Required aisle space.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 330 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ The large quantity generator must maintain aisle space to allow the unobstructed 

movement of personnel, fire protection equipment, spill control equipment, and decontamination 

equipment to any area of site operation in an emergency, unless aisle space is not needed for any 

of these purposes.

§ 262.256 Arrangements with local authorities.

(a) The large quantity generator must make arrangements with the Local Emergency 

Planning Committee for the types and quantities of hazardous waste handled at the site, as well 

as the potential need for the services of the local police department, other emergency response 

teams, emergency response contractors, equipment suppliers, and local hospitals. Should there be 

no Local Emergency Planning Committee, should it not respond, or should the Local Emergency 

Planning Committee determine that it is not the appropriate organization to make arrangements 

with, then the large quantity generator must make arrangements with the local fire department 

and other relevant emergency responders (e.g., police and hospitals).

(1) A large quantity generator that must make arrangements with its local fire department 

must determine the potential need for the services of the local police department, other 

emergency response teams, emergency response contractors, equipment suppliers and local 

hospitals. 

(2) As part of this coordination, the large quantity generator shall make arrangements, as 

necessary, to familiarize the above organizations with the layout of the site, the properties of the 

hazardous waste handled at the site and associated hazards, places where personnel would 

normally be working, entrances to roads inside the site, and possible evacuation routes as well as 

the types of injuries or illnesses which could result from fires, explosions, or releases at the site. 

(3) Where more than one police or fire department might respond to an emergency, the 

large quantity generator shall enter into agreements designating primary emergency authority to 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 331 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

a specific fire or police department, and agreements with any others to provide support to the 

primary emergency authority. 

(b) The large quantity generator shall maintain records documenting the arrangements 

with the Local Emergency Planning Committee, or if appropriate, with the local fire department 

as well as any other organization necessary to respond to an emergency. This documentation 

must include a certified letter or any other documentation that confirms such arrangements 

actively exist.

§ 262.260 Purpose and implementation of contingency plan.

(a) A large quantity generator must have a contingency plan for the site. The contingency 

plan must be designed to minimize hazards to human health or the environment from fires, 

explosions, or any unplanned sudden or non-sudden release of hazardous waste or hazardous 

waste constituents to air, soil, or surface water.

 (b) The provisions of the plan must be carried out immediately whenever there is a fire, 

explosion, or release of hazardous waste or hazardous waste constituents which could threaten 

human health or the environment.

§ 262.261 Content of contingency plan.

(a) The contingency plan must describe the actions site personnel must take to comply 

with §§ 262.260 and 262.265 in response to fires, explosions, or any unplanned sudden or nonsudden release of hazardous waste or hazardous waste constituents to air, soil, or surface water at 

the site.

(b) If the generator has already prepared a Spill Prevention, Control, and 

Countermeasures (SPCC) Plan in accordance with part 112 of this chapter, or some other 

emergency or contingency plan, it need only amend that plan to incorporate hazardous waste 

management provisions that are sufficient to comply with the standards of this part. The 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 332 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ generator may develop one contingency plan that meets all regulatory standards. EPA 

recommends that the plan be based on the National Response Team's Integrated Contingency 

Plan Guidance (“One Plan”).

(c) The plan must describe arrangements agreed to with the Local Emergency Planning 

Committee. Should there be no Local Emergency Planning Committee, should it not respond, or 

should the Local Emergency Planning Committee determine that it is not the appropriate 

organization to make arrangements with, then the plan must describe arrangements agreed to by

local fire departments and other relevant emergency responders (e.g., police and hospitals) to 

coordinate emergency services, pursuant to § 262.256.

(d) The plan must list names and emergency telephone numbers of all persons qualified 

to act as emergency coordinator (see § 262.264), and this list must be kept up to date. Where 

more than one person is listed, one must be named as primary emergency coordinator and others 

must be listed in the order in which they will assume responsibility as alternates. In situations 

where the generator site has an emergency coordinator continuously on duty because it operates 

24/7/365, the plan may list the staffed position (e.g., operations manager, shift coordinator, shift 

operations supervisor) as well as an emergency telephone number that can be guaranteed to be 

answered 24/7/365.

(e) The plan must include a list of all emergency equipment at the site (such as fire 

extinguishing systems, spill control equipment, communications and alarm systems (internal and 

external), and decontamination equipment), where this equipment is required. This list must be 

kept up to date. In addition, the plan must include the location and a physical description of each 

item on the list, and a brief outline of its capabilities.

(f) The plan must include an evacuation plan for generator personnel where there is a 

possibility that evacuation could be necessary. This plan must describe signal(s) to be used to 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 333 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ begin evacuation, evacuation routes, and alternate evacuation routes (in cases where the primary 

routes could be blocked by releases of hazardous waste or fires).

§ 262.262 Copies of contingency plan.

(a) A copy of the contingency plan and all revisions to the plan must be maintained at the 

large quantity generator’s site and

(b)(1) The large quantity generator must submit a copy of the contingency plan to 

the Local Emergency Planning Committee. Should there be no Local Emergency 

Planning Committee, should it not respond, or should the Local Emergency Planning 

Committee determine that it is not the appropriate organization to make arrangements 

with, the large quantity generator must submit the copy to the local emergency 

responders.

(2) A generator that first becomes subject to these provisions after [INSERT DATE 6

MONTHS AFTER THE DATE OF PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL RULE IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER] 

must submit an executive summary of the contingency plan to the Local Emergency 

Planning Committee. Should there be no Local Emergency Planning Committee, should 

it not respond, or should the Local Emergency Planning Committee determine that it is 

not the appropriate organization to make arrangements with, the generator must submit 

the copy to the local emergency responders. The executive summary must include the 

following elements: 

(i) The types/names of hazardous wastes in layman’s terms and the associated 

hazard associated with each waste present at any one time (e.g., toxic paint wastes, spent 

ignitable solvent, corrosive acid); 

(ii) The estimated maximum amount of each hazardous waste that may be present 

at any one time; 

Formatted: Small caps

Deleted: SIX 

Formatted: Small caps
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 334 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(iii) The identification of any hazardous wastes where exposure would require 

unique or special treatment by medical or hospital staff; 

(iv) A map of the site showing where hazardous wastes are generated and 

accumulated and routes for accessing these wastes; 

(v) A street map of the site in relation to surrounding businesses, schools and 

residential areas to understand how best to get to the facility and also evacuate citizens 

and workers; 

(vi) The locations of water supply (e.g., fire hydrant and its flow rate); 

(vii) The identification of on-site notification systems (e.g., a fire alarm that rings 

off site, smoke alarms); and 

(viii) The name of the emergency coordinator and 7/24-hour emergency telephone 

number. 

§ 262.263 Amendment of contingency plan.

The contingency plan must be reviewed, and immediately amended, if necessary, whenever:

(a) Applicable regulations are revised;

(b) The plan fails in an emergency;

(c) The generator site changes—in its design, construction, operation, maintenance, or 

other circumstances—in a way that materially increases the potential for fires, explosions, or 

releases of hazardous waste or hazardous waste constituents, or changes the response necessary 

in an emergency;

(d) The list of emergency coordinators changes; or

(e) The list of emergency equipment changes.

§ 262.264 Emergency coordinator.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 335 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

At all times, there must be at least one employee either on the generator’s premises or on Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

call (i.e., available to respond to an emergency by reaching the site within a short period of time) 

with the responsibility for coordinating all emergency response measures and implementing the 

necessary emergency procedures outlined in § 262.265. This emergency coordinator must be 

thoroughly familiar with all aspects of the generator’s contingency plan, all operations and 

activities at the site, the location and characteristics of waste handled, the location of all records 

within the site, and the site’s layout. In addition, this person must have the authority to commit 

the resources needed to carry out the contingency plan.

§ 262.265 Emergency procedures.

(a) Whenever there is an imminent or actual emergency situation, the emergency 

coordinator (or his designee when the emergency coordinator is on call) must immediately:

(1) Activate internal site alarms or communication systems, where applicable, to notify 

all site personnel; and

(2) Notify appropriate state or local agencies with designated response roles if their help 

is needed.

(b) Whenever there is a release, fire, or explosion, the emergency coordinator must 

immediately identify the character, exact source, amount, and areal extent of any released 

materials. The emergency coordinator may do this by observation or review of the site records or 

manifests and, if necessary, by chemical analysis.

(c) Concurrently, the emergency coordinator must assess possible hazards to human 

health or the environment that may result from the release, fire, or explosion. This assessment 

must consider both direct and indirect effects of the release, fire, or explosion (e.g., the effects of 

any toxic, irritating, or asphyxiating gases that are generated, or the effects of any hazardous 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 336 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

surface water run-offs from water or chemical agents used to control fire and heat-induced 

explosions).

(d) If the emergency coordinator determines that the site has had a release, fire, or 

explosion which could threaten human health, or the environment, outside the facility, the 

emergency coordinator must report the findings as follows:

(1) If the assessment indicates that evacuation of local areas may be advisable, the 

emergency coordinator must immediately notify appropriate local authorities. The emergency 

coordinator must be available to help appropriate officials decide whether local areas should be 

evacuated; and

(2) The emergency coordinator must immediately notify either the government official 

designated as the on-scene coordinator for that geographical area, or the National Response 

Center (using their 24-hour toll free number 800/424-8802). The report must include:

(i) Name and telephone number of reporter;

(ii) Name and address of the generator;

(iii) Time and type of incident (e.g., release, fire);

(iv) Name and quantity of material(s) involved, to the extent known;

(v) The extent of injuries, if any; and

(vi) The possible hazards to human health, or the environment, outside the site.

(e) During an emergency, the emergency coordinator must take all reasonable measures 

necessary to ensure that fires, explosions, and releases do not occur, recur, or spread to other 

hazardous waste at the generator’s site. These measures must include, where applicable, stopping 

processes and operations, collecting and containing released waste, and removing or isolating 

containers.
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 337 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(f) If the generator’s site stops operations in response to a fire, explosion or release, the 

emergency coordinator must monitor for leaks, pressure buildup, gas generation, or ruptures in 

valves, pipes, or other equipment, wherever this is appropriate.

(g) Immediately after an emergency, the emergency coordinator must provide for 

treating, storing, or disposing of recovered waste, contaminated soil or surface water, or any 

other material that results from a release, fire, or explosion at the facility. Unless the generator 

can demonstrate, in accordance with § 261.3(c) or (d) of this chapter, that the recovered material 

is not a hazardous waste, then it is a newly generated hazardous waste that must be managed in 

accordance with all the applicable independent requirements and conditions for exemption in 

parts 262, 263, and 265 of this chapter.

(h) The emergency coordinator must ensure that, in the affected area(s) of the site:

(1) No waste that may be incompatible with the released material is treated, stored, or 

disposed of until cleanup procedures are completed; and

(2) All emergency equipment listed in the contingency plan is cleaned and fit for its 

intended use before operations are resumed.

(i) The generator must note in the operating record the time, date, and details of any 

incident that requires implementing the contingency plan. Within 15 days after the incident, the 

generator must submit a written report on the incident to the Regional Administrator. The report 

must include:

(1) Name, address, and telephone number of the generator;

(2) Date, time, and type of incident (e.g., fire, explosion);

(3) Name and quantity of material(s) involved;

(4) The extent of injuries, if any;
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 338 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(5) An assessment of actual or potential hazards to human health or the environment, 

where this is applicable; and

(6) Estimated quantity and disposition of recovered material that resulted from the 

incident.

PART 263—STANDARDS APPLICABLE TO TRANSPORTERS OF HAZARDOUS 

WASTE

 45. The authority citation for part 263 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6906, 6912, 6922–6925, 6937, and 6938.

 46. Section 263.12 is amended to read as follows:

§ 263.12 Transfer facility requirements.

(a) A transporter who stores manifested shipments of hazardous waste in containers 

meeting the independent requirements of § 262.30 at a transfer facility for a period of ten days or 

less is not subject to regulation under parts 264, 265, 267, 268 and 270 of this chapter with 

respect to the storage of those wastes. 

(b) The transporter must hold hazardous wastes that are stored at transfer facilities in 

containers marked with the following information: 

(1) The words “Hazardous Waste;” 

(2) The applicable EPA hazardous waste number(s) (EPA hazardous waste codes) in 

subparts C and D of part 261;

(3) Other words that identify the contents of the containers (examples may include, but 

are not limited to the name of the chemical(s), such as “acetone” or “methylene dichloride”; or 

the type or class of chemical, such as “organic solvents” or “halogenated organic solvents” or, as 

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: §

Deleted: .
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 339 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

applicable, the proper shipping name and technical name markings used to comply with 

Department of Transportation requirements at 49 CFR part 172 subpart D); and

(4) An indication of the hazards of the contents (examples include, but are not limited to, 

the applicable hazardous waste characteristic(s) (i.e., ignitable, corrosive, reactive, toxic); a 

hazard class label consistent with the Department of Transportation requirements at 49 CFR part 

172 subpart E (labeling); a label consistent with the Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration Hazard Communication Standard at 29 CFR 1920.1200; a chemical hazard label 

consistent with the National Fire Protection Association code 704; a hazard pictogram consistent 

with the United Nations’ Globally Harmonized System; or any other marking and labeling 

commonly used nationwide in commerce that identifies the nature of the hazards associated with 

the contents of the waste accumulation unit). 

PART 264—STANDARDS FOR OWNERS AND OPERATORS OF HAZARDOUS 

WASTE TREATMENT, STORAGE, AND DISPOSAL FACILITIES

 47. The authority citation for part 264 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), 6924, and 6925. 

 48. Section 264.1 is amended by revising paragraphs (g)(1) and (3) to read as follows:

§ 264.1 Purpose, scope and applicability.

* * * * *

(g) * * *

(1) The owner or operator of a facility permitted, licensed, or registered by a state to 

manage municipal or industrial solid waste, if the only hazardous waste the facility treats, stores, 

or disposes of is excluded from regulation under this part by § 262.14 of this chapter;

* * * * *

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: §

Deleted: (g)

Formatted: Font: Bold

Deleted: (2) 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 340 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(3) A generator accumulating waste on site in compliance with §§ 262.14, 262.15, 

262.16, or 262.17 of this chapter.

* * * * *

 49. Section 264.15 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(4) and removing paragraph 

(b)(5) to read as follows:

§ 264.15 General inspection requirements. 

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(4) The frequency of inspection may vary for the items on the schedule. However, the 

frequency should be based on the rate of deterioration of the equipment and the probability of an 

environmental or human health incident if the deterioration, malfunction, or operator error goes 

undetected between inspections. Areas subject to spills, such as loading and unloading areas, 

must be inspected daily when in use. At a minimum, the inspection schedule must include the 

items and frequencies called for in §§ 264.174, 264.193, 264.195, 264.226, 264.254, 264.278, 

264.303, 264.347, 264.602, 264.1033, 264.1052, 264.1053, 264.1058, and 264.1083 through 

264.1089 of this part, where applicable. Part 270 of this chapter requires the inspection schedule 

to be submitted with part B of the permit application. EPA will evaluate the schedule along with 

the rest of the application to ensure that it adequately protects human health and the environment. 

As part of this review, EPA may modify or amend the schedule as may be necessary.

* * * * *

 50. Section 264.71 is amended by revising paragraph (c) to read as follows:

§ 264.71 Use of manifest system.

* * * * *

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: §

Formatted: Font: Bold

Deleted: (5) [Delete]¶

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: §

Deleted: is amended

Deleted: .
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 341 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(c) Whenever a shipment of hazardous waste is initiated from a facility, the owner or 

operator of that facility must comply with the requirements of part 262 of this chapter. The 

provisions of §§ 262.15, 262.16, and 262.17 are applicable to the on-site accumulation of 

hazardous wastes by generators. Therefore, the provisions of §§ 262.15, 262.16, and 262.17 only 

apply to owners or operators who are shipping hazardous waste which they generated at that 

facility.

* * * * *

 51. Section 264.75 is revised to read as follows:

§ 264.75 Biennial report.

The owner or operator must complete and submit EPA form 8700-13 to the Regional 

Administrator by March 1 of each even numbered year for facility activities during the previous 

calendar year. 

 52. Section 264.170 is revised to read as follows:

§ 264.170 Applicability.

The regulations in this subpart apply to owners and operators of all hazardous waste 

facilities that store hazardous waste in containers, except as § 264.1 provides otherwise.

 53. Section 264.174 is revised to read as follows:

§ 264.174 Inspections.

At least weekly, the owner or operator must inspect areas where containers are stored. 

The owner or operator must look for leaking containers and for deterioration of containers and 

the containment system cause by corrosion or other factors. See §§ 264.15(c) and 264.171 for 

remedial action required if deterioration or leaks are detected.

 54. Section 264.191 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:

§ 264.191 Assessment of existing tank system’s integrity.

Deleted: <#>[#]. § 264.71 is amended as follows:¶

* * * * *¶

(c) Whenever a shipment of hazardous waste is initiated from a 

facility, the owner or operator of that facility must comply with the 

requirements of part 262 of this chapter. The provisions of §§ 

262.15, 262.16, and 262.17 are applicable to the on-site 

accumulation of hazardous wastes by generators. Therefore, the 

provisions of §§ 262.14, 262.15, 262.16, and 262.17 only apply to 

owners and operators who are shipping hazardous waste which they 

generated at that facility. ¶

* * * * * ¶

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: §

Deleted: amended

Deleted: .

Deleted: 

Formatted: Indent: Hanging: 0.75", Bulleted + Level: 1 +

Aligned at: 0.75" + Indent at: 1"

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: §

Deleted: amended

Deleted: .

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: §

Deleted: amended

Deleted: .

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: §

Deleted: is amended

Deleted: .
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 342 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(a) For each existing tank system that does not have secondary containment meeting the 

requirements of § 264.193, the owner or operator must determine that the tank system is not 

leaking or is fit for use. Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, the owner or operator 

must obtain and keep on file at the facility a written assessment reviewed and certified by a 

qualified Professional Engineer, in accordance with § 270.11(d) of this chapter, that attests to the 

tank system’s integrity by January 12, 1988.

* * * * *

§ 264.195 [Amended]

 55. Section 264.195 is amended by removing and reserving paragraph (e).

 56. Section 264.1030 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(2) to read as follows:

§ 264.1030 Applicability.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(2) A unit (including a hazardous waste recycling unit) that is not exempt from permitting 

under the provisions of 40 CFR 262.17 (i.e., a hazardous waste recycling unit that is not a 90-day 

tank or container) and that is located at a hazardous waste management facility otherwise subject 

to the permitting requirements of 40 CFR part 270, or

* * * * *

 57. Section 264.1050 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(3) to read as follows:

§ 264.1050 Applicability.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

Deleted: Inspections.

Deleted: ¶

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: §

Deleted: is removed and reserved as follows

Deleted: § 264.195 Inspections.

Deleted: 

Deleted: * * * * *¶

(e) [Reserved]¶

* * * * *¶

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: §

Deleted: is amended 

Deleted: .

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: §

Deleted: is amended 

Deleted: .
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 343 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(3) A unit that is exempt from permitting under the provisions of 40 CFR 262.17 (i.e., a 

“90-day” tank or container) and is not a recycling unit under the provisions of 40 CFR 261.6.

* * * * *

 58. Section 264.1101 is amended by revising paragraph (c)(4) to read as follows:

§ 264.1101 Design and operating standards.

* * * * *

(c)* * *

(4) Inspect and record in the facility operating record, at least once every seven days, data 

gathered from monitoring and leak detection equipment as well as the containment building and 

the area immediately surrounding the containment building to detect signs of releases of 

hazardous waste. 

* * * * *

PART 265—INTERIM STATUS STANDARDS FOR OWNERS AND OPERATORS OF 

HAZARDOUS WASTE TREATMENT, STORAGE, AND DISPOSAL FACILITIES

 59. The authority citation for part 265 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6906, 6912, 6922, 6923, 6924, 6925, 6935, 6936, and 6937. 

 60. Section 265.1 is amended by revising paragraphs (c)(5) and (7) to read as follows:

§ 265.1 Purpose, scope, and applicability.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(5) The owner or operator of a facility permitted, licensed, or registered by a State to 

manage municipal or industrial solid waste, if the only hazardous waste the facility treats, stores, 

or disposes of is excluded from regulation under this part by § 262.14 of this chapter;

Deleted: 

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: §

Deleted: is amended

Deleted: .

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: [#]. 

Deleted: §

Deleted: (c)

Deleted: are amended

Deleted: .
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 344 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ * * * * * 

(7) A generator accumulating waste on site in compliance with §§ 262.15, 262.16, and 

262.17, except to the extent the provisions are included in § § 262.15, 262.16, or 262.17 of this 

chapter;

* * * * *

 61. Section 265.15 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(4) and removing paragraph 

(b)(5) to read as follows: 

§ 265.15 General inspection requirements.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(4) The frequency of inspection may vary for the items on the schedule. However, the 

frequency should be based on the rate of deterioration of the equipment and the probability of an 

environmental or human health incident if the deterioration, malfunction, or operator error goes 

undetected between inspections. Areas subject to spills, such as loading and unloading areas, 

must be inspected daily when in use. At a minimum, the inspection schedule must include the 

items and frequencies called for in §§ 265.174, 265.193, 265.195, 265.226, 265.260, 265.278, 

265.304, 265.347, 265.377, 265.403, 265.1033, 265.1052, 265.1053, 265.1058, and 265.1084 

through 265.1090, where applicable.

* * * * *

 62. Section 265.71 is amended by revising paragraph (c) to read as follows:

§ 265.71 Use of manifest system.

* * * * *

(c) Whenever a shipment of hazardous waste is initiated from a facility, the owner or 

operator of that facility must comply with the requirements of part 262 of this chapter. The 

Deleted: (6) 

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: §

Deleted: is amended as follows and § 265.15(

Deleted: is removed.

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: §

Deleted: .
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 345 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶ provisions of §§ 262.15, 262.16, and 262.17 are applicable to the on-site accumulation of 

hazardous wastes by generators. Therefore, the provisions of §§ 262.15, 262.16, and 262.17 only 

apply to owners or operators who are shipping hazardous waste which they generated at that 

facility.

* * * * *

 63. Section 265.75 is revised to read as follows:

§ 265.75 Biennial report.

The owner or operator must complete and submit EPA form 8700-13 to the Regional 

Administrator by March 1 of each even numbered year for facility activities during the previous 

calendar year.

 64. Section 265.111 is amended by revising paragraph (c) to read as follows:

§ 265.111 Closure performance standard.

* * * * *

(c) Complies with the closure requirements of this subpart, including, but not limited to, 

the requirements of §§ 265.197, 265.228, 265.258, 265.280, 265.310, 265.351, 265.381, 

265.404, 265.445, and 265.1102.

 65. Section 265.114 is revised to read as follows:

§ 265.114 Disposal or decontamination of equipment, structures and soils.

During the partial and final closure periods, all contaminated equipment, structures and 

soil must be properly disposed of, or decontaminated unless specified otherwise in §§ 265.197, 

265.228, 265.445, 265.258, 265.280, 265.310 or 265.1102. By removing all hazardous wastes or 

hazardous constituents during partial and final closure, the owner or operator may become a 

generator of hazardous waste and must handle that hazardous waste in accordance with all 

applicable requirements of part 262 of this chapter.

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: §

Deleted: amended

Deleted: .

Deleted: [

Deleted: #]

Deleted: §

Deleted: is amended 

Deleted: .

Deleted: P

Deleted: S

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: §

Deleted: amended

Deleted: .

Deleted: ,
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 346 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

 66. Section 265.174 is revised to read as follows:

§ 265.174 Inspections.

At least weekly, the owner or operator must inspect areas where containers are stored. 

The owner or operator must look for leaking containers and for deterioration of containers 

caused by corrosion or other factors. See § 265.171 for remedial action required if deterioration 

or leaks are detected.

§ 265.195 [Amended]

 67. Section 265.195is amended by removing and reserving paragraph (d).

§ 265.201 [Reserved]

 68. Remove and reserve § 265.201.

 69. Section 265.1030 is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(2) and (3) to read as follows:

§ 265.1030 Applicability.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(2) A unit (including a hazardous waste recycling unit) that is not exempt from permitting 

under the provisions of 40 CFR 262.17 (i.e., a hazardous waste recycling unit that is not a 90-day 

tank or container) and that is located at a hazardous waste management facility otherwise subject 

to the permitting requirements of 40 CFR part 270, or

(3) A unit that is exempt from permitting under the provisions of 40 CFR 262.17 (i.e., a 

“90-day” tank or container) and is not a recycling unit under the requirements of 40 CFR 261.6.

* * * * *

 70. Section 265.1101 is amended by revising paragraph (c)(4) to read as follows:

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: §

Deleted: amended

Deleted: .

Deleted: Inspections

Deleted: .

Deleted: ¶

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: §

Deleted: e

Deleted: is removed and reserved as follows

Formatted: Font: Times New Roman, 12 pt

Formatted: Normal, No bullets or numbering

Formatted: Font: Times New Roman, 12 pt, Bold

Deleted: ¶

Formatted: Font: Times New Roman, 12 pt

Deleted: § 265.195 Inspections.

Deleted: 

Deleted: * * * * *¶

(d) [Reserved]¶

* * * * *¶

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: is removed and reserved as follows

Deleted: § 265.201 [Reserved]

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: §

Deleted: 1

Deleted: 2

Deleted: is amended

Deleted: .

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: §

Deleted: is amended

Deleted: .
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 347 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

§ 265.1101 Design and operating standards.

* * * * *

(c)* * *

(4) Inspect and record in the facility’s operating record at least once every seven days 

data gathered from monitoring and leak detection equipment as well as the containment building 

and the area immediately surrounding the containment building to detect signs of releases of 

hazardous waste.

* * * * *

PART 268 – LAND DISPOSAL RESTRICTIONS

 71. The authority citation for part 268 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), 6921, and 6924. 

 72. Section 268.1 is amended by revising paragraph (e)(1) to read as follows:

§ 268.1 Purpose, scope, and applicability.

* * * * * 

(e) * * *

(1) Waste generated by very small quantity generators, as defined in § 260.10; 

* * * * *

 73. Section 268.7 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(5) introductory paragraph to read

as follows:

§ 268.7 Testing, tracking, and recordkeeping requirements for generators, treaters, and 

disposal facilities.

(a) * * *

(5) If a generator is managing and treating prohibited waste or contaminated soil in tanks, 

containers, or containment buildings regulated under 40 CFR 262.15, 262.16, and 262.17 to meet 

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: §

Deleted: is amended 

Deleted: .

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: §

Deleted: is amended

Deleted: .
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 348 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

applicable LDR treatment standards found at § 268.40, the generator must develop and follow a 

written waste analysis plan which describes the procedures they will carry out to comply with the 

treatment standards. (Generators treating hazardous debris under the alternative treatment 

standards of Table 1, § 268.45, however, are not subject to these waste analysis requirements.) 

The plan must be kept on site in the generator’s records, and the following requirements must be 

met:

* * * * *

 74. Section 268.50 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(2)(i) to read as follows:

§ 268.50 Prohibitions on storage of restricted waste.

(a) * * *

(2) * * *

(i) Each container is clearly marked with:

(A) The words “Hazardous Waste;” 

(B) The applicable EPA hazardous waste number(s) (EPA hazardous waste codes) in 

subparts C and D of part 261;

(C) Other words that identify the contents of the containers (examples may include, but 

are not limited to the name of the chemical(s), such as “acetone” or “methylene dichloride”; or 

the type or class of chemical, such as “organic solvents” or “halogenated organic solvents” or, as 

applicable, the proper shipping name and technical name markings used to comply with 

Department of Transportation requirements at 49 CFR part 172 subpart D); and

(D) An indication of the hazards of the contents (examples include, but are not limited to, 

the applicable hazardous waste characteristic(s) (i.e., ignitable, corrosive, reactive, toxic); a 

hazard class label consistent with the Department of Transportation requirements at 49 CFR part 

172 subpart E (labeling); a label consistent with the Occupational Safety and Health 

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: §

Deleted: is amended 

Deleted: .

Deleted: ,
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 349 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Administration Hazard Communication Standard at 29 CFR 1920.1200; a chemical hazard label Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

consistent with the National Fire Protection Association code 704; a hazard pictogram consistent 

with the United Nations’ Globally Harmonized System; or any other marking and labeling 

commonly used nationwide in commerce that identifies the nature of the hazards associated with 

the contents of the waste accumulation unit); and

(E) The date each period of accumulation begins. 

* * * * *

PART 270 – EPA ADMINISTERED PERMIT PROGRAMS: THE HAZARDOUS 

WASTE PERMIT PROGRAM

 75. The authority citation for part 270 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912, 6924, 6925, 6927, 6939, and 6974. 

 76. Section 270.1 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(3), (c)(2), (c)(2)(i), and 

(c)(2)(iii) to read as follows:

§ 270.1 Purpose and scope of these regulations.

(a) * * *

(3) Technical regulations. The RCRA permit program has separate additional regulations 

that contain technical requirements. These separate regulations are used by permit issuing 

authorities to determine what requirements must be placed in permits if they are issued. These 

separate regulations are located in 40 CFR parts 264, 266, 267, and 268.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(2) Specific exclusions and exemptions. The following persons are among those who are 

not required to obtain a RCRA permit:

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: §

Deleted: and

Formatted: Font: Bold

Formatted: Normal, No bullets or numbering

Deleted: .

Formatted: Font: Times New Roman, 12 pt, Bold

Deleted: (b) 
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 350 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(i) Generators who accumulate hazardous waste on site in compliance with all of the 

conditions for exemption provided in 40 CFR 262.14, 262.15, 262.16, and 262.17.

* * * * *

(iii) Persons who own or operate facilities solely for the treatment, storage, or disposal of 

hazardous waste excluded from regulations under this part by 40 CFR 261.4.

* * * * *

§ 270.42 [Amended]

 77. Section 270.42 is amended by removing and reserving paragraph (l) and section 

(O)(1) of Appendix I to § 270.42.

PART 273 – STANDARDS FOR UNIVERSAL WASTE MANAGEMENT

 78. The authority citation for part 273 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6922, 6923, 6924, 6925, 6930, and 6937. 

 79. Section 273.8 is amended by revising the section heading and paragraph (a)(2) to read 

as follows:

§ 273.8 Applicability – household and very small quantity generator waste.

(a) * * *

(2) Very small quantity generator wastes that are exempt under § 262.14 of this chapter 

and are also of the same type as the universal wastes defined at § 273.9.

* * * * *

 80. Section 273.81is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:

§ 273.81 Factors for petitions to include other wastes under 40 CFR part 273.

* * * * *

Deleted: (ii) 

Deleted: Permit modification at the request of the permittee.

Deleted: ¶

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: Paragraph (l ) of § 

Deleted: ed 

Deleted: ed

Deleted: as follows

Deleted: § 270.42 Permit modification at the request of the 

permittee.

Deleted: * * * * *¶

(l) [Reserved]¶

<#>[#]. Section O is amended in Appendix I to § 270.42 as follows:¶

APPENDIX I to § 270.42 – CLASSIFICATION OF PERMIT

MODIFICATION¶

O. Burden Reduction¶

1. [Reserved]

...

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: The section title and paragraph (a)(2) of §

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: §

Deleted: is amended
*** E.O. 12866 Review – Revised Version – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review *** 

Page 351 of 351

Deleted: *** Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***¶

Revisions Made During OMB Interagency Review¶

(b) The waste or category of waste is not exclusive to a specific industry or group of 

industries, is commonly generated by a wide variety of types of establishments (including, for 

example, households, retail and commercial businesses, office complexes, very small quantity 

generators, small businesses, government organizations, as well as large industrial facilities);

* * * * *

PART 279 – STANDARDS FOR MANAGEMENT OF USED OIL

 81. The authority citation for part 279 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: Sections 1006, 2002(a), 3001 through 3007, 3010, 3014, and 7004 of the Solid Waste 

Disposal Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), 6921 through 6927, 6930, 6934, and 6974) ; 

and sections 101(37) and 144(c) of CERCLA (42 U.S.C. 9601(37) and 9614(c)). 

 82. Section 279.10 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(3) to read as follows:

§ 279.10 Applicability.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(3) Very small quantity generator hazardous waste. Mixtures of used oil and very small 

quantity generator hazardous waste regulated under § 262.14 of this chapter are subject to 

regulation as used oil under this part.

* * * * *

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: [#]

Deleted: §

Deleted: is amended