Docket Number: EPA-HQ-RCRA-2005-0018



### Cost Assessment for the Final Rule on Exports and Imports of Hazardous Waste Destined for Recovery Among OECD Countries, Exports of Spent Lead-Acid Batteries from the U.S., and Import Consent Documentation

Office of Resource Cons ervation and Recovery Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

May 2009ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The Agency recognizes DPRA, Inc. for the overall organi zation and development of this report. Project supervision and coordination was pr ovided by Industrial Economics, Incorporated. Lyn D. Luben, Laura Coughlan, Christina Kager, and Fra nk McAlister of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery, provided technical guidance and review.iii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA ) is currently developing a final action designed to amend the existing regulations gov erning shipments (export /import/transit) of hazardous wastes destined for recovery between the U.S. and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries. This action integrates into the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) various OECD Co uncil Decisions revising the rules governing transboundary movement of hazardous wastes among OECD countries, which the U.S, as a signing party, is obligated to implement. U nder Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), these regulations are under 40 CFR 262, Subpart H.

As part of this rule, EPA is also regulati ng exports of Spent Lead -Acid Batteries (SLAB) to OECD countries (except for Canada and Mexico) under the same rule above (49 CFR 262, Subpart H) while regulating SLAB exports to other countries under 40 CFR 262, Subpart E requirements. Currently, SLABs are exempt fr om any export requirements when managed under 40 CFR 266 Subpart G ("SLAB Regulations"). SLABs may also be managed as Universal
Wastes under 40 CFR 273 ("Universal Waste Re gulations"), under which export requirements apply.

The Agency is combining the OECD and SL AB revisions into a single rulemaking under the current action. Also incorpor ated into this final rule is a requirement for documentation necessary to confirm EPA’s consen t to import. Finally, this ac tion presents a revision to the current language in 262.55 and 262.87(b) that will require exception reports to be submitted directly to the Director, International Complia nce and Assurance Divisi on (ICAD), of the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA) , EPA Headquarters, rath er than to the EPA

“Administrator.”

This economic assessment considers the imp acts of the OECD, SLAB and import consent documentation requirements separately, and in aggr egate. There is no discernable cost impact associated with the address change requirement.

OECD Rule

The OECD has adopted Council Decisi on C(2001)107/FINAL, and the amendment C(2004)20, concerning the control of transboundary movements of wastes destined for recovery operations. In order to implement this legally -binding Decision, EPA is taking action to amend the existing regulations at 40 CF R 262, Subpart H. EPA is also taking this opportunity to make

technical corrections an d clarifications to the regulati ons at 40 CFR part 262; §262.58(a); §262.58(b); §262.12(a)(2); and §265.12(a)(2). The Ag ency’s regulatory changes do not increase the scope of hazardous wastes subject to U.S. expor t and import controls. However, they modify the procedural controls gove rning their export and import when shipped for recovery among OECD Countries. The regulatory changes apply only to U.S. exports and imports of hazardous waste destined for recovery operations among OE CD Countries, except for Canada and Mexico. Hazardous waste shipments to Canada and Mexi co will continue to move under the current bilateral agreements and regulations.

This economic assessment examines the increm ental cost impacts as sociated with the final rule. For purposes of this analysis, th e cost impacts were categorized as follows:iv • Reading the Rule. Although not actually required by the rule , affected entities are expected to incur first year incrementa l costs associated with reading the rule in order to understand and comply with th e new requirements. This is considered a default requirement of the rule.

• Exemption for Wastes Destined for Laboratory Analysis. Under the rule, shipments of amber-list wastes are exempt from the amber control procedure if they are explicitly destined for laboratory analysis to assess their physical/chemical characteristics or to de termine their suitability for recovery operations. As a result, the affected en tities will experience cost savings, since they will no longer need to comply with the information co llection requirements under the existing regulations.

• Certificate of Recovery. Under the rule, recovery facilities must provide a certificate of recovery to the exporter and to the comp etent authorities of the countries of export and import. This certi ficate of recovery must be provided as soon as possible, but no later than 30 days after the completion of recovery and no later than one calendar year following receipt of waste.

• Exchange and Accumulation Recovery Operations. Under the rule, shipments

of hazardous wastes destined for excha nge (R12) or accumulation (R13) recovery operations need to comply with additiona l information collection requirements. These requirements include: (1) indi cating the subsequent R1-R11 recovery facility (e.g., facility that conducts solvent reclamation, acid regeneration) in the notification, (2) provid ing and maintaining a signed copy of the movement/tracking document, (3) prepar ing and providing a certificate of recovery for R12/R13 recovery operations , and (4) providing and maintaining a copy of the certificate of recovery for R1-R11 recovery operations.

• Return of Wastes. Under the rule, when a shipme nt of hazardous wastes to which concerned countries have given consent cannot be completed in accordance with

the terms of the contract and alternativ e arrangements cannot be made to recover these wastes in an environmentally s ound manner in the U.S., the U.S. importer must inform EPA of the need to return the shipment and EPA must inform the competent authorities of the countries of export and tran sit the reason for returning the waste.

Total OECD Rule Impact:

The costs and cost savings associated with the OECD Rule are presented in Exhibit ES-1.

As shown in the exhibit, the total incrementa l cost of the rule dur ing the first year of implementation (i.e., including read ing the rule) is estimated to be $14,494. This is a net impact

estimate that includes a total in cremental cost to the regulated community of $13,656 and to EPA

of $838. The total incremental annual net cost af ter the first year of implementation (i.e., excluding reading the rule) is estimated to be $9,700 (i.e., $14,494 - $4,794). This includes a cost of $278 for export shipments and a cost of $9,426 for import shipments (See exhibits 7 and 8). The impact after the first year includes a tota l incremental cost to th e regulated community of $8,862 and to EPA of $838.v Exhibit ES-1

First Year Incremental Costs to Aff ected Entities under OECD Final Rule a, b

Regulatory Change U.S. Exporter U.S. Importer U.S. Transporter EPA Total

Reading the Regulations c $685 $1,712 $2,397 $0 $4,794

Exemption for Wastes Destined for Laboratory Analysis ($2,060) ($99) ($66) ($1,667) ($3,892)

Certificate of Recovery $1,621 $7,444 $0 $2,306 $11,371

Exchange and Accumulation Recovery Operations $74 $1,926 $0 $170 $2,170

Return of Wastes $0 $22 $0 $29 $51

Total: $320 $11,005 $2,331 $838 $14,494

N otes: Costs presented in 2007 dollars.

Assumes 6 exporters, 15 importers, and 21 transporters.

a Exhibit contains rounding error.

b Numbers in parentheses indicate cost savings rather than costs.

c Activity to be conducted in the firs t year of rule im plementation only.

SLAB Rule

Currently, spent lead-acid battery (SLAB) exporters are exempt from any export requirements when managed under 40 CFR 266 Subpart G, which contains the SLAB regulations. Although SLABs may also be mana ged under 40 CFR 273 as Universal Waste and thus be required to comply with specific export requirements, very few exporters have chosen to do so. For the purpose of this analysis, we assume the regulatory baseline to be that all SLAB exporters are managing their exports under 40 CFR 266 Subpart G.

The final rule prescribes specific export requ irements for SLAB exports to two groups of countries, i.e., OECD countries (except for Canada and Mexico), and non-OECD countries (including Canada and Mexico). Specifically, the SLAB exports going to OECD countries will

fall under the revised 40 CFR 262 Su bpart H, as discussed in th e section above, while those going to non-OECD countries will be governed under 40 CFR 262 Subpart E, consistent with Universal Waste requirements. 1 While Subparts E and H are diffe rent regulations, except for the exception report requirements, the requirements for SLAB exports are largely similar.

Furthermore, based on the data EPA has collected to date on the amount of SLAB exports to

different countries, we find that only about 0.03% of exports have gone to countries that will fall under 40 CFR 262 Subpart H, i.e., OECD countries except for Canada and Mexico. 2 As such, we assume that the categories of regulatory costs for the SLAB rule are essentially those under 40 CFR 262 Subpart E requirements. This assump tion essentially excludes requirements for the exception report.

1 Exports going to OECD countries are subject to 40 CF R 262 subpart H; exports going to non-OECD countries (including Canada and Mexico) are subject to 262.53, 262.56 (a) (1) through (4) (6) and (b), and 262.57.

2 In 2006 only 90 metric tons (0.03%) out of 269,171 metric tons of SLAB exports from the U.S. went to OECD

countries other than Canada and Mexico, and 4,838 metric tons (1.8%) went to all other countries except Canada

and Mexico. Please see Attachment E for further details.vi • Reading the Rule. Although not actually required by the rule , affected entities are expected to incur first year incrementa l costs associated with reading the rule in order to understand and comply with the new requirements.

• Notification. Under the rule, exporters must no tify EPA of their intent to export SLABs and seek an Acknowledgement of Consent. The notification must contain detailed information with regard to the id entity of the exporter, waste type, means of transport, ultimate destination facil ity, methods of treatment, recovery, and disposal, and destination and transit countries.

• Renotification . Under the rule, when the condi tions specified on the original notification change, the primary exporter must provide EPA with a Renotification of the change. Also, where a shipment cannot be delivered for any reason, the export must renotify EPA of a change in the conditions and obtain a new EPA Acknowledgement of Consent. Based on the 2004 ICR 3 , we assume only a fraction of exporters will be s ubject to this requirement.

• Annual Report . Under the rule, exporters must file detailed annual reports on SLAB exports containing information such as waste types, quantities, frequency, and ultimate destination of all exports, among others.

• Additional Report . Upon request by EPA, an exporter shall furnish to EPA any additional information which a receiving count ry requests in order to respond to a

notification. Based on the 2004 ICR, we a ssume only a fraction of exporters will be subject to this requirement.

• Provide Acknowledgment of Consent to Transporter. An exporter must provide a copy of the EPA Acknowledgement of Consent for the shipment to the transporter transporting the shipment for export.

• Exception Report . An exporter must file an exception report if any of the following occurs: (1) it has not receive d a copy of the movement documentation signed by a transporter stating point of depa rture from the U.S., within 45 days of acceptance of waste, (2) within 90 days from the acceptance of waste, the exporter has not received written confirma tion from the recovery facility that the waste was received, or (3) the waste is returned to the U.S. This requirement appears only in Subpart H (262.87(b)).

• Recordkeeping. Under the rule, the exporter must keep a copy of each notification, EPA Acknowledgment of C onsent, each confirmation of delivery and each annual report, all for a pe riod of at least three years.

3 Supporting Statement for EPA Informat ion Collection Request (ICR) Number 820.09, Hazardous Waste Generator

Standards, October 2004.vii • Movement/Tracking Document. All U.S. parties subj ect to the contract provisions under 262.85 must accompany a movement document with the waste

until it reaches the final rec overy facility. This movement document must include all the information required under 262.83 (for notification) and additional information regarding the shipment of the waste such as transport requirements and transporter information.

• Certificate of Recovery. Under the rule, recovery facilities must provide a certificate of recovery to the exporter and to the comp etent authorities of the countries of export and import. This certi ficate of recovery must be provided as soon as possible, but no later than 30 days after the completion of recovery and no later than one calendar year following receipt of waste. [not in current Subpart H]

Total SLAB Rule Impact:

The costs associated with the SLAB final rule are presented in Exhibit ES-2. As shown in the exhibit, the total incremental cost of the rule during the first year of implementation (i.e., including reading the rule) is estimated to be $0.85 million. This includes $0.78 million for the regulated community and $0.07 million for EPA. Th e total incremental annua l cost after the first year of implementation (i.e., excluding reading the rule) is estimated to be $0.40 million (i.e., $0.85 million – $0.45 million). Of this total, ap proximately $0.33 million is attributable to the regulated community and $0.07 million to EPA.

Exhibit ES-2

First Year Incremental Costs to Affect ed Entities under Final SLAB Rule a

U.S. Exporter Importer Transporter EPA Total

Reading the Regulations b $297,385 $0 $148,823 $0 $446,207

Notification $65,120 $0 $0 $55,880 $121,000

Renotification $2,562 $0 $0 $2,493 $5,056

Annual Report $118,011 $0 $0 $12,808 $130,820

Additional Report $107 $0 $0 $50 $157

Acknowledgment of Consent to Transporter $141,898 $0 $0 $0 $141,898

Recordkeeping $5,416 $0 $0 $0 $5,416

Total $630,499 $0 $148,823 $71,232 $850,553

Notes:
Costs presented in 2007 dollars.

Assumes 1,141 exporters, zero importers, and 571 transporters (s ee data limitations)

a Exhibit may contain rounding error.

b Activity to be conducted in the fi rst year of rule implementation only.viii Combined Costs of OECD/SLAB a nd Import Consent Documentation

The separate cost impact analyses for the OE CD rule and the SLAB rule are combined in Exhibit ES-3 which shows the aggregate impact s for the regulatory changes and impacted parties. Also incorporated into Exhibit ES-3 is the estimated total cost for the documentation necessary to confirm EPA’s consent to import. This is apart from the final OECD/SLAB requirements. Finally, this action revises th e current language in 262.55 and 262.87(b) to require exception reports to be submitted directly to the Director, ICAD, of OECA, EPA Headquarters,

rather than to the EPA “Administrator.” There is no discernable cost impact associated with this requirement.

As mentioned above, the rule also includes new import shipment requirements that will require receiving facilities to in clude EPA’s import consent docume ntation with the manifest for each import. Specifically, upon receipt of the hazar dous waste, the receivi ng facility will match the manifest to the relevant import consent document and submit the documentation confirming EPA’s consent to the import along with a copy of the manifest to EPA’s International Compliance Assurance Division within thirty (30) days of shipme nt delivery. These changes will modify the language in 40 CFR sections 264.71(a)(3), and 265.71(a)(3). These changes will apply to all imports of hazardous waste required to have a RCRA hazardous waste manifest.

The total first year cost impact of the OE CD/SLAB and Import Consent rulemaking is estimated at $0.91 million. Approximately 93.3% of this total is attributable to the SLAB portion, followed by the import consent documenta tion requirements, accounting for 5.1%. The OECD portion of today’s rule accounts for approxim ately 1.6% of the total. After the first year,

the total incremental cost of the rulemaking, omitting the cost of r eading the rule, is estimated at

$0.46 million.

Qualitative Benefits of the OECD/SLAB Rule and Import Consent Documentation

The qualitative benefits of the OECD/SLAB Ru le, include: (1) the U.S. would meet its legal obligations to implement the Amended 200 1 OECD Decision; (2) increased regulatory efficiency; (3) reduced storage cost for hazardou s wastes destined for re covery; (4) reduction of

risks associated with treatment and disposal of hazardous wastes; (5) improved ability to acquire information regarding the quant ities of SLABs exported from the U.S. and the destination facilities to which the SLABs are exported; (6) better tracking of return s and compliance with exception reporting requirements; and (7) better tracking of co mpliance with terms of import

notices.ix Exhibit ES-3

Incremental Costs to Affected Entities under the OECD/SLAB and Import Consent

Documentation Final Rule a, b

Exporter Importer Transporter EPA Total
Reading the Regulations c $298,069 $1,712 $151,220 $0 $451,001

Exemption for Wastes Destined for Laboratory Analysis ($2,060) ($99) ($66) ($1,667) ($3,892)

Certificate of Recovery $1,621 $7,444 $0 $2,306 $11,371

Exchange and Accumulation Recovery Operations $74 $1,926 $0 $170 $2,170

Return of Wastes $0 $22 $0 $29 $51

Notification $65,120 $0 $0 $55,880 $121,000

Renotification $2,562 $0 $0 $2,493 $5,056

Annual Report $118,011 $0 $0 $12,808 $130,820

Additional Report $107 $0 $0 $50 $157

Acknowledgment of Consent to
Transporter $141,898 $0 $0 $0 $141,898

Recordkeeping $5,416 $0 $0 $0 $5,416

Sub Total-OECD/SLAB $630,818 $11,005 $151,154 $72,069 $865,048

EPA Import Consent

Documentation $0 $39,429 $0 $6,699 $46,127

First Year Grand Total: $630,818 $50,434 $151,154 $78,768 $911,176

Annual Total After First

Year: $332,749 $48,721 ($66) $78,768 $460,173

Costs presented in 2007 dollars.

a Exhibit contains rounding error.

b Numbers in parentheses indicate cost savings rather than costs.

c Activity to be conducted in the first year of rule implementation only.

Alternative Cost Boundin g Analysis for SLABs

In addition to our assessment of the fina l rule, we have developed a cost bounding analysis designed to estimate total costs assuming all of the SLABs currently exported to Canada and Mexico were required to comply with 40 CFR 262 Subpart H. In addition, this bounding assessment applies the high-end SLAB export data for Mexico, as presented by the International
Trade Commission (ITC) 4 . While this high-end scenario is not likely to occur under expected practices, we have assessed this scenario to de monstrate what total costs may be under a “worst case” cost assumption.

The cost factors for SLAB exports to Mexico and Canada necessary to comply with the additional requirements of 40 CFR 2 62 Subpart H are described below.

4 For 2006, the ITC estimated total (all categories) U.S. SLAB exports to Mexico at 1,086,446 metric tons.x • Movement/Tracking Document. Each time a U.S. Exporter ships SLABs to an OECD member country other than Canada and Mexico, the exporter is required to complete and submit to the carrier a movement/tracking document.

• Exception Report. An exporter must file an exce ption report if they do not receive the necessary documentation requi red by the rule to confirm transfer of the waste and receipt by the recovery facility within the allotted period of time, or if the waste is returned to the U.S. This requirement appears only in Subpart H (262.87(b)).

• Certificate of Recovery. Under the OECD rule, recove ry facilities must provide a certificate of recovery to the exporter and to the competent authorities of the countries of export and import. This certificate of rec overy must be provided as soon as possible, but no later than 30 days after the completion of recovery and no later than one calendar year following receipt of waste.

The costs associated with complying with th e requirements of 40 CFR 262 Subpart H for all SLABs currently exported to Canada and Mexi co, plus costs associated with the higher SLAB quantities exported to Mexico, as reported by the ITC, are presente d in Exhibit ES-4. As shown

in the exhibit, the tota l incremental cost of this bounding analysis during the first year of implementation (i.e., including reading the rule) is estimated to be $5.59 million. This estimate includes a cost impact of $4.54 million to the regulated community and $1.05 million to EPA. The total incremental annual cost after the first year of implementation (i.e., excluding reading the rule) is estimated to be $3.65 million (i.e ., $5.59 million – $1.94 million), with $2.60 million attributed to the regulated community and $1.05 million for EPA.

Exhibit ES-4

First Year Incremental Costs to Affected En tities under Final SLAB Rule Assuming all Exports to Canada and Mexico Mu st Meet full OECD Requirements a

Exporter Importer Transporter EPA Total
Reading the Regulations b $1,293,532 $0 $646,766 $0 $1,940,297

Notification $283,681 $0 $0 $243,431 $527,112

Renotification $11,143 $0 $0 $10,844 $21,986

Annual Report $513,421 $0 $0 $55,736 $569,157

Additional Report $535 $0 $0 $248 $783

Recordkeeping $23,568 $0 $0 $0 $23,568

Movement/Tracking

Document $1,518,550 $0 $0 $523,783 $2,042,333

Exception Report $15,734 c $0 $0 $2,619 $18,353

Certificate of Recovery $238,307 $0 $0 $209,513 $447,821

Total $3,898,470 $0 $646,766 $1,046,174 $5,591,410

Costs presented in 2007 dollars.

a Exhibit contains rounding error.

b Activity to be conducted in the fi rst year of rule implementation only.

C Total impact attribut able to; (1) exporter does not received a copy of the movement documentation signed by a transporter stating point of departure from the U.S., with in 45 days of acceptance of waste, or, (2 ) within 90 days from the acceptance of waste, the exporter does not received written confirmation from the recovery fa cility that the waste was received. No exceptio n reports assumed due to returns only. Availa ble data do not indicate any return shipme nts to the U.S. of previously exported

SLABs.xi Combined Costs of OECD/SLAB a nd Import Consent Documentation Final Rulemaking – Alternative Cost Bounding Analysis

The alternative bounding analysis cost im pacts including the OECD, SLAB, and Import Consent Documentation requirements are combined in Exhibit ES-5. This exhibit presents aggregate impacts for all impacted parties. The co sts presented in Exhib it ES-5 apply the worst case scenario assumption that all SLABs currently exported to Canada and Mexico would meet 40 CFR 262 Subpart H requirements. In addition, the high-end ITC export data for Mexico are

included, as described above.

The total cost impacts for the OECD, SLAB, and Import Consent Documentation requirements under this cost boundi ng analysis are estimated at $5.65 million for the first year (includes reading the regulation). Of this total, approximately $0.014 million is attributable to the OECD portion, $5.59 million is attributable to the SLAB portion, and $0.046 million is attributable to the Import Consent Documentation requirements. The total incremental first year cost to the regulated community is expected to be about $4.60 million, while the total Federal

cost is estimated at $1.05 million. After the fi rst year, the total annual incremental cost is estimated at $3.71 million, with about $2.66 million at tributable to the regulated community and

$1.05 million of Federal costs.

Exhibit ES-5

Annual Total Incremental Costs to Affected Entities for the OECD/SLAB and Import Consent Documentation Requiremen ts – Cost Bounding Scenario a, b

Exporter Importer Transporter EPA Total Reading the Regulations c $1,294,216 $1,712 $649,163 $0 $1,945,091

Exemption for Wastes Destined for Laboratory Analysis ($2,060) ($99) ($66) ($1,667) ($3,892)

Certificate of Recovery $239,929 $7,444 $0 $211,820 $459,193

Exchange and Accumulation Recovery Operations $74 $1,926 $0 $170 $2,169

Return of Wastes $0 $22 $0 $29 $51

Notification $283,681 $0 $0 $243,431 $527,112

Renotification $11,143 $0 $0 $10,844 $21,986

Annual Report $513,421 $0 $0 $55,736 $569,157

Additional Report $535 $0 $0 $248 $783

Recordkeeping $23,568 $0 $0 $0 $23,568

Movement/Tracking Document $1,518,550 $0 $0 $523,783 $2,042,333

Exception Report $15,734 $0 $0 $2,619 $18,353

Sub Total OECD/SLAB $3,898,790 $11,005 $649,097 $1,047,012 $5,605,903

EPA Import Consent

Documentation $0 $39,429 $0 $6,699 $46,127

Grand Total: $3,898,790 $50,434 $649,097 $1,053,711 $5,652,031

Costs presented in 2007 dollars.

a Exhibit contains rounding error.

b Numbers in parentheses indicate cost savings rather than costs.

c Activity to be conducted in the first year of rule implementation only.

### Table of Contents

1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Background on OECD .................................................................................................. 1

1.2 Need for Regulatory Action on OECD Rule ................................................................ 2

1.3 Background on SLAB Rule .......................................................................................... 3

1.4 Need for Regulatory Action on SLAB Rule ................................................................. 3

1.5 Background on Import Consent Documentation Requirements ................................... 4

1.6 Need for Import Consent Documentation Requirements .............................................. 4

1.7 Organization of Document ............................................................................................ 4

2. OVERVIEW OF REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS ........................................................... 5

2.1 Requirements under the Existing Regulations for Hazardous Wastes Destined for Recovery among OECD Countries ............................................................................... 5

2.1.1 Green-List Wastes .......................................................................................... 5

2.1.2 Amber-List Wastes ........................................................................................ 5

2.1.3 Red-List Wastes ............................................................................................. 7

2.1.4 Wastes Not Listed in the OECD Waste Lists ................................................ 8

2.1.5 Mixtures of Wastes ........................................................................................ 8

2.2 Requirements under Final OECD Rule ......................................................................... 9

2.3 Differences in the Requirements under th e Existing Regulations and Final OECD

Rule ............................................................................................................................. 11

2.4 Existing Regulations for the Export of SLABs ........................................................... 11

2.5 Requirements under the Final SLAB Rule ................................................................. 17

2.6 Differences in the Requirements under th e Existing Regulations and Final SLAB

Rule ............................................................................................................................. 19

2.7 Current Import Documentation Requirements ............................................................ 19

2.8 Final Import Consent Documentation Requirements ................................................. 19

2.9 Differences in the Requirements under th e Existing Regulations and the Final Requirements .............................................................................................................. 19

3. METHODOLOGY AND ASSUMPTIONS ........................................................................ 23

3.1 Labor Rate Assumptions ............................................................................................. 23

3.2 Materials Costs Assumptions ...................................................................................... 24

3.3 Methodology used in As sessing the OECD Rule ....................................................... 25

3.3.1 Hourly Burden Assumptions ....................................................................... 26

3.3.2 Universe Assumptions ................................................................................. 26

3.4 Methodology used in As sessing the SLAB Rule ........................................................ 28

3.4.1 Hourly Burden Assumptions ....................................................................... 29

3.4.2 Universe Assumptions ................................................................................. 30

3.5 Methodology used in Assessing Import Consent Documentation Requirements ....... 31

3.5.1 Hourly Burden Assumptions ....................................................................... 31

3.5.2 Universe Assumptions ................................................................................. 32

4. COSTS AND BENEFITS ....................................................................................................... 33

4.1 Analysis of Costs to Affected Entities from the Final OECD Rule ............................ 33

4.1.1 Reading the Rule .......................................................................................... 33

4.1.2 Exemption for Wastes Destined for Laboratory Analysis ........................... 33

4.1.3 Certificate of Recovery ................................................................................ 34

4.1.4 Exchange and Accumulation Recovery Operations .................................... 35

4.1.5 Return of Wastes .......................................................................................... 364.1.6 Summary of Cost to Affected En tities under the Final OECD Rule ........... 36

4.2 Analysis of Costs to Affected Entities from the Final SLAB Rule ............................ 40

4.2.1 Reading the Rule .......................................................................................... 40

4.2.2 Notification .................................................................................................. 40

4.2.3 Renotification ............................................................................................... 41

4.2.4 Annual Report .............................................................................................. 41

4.2.5 Additional Report ......................................................................................... 42

4.2.6 Provide Acknowledgment of Consent to Transporter ................................. 42

4.2.7 Recordkeeping ............................................................................................. 43

4.2.8 Summary of Cost to Affected En tities under the Final SLAB Rule ............ 43

4.3 Analysis of Costs to Affected Entities from the Final Import Consent Documentation

Provision ..................................................................................................................... 44

4.3.1 U.S. Importer Submission to Transporter .................................................... 44

4.3.2 U.S. Receiving Facility Submission to EPA ................................................ 45

4.3.3 Summary of Costs to Affected Enti ties under the Final Import Consent

Documentation Provision ............................................................................. 45

4.4 Alternative Option Analysis for SLABs ..................................................................... 46

4.4.1 Movement/Tracking Document ................................................................... 46

4.4.2 Exception Report ......................................................................................... 47

4.4.3 Certificate of Recovery ................................................................................ 47

4.4.4 Summary of Costs to Affected Enti ties Under the Alternative Option Analysis for SLABs ..................................................................................... 48

4.5 Combined Costs of OECD/SLAB an d Import Consent Documentation .................... 50

4.6 Qualitative Benefits of the Final Rule ........................................................................ 53

4.7 Limitations of Analysis ............................................................................................... 54

5. OTHER ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS ................................................................ 56

5.1 Executive Order 12866: Regul atory Planning and Review ....................................... 56

5.2 Paperwork Reduction Act ........................................................................................... 57

5.3 Regulatory Flexibility Act .......................................................................................... 57

5.4 Unfunded Mandates Reform Act ................................................................................ 58

5.5 Executive Order 13132: Federalism .......................................................................... 60

5.6 Executive Order 13175: Consultation a nd Coordination with Indian Tribal

Governments ............................................................................................................... 60

5.7 Executive Order 13045: Protection of Child ren from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks .......................................................................................................... 61

5.8 Executive Order 12898: Environmental Justice ......................................................... 61

5.9 Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Re gulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use ........................................................................... 61

5.10 National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act ............................................... 62

Attachment A

Attachment B

Attachment C

Attachment D

Attachment E1 1. INTRODUCTION

The final rule consists of four parts. First, this rule will amend the existing regulation under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) regarding the transboundary movement of hazardous waste among countries belonging to the Orga nization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). R ecently, the OECD adopted Council Decision
C(2001)107/FINAL, and the amendment C(2004)20, concerning the control of transboundary movements of wastes destined for recovery operations. To implement this legally-binding

Decision in the U.S., the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) must modify certain regulations promulgated under the au thority of the RCRA, as amended. In order to do so, EPA is amending the existing regulations at 40 CFR part 262, Subpart H; 262.58(a); 262.58(b);
262.12(a)(2); and 265.12(a)(2). These regulations apply to the proced ural controls governing the U.S. export and import of hazardous wastes dest ined for recovery among OECD Countries.

Second, this rule amends the regulations under RCRA regarding the management of spent lead-acid batteries being reclaimed to require appropriat e notice and consent for those batteries intended for reclamation in a foreign count ry. This rule regulates exports of spent leadacid batteries (SLABs) to OECD countries (e xcept for Canada and Mexico) under the OECD export requirements (49 CFR 262, Subpart H) while regulating SLAB exports to other countries under 40 CFR 262, Subpart E requirements. Under 40 CFR Part 266, Subpart G, generators of SLABs are currently exempt from Part 262 hazardous waste manifesting and export requirements. SLABs may also be managed as Universal Wastes under 40 CFR 272 (“Universal Waste Regulations”), under which export requirements apply.

Third, this rule revises the current langua ge in 262.55 and 262.87(b) that will require exception reports to be submitted directly to the Director, International Compliance and
Assurance Division (ICAD), of the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA), EPA Headquarters, rather than to the EPA “Administrator.”

Fourth, this rule amends the hazardous wast e import requirements to require that upon import shipment delivery, U.S. receiving faciliti es match the RCRA hazardous waste manifest to the relevant import notice consent documentations. This documentation must then be submitted to EPA by the U.S. receiving faci lity along with the RCRA manifest within thirty days of import shipment delivery.

This economic assessment examines the incr emental cost impacts of the final rules separately and together. That is, we will ag gregate the economic impacts of the rules after assessing their impacts as separa te rulemakings. This assessment also characterizes the expected

benefits of the rules, as well as other admi nistrative requirements established by statute or

executive order. There is no discernable cost impact associated with the address change requirement for exception reports; therefore, this change is no t discussed further in this

assessment.

1.1 Background on OECD Rule

The OECD was charted to assist Member Countries in achieving high economic growth, employment, and a rising standard of livi ng while ensuring that human health and the environment are protected. Presently, there ar e 30 Member Countries of the OECD, including2 the U.S. 5

On March 30, 1992, the OECD adopted Counc il Decision C(92)39/FINAL on the control of transboundary movements of wastes destined for recovery operations. The U.S. supported

this Decision and therefore, it is le gally binding upon the U.S. Government.

To implement this legally-binding OECD C ouncil Decision in the U.S., EPA, under the authority of RCRA, promulgated the Imports and Exports of Hazardous Waste Final Rule on April 12, 1996 (61 FR 16290). This rule codified the requirements of Council Decision C(92)39/FINAL, as implemented in the U.S., at 40 CFR part 262, Subpart H.

Recently, Council Decision C(92)39/FINAL wa s revised to improve some of its provisions and enhance harmonizati on with the Basel Convention. This revision resulted in the adoption of Council De cision C(2001)107/FINAL. 6 Finally, in 2003, C(2004)20 amended the 2001 decision by updating the OECD wast e lists in Appendices 3 and 4.

1.2 Need for Regulatory Action on OECD Rule

In order to implement OECD Council Decision C(2001)107/FINAL, EPA needs to amend the regulations at 40 CFR part 262, Subpart H. In addition, EPA is taking this opportunity to make technical corrections a nd clarifications to the regulations at 40 CFR part 262; 262.58(a); 262.58(b); 262.12(a)(2); and 265.12(a)(2 ). EPA's regulatory changes do not increase the scope of hazardous wastes subject to U.S. export and import controls. However, they modify the procedural controls governing their export and import when shipped for recovery among OECD Countries. The regulator y changes apply only to U.S. exports and imports of hazardous waste destined for recove ry operations among OECD Countries, except for Canada and Mexico. Hazardous waste shipments to Canada and Mexico will continue to move under the current bilateral ag reements and regulations.

The U.S. Government has entered into a legally-binding commitment with the other OECD Countries to implement the Council Decisi on virtually as writte n. Deviation from the regulatory scheme articulated in the Decision might preclude the U.S. from implementing the

Decision and, therefore, from satis fying its international commitments. Modifications to the rule could defeat the goal of achieving an internationally consistent re gime to control the import and export of hazardous wastes de stined for recovery.

EPA believes that the continued movement and recovery of hazardous wastes is environmentally and economically beneficial. The U.S., therefore, encourages environmentally sound recovery of waste, particularly hazardous wastes, as an alternative to disposal. The Agency believes that the import and export of wastes among OECD Countries for purposes of recovery serves the public inte rest by making waste manageme nt facilities in the OECD available to waste generators in the U.S. and other OECD Countries, thereby providing

additional assurance that wastes amenable to recovery operations will be managed in an environmentally sound manner. Failure of the U.S. to implement the Decision in the form

5 OECD Member Countries consist of: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Korea, Luxembourg, Mexico, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Slovak Republic, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, United Kingdom,

and U.S.

6 Available at: http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/osw/internat/5-21-02.pdf

.3 approved by the OECD Countries could thwart this objective.

1.3 Background on SLAB Rule

Currently, spent lead acid battery exporters are exempt from any export requirements when managed under 40 CFR 266 Subpart G, whic h contains the SLAB regulations. Although SLABs may also be managed under 40 CFR 273 as Universal Waste and thus be required to comply with specific export requirements, ve ry few exporters have chosen to do so.

There are two major internat ional agreements that expr essly address the export of

SLABs, the Basel Convention on the Contro l of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal (Basel Conventio n) and OECD’s Amended 2001 Decision. The

Basel Convention is a multilate ral international ag reement that governs the transboundary

movement of hazardous waste. The Basel Conve ntion includes a requirement for notice and written consent for transboundary movements of hazardous waste between trading countries.

SLABs are identified as a hazardous waste under th e Basel Convention and are therefore, subject to the notification and consent requirements. The OECD’s Amended 2001 Decision regulates the transboundary movements of hazardous wastes destined for recycli ng within OECD member

countries. Whole and crushed SLABs are s ubject to the OECD’s Amended 2001 Decision hazardous waste requirements.

The final rule prescribes specific export requ irements for SLAB exports to two groups of countries, i.e., OECD countries (except for Canada and Mexico), and non-OECD countries (including Canada and Mexico). Specifically, the SLAB exports going to OECD countries will fall under the revised 40 CFR 262 Subpart H, whil e those going to non-OECD countries will be governed under 40 CFR 262 Subpart E, consistent with Universal Waste requirements. While Subparts E and H are different regulations, the requirements for SLAB exports are generally

similar. Furthermore, based on the data EPA has collected to date on the amount of SLAB exports to different countries, we estimate that about 0.03% of exports have gone to countries that will fall under 40 CFR 262 Subpart H, i.e., OECD countries except for Canada and Mexico
(see Attachment E).

1.4 Need for Regulatory Action on SLAB Rule

EPA has developed this final rule in order to ensure that SL ABs are sent to countries, and

reclamation facilities in those countries, that can manage the SLABs in an environmentally sound manner. These changes to SLAB requirement s are needed to: (1) re duce potential risk to human health and the environment, including potential risk from the transboundary movement of pollution from other countries to the U.S.; and (2) harmonize them with international practice and with RCRA universal waste regulations for th e export of SLABs, thus resulting in a more uniform practice for notificati on and consent for SLABs.

EPA believes that the risks to human health and the environment de rived from improper recycling of SLABs are of a major concern. Ther e are inherent human health and environmental hazards associated with SLABs being exporte d without the knowledge and consent of the receiving countries and/or SLABs being exported to countries with substandard smelting

infrastructures. The notification and consent requirements will help ensure that SLABs are exported to countries with the capacity to hand le them in an environmentally sound manner and4 to aid countries with tracking the movements a nd life-cycle management of SLABs inside their

borders.

1.5 Background on Import Consent Documentation Requirements

Under the current regulations, imports of hazardous waste ar e required to be accompanied by a hazardous waste manifest from the initial point of import to the destination facility. The destination facility is required to submit a copy of the completed manifest to EPA. However, there is currently no requirement to in clude any verification of EPA’s consent to the import with the manifest during transit, or with the submission to EPA.

1.6 Need for the Import Consent Documentation Requirements

EPA currently requires that U.S. receiving f acilities submit a copy of the hazardous waste manifest to document individual import shipments. This requirement was established, at least in part, to confirm that the import shipment complie d with the terms specified in the foreign notice to which EPA consented. However, it has pr oven difficult for EPA to match an individual manifest against approved notices of intent to ex port from a foreign country. This has occurred in part because a given destinati on facility in the U.S. could be receiving the same waste from the same foreign exporter under more than one approved notice. Adding the requirement that the import consent documentation be sent along with th e manifest will enable EPA to clearly match the individual import shipments against the appr oved foreign notice. In addition, notices can cover up to twelve months of imports, so severa l import shipments may be matched to the same notice. This requirement will help EPA facilitate the oversight of such imports and verify that the actual management of the import shipment co mplies with the terms specified in the foreign notice to which EPA consented from entry into the United States to receipt at the destination facility.

1.7 Organization of Document

This remainder of this document is organized as follows:

• Each Chapter first discusses the OECD Rule, then the SLAB Rule, and then the import consent documentation requirements.

• Chapter 2 presents an overview of the regulatory requirement s under the existing regulations. It also identifies the differences in the requirements under the existing regulations and the final rules.

• Chapter 3 describes the cost met hodologies and assumptions.

• Chapter 4 examines the cost impacts and benefits of the final rules.

• Chapter 5 briefly discusses other administ rative requirements established by
statute or executive order (e .g., Regulatory Flexibility Ac t, environmental justice),

within the context of the final rules.5 2. OVERVIEW OF REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS

This chapter provides an overview of the appl icable regulatory requi rements. Sections 2.1 through 2.3 discuss the regulatory requirement s under the existing regulations for hazardous wastes destined for recovery am ong OECD countries, the regulato ry requirements under the final

OECD rule, and the differences between the two, respectively. Sections 2.4 through 2.6 discuss the regulatory requirements unde r the existing regulations fo r the export of SLABs, the regulatory requirements under the final SLAB rule, and the differences between the two, respectively. Sections 2.6 th rough 2.8 discuss the existing import documentation requirements, the final import consent documentation require ments, and the differences between the two, respectively.

2.1 Requirements under the Existing Regulations for Hazardous Wastes Destined for Recovery among OECD Countries

The existing regulations at 40 CFR part 262, Subpart H codify the requirements of OECD Council Decision C(92)39/FINAL, as implemented in the U.S. In particular, they establish a three-tiered system for the transboundary moveme nt of hazardous wastes destined for recovery operations among OECD Countries , except Canada and Mexico. 7 Under this system, the level of control applied to movements of hazardous wastes is indicated by assignment of the waste to a green, amber, or red list and by U.S. national procedures. 8 The waste lists are those in Appendices 3, 4, and 5 to the OECD Council Deci sion, and are incorporated by reference in 40

CFR 262.89(e).

2.1.1 Green-List Wastes

The wastes on the green list do not typically exhibit hazardous characteristics and are deemed to pose negligible risks to human health and the environment. These wastes are subject to existing controls normally applied to commer cial transactions. Such controls may include bills of lading, customs declarations, internationa l insurance, or other controls. Note, however, that green-list wastes that are considered hazardous under U.S. na tional procedures are subject to the amber control procedure.

2.1.2 Amber-List Wastes

The wastes on the amber list usually exhibit one or more hazardous characteristic(s) and may pose a risk to human health and the environm ent. These wastes are subject to the amber control procedure requirements descri bed in the following paragraphs.

7 Note that, for purposes of 40 CFR part 262, subpart H, Canada and Mexico are considered OECD Countries only for the purpose of transit. Exports and imports of hazardous wastes destined for recovery to or from Canada and Mexico are subject to th e requirements of 40 CFR part 262, subparts E and F.

8 As provided in 40 CFR 262.80, a waste is considered hazardous unde r U.S. national procedures if it meets the

Federal definition of hazardous waste in 40 CFR 261.3 and is subject to either the Federal manifesting requirements

at 40 CFR part 262, subpart B; the universal waste management standards of 40 CFR part 273; or State requirements analogous to 40 CFR part 273.6 Contracts

Transboundary movements of hazardous wastes subject to amber control procedures may only occur under the terms of a va lid written contract, chain of contracts, or an equivalent arrangement between facilities controlled by the same legal entity. Such c ontracts or equivalent arrangements must be executed by the exporter and the owner or operator of the recovery facility, and must specify responsibilities for each.

Contracts or equivalent arrangements mu st include information specified at 40 CFR 262.85, including provisions for alternate management or re-export of the waste if it cannot be managed as planned and financial guarantees for su ch alternate management if so required by the competent authorities of any concerned countr y, in accordance with applicable national or

international laws. 9

Notification and Consent

Prior to commencement of each transboundary movement, the exporter must provide written notification to the compet ent authority of the country of export, who in turn will notify the competent authorities of all other concerne d OECD Countries, to allow for consent or objection of the proposed movement. This notif ication must include all of the information

identified in 40 CFR 262.83(e). Upon receipt of the co mplete notification, the competent authority of the importing country must issue an Acknowledgment of Recei pt to the competent

authorities of the countri es of export and transit. 10

The competent authorities of the importing and tr ansit countries must consent or object to the shipment within a specified time frame. If the competent authorities of all the relevant OECD importing and transit coun tries provide written consent within this time frame, the shipment may proceed, as specified in the notification, immediatel y after all necessary consents are received. However, if the competent author ities of the importing and transit countries do not notify in writing within the specified time frame that the request has be en denied, then tacit consent is deemed to be granted, and the shipment may proceed as specified in the notification. If a transit country denies c onsent, the proposed shipment must be re-routed and a new notification must be submitted to the competen t authority of the new transit country. The shipment may not commence until that OECD Count ry tacitly or expressly consents to the shipment.

9 Note that the U.S. does not require such financial guara ntees. However, some OECD Countries do. It is the responsibility of the exporter to ascertain and comply with such requirements.

10 In this context, "transit country" refers only to a tran sit country that is a member of the OECD, including Canada

and Mexico.7 Movement/Tracking Document

Each shipment of wastes must be accomp anied by a movement/tracking document from initiation of the shipment until it reaches the fina l recovery facility, incl uding cases in which the waste is stored and/or exchanged by the consignee prior to shipment to the final recovery facility, as specified. This movement/tracking document must include all information required under 40

CFR 262.84(b). Each person that has physical cust ody of the waste from the time the shipment

commences until it arrives at the r ecovery facility (e.g., transporter, consignee, owner/operator of recovery facility) must sign the movement/tracking document.

Within three working days of the receipt of the wastes by the recove ry facility, the owner or operator of the recovery faci lity must send a signed copy of the completed movement/tracking document to the exporter and to the competent author ities of the countries of export, transit, and import. The recovery facility must retain the original movement/tracking document for three

years.

Exchange and Accumulation Recovery Operations

For transboundary movements of wastes des tined for exchange (R12) or accumulation (R13) recovery operations prior to submissi on to R1-R11 recovery operations (e.g., solvent reclamation, regeneration of acids) 11 , the notification of intent to export must indicate that exchange or storage of the waste will take pl ace prior to delivery of the waste to the R1-R11 recovery facility (i.e., the final recovery facility). Note that the R1-R11 recovery facility, not the R12/R13 recovery facility, is th e entity responsible for sending a signed copy of the completed movement/tracking document to the exporter and to the competent authoritie s of the countries of export, transit, and import.

Re-Export to a Third Country

Re-export of wastes subject to the amber c ontrol procedures from the importing country to a third country may occur only af ter an exporter in the country of import provides notification to and obtains consent of the competent authorities in the third countr y, the initial exporting country, and new transit countries. The competent authorities of the initial exporting country, as well as the competent authorities of all other conc erned countries, must c onsent or object to the shipment within a specified time frame. If th e competent authorities of all the relevant OECD importing and transit countries prov ide written consent within this time frame, the shipment may proceed, as specified in the notif ication, immediately af ter all necessary cons ents are received. However, if the competent authorities of the importing and transit c ountries do not notify in writing within the specified time frame that the request has been denied, then tacit consent is deemed to be granted, and the shipment may proceed as specified in the notification.

2.1.3 Red-List Wastes

The wastes on the red list usually exhibit on e or more hazardous characteristic(s) and may pose a risk to human health and the enviro nment. These wastes are subject to red-list control procedures.

11 Refer to 40 CFR 262.81(k) for the definitions of recovery operations R1 through R11.8 The red control procedure requirements are similar to the amber control procedure requirements:

• A written contract, chain of contracts, or equivalent arrangement between facilities controlled by the same legal entity.

• Written notification to the competent authorities of all concerned OECD

Countries.

• Prior consent of the impor ting and transit countries.

• A movement/tracking document accompanying the shipment.

However, unlike amber-list wastes, red-list wa stes cannot be shipped unless all necessary consents are obtained in writing. That is, tacit consent is not permissible.

2.1.4 Wastes Not Listed in the OECD Waste Lists

Wastes not yet assigned to a list are eligible for transboundary movement under the following conditions:

• Wastes that are considered hazardous unde r U.S. national procedures are subject to the red control procedure.

• Wastes that are not cons idered hazardous under U.S. national procedures may move as though they app eared on the green list.

2.1.5 Mixtures of Wastes

In instances in which a waste is sufficiently contaminated or mixed with another waste, the following rules apply:

• Green-list wastes that are sufficiently contaminated or mixed with amber-list

wastes, such that the waste or waste mi xture is considered hazardous under U.S. national procedures, are subject to the amber control procedure.

• Green-list wastes that are sufficiently cont aminated or mixed with red-list wastes,

such that the waste or waste mixture is considered hazardous under U.S. national procedures, are subject to the red control procedure.

• Amber-list wastes that are sufficiently contaminated or mixed with red-list

wastes, such that the waste or waste mi xture is considered hazardous under U.S. national procedures, are subject to the red control procedure.9 2.2 Requirements under the Final OECD Rule

The final rule amends the regulations at 40 CFR part 262, Subpart H in order to implement OECD Council Decision C(2001)107/FI NAL and the amendment, C(2004)20, in the U.S. A description of the regulatory changes und er the final rule is provided in the following paragraphs.

Number of Control Levels

Consistent with OECD Council Decision C( 2001)107/FINAL, the final rule reduces the number of control levels from three (i.e., green, amber, and red) to two (i.e., green and amber). The level of control applied to transboundary movements of hazardous wastes is indicated by assignment of the waste to a green or amber list and by U.S. national procedures. The waste lists are those in Appendices 3 and 4 to the OECD Decision, and are incorporated by reference under

the rule.

OECD Waste Lists

The final rule incorporates, by reference, the “List of Wastes Subject to the Green

Control Procedure" and the "Lis t of Wastes Subject to the Am ber Control Procedure," as set forth in Appendix 3 and Appendix 4, respectivel y, to OECD Council Decision amendment to
C(2001)107/FINAL, C(2004)20. These waste lists are harmonized w ith the Basel Convention. Specifically, the “List of Wastes Subject to the Green Control Procedure" is harmonized with the

list of wastes in Annex IX of the Basel Convent ion. The “List of Wastes Subject to the Amber

Control Procedure" is harmonized with the list of wastes in Annexes II and VIII of the Basel

Convention.

Wastes Not Listed in the OECD Waste Lists

The final rule incorporates new provisions to clarify that wastes destined for recovery operations that have not yet been assigned to Appendices 3 or 4 to OECD Council Decision
C(2001)107/FINAL, and the amendment C(2004)20, ar e eligible for transboundary movements under the following conditions:

• Wastes that are considered hazardous unde r U.S. national procedures are subject to the amber control procedure.

• Wastes that are not cons idered hazardous under U.S. national procedures may move as though they app eared on the green list.

Mixtures of Wastes

The final rule incorporates new provisions to cl arify the status of mi xtures of wastes for which no individual entry exists in the OECD Waste Lists:

• A mixture of two or more green-list wa stes is subject to the green control procedure.10 • A mixture of a green-list waste and more than a de minimis amount of an amberlist waste, or a mixture of two or more amber-list wastes, is subject to the amber control procedure when the resulting mixture is consid ered hazardous under U.S. national procedures.

Exemption for Wastes Destined for Laboratory Analysis

Under the final rule, shipments of amber-list wastes are exempt from the amber control procedure if they are explicitly destined for laboratory analysis to assess their physical or

chemical characteristics or to determine their suitability for re covery operations. The amount of such waste must be determined by the minimu m quantity reasonably needed to adequately perform the analysis in each pa rticular case, but not more than 25 kg. Analytical samples must be appropriately packaged and labeled. These sh ipments must be carried out under the terms of applicable international transpor t agreements. In addition, any tr ansit of such wastes through a non-OECD Country is subject to international law and to all applicable national laws and regulations. Where a competent au thority of a country of import or country of export is required to be informed under its domestic legislation, the exporter must inform that authority of a transboundary shipment of a laboratory sample.

Certificate of Recovery

Under the final rule, recovery facilities must provide a certificate of recovery to the exporter and to the competent aut horities of the countries of export and import. This certificate of recovery must be provided as soon as possi ble, but no later than 30 days after the completion of recovery and no later than one cale ndar year following receipt of waste.

Exchange and Accumulation Recovery Operations

Under the final rule, if wastes are destined for an R12/R13 recovery facility, exporters

also must indicate in the notific ation the name, address, and te lephone and telefax number of the recovery facility or facilitie s where the subsequent R1-R11 re covery operation takes place or may take place.

Within three days of the receipt of the wa stes by the R12/R13 r ecovery facility, the facility must return a signed copy of the moveme nt/tracking document to the exporter and to the competent authorities of the countri es of export and import. The fac ility must retain the original of the movement/tracking document for three years.

As soon as possible, but no later than 30 days after the completion of the R12/R13 recovery operation and no later than one calendar year following the receipt of the waste, the R12/R13 recovery facility must send a certificate of recovery to the exporter and to the competent authorities of the c ountries of export and import.

When an R12/R13 recovery facility delivers wastes for recovery to an R1-R11 recovery facility located in the country of import, it must obtain as soon as possible, but no later than one calendar year following delivery of the waste, a certification from the R1-R11 facility that recovery of the wastes at that facility has been completed. The R12/R13 facility must promptly transmit the applicable certification to the comp etent authorities of the countries of import and export, identifying the transboundary shipme nts to which the certification pertain.11 When an R12/R13 recovery facility delivers wastes for recovery to an R1-R11 recovery facility located in the initial country of export or in a third country other than the initial country of export, a new notif ication is required.

Return of Wastes

Under the final rule, when a transboundary movement of wastes to which concerned OECD Countries have given consent cannot be completed in accordance w ith the terms of the contract, and alternative arrangements cannot be made to recover these wastes in an environmentally sound manner in the U.S., the U.S. importer must inform EPA of the need to return the shipment. In addition, EPA must inform the competent authoritie s of the countries of export and transit, mentioning in particular the reason fo r returning the waste. The return should take place within 90 days from the time EPA info rms the country of export, or such other period of time as the concerned OECD Countries agree.

2.3 Differences in the Requirements und er the Existing Regulations and the

Final OECD Rule

Exhibit 1 summarizes the primary differences in the requirements under the existing regulations at 40 CFR part 262, Subpart H and the final rule. It also qualitatively identifies the impacts associated with the regulatory changes. These impacts are further examined in Chapters

3 and 4 of this document. 12

2.4 Existing Regulations for the Export of SLABs

SLABs typically exhibit the toxicity characteri stic for lead and are therefore a hazardous

waste under RCRA. Under 40 CFR Part 266, Subpart G, generators of SLABs are currently exempt from Part 262 hazardous waste manifesting and export requirements. Although SLABs may also be managed under 40 CFR 273 as Universa l Waste and thus be required to comply with specific export requirements, very few exporters have chosen to do so.

12 The final rule also clarifies language in 262.(a) and 262(b) of Subpart E to avoid any unintended inconsistencies with Subpart H, and to reduce confusion for U.S. exporters and importers. Additionally, the final rule amends 264.12(a)(2) and 265.12(a)(b) by, among other things, requiring owners or operators of recovery facilities to submit a certificate of recovery. Since in the final rule, the same requirement regarding a certificate of recovery is added into Subpart H, the certificate of recovery will be discussed in the context of Subpart H.Exhibit 1Primary Differences in the Requirements under the Existing Regulations and the Final OECD RuleExisting RegulationsFinal RuleQualitative Impacts of the Final RuleNumber of Control LevelsThe level of control applied to transboundarymovements of hazardous wastes is indicatedby assignment of the waste to a green, amber,or red list and by U.S. national procedures.Three levels of control:-- Green Control Procedure.Wastes aresubject to the same level of control asnormal transboundary movements.-- Amber Control Procedure.Wastesare subject to the followingrequirements:- Written contract, chain of contracts,or equivalent arrangement- Written notification to the competentauthorities of the concerned countries- Prior written or tacit consent of thecompetent authorities of the importingand transit countries- A movement/tracking documentaccompanying the shipment-- Red Control Procedure.The redcontrol procedure requirements aresimilar to the amber control procedurerequirements. However, tacit consentisnotpermissible.The level of control applied to transboundary movementsof hazardous wastes is indicated by assignment of thewaste to a green or amber list and by U.S. nationalprocedures.The number of levels of control are reduced from three totwo:-- Green-- Amber§262.89(e)Costs associated with reading the rule to understand andcomply with the change.Under existing requirements, U.S. exporters had to storered-list waste while waiting for written consent. Under thefinal rule, former red-list wastes are subject to the ambercontrol procedure, which allows tacit consent. Thus, U.S.exporters will likely store these wastes for shorter periodsof time before export, reducing their storage cost.12Existing RegulationsFinal RuleQualitative Impacts of the Final RuleOECD Waste ListsThe existing regulations incorporate byreference the waste lists in Appendices 3, 4,and 5 to the OECD Council DecisionC(92)39/FINAL.The final rule incorporates, by reference, the waste lists inAppendices 3 and 4 to OECD Council Decisionamendment C(2001)20/FINAL. These waste lists areharmonized with the Basel Convention.§262.83(c)Costs associated with reading the rule to understand andcomply with the change.This change will not affect cost associated with exportsand imports because all hazardous waste exports andimports are currently subject toeither amber or red controlprocedures. Under the final rule, all hazardous wasteexports and imports will be subject to the amber controlprocedure, which is the same as the red control procedure,except for the tacit consent.(Note that exporters mayexperience a savings associatedwith storage of former redlist waste. These savings are addressed under the "Numberof Control Procedures" section of this table.)Wastes Not Listed in the OECD Waste ListsWastes not yet assigned to a list are eligible fortransboundary movement under the followingconditions:-- Wastes that are considered hazardousunder U.S. national procedures aresubject to the red control procedure.-- Wastes that are not consideredhazardous under U.S. nationalprocedures may move as though theyappeared on the green list.Wastes not yet assigned to a list are eligible fortransboundary movements under the following conditions:-- Wastes that are considered hazardous under U.S.national procedures are subject to the ambercontrol procedure.-- Wastes that are not considered hazardous underU.S. national procedures may move as thoughthey appeared on the green list.(No Red List)Costs associated with reading the rule to understand andcomply with the change.This change will not affect cost associated with exportsand imports because all hazardous waste exports andimports are currently subject toeither amber or red controlprocedures. Under the final rule, all hazardous wasteexports and imports will be subject to the amber controlprocedure, which is the same as the red control procedure,except for the tacit consent.(Note that exporters mayexperience a savings associatedwith storage of former redlist waste. These savings are addressed under the "Numberof Control Procedures" section of this table.)13Existing RegulationsFinal RuleQualitative Impacts of the Final RuleMixtures of WastesIn instances in which a waste is sufficientlycontaminated or mixed with another waste, thefollowing rules apply:-- A mixture of a green-list waste withan amber-list waste is subject to theamber control procedure.-- A mixture of a green-list waste with ared-list waste is subject to the redcontrol procedure.-- A mixture of an amber-list waste witha red-list waste is subject to the redcontrol procedure.For mixtures of wastes, the following conditions apply:-- A mixture of two or more green-list wastes issubject to the green control procedure.-- A mixture of a green-list waste and more than ade minimisamount of an amber-list waste issubject to the amber control procedure.-- A mixture of two or more amber-list wastes issubject to the amber control procedure.§262.82(a)(3)Costs associated with reading the rule to understand andcomply with the change.This change will not affect cost associated with exportsand imports because all hazardous waste exports andimports are currently subject toeither amber or red controlprocedures. Under the final rule, all hazardous wasteexports and imports will be subject to the amber controlprocedure, which is the same as the red control procedure,except for the tacit consent.(Note that exporters mayexperience a savings associatedwith storage of former redlist waste. These savings are addressed under the "Numberof Control Procedures" section of this table.)Exemption for Wastes Destinedfor Laboratory AnalysisAmber-list and red-list wastes destined forlaboratory analysis are subject to the amber orred control procedures,as applicable. Theseprocedures include the following requirements:-- Contract-- Notification-- Consent-- Movement/Tracking documentAmber-list wastes explicitly destined for laboratoryanalysis are exempt from amber control procedures, ifspecified conditions are met. In such cases, the greencontrol procedure applies.§262.82(g)Under the existing regulations, amber-list and red-listwastes are subject to the information collectionrequirements of the amber or red control procedure, asapplicable. Under the final rule, amber-list and former redlist wastes are exempt from those information collectionrequirements. Thus, U.S. exporters and importers willexperience cost savings.Certificate of RecoveryNo existing requirement.Recovery facilities must provide a certificate of recovery tothe exporter and to the competent authorities of thecountries of export and import.§262.83(e)Costs associated with preparing and maintaining a copy thecertificate of recovery for each hazardous waste shipment.14Existing RegulationsFinal RuleQualitative Impacts of the Final RuleExchange and Accumulation Recovery OperationsFor amber-list and red-list wastes destined forR12/R13 recovery operations prior tosubmission to R1-R11 recovery operations, thenotification must indicate that exchange orstorage of the waste will take place prior todelivery of the waste to the R1-R11 recoveryfacility (i.e., the final recovery facility).The following additional requirements apply totransboundary movements of wastes destined for R12/R13recovery operations: §262.82(f)-- Exporters must indicate in the notification therecovery facility where the subsequent R1-R11recovery operation takes place or may take place.-- The R12/R13 recovery facility must return asigned copy of the movement/tracking documentto the exporter and to the competent authorities ofthe countries of export and import. The facilitymust retain the original of the movement/trackingdocument for three years.-- After the completion of the R12/R13 recoveryoperation, the R12/R13 recovery facility mustsend a certificate of recovery to the exporter andto the competent authorities of the countries ofexport and import.-- When an R12/R13 recovery facility deliverswastes for recovery to an R1-R11 recoveryfacility located in the country of import, it mustobtain a certificate of recovery from the R1-R11facility. The R12/R13 facility must promptlytransmit the certificate to the competentauthorities of the countries of import and export.-- When an R12/R13 recovery facility deliverswastes for recovery to an R1-R11 recoveryfacility located in the initial country of export orin a third country other than the initial country ofexport, a new notification is required.Costs associated with: (1) indicating the subsequent R1-R11 recovery facility in the notification, (2) providing andmaintaining a signed copy of the movement/trackingdocument, (3) preparing and providing a certificate ofrecovery for R12/R13 recovery operations, and (4)providing and maintaining a copy of the certificate ofrecovery for R1-R11 recovery operations.Return of WastesNo existing requirement.When a transboundary movement of wastes subject to theAmber control procedures cannot be completed inaccordance with the terms of thecontract or the consent(s)and alternative arrangements cannot be made to recover thewaste in an environmentally sound manner in the countryCosts associated with informing the competent authoritiesof the countries of export and transit about the return ofwastes.1516Existing RegulationsFinal RuleQualitative Impacts of the Final Ruleof import, the waste must be returned to the country ofexport or re-exported to a third country., The U.S. importermust inform EPA of the need to return the shipment andEPA must inform the competent authorities of thecountries of export and transit.§262.82(d)17 2.5 Requirements under the Final SLAB Rule

EPA is amending the RCRA regulations for SLABs specified in 40 CFR Part 266 Subpart G by requiring notification and consent for the export of SLABs. This action prescribes specific export requirements for SLAB exports to two gro ups of countries, i.e., OECD countries (except
for Canada and Mexico), and non-OECD count ries (including Canada and Mexico). Specifically, the SLAB exports going to OECD countries will fall under the revised 40 CFR 262 Subpart H, while those going to non-OECD countries will be governed under 40 CFR 262 Subpart E, consistent with Un iversal Waste requirements.

While Subparts E and H are different regulati ons the requirements for SLAB exports are largely similar. Furthermore, based on the da ta EPA has collected to date on the amount of SLAB exports to different countries, we find th at only about 0.03% of exports have gone to countries that will fall under 40 CFR 262 Subpart H, i.e., OECD countries except for Canada and

Mexico. 13 The small number of shipments going to OECD countries except for Canada and Mexico will follow the new requireme nts described in Section 2.2.

The vast majority of SLAB exports will be subject to 40 CFR 262 Subpart E, consistent with Universal Waste requirements. A descripti on of the regulatory requirements that SLAB exports will now be subject to is provided in the following paragra phs. Each paragraph identifies whether this requirement is part of 40 CFR 262 Subpart E, 40 CFR 262 S ubpart H, or both.

Notification

Under the final rule, exporters must notify EPA of their intent to e xport SLABs and seek an Acknowledgement of Consent. The notification mu st contain detailed information with regard to the identity of the exporter, waste type, m eans of transport, ultimate destination facility, methods of treatment, recovery, and disposal, and destination and transit countries. This requirement appears both in Subpart E (262.53(a)-(b)) and Subpart H (262.83(b)&(e))

Renotification

Under the final rule, when th e conditions specified on the original notific ation change, the primary exporter must provide EPA with a renotification of the change. Also, where a shipment cannot be delivered for any reason, the export must renotify EPA of a change in the

conditions and obtain a new EPA Ac knowledgement of Consent. Th is requirement appears both in Subpart E (262.53(c)) a nd Subpart H (262.83(b)).

Annual Report

Under the final rule, exporters must file detailed annual repo rts on SLAB exports containing information such as wa ste types, quantities, frequency, and ultimate destination of all exports, among others. This requirement a ppears both in 262.83(d)(14) and 262.85(e).

13 In 2006 only 90 metric tons (0.03%) out of 269,171 metric tons of SLAB exports from the U.S. went to OECD

countries other than Canada and Mexico, and 4,838 metric t ons (1.8%) went to all other countries except Canada

and Mexico. Please see Attachment E for further details.18 Additional Report

Upon request by EPA, an exporter shall furnish to EPA any additional information which a receiving country requests in order to respond to a notification. This requirement appears both in Subpart E (262.53(d)) and Subpa rt H (262.83(e)(12), 262.85(e)).

Provide Acknowledgment of Consent to Transporter

Under the final rule, an exporter must provi de a copy of the EPA Acknowledgement of Consent for the shipment to the transporter transporti ng the shipment for e xport to a non-OECD country, Canada, or Mexico. This is consiste nt with Subpart E (262.52( c)) but is separately

included in the new Item 6 in the table in Subpart G (266.80(a)).

Exception Report

An exporter must file an exception report if any of the following occurs: (1) it has not received a copy of the movement documenta tion signed by a transpor ter stating point of departure from the U.S., within 45 days of acceptance of waste, (2) within 90 days from the acceptance of waste, the exporter has not rece ived written confirmation from the recovery facility that the waste was receiv ed, or (3) the waste is returned to the U.S.. This requirement appears only in Subpart H (262.87(b)).

Recordkeeping

Under the final rule, the exporter must keep a copy of each notification, EPA Acknowledgment of Consent, each confirmation of delivery and each annual report, all for a period of at least 3 years. Th is requirement appears both in Subpart E (262.57) and Subpart H
(262.87(c)).

Movement/Tracking Document

All U.S. parties subject to the contract pr ovisions under 262.85 must ensure a movement document accompanies the waste shipment until it reaches the final recovery facility. This

movement document must include all the info rmation required under 262.83 (for notification) and additional information regarding the shipment of the waste such as transport requirements and transporter information. This requ irement appears in Subpart H (262.84).

Certificate of Recovery

Under the final rule, recovery facilities must provide a certificate of recovery to the exporter and to the competent aut horities of the countries of export and import. This certificate of recovery must be provided as soon as possi ble, but no later than 30 days after the completion of recovery and no later than one calendar year following receipt of waste. This requirement is part of the OECD Rule (262.83(e)) and is not in the current Subpart H.19 2.6 Differences in the Requirements und er the Existing Regulations and the

Final SLAB Rule

It is assumed that the vast majority of all SLAB exports are currently not subject to any export requirements. Therefore, the difference be tween the existing regulati ons and the final rule requirements are simply the final requirements . SLABs exported to non-OECD countries, Canada, or Mexico will be subjec t to Subpart E requirements under the final regulations. SLABs exported to OECD countries othe r than Canada and Mexico woul d be subject to Subpart H under the final regulations. Exhibit 2 compares th e requirements for SLABs under Subpart E and Subpart H, and summarizes the impacts of the final requirements.

2.7 Current Import Documentation Requirements

U.S. importers must initiate a RCRA hazardous waste manifest and provide an additional copy of the manifest to the transporter as re quired by 40 CFR 262.60. The U.S. receiving facility must submit this additional copy of the manife st to EPA within 30 days of import shipment delivery as required by 40 CFR 264.71(a)(3) and 265.71(a)(3).

2.8 Final Import Consent Do cumentation Requirements

This rule amends the hazardous waste impor t requirements to require that upon import shipment delivery, the U.S. receiving facility ma tches the RCRA manifest to the relevant import notice consent documentation, and sends a copy of the matched RCRA manifest and import

consent documentation back to EPA within thirty days of delivery.

2.9 Differences in the Requirements und er the Existing Regulations and the Final Requirements

This final rule requires that the receiving facility match the import consent documentation that is provided by EPA to th e RCRA manifest for the incoming shipment that the facility receives from the transporter. The receivi ng facility must then copy the import consent documentation along with the manifest and then mail the copies of the matched documents to EPA. The cost impacts of this rule to the de stination facility would be the cost to find the

consent documentation, match it to the rele vant manifest, copy this import consent documentation, and include it with the submission of the completed manifest to EPA.Exhibit 2Final SLAB Regulations and Impacts40 CFR 262 Subpart ESLAB Exports to Non-OECD Countries,Canada and Mexico40 CFR 262 Subpart HSLAB Exports to OECD Countries Otherthan Canada and MexicoQualitative Impacts of the Final RuleNotificationExporters must notify EPA of their intent toexport SLABs at least 60 days before the initialshipment is intended to be shipped off site. Thisnotice may cover export activities extendingover a 12 month period. The notification mustcontain detailed information regarding theexporter, waste details, transporters, means oftransport and containers to be used, all points ofentry and departure foreach foreign country oftransit, receiving facility information, andultimate management method.Notification must be submitted to the Office ofEnforcement and Compliance Assurance, Officeof Federal Activities, International ComplianceAssurance Division, EPA. “Attention:Notification of Intent to Export.”Exporters must provide written notification at least 45days prior to shipment. This notice may cover exportactivities over a 12 month period. Notification must besubmitted to the Office of Enforcement and ComplianceAssurance, Office of Federal Activities, InternationalCompliance Assurance Division, EPA. “Attention:OECD Export Notification.”The notification must include detailed informationregarding the shipment such as exporter details; recoveryfacility name and method of recovery; names and detailsof all transporters; details of all countries of import,transit, and import; and waste information including wastedescription meeting OECD requirements.The notification must include a signedcertification/declaration by the exporter with requiredwording.Exporters and transporters will incur costs associatedwith reading the rule to understand and comply withthe change.Current regulations do not require any notification forSLAB exports. Exporters will incur costs to prepareand submit notification to EPA. EPA will incur coststo receive and process thenotifications, forward themto the countries of import, receive and process consentfrom countries of import, and forward theacknowledgement of consent to the exporter.RenotificationIf the conditions specified on the originalnotification change theexporter must provideEPA with a written renotification of the change.Renotification required after the previous consent hasexpired.Although expected to be an infrequent occurrenceexporters will experience costs associated withrenotification when the conditions of export changeafter the original notification or if the notificationexpires prior to shipment. EPA will incur costs toprocess these changes.2040 CFR 262 Subpart ESLAB Exports to Non-OECD Countries,Canada and Mexico40 CFR 262 Subpart HSLAB Exports to OECD Countries Otherthan Canada and MexicoQualitative Impacts of the Final RuleAnnual ReportExporters must file with the administrator nolater than March 1 of each year, a reportsummarizing the types, quantities, frequency,and ultimate destination of all hazardous wasteexported during the previous calendar year.The report must include a signed certification bythe exporter with required wording.Exporters shall file an annual report no later than March 1of each year summarizing the types, quantities, frequency,and ultimate destination of all hazardous waste exportedduring the previous calendar year. The report must includea signed certification by the exporter with requiredwording.During even numbered years LQGs must include adescription of waste reduction efforts and changes in wastegeneration (except for waste reported in the generatorsBiennial Report submission) in the annual report.Exporters will incur costs to gather the informationrequired for the annual report, prepare the report andsubmit it to EPA. EPA will incur costs to receive andrecord the annual reportinformation. An exporterwho exports waste under Subpart E and Subpart Hmay file one report provided the wastes are containedin separate sections.Additional ReportUpon request by EPA, an exporter shall furnishto EPA any additional information which areceiving country requests in order to respond toa notification.Upon request by EPA, an exporter shall furnish to EPAany additional information regarding financial assurancesor contractual arrangementswhich a receiving countryrequests in order to respond to a notificationExporters will incur costs to collect and submitadditional information requested by EPA. EPA willincur costs to request theinformation and to receiveand process the information provided by exporters.Provide Acknowledgement of Consent to TransporterExporters must provide a copy of EPA’sAcknowledgement of Consent for the shipmentto the transporter.None.Exporters will incur costs to copy EPA’sAcknowledgment of Consent and provide it to thetransporter with each shipment.Exception ReportNot RequiredExporters must file an exception report with EPA if one ofthe following occurs:(1) Written confirmation ofreceipt from the recoveryfacility is not received within 90 days from the date thewaste was accepted by the initial transporter.(3) The waste is returned to the U.S.Under Subpart H, exporters will incur costs to prepareand submit and exceptionreport if any of theconditions listed occurs.212240 CFR 262 Subpart ESLAB Exports to Non-OECD Countries,Canada and Mexico40 CFR 262 Subpart HSLAB Exports to OECD Countries Otherthan Canada and MexicoQualitative Impacts of the Final RuleRecordkeepingExporters must keep a copy of the following forat least three years for all exports:(1) notifications(2) EPA’s Acknowledgement of Consent(3) confirmation of delivery(4) annual reportsExporters must keep a copy of the following for at leastthree years for all exports:(1) notifications, (2) all written consents, (3) confirmationof delivery, (4) exception reports, (5) confirmation ofrecovery, (6) annual reportsExporters will incur costs to maintain the requiredrecords.Movement/Tracking DocumentNot RequiredExporters must ensure that a movement documentaccompanies all shipments for export. The movementdocument must include all the information required fornotification and additional information regarding theshipment requirements.The document must include a signedcertification/declaration by the exporter with requiredwording.Exporters will incur coststo prepare the movementdocument and provide it with each shipment.Certificate of RecoveryNot RequiredRecovery facilities must provide a certificate of recoveryto the exporter and to thecompetent authorities of thecountries of export and import.Exporters and EPA will incur costs to receive andmaintain the certificate of recovery from the recoveryfacility.23 3. METHODOLOGY AND ASSUMPTIONS

This chapter summarizes the methodology and assumptions applied in the development of incremental cost impacts associated with th e final rules. Sections 3.3, 3.4, and 3.5 describe the methodologies, analytical data, and assumptions used in assessing the cost impacts from the

OECD Rule, the SLAB Rule, and the import consent documentation requirements, respectively.

The cost models for each portion of the rule, OECD, SLAB, and import consent documentation requirements were deve loped based on inputs including:

• Hourly labor rates

• Materials costs

• Hourly burden

• Number of affected en tities and/or shipments

The hourly labor rates and materials costs were used consistently for ea ch part of the rule and are described in section 3.1 and 3.2, respec tively. The hourly burden assumptions and

number of affected entities and/ or shipments were unique to each requirement and are discussed in the relevant portions of sections 3.3, 3.4, and 3.5.

3.1 Labor Rate Assumptions

Exhibit 3 presents the hourly labor rates used in this analysis. As shown in the exhibit, for U.S. exporters, U.S. importers, and U.S. tr ansporters, we estimated an average hourly labor rate (including fringe and ove rhead) of $98.86 for managerial st aff, $64.71 for technical staff,

and $33.85 for clerical staff. These labor rates were obtained from the Cost Assessment in Support of the Proposed Rule on Exports and Im ports of Hazardous Waste Destined for
Recovery among OECD Countries 14 and updated to 2007 levels usi ng Employment Cost Indices developed by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 15

For EPA, we estimated an average hourly labor rate of $60.66 for managerial staff (GS14, Step 1), $51.33 for technical staff (GS-13, Step 1), and $29.76 for clerical staff (GS-9, Step 1). To derive these hourly estimates, we referred to the General Schedule (GS) Salary Table

2007 . This publication summarizes the unloaded (bas e) hourly rate for va rious labor categories in the Federal Government. We then applied th e standard government overhead factor of 1.6 to the unloaded rate to derive loaded hourly labor rates.

14 U.S. EPA. September 27, 2004 (revised February 24, 2005)

. Cost Assessment in Support of the Proposed Rule on Exports and Imports of Hazardous Waste Destined for Recovery among OECD Countries

15 To update the hourly rates from 2004 to 2007 levels, EPA referred to Table 9. Employment Cost Index for Wages and Salaries, for Private Industry Workers by Occupation Group and Industry (Not seasonally adjusted) of Employment Cost Index: Historical Listing (December 2005 = 100) , U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (July 31, 2007). This table presents employment cost indices for private industry workers, by annual quarter (i.e., for March, June, September, and December). EPA used the June 2004 Index (96.5) and the June 2007 Index (105.1) to develop an adjustment factor of 1.089 (i.e., 105.1 / 96.5 = 1.089). Available at: http://www.bls.gov/ncs/ect/home.htm

.24 Exhibit 3 Average Hourly Labor Rates Used to Asse ss the Cost Impacts of the Final Rule

Labor Category Exporters, Importers, and Transporters

(2007 dollars) EPA
(2007 dollars)

Managerial $98.86 $60.66

Technical $64.71 $51.33

Clerical $33.85 $29.76

3.2 Materials Cost Assumptions

Exhibit 4 presents the materials costs used in this analysis. These costs are described

below:

• Mailing costs : The Agency estimates that affected entities will incur a cost of $4.24 to mail a five-ounce package by certified mail ($1.48 for postage, $2.65 for the certified-mail fee, and $0.11 for a 9 x 12 manila envelope).

Affected entities are estimated to incu r a cost of $0.42 for each standard letter mailed ($0.41 for first class postage 16 and $0.01 for a standard envelope).

• Copying Costs : The agency estimates that affect ed entities will in cur a cost of $0.11 per page for copying.

• Faxing costs : The Agency estimates that affected entities will incur a cost of $0.12 for each international fax they send. This cost was derived from the average revenues per minute for a telephone call from the U.S. to an OECD Country (excluding Canada and Mexico). Revenue figures were obtained from the 2005 International Telecommunications Data Report issued by the Federal Communications Commission on April 24, 2007. The cost estim ate assumes that the fax transmission

will take one-minute.

• Domestic telephone call costs : The Agency estimates that affected entities will incur a cost of $0.90 for each domestic telephone call they make. This cost was derived by averaging the advertised rate s of a 15-minute State-to-Sta te telephone call from four large U.S. long distance carriers.

16 Note : Since the completion of this analysis U.S. Firs t Class postage has increased form $0.41 to $0.42 per standard letter. This change is expected to have a negligible impact on total costs.25 Exhibit 4 Materials Costs Used to Assess the Cost Impacts of the Final Rule

Materials Cost Category Unit Cost
(2007 dollars)

Mailing Costs (9 x 12 package) $4.24

Mailing Costs (standard letter) $0.42

Copying Costs $0.11

Faxing Costs $0.12

Domestic Telephone Call Costs $0.90

3.3 Methodology used in Assessing the OECD Rule

In assessing the cost impacts of the final ru le, we estimated the in cremental annual costs and cost savings to U.S. exporters, U.S. importe rs, U.S. transporters, and EPA. In estimating these costs and cost savings, we first reviewed and compared the provisions under the existing regulations at 40 CFR Part 262, Subpart H 262.5 8(a); 262.58(b); 262.12(a)(2 ); and 265.12(a)(2), and the final rule. Based on this comparison, th e Agency identified diffe rences in requirements
(see Exhibit 1), and used this information in the development of a cost model.

The cost model estimates the costs to U.S. exporters, U.S. importers, U.S. transporters, and EPA to complete the activities required by the fina l rule. It also estimates the cost savings in

situations where the rule reliev es them of existing requirements. The cost model estimates the costs or cost savings for each ac tivity based on the following inputs:

• Hourly burden

• Hourly labor rates

• Materials costs

• Number of affected en tities and/or shipments

After estimating the costs or cost savings for each activity, the co st model adds up the costs and cost savings across all activities to derive the net tota l costs to U.S. exporters, U.S. importers, U.S. transporters, and EPA.26 3.3.1 Hourly Burden Assumptions

In estimating the hourly burden for each of the activities, we referred to the most recently approved Generator Standards Info rmation Collection Request (ICR) 17 and Exports/Imports

ICR 18 . The Generator Standards ICR examines the annual hour and cost burden to exporters, importers, and EPA in carrying out information co llection activitie s associated with the export and import of hazardous wastes (40 CFR part 262, Subparts E and F). The Exports/Imports ICR

examines the incremental annual hour and cost burden to exporters, importers, and EPA in carrying out information collecti on activities associated with th e export and import of hazardous

wastes destined for recove ry among OECD Countries (40 CFR part 262, Subpart H). We

reviewed these ICRs and incor porated all applicable hourly bur den estimates into the cost

estimate. We then addressed additional data needs through best judgment or consultations.

3.3.2 Universe Assumptions

In the following paragraphs, we discuss the univ erse assumptions used in the analysis of

the final OECD Rule. This information is summarized in Exhibit 5.

Number of U.S. Exporters and Export Shipments

In estimating the number of U.S. exporters and export shipments subject to rule requirements, we referred to the Export Reports Database. The Export Report Database is a database used by EPA's Office of Resource Conser vation and Recovery (ORCR) to track exports of hazardous waste. The database includes export shipment data reported by exporters in their annual export reports (e .g., receiving country, number of shipments).

Based on Export Report Database data 19 , we estimate that, on average, six entities export a total of 489 shipments of hazardous waste to OECD Countries (except Canada and Mexico) each year.

Based on industry consultations 20 , we estimate that 2.1 percent (10) of the 489 shipments to OECD Countries are samples destined for la boratory analysis. The remaining 479 (i.e., 489 - 10) shipments are shipments of hazar dous wastes destined for recovery.

17 Supporting Statement for EPA In formation Collection Request Number 820.08, Hazardous Waste Generator

Standards, June 22, 2001.

18 Supporting Statement for EPA Information Collection Request Number 1647.03, Exports from and Imports to the United States under the OECD Decision, January 5, 2001.

19 For purposes of this analysis, EPA used the average of the data reported in 2003, 2004, and 2005 annual export

reports.

20 Consultations with industry were conducted in July 2004. See consultation telephone logs available in the public docket. Based on the 2001and 2003 Export Reports Database there were an average of 434 shipments to OECD Countries. Of these 434 shipments, consultations with industry indicate nine (2.1%) were samples destined for laboratory analysis.27 Based on RCRAInfo data for imports discussed in Section 3.5.2, we estimate that, of the 479 shipments of hazardous wastes destined for r ecovery, it is estimated that 12 percent (or 57 shipments) are shipped to R12/R13 r ecovery facilities in OECD Countries.

Number of U.S. Importers and Import Shipments

In estimating the number of U.S. importers and import shipments subject to the requirements of the rule, we referred to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Information (RCRAInfo) System. RCRAInfo is a national program management and inventory system used by EPA to track entities regulated under Subtitle C of RCRA (i.e., hazardous waste
handlers). RCRAInfo includes da ta on general handler inform ation, waste generation and management, permit or closure status, complia nce with Federal and State regulations, and cleanup activities. We also assessed the info rmation in EPA’s Waste International Tracking System (WITS) 21 database.

Based on WITS data 22 , we estimate that, on average 15 entities import shipments of hazardous waste from OECD Countries (excep t Canada and Mexico) each year. Based on

RCRAInfo data 23 , we estimate that, on average, 300 shipments of hazardous waste are imported from OECD Countries (except Canada and Mexico) each year.

Based on industry consultations 24 , we estimate that 1.4 percen t (4) of the 300 shipments from OECD Countries are samples destined for laboratory analysis. The remaining 296 (i.e., 300 - 4) shipments are shipments of hazar dous wastes destined for recovery.

21 D ata collected through EPA’s Office of En forcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA)

22 For purposes of this analysis, EPA used the average of the data reported in 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006 in the

WITS database.

23 For purposes of this analysis, EPA used the average of the data reported in 2003 and 2005 Biennial Reports. These data do not indicate which specific country is importing the waste. Canada and Mexico imports were commonly indicated and these records were removed. The estimate only includes records of imports destined for metal recovery, solvent recovery, other recovery, and transfer facilities. The number of shipments was estimated by dividing the quantity of waste imported by 18 tons. One tr uck load of waste is estimated to have an 18-ton capacity. The estimate for the number of shipments would be lower if transport by train is assumed. Reuse-as-fuel and energy recovery imports were assumed to come from Canada or Mexico given the transport economics for this industry and not included. The quantity reported for one 2005 record for spent catalyst waste destined for metals recovery was reduced by an order of magnitude assuming there was a misplaced decima l point in the reporting or data entry of this waste. Internal U.S. shipments of this waste never were reported at this magnitude. This reduced the estimate of the number of 2005 import shipments from 909 to 218. The estimate for the number of 2003 import shipments is 381. The average number of import shipments is 300.

24 Consultations with industry were conducted in July 2004. See consultation telephone logs available in the public docket. Based on the 2001and 2003 Export Reports Database there were an average of 345 shipments from OECD Countries. Of these 345 shipments, consultations with industry indicate five (1.4%) were samples destined for laboratory analysis.28 Based on RCRAInfo Data 25 , we estimate that, of the 296 shipments of hazardous wastes destined for recovery, 36 shipme nts (or 12 percent) are received at R12/R13 recovery facilities in

the U.S.

Number of U.S. Transporters

Data on the number of U.S. transporters invo lved in the export a nd import of hazardous wastes destined for recovery among OECD Countr ies are not generally available. For purposes of this analysis, we have assumed that there is one U.S. transporter fo r each U.S. exporter and U.S. importer. No shipments are assumed to tran sit through Canada and Mexi co in this analysis.

Exhibit 5 Universe Assumptions Used to Assess th e Cost Impacts of the Final OECD Rule

Number of Affected Entities Number of Shipments Type of Shipment U.S. Exporters/ U.S. Importers U.S.
Transporters Wastes Destined for Laboratory Analysis Wastes Destined for Recovery Operations Total

Export 6 6 10 479 489

Import 15 15 4 296 300

3.4 Methodology used in Assessing the SLAB Rule

In assessing the cost impacts of the final SLAB rule, we estimated the incremental annual costs to U.S. exporters, U.S. transporters, and EPA. In estimating these costs, we first reviewed the provisions under the existing regulations at 40 CFR Part 266 Subpart G, and the final rule. Based on this comparison, the Agency identified the new requirements under the final rule (see Exhibit 2), and used this information in the development of a cost model.

The cost model estimates the costs to U.S. exporters, U.S. transporters, and EPA to complete the activities required by the final rule . The cost model estimates the costs for each activity based on the following inputs:

• Hourly burden

• Hourly labor rates

• Materials costs

• Number of affected entities, notices, and/or shipments

25 For purposes of this analysis, we used the average of the data reported in 2003 and 2005 Biennial Reports. See comments regarding the data in footnote 16. The estimate of the number of 2005 import shipments to storage, bulking, and/or transfer facili ties is 39. The estimate of the number of 2003 import shipments to storage, bulking,

and/or transfer facilities is 34. Th e average is 36 (36/300 x 100% = 12%).29 Section 3.4.1 describes the hourly burden assumptions made in the analysis. Section 3.4.2 describe the universe assumptions made regard ing the number of eff ected entities including exporters and transporters and th e number of shipments and notices required to comply with the

rule.

After estimating the costs or cost savings for each activity, the co st model adds up the costs and cost savings across all activities to derive the net tota l costs to U.S. exporters, U.S. transporters, and EPA.

The vast majority of exported SLABs are expo rted to Canada or Me xico (see Attachment E) and only a negligible amount of SLABs will be regulated under S ubpart H. Therefore, in the analysis presented in Section 4.2 we assume that all SLABs will be managed under 40 CFR 262 Subpart E. A worse-case cost scenario is al so developed assuming that all SLAB shipments currently going to Canada and Mexico would sh ift to other OECD countries, thereby requiring costs associated with the exception report and the movement/tracking document, as required by Subpart H. In addition, this bounding assessment applies the high-end SLAB export data for Mexico, as presented by the In ternational Trade Commission (ITC) 26 . This bounding analysis is presented in Section 4.4. A certif icate of recovery is not requ ired under 40 CFR 262 Subpart E or the current Subpart H. However, it is incl uded in the OECD rule, a nd costs associated with the new requirements are included in the analysis in Section 4.4.

3.4.1 Hourly Burden Assumptions

In estimating the hourly burden for each of th e activities, we refe rred to the Generator Standards Information Collection Request 27 , Exports/Imports ICR 28 , and the Economic Impact Analysis (EIA) of the OECD Decision 29 . The Generator Standards ICR (2004 ICR) examines the annual hour and cost burden to exporters, importers, and EPA in carrying out information

collection activities a ssociated with the export and import of hazardous wastes (40 CFR part 262, Subparts E and F). The Exports/Imports ICR an d the Economic Impact Analysis of the OECD

Decision examine the incremental annual hour and cost burden to exporters, importers, and EPA in carrying out information collection activities associated with the export and import of hazardous wastes destined for recovery among OECD Countries (40 CFR part 262, Subpart H). We reviewed these ICRs and the EIA and incorp orated all applicable hourly burden estimates

into the cost estimate. We then addressed additional data needs through best judgment or

consultations.

26 For 2006, the ITC estimated total (all categories) U. S. SLAB exports to Mexico at 1,086,446 metric tons.

27 Supporting Statement for EPA In formation Collection Request Number 820.09, Hazardous Waste Generator

Standards. October 2004.

28 Supporting Statement for EPA Information Collection Request Number 1647.03, Exports from and Imports to the United States under the OECD Decision, January 5, 2001.

29 Economic Impact Analysis of the Codification of the OECD Decision Covering Transfrontier Shipments of Hazardous Waste Destined for Recovery, August 26, 1994.30 3.4.2 Universe Assumptions

In the following paragraphs, we discuss the univ erse assumptions used in the analysis of

the final SLAB Rule.

Number of U.S. Exporters

The number of U.S. SLAB exporters needs to be estimated because each exporter will be required to submit a detailed annual report a nd any additional reports requested by EPA under the final SLAB rule. These costs are estimated on a per exporter basis.

It is unlikely that the majority of SLAB generators, for example, automotive repair shops and battery retailers, would find it economical to export SLABs because of the relatively small quantities typically generated by individual entities. Collectors consolidate larg e quantities of batteries, however, thereby allowing for economi cally viable export shipment sizes. This analysis assumes that the collect ors are also the entities decidi ng whether or not to export. Specifically, a subset of battery manufacturers, battery whol esalers and scrap dealers are assumed to export SLABs. These establishments are termed “exporters.”

We received Environment Canada (EC) data on SLAB imports that Canada received from the U.S. in multiple years, and identified the number of U.S. exporters that exported SLABs to Canada during that period, the average metric tons per notice, and the total metric tons exported to Canada in 2006 (see Attachment E). In addition, data from the International Trade
Commission (ITC) on the metric tons of SLABs e xported from the U.S. over several years were obtained. The ITC data reported the total SLAB exports from the U.S. to each country but did not provide information on the number of notices, en tities, or shipments. The total tonnage of SLABs exported to Mexico in 2006 was obtaine d from the Secretaría de Medio Ambiente y
Recursos Naturales (SEMARNAT) . The total number of entiti es exporting SLABs to Canada and Mexico was extrapolated by applying a ratio of the average annual numb er of entities to the average annual metric tons obtained from the Cana dian import data to the total exports to Canada

and Mexico obtained from a comb ination of the SEMARNAT and Environment Canada data.

The estimated annual total number of SLAB exporting entities is 640 (calculation:
0.002418*.264,333) [see Attachment E].

Our review of the Environment Canada da ta indicate that ther e were two hundred and thirty seven (237) unique entities that shipped SLABs from the U.S. to Canada in the five year period from 2002 to 2006. Many of these entities were not iden tified as shipping SLABs to Canada in each of the five years. The average annual number of uni que exporting entities was 133. The ratio of 237 to 133 was used to extrapolate an estimated number of entities that would be required to read the revised rule. The number of entities used to estimate the cost impact of reading the rule is 1,141 (calcula tion: 640 SLAB exporting entities in any given year * (237/133) = 1,141 total unique entities).

Number of Export Shipments

In this analysis we assume that each sh ipment contains 16.4 metric tons of SLABs (equivalent to an 18-ton truck). This analysis uses the total weight of all SLAB exports to31 Canada and Mexico from 2006 (264,333 metric tons) from a co mbination of SEMARNAT and EC data (see Appendix E). The estimated numbe r of shipments, based on this assumption, is

16,154 (calculation: 264,333 metric tons of SLAB export in 2006 divided by 16.36 metric tons of

slab/shipment = 16,154 shipments) . Please note that this assump tion may understate the size of some container shipments and therefore may overs tate costs for these shipments. However, some shipments may also be less than 16.4 metric tons.

Number of U.S. Transporters

Data on the number of U.S. transporters invo lved in the export of SLABs destined for recovery in Canada and Mexico ar e not available. For purposes of our analysis we have assumed that each transporter services two exporters.

Number of Notices

Based on the EC data for Canadian imports of SLABs from the U.S. covering the years 2002 through 2006, we calculated that, on average each notice contained 396 metric tons of SLABs (see Attachment E). Using the total SLAB export weight in 2006 to Canada and Mexico
(264,333 metric tons), we estimate that there were 668 notices during the year 2006 (calculation:

264,333 metric tons of SLAB export in 2006 divided by 395.9 metric tons of slab/notice = 668 notices)

.

3.5 Methodology used in Assessing Import Consent Documentation Requirements

In assessing the cost impacts of the fina l import consent documentation requirements, the agency estimated the incremental costs to U.S. receivers to complete the activities required by

the rule. The cost model estimates the costs for each activity based on the following inputs:

• Hourly burden

• Hourly labor rates

• Number of affected shipments

After estimating the costs for each activity, the cost model adds up the costs across all

activities to derive the net total costs to U.S. receivers and EPA.

3.5.1 Hourly Burden Assumptions

The agency estimated that it would take a total of 25 additional minutes per shipment. Once the shipment reaches the destination facility it is assumed that the de stination facility will require a total of 25 minutes to locate the c onsent document for each sh ipment (10 minutes),
match the consent document to the manifest (10 minutes), and make a copy of the document (5
minutes). This estimate takes into consideration that the destination facility is currently required to mail a copy of the completed manifest to EPA; therefore, no mailing costs are included in this

estimate of the incremental costs.

3.5.2 Universe Assumptions32 In the following paragraphs, we discuss the univ erse assumptions used in the analysis of the import consent documentation requirements.

Number of Shipments

From September 2006 through January 2008, a 17 month period, OECA reported the receipt of 3,841 import manifests. Based on an average of 226 manifests per month (3,841
manifests/17 months) it was estimated that th ere is an average of 2,712 import shipments requiring manifests per year.

Number of U.S. Receivers

Based on OECD import assumptions discussed in section 3.3.2, the ra tio of shipments to receivers was 20 to 1 (300 shipments/15 receivers) . This ratio was used to estimate the number of receivers that will be impact ed by the import consent documenta tion requirements. Therefore,

it is estimated that 136 receivers (2,712 shipments/20 shipments per receiver) will be required to submit copies of the import consent documentati on to EPA along with the manifest. The number

of receivers was used to determine the im pacts to small entitie s in section 5.3.33 4. COSTS AND BENEFITS

This chapter examines the costs and benefits of the final rules. Section 4.1 examines the cost impacts of the OECD Rule. Section 4.2 examines the cost impacts of the SLAB rule. Section 4.3 examines the cost impacts of th e import consent documentation requirements. Section 4.4 discusses the qualitati ve benefits of the combined rules. Section 4.5 discusses limitations of the analysis.

4.1 Analysis of Costs to Affected Entities from the Final OECD Rule

Using the analytical data and assumptions discussed in Chapter 3 of this document,

EPA's cost model estimated the costs and cost sa vings to U.S. exporters, U.S. importers, U.S. transporters, and EPA under the final rule. Th e results of the cost model are presented in

Attachment A, and discussed in the following subsections.

4.1.1 Reading the Rule

The Agency estimates that at total of 42 entities (i.e., six U.S. exporters, 15 U.S. importers, and 21 U.S. transporters) will read the rule in order to understand and comply with the new requirements. We also estimate that each entity will experience a cost of $114.14 in reading

the rule (see Exhibit A-1). Thus, collectiv ely, U.S. exporters, U.S. importers, and U.S. transporters may experience a one-time cost of approximately $4,794 (i.e., 42 entities x $114.14/entity) for this activity.

4.1.2 Exemption for Wastes Destin ed for Laboratory Analysis

Under the final rule, shipments of amber-list wastes are exempt from the amber control procedure if they are explicitly destined for laboratory analysis to assess their physical/chemical characteristics or to determine their suitability fo r recovery operations. As a result, the affected entities will experience cost sa vings, since they will no longe r need to comply with the information collection requirements under the existing regulations.

In the following paragraphs, EPA discusses the cost savings associated with the exemption for wastes destined for labor atory analysis. (See Exhibit A-2.)

U.S. Exporters

We estimate that, each year, ten samples of hazardous waste are exported to OECD Countries for laboratory analysis. EPA also estimates that, under the rule, U.S. exporters will experience a cost savings of $206.02 per shipment for no longer complying with notification, movement/tracking document, and recordkeeping requirements. Thus, EPA estimates that U.S. exporters will experience a cost savings of $2,060 per year (i.e., 10 shipments/year x $206.02/shipment) under the final rule.34 U.S. Importers

We estimate that, each year, four samples of hazardous waste are imported from OECD Countries for laboratory analysis. Under the rule U.S. importers are expected to experience an estimated cost savings of $24.83 per shipment for no longer comp lying with notification and movement/tracking document requirements. Thus, we estimate that U.S. importers will experience a cost savings of $99 per year (i .e., 4 shipments/year x $24.83/shipment) under the

final rule.

U.S. Transporters

We estimate that, each year, a total of 14 sa mples of hazardous waste are transported to

or from OECD Countries for la boratory analysis (i.e., ten expor t and four import shipments). Under the final rule, U.S. transporters will experience a cost savings of $4.68 per shipment for no longer complying with movement/tracking document requirements. Thus, U.S. transporters may experience estimated cost savings of $66 per year (i.e., 14 shipment s/year x $4.68/shipment)

under the rule.

EPA

We estimate that, each year, ten samples of hazardous waste are exported to OECD Countries for laboratory analysis. Under the rule, the Agency is expected to experience a cost savings of $91.09 per shipment for no longer co nducting activities a ssociated with the notification and movement/tracking document requi rements. Thus, the Agency will experience cost savings of $911 per year (i.e., 10 shipments/year x $91.09shipment).

Each year and estimated four samples of hazardous waste are imported from OECD Countries for laboratory analysis. Under the rule, the Agency is expected to experience a cost savings of $189.02 per shipment for no longer co nducting activities associated with the notification and movement/tracking document require ments. Thus, the Agency is expected to experience a cost savings of $756 per year (i.e., 4 shipments/year x $189.02/shipment).

Based on the above, we estimate that the Agen cy will experience a total cost savings of $1,667 per year (i.e., $911 + $756) under the final rule.

4.1.3 Certificate of Recovery

Under the rule, recovery facilities must provide a certifi cate of recovery to the exporter and to the competent authorities of the countries of export and import. This certificate of recovery must be provided as soon as possible, but no later than 30 days after the completion of recovery and no later than one calendar year following receipt of waste.

In the following paragraphs, we discuss the costs associated with the certificate of recovery. (See Exhibit A-3.)35 U.S. Exporters

We estimate that, each year, 479 shipments of hazardous wastes are exported to OECD Countries for recovery operations. Under the ru le, U.S. exporters will need to maintain a certificate of recovery for each export shipment. At a cost of $3.39 per shipment, U.S. exporters will experience an incremental cost of $1,621 per year (i.e., 479 shipments/year x $3.39/shipment).

U.S. Importers

We estimate that, each year, 296 shipment s of hazardous wastes are imported from OECD Countries for recovery operations. Under the final rule, U.S. importers will need to prepare and provide a cer tificate of recovery to the exporter, EPA, and the competent authority of the country of export for each import ship ment. At a cost of $25.15 per shipment, U.S. importers will experience an incremental cost of $7,444 per year (i.e., 296 shipments/year x $25.15/shipment).

EPA

EPA estimates that, each year, a total of 775 shipments of hazardous wastes are exported from the U.S. or imported to the U.S. for r ecovery operations (i.e., 479 export and 296 import shipments). Under the rule the Agency will need to maintain a certificat e of recovery for each shipment. At a cost of $2.98 per shipment, EPA is expected to experience a total incremental cost of $2,310 per year (i.e., 775 sh ipments/year x $2.98/shipment).

4.1.4 Exchange and Accumulati on Recovery Operations

Shipments of hazardous wastes destined for R12/R13 recovery operations will need to comply with additional information collecti on requirements under the final rule. These requirements, as well as the associated costs, are discussed in the following paragraphs. (See
Exhibit A-4.)

U.S. Exporters

We estimate that, each year, 57 shipments of hazardous wastes are exported to OECD Countries for R12/R13 recovery operations. Under the final rule, U.S. exporters will need to indicate in the notification pape r the recovery facility or fa cilities where subsequent R1-R11 recovery will take place. At a cost of $1.29 per shipment, U.S. exporters are estimated to experience an incremental aggregate cost of $74 per year (i.e., 57 shipments/year x $1.29/shipment), under the final rule.

U.S. Importers

Each year, an estimated 36 shipments of hazardous wastes are imported from OECD Countries for R12/R13 recovery operations. Under the final rule, U.S. impor ters will need to: sign the movement/tracking document; provide a c opy to the exporter, EPA, and the competent authority of the country of expor t; maintain a copy of the signed movement/tracking document;36 prepare and provide a cer tificate of recovery to the exporter, EPA and the competent authority of the country of export; obtain a certificate of recovery from the R1-R11 recovery facility; and forward the certificate of recovery from the R1-R11 recovery facility to EPA and the competent authority of the country of export. At a cost of $53.49 per shipment, U.S. importers are estimated to experience an aggregate incrementa l cost of $1,926 per year (i.e., 36 shipments/year x $53.49/shipment) under the rule.

EPA

The Agency estimates that, each year, 57 ship ments of hazardous wastes are exported to OECD Countries for R12/R13 recovery operations. Under the rule, EPA will need to maintain a certificate of recovery for each export shipment. At a cost of $2.98 per shipment, EPA is estimated to experience an aggregate incremental cost of $170 per year (i.e., 57 shipments/year x $2.98/shipment) under the final rule.

4.1.5 Return of Wastes

Under the final rule, when a shipment of hazardous wastes to which concerned countries have given consent, cannot be completed in accordance with the terms of the contract, and alternative arrangements cannot be made to rec over these wastes in an environmentally sound manner in the U.S., the U.S. importer must inform EPA in writing of the need to return the shipment. In addition, EPA must inform the comp etent authorities of the countries of export and transit the reason for returning the waste.

Based on our best judgment, we estimate that, each year, one shipment of waste will be returned from a country of import or transit to the U.S. (See E xhibit A-5.) Under the rule, EPA

will need to maintain a notification of the return of the waste for each export shipment. At a cost of $2.98 per shipment, the Agency is estimated to experience an aggregate incremental cost of $3 per year (i.e., 1 shipments/year x $2.98/shipment).

Based on our best judgment, we also estimate that, each year, one shipment of waste will be returned to a country of export. (See Exhib it A-5.) Under the final rule, the U.S. importer

must inform EPA of the need to return the sh ipment and EPA needs to inform the competent

authorities of the countries of e xport and transit about th e return of the wastes. At a cost of $21.84 and $25.79 per shipment, the importer and EPA, respectively, are estimated to experience an aggregate incremental cost of $48 per year (i.e., one shipment/year x $21.84 per shipment plus one shipment/year x $25.79 per shipment).

Based on the above, the Agency is estimated to experience an incremental cost of $51 per year under the final rule.

4.1.6 Summary of Cost to Affected Entities under the Final OECD Rule

Exhibit 6 summarizes the incremental costs of the final rule during the first year of implementation. These costs include the costs as sociated with: (1) r eading the ru le, (2) the exemption for wastes destined for laboratory analys is, (3) the certificate of recovery, (4) the new requirements applicable to R12/R 13 recovery operations, and (5) re turn of wastes. As shown in37 the exhibit, the total increm ental cost is estimated to be $14,494 during the first year.

Exhibits 7 and 8 summarize the incremental annual costs of th e final rule af ter the first year of implementation for export and import shipments, respectivel y. These costs do not

include the costs associated with reading the rule. As shown in Exhibit 7, the total incremental annual cost for export shipments is estimated to be $278. As shown in Exhibit 8, the total incremental annual cost for import shipments is estimated to be $9,404. Thus, the total

incremental annual cost under the rule is estim ated to be $9,682 (i.e., $278 + $9,404). The total

incremental annual cost after the first year of implementation is expected to be $8,840 for the regulated community and $842 for EPA.Exhibit 6Exports and Imports of Hazardous Wastes Destined for Recovery:Incremental Costs to Affected Entities during the First Year of Rule Implementationa, bRegulatory ChangeU.S. ExporterU.S. ImporterU.S. TransporterEPATotalReading the Regulationsc$685$1,712$2,397$0$4,794Exemption for Wastes Destined for Laboratory Analysis($2,060)($99)($66)($1,667)($3,892)Certificate of Recovery$1,621$7,444$0$2,306$11,371Exchange and Accumulation Recovery Operations$74$1,926$0$170$2,170Return of Wastes$0$22$0$29$51Total$320$11,005$2,331$838$14,494Costs presented in 2007 dollars.aExhibit contains rounding error.bNumbers in parentheses indicate cost savings rather than costs.cActivity to be conducted in the first year of ruleimplementation only.Exhibit 7Exports to OECD Countries from the U.S.:Incremental Annual Costs to Affected Entities under the Rulea, bRegulatory ChangeU.S. ExporterU.S. TransporterEPATotalExemption for Wastes Destined for LaboratoryAnalysis($2,060)($47)($910)($3,017)Certificate of Recovery$1,621$0$1,427$3,048Exchange and Accumulation RecoveryOperations$74$0$170$244Return of Wastes$0$0$3$3Total($365)($47)$690$278Costs presented in 2007 dollars.aExhibit contains rounding error.bNumbers in parentheses indicate cost savings rather than costs.3839Exhibit 8Imports from OECD Countries to the U.S.:Incremental Annual Costs to Affected Entities under the Rulea, bRegulatory ChangeU.S. ImporterU.S. TransporterEPATotalExemption for Wastes Destined for Laboratory Analysis($99)($19)($756)($874)Certificate of Recovery$7,444$0$882$8,326Exchange and Accumulation Recovery Operations$1,926$0$0$1,926Return of Wastes$22$0$26$48Total$9,293($19)$152$9,426Costs presented in 2007 dollars.aExhibit containsrounding error.bNumbers in parentheses indicate cost savings rather than costs.40 4.2 Analysis of Costs to Affected En tities from the Final SLAB Rule

Using the analytical data and assumptions discussed in Chapter 3 of this document,

EPA's cost model estimated the costs and cost sa vings to U.S. exporters, U.S. transporters, and

EPA under the final rule. Since the SLAB Rule applies only to the e xport of SLABs, U.S. importers will not experience any costs or cost sa vings from the rule. The results of the cost model are presented in Attachment B, a nd discussed in the following subsections.

This analysis of costs assumes that all SL ABs are exported to Canada and Mexico based on the fact that the vast majority of SLABs are exported to these two coun tries. Therefore, the cost impacts associated with requirements that apply only to exports to OECD countries (except
Canada and Mexico) are not evalua ted in this analysis. An alternative option analysis that evaluates these additional requir ements found in Subpart H is presented in Section 4.4.

4.2.1 Reading the Rule

The Agency estimates that a total of 1,712 entities (i.e., 1,141 U.S. exporters and 571 U.S. transporters) will need to read the rule in order to understand and comply with the new requirements. We also estimate that each ent ity will experience a cost of $260.64 in reading the rule (see Exhibit B-1). Thus, collectively, U.S. exporters and U.S. transporters may experience a

one-time cost of approximately $446,207 (i.e., 1,712 entities x $260.64/entity) for this activity. 30

4.2.2 Notification

Under the final rule, exporters must submit a not ification to EPA indicating their intent to export SLABs. EPA then must process the notifi cation and seek consent from the countries of imports and transit. EPA will undertake the follow ing tasks to complete the notification process and issue an Acknowledgment of Consent:

• Receive and process the notific ation from the U.S. exporter

• Prepare and transmit a confirmation of receipt to the U.S. exporter

• Forward the notification to th e competent authorities of the countries of import and

transit.

• Receive and process consent or objection from the competent authorities of the countries of import and transit.

• Forward written Acknowledgement of Cons ent or objection to U.S. exporter.

In the following paragraphs, we discuss the cost s associated with the notification process.

U.S. Exporters

We estimate that U.S. exporters will prepar e and submit a total of 668 notices per year to EPA for the export of SLABs (See Section 3.4.2 – Number of Notices) 31 . We also estimate that

30 Contains rounding error, actual number of transporters is assumed to be half the number of exporters or 570.5.

31 The number of notices is derived from an average of th e metric tons per notice for SLABs going to Canada over the 2002 to 2006 period (396), divided into the single year total 2006 quantity (264,333 MT) going to Mexico plus Canada (See Attachment E). This approach provides a more refined estimate of metric tons per notice while avoiding trend distortions that would occur through the averaging of annual quantity data over the same period. Furthermore, while we believe that this approach more accurately captures current and near future impacts, we41 each notice will cost $97.49 to prepare and submit (see Exhibit B-2). Thus, EPA estimates that U.S. exporters will experience an annual co st of $65,120 (i.e., 668 notices/year x $97.49/notice)

under the final rule.

EPA

We estimate that EPA will receive 668 notices per year for the export of SLABs. It is estimated that EPA will incur $83.65 to process each notice (see Exhibit B-2). It is assumed that SLABs do not travel through trans it countries since virtually all shipments of SLABs go directly

to Canada or Mexico. Therefore, it is assu med that EPA will only have to notify the receiving country and no transit countries. Based on the above, we estimate that the Agency will experience an annual cost of $55,880 (i.e., $668 notices/year x $83.65/notice) under the final

rule.

4.2.3 Renotification

When the conditions specified under the origin al notification change, the U.S. exporter must provide EPA with a renotification of the change. Also, where a shipment can not be delivered for any reason, the expor t must renotify EPA of a change in the conditions and obtain a new EPA Acknowledgement of Consent. Based on the 2004 ICR, it is estimated that only a fraction of exporters will be subject to this requirement. The 2004 ICR assumed that 18 renotifications would be require d out of a total of 280 original notices. In the following paragraphs, we discuss the costs associated with the renotifica tion requirements.

U.S. Exporters

We estimate that U.S. exporters will prepar e and submit a total of 43 renotifications per year to EPA for the export of SLABs (668 notices/y ear * (18/280)). We also estimate that each renotice will cost $59.59 to prepare and submit (see E xhibit B-3). Thus, EPA estimates that U.S. exporters will experience an annual cost of $2,562 (i.e., 43 re notices/year x $59.59/notice) under

the final rule.

EPA

We estimate that EPA will receive 43 renotices per year for the export of SLABs. It is estimated that EPA will incur $57.99 to process each notice (see Exhibit B-3). Based on the above, we estimate that the Agency will e xperience an annual cost of $2,493 (i.e., 43 renotices/year x $57.99/notice) under the final rule.

4.2.4 Annual Report

Under the final rule, U.S. exporters must subm it detailed annual reports on SLAB exports to EPA. The following paragraphs discuss the estimated costs associated with the annual report.

recognize that metals market conditions can shift dramatica lly over short periods of time and such volatility may be further exacerbated by uncertain energy prices.42 U.S. Exporters

We estimate that 640 U.S. exporters of SLABs will be required to prepare and submit an annual report under the final rule. Based on the 2004 ICR, 27 of these exporters are assumed to be small exporters and the remaining 613 are assumed to be large exporters. The 2004 ICR assumed that 12 out of 280 entities were small and the remaining 268 are large entities. We estimate that the cost to prepare and submit an annual report is $112.69 for each small exporter and $187.55 for each large exporter (see Exhibit B-4). Thus, EPA estimates that U.S. exporters will experience an annual cost of $118,011 (i.e ., 27 small exporters x $112.69/annual report + 613 large exporters x $187.55/annual re port) to submit the an nual report under the final rule.

EPA

We estimate that EPA will receive 640 annual re ports per year. It is estimated that EPA

will incur $20.01 to receive and record each annual report (see Exhibit B-4). Thus, we estimate that the Agency will experience an annual cost of $12,808 (i.e., 640 annual reports/year x $20.01/report) under the final rule.

4.2.5 Additional Report

Under the final rule, upon request by EPA, an exporter must submit to EPA any additional information which a receiving country re quests in order to respond to a notification. Based on the 2004 ICR, it is assumed that only a frac tion of U.S. exporters w ill be subject to this requirement. The 2004 ICR assumed that one out of 280 entities would be required to submit an additional report. In the followi ng paragraphs, we discuss the estim ated costs associated with the additional report.

U.S. Exporters

We estimate that 2 entities (640 entities * (1/280)) will respond to requests for additional reports and submit the report to EPA. We also estimate that each entity will incur $53.52 to prepare and submit the additional report (see Exhibit B-5). Thus, EPA estimates that U.S. exporters will experience an a nnual cost of $107 (i.e., 2 reques ts/year x $53.52/request) under the

final rule.

EPA

We estimate that EPA will receive requests fo r additional information from 2 entities per year. It is estimated that EPA will incur $24.76 to receive the request, forward it on to the exporter, receive and process th e additional information, and fina lly forward the additional report to the requesting country (see Exhibit B-5). Th erefore, it is estimated that the Agency will experience an annual cost of $50 (i.e., 2 requests/year x $24.76/request) under the final rule.

4.2.6 Provide Acknowledgment of Consent to Transporter

Under the final rule, the exporter is required to pr ovide a copy of the EPA Acknowledgment of Consent for each shipment to the transporter transporting the shipment for export. EPA will not experience any costs associated with this requirement.43 U.S. Exporters

The cost to find the Acknowledgment of Consen t and provide a copy to the transporter is estimated to be $8.78 per shipment (see Exhibit B- 6). Thus, EPA estimates that U.S. exporters will experience an annual cost of $141,898 (i .e., 16,154 shipments/year x $8.78/shipment) to comply with this requirement of the final rule.

4.2.7 Recordkeeping

Under the final rule, U.S. exporters mu st keep a copy of each notification, EPA Acknowledgement of Consent, ea ch confirmation of delivery, and each annual report for a period of at least 3 years.

U.S. Exporters

The annual cost to comply w ith the recordkeeping requireme nts is estimated to be $8.46 per entity (see Exhibit B-7). Thus, EPA estimates that U.S. exporters will experience an annual cost of $5,416 (i.e., 640 exporters x $8.46/exporter) fo r recordkeeping under the final rule.

4.2.8 Summary of Cost to Affected Entities under the Final SLAB Rule

Exhibit 9 summarizes the incremental costs of the rule during the first year of implementation. These costs include the costs associated with: (1) reading the rule, (2)
notification, (3) re notification, (4) an nual reporting, (5) additional reporting, (6) providing the Acknowledgement of Consent to the transporter, and (7) reco rdkeeping. As shown in the

exhibit, the total incremental cost is es timated to be $850,553 during the first year.

Exhibit 10 summarizes the incremental annual costs of the final rule after the first year of implementation. These costs do not include the cost s associated with readi ng the rule. As shown

in the exhibit, the to tal incremental annual cost for expor t shipments is estimated to be $404,346.

The total incremental annual cost after the first year of impl ementation is expected to be $333,114 for the regulated community and $71,232 for EPA.44 Exhibit 9 Exports of SLABs:

Incremental Costs to Affected Entities durin g the First Year of Rule Implementation a

Regulatory Change U.S. Exporter U.S. Transporter EPA Total

Reading the Regulations b $297,385 $148,823 $0 $446,207

Notification $65,120 $0 $55,880 $121,000

Renotification $2,562 $0 $2,493 $5,056

Annual Report $118,011 $0 $12,808 $130,820

Additional Report $107 $0 $50 $157

Provide Acknowledgement of Consen t to Transporter $141,898 $0 $0 $141,898

Recordkeeping $5,416 $0 $0 $5,416

Total $630,499 $148,823 $71,232 $850,553

Costs presented in 2007 dollars. a Exhibit contains rounding error. b Activity to be conducted in the fi rst year of rule implementation only.

Exhibit 10 Exports of SLABs:

Incremental Annual Costs to Affe cted Entities Following the First Year of Implementation a

Regulatory Change U.S. Exporter U.S. Transporter EPA Total

Notification $65,120 $0 $55,880 $121,000

Renotification $2,562 $0 $2,493 $5,056

Annual Report $118,011 $0 $12,808 $130,820

Additional Report $107 $0 $50 $157

Provide Acknowledgement of Consen t to Transporter $141,898 $0 $0 $141,898

Recordkeeping $5,416 $0 $0 $5,416

Total $333,114 $0 $71,232 $404,346

Costs presented in 2007 dollars.

a Exhibit contains rounding error.

4.3 Analysis of Costs to Affected En tities from Final Import Consent

Documentation Provision

Using the analytical data and assumptions discussed in Chapter 3 of this document,

EPA's cost model estimated the costs and cost savings to U.S. receivers and EPA under the import consent documentation provision of the fina l rule. The results of the cost model are presented in Attachment C, and di scussed in the following subsections.

4.3.1 U.S. Receiving Facility Submission to EPA

Under the final import consent documentati on provision, U.S. receivers will match the RCRA manifest to the relevant import notice consent documentation and will be required to submit both the import consent documentation with manifest submission to EPA within 30 days. The following paragraphs summarize the costs to U.S. importers and EPA under the final rule.45 U.S. Importers

EPA estimates that each importer will incu r $14.53 to locate the appropriate consent

documentation, match it to the relevant manifest , and submit a copy to EPA (see Exhibit C-1). Thus, U.S. receivers are expected to experi ence an annual cost of $39,429 (i.e., 2,712 shipments x $14.53/shipment) under the final rule.

EPA

We estimate that EPA will incur $2.47 to receive and file each consent document (see Exhibit C-1). Thus, the Agency is expected to experience an annua l cost of $6,699 (i.e., 2,712 shipments x $2.47/shipment) under the final rule.

4.3.2 Summary of Costs to Affected Entities under the Final Import Consent

Documentation Provision

Exhibit 11 summarizes the incremental annual costs of the import consent documentation provision of the final rule. Th ese costs include: (1) matching the import consent documentation to the manifest, and (2) submitting the documenta tion to EPA with manifest submission. As

shown in the exhibit, the total incremental annual cost for export shipments is estimated to be $46,127. The total incremental annual cost is expected to be $39,429 for the regulated community and $6,699 for EPA.

Exhibit 11 Import Consent Documentation:

Incremental Annual Costs to Affected Entities under the Final Rule a

Regulatory Change U.S. Importer U.S. Transporter EPA Total

Receiving Facility Submission to EPA $39,429 $0 $6,699 $46,127

Costs presented in 2007 dollars.

a Exhibit contains rounding error.

4.4 Alternative Cost Bound ing Analysis for SLABs

For contextual purposes we developed a wors t case cost bounding analysis assuming that all SLABs currently exported to Canada and Mexi co are diverted to ot her OECD Countries, or, alternatively, if Canada and Mexico exports we re to comply with 40 CFR 262 Subpart H. In addition, this bounding assessment applies the hi gh-end SLAB export data for Mexico, as developed by the Interna tional Trade Commission (ITC) 32 33 . While this high-end cost scenario

32 For 2006, the ITC estimated total (all categories) U.S. SLAB exports to Mexico at 1,086,446 metric tons vs. 198,775 metric tons for 2006 using the SEMARNAT (Mexican import) data.

33 In developing our SLAB impact estimates for the final rule, as presented in Section 4.2, we determined that import data (e.g., SEMARNAT) are generally more reliable than data from exporting countries (e.g., ITC) because importing countries use import information for tariff coll ection purposes. Thus, we have assumed that Mexican government officials will be motivated to record import data more accurately for the purposes of collecting tariffs. Further, the Mexican import statistics track precisely th e SLAB waste stream that would be controlled under the46 is not likely to occur under a ny actual current or future cond itions, we have developed this analysis to demonstrate the abso lute high-end cost impacts possibl e under a worst case scenario. Costs to comply with the additional requirements of 40 CFR 262 Subpart H, as described in this section are presented below.

Using the analytical data and assumptions discussed in Chapter 3, and substituting the ITC data for the Mexican import data, our impacts model estimated the costs and cost savings to U.S. exporters, U.S. transporters, and EPA assuming all SLABs were exported to OECD

countries other than Canada and Mexico or, altern atively, if Canada and Me xico exports were to comply with 40 CFR 262 Subpart H. Since the SL AB Rule applies only to the export of SLABs, U.S. Importers will not experien ce any costs or cost savings from the rule. The results of the cost model are presented in Attachment D, and discussed in th e following subsections.

4.4.1 Movement/Tracking Document

Under Subpart H Section 262.84, each time a U. S. Exporter ships SLABs to an OECD member country other than Canada and Mexico, the exporter is required to complete and submit to the carrier a movement/tracking document . No incremental costs are expected for transporters. In the following paragraphs, EP A discusses the costs associated with the movement/tracking document requirements.

U.S. Exporters

It is assumed that all SLABs are currently transported with shipping papers. The 1994

OECD EIA estimated that the incremental cost between a manifest and a movement/tracking document would be equivalent to 15 minutes of clerical labor. Based on the 1994 OECD EIA, it is assumed that the incremental cost to complete the additional information required by a movement/tracking document as opposed to shipping papers is equivalent to 20 minutes of

technical labor.

It is estimated that U.S. exporters wi ll experience an increm ental cost of $21.57 pershipment to prepare a movement/tracking document instead of shipping papers (see Exhibit D1). Thus, EPA estimates that U.S. expor ters will experience an annual cost of $1,518,549

EPA

We estimate that the Agency will incur $7.44 to receive and maintain each tracking document (see Exhibit D-1). Thus, the Agency is expected to experience a total incremental cost of $523,783 per year (i.e., 70,401 shipments x $7.44/shipment) under the final rule.

4.4.2 Exception Report

Under Subpart H Section 262.87(b), an exporter must file an exception report if they do

final rule, while the ITC data may capture other battery shipments and therefore overestimate the waste stream of

concern.47 not receive the necessary documentation required by the rule to confirm transfer of the waste and receipt by the recovery facility within the allotted period of time, or if the waste is returned to the U.S. Assumptions regarding the cost to prepar e, submit and maintain the exception reports and the number of exception reports required was obtained from ICR 801 “M odifications of the Hazardous Waste Manifest System – Proposed Rule.” Based on this ICR, it is estimated that 0.5 percent of all shipments (352) will require an exception report. No incremental costs are expected for transporters. In the following para graphs, we discus the co sts associated with the movement/tracking document requirements.

U.S. Exporters

It is estimated that the exporter will in cur $44.70 to submit and ma intain each exception report (see Exhibit D-2). Thus, U.S. exporters are expected to incur $15,734 per year (i.e., $44.70/shipment x 352 shipments) to file exception reports under the final rule.

EPA

The Agency is estimated to incur $7.44 to receive and maintain each exception report (see Exhibit D-2). Therefore, EPA is expected to experience an incremental cost of $2,619 per year (i.e., $7.44/shipment x 352 ship ments) under the final rule.

4.4.3 Certificate of Recovery

Under the final rule, recovery facilities mu st provide a certificat e of recovery to the exporter and to the competent aut horities of the countries of export and import. This certificate of recovery must be provided as soon as possi ble, but no later than 30 days after the completion of recovery and no later than one calendar year following receipt of waste. This analysis uses the same assumptions used to estimate these costs for the OECD rule in Section 4.1.3.

U.S. Exporters

U.S. exporters are estimated to incur $3.39 in costs per shipment to receive and maintain the certificate of recovery provided by the re covery facility (see Exhibit D-3). Thus, EPA estimates that U.S. exporters will experi ence an annual cost of $238,397 ($3.39/shipment x 70,401 shipments) under the final rule.

It is estimated that U.S. exporters wi ll experience an increm ental cost of $21.57 pershipment to prepare a movement/tracking document instead of shipping papers (see Exhibit D1). Thus, EPA estimates that U.S. expor ters will experience an annual cost of $1,518,549.

EPA

We estimate that the Agency will incur $2.98 per shipment to receive and maintain the certificate of recovery provided by the recovery facility (see Exhib it D-3). Thus, the Agency is expected to experience a total incremental cost of $209,513 per year (i.e., $2.98/shipment x 70,401 shipments) under the final rule.

4.4.4 Summary of Costs to Affected Entities Under the Alternative Cost Bounding Analysis for SLABs48 Exhibit 12 summarizes the incremental co sts under the alternative high-end cost assumption for SLABs. These costs include the co sts associated with: (1 ) reading the rule, (2)
notification, (3) re notification, (4) an nual reporting, (5) additional reporting, (6) recordkeeping, (7) the movement/tracking document, (8) the excep tion report, and (9) the certificate of recovery.

As shown in the exhibit, the to tal incremental cost is estima ted to be $5,591,410 during the first

year.

Exhibit 13 summarizes the incremental annual costs of this high-end alternative scenario after the first year of rule implementation. These costs do no t include the costs associated with reading the rule. As shown in the exhibit, the total incremental costs under this scenario are estimated to be $3,651,113 per year, with costs to the regulated community of $2,604,939 and costs to EPA of $1,046,174.49 Exhibit 12 Exports of SLABs Under Alternative Analysis:

Incremental Costs to Affected Entities durin g the First Year of Rule Implementation a

Regulatory Change U.S. Exporter U.S. Transporter EPA Total

Reading the Regulations b $1,293,532 $646,766 $0 $1,940,297

Notification $283,681 $0 $243,431 $527,112

Renotification $11,143 $0 $10,844 $21,986

Annual Report $513,421 $0 $55,736 $569,157

Additional Report $535 $0 $248 $783

Recordkeeping $23,568 $0 $0 $23,568

Tracking Document $1,518,550 $0 $523,783 $2,042,333

Exception Report $15,734 C $0 $2,619 $18,353

Certificate of Recovery $238,307 $0 $209,513 $447,821

Total $3,898,470 $646,766 $1,046,174 $5,591,410

Costs presented in 2007 dollars. Assumes all SLAB exports currently going to Canada and Mexico meet 40 CF R 262 Subpart H standards, or go to OECD countries othe r than

Canada and Mexico.

a Exhibit contains rounding error.

b Activity to be conducted in the first year of rule implementation only.

C Total impact attr ibutable to; (1) exporter does not received a copy of the movement documentation signed by a transporter st ating point of departure from the U.S., within 45 days of acceptance of waste, or, (2) within 90 days from the acceptance of waste, the export er does not received written confirmation from the recovery facility that the waste was received. No exception reports assumed due to retu rns. Available data do not indicate any return shipments to the U.S. of previously exported SLABs.

Exhibit 13 Exports of SLABs Under Alternative Analysis:

Incremental Annual Costs to Affect ed Entities under the Final Rule a

Regulatory Change U.S. Exporter U.S. Transporter EPA Total

Notification $283,681 $0 $243,431 $527,112

Renotification $11,143 $0 $10,844 $21,986

Annual Report $513,421 $0 $55,736 $569,157

Additional Report $535 $0 $248 $783

Recordkeeping $23,568 $0 $0 $23,568

Tracking Document $1,518,550 $0 $523,783 $2,042,333

Exception Report $15,734 C $0 $2,619 $18,353

Certificate of Recovery $238,307 $0 $209,513 $447,821

Total $2,604,939 $0 $1,046,174 $3,651,113

Costs presented in 2007 dollars. Assumes all SLAB exports currently going to Canada and Mexico meet 40 CF R 262 Subpart H standards, or go to OECD countries othe r than

Canada and Mexico.

a Exhibit contains rounding error.

C Total impact attr ibutable to; (1) exporter does not received a copy of the movement documentation signed by a transporter st ating point of departure from the U.S., within 45 days of acceptance of waste, or, (2) within 90 days from the acceptance of waste, the export er does not received written confirmation from the recovery facility that the waste was received. No exception reports assumed due to retu rns. Available data do not indicate any return shipments to the U.S. of previously exported SLABs.50 4.5 Combined Costs of OECD/SLAB a nd Import Consent Documentation

The separate costs impact analyses for th e OECD rule, the SLAB rule, and the import consent documentation requirements are combined in Exhibits 14 and 15 These exhibits show the aggregate impacts for the regulatory changes a nd the impacted parties. Exhibit 14 includes the cost impacts for the final SLAB rule, as an alyzed in section 4.2, and assumes that all SLABs are exported to Canada and Me xico. Exhibit 15 presents the aggregate cost impacts including the alternative SLAB analysis, as estimated in section 4.4. This “high end” SLAB scenario uses the ITC data for Mexican imports and assumes that all SLAB exports currently going to Canada

and Mexico would meet 40 CFR 262 Subpart H requirements, or go to OECD countries other

than Canada and Mexico.

As shown in Exhibit 14, the total first year cost impact of the final OECD/SLAB and Import Consent rulemaking is estimated at $0.91 m illion. Approximately 93.3% of this total is attributable to the SLAB por tion of the rule, followed by the import consent documentation requirements, accounting for 5.1%. The OECD portion of the fina l rule accounts for approximately 1.6% of the total. After the first year, the total incremental cost, omitting the cost of reading the rule, is estimated at $0.46 million, including $0.39 million to the regulated community and $0.079 million in Federal costs.

As shown in Exhibit 15 the total cost imp acts of the OECD/SLAB, plus Import Consent Documentation alternative “high end” analytical scenario is estimated at $5.65 million for the first year. Nearly 99% ($5.59 million) of this tota l is attributable to the SLAB portion, followed by the import consent documentation requirements accounting for approximately 0.9% ($0.05 million). The OECD portion accounts for about 0.2% ($0.01 million) of the to tal. After the first year, the total annual incremental costs are estimated at $3.71 million, including $2.65 million to the regulated community and slightly over $1.05 million in Federal costs.Exhibit 14Incremental Costs to Affected Entities under the OECD/SLAB and Import Consent Documentation, Final Rulesa, bExporterImporterTransporterEPATotalReading the Regulationsc$298,069$1,712$151,220$0$451,001Exemption for Wastes Destined for Laboratory Analysis($2,060)($99)($66)($1,667)($3,892)Certificate of Recovery$1,621$7,444$0$2,306$11,371Exchange and Accumulation Recovery Operations$74$1,926$0$170$2,170Return of Wastes$0$22$0$29$51Notification$65,120$0$0$55,880$121,000Renotification$2,562$0$0$2,493$5,056Annual Report$118,011$0$0$12,808$130,820Additional Report$107$0$0$50$157Acknowledgment of Consent to Transporter$141,898$0$0$0$141,898Recordkeeping$5,416$0$0$0$5,416Sub Total-OECD/SLAB$630,818$11,005$151,154$72,069$865,048EPA Import Consent Documentation$0$39,429$0$6,699$46,127First Year Grand Total:$630,818$50,434$151,154$78,768$911,176Annual Total After First Year:$332,749$48,721($66)$78,768$460,173Costs presented in 2007 dollars.aExhibit contains rounding error.bNumbers in parentheses indicate cost savings rather than costs.cActivity to be conducted in the first year of rule implementation only.5152Exhibit 15OECD/SLAB Rule and Import Consent Documentation Requirements Using Alternative SLAB Analysis:Incremental Costs to Affected Entities during the First Year of Rule Implementationa, bRegulatory ChangeU.S. ExporterU.S. ImporterU.S.TransporterEPATotalReading the Regulationsc$1,294,216$1,712$649,163$0$1,945,091Exemption for Wastes Destined for LaboratoryAnalysis($2,060)($99)($66)($1,667)($3,892)Certificate of Recovery$239,929$7,444$0$211,820$459,193Exchange and Accumulation RecoveryOperations$74$1,926$0$170$2,169Return of Wastes$0$22$0$29$51Notification$283,681$0$0$243,431$527,112Renotification$11,143$0$0$10,844$21,986Annual Report$513,421$0$0$55,736$569,157Additional Report$535$0$0$248$783Acknowledgement of Consent to Transporter$618,406$0$0$0$618,406Recordkeeping$23,568$0$0$0$23,568Movement/Tracking Document$1,518,550$0$0$523,783$2,042,333Exception Report$15,734C$0$0$2,619$18,353Import Consent Documentation$0$39,429$0$6,699$46,127Total$3,898,790$50,434$649,097$1,053,711$5,652,031Costs presented in 2007 dollars.Assumes all SLAB exports currently going toCanada and Mexico meet 40 CFR 262 Subpart H standards, orgo to OECD countries other than Canada and Mexico.aExhibit contains rounding error.bNumbers in parentheses indicate cost savings rather than costs.cActivity to be conducted in the first year of rule implementation only.CTotal impact attributable to; (1) exporter does not received a copy ofthe movement documentation signed by a transporter stating point of departure from the U.S.,within 45 days of acceptance of waste, or, (2) within 90 days from the acceptance of waste, the exporter does not received written confirmation from the recovery facilitythat the waste was received. No exception reports assumed due to returns. Available data do not indicate any return shipmentsto the U.S. of previously exported SLABs.53 4.6 Qualitative Benefits of the Final Rule

The qualitative benefits of this OECD/SLA B and Import Consent Documentation Final

Rule include:

• Consistency with OECD Decision C92001)107/ FINAL. This rule is necessary to implement the OECD Council Decision C 92001)107/FINAL, and thereby enables the U.S. to meet its legal obligations as an OECD Member country.

• Increased regulatory efficiency. The OECD portion of the rule implements provisions in the OECD Decision that were meant to clarify the scope of control and make the control procedures more precise. In addition, the rule implements technical corrections and clarifications to the language contained in the existing regulations.

• Consistent with OECD Council Decision C( 2001)107/FINAL. This rule eliminates the red control procedure. As a result, fo rmer red-list wastes are now subject to the amber control procedure, which allows tacit co nsent. Exporters will be able to ship wastes more quickly and store for shorter periods of time.

• Reduction of risks associated with treatment and disposal of hazardous wastes. Implementation of the OECD Decision allows for the continued shipment and recovery of hazardous wastes among OECD Countries. This provides additional opportunities for wastes amenable to recove ry operations to be managed in an environmentally sound manner and provides an a lternative to disposal. Thus the rule encourages environmentally sound recovery of hazardous wastes, thereby reducing the risks associated with treatment and disposal.

• Improved ability to acquire information re garding the quantities of SLABs exported

from the U.S. and the destination facil ities to which the SLABs are exported. Currently there is a lack of data to provide the assura nce that SLABs exported to other countries (with the exception of Cana da) are recycled in properly licensed facilities in an environmentally sound manner. 34 Notification and tracking requirements will ensure that all wastes are managed at facilities with appropriate technologies and environmental controls.

• Revising the exception reporting text to spec ify submission directly to OECA rather

than to the EPA Administrator should ensu re better tracking of returns and improved U.S. exporters’ compliance with the excepti on report requirements in Subpart E and Subpart H.

• Requiring the inclusion of documentation confirming EPA’s consent to import along with the receiving facility’s submission of individual import shipment manifests to

EPA will enable EPA to better match indivi dual import shipments against a specific foreign notice to which EPA consented. This will help EPA identify when import

34 Practices and Options for Environmentally Sound Management of Spent Lead-Acid Batteries within North America, December 2007. Prepared by the Commission for Environmental Cooperation.54 shipments coming in under a specific fore ign notice had exceeded the specific

notice’s total allowable number of sh ipments and maximum allowable import quantity.

4.7 Limitations of Analysis

The reader should be aware of the followi ng key data limitations associated with this analysis:

• Universe of SLAB Exporters : In calculating the economic impacts associated with the SLAB rulemaking, we assumed the number of entities to be 640, as extrapolated from

data received from Environment Canada a nd the Secretaría de Medio Ambiente y
Recursos Naturales (SEMARNAT). The Economic Census of 2002 indicated that there were about 240 entities exporti ng SLABs at the time of the survey. Furthermore, extrapolated findings ba sed on Environment Canada and ITC data 35

would indicate a total of 2,785 entities. There has been phenomenal growth in the SLAB export volume in recent years. As a re sult, it is possible that the universe of exporters is greater than our 640 estimate. Accordingly, our current estimate could

lead to an underestimation of costs.

• Universe of Waste Transporters . Data on the number of U.S. transporters involved in the export and import of hazardous wastes destined for recovery among OECD Countries are not generally available. For purposes of our OECD analysis we assumed one U.S. transporter for each U. S. exporter and U.S. importer. For our SLAB analysis, we assumed that each transp orter serviced two exporters. While these are reasonable assumptions, the actual number could potentially fluctuate significantly. For example, one transporter could be providing service to many small exporters, in which case the 1: 2 transporter-to-exporter ra tio for the SLAB analysis could overestimate the number of transporte rs. Accordingly, this could lead to an

overestimation of the total cost.

• Universe of Hazardous Waste Exporters to OECD Countries: The Exports Report

Database includes universal wastes and may overstate the number of exporters and export shipments subject to the requir ements of 40 CFR part 262, Subpart H.

• Number of Shipments to OECD Countries: The RCRAInfo data used in this analysis may not fully reflect the total number of sh ipments subject to the requirements of 40

CFR part 262, Subpart H.

35 In developing our estimate for the Universe of SLAB exporters, we determined that import data (e.g., SEMARNAT) are generally more reliable than data from exporting countries (e.g., ITC) because importing countries use import information for tariff collection purposes. Thus, we have assumed that Mexican government officials will be motivated to record impo rt data more accurately for the purposes of collecting tariffs. Further, the Mexican import statistics track precisely the SLAB waste st ream that would be controlled under the final rule, while the ITC data may capture other battery shipments and theref ore overestimate the waste stream of concern. Due to

these factors, we determined that th e ITC SLAB export data could be significantly overstated for 2006 and avoided using this source, except under our high-end bounding scenario.55 • Variability in the Number of SLAB Shipments: There seems to be a fair amount of variation in the number of shipments of SLABs and the destina tion countries from year to year, perhaps because of the fluctua tions in the price of lead over time. This analysis is based on data for 2006, and doe s not try to capture that variability, primarily due to: the limited availability of Census data; and inconsistencies in data groupings between Census data, International Trade commission data, U.S. Geological Survey data, and data fr om other government sources.56 5. OTHER ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS

This chapter briefly discusses EPA's analysis and determinations under Federal statutory requirements and Executive Orders applicab le to Federal rules. These include:

• Executive Order 12866: Regulat ory Planning and Review;

• Paperwork Reduction Act;

• Regulatory Flexibility Act;

• Unfunded Mandates Reform Act;

• Executive Order 13132: Federalism;

• Executive Order 13084: Consultation a nd Coordination with Indian Tribal

Governments;

• Executive Order 13045: Protection of Child ren from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks;

• Executive Order 12898: Environmental Justice;

• Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerni ng Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Dist ribution, or Use; and

• National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

5.1 Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

Executive Order 12866, as amended by Ex ecutive Order 13258, requires EPA to determine whether a regulatory action is "si gnificant" and therefore subject to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review and the requirements of the Executive Order. As defined in Executive Order 12866, a "significant re gulatory action" is any regulatory action that is likely to result in a rule that may: (1) have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local , or Tribal governments
or communities; (2) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise inte rfere with an action taken or planned by another agency; (3) mate rially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the right s and obligations of recipients thereof; or (4) raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth

in the Executive Order.

Based on our analysis, we believe that this rule is not an ec onomically significant regulatory action, as defined under point number one a bove. As such, this action is not subject to the comprehensive cost-benefit assessment under full OMB/OIRA review. The Agency made

this determination based on several factors. First, the rule will not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more. Examination of the costs in Chapter 4 of this document

shows that the annual costs under the rule will to tal less than one million dollars under the likely cost scenario (see Exhibit 14), and approxi mately $5.6 million under our high-end cost bounding

scenario. (see Exhibit 15).

In addition to the question of economic signif icance, this rule will not create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interf ere with an action taken or pla nned by another agency; will not materially alter the budgetary imp act of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs, or the rights and obligations of recipien ts thereof; and is not expected to raise novel legal or policy

issues.57 5.2 Paperwork Reduction Act

Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), the Agency is required to obtain OMB approval before the Agency can collect information from ten or more non-Federal respondents. In order to obtain OMB approval, EPA will prepare and submit to OMB an ICR. The ICR provides an overview of the collection a nd includes and estimate of the hour and cost burden placed on respondents. Th e final rule includes new inform ation collection requirements subject to OMB review under the PRA.

Under the PRA, burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclo se or provide informati on to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to revi ew instructions; devel op, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purpos es of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining informa tion, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any prev iously applicable instru ctions and requirements; train personnel to be able to res pond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete

and review the collection of info rmation; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.

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 number for this supporting ICR 36 is: 2308.01. This ICR document is available in the docket established in sup port of today’s action.

5.3 Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), requires EPA to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis for any rule that will ha ve a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities (i.e., small busine sses, small governments, and small non-profit organizations). However, a regulatory flexibilit y analysis is not required if the Administrator certifies that the rule will not have a signifi cant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. SBREFA further requires EPA to provide a statement of the factual basis for certifying that a rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of

small entities.

The Agency has examined the final rule's poten tial effects on small entities as required by

the RFA/SBREFA. We have dete rmined that the rule will not result in a significant impact on a

substantial number of small entities. This determination was made by comparing annual compliance costs under the rule to the average annual sales of small business in the industry sectors likely affected by the rule. According to the U.S. Small Business Administration's small

business size standards, firms in most of th ese industry sectors are classified as a "small business" if they have fewer than 750 employees . However, for purposes of this analysis, we determined that this threshold may be too hi gh and could mask the pot ential effects on the

36 Supporting Statement for EPA Information Collection Request Number 2308.01 - Revisions to the Requirements for Transboundary Shipments of Wastes between OECD Countries, to the Requirements for Export Shipments of Spent Lead Acid Batteries, to the Requirements on Submitting Exception Reports for Export Shipments of Hazardous Wastes, and to the Requirements for Import Shipments of Hazardous Wastes.58 smallest, most vulnerable firms. Therefore, the Agency selected a threshold for firms with fewer than 20 employees. As shown in Exhibit 16, for firms with fewer than 20 employees, the annual compliance cost as a percentage of annual sales is less than 0.1 percent. Th erefore, the final rule will not have a significant economic impact on these firms. Based on the above, the Agency has determined that the rule will not have a signif icant economic impact on a substantial number of

small entities.

5.4 Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the eff ects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and Tribal governments and the private sector . Under Section 202 of the UMRA, EPA must prepare a written statement for ru les with Federal mandates that ma y result in the expenditure by State, local, and Tribal governments, in the aggr egate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any one year. Before promulgating a rule for which a written statement is needed, Section 205 of the UMRA requires EPA to iden tify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the least costly, most cost -effective or least burdensome alternative that achieves the obj ectives of the rule. The provisions of Section 205 do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover, S ection 205 allows EPA to adopt an

alternative other than the least costly, most cost-effective or le ast burdensome alternative if the Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation of why that alternative was not adopted.

Before EPA establishes any regulatory requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small governments, including Tribal gov ernments, it must have developed, under Section 203 of the UMRA, a small government agency pl an. The plan must provide for notifying potentially affected small governments; enabli ng officials of affected small governments to provide meaningful and timely input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant Federal intergovernment al mandates; and informing, educating, and advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory requirements.

We have determined that this rule does not contain a Federal mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more by State, local , and Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, in any one year. In addition, the rule contains no regulatory requirements for small governments. Thus, we believe that this final rule is not subject to the requirements of Sections 202, 203, and 205 of the UMRA.59 Exhibit 16

Evaluation of the Economic Impacts on Small Businesses

Industry Sector NAICS

Code Number of

Firms with

Fewer than 20

Employees Annual

Sales Per Facility (2007$) a Annual Compliance

Cost ($) b Annual Compliance Cost as a Percentage

of Sales

SLAB Rule
Storage Battery Manufacturing 335911 49 1,511,476 620 0.04%

Motor vehicle supplies and new parts merchant

wholesalers 423120 12840 3,181,891 620 0.02%

Recyclable Material

Wholesaler 423930 5133 2,636,310 620 0.02%

Alternative SLAB Rule
Storage Battery Manufacturing 335911 49 1,511,476 1,210 0.08%

Motor vehicle supplies and new parts merchant

wholesalers 423120 12840 3,181,891 1,210 0.04%

Recyclable Material

Wholesaler 423930 5133 2,636,310 1,210 0.05%

OECD Rule
Electrometallurgical ferroalloy product manufacturing 331112 7 807,629 227 0.03%

Primary smelting and refining of copper 331411 7 1,606,714 227 0.01%

Secondary smelting, refining, and alloying of

copper 331423 13 4,141,681 227 0.01%

Secondary smelting, refining, and alloying of nonferrous metal (except copper and aluminum) 331492 137 2,201,797 227 0.01%

Hazardous waste treatment and disposal 562211 390 1,424,652 227 0.02%

Materials recovery facility 56292 621 971,543 227 0.02%
Import Consent Rule
Recyclable Material

Wholesaler 423930 5133 2,636,310 304 0.01%

Materials Recovery

Facilities 562920 621 971,543 304 0.03%

Recyclable Material

Collection Services, Solid

Waste Collection 562111 5620 1,014,036 304 0.03%

Hazardous Waste Collectors 562112 388 1,952,166 304 0.02%

Other Waste Collection 562119 457 423,059 304 0.07%

a Based on 2002 U.S. Census Bureau data, updated to 2007 dollars using the GDP Implic it Price Deflator (1.15)

b Based on an annual compliance cost calculated as the aggr egate annual costs incurred by all exporters, importers and transporters, divided by the total number of affected entities. First year costs were annualized over 10 years using a discoun t factor of seven percent60 5.5 Executive Order 13132: Federalism

Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure a meaningful and timely input by Stat e and local officials in the de velopment of regulatory policies that have "Federalism implications." As de fined in Executive Order 13132, policies that have "Federalism implications" includ e regulations, legisla tive comments or proposed legislation, and other policy statements or acti ons that have substantial dire ct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the vari ous levels of government.

Under Section 6 of Executive Order 13132, EP A may not issue a regulation that has Federalism implications, that imposes substan tial direct compliance costs, and that is not required by statute, unless the Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by State and local gover nments, or EPA consults with State and local officials early in the process of developing the proposed regulation. EPA may not issue a regulation that has Federalism im plications and that preempts State law, unless the Agency consults with State and local officials early in the process of de veloping the regulation.

Today’s final rule does not have Federali sm implications because State and local governments do not administer the import and export requirements under RCRA. In addition,

the rule will not have substantia l direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the di stribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this rule.

5.6 Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal

Governments

Executive Order 13175 requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure meaningful and timely input by Tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies that have "Tribal implications." As defined in Executive Order 13175, policies that have "Tribal implications" include regulations , legislative comments or proposed legislation, and other policy

statements or actions that have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian Tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes, or on th e distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes.

The Agency has determined that this rule doe s not have Tribal implications because no Tribal governments are known to ow n or operate businesses that may be affected by this rule. In

addition, the rule will not have substantial direct effects on Tribal governments, on the relationship between the Federal government and Indian Tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Fe deral government and Indian Trib es, as specified in Executive

Order 13175. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule.61 5.7 Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks

Executive Order 13045 applies to any rule that may: (1) be "econo mically significant"
under Executive Order 12866 (i.e., a rulemaking that has an annua l effect on the economy of $100 million or more or would adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environm ent, public health or safety, or State, local, or Tribal governments or communities), and (2) concern an environmental health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a disproportionate eff ect on children. If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health or safety effects of the planne d rule on children, and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other potentially e ffective and reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.

We have determined that this rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is not economically significant as defined under Executive Order 12866. In addition, the Agency does not have reason to believe that this rule pr esents disproportionate or additional risks to

children.

5.8 Executive Order 12898: Environmental Justice

Under Executive Order 12898, as well as through EPA's April 1995, Environmental Justice Strategy, OSWER Environmental Justice Task Force Action Agency Report and National Environmental Justice Advisory Council, EPA has undertaken to inco rporate environmental justice into its policies and programs. EPA is committed to addressing environmental justice concerns, and is assuming a leadership role in environmental justice initiatives to enhance environmental quality for all residents of the U. S. The Agency's goals are to ensure that no segment of the population, regardless of race, color, national origin, or income, bears disproportionately high and adverse human health and environmental effects as a result of EPA's policies, programs, and activities.

This rule is intended to, among other thi ngs: improve the understanding, implementation, and enforcement of existing regulations; enha nce waste tracking procedures; and increase accountability among all parties associat ed with international shipments. As such, this rule is not expected to have any disproporti onately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority populations or low-income populations.

5.9 Executive Order 13211: Actions Con cerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

Executive Order 13211 requires EPA to prepare and submit a Statement of Energy Effects to OMB for those matters identified as significant energy actions. As defined in Executive Order 13211, a "significant energy action" is any action by an agency (normally published in the Federal Register ) that promulgates or is expected to lead to the promulgation of a final rule or regulation, incl uding notices of inquiry, advanc e notices of proposed rulemaking, and notices of proposed rulemaking that: (1) is a significant regulat ory action under Executive Order 12866 or any successor order and is likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy; or (2) is designated by OMB as a si gnificant energy action.62 This rule does not involve the supply, dist ribution, or use of energy. Thus, Executive Order 13211 does not apply to this rule.

5.10 National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

Section 12(d) of the Nati onal Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory activities unless to do so would be in consistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standard s are technical stan dards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling procedur es) that are developed or adopted by voluntary

consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA also directs EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use available and applic able voluntary consensus

standards.

This rule does not involve the use of voluntary consensus standards. Thus, the rule is not subject to the requirements of Section 12(d) of the NTTAA.ATTACHMENT A

ESTIMATION OF COSTS AND COST SAVINGS FOR OECD RULEExhibit A-1Reading the RuleCost per EntityCost of All EntitiesActivityManagerialStaff HoursTechnical StaffHoursClerical StaffHoursHoursLabor CostaMaterialsCostbTotal CostNumber ofEntitiesCTotal CostReading the RegulationsU.S. Exporters0.501.000.001.50$114.14$0.00$114.146$684.84U.S. Importers0.501.000.001.50$114.14$0.00$114.1415$1,712.10U.S. Transporters0.501.000.001.50$114.14$0.00$114.1421$2,396.94Total42$4,793.88aBased on hourly rates discussed in Section 3.1 of this document.bBased on materials costs discussed in Section 3.2 of this document.cBased on universe assumptions discussed in Section 3.3 of this document.A-1Exhibit A-2Exemption for Wastes Destined forLaboratory Analysis - ExportsCost per ShipmentCost for All ShipmentsActivityManagerialStaff HoursTechnicalStaff HoursClerical StaffHoursTotalHoursLaborCostaMaterialsCostbTotalCostNumber ofShipmentscTotalCostExports from the U.S. to OCED CountriesU.S. ExportersPrepare and Submit Notification to EPA0.101.801.503.40$177.14$4.24$181.3810$1,813.79Complete and Sign Movement/Tracking Document0.000.250.000.25$16.18$0.00$16.1810$161.78Receive and maintain copy of notification of intent toexport, Acknowledgment of Receipt, writtenconsent/objection, and signed movement/trackingdocument provided by the recovery facility0.000.000.250.25$8.46$0.00$8.4610$84.63Subtotal0.102.051.753.90$201.78$4.24$206.0210$2,060.19U.S. TransportersUpon obtaining physical custody of the waste, sign themovement/tracking document0.000.010.000.01$0.65$0.00$0.6510$6.47Maintain copy of signed movement/tracking document0.000.000.100.10$3.39$0.00$3.3910$33.85Upon delivery of the waste, obtain signed copy ofmovement/tracking document from the OECD Countryrecovery facility0.000.010.000.01$0.65$0.00$0.6510$6.47Subtotal0.000.020.100.12$4.68$0.00$4.6810$46.79EPAReceive and process notification from U.S. exporter0.001.000.001.00$51.33$0.00$51.3310$513.30Prepare and transmit confirmation of receipt to U.S.exporter0.000.000.250.25$7.44$0.12$7.5610$75.60Forward notification to the competent authorities of thecountries of import and transit0.000.000.160.16$4.76$0.24$5.0010$50.02Receive and process Acknowledgement of Receipt fromthe competent authority of the country of import0.000.000.250.25$7.44$0.00$7.4410$74.40Receive and process consent/objection from thecompetent authorities of the countries of import andtransit0.000.000.160.16$4.76$0.00$4.7610$47.62Forward Acknowledgement of Receipt and written0.000.000.250.25$7.44$0.12$7.5610$75.60A-2Cost per ShipmentCost for All ShipmentsActivityManagerialStaff HoursTechnicalStaff HoursClerical StaffHoursTotalHoursLaborCostaMaterialsCostbTotalCostNumber ofShipmentscTotalCostconsent/objection to U.S. exporterReceive and process signed copy of movement/trackingdocument provided by the OECD Country recoveryfacility0.000.000.250.25$7.44$0.00$7.4410$74.40Subtotal0.001.001.322.32$90.61$0.48$91.0910$910.93Total0.103.073.176.34$297.07$4.72$301.7910$3,017.91aBased on hourly rates discussed in Section 3.1 of this document.bBased on materials costs discussed in Section 3.2 of this document.cBased on universe assumptions discussed in Section 3.3 of this document.A-3Exhibit A-2 (continued)Exemption for Wastes Destined forLaboratory Analysis - ImportsCostper ShipmentCost for All ShipmentsActivityManagerialStaff HoursTechnicalStaff HoursClericalStaff HoursTotalHoursLaborCostaMaterialsCostbTotalCostNumber ofShipmentscTotalCostImports to the U.S. from OECD CountriesU.S. ImportersReceive and maintain copyof confirmation of receipt000.250.25$8.46$0.00$8.464$33.85Sign movement/tracking document and provide copy toOECD Country exporter, EPA and competent authorityof the countryof export0.0800.250.33$16.37$0.00$16.374$65.49Subtotal0.0800.50.58$24.83$0.00$24.834$99.34U.S. TransportersUpon obtaining physical custody of the waste, sign themovement/tracking document00.0100.01$0.65$0.00$0.654$2.59Maintain copy of signed movement/tracking document000.10.1$3.39$0.00$3.394$13.54Upon delivery of the waste, obtain signed copy ofmovement/tracking document from the OECD Countryrecovery facility00.0100.01$0.65$0.00$0.654$2.59Subtotal00.020.10.12$4.68$0.00$4.684$18.72EPAReceive and process notification from the competentauthority of the country of export0101$51.33$0.00$51.334$205.32Prepare and transmit Acknowledgment of Receipt to thecompetent authorities of the countries of export andt it000.250.25$7.44$0.24$7.684$30.72Prepare and transmit confirmation of receipt to U.S.importer000.250.25$7.44$0.12$7.564$30.24Review notification to determine if U.S. recovery facilityis authorized to handle the waste0.51.502$107.33$0.00$107.334$429.30Prepare and provide written consent/objection to thecompetent authorities of the countries of export andtransit000.250.25$7.44$0.24$7.684$30.72Receive and process signed copy of movement/trackingdocument provided by the U.S. recovery facility000.250.25$7.44$0.00$7.444$29.76A-4Costper ShipmentCost for All ShipmentsActivityManagerialStaff HoursTechnicalStaff HoursClericalStaff HoursTotalHoursLaborCostaMaterialsCostbTotalCostNumber ofShipmentscTotalCostSubtotal0.52.514$188.42$0.60$189.024$756.06Total0.582.521.64.7$217.93$0.60$218.534$874.11aBased on hourly rates discussed in Section 3.1 of this document.bBased on materials costs discussed in Section 3.2 of this document.cBased on universe assumptions discussed in Section 3.3 of this document.A-5Exhibit A-3Certificate of RecoveryCost per ShipmentCost for All ShipmentsActivityManagerialStaff HoursTechnicalStaff HoursClerical StaffHoursTotalHoursLabor CostaMaterialsCostbTotal CostNumber ofShipmentscTotal CostExports from the U.S. to OCED CountriesExportersReceive and maintain the certificate ofrecovery provided by the OECD Countryrecovery facility0.000.000.100.10$3.39$0.00$3.39479$1,621.42EPAReceive and maintain the certificate ofrecovery provided by the OECD Countryrecovery facility0.000.000.100.10$2.98$0.00$2.98479$1,425.50Total0.000.000.200.20$6.36$0.00$6.36479$3,046.92Imports to the U.S. from OECD CountriesImportersPrepare and provide certificate of recoveryto OECD Country exporter, EPA, and thecompetent authority of the country of export0.000.200.250.45$21.40$0.36$21.76296$6,442.29Maintain copy of certificate of recovery0.000.000.100.10$3.39$0.00$3.39296$1,001.96Subtotal0.000.200.350.55$24.79$0.36$25.15296$7,444.25EPAReceive and Maintain the certificate ofrecovery provided by the U.S. recoveryfacility0.000.000.100.10$2.98$0.00$2.98296$880.90Total0.000.200.450.65$27.77$0.36$28.13296$8,325.15aBased on hourly rates discussed in Section 3.1 of this document.bBased on materials costs discussed in Section 3.2 of this document.cBased on universe assumptions discussed in Section 3.3 of this document.A-6Exhibit A-4Exchange and Accumulation Recovery OperationsCost per ShipmentCost for All ShipmentsActivityManagerialStaff HoursTechnical StaffHoursClerical StaffHoursTotal HoursLaborCostaMaterialsCostbTotalCostNumber ofShipmentscTotal CostExports from the U.S. to OCED CountriesExportersIndicate in the notification therecovery facility where subsequentR1-R11 recovery took place0.000.020.000.02$1.29$0.00$1.2957$73.77EPAReceive and maintain the certificateof recovery provided by the OECDCountry R12/R13 recovery facility0.000.000.100.10$2.98$0.00$2.9857$169.63Total0.000.020.100.12$4.27$0.00$4.2757$243.40Imports to the U.S. from OECD CountriesImportersSign movement/tracking documentand provide copy to OECD Countryexporter, EPA, and competentauthority of the country of export0.080.000.250.33$16.37$0.00$16.3736$589.37Maintain copy of signedmovement/tracking document0.000.000.100.10$3.39$0.00$3.3936$121.86Prepare and provide certificate ofrecovery to OECD Country exporter,EPA, and competent authority of thecountry of export0.000.200.250.45$21.40$0.36$21.7636$783.52Obtain certificate of recovery fromthe U.S. R1-R11 facility0.000.000.160.16$5.42$0.90$6.3236$227.38Provide copy of certificate ofrecovery to EPA and the competentauthority of the country of export0.000.000.160.16$5.42$0.24$5.6636$203.62Total0.080.200.921.20$51.99$1.50$53.4936$1,925.74aBased on hourly rates discussed in Section 3.1 of this document.bBased on materials costs discussed in Section 3.2 of this document.cBased on universe assumptions discussed in Section 3.3 of this document.A-7A-8Exhibit A-5Return of WastesCost per ShipmentCost for All ShipmentsActivityManagerialStaff HoursTechnicalStaff HoursClerical StaffHoursTotalHoursLaborCostaMaterialsCostbTotal CostNumber ofShipmentscTotal CostExports from the U.S. to OCED CountriesEPA$2.98Receive and maintain notification ofthe return of the waste provided by thecompetent authority of the country ofimport0.000.000.100.10$2.98$0.00$2.981Imports to the U.S. from OCED CountriesU.S. ImporterPrepare and Submit Notification toEPA. (U.S. importer must informEPA [ ....] of the need to return theshipment.Assumes: importercompletes return within 90 days,return shipment does not cross anynew transit country.)0.000.200.250.45$21.40$0.44(mailed)$21.841$21.84EPAInform the competent authorities ofthe countries of export and transitabout the return of the wastes0.000.500.000.50$25.67$0.12(FAX)$25.791$25.79$50.61Total0.000.500.100.60$50.05$0.56$50.61--aBased on hourly rates discussed in Section 3.1 of the source document.bBased on materials costs discussed in Section 3.2 of the source document. Plus, assumes April 2009 first-class postage of $0.42 plus $0.01 for envelopand$0.01 for one sheet ofpaper.cBased on universe assumptions discussed in Section 3.3 of the source document.ATTACHMENT B

ESTIMATION OF COSTS FOR THE SLAB RULEExhibit B-1Reading the RuleCostper EntityCost of All EntitiesActivityManagerialStaff HoursTechnical StaffHoursClerical StaffHoursHoursLaborCostaMaterialsCostbTotal CostNumber ofEntitiescTotal CostReading the RegulationsU.S. Exporters1.002.500.003.50$260.64$0.00$260.641,141$297,385U.S. Transporters1.002.500.003.50$260.64$0.00$260.64571$148,823Total1,712$446,207aBased on hourly rates discussed in Section 3.1 of theCost Assessment.bBased on materials costs discussed in Section 3.2 of theCost Assessment.cBased on universe assumptions discussed in Section 3.4 and 4.7 of theCost Assessmentandthe revisions noted above.Note: We assume that there is one transporter for every two exporters.B-1Exhibit B-2NotificationCostper NoticeCost of All NoticesActivityManagerial StaffHoursTechnicalStaff HoursClerical StaffHoursHoursLabor CostaMaterialsCostbTotal CostNumber ofNoticescTotal CostNotificationU.S. ExportersPrepare and submit notification0.001.500.001.50$97.07$0.42$97.49668$65,120Total0.001.500.001.50$97.07$0.42$97.49668$65,120EPAReceive and process notification0.001.000.001.00$51.33$0.00$51.33668$34,288Prepare and transmit confirmation ofreceipt to U.S. exporter0.000.000.250.25$7.44$0.12$7.56668$5,050Forward notificationto the competentauthorities of the countries of importand transit0.000.000.160.16$4.76$0.24$5.00668$3,341Receive and processAcknowledgement of Receipt from thecompetent authority of the country ofimport0.000.000.250.25$7.44$0.00$7.44668$4,970Receive and process consent/objectionfrom the competent authorities of thecountries of import and transit0.000.000.160.16$4.76$0.00$4.76668$3,181Forward written Acknowledgement ofConsent or objection to U.S. exporter0.000.000.250.25$7.44$0.12$7.56668$5,050Total0.001.001.072.07$83.17$0.48$83.65668$55,880aBased on hourly rates discussed in Section 3.1 of theCost Assessment.bBased on materials costs discussed in Section 3.2 of theCost Assessment.cBased on universe assumptions discussed in Section 3.4 of theCost Assessmentand the revisionsnoted above.B-2Exhibit B-3RenotificationCostper NoticeCost of All NoticesActivityManagerialStaff HoursTechnicalStaff HoursClerical StaffHoursHoursLabor CostaMaterialsCostbTotal CostNumber ofNoticescTotal CostRenotificationU.S. ExportersCollect specific changes0.000.500.000.50$32.36$0.00$32.3643$1,391Prepare and submit renotification0.100.000.500.60$26.81$0.42$27.2343$1,171Total0.100.500.501.10$59.17$0.42$59.5943$2,562EPAReceive and process notification0.000.500.000.50$25.67$0.00$25.6743$1,104Prepare and transmit confirmation ofreceipt to U.S. exporter0.000.000.250.25$7.44$0.12$7.5643$325Forward notificationto the competentauthorities of the countries of importand transit0.000.000.160.16$4.76$0.24$5.0043$215Receive and processAcknowledgement of Receipt from thecompetent authority of the country ofimport0.000.000.250.25$7.44$0.00$7.4443$320Receive and process consent/objectionfrom the competent authorities of thecountries of import and transit0.000.000.160.16$4.76$0.00$4.7643$205Forward written Acknowledgement ofConsent or objection to U.S. exporter0.000.000.250.25$7.44$0.12$7.5643$325Total0.000.501.071.57$57.51$0.48$57.9943$2,493aBased on hourly rates discussed in Section 3.1 of theCost Assessment.bBased on materials costs discussed in Section 3.2 of theCost Assessment.cBased on universe assumptions discussed in Section 3.4 of theCost Assessmentand therevisions noted above.B-3Exhibit B-4Annual ReportCostper EntityCost for all EntitiesActivityManagerialStaff HoursTechnical StaffHoursClerical StaffHoursHoursLabor CostaMaterialsCostbTotal CostNumber ofEntitiescTotal CostAnnual ReportLarge U.S. ExportersResearch specific exportinformation0.001.001.002.00$98.56$0.00$98.56613$60,417Prepare and submit report0.101.000.301.40$84.75$4.24$88.99613$54,551Small U.S. Exporters$183.31$4.24Research specific exportinformation0.000.500.501.00$49.28$0.00$49.2827$1,331Prepare and submit report0.100.500.501.10$59.17$4.24$63.4127$1,712Total0.203.002.305.50$108.45$4.24$300.24640$118,011EPAReceive and record report0.000.100.500.60$20.01$0.00$20.01640$12,808Total0.000.100.500.60$20.01$0.00$20.01640$12,808aBased on hourly rates discussed in Section 3.1 of theCost Assessment.bBased on materials costs discussed in Section 3.2 of theCost Assessment.cBased on universe assumptions discussed in Section 3.4 of theCost Assessmentandthe revisions noted above.B-4Exhibit B-5Additional ReportCostper EntityCost for all EntitiesActivityManagerialStaff HoursTechnical StaffHoursClerical StaffHoursHoursLabor CostaMaterialsCostbTotal CostNumber ofReportscTotal CostAdditional ReportU.S. ExportersCollect and provideadditional information0.000.500.501.00$49.28$4.24$53.522$107Total0.000.500.501.00$49.28$4.24$53.522$107EPAReceive and processRequest for AdditionalInformation from thecompetent authority of thecountry of import0.000.000.250.25$7.44$0.00$7.442$15Forward request foradditional information toU.S. Exporter0.000.000.160.16$4.76$0.12$4.882$10Receive and processadditional info from U.S.Exporter0.000.000.250.25$7.44$0.00$7.442$15Forward additional info tocountries of import andtransit0.000.000.160.16$4.76$0.24$5.002$10Total0.000.000.820.82$24.40$0.36$24.762$50aBased on hourly rates discussed in Section 3.1 of theCost Assessment.bBased on materials costs discussed in Section 3.2 of theCost Assessment.cBased on universe assumptions discussed in Section 3.4 of theCost Assessmentandthe revisions noted above.B-5Exhibit B-6Provide Acknowledgement of Consent to TransporterCostper ShipmentCost of All ShipmentsActivityManagerialStaff HoursTechnical StaffHoursClerical StaffHoursHoursLabor CostaMaterialsCostbTotal CostNumber ofShipmentscTotal CostU.S. Exporter Provides Copy of EPA’s Acknowledgement of Consent to TransporterFind consent document0.000.000.170.17$5.75$0.00$5.7516,154$92,958Copy consent document0.000.000.080.08$2.81$0.22$3.0316,154$48,939Total0.000.000.250.25$8.56$0.22$8.7816,154$141,898aBased on hourly rates discussed in Section 3.1 of theCost Assessment.bBased on materials costs discussed in Section 3.2 of theCost Assessment.cBased on universe assumptions discussed in Section 3.4 of theCost Assessmentandthe revisions noted above.B-6B-7Exhibit B-7RecordkeepingCostper EntityCost of All EntitiesActivityManagerialStaff HoursTechnical StaffHoursClerical StaffHoursHoursLabor CostaMaterialsCostbTotal CostNumber ofEntitiescTotal CostU.S. Exporter RecordkeepingFile and maintainnecessary documents0.000.000.250.25$8.46$0.00$8.46640$5,416Total0.000.000.250.25$8.46$0.00$8.46640$5,416aBased on hourly rates discussed in Section 3.1 of theCost Assessment.bBased on materials costs discussed in Section 3.2 of theCost Assessment.cBased on universe assumptions discussed in Section 3.4 of theCost Assessmentandthe revisions noted above.ATTACHMENT C

ESTIMATION OF COSTS

FOR THE IMPORT CONSENT DOCUMENTATION REQUIREMENTSC-1Exhibit C-1Receiving Facility Submission to EPACost Per ShipmentCost for All ShipmentsActivityManagerialStaff HoursTechnicalStaff HoursClericalStaff HoursTotalHoursLaborCostaMaterialsCostbTotalCostNumber ofShipmentscTotal CostReceiving Facility Submission to EPAImportersFind Consent Document0.000.000.170.17$5.75$0.00$5.752,712$15,606.20Match Consent Document to Manifest0.000.000.170.17$5.75$0.00$5.752,712$15,606.20Copy Consent Document0.000.000.080.08$2.81$0.22$3.032,712$8,216.14Submit Consent to EPA0.000.000.000.00$0.00$0.00$0.002,712$0.00Total0.000.000.420.42$14.31$0.22$14.532,712$39,428.54EPAReceive and File Consent Document0.000.000.080.08$2.47$0.00$2.472,712$6,698.86$6,698.86Total0.000.000.080.08$2.47$0.00$2.472,712aBased on hourly rates discussed in Section 3.1 of this document.bBased on materials costs discussed in Section 3.2 of this document.cBased on universe assumptions discussed in Section 3.5 of this document.ATTACHMENT D

ESTIMATION OF COSTS UNDER ALTERNATE SLAB ANALYSISExhibit D-1Movement/Tracking DocumentCostper ShipmentCost for all ShipmentsActivityManagerialStaff HoursTechnical StaffHoursClerical StaffHoursHoursLabor CostaMaterialsCostbTotal CostNumber ofShipmentsCTotal CostMovement/Tracking DocumentU.S. ExportersComplete trackingdocument0.000.330.000.33$21.57$0.00$21.5770,401$1,518,549.57Total0.000.330.000.33$21.57$0.00$21.5770,401$1,518,549.57EPAReceive and maintaintracking document0.000.000.250.25$7.44$0.00$7.4470,401$523,783.44Total0.000.000.250.25$7.44$0.00$7.4470,401$523,783.44aBased on hourly rates discussed in Section 3.1 of this document.bBased on materials costs discussed in Section 3.2 of this document.cBased on universe assumptions discussed in Section 3.4 and 4.7 of this documentD-1Exhibit D-2Exception ReportCostper ReportCost for all ReportsActivityManagerialStaff HoursTechnical StaffHoursClerical StaffHoursHoursLabor CostaMaterialsCostbTotal CostNumber ofReportsCTotal CostPreparation of Exception ReportU.S. ExportersPrepare and submitexception report0.250.250.000.50$40.89$0.42$41.31352$14,542.21Maintain exception report0.000.000.100.10$3.39$0.00$3.39352$1,191.54Total0.250.250.100.60$44.28$0.42$44.70352$15,733.74EPAReceive and maintainexception report0.000.000.250.25$7.44$0.00$7.44352$2,618.92Total0.000.000.250.25$7.44$0.00$7.44352$2,618.92aBased on hourly rates discussed in Section 3.1 of this document.bBased on materials costs discussed in Section 3.2 of this document.cBased on universe assumptions discussed in Section 3.4 of this document.D-2D-3Exhibit D-3Certificate of RecoveryCostper ShipmentCost for all ShipmentsActivityManagerialStaff HoursTechnical StaffHoursClerical StaffHoursHoursLabor CostaMaterialsCostbTotal CostNumber ofShipmentsCTotal CostDocumentation of Certificate of RecoveryU.S. ExportersReceive and maintaincertificate of recoveryprovided by the OECDcountry recovery facility0.000.000.100.10$3.39$0.00$3.3970,401$238,307.39Total0.000.000.100.10$3.39$0.00$3.3970,401$238,307.39EPAReceive and maintaincertificate of recoveryprovided by the OECDcountry recovery facility0.000.000.100.10$2.98$0.00$2.9870,401$209,513.38Total0.000.000.100.10$2.98$0.00$2.9870,401$209,513.38aBased on hourly rates discussed in Section 3.1 of this document.bBased on materials costs discussed in Section 3.2 of this document.cBased on universe assumptions discussed in Section 3.4 of this document.E-1 ATTACHMENT E



### 2002-2006 Spent Lead Ac id Batteries (SLABs) Exports from U.S. to Canada

Year Number of

Potential Notices Total Amt. of SLABs exported to Canada (metric tonnes) Metric Ton per Notice Number of

Entities

2002 125 37,732 301.852812 120

2003 142 50,082 352.68978 132

2004 147 46,578 316.857352 142

2005 141 76,584 543.148732 136

2006 141 65,558 464.951796 137

Average 139.2 55,307 395.900094 133.4
Average Ratio 0.002418

Source: Environment CanadaE-2 

### SLAB Exports From the U.S., 2006

SLAB Exports Metric Tons Source

Total Exports to All Countries 269,171 International Trade
Commission (ITC) data for all countries, except Canada and

Mexico. Environment Canada
(EC) data substituted for ITC

Canada data and SEMARNAT

data substituted for ITC Mexico

data. Total Exports to OECD Countries Excluding Canada

and Mexico 90 (0.03% of total) ITC data

Total Exports to Canada and Mexico Only 264,333 SEMARNAT data for Mexico (198,775) plus EC data for
Canada (65,558) Total Exports to all OECD Countries, Including Canada

and Mexico 264,423 ITC data plus EC data plus

SEMARNAT data.

Total Exports to Non OECD Countries, Including Canada

and Mexico 269,081 ITC data plus EC data plus

SEMARNAT data

Total Exports to Non OECD Countries Excluding Canada

and Mexico 4,748 ITC data