Page 1 of 6

2013 Hazardous Waste Report

Amendment to Information Collection Request: Justification for proposed changes 

March 27, 2012

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery 

(ORCR) must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in order to collect 

information regarding hazardous waste generation and management through the use of the Hazardous 

Waste Report Instructions and Forms (EPA Form 8700-13 A/B). In order to obtain OMB approval, ORCR 

must submit an Information Collection Request (ICR) to OMB. An ICR provides an overview of the 

information collection requirements (e.g., reporting or recordkeeping requirements), and includes an 

estimate of the time and cost burden placed on respondents (e.g., private sector, State and local 

governments) and EPA. The currently approved Hazardous Waste Report ICR covers reporting year 

2011. ORCR is amending the existing ICR in order to reflect the time and cost burden associated with 

reporting year 2013. 

For reporting year 2013, ORCR is making some changes to the Hazardous Waste Report Instructions 

and Forms in order to ease reporting and improve clarity for filers. These changes include:

 Revised Language for Some Source Code Descriptions. ORCR has made editorial changes to the 

description of some source codes in order to improve clarity for filers. 

 Consolidated Management Method Codes. ORCR has consolidated some management method 

codes in order to ease reporting. 

 Revised Waste Minimization Codes. ORCR has revised the waste minimization codes in order to 

assist filers with reporting their waste minimization activities. 

The above changes on the management method codes and waste minimization codes were proposed in 

the Draft 2011 Hazardous Waste Report Instructions and Forms made available for public comment in 

March 2011 (76 FR 17414; March 29, 2011). However, in consultation with States and EPA Regions, 

ORCR decided to delay these proposed changes until the 2013 Hazardous Waste Report in order to 

provide adequate time for further study and implementation. The decision to delay implementation of 

these changes was stated in the ICR supporting statement for the 2011 Hazardous Waste Report, which 

was submitted for OMB approval last year. 

Furthermore, starting with reporting year 2013, ORCR wants to make the Hazardous Waste Report 

Instructions and Forms readily available to States, EPA Regions (if a State is not authorized to implement 

the biennial reporting requirement), and filers at the beginning of each reporting year in order to facilitate 

implementation of any changes to the Hazardous Waste Report forms. For example, EPA and States 

can inform report filers of the final changes with adequate time for implementation, e.g., States will have 

adequate time to plan and provide training to report filers. In addition, States and report filers will have 

adequate time to revise their in-house or commercial data system in order to include new or revised

Hazardous Waste Report data items.

The following sections provide additional information on the changes to the Hazardous Waste Report 

Instructions and Forms for reporting year 2013.

Revised Language for Some Source Code Descriptions

ORCR has made editorial changes to the description of some source codes in order to improve clarity for 

filers. For example, ORCR is changing Source Code G25 from “hazardous waste management” to 

“treatment, disposal, or recycling of hazardous waste” in order to better communicate the meaning of this 

code. See the proposed changes identified in the “Source Codes” table included in the “Other Reference 
Page 2 of 6

Information and Code Lists” section of the Draft 2013 Hazardous Waste Report Instructions and Forms 

included as part of the docket for the Federal Register Notice.

Consolidated Management Method Codes

In March 2011, ORCR published a Federal Register Notice notifying the public that the Draft 2011 

Hazardous Waste Report Instructions and Forms was available for comment (76 FR 17414; March 29, 

2011). ORCR also included in the docket a memorandum that provided supporting information on the 

proposed changes included in the Draft 2011 Hazardous Waste Report. One of these proposed changes 

was the consolidation of management method codes. However, in consultation with States and EPA 

Regions, ORCR decided to defer consolidation of the management method codes until the 2013 

Hazardous Waste Report in order to provide adequate time for implementation of these changes. 

In the Draft 2013 Hazardous Waste Report, ORCR has consolidated many of the management method 

codes associated with “destruction or treatment prior to disposal at another site” in order to ease 

reporting. For example, previous codes H071 (chemical reduction), H073 (cyanide destruction), H075 

(chemical oxidation), H076 (wet air oxidation) and H077 (other chemical precipitation) have all been 

consolidated under the new management method code H070 (chemical treatment). In order to assist 

filers with the transition, the management method codes for reporting year 2013 have been mapped to 

the management method codes used for previous reporting years. See the proposed changes identified 

in the “Management Method Codes” table included in the “Other Reference Information and Code Lists” 

section of the Draft 2013 Hazardous Waste Report Instructions and Forms included as part of the docket 

for the Federal Register Notice.

Revised Waste Minimization Codes

ORCR has revised the waste minimization codes in order to assist filers with reporting their waste 

minimization efforts. The new waste minimization codes identify when waste minimization efforts

occurred (whether initiated prior to the reporting year or during the reporting year) and whether waste 

minimization efforts were undertaken. In addition, the new waste minimization codes include examples of 

types of waste minimization activities. ORCR anticipates that we will be able to collect basic waste 

minimization information through the use of the revised waste minimization codes, which meet the 

regulatory requirements at 40 CFR 261.41(a) and 262.27. The proposed waste minimization codes also 

meet basic targeting analysis needs, and can be used as a starting point for further studies and project 

planning on waste minimization and pollution prevention to be performed by EPA’s or States’ individual 

programs. 

The remainder of this section provides information on the need for and the use of the waste minimization 

data, as well as on the development of the revised list of waste minimization codes included in the Draft 

2013 Hazardous Waste Report. It also addresses the public comments received in response to the

Federal Register Notice published in March 2011.

Background

In the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), as amended, Congress established the 

following national policy, making waste minimization the nation's preferred hazardous waste management 

practice: "...the generation of hazardous waste is to be reduced or eliminated as expeditiously as 

possible. Waste that is nevertheless generated should be treated, stored, or disposed of so as to 

minimize the present and future threat to human health and the environment." (RCRA Section 1003(b))

In response to Congress’ national policy on waste minimization, EPA has promulgated regulations that 

require generators of hazardous waste to comply with waste minimization requirements. For example,

generators are required to have a program in place to reduce the volume and toxicity of waste generated 

to the degree they have determined to be economically practicable (40 CFR 262.27). In addition, under 

40 CFR 262.41(a), which contains the requirements for the Hazardous Waste Report, generators must 
Page 3 of 6

provide to the regulatory authority a description of the efforts undertaken during the year to reduce the 

volume and toxicity of waste generated. 

To ensure that generators are complying with RCRA and its implementing regulations pertaining to waste 

minimization, EPA needs to collect information on waste minimization efforts. There are two ways in 

which EPA may obtain information on waste minimization efforts: (1) limited surveys of selected 

demographics and (2) the Hazardous Waste Report. Given that the Hazardous Waste Report process is 

already in place and, under RCRA, EPA has the authority and obligation to collect information on waste 

minimization activities, the Hazardous Waste Report is the most cost-effective mechanism to obtain the 

information needed in order to monitor and evaluate the extent to which hazardous waste is being 

reduced or eliminated. Information on waste minimization is not available from any source other than 

hazardous waste generators. EPA’s ORCR is the only office within the Agency requiring the reporting 

and recordkeeping of this information. No other Federal agency or department collects information on 

waste minimization efforts. 

EPA may use information on waste minimization at the national level, among other things, to:

 Support and evaluate program initiatives. Information on waste minimization may assist EPA in 

determining whether the Agency’s program initiatives are promoting or preventing waste 

minimization. 

 Target outreach efforts for waste minimization. Analysis of information on waste minimization may

allow EPA to identify new or existing facilities with the same characteristics as those facilities already 

conducting waste minimization activities. A similar type of analysis also may be conducted at the 

industry and/or waste stream level.

 Provide information to the public and other EPA stakeholders. Information on waste minimization 

may allow EPA to evaluate trend analyses and share with the public and other EPA stakeholders 

changes in waste minimization activity over time.

 Meet regulatory mandates and plan/develop regulations. Regulatory development always involves

conducting an economic impact analysis. As part of this analysis, EPA needs to establish a reliable 

baseline and estimate changes in facility behavior as a result of different regulatory options. Waste 

minimization is often a component that is included, or should be included, in this analysis.

 Support initiatives of other EPA offices. Information on waste minimization may be used to support 

initiatives of other EPA offices, including EPA Regional Offices, EPA’s Office of Enforcement and 

Compliance Assistance (OECA), and EPA's Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT). 

Information on waste minimization also may be used by other stakeholders, including States, industry, 

and public interest groups.

Waste Minimization Code List Included in 2009 Hazardous Waste Report

As of reporting year 2009, the Hazardous Waste Report Instructions and Forms require that generators 

provide information regarding waste minimization efforts undertaken at their facilities. In order to report 

this information, filers would select a single code from a list of five (5) waste minimization codes. 

Proposed Waste Minimization Code List Included in Draft 2011 Hazardous Waste Report in March 2011

In consultation with States regarding the 2009 waste minimization codes, ORCR developed a revised list 

of waste minimization codes. This list consisted of 18 codes, and was included in the Draft 2011 

Hazardous Waste Report made available to the public in March 2011 (76 FR 17414, March 29, 2011). 

ORCR sought public comment on the proposed changes to the list of waste minimization codes. 
Page 4 of 6

ORCR received three public comments (submitted by Illinois, Ohio, and Texas) on the list of waste 

minimization codes proposed in March 2011 (i.e., the list of codes in the Draft 2011 Hazardous Waste 

Report). These three commenters questioned why we need to collect these data, how we are going to 

use them, and why we need a longer list of waste minimization codes. These commenters also argued 

that EPA did not conduct a thorough analysis of the 2009 waste minimization data and had comments 

regarding our definition of source reduction. 

In consultation with States and EPA Regions, ORCR decided to defer changes to the waste minimization 

code list until the 2013 Hazardous Waste Report in order to have adequate time to consider comments 

and conduct detailed analyses of the 2009 waste minimization data. 

Analysis of Waste Minimization Data reported in the 2009 Hazardous Waste Report

ORCR more thoroughly reviewed its need for the waste minimization data and conducted an analysis of 

the waste minimization data collected as part of the 2009 Hazardous Waste Report. Below are some 

general observations, based on the data presented in the table below: 

 Waste Minimization Was Not Attempted or Was Unsuccessful

 Of the 13,898 unique facilities in the waste minimization data available for review and analysis, 

12,524 facilities (or 90%) reported at least one waste stream for which waste minimization was 

not attempted or was unsuccessful (i.e., at least one waste stream with Waste Minimization Code 

N or X). The majority of these facilities (i.e., 12,141 facilities or 87% of the total number of unique 

facilities) indicated that no waste minimization efforts were implemented for the waste (i.e., Waste 

Minimization Code X).

 Of the 152,653 waste streams in the waste minimization data available for review and analysis, 

waste minimization was not attempted or was unsuccessful for 128,421 waste streams (or 84%). 

For the majority of these waste streams (i.e., 123,393 waste streams or 81%) no waste 

minimization efforts were implemented (i.e., were represented by Waste Minimization Code X).

 Waste Minimization Was Attempted and Was Successful

 Of the 13,898 unique facilities in the waste minimization data available for review and analysis, 

4,531 facilities (or 33%) reported at least one waste stream for which waste minimization was 

attempted and was successful (i.e., at least one waste stream with Waste Minimization Code Y, 

R, or S). The majority of these facilities (i.e., 3,227 facilities or 23% of the total number of unique 

facilities) indicated that waste minimization was implemented and was successful in reducing 

quantity and/or toxicity (i.e., Waste Minimization Code Y).

 Of the 152,653 waste streams in the waste minimization data available for review and analysis, 

waste minimization was attempted and was successful for 24,232 waste streams (or 16%). For 

the majority of these waste streams (i.e., 18,134 waste streams or 12%) waste minimization was 

implemented and was successful in reducing quantity and/or toxicity (i.e., were represented by 

Waste Minimization Code Y).
Page 5 of 6

Waste Minimization Code and Description

Facilities Waste Streams

Generated

Waste Quantity

(Provided as a Reference)

Number Percent

of Total Number Percentof Total Tons Percentof Total

Waste Minimization was not attempted or was unsuccessful

N

Waste minimization efforts were unsuccessful in reducing 

quantity and/or toxicity

(Please detail reasons in the Comments section)

1,044 8% 5,028 3% 1,620,222 5%

X

No waste minimization efforts were implemented for this 

waste 12,141 87% 123,393 81% 21,978,891 65%

Subtotal 12,524 a90% 128,421 84% 23,599,114 70%

Waste Minimization was attempted and was successful

Y

Waste minimization was implemented and was successful in 

reducing quantity and/or toxicity

(Please detail reasons in the Comments section)

3,227 23% 18,134 12% 7,758,951 23%

R Recycling on-site was implemented and was successful 571 4% 1,418 1% 1,966,671 6%

S Began to ship waste off-site for recycling 1,254 9% 4,680 3% 310,711 1%

Subtotal 4,531 a33% 24,232 16% 10,036,333 30%

Total 13,898 a100% 152,653 100% 33,635,447 100%

a

 This is the number of unique facilities. A facility may report more than one waste minimization code. Therefore, the number of facilities is not additive. 

The analysis of the 2009 waste minimization data included reviewing thousands of comments submitted

by facilities. For example: 

 Of the 18,134 waste streams represented by Waste Minimization Code Y, 11,420 waste streams (or 

63%) have comments on waste minimization activities. 

 Of the 11,420 waste streams with comments on waste minimization activities, a sample of about 

5,200 (or 46%) were reviewed and matched to the waste minimization codes proposed in March 2011 

(i.e., codes in the Draft 2011 Hazardous Waste Report). This sample of 5,200 waste streams covers

47 States. 

ORCR reviewed many of the comments on waste minimization activities and examined how well the 

comments matched with the waste minimization codes proposed in March 2011 (i.e., codes in the Draft 

2011 Hazardous Waste Report). The results were mixed; some waste minimization efforts fit cleanly in 

the codes and others did not. Some comments needed more than one of the codes to describe the 

facility’s waste minimization efforts. Finally, some of the efforts identified by the facilities were not waste 

minimization efforts at all. 

From the analysis of the 2009 waste minimization data, the instructions for reporting waste minimization 

data lacked description and provided no examples. Most facilities provided comments to describe their 

waste minimization efforts, which resulted in a large quantity of qualitative information that was resourceintensive to review and not easy to analyze. Additionally, there was confusion about whether to report 

new waste minimization activities undertaken during that reporting year, or report waste minimization 

activities undertaken during previous years.

Based on the analysis of the 2009 waste minimization data, we developed the revised waste minimization

codes list by modifying the original list of codes included in the 2011 Hazardous Waste Report 

Instructions and Forms (same list included in the 2009 Hazardous Waste Report Instructions and Forms). 

The revised waste minimization codes list also streamlines and reorganizes the list of waste minimization 

codes proposed in March 2011.
Page 6 of 6

Proposed Waste Minimization Code List Included in the ICR Amendment for Draft 2013 Hazardous Waste 

Report

Based on our analysis of the 2009 waste minimization data and review of comments received on the list 

of waste minimization codes proposed in March 2011 (i.e., the codes in the Draft 2011 Hazardous Waste 

Report), ORCR has revised the set of waste minimization codes as follows:

 The revised set of codes streamlines the waste minimization code list first proposed in March 2011. 

The revised list of waste minimization codes consists of six (6) codes. This new set of codes 

consolidates categories, which makes it easier for facilities to report their efforts, especially for those 

facilities with waste minimization efforts that would have fit into more than one category in the 

proposed March 2011 list. The streamlined codes are organized into three (3) categories and each 

category has two (2) waste minimization codes; the first category - initiated prior to the reporting year; 

the second category - initiated during the reporting year, the third category - effort impracticable or no 

effort. 

 The new set of codes builds in examples and descriptions of the waste minimization efforts, which 

should reduce the frequency in which facilities report waste minimization efforts that are not really 

waste minimization efforts. 

 The new set of codes is less labor intensive to review and helps to differentiate new waste 

minimization efforts initiated during the reporting year from efforts that were initiated in previous 

years. 

 The requirement to submit comments is optional. As a result, there will be a reduction in burden for 

reporting facilities. In addition, there will be a reduction in burden for EPA and States when 

performing data quality assurance/quality control activities. 

See the proposed changes identified in the Waste Minimization Codes table included in the “Other 

Reference Information and Code Lists” section of the Draft 2013 Hazardous Waste Report Instructions 

and Forms included as part of the docket for the Federal Register Notice.

Note, however, that, because the revised list of waste minimization codes consists of a smaller number of 

codes than the list proposed in March 2011, it does reduce the specificity of the information regarding 

individual waste minimization efforts. However, the revised code list should provide enough information 

for EPA and other stakeholders to target waste minimization efforts at the national level. It also should 

allow us to decipher patterns in the data to identify where possible case studies could yield opportunities 

in waste minimization.