Scan this mobile

code to learn more
about the EPA OIG. 

# EPA Does Not Effectively

Control or Monitor Imports
of Hazardous Waste

Report No. 15

- P

- 0172 July 6, 2015 U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY



## OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

Enforcement and ComplianceReport Contributors: Steve Hanna

Jim Kohler Tina Lovingood

Naomi Rowden Olga Stein

Abbreviations

BR Biennia l Report

CBP U.S. Customs and Border Protection

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

ITDS International Trade Data System

OECA Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance

OECD Organization for Economic Coopera tion and Development

OFA Office of Federal Activities

OIG Office of Inspector General

ORCR Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery

RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act

TSDF Treatment/ Stor age/ Disposal Facility

WIETS Waste Import Export Tr acking System

Cover illustration : An OIG

- prepared map showing hazardous waste imports, based on

OIG analysis of the EPA ’s 2011 Biennial Report data. The map excludes approximately 9,000 tons reported without an importing country

identified.

Are you awa re of fraud, waste or abuse in an EPA program?

EPA Inspector General Hotline 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW (2431T) Washington, DC 20460 (888) 546

- 8740 (202) 566

- 2599 (fax) OIG_Hotline@epa.gov

More information at www.epa.gov/oig/hotline.html

. EPA Office of Inspector General 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW (2410T) Washington, DC 20460 (202) 566

- 2391 www.epa.gov/oig

Subscribe to our Email Updates

Follow us on Twitter @EPAoig Send us your Project Suggestions15

- P

- 0172 July 6, 2015

Why We Did This Review

We evaluate d the effectiveness of

the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s ( EPA’s ) oversight of hazardous waste imports to the

U nited States

. According to data
from the EPA’s 2011 Biennial Report, h azardous waste treatment/storage/di sposal
facilities in t he U nited States

receive and manage approximately 90,000 tons of hazardous waste annually from at
least eight foreign countries

. International agreements establish a notice and consent process to
ensure the receiving countr ies are

awa re of and properly able to
handle the waste. Once in the

U nited States , the shipment must be accompanied by a hazardous
waste manifest

.

This report addresses the following EPA goal s or

cross
- agency strategies :

 Cleaning up communities and advancing susta inable development.

 Ensuring the safety of chemicals and preventing pollution.

 Protecting human health and the environment by enforcing laws and assuring compliance.

Send all inquiries to our public affairs office at (202) 566 2391

or visit www.epa.gov/oig

.

The full report is at: www.epa.gov/oig/reports/2015/

20150706

- 15

- P

- 0172.pdf 

## EPA Does Not Effectively Control or Monitor Imports of Hazardous Waste

What We Found

T he EPA’s actions to ensure that hazardous waste imports to the United States are received

, processed and managed are incomplete and ineffective. The EPA is unable to (1) confirm that all imported hazardous waste shipmen ts reach their intended destinations, (2) ensure hazardous waste shipments are received only by facilities that are properly permitted to handle the waste, (3) determine whether there are any lost or unaccounted for shipments

of hazardous waste

, and (4) bl ock hazardous waste from coming into the country

without the EPA’s consent

.

Review of a sample of manifests returned to the EPA found that some shipments occurred outside the consented time frame, incorrectly identified the generator

, or had unusually long transit times. More than half of the manifests reviewed were not accompanied by a n EPA consent letter or other acceptable documentation as required by federal regulations. Further, the EPA letter s consenting to imports did not consistently include suf ficient information to verify that the types of hazardous waste shipped are those that have received consent.

Based on our assessment of data in EPA information systems, the EPA has an incomplete picture of hazardous waste entering the country

. This can give rise to
undetected and unenforced violations of federal hazardous waste laws

, which

could result in unknown human and environmental exposure to toxic substances

. A lso , the EPA does not review manifests or data to identify regulatory violations and pur sue appropriate enforcement actions consistent with federal laws for importing hazardous waste. The EPA’s enforcement options are restricted by a lack of authority to prevent unconsented shipments from entering the U nited States

.

Recommend ations and Pl anned Agency Corrective Actions

We recommend that the EPA implement controls to ensure identification and tracking of all hazardous waste import shipments, d evelop and implement procedures to identify and pursue administrative and enforcement actions to address deficiencies in the current process, and seek explicit statutory authority to prevent the import of hazardous waste without prior and explicit EPA consent

. We revised the draft report recommendations after discussion with the agency, and the agency now agrees with all recommendations

. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Offic e of Inspector General 

# At a Glance

The EPA lacks explicit authority to block imported shipments of hazardous waste that lack prior

EPA consent. This could lead to improper handling and disposal, resulting in unknown human and environmental exposure to tox ic

substances , including solvents, mercury, lead or other metals.July 6, 2015

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: EPA Does Not Effectively Control or Monitor Imports of Hazardous Waste

Report No. 15

- P

- 0172

FROM: Arthur A. Elkins Jr.

TO: Cynthia Giles, Assistant Administrator

Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance

Mathy Stanislaus, Assistant Administrator Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response

This is our report on the subject evaluation conducted by the Office of Inspector General (OIG) of the

U.S. Envi ronmental Protection Agency (EPA) . This report contains findings that describe the problems the OIG has identified and corrective actions the OIG recommends. This report represents the opinion of the OIG and does not necessarily represent the final EPA pos ition. Final determinations on matters in this report will be made by EPA managers in accordance with established audit resolution procedures

.

The EPA office s having primary jurisdiction over the issues evaluated in this report are the Office of

Solid Was te and Emergency Response’s Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery, and the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance’s Office of Federal Activities

.

Action Required

In accordance with EPA Manual 2750, you are required to provide a written res ponse to this report within 60 calendar days. You should include planned corrective actions and completion dates for all unresolved recommendations. Your response will be posted on the OIG’s public website, along with our memorandum commenting on your resp onse. Your response should be provided as an Adobe PDF file that complies with the accessibility requirements of Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended. The final response should not contain data that you do not want to be released to th e public;

if your response contains such data, you should identify the data for redaction or removal along with corresponding justification. Please email your response to Tina Lovingood at lovingood.tina@epa.gov

.

We will post this report to our website at http://www.epa.gov/oig

. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

WASHINGTON, D

. C

. 20460

THE INSPECTOR GENERALEP A Does Not Effectively Control or Monitor 15

- P

- 0172

Imports of Hazardous Waste



# Table of Contents

Chapters

1 Introduction

................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 1

Purpose

................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 1 Background

................................ ................................ ................................ 1 Scope and Methodology

................................ ................................ ............ 6

2 Hazardous Waste Imports Not Eff ectively Tracked and
Enforcement Actions A re Limited

................................ ................................ ... 7

EPA Does Not Effectively Track Hazardous Waste Imports

....................... 7 EPA Has Not Enforced Against Improper Hazardous Waste Shipments Coming to the U nited States

................................ ............... 1 4
Conclusions

................................ ................................ ............................... 16
Recommendations

................................ ................................ ..................... 1 6 Agency Response and OIG Evaluation

................................ ...................... 17

Status of Recommendations and Potential Monetary Benefits

............................. 1 9



## Appendices

A Agency Response to Draft Report

................................ ................................ ... 20

B Distribution

................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 2 815

- P

- 0172 1 

# Chapter 1

Introduction

Purpose

The purpose of this evaluat ion was to d etermine the U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency’s ( EPA’s ) effectiveness in ensuring that imported hazardous waste shipments are received and processed as expected. We asked the following questions:

 How does the EPA confirm that hazardous was tes imported to the U nited

States reach their intended destination facility and that no hazardous waste

is lost or unaccounted for?

 What management or enforcement actions does the EPA take to respond to failures of shipments to reach intended destination facilities, and significant discrepancies in the volume or nature of hazardous waste shipped?



### Background

Hazardous waste can be dangerous and potentially harmful to human health or the environment. Hazardous wastes can be liquids, solids, gases, or sludg es. They can be discarded commercial products, like cleaning fluids or pesticides, or the by

- products of manufacturing processes. The EPA regulates hazardous waste under the authority of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act ( RCRA ) Subtitle C.

This pr ogram regulates the management of hazardous waste from cradle

- to

- grave. 1

Generators, transporters and treatment/storage/disposal facilities (TSDFs) must notify the EPA of their activities, and TSDFs are required to obtain permits to handle

hazardous wast e from an authorized state or the EPA. Shipments of hazardous waste from a generator to a TSDF must be accompanied by an EPA hazardous waste manifest. The manifest identifies the generator, transporter, TSDF, type and volume of waste, and dates of shipment and receipt. Additionally, the manifest process requires the TSDF to notify the generator of receipt of the waste, and the generator must notify its state or the EPA if this confirmation is not received.

Hazardous waste exports and imports complicate cra dle

- to

- grave management of

hazardous waste because the EPA’s jurisdiction ends the moment the shipment leaves the country and starts after it enters the country. RCRA provides different

authorities to the EPA for imports and exports

. RCRA provides no expli cit authority to prevent imports of hazardous waste at the border. In contrast, RCRA provides explicit statutory authority to control exports of hazardous waste.

1 RCRA establishes a system for controlling hazardous waste from the time it i s generated until its ultimate disposal

, commonly referred to as “cradle

- to

- grave.”15

- P

- 0172 2 EPA Requirements for Imports of Hazardous Waste

R egulations that apply to domestically genera ted hazardous waste also apply to imported hazardous waste when it ent er s the U nited States . Additionally, the following controls have been developed for hazardous waste imports:

1. One

- time notification

– Each permitted RCRA TSDF receiving hazardous

waste must notify the EPA at least 4 weeks before receipt of the first shipment from a foreign source . This is a one

- time notification that

identifies the foreign source

. 2

2. 12

- month consent

– F oreign governments

— including Canada, Mexico,

and Organization for Ec onomic Cooperation and Development ( OECD )

countries

— are required to provide notice and obtain the EPA’s consent to ship hazardous waste to a named TSDF in the United States for identified

waste streams. The EPA ’s consent is valid for up to 12 month s. 3

3. M an ifest submittal

– For each import shipment, the TSDF is required to

s ubmit to the EPA a copy of the completed manifest and a copy of the

EPA consent letter

, 4 or other documentation explaining why a consent letter is not provided

.

4. Biennial r eport of impor t shipments and volumes

– TSDFs and generators are required to identify the content of imported waste shipments and their

volumes in the RCRA Biennial Report. 5

5. Certificate of Recovery

– For shipments from certain OECD countries

, 6
TSDFs that recycle hazar dous waste imports must submit to the EPA and countries of export and transit separate c ertificate s of r eceipt and r ecovery. 7

Control over the transboundary movement of hazardous waste is a foreign policy function of the government that has been delegate d to the EPA ’s Office of Federal

Activities in the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance

. According to

the EPA ’s 2013 Standard Operating Procedures for the Regional Review Of Hazardous Waste Import Notifications

, t he “ delegation of the notificatio n function to the EPA imposes a substantial responsibility on the agency t o serve the interests of the US G overnment

. Moreover, shipments of hazardous waste into the US pose potential risks for the public health and environment of our country,

2 The Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) in 40 CFR § 265.12(a)(1).

3 Per treaties with Canada and Mexico and the OECD Decision.

4 40 CFR § 265.71(a)(3).

5 40 CFR § 265.75( d) and 40 CFR § 262.41(a)(5).

6 For the purposes of 40 CFR 262, S ubpart H, the designated OECD m ember countries consist of Australia, Austria, Belgium, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, the Republic of Korea, the Slovak Republic, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

7 40 CFR § 262.58(a)(1) , 262.80(a), and 262.83(e).15

- P

- 0172 3 since these wastes originate outside the U S

. ” Figure 1 illustrates the hazardous waste import process and the responsibilities of all parties involved.

Figure 1

– Import Shipping Procedures

Source: EPA

. M odified by Office of Inspector General ( OIG )

.15

- P

- 0172 4 U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has ultimate control over border entry points and has broad authority to stop dangerous vehicles or shipments from entering the country. However, RCRA does not designate authority for CBP to stop hazardous waste imports at the border.

CBP is generally responsible for knowing what is in a shipment and whether it poses a risk to the American people, and ensuring that all proper revenues are collected. CBP “conditionally releases” all imports that comply with a mo re limited number of federal regulations for which CBP has border authority, such as the EPA’s pesticide import requirements. CBP must verify compliance with these regulations before releasing the shipment into the country. The EPA, however, was not design ated explicit authority under RCRA for hazardous waste imports and, therefore, CBP does not verify compliance with import requirements at the border, such as whether the EPA has consented to the hazardous waste shipment or whether the shipment has the requ ired EPA manifest. CBP does have its own authority to require an importer to “redeliver” any shipment back to the port of entry that may be in violation of any federal regulations within 30 days of entry into the United States. The EPA could make a request to CBP for redelivery of a shipment if it suspects a facility has imported hazardous waste that is not in compliance with any RCRA regulation.

CBP is currently working with other federal agencies

— including the EPA

— to implement the International Trade D ata System (ITDS). It will allow businesses to submit data required by CBP and Partner Government Agencies to
im port or export cargo through a “Single Window” concept operated by CBP

rather than various Partner Government Agency systems

. This system allows importers and exporters to demonstrate compliance with federal regulations to the

Partner Government Agencies , who then certify whether the shipment is in compliance. CBP is able to see in ITDS whether the Partner Government Agency certified the shipment and, if not, reject or detain the shipment at the border.

Responsible EPA Offices

I mport

- export activities for hazardous waste at the EPA are performed by two separate offices:

 Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery (ORCR) : Within the

O ffice of S olid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER) , ORCR

p er forms the following import

- export activities:

 Promulgates and interprets regulations.

 Participates in regulatory and voluntary initiatives to promote the safe handling of waste imports and exports.

 Compi les and issues the Biennial Report ( BR )

.

 Manages RCRAInfo, a national program management and inventory system about hazardous waste handlers.15

- P

- 0172 5  Office of Federal Activities (OFA) : Within the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA) , OFA perfor ms the following activities:

 Operates the import

- export notice and consent process.

 Receives hazardous waste manifests for import

- export shipments.

 Receives annual hazardous waste export reports from handlers.

 Manages the Waste Import Export Tracking Syst em (WIETS).

The OFA and Regional Import

- Export Coordinators annu ally process more than

700 notices for over 7 ,000 waste streams from foreign countries that ship

hazardous waste to the U nited States

. ORCR is in the process of developing a proposed rulemaki ng (expected to be published in 2015) that will consider

revisions to the hazardous waste import

- export related requirements in 40 CFR

Parts 262

– 265 for the purpose of (1) making existing import

- and export

- related requirements more consistent with the cur rent requirements for shipments between members of the OECD; (2) enabling electronic submittal of all import

and ex port

- related documents (e.g., export notices, export annual reports); and (3) enabling electronic validation of export shipment data prior t o exit.

E PA Information Systems

Data on hazardous waste imports can be obtained from two EPA sources :

 Biennial Report : Hazardous waste TSDFs and large

- quantity generators 8

must report the nature, quantities and disposition of the hazardous waste they ha ndle once every 2 years. This information is compiled in the BR maintained by ORCR. The latest BR data from 2011 indicates that more

than 900 shipments of hazardous waste were received by facilities in the

United States

, with a volume of about 90,000 tons. 9

 WIETS : OFA maintains WIETS to track import and export notifications

and determinations . For imports, the information in this database includes the type of waste (if available) , the generation country, the destination TSDF, the anticipated waste volume, and if the waste shipment has been approved by the EPA. Since 2011, WIETS has documented over 2

, 5 00 hazardous waste import notifications for over 25 ,000 different waste

streams

.

8 Generators o f hazardous waste are considered “large

- quantity generators” if they generate 1,000 kilograms per month or more of hazardous waste, or more than one kilogram a month of acutely hazardous waste.

9 The 2011 BR was the most recent available BR as of October 2014. The f inal 2013 BR is expected to be available

in December 2014

.15

- P

- 0172 6



### Scope and Methodology

We conducte d our work from April 2014 to January 2 015 . We conducted this performance audit in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findin gs and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives.

We reviewed 2009 and 2011 data from the EPA ’ s B R and manifest information submitted to OFA. We did not assess the accuracy of the BR data. We sampled (non

- statistically) scanned copies of manifests and consent documentation

submitted to OFA from TSDFs in 2011 and 2012. We selected 23 files from more than 1,000 supplied by OFA, a nd we reviewed a total of 211 manifests and

consent documentation from these files.

We interviewed EPA staff and management in OECA /OFA and in the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response’s ORCR

. We also interviewed EPA s taff responsible for the revie w of import s /export s in R egions 2, 5

, 6 and 9. We analyzed import data available in the BR as well as import manifest summaries compiled by OFA. We reviewed copies of manifests

, consent letters

, and other

documentation received and compiled by OFA. We also analyzed import notices

and waste determinations in the WIETS database. Various modules of RCRAInfo were also used to analyze the characteristics , including permit status, of hazardous waste importers. We reviewed international laws and treaties governing the import of hazardous waste and examined EPA policies and procedures for the current data systems in use. We interviewed personnel at CBP regarding their role in handling hazardous waste at the border. We met with the EPA ’s Office of

General Counsel to obtain their interpretation of the EPA ’s authority to oversee hazardous waste imports under RCRA.15

- P

- 0172 7 

# Chapter 2
Hazardous Waste Imports Not Effectively Tracked
and Enforcement Actions A re Limited

The EPA’s actions to ensure that hazardous waste imports t o the U nited States are received, processed and managed in accordance with RCRA regulations are incomplete and ineffective. Review of a sample of manifests submitted to the

EPA found that some shipments occurred outside the consented time frame,

incorrectl y identified the generator

, or had unusually long transit times. Further:

 More than half of the manifests reviewed were not accompanied by a

consent letter or other acceptable documentation as required by RCRA regulations.

 T he EPA letter consenting to i mports did not consistently include sufficient information to verify that the types of hazardous waste shipped

were those which received consent.

Review of two EPA information systems revealed major discrepancies in hazardous waste import volumes

, indica t ing that the EPA has incomplete knowledge of hazardous waste import shipments

. EPA managers and staff s ai d their enforcement options were restricted by a lack of explicit authority to prevent unconsented shipments from entering the U nited States . Addition ally, the EPA does not review manifests or data to identify regulatory violations and pursue appropriate enforcement actions consistent with RCRA regulations. As a result

, the EPA has an incomplete picture of hazardous waste entering the country

, and

there is the potential for violations of federal hazardous waste regulations to go
undetected and unenforced

. The EPA has recognized that “shipments of hazardous waste into the U.S. pose potential risks for the public health and environment of our country, sinc e these wastes originate outside the U.S.” 10



### EPA Does Not Effectively Track Hazardous Waste Imports

EPA Does Not Have an Accurate Accounting of Hazardous Waste Entering the Country

The EPA does not have an accurate accounting of hazardous waste coming i nto the

United States . Comparison of import quantities for 2009 11 showed OFA received manifests for less than half the waste identified in the BR. OIG analysis of 2011

10 From 2013 Standard Operating Procedures for the Regional Review of Hazardous Waste Import Notifications

. 11 OECA does not regularly compile hazardous waste quantities from import manif ests, and data was only available for 2007 and 2009 and only included imports from Canada and Mexico (according to the 2011 BR, almost

90 percent of hazardous waste imported came from these two countries). There are data on the number of manifests

received by OFA in 2011 and 2012, but not the waste quantity.15

- P

- 0172 8 data also show ed much of the waste documented in the manifests received by OFA

wa s not re ported in the BR. Further, the BR and OFA data ha d major discrepancies

. Figure 2 illustrate s the major differences in the quantity of hazardous waste imported in to the United States depending on which EPA data source is used. Specific state discrepancies a re further illustrated in Figure 3

.

Figure 2

– 2009 Hazardous Waste Imports

Source: OIG analysis of OFA manifest and EPA BR data for 2009

.15

- P

- 0172 9 Figure 3

– 2009 Hazardous Waste Imports by State

– OFA versus BR Data

Source: OIG analysis of OFA manifest and EP A BR data for 2009.

BR queries also showed internal discrepancies between import volumes reported for generators and TSDFs . The BR requires both generators and TSDFs to identify quantities that were imported. Therefore, the total volumes of imported

hazar dous waste reported by generators and TSDFs should be identical. However,

the EPA records show that little imported hazardous waste is reported by

generators. For 2011, BR data indicate only 3,000 tons of hazardous waste reported by generators v ersus 90,00 0 tons received by TSDFs

.

The EPA does not routinely tally the quantity of hazardous waste imported as indicated on manifests received from OFA. Comparison of import quantities from the manifests is not compared to the import quantities reported to the B R. According to OFA managers and staff, review of the manifest data collected is not performed due to resource constraints and lack of management emphasis that

stems from lack of explicit statutory authority to control imports. Also, the

WIETS notice and c onsent tracking system does not track actual shipped quantities, only expected shipment size and frequency.

In practice, expected shipment notices in WIETS are orders of magnitude larger than actual shipments as reported to the BR or OFA. The cause is li kely a

combination of ( a) overestimating import quantity as there is no penalty for doing

so
, ( b) overestimating import quantity so exporters can avoid having to amend the consent or obtain a new consent if they want to export more hazardous waste than

ori ginally expected

, and ( c) potential underreporting of actual shipments as evidenced by the discrepancies in the actual import quantities identified above.15

- P

- 0172 10 By not following up on these differences between and within data sources, the

EPA does not have an a ccurate accounting of the hazardous waste entering the country. The lack of review of data reported to OFA and through the BR compromises the completeness and quality of data in both sources.

The types of hazardous waste imported include solvents, acids, heavy metals such

as cadmium and mercury , and used batteries containing lead

. The human health and environmental risks from the waste come from potential mismanagement and contamination of air, water and soil with toxic constituents.

EPA Does Not Have Ex plicit Authority to Prevent Hazardous Waste Imports F

rom Entering the Country

RCRA is silent as to granting the EPA (or any other agency) express authority to stop shipments of hazardous waste imports at the border. Due to this apparent lack of authority, neither the EPA nor CBP stop shipments of hazardous waste that

have not received the EPA’s prior consent at the border

. 12 Further, imported

h azardous waste shipments may be received by TSDFs without prior consent

from EPA

. The EPA’s only knowledge of shipm ents without prior consent is

recei pt of a manifest or other documentation from the TSDF. The EPA’s only course of action in such cases is communication with the government of the originating country

, 13 or requesting CBP to issue a redelivery notice to the importer to send the hazardous waste shipment back to the port of entry. EPA managers and staff stated they lack explicit authority to pursue enforcement actions against a TSDF for receiving waste without prior consent (or outside the consent period) . With out prior consent, there is no assurance that the hazardous

waste is sent to TSDFs that are permitted to manage the hazardous waste , or that the waste will be properly managed.

Other Environmental Laws Address Other Imports

While the EPA does not have ex plicit authority under RCRA to stop unconsented hazardous waste imports from entering the country, the EPA does have explicit authority under other statutes and work s more closely with CBP to regulate these imports. Some examples include:

 Pesticides

– Th e Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act explicitly states that any pesticide or device that violates the provision of the act may be refused admission into the U nited States

. 14 It states that the pesticide or device may be destroyed or stored and that any charges

12 In contrast, illegal imports of counterfeit products such as shoes or purses may be stopped at the border.

13 In these cases, EPA would inform the government of the originating country that there may b e an exporter in their country who is exporting hazardous waste in violation of international treaties. It would be incumbent on the foreign government to take further action against the exporter.

14 7 U.S.C. § 136o.15

- P

- 0172 11 incurred will be billed to the owner or will constitute a lien on any future importation by the owner.

 Chemical s

– The Toxic Substance s Control Act states that any chemical substance or mixture that fails to comply with any rule in ef fect under the

a ct shall be refused entry into the customs territory of the United States

. Like the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act

, the Toxic

Substances Control Act states that a ll charg es for storage, cartage and

labor on and for disp osal of substances, mixtures or articles which are

refused entry or released shall be paid by the owner or consignee, and in default of such payment shall constitute a lien against any f uture entry made by the owner or consignee

. 15

 New m otor vehicles or n ew motor vehicle engines

– The Clean Air Act prohibits the importation into the United States of any new motor vehicle or new motor vehicle engine manufactured after the effective date of regulations

, which are applicable to such vehicle or engine

, unless such vehicle or engine is covered by a certificate of conformity issued (and in effect) under regulations prescribed under the a ct. 16

These examples of the authority to stop specific types of shipments at the border provide a sharp contrast to the inabili ty to stop unconsented hazardous waste imports at the border. RCRA does not address the import of hazardous waste (while it does explicitly address conditions of export). The EPA has stated that without explicit statutory authority under RCRA

, it cannot wo rk with CBP to refuse entry of illegal hazardous waste imports like the EPA does for imports of

items covered under the other statutes described above.

The EPA is currently focused on using ITDS to manage hazardous waste exports rather than imports, clai ming lack of authority as the reason for not including imports. However, according to CBP, the use of ITDS need not be restricted to regulations for which an agency has border authority. For compliance monitoring and assurance purposes, the use of ITDS for hazardous waste imports could identify noncompliers and inform CBP and the EPA on the extent to which hazardous waste imports are entering the country without proper consent. Furthermore, CBP’s broader authority to require redelivery of imports up until

3 0 days after entry (upon request of Partner Government Agencies) is consistent

with the use of ITDS.

15 15 U.S.C. § 2612.

16 42 U.S.C. § 7 522(a)(1).15

- P

- 0172 12 EPA Monitoring of Hazardous Waste Import Transit Is Incomplete

The EPA may be unaware of shipments that do not reach their intended

destination facil ities

, as well as significant discrepancies in the volume or nature of hazardous waste shipped.

Even when there is consent, the EPA does not routinely confirm that the type of waste imported is consistent with both the consent and the receiving facility permit conditions. EPA managers and staff stated that the regions confirm the receiving facility is permitted to accept the type of expected waste to be shipped prior to consent. I mport notifications generally do not contain EPA waste codes

because they ar e from foreign entities; however, they do contain a description of the waste or foreign /international waste codes. The regions may examine the waste description to confirm that receiving facilities can handle the waste and

make a consent determination. At this point, t ranslating the description into EPA

waste codes and entering into WIETS would ensure they are contained in the

consent letter as these letters are automatically generated from WIETS. Currently

, the information in the consent letter does not ty pically contain sufficient detail (such as EPA hazardous waste codes ) to allow OECA staff to confirm that the type of actual hazardous waste shipped is consistent with that with which the EPA

consented.

It should be noted that EPA consent is only given f or hazardous waste imports. If the imported waste falls under one of the RCRA recycling exclusions

, a notice to import would n ot be required . I f the exporting country requires a notice, o nly a “neither consent nor object” determination is issued by the EPA since consent is only required for waste that is considered hazardous in the U nited States

.

Our review of EPA consent letters found that more than half of them were issued

to facilities that were not permitted to receive hazardous waste

, 17 a potentially serious regulatory violation that could lead to criminal or civil enforcement

actions . However, a ccording to regional import coordinators we interviewed, this discrepancy was because the waste was either not hazardous or was being sent for recycling. The r egional coordinators indicated a “neither consent nor object”

determination , rather than a “consent” determination

, should have been made in

these cases

.

The EPA does not analyze BR data on hazardous waste imports as a means to identify hazar dous waste i mport ed without EPA consent . For the 2011 data available, we identified 23 TSDFs that submitted import manifests to the EPA but did not report to the BR. The OIG also identified 35 TSDFs that were reported to

the BR but did not submit manifests to OFA as r equired. The EPA was previously unaware of these potential reporting violations. We have provid ed this

information to OFA and ORCR staff so that they may follow up as appropriate.

17 Under RCRA, a TSDF may not receive hazardous waste for treatment, storage, or disposal without a permit.15

- P

- 0172 13 The regional coordinators provide recommendation s to OFA regarding whether t o consent or object to the shipment. According to OFA , the coordinators review the

one

- time notice of intent to import ; the individual notices of intent to import ; and

other information such as the permitted operations of the TSDF, including allowable type s of hazardous waste. The coordinators then provide a recommendation to OFA, wh ich makes the final consent determination. The

criteria used by the coordinators are outlin ed in the 2010 “ Criteria and Process for Objecting to Requests to Import Hazardous Was te to a U.S. Facility Memorandum” developed by OFA . Any one of these criteria may be sufficient to object to the proposed import:

1. The notice of intent to import does not provide all required information

. 2. T he notice of intent to import contains material i nformation that is

inconsistent with information contained in th e one

- time notice to import

. 3. The import of the waste is prohibited under other f ederal statute(s)

. 4. The U.S. importing facility seeks to import regulated hazardous wastes

that are not included in the facility’s permit or interim status authorization.

5. The U.S. importing facility is not in interim status or is operating without a required RCRA permit.

6. The U.S. importing facility’s owner, operator or parent corporation has

been convicted under the criminal provisions of any environmental statute within a year of notification

. 7. The EPA has received information that demonstrates that the U.S. importing facility cannot properly and safely manage the imported hazardous waste.

T he information contained in the one

- time notice can become obsolete

. One

- time

notices may not exist. For this reason, some of the r egions we spoke with rarely rely on the information in the one

- time notice

. Additionally, the information in the

one

- time notice is also in WIETS via the notices of intent to import

. Moreover,

the a gency has stated is difficult to pursue enforcement action for failure to

submit one

- time notices.

EPA T racking of S ubmitted M anifests and C onsents I s I ncomplete

An OIG review of a random sample of 21 1 ma nifests received by OFA over a

2

- year period (201 1 to 2012) revealed that 59 percent of the import manifests are not accompanied by a consent letter or other acceptable import documentation as required by RCRA regulations

. Although EPA consent requires spe cific identification of the waste generator, TSDF and waste types, the EPA does not track the consented waste type or that the TSDF is receiving waste from the foreign generator specified in the consent

. In the sample we reviewed , the waste type is often a bsent from consent letters that accompany import manifest copies

returned to the EPA

. This makes it difficult to verify that the waste received

matches the was te for which consent was given. OIG analysis of manifests also

revealed other irregularities

, inc luding :15

- P

- 0172 14  Waste received outside consent window

– This invalidates the concept of providing consent for a specified time. Also, the TSDF permit conditions that allowed consent may have changed.

 Incorrectly identified generators

– This makes it difficult to follow up with a generator in the event a shipment is overdue, and also complicates efforts to validate import generation and received volumes in the BR.

 Abnormally long domestic s hipment times, e.g.

, over 2 months (not including international transit)

– Exposure risk also comes from potential releases or accidents during transportation of hazardous waste imports where the distance between generation and final disposal (cradle to grave) may be longer than for domestic hazardous waste shipments.

Requiri ng the importer to provide the EPA Notice ID and the foreign generator on

the manifest itself would enable the EPA to more easily verify whether the

manifest it ha s received is connected to an entry in WIETS, the system used to track import notices and con sents.

According to the EPA’s 2013 Standard Operating Procedures for the Regional Review of Hazardous Waste Import Notifications

, within 30 days of receipt of the hazardous waste, the receiving TSDF is required to submit to EPA import consent

documentatio n and a copy of the i mport manifest for the shipment. The document

further states that this “ is one of the basic self

- reporting requirements of RCRA which is designed to make complian ce monitoring by the EPA possible. Like other

self

- reporting requirements of RCRA, it is important to require regulated parties to uphold their obligations or else the legal framework enacted by Congress will fail.”

There may be valid reasons why import manifests may not be accompanied by a

consent letter . For example, imports of hazardous waste from U.S.

- owned manufacturing facilities in Mexico (known as “maquiladoras”) are not required to give notice or seek consent; thus, imports of this waste may not be accompanied by a consent letter f

rom the EPA. I n these cases, the EPA d oes require documentation to accompany the manifest that explains why the TSDF may not

have received a consent letter. However, the EPA is not verifying whether TSDFs submitting manifests without a consent letter have this documentation and

whether it is b eing submitted in lieu of a consent letter for legitimate reasons.



### EPA Has Not Enforced Against Improper Hazardous Waste Shipments Coming to the United States

The EPA has rarely taken any enforcement actions against shipments entering the

United States w ithout prior consent. EPA managers stated that the appropriate response for shipments without consent would be communication with the government of the foreign country so that it may take enforce ment actions against

its exporters

. The EPA pr ovided document ation indicating that this has been done.15

- P

- 0172 15 However, t he EPA has not taken any enforcement actions against receiving

facilities for failure to submit import manifests or include consent documentation.

A s illustrated in Figures 2 and 3, OFA is un aware of many import shipments that are identified in the BR. Conversely, there are many importers that submitted manifests to OFA but did not report to the BR, which is a potential violation of RCRA regulations. Possible enforcement actions are presented in Table 1.

Table 1 : Possible EPA actions for import violations

Import “violation” Possible E nforcement Action

No one

- time notice received RCRA enforcement action is permitted

– this is a violation of RCRA regulations. No consent given None

– no authority under RC RA. Communication back to exporting country. Shipment outside of consent

timeframe None

– no authority under RCRA. Communication back to exporting country. Waste type shipped different

than what EPA consented to None

– no authority under RCRA. Also, cons ent letters often do not include RCRA waste type to easily verify.

No consent documentation
included with manifest
returned to OFA RCRA enforcement is permitted

– this is a violation of RCRA regulations.

No manifest returned to OFA RCRA enforcement actio n is permitted

– this is a violation of RCRA regulations. Import shipments not reported in BR RCRA enforcement action is permitted

– this is a violation of RCRA regulations.

Source: OIG analysis.

EPA managers and staff informed us of two instances of e nforcement cases related to hazardous waste imports. One was historical reports of illegal stockpiling of hazardous waste imports from Mexico at the border. The second case involved a shipment that entered the country through Region 5 and ended up in a Reg ion 4 facility in Alabama. The case involved an importer attempting to obtain consent through the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act to import partially empty containers of discarded, illegal pesticides. The EPA’s pesticides program

repeat edly denied entry of these containers and informed the RCRA program that there may be undocumented hazardous waste entering the country. The pesticide contained an active ingredient that would be listed as an acutely toxic hazardous

waste under RCRA. Accor ding to the EPA, enforcement action will be pursued by either Region 4 or 5.

According to EPA managers and staff , t he lack of explicit statutory authority to stop hazardous waste shipments at the border has resulted in a reduced level of

staff time focuse d on imports. EPA managers stated that l ess than 10 percent of

OFA and regional coordinator time is focused on imports.

Lack of explicit authority may prevent the EPA from stopping unconsented shipments at the border, but it does not prevent the EPA from taking appropriate and necessary enforcement actions against U.S. handlers ( importer, transporter or TSDF) in violatio n of RCRA requirements. The absence of enforcement activity15

- P

- 0172 16 in this area may cause hazardous waste importers to become complacent and

non compliant, potentially leading to an increase in rogue importers operat ing

undetected

, and increasing the potential for unacceptable human and environmental exposure to toxic contaminants

.



### Conclusions

L ack of explicit authority restricts the EPA’s abili ty to prevent unconsented hazardous waste shipments from entering the United States

. This is a gap in the federal law that governs the management and handling of hazardous waste and its

intent to address “ cradle

- to

- grave ” management of hazardous waste. Wit h hazardous waste imports, the U.S. border acts as the point of generation (i.e.

, cradle), but neither the EPA nor CBP believes they otherwise have explicit authority to stop unconsented shipments of hazardous waste at the border. The

EPA needs to seek exp licit authority to stop unconsented imports at the U.S.

border.

The EPA also needs to better use the authorities it does have. Th e EPA has failed

to take enforcement action against domestic entities when RCRA import regulations are violated

. The EPA can b egin to address this by taking enforcement actions and working with CBP to identify how existing border controls can be more effectively used.

OFA’s efforts to monitor hazardous waste import shipments are ineffective ; over 60 percent of the hazardous was te volume reported in the BR system was not reported to OFA. However, the BR system also does not provide a complete picture of hazardous waste imports. As a result, there is an incomplete picture of hazardous waste entering the country and a potential for violations of RCRA regulations to go undetected

. Th e EPA could remedy this situation by implementing additional controls for accounting of hazardous waste imports.



### Recommendations

We recommend that the Assistant Administrator for Enforcement and Complia nce Assurance and Assistant Administrator for Solid Waste and Emergency Response:

1. Implement controls to improve monitoring of hazardous waste imports :

a. Reconcile TSDF import manifests submitted to OFA with data reported in the BR.

b. Include an additional s tatement in consent documentation reminding importers of the reporting requirements and emphasizing that TSDFs must submit import manifests to OFA and report imported hazardous waste in the BR.15

- P

- 0172 17 c. Require sufficient information in the consent letter and the

m anifest to confirm that the receiving TSDF and the type of hazardous waste imported have received prior consent

d. Implement mechanisms to ensure TSDFs submit required documentation, such as a copy of the consent letter, to OFA in addition to the import manif est.

2. Eliminate the one

- time notice of intent to import requirement.

3. W ork with CBP to u s e the ITDS system for hazardous waste imports to enhance domestic compliance monitoring

.

4. Seek explicit statutory authority to prevent the import of hazardous waste

t hat does not have prior EPA consent.



### Agency Response and OIG Evaluation

We revised the draft report recommendations after discussion with the agency
, and the agency now agrees with all recommendations . Agency corrective actions

to address the recommendat ions are:

Recommendation 1a

– The agency will r econcile discrepancies between import manifests submitted by TSDFs to OFA with import data reported by those TSDFs in the Biennial Report (BR) for 2011. First, OFA will send letters to those TSDFs

identified by the OIG as having submitted data on import shipments in their 2011 BR submittal that could not be matched to import manifests submitted to OFA. Second, ORCR will inform the relevant regions about the discrepancies and ask those regions to work with the relevant authorized states to follow up with those TSDFs identified by the OIG as having submitted 2011 import manifests to OFA but not having submitted matching import data on those manifested import shipments as part of their 2011 BR submittals

. Mileston e date : March 1, 2016.

Recommendation 1b

– The agency will i nclude an additional statement in consent documentation reminding importers of the reporting requirements and emphasizing that TSDFs must submit import manifests to OFA and report imported hazard ous waste on the “waste received from off

- site” form (WR form) form in the BR, and that importers need to report imported hazardous waste on the “waste generation and management” form (GM form) form in the BR as appropriate. Milestone date : January 31, 201 6.

Recommendations 1c

- d and 2

– The agency informed us that R ecommendations 1

c

- d and 2 may be addressed in their proposed rulemaking currently under review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Due to this ongoing deliberative process, the agency managers believed it was inappropriate to specifically address their position on these recommendations until OMB review of the proposed rule is complete. We will therefore review the content of the15

- P

- 0172 18 proposed rule with EPA staff after OMB review. At that ti me, we may modify the recommendations and develop mutually

- agreeable corrective action dates.

Recommendation 3

– The a gency will report on the status of this recommendation by December 31, 2015.

Recommendation 4

– The a gency will m eet with Administratio n officials outside

of EPA by 2nd Quarter FY2016 to discuss obtaining explicit import border authority.

Recommendations 1a

- b, 3, and 4 are open with corrective actions underway

. Because recommendations 1c

- d and 2 will be discussed by the Agency and OIG

st aff after OMB review of the proposed rule, these recommendations are considered unresolved and will be addressed in the Agency’s 60

- day response to this report. Appendix A contains the agency ’s response to our draft report and planned actions to address ou r recommendation. We reviewed the technical comments and made revisions to the report as appropriate.15

- P

- 0172 19



## Status of Recommendations and Potential Monetary Benefits

RECOMMENDATIONS POTENTIAL MONETARY BENEFITS (in $000s)

Rec.

No. Page

No. Subject Status 1 Action Official Planned Completion

Date Claimed

Amount Agre ed

- To

Amount

1 1 6 Implement controls to improve track ing of

hazardous waste imports:

a. Reconcile TSDF import manifests submitted to OFA with data reported in the BR.

b. Include an additional statemen t in consent documentation reminding importers of the reporting requirements and emphasizing that TSDFs must submit import manifests to OFA and report imported hazardous waste in the

BR.

c. Require sufficient information in the consent
letter and the manifest to confirm that the receiving TSDF and the type of hazardous waste imported have received prior consent

d. Implement mechanisms to ensure TSDFs submit required documentation, such as a copy of the consent letter, to OFA in addition to the import manifest. O

O

U

U Assistant Administrator for Enforcement and Compliance

Assurance and Assistant
Administrator for Solid Waste and Emergency Response 3/ 1/16

1/31/16

2 1 7 Eliminate the one

- time notice of intent to import

requirement. U Assistant Admi nistrator for Enforcement and Compliance

Assurance and Assistant
Administrator for Solid Waste and Emergency Response

3 1 7 W ork with CBP to u s e the ITDS system for

hazardous waste imports to enhance domestic compliance monitoring

. O Assistant Administ rator for Enforcement and Compliance

Assurance and Assistant
Administrator for Solid Waste and Emergency Response 12/31/15

4 1 7 Seek explicit statutory authority to prevent the

import of hazardous waste that does not have prior

EPA consent. O Assistan t Administrator for Enforcement and Compliance

Assurance and Assistant
Administrator for Solid Waste and Emergency Response 1/ 1/17

1 O = R ecommendation is open with agreed

- to corrective actions pending

. C = R ecommendation is closed with all ag reed

- to actions completed.

U = R ecommendation is unresolved with resolution efforts in progress

.15

- P

- 0172 20 Appendix A



## Agency Response to Draft Report

(Dated March 25 , 201 5 )

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: Response to Office of Inspector General Draft Report No

. OPE

- FY14

- 0036,

“ EPA Does Not Effectively Control or Monitor Imports of Hazardous

Waste

, ” dated February 23, 2015

FROM: Cynthia Giles

Assistant Administrator, OECA

Mathy Stanislaus

Assistant Administrator , OSWER

TO: Arthur A. Elkins, Jr.

Inspec tor General

Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the issues and recommendations in the subject audit report. Following is a summary of the agency’s key points , along with its

responses on each of the report recommendations. For those report recomme ndations with which the agency agrees, we have provided intended corrective actions and estimated completion dates to the extent we can. For those report recommendations that we do not think are appropriate or supported, we have explained our position, and proposed alternatives to recommendations. For your consideration, we have included a Technical Comments Attachment to supplement this response.
AGENCY’S OVERALL POSITION Our chief concern is the significant overstatement in the report’s draft conclusions

, which claim that EPA’s monitoring of imports of hazardous waste has “serious flaws.” Although the report acknowledges that EPA does not have legal authority to stop hazardous waste imports at the border, the report nevertheless criticizes EPA for failing to properly monitor imports and suggests that EPA should increase its work in this area to do a variety of paperwork exercises of no demonstrated value. The report goes on to recommend that EPA seek new legal authority from Congress and states that “[ t ]he EPA’s actions to ensure that hazardous waste imports to the United States are received, processed and managed in accordance with RCRA regulations are incomplete and ineffective.” EPA has several significant concerns about the OIG’s

recommendations. First, EPA does conduct some monitoring of hazardous waste imports, as resources permit. Even in the absence of explicit statutory authority, as OIG has recognized, we have in a number of instances informed the sending country of apparent shipment

without consen t for their enforcement action.15

- P

- 0172 21

OIG Response 1 : As acknowledged in the report, the EPA has informed the sending country of apparent shipments without consent. However, as documented in the report, EPA has incomplete information on imported hazardous waste shipments.

Second, the Agency is taking new steps to improve the tracking of hazardous waste imports that will improve the level of compliance monitoring. EPA is working on a proposed rule, the “Hazardous Waste Export

- Import Revisions Rule, EPA

- HQ

- RCRA

2015

- 0147,” that would improve the tracking of imports of hazardous waste. In addition, pursuant to recently passed legislation, the Agency is developing a new electronic reporting and electronic manifest program that will enhance EPA’s ability to track

im ports. These two new regulatory efforts will advance our work in the imports area by making review and analysis of data much more efficient.

OIG Response 2 : Both the proposed rule and the electronic manifest program have been agreed upon as acceptable c orrective actions to address the revised recommendations, pending the content of the proposed rule after review by OMB.

Third, in a time of constrained resources when EPA’s enforcement program is at the lowest staffing level it has ever been since OECA was created over 20 years ago, EPA must focus its enforcement resources on those violations that pose the greatest environmental and public health impacts. While illegal movements of hazardous waste constitute a matter of serious concern, the available inf ormation does not support the need to elevate the compliance analysis of import shipments to a higher priority level, as the draft report recommends. Moreover, the draft report has not identified a substantial impact from hazardous waste imports that requi res further action at this time.

OIG Response 3 : The OIG has communicated with the EPA about ways to effectively reconcile the two sources of import data with minimal resources. This is reflected in the revised recommendations. With regard to “substantia l impact” we refer to EPA’s own language in their 2013 Standard Operating Procedures for the Regional Review of Hazardous Waste Import Notifications : “ shipments of hazardous waste into the U.S. pose potential risks for the public health and environment of our country, since these wastes originate outside the

U.S. ”

Fourth, as the draft report itself acknowledges, EPA lacks ex plicit RCRA import authority to stop imports at t he border that lack EPA consent. In light of these factors, the draft report’s rec ommendation of increased investment is misplaced. Recognizing the lack of authority to take the recommended actions, the draft report goes on to recommend that the Assistant Administrators of the two Offices seek to obtain explicit statutory authority to prevent the import of hazardous waste that does not have prior EPA consent. OECA and OSWER believe that such a recommendation goes well beyond the OIG’s authority and is not appropriate to include as a recommendation

for corrective action.15

- P

- 0172 22

OIG Respons e 4 : The EPA is incorrect to state that the OIG does not have this authority

– nothing in the IG Act prohibits recommending that the EPA seek additional authority. Further, seeking additional authority has been included in OIG recommendations, agreed to by EPA, in prior reports. The OIG recommendation stemmed from EPA’s consistent statements in interviews that efforts to control hazardous waste imports were restricted by the lack of authority and the fact that RCRA did not specifically give EPA the authorit y to stop imports at the border where consent was not received. After additional discussion, the Agency agreed to

m eet with Administration officials outside of EPA to discuss obtaining explicit import border authority

.

In its technical comments, the Agen cy requested that the OIG add the word “explicit” before “authority” in the instances in the report where we discussed the lack of RCRA authority to stop imports at the port where consent had not been received. The Agency’s request for the

insertion of “ex plicit” suggests that the Agency may have implicit authority it has not used. In
that case, th e A gency has n o t explained why it would otherwise lack the authority to address the imports of hazardous waste under its general RCRA authority

.

We would welco me the opportunity to discuss these issues further. If you have any questions regarding this response, please contact Gwendolyn Spriggs,
OECA Point of Contact on (202) 564

- 2439, or Kecia Thornton, OSWER Point of Contact on (202)566

- 1913.
Attachments : Cha rt of Agency’s Response to Report Recommendations
Technical Comments

cc:15

- P

- 0172 23

Attachment 1: CHART OF AGENCY’S RESPONSE TO REPORT
RECOMMENDATIONS

Agreements

No. Recommendation High

- Level Intended Corrective Action(s) Estimated Completion by Quarter and FY

1. Implement controls to improve tracking of

hazardous waste imports. This could include ensuring TSDFs report to the BR as both the generator and receiving facility if they are acting in both capacities. OFA will include a statement in its import

consent documentation reminding receiving facilities that they must report to the biennial report ( BR ) using the “waste generation and management” form (GM form) as well as the “waste

received from off

- site” form (WR form) if they are both the receiving treatment, storage, or disposal facility (TSDF) and the U.S. importer, and the total quantity of imported and domestically generated waste in any month meets the large quantity generator

threshold

. The statement will remind the facility that if
it is not the U.S. im porter, it
should remind the U.S. importer of this potential reporting requirement, as all parties that are

contributors to the importation of hazardous waste are jointly and severally liable for compliance with import requirements 18

. 4 th Quarter FY 2015 for changes to import

consent
documentation.

December 2016 for any regulatory changes.

18 Memo from John Skinner, Director of the Office of Solid Waste, to Harry Seraydarian, Director of the Toxics and Waste Management Divisi on in EPA Region IX, June 25, 1985, available online at http://yosemite.epa.gov/osw/rcra.nsf/0c994248c239947e85256d0900711 75f/E27643CD81ABBDCA8525670F006B D187/$file/11085.pdf

.15

- P

- 0172 24 ORCR is considering t he inclusion of improved tracking measures for hazardous waste imports in the proposed rule titled “Hazardous Waste Export

Import Revisions Rule” (RIN 2050

- AG77) that is currently in development.

Since the 2001 BR cycle,

the instructions have

included a n ote in the section, WHO IS
REQUIRED TO FILE THE
HAZARDOUS WASTE
REPORT

, informing the regulated community that

h azardous waste imported from a foreign country in

2015 mus t be counted in determining a reporter’s generator status and

included in their hazard ous waste report if the reporting site is the U.S. Importer

. 2. Eliminate the one

- time notice of intent to import requirement. ORCR is consideri ng the
inclusion of this

recommendation in the proposed rule titled “Hazardous Waste Export

Import Revisions Rule” (RIN 2050

- AG77) that is currently in development. December 2016

.

3. Work with CBP to use the ITDS system for

hazardous waste imports to enh ance domestic compliance monitoring. OSWER and OECA are arranging to discuss with
Customs and Border Protection (CBP) the potential use of CBP's authority to redeliver import shipments

under the International Trade Data System ( ITDS ). Despite our willingne ss to explore this recommendation now, this avenue may present difficult legal and practical obstacles 4 th Quarter FY 2015 to discuss possibility of redelivery option with
CBP.15

- P

- 0172 25 and ultimately may not prove

to be available.

5. Develop and implement

proce dures to address
deficiencies in the current process and pursue enforcement actions as necessary. These procedures could

include:

b. Including the EPA Notice ID and foreign generator on the manifest returned by the TSDF to OFA, to allow

confirmation with data
entered into WIETS. The EPA manifest requirements in 40 CFR Part 262 Subpart F already require entry of the foreign generator

name and address in addition to the U.S. importer’s name, address, and EPA ID number.

ORCR is considering

inclusi on of the recommendation regarding

the EPA notice ID in the proposed rule titled “Hazardous Waste Export

Import Revisions Rule” (RIN

2050

- AG77) that is currently in development. December 2016

.

Disagreements

No. Recommendation Agency

Ex planation/Response Proposed Alternative

1. Implement controls to improve tracking of

hazardous waste imports. This could include reconciling BR data with the import manifests received by OFA as well as ensuring TSDFs report to the BR as both the generato r and receiving facility if they are acting in both capacities. Available data do not support the need for this increased work, particularly at a time of greatly

diminished resources. See Agency proposal

for item #1 under Agreements.

4. Seek explicit st atutory authority to prevent the This recommendation goes beyond OIG’s authority and15

- P

- 0172 26

import of hazardous

waste that does not have prior EPA consent. is not appropriate for

inclusion as a corrective

action.

5. Develop and implement procedures to addr ess deficiencies in the current process and pursue enforcement actions as necessary. These procedures could

include:

a. Ensuring EPA waste

codes are entered into
WIETS at the time of

consent. Regional Coordinators use their best judgment in determining which EPA waste codes correspond to a particular listing of UN
waste codes found in import notifications, where the foreign notices do not provide EPA waste codes. However, the manual entry
of EPA waste codes that are not listed in the foreign

notice into a WIETS

comment box could result in documenting inaccurate and/or incomplete waste
code data in WIETS and potentially degrading data quality. OFA will continue to

enter all EPA waste

codes listed in the foreign notice in
WIETS.

c. Requiring sufficient

i nformation in the consent letter (TSDF

and hazardous waste codes) to allow confirmation using the
manifest that the receiving TSDF is the

one consented to and that the type of

hazardous waste Import Consent

documentation al ready lists the receiving TSDF’s name and address, the

hazardous waste description and the foreign generator. ORCR is considering

the inclusion of certain changes to ensure that

hazardous waste imports have received prior consent in the proposed rule title d
“Hazardous Waste Export

- Import Revisions Rule” (RIN

2050

- AG77) that is15

- P

- 0172 27

imported received prior

consent. currently in development.

d. Implementing

mechanisms to ensure TSDFs submit required documentation, such as a copy of the consent letter, to OFA in addition to the import manifest. Available data do not support the need for this increased work, particularly at a time of greatly

diminished resources. ORCR is considering adding certain changes to better

document consent on
the EPA manifest in the proposed rule titled
“Hazardous Waste

E xport

- Import Revisions Rule” (RIN

2050

- AG77) that is currently in development. e. Following up with
TSDFs for failure to

submit a hazardous import manifest to OFA when they are identified as reporting to the BR. Available data do not support the need for this increased work, particularly at a time of greatly

diminished resources. Once the e

- manifest system is functioning, import shipment data will be automatically
available to OFA.

f. Following up with
TSDFs for failure to report to the BR when they are identified as having submitted a
manifest to OFA. Available data do not support the need for this increased work, particularly at a time of greatly

diminished resources. Once the e

- manifest system is functioning, linkage to the BR may

be included.15

- P

- 0172 28 Ap pendix B



## Distribution

Office of the Administrator Assistant Administrator for Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Assistant Administrator for Solid Waste and Emergency Response Agency Follow

- Up Official (the CFO) Agency Follow

- Up Coordinator

General Counsel Associate Administrator for Congressional and Intergovernmental Relations

Associate Administrator for Public Affairs Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator for Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Deputy Assistant Administrator for Solid Was te and Emergency Response

Audit Follow

- Up Coordinator, Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance

Audit Follow

- Up Coordinator, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response