Document ID: EPA-HQ-RCRA-1999-0031-0108
Agency: epa
Document Type: Proposed Rule
Title: Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Burden Reduction Initiative; Proposed Rule
Posted Date: 2002-01-17T05:00Z

Thursday,

January
17,
2002
Part
II
Environmental
Protection
Agency
40
CFR
Part
260,
et
al.
Resource
Conservation
and
Recovery
Act
Burden
Reduction
Initiative;
Proposed
Rule
VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
11:
32
Jan
16,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00001
Fmt
4717
Sfmt
4717
E:\
FR\
FM\
17JAP2.
SGM
pfrm06
PsN:
17JAP2
2518
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
12
/
Thursday,
January
17,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
40
CFR
Parts
260,
261,
264,
265,
266,
268,
270,
and
271
[
FRL
 
7123
 
9]

RIN
2050
 
AE50
Resource
Conservation
and
Recovery
Act
Burden
Reduction
Initiative
AGENCY:
Environmental
Protection
Agency.
ACTION:
Proposed
rule.

SUMMARY:
The
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
EPA)
proposes
to
reduce
the
recordkeeping
and
reporting
burden
the
Resource
Conservation
and
Recovery
Act
(
RCRA)
imposes
on
the
states,
the
public,
and
the
regulated
community.
The
burden
reduction
ideas
proposed
today
will
have
no
anticipated
impact
on
the
protections
for
human
health
and
the
environment
we
have
established.
At
the
same
time,
our
proposals
will
eliminate
non­
essential
paperwork.
In
a
Federal
Register
``
Notice
of
Data
Availability''
published
June
18,
1999,
we
asked
for
comment
on
an
initial
set
of
burden
reduction
ideas.
In
today's
action,
we
are
proposing
for
rulemaking
many
of
these
ideas.
DATES:
Written
comments
must
be
received
by
April
17,
2002.
ADDRESSES:
If
you
wish
to
comment
on
this
proposed
rule,
you
must
send
an
original
and
two
copies
of
the
comments
referencing
Docket
Number
F
 
1999
 
IBRA
 
FFFFF
to:
RCRA
Information
Center
(
RIC),
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
5305G),
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Headquarters
(
EPA
HQ),
Ariel
Rios
Building,
1200
Pennsylvania
Avenue,
NW.,
Washington,
DC
20460
 
0002;
or,
(
2)
if
using
special
delivery,
such
as
overnight
express
service:
RIC,
Crystal
Gateway
One,
1235
Jefferson
Davis
Highway,
First
Floor,
Arlington,
VA
22202.
You
may
also
submit
comments
electronically
following
the
directions
in
the
SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION
section
below.
You
may
view
public
comments
and
supporting
materials
in
the
RIC.
The
RIC
is
open
from
9
am
to
4
pm
Monday
through
Friday,
excluding
Federal
holidays.
To
review
docket
materials,
we
recommend
that
you
make
an
appointment
by
calling
703
 
603
 
9230.
You
may
copy
up
to
100
pages
from
any
regulatory
document
at
no
charge.
Additional
copies
cost
$
0.15
per
page.
For
information
on
accessing
an
electronic
copy
of
the
data
base,
see
the
SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION
section.
FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT:
For
general
information,
call
the
RCRA
Hotline
at
1
 
800
 
424
 
9346
or
TDD
1
 
800
 
553
 
7672
(
hearing
impaired).
Callers
within
the
Washington
Metropolitan
Area
must
dial
703
 
412
 
9810
or
TDD
703
 
412
 
3323
(
hearing
impaired).
The
RCRA
Hotline
is
open
Monday
 
Friday,
9
am
to
6
pm,
Eastern
Standard
Time.
For
more
information
on
specific
aspects
of
this
proposed
rule,
contact
Mr.
Robert
Burchard
at
703
 
308
 
8450,
burchard.
robert@
epa.
gov,
write
him
at
the
Office
of
Solid
Waste,
5302W,
U.
S.
EPA,
Ariel
Rios
Building,
1200
Pennsylvania
Avenue,
NW.,
Washington,
DC
20460.
SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION:

Submittal
of
Comments
You
may
submit
comments
electronically
by
sending
electronic
mail
through
the
Internet
to:
rcradocket
epamail.
epa.
gov.
You
should
identify
comments
in
electronic
format
with
the
docket
number
F
 
1999
 
IBRA
 
FFFFF.
You
must
submit
all
electronic
comments
as
an
ASCII
(
text)
file,
avoiding
the
use
of
special
characters
or
any
type
of
encryption.
The
official
record
for
this
action
will
be
kept
in
the
paper
form.
Accordingly,
we
will
transfer
all
comments
received
electronically
into
paper
form
and
place
them
in
the
official
record
which
will
also
include
all
comments
submitted
directly
in
writing.
The
official
record
is
the
paper
record
maintained
at
the
RIC
as
described
above.
We
may
seek
clarification
of
electronic
comments
that
are
garbled
in
transmission
or
during
conversion
to
paper
form.
You
should
not
electronically
submit
any
confidential
business
information
(
CBI).
You
must
submit
an
original
and
two
copies
of
CBI
under
separate
cover
to:
RCRA
CBI
Document
Control
Officer,
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
5305W),
U.
S.
EPA,
Ariel
Rios
Building,
1200
Pennsylvania
Avenue,
NW.,
Washington,
DC
20460.
If
you
do
not
submit
comments
electronically,
we
are
asking
prospective
commenters
to
voluntarily
submit
one
additional
copy
of
their
comments
on
labeled
personal
computer
diskettes
in
ASCII
(
text)
format
or
a
word
processing
format
that
can
be
converted
to
ASCII
(
text).
It
is
essential
that
you
specify
on
the
disk
label
the
word
processing
software
and
version/
edition
as
well
as
the
commenter's
name.
This
will
allow
us
to
convert
the
comments
into
one
of
the
word
processing
formats
used
by
the
Agency.
Please
use
mailing
envelopes
designed
to
protect
the
diskettes.
We
emphasize
that
submission
of
diskettes
is
not
mandatory,
nor
will
it
result
in
any
advantage
or
disadvantage
to
any
commenter.
Accessing
Electronic
Data
Background
information
materials
for
this
Notice
are
available
on
the
Internet.
Follow
the
instructions
below
to
access
these
materials
electronically:
WWW:
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
epaoswer/
hazwaste/
data/
burdenreduction.
FTP:
ftp.
epa.
gov.
Login:
anonymous.
Password:
Your
Internet
address.
Files
are
located
in
/
pub/
epaoswer.

Index
I.
Background
and
Purpose
of
Today's
Proposed
Rulemaking
A.
Why
are
We
Reducing
Burden?
B.
How
is
Burden
Estimated?
C.
What
is
the
Baseline
for
the
Resource
Conservation
and
Recovery
Act
(
RCRA)
Paperwork
Requirements?
D.
What
is
the
Resource
Conservation
and
Recovery
Act
(
RCRA)
Burden
Reduction
Initiative
and
What
have
We
Done
to
Date?
E.
How
Can
I
Influence
EPA's
Thinking
on
this
Rule?
II.
Our
Main
Burden
Reduction
Proposals
A.
We
Propose
to
Reduce
the
Reporting
Requirements
for
Generators
and
Treatment,
Storage
and
Disposal
Facilities
(
TSDFs)
B.
We
are
Proposing
Weekly
Hazardous
Waste
Tank
Inspections
C.
We
Propose
to
Allow
Facilities
the
Opportunity
to
Adjust
the
Frequency
of
their
Self­
Inspections
D.
We
Propose
Reducing
the
Burden
of
RCRA
Personnel
Training
Requirements
and
Eliminating
an
Overlap
with
Occupational
Safety
and
Health
Administration
Training
Requirements
E.
We
Propose
to
Further
Eliminate
and
Streamline
the
Land
Disposal
Restrictions
(
LDR)
Paperwork
Requirements
III.
Other
Burden
Reduction
Proposals
IV.
How
Would
Today's
Proposed
Regulatory
Changes
be
Administered
and
Enforced
in
the
States?
A.
Applicability
of
Federal
Rules
in
Authorized
States
B.
Authorization
of
States
for
Today's
Proposal
C.
Abbreviated
Authorization
Procedures
V.
Administrative
Requirements
A.
Executive
Order
12866
B.
Environmental
Justice
Executive
Order
12898
C.
Executive
Order
13045:
Protection
of
Children
from
Environmental
Health
Risks
and
Safety
Risks
D.
National
Technology
Transfer
and
Advancement
Act
of
1995
E.
Regulatory
Flexibility
Act
(
RFA),
as
amended
by
the
Small
Business
Regulatory
Enforcement
Fairness
Act
of
1996
(
SBREFA)
F.
Executive
Order
13132
(
Federalism)
G.
Unfunded
Mandates
Reform
Act
H.
Executive
Order
13175:
Consultation
with
Indian
and
Tribal
Governments
I.
Paperwork
Reduction
Act
J.
Executive
Order
13211
(
Energy
Effects)

VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
11:
32
Jan
16,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00002
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
17JAP2.
SGM
pfrm06
PsN:
17JAP2
2519
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
12
/
Thursday,
January
17,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
Regulatory
Language
I.
Background
and
Purpose
of
Today's
Proposed
Rulemaking
A.
Why
Are
We
Reducing
Burden?
To
meet
the
federal
government­
wide
goal
established
by
the
Paperwork
Reduction
Act
(
PRA),
we
plan
to
reduce
the
burden
imposed
by
our
reporting
and
recordkeeping
requirements.
Burden
is
the
time
that
a
state
employee,
member
of
the
regulated
community,
or
private
citizen
spends
generating
and
reporting
information
to
us
and
keeping
records.
The
PRA
establishes
a
federal
government­
wide
goal
of
reducing
burden
40
percent
from
the
total
burden
imposed
annually
on
September
30,
1995.

B.
How
Is
Burden
Estimated?
We
estimate
burden
by
first
listing
the
activities
undertaken
to
collect
and
organize
information
in
response
to
our
regulations,
report
the
information,
or
keep
it
as
records.
For
each
activity,
we
then
estimate
the
time
in
hours
it
takes
an
average
respondent
to
complete
the
information
request,
taking
into
account
differences
such
as
facility
size
and
amount
of
information
required.
Next,
we
verify
these
estimates
through
consultations
with
affected
parties.
These
hour
estimates
are
then
multiplied
by
the
number
of
people
or
entities
expected
to
complete
the
information
collection.
The
results
of
these
analyses
are
the
basis
for
our
Information
Collection
Requests,
which
are
published
in
the
Federal
Register.

C.
What
Is
the
Baseline
for
the
Resource
Conservation
and
Recovery
Act
(
RCRA)
Paperwork
Requirements?
On
September
30,
1995,
the
baseline
for
the
PRA,
the
burden
imposed
by
RCRA
regulation
was
12,600,000
hours
per
year.
Forty
per
cent
reduction
from
the
baseline
is
7,560,000
hours
per
year.
This
proposed
rule
will
eliminate
929,000
hours.
Coupled
with
reductions
that
have
occurred,
and
reductions
that
are
planned,
we
expect
to
reduce
our
burden
by
47%
from
1995.

D.
What
Is
the
Resource
Conservation
and
Recovery
Act
(
RCRA)
Burden
Reduction
Initiative
and
What
Have
We
Done
to
Date?
There
have
already
been
substantial
burden
reduction
efforts
in
implementing
the
Resource
Conservation
and
Recovery
Act
(
RCRA),
such
as
for
the
Land
Disposal
Restrictions
and
Used
Oil
programs.
We
have
already
achieved
reductions
of
close
to
five
million
burden
hours.
And
there
are
other
ongoing,
proactive
burden
reduction
efforts
such
as
revisions
to
the
Hazardous
Waste
Manifest
system,
including
allowing
manifests
to
be
sent
electronically,
development
of
a
standardized
permit
for
selected
RCRA
facilities,
and
a
major
information
system
overhaul
through
the
Waste
Information
Needs
(
WIN)
Initiative.
The
WIN
Initiative
is
a
multi­
year
project
which
is
reinventing
RCRA
information
management.
It
operates
as
a
partnership
among
EPA
Headquarters,
EPA
Regions,
and
the
states.
Both
information
management
experts
and
implementers
of
hazardous
waste
programs
participate
in
the
Initiative.
The
WIN
Initiative
began
by
identifying
the
information
needed
to
carry
out
the
activities
of
the
RCRA
program,
assessing
the
reliability
and
accessibility
of
current
information
systems
that
support
these
activities,
projecting
future
information
needs,
and
analyzing
what
the
needed
information
technologies
will
be.
It
is
now
implementing
information
change,
starting
with
the
Biennial
Report,
Notification,
and
part
A
permit
application
requirements.
The
standardized
permit,
which
was
proposed
on
October
12,
2001
(
66
FR
52191),
would
be
available
to
facilities
that
generate
hazardous
waste
and
then
manage
the
waste
in
on­
site
units
such
as
tanks,
containers,
and
containment
buildings.
The
standardized
permit
would
streamline
the
entire
permitting
process.
Revisions
to
the
Hazardous
Waste
Manifest
include
standardizing
the
content
and
appearance
of
manifest
forms
and
allowing
waste
handlers
to
complete,
send,
and
store
manifest
information
electronically.
Additionally,
we
have
combined
our
two
main
databases
of
hazardous
waste
information
(
the
Biennial
Report
and
the
Resource
Conservation
and
Recovery
Information
System
 
RCRIS)
into
a
new
database,
named
``
RCRAInfo'',
which
will
provide
easier
and
faster
access
to
the
information
we
collect.
These
are
part
of
the
Agency's
efforts
to
comprehensively
reform
and
improve
RCRA
information
management.
This
process
has
asked
the
questions:
Who
uses
hazardous
waste
information,
why
do
they
need
it,
is
the
information
useful
as
it
is
currently
collected,
and
how
can
the
quality
and
timeliness
of
the
information
be
improved?
Over
the
past
three
years,
the
RCRA
Burden
Reduction
Initiative
has
reviewed
and
analyzed
all
RCRA
reporting
and
recordkeeping
requirements.
We
have
developed
ideas
for
eliminating
or
streamlining
many
of
them.
We
obtained
input
from
program
offices
at
EPA
Headquarters,
the
EPA
Regions,
and
state
experts
on
the
validity
of
the
ideas,
and
whether
the
ideas
would
detract
from
our
mission
to
protect
human
health
and
the
environment.
This
input
was
obtained
through
almost
twenty
intensive
information
gathering
sessions
and
workgroup
meetings.
We
also
had
the
assistance
of
EPA's
Office
of
Inspector
General,
which
made
field
visits
to
see
whether
certain
records
required
by
regulation
are
kept
and
used
by
regulatory
authorities.
The
ideas
for
the
Land
Disposal
Restrictions
changes
we
are
proposing
today
came
from
a
series
of
information
gathering
roundtables
on
the
Land
Disposal
Restrictions
program
sponsored
by
the
Agency
that
brought
together
EPA,
state
implementors,
the
regulated
community,
and
environmental
groups.
Our
ideas
were
first
announced
for
comment
in
a
June
18,
1999
Federal
Register
``
Notice
of
Data
Availability''
(
64
FR
32859).
In
the
``
Notice''
and
background
documents
(
which
are
available
on
the
Internet),
we
included
every
burden
reduction
idea
we
considered.
We
received
36
comments,
all
of
which
were
taken
into
consideration
when
developing
today's
proposal.
Based
on
comments
we
received
on
the
``
Notice'',
we
dropped
a
number
of
burden
reduction
ideas.
Ideas
were
dropped
when
a
commenter
demonstrated
a
practical
use
for
the
information,
or
where
they
presented
a
specific
example
of
how
an
idea
would
negatively
impact
human
health
and
the
environment.
Based
on
these
comments,
we
also
added
some
additional
ideas
which
appear
in
today's
proposal.
We
discussed
our
burden
reduction
plans
in
public
forums,
including
a
national
public
meeting
in
April
2000,
sponsored
by
the
Office
of
Management
and
Budget
on
reinventing
government,
a
national
meeting
of
states
sponsored
by
the
Association
of
Territorial
and
Solid
Waste
Management
Officials,
several
industry­
outreach
roundtables,
and
a
meeting
with
a
coalition
of
environmental
groups.
At
these
forums,
we
invited
discussion
of
the
same
questions
we
had
posed
in
the
``
Notice
of
Data
Availability''.
We
received
no
specific
information
from
meeting
participants
indicating
that
human
health
and
the
environment
would
be
impaired
if
our
burden
reduction
ideas
were
implemented.

E.
How
Can
I
Influence
EPA's
Thinking
on
This
Rule?
We
invite
comment
on
all
aspects
of
this
proposal.
We
specifically
want
comment
on:
How
will
this
proposal
affect
users
of
environmental
VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
11:
32
Jan
16,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00003
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
17JAP2.
SGM
pfrm06
PsN:
17JAP2
2520
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
12
/
Thursday,
January
17,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
information,
particularly
the
public?
Are
any
of
the
regulations
we
are
proposing
to
eliminate
crucial
to
protecting
human
health
and
the
environment?
What
kinds
of
information
do
people
need
to
protect
public
health
and
the
environment,
and
how
can
they
get
it
most
efficiently?
Most
importantly,
what
information
is
actually
used?
Although
a
very
broad
range
of
information
might
be
theoretically
useful
to
regulators
and
the
public,
it
is
our
understanding
that
much
of
the
information
we
have
required
to
be
collected
and
reported
is
not
accessed
or
used
on
a
regular
basis
for
protecting
human
health
and
the
environment.
At
this
point,
twenty
years
into
the
RCRA
program,
we
would
like
our
information
requirements
to
reflect
demonstrated
needs.
We
plan
to
implement
the
ideas
in
today's
proposal
in
a
final
rulemaking,
and
your
comments
will
play
an
important
part
in
our
decision­
making
process.
If
you
have
any
comments
on
this
proposal,
you
must
submit
them
even
if
you
already
submitted
comments
on
the
``
Notice
of
Data
Availability.''
Today's
proposed
rule
responds
to
the
comments
we
received
on
the
NODA,
and
we
will
assume
that
any
concerns
identified
in
the
comments
on
the
NODA
have
been
addressed
unless
we
hear
otherwise.
In
developing
this
proposal,
we
tried
to
address
the
concerns
of
our
stakeholders.
Your
comments
will
help
us
improve
this
rule.
We
invite
you
to
provide
different
views
on
options
we
propose,
new
approaches
we
haven't
considered,
new
data,
how
this
rule
may
effect
you,
or
other
relevant
information.
Your
comments
will
be
most
effective
if
you
follow
the
suggestions
below:
 
Explain
your
views
clearly,
and
why
you
feel
that
way.
 
Provide
technical
and
cost
data
to
support
your
views.
 
If
you
estimate
potential
costs,
explain
how
you
arrived
at
the
estimate.
 
Tell
us
which
parts
you
support,
as
well
as
those
that
you
disagree
with.
 
Provide
specific
examples
to
illustrate
your
concerns.
 
Offer
specific
alternatives.
 
Refer
your
comments
to
specific
sections
of
the
proposal,
such
as
the
units
or
page
numbers
of
the
preamble,
or
the
regulatory
sections.
 
Submit
your
comments
by
the
deadline
in
this
Notice.
 
Include
your
name,
date,
and
docket
number
with
your
comments.
II.
Our
Main
Burden
Reduction
Proposals
A.
We
Propose
To
Reduce
the
Reporting
Requirements
for
Generators
and
Treatment,
Storage
and
Disposal
Facilities
(
TSDFs)
We
require
the
submittal
of
334
different
types
of
notifications,
reports,
certifications,
demonstrations,
and
plans
from
generators
and
TSDFs
to
show
compliance
with
the
RCRA
regulations.
We
also
ask
for
this
information
as
part
of
applications
for
extensions,
permits,
variances,
and
exemptions.
A
study
done
by
the
Chemical
Manufacturers
Association
showed
that
as
with
the
other
major
environmental
statutes
implemented
by
EPA
 
such
as
The
Clean
Air
Act
and
The
Clean
Water
Act
 
RCRA
imposes
a
large
number
of
reporting
requirements.
When
we
crafted
our
regulations,
we
decided
to
collect
as
much
information
as
possible
about
facility
operations.
Without
prior
experience
as
a
guide,
our
philosophy
was
that
it
was
better
to
collect
information
in
all
cases,
knowing
that
we
could
eliminate
information
requirements
later
if
they
turned
out
to
not
be
useful.
Given
that
we
now
have
20
years
of
operating
history
in
RCRA,
we
have
decided
to
use
this
proposed
rulemaking
to
step
back
and
reevaluate
based
on
actual
experience
whether
this
level
of
information
collection
is
necessary.
And
if
not,
whether
we
can
reduce
paperwork
while
ensuring
that
public
health
and
environmental
protection
continues.
Doing
so
will
ease
some
of
the
unnecessary
bureaucratic
controls
we
have
established.
Based
on
comments
we
received
on
the
``
Notice
of
Data
Availability,''
our
own
analysis
(
which
consisted
of
interviews
with
Agency
experts,
consulting
with
stakeholders,
and
professional
judgement
in
weighing
the
qualitative
costs
and
benefits
of
the
ideas),
and
an
analysis
conducted
by
EPA's
Office
of
Inspector
General
(
discussed
above),
we
identified
approximately
one
third
of
the
334
reporting
requirements
for
elimination
or
modification.
We
developed
two
criteria
for
determining
which
reports
to
keep,
cut,
or
modify,
to
the
extent
there
was
no
indication
from
our
outreach
activities
and
analysis
that
protection
of
human
health
and
the
environment
would
be
affected
in
any
way:
(
1)
Reporting
should
occur
for
information
about
the
opening
and
closing
of
a
facility,
along
with
informational
updates
such
as
financial
assurance
updates
and
the
Biennial
Report
submission,
and,
(
2)
reporting
on
the
majority
of
the
day­
today
functions
of
a
facility
is
unnecessary.
Although
oversight
of
hazardous
waste
facilities
on
a
day­
today
basis
is
important,
many
of
the
various
notices
now
required
are
not
used
in
assessing
the
protectiveness
of
facility
operations,
and
some
are
simply
redundant.
One
of
the
measures
we
used
to
determine
this
was
whether
the
information
was
put
into
a
database
by
regulatory
authorities.
The
bulk
of
the
reports
we
propose
cutting
or
modifying
are
reports
notifying
the
regulatory
agency
that
some
other
regulatory
requirement
(
such
as
complying
with
a
technical
standard
for
the
operation
of
a
treatment
unit)
was
performed.
Other
reports
we
propose
to
cut
are
instances
when
a
facility
has
to
notify
the
regulatory
authorities
twice
about
something
that
happened
at
the
facility.
Requiring
a
double
notification
is
overly
burdensome
and
does
not
appreciably
improve
protection
of
human
health
and
the
environment.
Our
proposal
maintains
facility
accountability
and
responsibility.
It
still
has
a
facility
undertaking
the
basic
environmentally
protective
activities
that
are
in
the
regulations
 
it
just
won't
have
to
submit
a
report
to
the
regulatory
authority
that
each
activity
was
completed.
And,
it
will
still
have
to
record
what
happens
at
the
facility
in
the
operating
record.
Through
this
proposal,
we
hope
to
focus
attention
on
those
critical
reports
regulators
really
need
to
have
to
ensure
protection
of
human
health
and
the
environment.
We
are
not
curtailing
the
right
of
regulatory
agencies
to
request
and
receive
any
information.
We
are
simply
saying
that
facilities
no
longer
have
to
send
in
many
of
the
reports
they
currently
have
to
submit
on
a
regular
basis.
We
are
not
cutting
back
the
government's
or
the
public's
ability
to
know
what
is
happening
at
a
facility,
and
whether
environmentally
protective
activities
are
still
occurring,
because
a
basic
set
of
compliance
information
will
still
be
at
the
facility
(
in
the
facility's
operating
record).
This
information
can
be
examined
by
regulatory
authorities
and
then
shared
with
the
public.
And,
another
set
of
information
about
a
facility
(
how
much
waste
they
generate
and
what
is
done
with
it)
will
still
be
readily
accessible
to
the
public
via
Agency
Web
sites
and
Web
sites
run
by
non­
Agency
organizations
such
as
the
Right­
to­
Know
Network
(
www.
rtknet.
org).
Many
of
the
notices
and
reports
we
propose
eliminating
are
obscure
and
only
rarely
needed
to
be
sent
to
VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
11:
32
Jan
16,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00004
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
17JAP2.
SGM
pfrm06
PsN:
17JAP2
2521
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
12
/
Thursday,
January
17,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
regulatory
authorities.
They
are
the
kind
of
notices
and
reports
that,
based
on
our
outreach
and
information
gathering,
are
little,
if
at
all,
used
by
the
public.
Please
review
the
regulatory
language
that
is
part
of
today's
rulemaking
for
the
specific
changes
we
are
proposing
to
existing
regulatory
requirements.
If
commenters
believe
that
any
of
the
notices
or
reports
we
are
proposing
to
eliminate
are
necessary,
they
should
provide
specific
examples
of
how
the
information
has
been
used
to
address
a
human
health
or
environmental
problem.
And,
if
commenters
have
a
different
way
to
identify
which
reports
to
eliminate
or
modify,
they
should
let
us
know.
The
following
chart
contains
all
of
the
reporting
and
recordkeeping
requirements
we
propose
to
eliminate
or
modify.
The
first
column
shows
the
requirement
and
what
we
propose
to
do
with
it.
The
second
column
provides
the
regulatory
citation
that
implements
the
requirement.
The
Code
of
Federal
Regulations
(
CFR)
is
a
publication
containing
all
federal
regulations.
EPA's
regulations
are
in
40
CFR.
We
are
interested
in
whether
or
not
any
of
these
items
have
an
existing,
specific,
and
demonstrable
use
to
the
public
or
regulators.
In
your
comments,
please
provide
specific
examples
of
how
this
information
is
used,
and
whether
it
is
stored
in
an
accessible
database.

RCRA
REPORTING
AND
RECORDKEEPING
REQUIREMENTS
PROPOSED
FOR
ELIMINATION
OR
MODIFICATION
Requirement
40
CFR
(
Code
of
Federal
Regulations)
citation
Submit
report
on
industry­
wide
prevalence
of
the
material
production
process:
Eliminate
 
Regulatory
authorities
can
decide
whether
to
give
a
variance
from
classification
as
a
solid
waste
without
this
information.
260.31(
b)(
2).

Exclusion
 
Submit
one­
time
notification
for
recycled
wood­
preserving
wastewaters
and
spent
wood­
preserving
solutions:
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
requirement.
According
to
an
EPA
expert,
this
requirement
now
has
limited
use
for
regulators.
Also,
this
proposed
change
does
not
affect
the
other,
existing,
protective
regulatory
requirements.
261.4(
a)(
9)(
iii)(
E).

Submit
report
estimating
the
number
of
studies
and
amount
of
waste
to
be
used
in
treatability
studies:
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
requirement,
since
this
information
is
provided
to
the
regulatory
agency
at
a
later
date,
meaning
that
the
information
has
to
be
supplied
by
the
facility
twice
(
an
unnecessary
duplication).
Plus,
according
to
EPA
staff
experts,
these
estimates
are
not
usually
accurate.
261.4(
f)(
9).

Exclusion
 
Generator
submit
a
one­
time
comparable/
syngas
fuel
notice
to
the
permitting
agency:
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
requirement
given
the
subsequent
public
notice
regulatory
requirements
(
where
this
information
is
also
submitted).
Plus,
we
are
not
eliminating
the
overall
regulatory
requirements
for
burning,
blending,
generation
sampling,
etc.
261.38(
c)(
1)(
i)(
A).

Personnel
training
requirements
 
training
program:
Eliminate
the
RCRA
requirements,
and
have
facilities
follow
Occupational
Safety
and
Health
Administration
standards,
which
are
more
comprehensive.
This
is
an
area
of
overlap
that
has
been
identified
in
a
comprehensive
study
of
federal
personnel
training
requirements
by
the
General
Accounting
Office.
264.16(
a)(
3).

Personnel
training
requirements
 
record
job
title:
Eliminate
 
based
on
comments
from
a
state
expert,
we
are
recommending
that
these
requirements
be
deleted.
The
rationale
is
that
the
job
title
doesn't
necessarily
correspond
to
the
work
the
employee
does,
and
has
little
bearing
on
whether
the
employee
is
capable
of
doing
the
job
safely.
264.16(
d)(
1).

Personnel
training
requirements
 
record
job
description:
Eliminate
 
based
on
comments
from
a
state
expert,
we
are
recommending
that
these
requirements
be
deleted.
The
rationale
is
that
this
requirement
has
little
bearing
on
whether
the
employee
is
capable
of
doing
the
job
safely.
264.16(
d)(
2).

Personnel
training
requirements
 
record
type
and
amount
of
training
that
will
be
provided:
Eliminate
 
based
on
comments
from
a
state
expert,
we
are
recommending
that
these
requirements
be
deleted.
The
rationale
is
that
this
requirement
isn't
necessarily
a
good
indicator
of
whether
an
employee
is
capable
of
doing
the
job
safely.
264.16(
d)(
3).

Contingency
Plan
 
Coordination
with
other
plans:
Modify
 
Plan
should
be
based
on
the
One
Plan
guidance,
which
will
eliminate
the
need
to
prepare
multiple
contingency
plans
for
Agency
requirements.
264.52(
b).

Emergency
Procedures
 
Notify
Regional
Administrator
that
facility
is
in
compliance
with
264.56(
h)
before
resuming
operations:
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
requirement.
This
is
a
notification
to
the
regulatory
Agency
that
the
emergency
coordinator
has
ensured
that
no
incompatible
waste
is
being
treated
at
the
site
and
that
the
emergency
equipment
is
ready
to
use
again.
This
emergency
coordinator
does
not
need
to
have
this
notification
to
ensure
that
these
tasks
are
done.
The
environmentally
protective
activities
are
still
in
place,
and
are
documented
in
the
facility
operating
record,
as
well
as
documented
by
the
emergency
coordinator.
264.56(
i).

Operating
record:
Maintain
operating
record
for
facility
Modify
amount
of
time
most
of
the
information
in
operating
records
have
to
be
kept
 
three
years
instead
of
for
the
life
of
the
facility.
We
are
proposing
this
to
standardize
our
record
retention
requirements.
264.73(
b).

Standards
for
Solid
Waste
Management
Units
Remove
obsolete
language
...........................................................
264.90(
a)(
2).
Detection
Monitoring
(
Permitted
Facilities)
 
Conduct
and
maintain
ground­
water
monitoring:
Modify
 
We
plan
to
introduce
flexibility
by
allowing
sampling
for
a
smaller
subset
of
constituents
from
the
Appendix
IX
list
of
constituents.
This
idea
originated
from
state
staff
with
field
experience.
264.98(
c).

Detection
Monitoring
(
Permitted
Facilities)
 
Prepare
and
submit
the
notification
of
contamination:
We
are
taking
comment
on
eliminating
this
requirement
(
but
we
are
not
proposing
this
in
today's
rule)
 
this
has
been
identified
through
our
review
of
the
regulations
as
a
duplicative
requirement.
The
owner/
operator
must
still
sample
groundwater
wells
for
hazardous
constituents
(
this
is
required
by
regulation)
and
also
submit
a
permit
modification
to
the
Regional
Administrator
that
establishes
a
compliance
monitoring
program
for
the
constituents.
This
should
be
sufficient
to
protect
human
health
and
the
environment.
264.98(
g)(
1).

Detection
Monitoring
(
Permitted
Facilities)
 
Prepare
and
submit
an
engineering
feasibility
plan
for
corrective
action
if
required:
Modify
 
Our
review
of
the
regulations
identified
this
requirement
as
one
that
could
be
switched
from
having
to
send
it
to
the
regulatory
authority
to
just
keeping
it
as
part
of
the
facility
operating
record.
Our
rationale
is
that
this
information
will
be
available
at
the
facility
for
inspectors
to
see,
and
that
the
facility
operator
still
has
to
undertake
the
environmentally
protective
actions
described
in
the
regulation.
264.98(
g)(
5)(
ii).

VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
16:
56
Jan
16,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00005
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
17JAP2.
SGM
pfrm04
PsN:
17JAP2
2522
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
12
/
Thursday,
January
17,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
RCRA
REPORTING
AND
RECORDKEEPING
REQUIREMENTS
PROPOSED
FOR
ELIMINATION
OR
MODIFICATION
 
Continued
Requirement
40
CFR
(
Code
of
Federal
Regulations)
citation
Detection
Monitoring
(
Permitted
Facilities)
 
Prepare
and
submit
notification
of
intent
to
make
a
demonstration:
Modify
 
make
part
of
operating
record
instead
of
sending
it
to
the
regulatory
authority.
This
information
will
be
available
at
the
facility
for
inspectors
to
see.
Additionally,
this
kind
of
information
is
also
provided
to
the
regulatory
authorities
in
the
permit
modification
submitted
under
264.98(
g)(
6)(
iii).
264.98(
g)(
6)(
i),
(
ii).

Compliance
Monitoring
(
Permitted
Facilities)
 
Prepare
and
submit
notification
of
new
constituent
concentrations
Modify
 
number
of
wells,
samples,
and
constituents
will
be
determined
on
a
case­
by­
case
basis,
instead
of
for
all
wells.
This
idea
came
from
state
experts,
and
is
based
on
their
field
experience
that
sampling
all
wells
can
be
unnecessary.
264.99(
g).

Compliance
Monitoring
(
Permitted
Facilities)
 
Prepare
and
submit
notification
of
exceeded
concentration
limits:
Eliminate
 
this
has
been
identified
through
our
review
of
the
regulations
as
a
duplicative
requirement,
since
this
information
is
later
included
as
part
of
a
permit
modification
that
must
be
submitted
under
264.99(
h)(
2).
264.99(
h)(
1).

Compliance
Monitoring
(
Permitted
Facilities)
 
Prepare
and
submit
notification
of
intent
to
make
a
demonstration
Eliminate
 
this
has
been
identified
through
our
review
of
the
regulations
as
a
duplicative
requirement,
since
the
Regional
Administrator
will
get
the
same
information
through
the
264.99(
i)(
3)
permit
modification.
264.99(
i)(
1),
(
2).

Closure
(
Permitted
Facilities)
 
Submit
semi­
annual
corrective
action
report:
Modify
 
report
only
needs
to
be
submitted
annually,
instead
of
semi­
annually.
According
to
staff
experts
at
the
Agency,
annual
reports
will
be
sufficient
to
ensure
protection
of
human
health
and
the
environment.
264.113(
e)(
5).

Certification
of
Closure:
We
are
taking
comment
on
(
but
we
are
not
proposing
in
today's
rule)
whether
a
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager
is
capable
of
performing
this
certification.
264.115.

Certification
of
Completion
of
Post­
Closure
Care:
Modify
 
certification
can
be
by
a
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager,
who
will
have
sufficient
education
and
skill
to
make
this
certification.
264.120.

Containers
 
Inspection
frequency:
Allow
self­
inspection
frequencies
to
be
changed,
on
a
case­
by­
case
basis.
Based
on
comments
from
states
and
the
regulated
community,
we
want
to
provide
flexibility
in
inspections
for
well­
performing
facilities.
264.174.

Assessment
of
existing
tank
system's
integrity:
Modify
 
assessment
can
be
made
by
a
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager,
who
will
have
sufficient
education
and
skill
to
do
this
certification.
264.191(
a),
(
b)(
5)(
ii).

Assessment
of
new
tank
system
and
components:
Modify
 
can
be
made
by
a
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager,
who
will
have
sufficient
education
and
skill
to
do
this
certification.
And,
this
assessment
may
be
retained
on­
site.
264.192(
a),
(
b).

Containment
and
detection
of
releases:
Remove
obsolete
language
......................................................................
264.193(
a),
(
a)(
1)
 
(
5).
Leak
Detection
System
for
Tanks:
Eliminate
need
for
demonstrations
to
the
regulatory
authorities,
and
make
this
requirement
self­
implementing.
The
owner
or
operator
is
in
the
best
position
to
make
the
determination
as
to
what
is
the
earliest
practical
time,
based
on
the
site
characteristics.
264.193(
c)(
3),
(
c)(
4),
(
e)(
3)(
iii).

Variance
from
Leak
Detection
Systems
for
Tanks:
Eliminate
need
to
obtain
variance,
and
make
this
provision
self­
implementing.
The
owner
or
operator
can
implement
alternate
design
and
operating
practices
as
long
as
they
follow
the
requirements
of
this
section.
264.193(
g),
(
h).

Tank
Systems
(
Permitted)
 
Inspection
frequency:
Change
frequency
to
weekly.
Based
on
comments
and
the
existence
of
substantial
safety
features
required
by
regulation,
this
change
will
have
little
negative
impact
on
human
health
and
the
environment.
Also,
inspections
may
be
less
frequent
than
weekly,
as
determined
on
a
case­
by­
case
basis
by
regulatory
authorities.
264.195(
b).

Tank
Systems
(
Permitted)
 
Notify
EPA
of
release
and
submit
report:
Eliminate
 
the
existing
regulatory
requirements
for
cleanup
and
certification
of
the
cleanup
are
adequately
protective;
this
extra
notification
to
the
regulatory
authorities
is
unnecessary.
This
information
will
be
retained
in
the
facility
records.
264.196(
d0(
1)
 
(
3).

Tank
Systems
(
Permitted)
 
Submit
certification
of
completion
of
major
repairs:
Eliminate
requirement
to
submit
certification
 
we
do
not
ask
for
certifications
to
be
submitted
for
other
kinds
of
repairs;
there
is
no
special
reason
for
this
certification
to
be
submitted.
Also,
the
certification
may
be
made
by
a
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager.
264.196(
f).

Surface
Impoundments
(
Permitted)
 
Notify
EPA
in
writing
if
flow
rate
exceeds
action
leakage
rate
(
ALR)
for
any
sumps
within
7
days:
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
requirement
as
long
as
action
is
taken
to
stop
leaks;
action
that
is
already
required
by
regulation.
We
do
not
think
regulatory
authorities
need
to
be
notified
in
these
cases.
264.223(
b)(
1).

Surface
Impoundments
(
Permitted)
 
Submit
a
written
assessment
to
the
Regional
Administrator
within
14
days
of
determination
of
leakage:
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
requirement
as
long
as
action
is
taken
to
stop
leaks,
action
that
is
already
required
by
regulation.
We
do
not
think
regulatory
authorities
need
to
be
notified
in
these
cases.
264.223(
b)(
2).

Surface
Impoundments
(
Permitted)
 
Submit
information
to
EPA
each
month
the
Action
Leakage
Rate
is
exceeded
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
requirement
as
long
as
action
is
taken
to
stop
leaks,
action
that
is
already
required
by
regulation.
We
do
not
think
regulatory
authorities
need
to
be
notified
in
these
cases.
264.223(
b)(
6).

Waste
Piles
(
Permitted)
 
Installation
of
liners
and
leachate
collection
systems
after
January
29,
1992:
Eliminate
 
obsolete
language.
264.251(
c).

Waste
Piles
(
Permitted)
 
Notify
EPA
in
writing
of
the
exceedance
amount
of
the
leakage:
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
requirement
as
long
as
action
is
taken
to
stop
leaks,
action
that
is
already
required
by
regulation.
We
do
not
think
regulatory
authorities
need
to
be
notified
in
these
cases.
264.253(
b)(
1).

Waste
Piles
(
Permitted)
 
Submit
a
written
assessment
to
the
RegionalAdministrator
within
14
days
of
determination
of
leakage:
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
requirement
as
long
as
action
is
taken
to
stop
leaks,
action
that
is
already
required
by
regulation.
We
do
not
think
regulatory
authorities
need
to
be
notified
in
these
cases.
264.253(
b)(
2).

Waste
Piles
(
Permitted)
 
Compile
and
submit
information
to
EPA
each
month
that
the
Action
Leakage
Rate
(
ALR)
is
exceeded:
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
requirement
as
long
as
action
is
taken
to
stop
leaks,
action
that
is
already
required
by
regulation.
We
do
not
think
regulatory
authorities
need
to
be
notified
in
these
cases.
264.253(
b)(
6).

VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
16:
56
Jan
16,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00006
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
17JAP2.
SGM
pfrm04
PsN:
17JAP2
2523
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
12
/
Thursday,
January
17,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
RCRA
REPORTING
AND
RECORDKEEPING
REQUIREMENTS
PROPOSED
FOR
ELIMINATION
OR
MODIFICATION
 
Continued
Requirement
40
CFR
(
Code
of
Federal
Regulations)
citation
Land
Treatment
(
Permitted)
 
Prepare
and
submit
a
notice
of
statistically
significant
increases
in
hazardous
constituents
below
treatment
zone:
Eliminate
 
a
duplicative
requirement
since
this
information
will
be
in
the
permit
modification
that
has
to
be
submitted
if
this
event
happens.
The
regulatory
authorities
do
not
need
to
be
notified
twice.
264.278(
g)(
1).

Land
Treatment
(
Permitted)
 
Prepare
and
submit
notice
of
intent
to
make
a
demonstration
that
other
sources
or
error
led
to
increases
below
treatment
zone:
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
requirement
since
this
information
will
be
in
the
permit
modification
that
has
to
be
submitted
if
this
event
happens.
The
regulatory
authorities
do
not
need
to
be
notified
twice.
264.278(
h)(
1),
(
2).

Land
Treatment
(
Permitted)
 
Certification
of
closure:
We
are
taking
comment
on
(
but
not
proposing
in
today's
rule)
whether
a
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager
is
capable
of
doing
this
certification.
264.280(
b).

Land
Fills
(
Permitted)
 
Notify
EPA
if
action
leakage
rate
is
exceeded
within
7
days
of
determination:
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
requirement
as
long
as
the
procedures
in
the
response
action
plan
(
a
response
action
plan
is
regulatorily
required)
are
followed.
264.304(
b)(
1).

Land
Fills
(
Permitted)
 
Submit
a
written
assessment
to
the
Regional
Administrator
within
14
days
of
determination
of
leakage:
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
requirement
as
long
as
the
procedures
in
the
response
action
plan
are
followed.
Response
action
plans
are
required
by
regulation.
264.304(
b)(
2).

Land
Fills
(
Permitted)
 
Submit
information
to
EPA
each
month
the
Action
Leakage
Rate
(
ALR)
is
exceeded:
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
requirement
as
long
as
the
procedures
in
the
response
action
plan
are
followed.
Response
action
plans
are
required
by
regulation.
264.304(
b)(
6).

Special
Requirements
for
Bulk
and
Containerized
Liquids:
Remove
obsolete
language
........................................
264.314(
a)(
1),
(
a)(
2),
(
b),
(
f).
Incinerators
(
Permitted)
 
Submit
notification
of
intent
to
burn
hazardous
wastes
F020,
F021,
F022,
F023,
F026,
F027:
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
requirement
since
the
facility
is
already
permitted
to
burn
this
waste,
and
since
there
are
already
regulatory
standards
governing
how
the
waste
is
burned.
264.343(
a)(
2).

Drip
Pads
(
Permitted)
 
Submit
written
plan,
as­
built
drawings,
and
certification
for
upgrading,
repairing
and
modifying
the
drip
pad:
Modify
 
in
addition
to
an
independent,
registered
professional
engineer,
these
activities
may
also
be
done
by
a
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager.
264.571(
a),
(
b),
(
c).

Drip
Pads
(
Permitted)
 
Evaluate
drip
pads:
Modify
 
in
addition
to
an
independent,
registered
professional
engineer
this
evaluation
may
also
be
done
by
a
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager.
264.573
(
a)(
4)(
ii),
(
g).

Drip
Pads
(
Permitted)
 
Notify
EPA
of
release
and
provide
written
notice
of
procedures
and
schedule
for
cleanup
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
requirement
as
long
as
response
actions
described
in
(
m)(
1)(
i)
 
(
iii)
of
this
part
are
taken.
Information
relevant
to
the
happenings
at
the
drip
pad
will
be
retained
in
the
facility
record.
264.573(
m)(
1)(
iv).

Drip
Pads
(
Permitted)
 
EPA
makes
determination
about
removal
of
pad:
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
requirement
as
long
as
response
actions
described
in
(
m)(
1)(
i)
 
(
iii)
of
this
part
are
undertaken.
Information
relevant
to
the
drip
pad
activities
will
be
retained
in
the
facility
record.
264.573(
m)(
2).

Drip
Pads
(
Permitted)
 
Notify
EPA
and
certify
completion
of
repairs:
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
requirement
as
long
as
cleanup
and
repairs
described
in
the
regulations
of
this
part
are
made.
Information
relevant
to
the
drip
pad
activities
will
be
retained
in
the
facility
record.
264.573(
m)(
3).

Drip
Pads
(
Permitted)
 
Inspections:
Modify
 
in
addition
to
an
independent,
registered
professional
engineer,
these
inspections
may
be
done
by
a
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager.
264.574(
a).

Process
Vents
(
Permitted)
 
Submit
semi­
annual
report
of
control
device
monitoring
events
to
the
Region:
Eliminate
need
to
submit
report
 
an
unnecessary
requirement
given
the
detailed
recordkeeping
required
by
264.1035.
The
264.1035
information
will
be
retained
on­
site
for
regulators
to
examine.
264.1036.

Equipment
Leaks
(
Permitted)
 
Submit
notification
to
implement
the
alternative
valve
standard:
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
requirement
since
the
relevant
information
will
be
retained
in
the
facility
record.
264.1061(
b)(
1).

Equipment
Leaks
(
Permitted)
 
Submit
notification
to
discontinue
alternative
valve
standard:
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
requirement
since
there
are
standards
that
must
be
followed
if
the
regular
standards
are
going
to
be
followed.
Relevant
information
will
be
retained
in
the
facility
record.
264.1061(
d).

Equipment
Leaks
(
Permitted)
 
Submit
notification
to
implement
alternative
work
practices
for
valves:
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
reporting
requirement
as
long
as
standards
are
followed.
Relevant
information
will
be
retained
in
the
facility
record
for
regulators
to
examine.
264.1062(
a)(
2).

Equipment
Leaks
(
Permitted)
 
Submit
a
semi­
annual
report
with
record
of
equipment,
shutdowns,
and
control
device
monitoring
events:
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
requirement.
The
264.1064
recordkeeping
requirements
will
provide
adequate
information.
The
264.1064
information
will
remain
on­
site
for
regulators
to
examine.
264.1065.

Containment
Buildings
(
Permitted):
Remove
obsolete
language
.............................................................................
264.1100.
Containment
Buildings
(
Permitted)
 
Obtain
certification
that
building
meets
requirements:
Modify
 
in
addition
to
an
independent,
registered
professional
engineer,
the
certification
may
be
made
by
a
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager.
264.1101(
c)(
2).

Containment
Buildings
(
Permitted)
 
Notify
EPA
of
condition
that
has
caused
a
release
and
provide
schedule
for
cleanup:
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
requirement
since
repair
of
containment
building
must
occur
anyway.
Information
about
this
situation
will
be
available
in
the
facility
record
for
regulators
to
inspect.
264.1101(
c)(
3)(
i)(
D).

Containment
Buildings
(
Permitted)
 
Notify
EPA
and
verify
in
writing
that
the
cleanup
and
repairs
have
been
completed
after
a
release:
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
requirement.
EPA
does
not
get
involved
in
similar
decisions
about
whether
other
parts
of
a
facility
need
to
be
removed
from
service.
Information
about
this
situation
will
be
available
in
the
facility
records
for
regulators
to
inspect.
264.1101(
c)(
3)(
ii),
(
iii).

Containment
Buildings
(
Permitted)
 
Inspection
frequency:
Allow
reduced
inspection
frequencies
on
a
case­
bycase
basis.
This
determination
will
be
made
by
regulatory
authorities
based
on
past
performance
of
the
facility
264.1101(
c)(
4).

Purpose,
Scope,
and
Applicability:
Remove
obsolete
language
..............................................................................
265.1(
b).
Personnel
Training
 
Emergency
response:
Eliminate
and
replace
with
Occupational
Safety
and
Health
Administration
requirements,
which
are
more
comprehensive
than
the
RCRA
requirements.
265.16(
a)(
3).

VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
16:
56
Jan
16,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00007
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
17JAP2.
SGM
pfrm04
PsN:
17JAP2
2524
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
12
/
Thursday,
January
17,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
RCRA
REPORTING
AND
RECORDKEEPING
REQUIREMENTS
PROPOSED
FOR
ELIMINATION
OR
MODIFICATION
 
Continued
Requirement
40
CFR
(
Code
of
Federal
Regulations)
citation
Personnel
Training
 
Record
job
titles:
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
requirement
 
from
information
we
received
from
the
field,
the
job
title
doesn't
necessarily
correspond
to
the
work
the
employee
does,
and
has
little
bearing
on
whether
the
employee
is
capable
of
doing
the
job
safely.
265.16(
d)(
1),
(
2).

Personnel
Training
 
Description
of
type
and
amount
of
training
each
employee
will
receive:
Eliminate
 
from
information
we
received
from
the
field,
this
requirement
is
not
necessarily
a
good
indicator
of
whether
an
employee
is
capable
of
doing
the
job
safely.
265.16(
d)(
3).

Contingency
Plans
 
Coordination
with
other
plans:
Modify
 
Facilities
should
follow
the
One
Plan
guidance,
which
is
designed
to
eliminate
overlap
between
different
regulatory
requirements
for
contingency
plans.
This
proposal
has
been
endorsed
by
a
recent
General
Accounting
Office
report
on
worker
protection.
265.52(
b).

Emergency
Procedures
 
Notify
Regional
Administrator
that
facility
is
in
compliance
with
265.56(
h)
before
resuming
operations:
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
requirement.
This
is
a
notification
to
the
regulatory
Agency
that
the
emergency
coordinator
has
ensured
that
no
incompatible
waste
is
being
treated
at
the
site
and
that
the
emergency
equipment
is
ready
to
use
again.
This
emergency
coordinator
does
not
need
to
have
this
notification
to
ensure
that
these
tasks
are
done.
The
environmentally
protective
activities
are
still
in
place,
and
are
documented
in
the
facility
operating
record,
as
well
as
documented
by
the
emergency
coordinator.
265.56(
i).

Operating
Record
 
Keep
operating
record
for
facility:
Modify
the
amount
of
time
most
records
have
to
be
kept;
three
years
instead
of
for
the
life
of
the
facility.
This
will
standardize
the
RCRA
record
retention
time
requirements
eliminating
confusion
about
how
long
records
have
to
be
kept.
265.73(
b).

Ground­
water
Monitoring
(
Interim
Status
Facilities)
 
Submit
alternate
ground­
water
monitoring
plan:
Modify
 
no
need
to
submit
plan
to
Regional
Administrator,
it
can
be
kept
onsite
where
it
will
be
available
for
regulators
to
inspect.
265.90(
d)(
1).

Ground­
water
Monitoring
(
Interim
Status
Facilities)
 
Submit
report:
Modify
 
no
need
to
submit
report
to
Regional
Administrators.
It
can
be
kept
on­
site,
where
it
will
be
available
for
regulators
to
inspect.
265.90(
d)(
3).

Ground­
water
Monitoring
(
Interim
Status
Facilities)
 
Submit
notification
of
increased
indicator
parameter
concentrations
Modify
 
no
need
to
submit
reports;
this
information
will
be
noted
as
part
of
the
groundwater
quality
assessment
program.
265.93
(
c)(
1),
(
d)(
1).

Ground­
water
Monitoring
(
Interim
Status
Facilities)
 
Submit
information
for
ground­
water
quality
assessment
plan:
Modify
 
no
need
to
submit
information.
It
may
be
maintained
on­
site,
where
it
will
be
available
for
regulators
to
inspect.
265.93(
d)(
2).

Ground­
water
Monitoring
(
Interim
Status
Facilities)
 
Develop
and
submit
ground­
water
quality
assessment
reports
Modify
 
no
need
to
submit
these
reports
given
other
regulatory
requirements
in
this
part,
which
give
detailed
instructions
on
assessments
and
cleanups.
265.93(
d)(
5),
(
e),
(
f).

Ground­
water
Monitoring
(
Interim
Status
Facilities)
 
Prepare
and
submit
a
quarterly
report
of
concentrations
of
values
of
the
drinking
water
suitability
parameters:
Modify
 
report
will
be
kept
onsite,
where
it
may
be
inspected
by
regulators.
265.94(
a)(
2)(
i).

Ground­
water
Monitoring
(
Interim
Status
Facilities)
 
Prepare
and
submit
a
report
on
indicator
parameter
concentrations
and
evaluations:
Modify
 
report
will
be
kept
onsite,
where
it
may
be
inspected
by
regulators.
265.94(
a)(
2)(
ii).

Ground­
water
Monitoring
(
Interim
Status
Facilities)
 
Prepare
and
submit
a
report
on
ground­
water
surface
elevations
Modify
 
report
will
be
kept
onsite,
where
it
may
be
inspected
by
regulators.
265.94(
a)(
2)(
iii).

Ground­
water
Monitoring
(
Interim
Status
Facilities)
 
Prepare
and
submit
a
report
on
the
results
of
the
groundwater
quality
assessment
program:
Modify
 
report
will
be
kept
onsite,
where
it
may
be
inspected
by
regulators
265.94(
b)(
2).

Closure
(
Interim
Status
Facilities)
 
Submit
semi­
annual
corrective
action
report:
Modify
 
according
to
Agency
staff
experts,
regulators
will
have
sufficient
information
if
these
reports
are
sent
in
annually
instead
of
semiannually
265.113(
e)(
5).

Certification
of
Closure:
We
are
taking
comment
on
(
but
we
are
not
proposing
in
today's
rule)
whether
a
Certified
HazardousMaterials
Manager
is
capable
of
performing
this
certification.
265.115.

Certify
completion
of
post­
closure
care:
Modify
 
in
addition
to
an
independent,
registered
professional
engineer
this
certification
may
be
made
by
a
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Managers.
265.120.

Container
Inspection
Frequency:
Modify
 
allow
regulators
to
modify
the
self­
inspection
frequency
for
well­
performing
facilities
on
a
case­
by­
case
basis.
265.174.

Assessment
of
Existing
Tank
System's
Integrity:
Modify
 
in
addition
to
an
independent,
registered
professional
engineer,
this
assessment
may
be
done
by
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Managers.
265.191(
a),
(
b)(
5)(
ii).

Design
and
Installation
of
New
Tank
Systems
or
Components
 
assessment
of
structural
integrity
and
acceptability
for
storing
and
treating
waste:
Modify
 
in
addition
to
an
independent,
registered
professional
engineer,
this
assessment
may
be
done
by
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Managers.
265.192(
a).

Design
and
Installation
of
New
Tank
Systems
or
Components
 
assessment
of
tank
installation:
Modify
 
in
addition
to
an
independent,
registered
professional
engineer,
assessment
may
be
done
by
a
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager.
265.192(
b).

Tank
Systems
(
Interim
Status):
Remove
obsolete
language
...................................................................................
265.193(
a).
Tank
Systems
(
Interim
Status)
 
Demonstrate
to
EPA
that
technology
and
site
conditions
do
not
allow
detection
of
release
within
24
hours:
Eliminate
this
demonstration.
Having
a
functional
leak
detection
system
capable
of
detecting
a
release
within
24
hours
or
the
earliest
practicable
time,
coupled
with
the
tank
design
requirements
is
adequately
protective.
265.193(
e)(
3)(
iii).

Tank
Systems
(
Interim
Status)
 
Obtain
variance
to
use
alternate
tank
design
and
operating
practices:
Eliminate
the
need
to
obtain
a
variance
and
make
this
self­
implementing.
Records
are
to
be
kept
on­
site
describing
the
decisionmaking.
265.193(
g)(
1),
(
h).

Tank
Systems
(
Interim
Status):
Allow
reduced
inspection
frequencies
on
a
case­
by­
case
basis.
This
determination
will
be
made
by
regulatory
authorities
based
on
past
performance
of
the
facility.
265.195(
a).

VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
16:
56
Jan
16,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00008
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
17JAP2.
SGM
pfrm04
PsN:
17JAP2
2525
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
12
/
Thursday,
January
17,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
RCRA
REPORTING
AND
RECORDKEEPING
REQUIREMENTS
PROPOSED
FOR
ELIMINATION
OR
MODIFICATION
 
Continued
Requirement
40
CFR
(
Code
of
Federal
Regulations)
citation
Tank
Systems
(
Interim
Status)
 
Notify
EPA
of
release:
Eliminate
 
the
existing
regulatory
requirements
for
cleanup
and
certification
of
the
cleanup
are
adequately
protective;
this
extra
notification
to
the
regulatory
authorities
is
unnecessary.
This
information
will
be
retained
in
the
facility
record.
265.196(
d)(
1),
(
d)(
2).

Tank
Systems
(
Interim
Status)
 
Submit
report
describing
releases:
Eliminate
 
the
cleanup
requirements
in
the
regulations
and
the
need
to
certify
(
required
by
265.196(
f))
is
sufficient
to
protect
human
health
and
the
environment
265.196(
d)(
3).

Tank
Systems
(
Interim
Status)
 
Submit
certification
of
completion
of
major
repairs:
Eliminate
requirement
to
submit
certification
 
we
do
not
ask
for
certifications
to
be
submitted
for
other
kinds
of
repairs;
there
is
no
special
reason
for
this
certification
to
be
submitted.
Also,
this
certification
may
be
done
by
a
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager.
265.196(
f).

Surface
Impoundments
(
Interim
Status):
Remove
obsolete
language
.....................................................................
265.221(
a).
Surface
Impoundments
(
Interim
Status)
 
Submit
the
Response
Action
Plan
to
EPA:
Eliminate
 
Response
Action
Plans
for
other
kinds
of
treatment
units
are
not
submitted
to
EPA.
We
are
proposing
that
it
is
sufficient
to
keep
this
Plan
on­
site.
265.223(
a).

Surface
Impoundments
(
Interim
Status)
 
Notify
EPA
in
writing
if
flow
rate
exceeds
action
leakage
rate
for
any
sumps
within
7
days:
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
requirement
since
the
facility
still
has
to
address
the
leakage
and
record
its
response
to
the
leakage
in
the
facility
record,
which
is
available
for
inspection
by
regulators
265.223(
b)(
1).

Surface
Impoundments
(
Interim
Status)
 
Submit
a
written
assessment
to
the
Regional
Administrator
within
14
days
of
determination
of
leakage:
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
requirement
since
the
facility
still
has
to
address
the
leakage
and
record
its
response
to
the
leakage
in
the
facility
record,
which
is
available
for
inspection
by
regulators.
265.223(
b)(
2).

Surface
Impoundments
(
Interim
Status)
 
Compile
and
submit
information
to
EPA
each
month
the
Action
Leakage
Rate
is
exceeded:
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
requirement
since
information
about
the
leak
will
be
kept
onsite,
where
it
is
available
for
inspection
by
regulators.
265.223(
b)(
6).

Waste
Piles
(
Interim
Status)
 
Submit
the
Response
Action
Plan
to
EPA:
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
requirement
since
other
treatment
units
do
not
have
to
submit
this
plan.
Removing
this
requirement
will
bring
consistency
to
the
regulations.
265.259(
a).

Waste
Piles
(
Interim
Status)
 
NotifyEPA
in
writing
of
the
exceedance
amount
of
the
leakage:
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
requirement
as
long
as
Response
Action
Plan
is
followed.
Information
about
the
facility's
response
to
the
leakage
will
be
available
in
the
facility's
operating
record.
265.259(
b)(
1).

Waste
Piles
(
Interim
Status)
 
Submit
a
written
assessment
to
the
Regional
Administrator
within
14
days
of
determination
of
leakage:
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
requirement
as
long
as
the
Response
Action
Plan
is
followed
Information
about
the
facility's
response
to
the
leakage
will
be
available
in
the
facility's
operating
record.
265.259(
b)(
2).

Waste
Piles
(
Interim
Status)
 
Submit
information
to
EPA
each
month
that
the
Action
Leakage
Rate
is
exceeded
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
requirement
as
long
as
the
Response
Action
Plan
is
followed.
Information
about
the
facility's
response
to
the
leakage
will
be
available
in
the
facility's
operating
record.
265.259(
b)(
6).

Land
Treatment
(
Interim
Status)
 
Submit
notification
for
food­
chain
crops
at
land
treatment
facility:
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
requirement
as
long
as
the
other
regulatory
requirements
in
265.276
are
followed.
Information
about
compliance
with
these
other
regulatory
requirements
will
be
in
the
facility
operating
record.
265.276(
a).

Landfills
(
Interim
Status)
 
Remove
obsolete
language
............................................................................................
265.301(
a).
Land
Fills
(
Interim
Status)
 
Submit
the
Response
Action
Plan
to
EPA:
Eliminate
requirement
to
submit
plan.
Developing
a
plan,
keeping
it
onsite,
and
implementing
it
when
necessary
is
sufficient.
265.303(
a).

Land
Fills
(
Interim
Status)
 
Notify
EPA
if
action
leakage
rate
is
exceeded
within
7
days
of
determination:
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
requirement
as
long
as
the
Response
Action
Plan
is
followed
and
information
on
adherence
to
the
Plan
is
kept
in
the
facility
operating
record,
where
it
will
be
available
for
inspection
by
regulators
265.303(
b)(
1).

Land
Fills
(
Interim
Status)
 
Submit
a
written
assessment
to
the
Regional
Administrator
within
14
days
of
determination
of
leakage:
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
requirement
as
long
as
the
Response
Plan
is
followed
and
information
on
adherence
to
the
Plan
is
kept
in
the
facility
operating
record,
where
it
will
be
available
for
inspection
by
regulators.
265.303(
b)(
2).

Land
Fills
(
Interim
Status)
 
Submit
information
to
EPA
each
month
the
Action
Leakage
Rate
(
ALR)
is
exceeded
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
requirement
as
long
as
the
remediation
required
by
regulation
takes
place,
and
information
about
the
remediation
is
kept
in
the
facility
record.
265.303(
b)(
6).

Requirements
for
bulk
and
containerized
liquids:
Remove
obsolete
language
.......................................................
265.314(
a),
(
a)(
1),
(
a)(
2),
(
b),
(
g).
Drip
Pads
(
Interim
Status)
 
Assessment
of
Drip
Pad,
Submit
written
plan,
as­
built
drawings,
and
certification
for
upgrading,
repairing
and
modifying
the
drip
pad:
Modify
 
in
addition
to
an
independent,
registered
professional
engineer,
certification
may
be
made
by
a
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager.
265.441(
a),
(
b),
(
c).

Drip
Pads
(
Interim
Status)
 
Assessment
of
Drip
Pad:
Modify
 
in
addition
to
an
independent,
registered
professional
engineer,
assessment
may
be
done
by
a
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager.
265.443(
a)(
4)(
ii),
(
g).

Drip
Pads
(
Interim
Status)
 
Notify
EPA
of
release
and
provide
written
notice
of
procedures
and
schedule
for
cleanup:
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
requirement
as
long
as
cleanup
required
by
regulation
takes
place,
and
is
recorded
in
the
facility
operating
record,
where
it
will
be
available
for
inspection
by
regulators.
265.443(
m)(
1)(
iv),
(
2).

Drip
Pads
(
Interim
Status)
 
Notify
Regional
Administrator
and
certify
completion
of
repairs:
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
requirement
as
long
as
the
required
cleanup
and
repairs
are
made.
265.443(
m)(
3).

Drip
Pads
(
Interim
Status)
 
Inspection
of
liners:
Modify
 
in
addition
to
an
independent,
registered
professional
engineer,
assessment
may
be
done
by
a
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager.
265.444(
a).

Equipment
Leaks
(
Interim
Status)
 
Submit
notification
to
implement
the
alternative
valve
standard:
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
requirement
as
long
as
other
regulatory
requirements
in
265.1061
are
followed.
265.1061(
b)(
1).

VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
16:
56
Jan
16,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00009
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
17JAP2.
SGM
pfrm04
PsN:
17JAP2
2526
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
12
/
Thursday,
January
17,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
RCRA
REPORTING
AND
RECORDKEEPING
REQUIREMENTS
PROPOSED
FOR
ELIMINATION
OR
MODIFICATION
 
Continued
Requirement
40
CFR
(
Code
of
Federal
Regulations)
citation
Equipment
Leaks
(
Interim
Status)
 
Submit
notification
to
discontinue
alternative
valve
standard:
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
requirement.
Owners
or
operators
can
decide
which
standard
to
meet
without
notifying
the
Agency.
This
information
will
be
retained
in
the
facility's
operating
record,
where
it
will
be
available
for
inspection
by
regulatory
authorities.
265.1061(
d).

Equipment
Leaks
(
Interim
Status)
 
Submit
notification
to
implement
alternative
work
practices
for
valves:
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
requirement.
Owners
or
operators
may
use
alternative
work
practice
without
notifying
the
Agency.
This
information
will
be
kept
in
the
facility
operating
record,
which
is
available
for
regulatory
authorities
to
inspect.
265.1062(
a)(
2).

Containment
Buildings
(
Interim
Status)
 
Notify
EPA
of
intent
to
be
bound
by
the
regulations
earlier
than
as
specified
in
section
265.1100:
Eliminate
 
an
obsolete
requirement.
265.1100.

Containment
Buildings
(
InterimStatus)
 
Obtain
certification
that
building
meets
design
requirements:
Modify
 
in
addition
to
an
independent,
registered
professional
engineer,
this
certification
can
be
done
by
a
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager.
265.1101(
c)(
2).

Containment
Buildings
(
InterimStatus)
 
Notify
EPA
of
release
and
provide
written
notice
of
procedures
and
schedule
for
cleanup:
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
requirement
to
notify
regulatory
authorities
about
a
cleanup
that
must
be
done
by
regulation.
Records
of
the
cleanup
will
be
in
a
facility's
operating
record,
which
is
available
for
inspection
by
regulatory
authorities.
265.1101(
c)(
3)(
i)(
D).

Containment
Buildings
(
Interim
Status)
 
Notify
EPA
and
verify
in
writing
that
the
cleanup
and
repairs
have
been
completed:
Eliminate
 
an
unnecessary
requirement
as
long
as
cleanup
required
by
regulation
takes
place.
This
information
will
be
maintained
in
the
operating
record,
which
is
available
for
inspection
by
regulators
265.1101(
c)(
3)(
ii),
(
iii).

Containment
Buildings
 
Interim
Status:
Allow
reduced
inspection
frequencies
on
a
case­
by­
case
basis.
This
determination
will
be
made
by
regulatory
authorities
based
on
past
performance
of
the
facility.
265.1101(
c)(
4).

Boilers
and
Industrial
Furnaces
(
Permitted)
 
Recordkeeping:
Modify
 
records
only
have
to
be
kept
for
three
years,
making
this
record
retention
time
consistent
with
other
treatment
units.
Bringing
consistency
to
record
retention
times
will
assist
facilities
in
complying
with
our
regulations.
266.102(
e)(
10).

Boilers
and
Industrial
Furnaces
(
Interim
Status)
 
Evaluation
of
data
and
making
determinations:
Modify
 
in
addition
to
an
independent,
registered
professional
engineer,
this
evaluation
can
be
made
by
a
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager.
266.103(
b)(
2)(
ii)(
D).

Boilers
and
Industrial
Furnaces
(
Interim
Status)
 
Periodic
recertifications
of
compliance:
Modify
 
extend
period
of
time
from
three
to
five
years,
which
Agency
field
staff
believe
is
sufficient
for
regulatory
purposes.
266.103(
d).

Boilers
and
Industrial
Furnaces
(
Interim
Status)
 
Recordkeeping:
Modify
 
records
only
have
to
be
kept
for
three
years,
making
this
record
retention
time
consistent
with
other
treatment
units.
Bringing
consistency
to
record
retention
times
will
assist
facilities
in
complying
with
our
regulations.
266.103(
k).

Direct
Transfer
Equipment
 
Assessment
of
equipment:
Modify
 
in
addition
to
an
independent,
registered
professional
engineer,
this
assessment
can
be
done
by
a
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager.
266.111(
e)(
2).

Storage
of
Solid
Waste
Military
Munitions
 
Notification
of
loss
or
theft:
Simplify
notification
process
 
there
is
no
need
to
notify
the
regulatory
authorities
twice.
266.205(
a)(
1)(
v).

LDR
Generator
Requirements
 
Generator
waste
determination:
Eliminate
 
a
separate
determination
is
unnecessary
See
discussion
in
proposed
rule
preamble.
268.7(
a)(
1).

LDR
Generator
Requirements
 
Generator
waste
determination:
Eliminate
 
because
we
are
eliminating
268.7(
a)(
1),
this
record
retention
requirement
is
unnecessary.
268.7(
a)(
6).

LDR
Treatment
Facility
Requirements
 
Submit
a
recycling
notice
and
certification
to
EPA:
Modify
 
keep
information
on­
site.
See
discussion
in
proposed
rule
preamble.
268.7(
b)(
6).

LDR
Hazardous
Debris
Requirements
 
Submit
notification
of
claim
that
debris
is
excluded
from
definition
of
hazardous
waste:
Modify
 
notification
becomes
one­
time
and
remains
on­
site.
See
discussion
in
proposed
rule
preamble.
268.7(
d)(
1).

LDR
Special
Rules
for
Characteristic
Wastes
 
Submit
one­
time
notification:
Modify
 
a
separate
determination
is
unnecessary.
See
discussion
in
proposed
rule
preamble.
268.9(
a).

LDR
Special
Rules
for
CharacteristicWastes
 
Submit
certification:
Modify
 
keep
information
on­
site.
See
discussion
in
proposed
rule
preamble.
268.9(
d).

Part
B
Requirements
for
Tank
Systems
 
Submit
written
assessment
of
structural
integrity:
Modify
 
in
addition
to
an
registered,
independent
professional
engineer,
this
assessment
may
be
done
by
a
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager.
270.16(
a).

Part
B
Requirements
for
Surface
Impoundments
 
Assessment
of
structural
integrity:
Modify
 
in
addition
to
a
registered,
independent
professional
engineer,
this
assessment
may
be
made
by
a
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager.
270.17(
d).

B.
We
Are
Proposing
Weekly
Hazardous
Waste
Tank
Inspections
We
are
proposing
to
reduce
the
selfinspection
frequencies
for
hazardous
waste
tanks
from
daily
to
weekly.
Tank
regulations
are
found
in
40
CFR
264.190
and
265.190.
This
proposal
is
based
on
three
factors.
First,
other
kinds
of
tanks
are
required
to
be
inspected
at
frequencies
less
than
daily.
These
tanks
have
to
meet
criteria
for
protecting
human
health
and
the
environment
similar
to
those
for
hazardous
waste
tanks.
For
example,
in
the
Underground
Storage
Tank
Program,
tanks
containing
petroleum
or
hazardous
substances
are
only
required
to
be
monitored
for
releases
every
thirty
days.
Oil
tanks
regulated
under
the
Spill
Prevention,
Control
and
Countermeasure
Program
(
SPCC)
are
required
to
be
frequently
observed
by
operating
personnel
for
signs
of
deterioration,
leaks
which
might
cause
a
spill,
or
accumulation
of
oil
inside
diked
areas.
It
is
up
to
the
engineer
who
certifies
the
SPCC
Plan
how
often
these
observations
should
occur.

VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
16:
56
Jan
16,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00010
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
17JAP2.
SGM
pfrm04
PsN:
17JAP2
2527
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
12
/
Thursday,
January
17,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
Comments
we
received
on
the
``
Notice
of
Data
Availability,''
as
well
as
the
outreach
we
did,
support
going
from
a
daily
to
weekly
inspection
frequency.
Commenters
and
an
expert
on
tank
systems
made
the
point
that
the
integrity
and
safety
of
hazardous
waste
tanks
would
not
be
compromised
by
reducing
the
daily
inspection
requirement
to
a
weekly
frequency.
Several
commenters
pointed
out
that
hazardous
waste
storage
tanks,
which
have
secondary
containment,
are
even
more
protectively
designed
than
process
tanks
which
handle
the
same
chemicals.
Additionally,
the
tanks
are
equipped
with
leak
detection
systems,
and
are
subject
to
routine
visual
inspection
by
employees.
Leak
detection
systems
provide
continuous
surveillance
for
the
presence
of
a
leak
or
spill.
Technically,
they
consist
of
wire
grids,
observation
wells,
and
U­
tubes
containing
thermalconductivity
or
electrical­
resistivity
sensors,
or
vapor
detectors.
Visual
inspection
is
effective
for
aboveground
or
vaulted
tanks,
and
for
other
tanks
where
access
to
potentially
leaking
parts
is
available.
Visual
monitoring
can
also
be
effective
for
the
inspection
of
ancillary
equipment.
Upon
detection
of
a
leak,
either
through
the
leak
detection
system
or
visual
observation,
the
owner
or
operator
of
the
tank
system
must
immediately
stop
the
flow
of
hazardous
waste,
determine
and
rectify
the
cause
of
the
leak,
remove
the
waste,
and
contain
releases
to
the
environment.
Finally,
tanks
are
simpler
to
design,
construct,
and
manage
than
units
such
as
combustion
units
or
land
disposal
units,
and
therefore
require
less
oversight
than
these
more
complicated
units
for
assessing
that
they
are
performing
protectively.

C.
We
Propose
To
Allow
Facilities
the
Opportunity
To
Adjust
the
Frequency
of
Their
Self­
Inspections
For
containers,
containment
buildings,
and
tanks
(
in
addition
to
moving
their
inspection
frequency
from
daily
to
weekly),
we
are
proposing
to
allow
on
a
case­
by­
case
basis
decreased
inspection
frequencies
(
from
the
frequency
currently
required
by
regulation).
The
regulations
for
containers
are
found
in
40
CFR
264.170
and
265.170;
containment
buildings
in
40
CFR
264.1100
and
265.1100;
and
tanks
in
40
CFR
264.190
and
265.190.
In
all
cases,
inspections
would
have
to
occur
at
least
monthly.
Decreased
inspection
frequencies
would
be
established
on
a
site­
specific
basis
by
the
Directors
of
authorized
states'
hazardous
waste
programs,
or
by
EPA.
Considerations
for
decreasing
inspection
frequencies
will
be
based
on
factors
such
as:
a
demonstrated
commitment
by
facility
management
to
sound
environmental
practices,
demonstrations
of
good
management
practices
over
the
years
(
having
a
record
of
sustained
compliance
with
environmental
laws
and
requirements),
demonstrated
commitment
to
continued
environmental
improvement,
demonstrated
commitment
to
pubic
outreach
and
performance
reporting,
the
installation
of
automatic
monitoring
devices
at
the
facility,
and
the
chemical
and
physical
characteristics
of
the
waste
being
managed
in
the
unit.
States
or
EPA
may
also
include
a
qualification
that
facilities
must
revert
to
the
original
inspection
schedule
if
there
are
spills
or
releases.
Several
states
and
a
coalition
of
environmental
groups
and
trade
unions
commented
that
they
do
not
support
any
decrease
in
inspection
frequency
because
of
concerns
that
if
inspection
frequencies
were
decreased,
the
amount
of
time
between
a
leak
and
its
discovery
would
increase.
If
the
factors
described
above
are
taken
into
account
when
extending
the
inspection
frequencies,
there
will
be
little
or
no
increase
in
the
likelihood
of
an
undetected
release.
These
decreased
inspection
frequencies
should
only
be
offered
to
the
safest
and
best­
performing
facilities.
In
addition,
the
proposed
approach
may
reduce
the
likelihood
of
release
by
providing
a
financial
incentive
for
companies
to
avoid
releases
in
order
to
be
approved
for
reduced
inspection
frequency.
We
also
received
comments
from
the
states
expressing
concern
over
the
added
administrative
burden
in
implementing
case­
by­
case
changes
to
inspection
frequencies.
We
are
not
mandating
that
states
offer
these
changes.
We
are
only
providing
the
option
to
states
that
are
interested.
Another
group
of
commenters
suggested
that
inspection
frequency
changes
should
be
self­
implementing.
For
example,
an
inspection
schedule
should
be
deemed
approved
if
EPA
does
not
specifically
deny
the
request
in
writing
within
30
days.
Where
we
were
able
to
identify
an
across­
the­
board
change,
like
tanks
going
to
weekly
inspections,
we
did
so.
We
think
beyond
that,
a
case­
by­
case
evaluation
of
facility
conditions
is
still
necessary.
It
is
important
that
regulatory
agencies
make
the
decisions
to
decrease
inspection
frequencies.
Thus,
we
are
not
proposing
the
self­
implementing
option.
D.
We
Propose
Reducing
the
Burden
of
RCRA
Personnel
Training
Requirements
and
Eliminating
an
Overlap
With
Occupational
Safety
and
Health
Administration
Training
Requirements
We
currently
require
facilities
to
train
their
employees
in
facility
operations
and
emergency
response
procedures.
We
also
require
a
written
job
description
for
each
employee.
And,
we
require
training
records
for
current
employees
to
be
kept
until
closure
of
the
facility.
These
requirements
are
found
in
40
CFR
264.16
and
265.16.
The
idea
behind
these
regulations
is
that
trained
employees
are
safe
employees,
and
will
be
able
to
prevent
releases
of
hazardous
waste
to
the
environment.
By
working
with
the
Occupational
Safety
and
Health
Administration,
we
have
developed
an
improved
way
of
meeting
these
goals.
During
our
research,
we
compared
the
personnel
training
requirements
imposed
by
EPA
under
RCRA
with
those
imposed
by
OSHA
through
their
Hazardous
Waste
Operations
and
Emergency
Response
regulation.
Based
on
this
analysis
and
comments
received
on
the
``
Notice
of
Data
Availability,''
we
discovered
that
there
is
really
only
one
area
of
overlap.
This
overlap
is
emergency
response
training.
A
recent
report
from
the
General
Accounting
Office
titled:
``
Worker
Protection,
Better
Coordination
Can
Improve
Safety
and
Hazardous
Materials
Facilities''
independently
reached
the
same
conclusion
about
an
overlap
in
these
two
sets
of
emergency
response
training
requirements.
We
propose
changing
the
RCRA
regulations
to
have
facilities
comply
with
the
OSHA
regulations
for
emergency
response
training,
and
to
drop
the
current
RCRA
requirements.
The
OSHA
requirements
are
more
extensive
than
the
current
RCRA
requirements,
and
should
therefore
replace
the
RCRA
requirements.
We
are
also
proposing
eliminating
the
requirement
that
facilities
include
job
titles
and
descriptions
as
part
of
their
personnel
records.
Based
on
comments
received
from
the
``
Notice
of
Data
Availability,''
we
believe
that
requiring
job
descriptions
provide
little
value
in
protecting
human
health
and
the
environment.
Often
these
job
descriptions
bear
little
resemblance
to
the
work
the
employees
do,
and
they
have
little
relationship
to
whether
an
employee
is
trained
properly.
Finally,
we
are
proposing
to
eliminate
the
regulatory
requirement
for
a
description
of
the
training
employees
will
receive.
The
facility
inspections
ensure
adequate
training
 
simply
VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
11:
32
Jan
16,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00011
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
17JAP2.
SGM
pfrm06
PsN:
17JAP2
2528
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
12
/
Thursday,
January
17,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
documenting
the
employee(
s)
name(
s)
and
date(
s)
of
training
is
sufficient.

E.
We
Propose
To
Further
Eliminate
and
Streamline
the
Land
Disposal
Restrictions
(
LDR)
Paperwork
Requirements,
Existing
LDR
Paperwork
Requirements
The
Land
Disposal
Restrictions
(
LDR)
are
a
major
regulatory
component
of
the
RCRA
program.
In
addition
to
establishing
treatment
standards
for
hazardous
waste
prior
to
land
disposal,
they
require
generators
and
TSDFs
to
determine
if
their
waste
needs
to
be
treated
before
land
disposal,
submit
demonstrations
and
petitions
to
EPA
if
applicable,
and
send
notices
and/
or
certifications
with
shipments
to
TSDFs.
Based
on
our
review
of
the
LDR
paperwork
requirements,
as
well
as
our
conversations
with
the
regulated
community,
states,
and
the
public
through
a
series
of
public
forums,
we
have
determined
that
a
number
of
LDR
requirements
for
waste
determinations,
notifications,
and
certifications
could
be
eliminated
without
diminishing
the
protection
of
human
health
or
the
environment.

Proposed
Changes
to
LDR
Paperwork
Requirements
Change
1:
We
Propose
To
Drop
the
§
268.7(
a)(
1)
Generator
Waste
Determination
Requirement
We
propose
to
eliminate
the
need
for
generators
to
conduct
the
waste
determination
required
by
§
268.7(
a)(
1).
Section
268.7(
a)(
1)
requires
a
generator
to
determine
if
their
hazardous
waste
must
be
treated
prior
to
land
disposal.
This
determination
can
be
made
either
through
testing
or
knowledge
of
the
waste's
properties
and
constituents.
After
consulting
with
staff
with
field
experience,
we
concluded
that
a
combination
of
several
other
requirements
provide
the
same
safeguards
as
the
§
268.7(
a)(
1)
requirement.
First,
a
determination
of
whether
a
waste
is
hazardous
is
required
by
§
262.11
(
which
says
that
generators
of
solid
waste
must
determine
whether
a
waste
is
hazardous).
This
means
a
generator
must
know
what
properties
and
constituents
are
present
in
his
waste
 
for
example,
does
it
contain
toxic
constituents
that
cause
it
to
exhibit
the
Toxicity
Characteristic
described
in
§
261.24?
Some
of
this
same
information
is
used
in
the
determination
as
to
whether
the
waste
must
be
treated
to
comply
with
the
LDRs.
Second,
§
264.13(
a)(
1)
requires
TSDFs
to
perform
a
general
waste
analysis
to
determine
``
all
of
the
information
which
must
be
known
to
treat,
store,
or
dispose
of
the
waste
in
accordance
with
this
part
and
part
268
of
this
chapter''
(
emphasis
added).
Therefore,
the
owner
or
operator
of
a
TSDF
is
already
required
to
work
with
the
waste
generator
to
ensure
that
adequate
information
is
available
to
comply
with
LDRs.
Third,
in
§
268.40,
hazardous
waste
is
prohibited
from
land
disposal
unless
it
meets
the
requirements
in
the
Table
of
Treatment
Standards
(
which
requires
knowledge
of
EPA
hazardous
waste
code,
waste
constituents,
wastewater
and
nonwastewater
classification,
and
treatability
group).
These
other
determinations
are
sufficient
to
assure
that
a
waste
is
properly
characterized
for
achieving
compliance
with
the
LDRs.
Therefore,
we
conclude
that
the
§
268.7(
a)(
1)
determination
is
duplicative,
and
we
propose
to
eliminate
it.

Change
2:
We
Propose
To
Modify
the
§
268.7(
b)(
6)
Recycler
Notification
and
Certification
Requirements
Currently,
treatment
facilities
must
test
their
waste
to
determine
whether
it
complies
with
LDR
treatment
standards.
A
one­
time
notice
containing
this
information
must
be
sent
to
the
disposal
facility.
The
treatment
facility
must
also
send
a
one­
time
notice
to
regulatory
authorities
that
the
treatment
technology
was
operated
properly.
We
originally
thought
that
the
regulating
agency
would
review
these
reports
to
monitor
what
happens
to
this
waste.
Based
on
a
recent
analysis
of
actual
state
and
Regional
facility
oversight
of
treatment
and
recycling
facilities,
we
have
found
that
this
information
is
not
routinely
used
for
its
intended
purpose.
Our
informants
suggested
that
it
would
be
sufficient
for
this
information
to
be
available
in
the
facility's
files
if
any
question
arises
as
to
whether
adequate
treatment
occurred.
Therefore,
we
are
proposing
that
treatment
and
recycling
facilities
no
longer
send
these
notifications
and
certifications
to
EPA,
as
long
as
the
information
contained
in
them
is
kept
in
facility
records.

Change
3:
We
Propose
To
Modify
the
§
268.7(
d)
Hazardous
Debris
Notification
Requirement
Currently,
generators
or
treatment
facilities
who
claim
that
their
hazardous
debris
is
excluded
from
the
definition
of
hazardous
waste
must
send
a
one­
time
notice
of
this
claim
to
EPA,
and
keep
a
copy
of
the
notice
in
their
files.
We
established
this
requirement
on
the
assumption
that
regulatory
agencies
would
review
the
notices
to
make
themselves
aware
that
this
treated
debris
was
being
sent
to
a
nonhazardous
waste
landfill.
We
have
been
unable
to
verify
that
this
information
is
routinely
used
for
its
intended
purpose.
Therefore,
we
are
proposing
that
generators
and
treaters
of
excluded
debris
not
send
these
notifications
to
EPA,
as
long
as
the
information
that
would
have
been
in
the
notifications
is
kept
in
facility
records.

Change
4:
We
Propose
To
Modify
the
§
268.9(
a)
Characteristic
Waste
Determination
Requirement
We
propose
to
eliminate
the
need
for
a
separate
LDR
waste
determination
for
characteristic
waste.
As
with
the
§
268.7(
a)(
1)
generator
determinations
above,
the
§
268.9(
a)
determinations
are
duplicated
elsewhere.
Generators
are
already
required
to
determine
whether
they
have
a
hazardous
waste
under
§
262.11,
and
treaters
are
required
to
obtain
a
detailed
chemical
and
physical
analysis
under
§
264.13.
Under
§
268.40,
hazardous
waste
is
prohibited
from
land
disposal
unless
it
meets
the
requirements
in
the
Table
of
Treatment
Standards
(
which
requires
knowledge
of
the
EPA
hazardous
characteristic
waste
code,
underlying
hazardous
constituents,
wastewater/
nonwastewater
classification,
and
treatability
group).
These
other
determinations
are
sufficient
to
assure
a
waste
is
properly
characterized
for
achieving
compliance
with
the
LDRs
and,
therefore,
protecting
human
health
and
the
environment.

Change
5:
We
Propose
To
Modify
the
§
268.9(
d)
Notification
Requirement
Under
§
268.9(
d),
once
a
characteristic
waste
is
treated
so
it
is
no
longer
characteristic,
a
one­
time
notification
and
certification
about
this
must
be
placed
in
the
generator's
or
treater's
files,
and
also
sent
to
EPA.
We
continue
to
see
value
in
parties
knowing
that
they
are
receiving
wastes
that
are
still
subject
to
land
disposal
restrictions,
even
though
they
no
longer
exhibit
a
characteristic.
These
records
do
not
need
to
be
sent
to
EPA,
however,
if
they
are
kept
on
site
in
the
facility's
files.
We
have
not
been
able
to
verify
that
this
information,
once
sent
to
EPA,
is
routinely
used.
Therefore,
we
conclude
based
on
the
absence
of
such
information
from
regulatory
agencies,
that
its
submission
is
not
critical
to
overall
protection
of
human
health
and
the
environment.
And
in
the
event
of
a
question
of
compliance
or
enforcement
action,
it
will
be
available
in
a
facility's
files.

VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
11:
32
Jan
16,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00012
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
17JAP2.
SGM
pfrm06
PsN:
17JAP2
2529
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
12
/
Thursday,
January
17,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
III.
Other
Burden
Reduction
Proposals
Boiler
and
Industrial
Furnace
Records
To
Be
Kept
3
Years
Owner/
operators
of
Boilers
and
Industrial
Furnaces
must
conduct
tests,
such
as
performance
tests
for
their
continuous
emissions
monitors,
and
report
the
results
to
us.
We
propose
to
standardize
the
retention
period
for
all
records
required
to
be
kept
by
the
Boilers
and
Industrial
Furnaces
to
three
years,
bringing
it
in
line
with
other
RCRA
recordkeeping
retention
periods.
See
40
CFR
266.102
for
the
Boiler
and
Industrial
Furnace
regulations.

Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Managers
Owners/
operators
of
hazardous
waste
facilities
must
certify
that
their
treatment,
storage,
and
disposal
units
are
functioning
properly.
For
example,
tank
systems
for
storing
or
treating
hazardous
waste
must
be
certified
by
an
independent,
qualified,
registered
professional
engineer
that
the
tanks
meet
thickness
and
strength
requirements.
We
propose
to
modify
most
of
the
RCRA
certification
requirements
to
allow
a
person
who
is
a
``
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager''
to
make
the
certification.
The
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager
Certification
is
accredited
by
the
Council
on
Engineering
and
Scientific
Specialties
Board,
which
also
accredits
certified
industrial
hygienists,
and
certified
safety
professionals.
The
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager
must
have
a
combination
of
education
and
hands­
on
work
experience
at
a
hazardous
waste
facility,
pass
a
closed
book
examination,
continue
their
professional
education,
and
follow
a
code
of
ethics.
The
Agency
was
not
aware
of
this
discipline
when
most
of
the
regulations
were
written
that
require
engineers
to
do
certifications.
Most
certification
duties
that
an
independent,
qualified,
registered
professional
engineer
must
perform
can
be
carried
out
by
a
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager.

General
Facility
Standards
Are
Streamlined
and
Updated
When
EPA
originally
developed
the
operating
record
requirements,
we
thought
that
records
should
routinely
be
kept
for
the
life
of
the
facility.
Our
reasoning
was
that
in
case
an
issue
or
problem
came
up
about
an
earlier
practice
at
a
facility,
the
records
would
be
available
for
examination.
After
many
years
of
experience
with
RCRA,
we
are
better
able
to
distinguish
records
that
must
be
kept
for
the
life
of
the
facility
from
those
which
can
be
discarded
after
some
period
of
time
without
affecting
protections
of
human
health
and
the
environment.
As
discussed
below,
information
about
what
wastes
are
disposed
at
a
facility,
where
the
disposed
waste
is
located,
and
information
relevant
for
facility
closure
must
be
kept
for
the
life
of
the
facility.
More
routine
information,
such
as
whether
certain
notices
were
filed
and
records
of
inspections,
can
be
discarded
after
three
years.
In
the
RCRA
regulations,
we
have
generally
settled
on
three
years
as
a
reasonable
time
frame
for
keeping
records.
This
is
consistent
with
other
Agency
programs,
such
as
the
Toxics
Substance
Control
Act
and
the
Toxic
Chemical
Release
Reporting
Community
Right
to
Know
programs,
that
impose
a
three
year
record
retention
time
in
their
regulations.
We
propose
to
modify
a
number
of
the
§
§
264.73
and
265.73
operating
record
requirements
to
require
only
a
threeyear
limit
on
keeping
information.
The
following
are
proposed
record
retention
times
for
each
part
of
the
operating
record:
§
264.73:
(
b)(
1)
Description
and
quantity
of
each
hazardous
waste
received
and
what
was
done
with
it:
Maintain
until
closure
of
the
facility.
(
b)(
2)
The
location
of
each
hazardous
waste:
Maintain
until
closure
of
the
facility.
(
b)(
3)
Records
and
results
of
waste
analyses
and
waste
determinations:
Maintain
for
three
years
after
entry
into
the
operating
record.
(
b)(
4)
Reports
of
implementation
of
contingency
plan:
Maintain
for
three
years
after
entry
into
the
operating
record.
(
b)(
5)
Records
of
inspections:
Maintain
for
three
years
after
entry
into
the
operating
record.
(
b)(
6)
Monitoring,
testing,
and
analytical
data:
Maintain
until
closure
of
the
facility.
(
b)(
7)
§
264.12(
b)
notices:
Maintain
for
three
years
after
entry
into
the
operating
record.
(
b)(
8)
Closure
estimates:
Maintain
in
operating
record
until
closure
of
the
facility.
(
b)(
9)
Waste
minimization
certification:
Maintain
for
three
years
after
entry
into
the
operating
record.
(
b)(
10)
Records
of
quantities
of
waste
placed
in
land
disposal
units
under
an
extension
to
the
effective
date
of
any
land
disposal
restriction:
Maintain
in
operating
record
until
closure
of
the
facility.
(
b)(
11)
For
off­
site
treatment
facility,
notices
and
certifications
from
generator:
Maintain
for
three
years
after
entry
into
the
operating
record.
(
b)(
12)
For
on­
site
treatment
facility,
notices
and
certifications:
Maintain
for
three
years
after
entry
into
the
operating
record.
(
b)(
13)
For
off­
site
land
disposal
facility,
notices
and
certifications
from
generator:
Maintain
for
three
years
after
entry
into
the
operating
record.
(
b)(
14)
For
on­
site
land
disposal
facility,
notices
and
certifications:
Maintain
for
three
years
after
entry
into
the
operating
record.
(
b)(
15)
For
off­
site
storage
facility,
notices
and
certifications
from
generator:
Maintain
for
three
years
after
entry
into
the
operating
record.
(
b)(
16)
For
on­
site
storage
facility,
notices
and
certifications:
Maintain
for
three
years
after
entry
into
the
operating
record.
(
b)(
17)
Records
required
under
§
264.1(
j)(
13):
Maintain
for
three
years
after
entry
into
the
operating
record.
We
propose
to
similarly
change
the
§
265.73
Operating
Record
requirements.

Consolidation
of
Facility
Contingency
Plans
Is
Encouraged
Owners
and
operators
of
hazardous
waste
facilities
must
have
contingency
plans
in
place
to
minimize
hazards
to
human
health
and
the
environment
from
fires,
explosions,
or
unplanned
releases
of
hazardous
waste.
We
received
several
comments
on
the
``
Notice
of
Data
Availability''
asking
that
we
streamline
or
combine
the
various
contingency
plans
required
not
only
by
EPA,
but
by
other
federal
agencies
too.
EPA
already
allows
combined
plans.
In
1996,
EPA
in
conjunction
with
the
Department
of
Transportation,
the
Department
of
the
Interior,
and
the
Department
of
Labor
issued
the
``
Integrated
Contingency
Plan
Guidance.''
This
Guidance
provides
a
mechanism
for
consolidating
the
multiple
contingency
plans
that
facilities
have
to
prepare
to
comply
with
various
government
regulations.
Owners
and
operators
of
hazardous
waste
facilities
should
consider
developing
one
contingency
plan
based
on
this
Guidance.
Facilities
which
adopt
the
``
Integrated
Contingency
Plan''
will
minimize
the
duplication
and
costs
associated
with
the
preparation
and
use
of
multiple
contingency
plans.
The
use
of
a
single
plan
per
facility
will
also
eliminate
confusion
for
``
first
responders''
(
for
example,
firemen)
who
often
must
decide
which
of
the
contingency
plans
is
applicable
to
a
particular
emergency.
And,
the
adoption
of
a
standard
plan
should
ease
the
burden
of
coordination
with
local
emergency
planning
committees.

VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
11:
32
Jan
16,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00013
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
17JAP2.
SGM
pfrm06
PsN:
17JAP2
2530
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
12
/
Thursday,
January
17,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
The
``
Integrated
Contingency
Plan
Guidance''
can
be
found
in
the
June
5,
1996
Federal
Register
(
61
FR
28641
 
28664)
or
on
the
Internet
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
swercepp/
p­
tech.
htm.
Today's
proposals
clarifies
our
regulations
(
see
40
CFR
265.52)
to
say
that
combined
plans
are
acceptable.

We
Propose
To
Streamline
the
Variance
From
Classification
as
a
Solid
Waste
Procedure
We
have
established
provisions
in
our
regulations
to
allow
regulated
entities
to
submit
applications
for
variances,
exclusions,
petitions,
and
exceptions
from
certain
RCRA
requirements.
To
simplify
one
of
these
applications,
we
propose
to
eliminate
the
requirement
that
a
petitioner
for
a
variance
from
classification
as
a
solid
waste
survey
the
industry­
wide
prevalence
of
the
material
production
process
(
the
requirement
is
found
in
40
CFR
260.31(
b)).
In
practice,
we
have
found
that
we
do
not
use
this
information
in
making
decisions
on
these
variances.
A
variance
petitioner
can
continue
to
submit
such
information
if
they
choose,
but
it
will
no
longer
be
an
application
requirement.

We
Propose
To
Eliminate
the
Requirement
for
Treatability
Study
Reports
We
also
propose
to
eliminate
the
requirement
that
facilities
submit
in
their
annual
report
under
§
261.4(
f)(
9)
an
estimate
of
the
number
of
treatability
studies
and
the
amount
of
waste
expected
to
be
used
in
treatability
studies
in
the
upcoming
year.
Based
on
the
observations
of
recipients
(
EPA
and
state
regulators),
we
have
determined
that
these
reports
do
not
contribute
to
the
protection
of
human
health
and
the
environment.
Moreover,
these
annual
forecasts
are
not
necessarily
accurate,
and
we
obtain
the
precise
information
anyway
in
the
annual
report
that
is
submitted.

We
Propose
To
Streamline
Groundwater
Monitoring
Requirements
Hazardous
waste
treatment,
storage,
and
disposal
facilities
must
implement
a
groundwater
monitoring
system
to
detect
the
presence
of
contaminants
in
the
groundwater.
If
contamination
is
detected,
monitoring
must
be
performed.
If
the
level
of
contamination
exceeds
the
groundwater
protection
standard,
corrective
action
must
be
undertaken.
We
propose
to
allow
owners/
operators
of
facilities
to
report
on
the
effectiveness
of
corrective
action
on
an
annual
basis
instead
of
the
current
semiannual
basis.
In
combination
with
other
forms
of
oversight
by
regulatory
agencies,
annual
reporting
will
provide
adequate
information
to
ensure
compliance.
This
proposed
change
makes
sense
because
monitoring
and
cleaning
up
groundwater
is
almost
always
a
multiyear
or
even
multi­
decade
effort.
Semiannual
reporting
of
data
is
not
necessary
for
ensuring
protection
of
human
health
and
the
environment.
We
are
also
proposing
to
allow
groundwater
monitoring
plans
and
reports
to
be
kept
at
a
facility.
And,
we
also
propose
to
modify
the
§
264.99(
g)
requirement
that
facilities
who
are
doing
compliance
monitoring
conduct
an
annual
Appendix
IX
analysis
of
all
monitoring
wells.
Specifically,
we
propose
allowing,
on
a
case­
by­
case
basis,
sampling
for
a
subset
of
the
wells.
Appendix
IX
analyses
are
costly
at
large
facilities,
and
analyzing
all
wells
does
not
necessarily
contribute
to
protection
of
human
health
and
the
environment.
This
is
especially
the
case
if
there
are
multiple
units
and
wells
at
a
facility,
and
only
one
unit
shows
signs
of
contamination.
Also,
monitoring
for
constituents
that
are
not
likely
to
be
found
at
a
site
is
not
a
good
use
of
resources
and
does
not
increase
the
protection
of
monitoring
programs.
Therefore,
we
propose
allowing,
on
a
case­
by­
case
basis,
sampling
for
a
subset
of
the
Appendix
IX
constituents.
These
decisions
will
be
based
on
regulatory
agencies'
judgement
of
what
supports
the
protection
of
human
health
and
the
environment,
as
well
as
on
the
contaminant
situation
at
a
site.

Biennial
Report
Changes
Are
Being
Implemented
Separately
We
are
not
making
changes
to
the
Biennial
Report
through
this
effort.
Reform
of
the
Biennial
Report
has
already
been
started
in
the
2001
Biennial
Report
cycle.
Changes
made
to
the
2001
Biennial
Report
include
streamlining
the
Biennial
Report
Source,
Origin,
Form,
and
Management
codes;
clarifying
the
types
of
waste
to
be
reported;
and
removing
some
data
elements.
The
2001
Biennial
Report
forms
and
instructions
are
located
on
the
Internet
at:
www.
epa.
gov/
epaoswer/
hazwaste/
data/
brs01/
forms.
htm.

Electronic
Reporting
and
Recordkeeping
Changes
Are
Being
Handled
Separately
In
the
``
Notice
of
Data
Availability,''
we
discussed
allowing
all
RCRArequired
documents
to
be
kept
and
sent
electronically.
Since
the
publication
of
the
``
Notice,''
the
Agency
has
begun
to
develop
a
separate
rulemaking
(
the
``
Cross­
Media
Electronic
Reporting
and
Recordkeeping
Rule'')
that
will
establish
Agency­
wide
standards
for
electronic
reporting
and
recordkeeping.
We
are
deferring
our
efforts
in
this
area
to
the
``
Cross­
Media
Electronic
Reporting
and
Recordkeeping''
rulemaking.

IV.
How
Would
Today's
Proposed
Regulatory
Changes
Be
Administered
and
Enforced
in
the
States?

A.
Applicability
of
Federal
Rules
in
Authorized
States
Under
section
3006
of
RCRA,
EPA
may
authorize
qualified
states
to
administer
the
RCRA
hazardous
waste
program
within
the
state.
Following
authorization,
the
state
requirements
authorized
by
EPA
apply
in
lieu
of
equivalent
Federal
requirements
and
become
Federally
enforceable
as
requirements
of
RCRA.
EPA
maintains
independent
authority
to
bring
enforcement
actions
under
RCRA
sections
3007,
3008,
3013,
and
7003.
Authorized
states
also
have
independent
authority
to
bring
enforcement
actions
under
state
law.
A
state
may
receive
authorization
by
following
the
approval
process
described
in
40
CFR
part
271.
40
CFR
part
271
also
describes
the
overall
standards
and
requirements
for
authorization.
After
a
state
receives
initial
authorization,
new
Federal
regulatory
requirements
promulgated
under
the
authority
in
the
RCRA
statute
which
existed
prior
to
the
1984
Hazardous
and
Solid
Waste
Amendments
(
HSWA)
do
not
apply
in
that
state
until
the
state
adopts
and
receives
authorization
for
equivalent
state
requirements.
The
state
must
adopt
such
requirements
to
maintain
authorization.
In
contrast,
under
RCRA
section
3006(
g),
(
42
U.
S.
C.
6926(
g)),
new
Federal
requirements
and
prohibitions
imposed
pursuant
to
HSWA
provisions
take
effect
in
authorized
states
at
the
same
time
that
they
take
effect
in
unauthorized
States.
Although
authorized
states
are
still
required
to
update
their
hazardous
waste
programs
to
remain
equivalent
to
the
Federal
program,
EPA
carries
out
HSWA
requirements
and
prohibitions
in
authorized
states,
including
the
issuance
of
new
permits
implementing
those
requirements,
until
EPA
authorizes
the
state
to
do
so.
Authorized
states
are
required
to
modify
their
programs
only
when
EPA
promulgates
Federal
requirements
that
are
more
stringent
or
broader
in
scope
than
existing
Federal
requirements.
RCRA
section
3009
allows
the
states
to
impose
standards
more
stringent
than
VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
11:
32
Jan
16,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00014
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
17JAP2.
SGM
pfrm06
PsN:
17JAP2
2531
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
12
/
Thursday,
January
17,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
those
in
the
Federal
program.
See
also
40
CFR
271.1(
i).
Therefore,
authorized
states
are
not
required
to
adopt
Federal
regulations,
both
HSWA
and
non­
HSWA,
that
are
considered
less
stringent.

B.
Authorization
of
States
for
Today's
Proposal
Today's
proposal
affects
many
aspects
of
the
RCRA
program
and
would
be
promulgated
pursuant
to
both
HSWA
and
non­
HSWA
statutory
authority.
Today's
proposal
would
amend
provisions
in
the
RCRA
regulations
which
were
promulgated
pursuant
to
HSWA.
These
provisions
include,
among
others,
the
land
disposal
restrictions
and
the
regulation
of
air
emissions
from
hazardous
waste
facilities,
which
were
promulgated
pursuant
to
authority
in
sections
3004(
m)
and
(
o)
respectively,
of
RCRA.
Therefore,
when
promulgated,
the
Agency
would
add
the
rule
to
Table
1
in
40
CFR
271.1(
j),
which
identifies
the
Federal
program
requirements
that
are
promulgated
pursuant
to
the
statutory
authority
that
was
added
by
HSWA.
States
may
apply
for
final
authorization
for
the
HSWA
provisions
in
Table
1,
as
discussed
in
the
following
section
of
this
preamble.
Other
sections
of
today's
proposal
would
be
promulgated
pursuant
to
non­
HSWA
authority.
The
requirements
in
today's
proposed
rulemaking
are
equivalent
to
or
less
stringent
than
the
existing
provisions
in
the
Federal
regulations
which
they
would
amend.
Therefore,
States
would
not
be
required
to
adopt
and
seek
authorization
for
this
rulemaking.
EPA
would
implement
this
rulemaking
only
in
those
States
which
are
not
authorized
for
the
RCRA
program,
and
will
implement
provisions
promulgated
pursuant
to
HSWA
only
in
those
states
which
have
not
received
authorization
for
the
HSWA
provision
that
would
be
amended.
This
rule
will
provide
significant
benefits
to
EPA,
states,
and
the
regulated
community,
without
compromising
human
health
or
environmental
protection.
Because
this
rulemaking
would
not
become
effective
in
authorized
States
until
they
adopted
and
are
authorized
for
it,
EPA
will
strongly
encourage
states
to
amend
their
programs
and
seek
authorization
for
today's
proposal,
once
it
becomes
final.

C.
Abbreviated
Authorization
Procedures
EPA
considers
today's
proposal
to
be
a
minor
rulemaking
and
is
proposing
to
add
it
to
the
list
of
minor
or
routine
rulemakings
in
Table
1
to
40
CFR
271.21.
Placement
in
this
table
would
enable
states
to
use
the
abbreviated
procedures
located
in
40
CFR
271.21(
h)
when
they
seek
authorization
for
today's
proposed
changes
after
they
are
promulgated.
These
abbreviated
procedures
were
established
in
the
HWIR­
media
rulemaking
(
see
63
FR
65927,
November
30,
1998).
EPA
requests
comment
on
this
placement
in
Table
1
to
40
CFR
271.21.

V.
Administrative
Requirements
A.
Executive
Order
12866
Under
Executive
Order
12866,
[
58
FR
51735
(
October
4,
1993)]
the
Agency
must
determine
whether
a
regulatory
action
is
``
significant''
and
therefore
subject
to
OMB
review
and
the
requirements
of
the
Executive
Order.
The
Order
defines
``
significant
regulatory
action''
as
one
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
interfere
with
an
action
taken
or
planned
by
another
agency;
(
3)
Materially
alter
the
budgetary
impact
of
entitlements,
grants,
user
fees,
or
loan
programs
or
the
rights
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.

Pursuant
to
the
terms
of
Executive
Order
12866,
it
has
been
determined
that
this
rule
is
a
``
significant
regulatory
action''
because
the
rule
raises
novel
legal
or
policy
issues.
As
such,
this
action
was
submitted
to
OMB
for
review.
Changes
made
in
response
to
OMB
suggestions
or
recommendations
will
be
documented
in
the
public
record.

B.
Environmental
Justice
Executive
Order
12898
Under
Executive
Order
12898,
``
Federal
Actions
to
Address
Environmental
Justice
in
Minority
Populations
and
Low­
Income
Populations''
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
incorporate
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
United
States.
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.
EPA
has
considered
the
impacts
of
this
proposed
rulemaking
on
lowincome
populations
and
minority
populations
and
concluded
that
any
risks
resulting
from
the
rule
would
be
very
small.
The
basic
reason
for
this
finding
is
that
the
current
features
of
the
RCRA
program
that
protect
human
health
and
the
environment
would
be
preserved
or
enhanced
under
the
proposal.
As
mentioned
earlier,
the
proposal
would
eliminate
or
modify
paperwork
requirements
that
have
been
deemed
unnecessary
because
they
add
little
to
the
protectiveness
of
the
regulations.
Most
of
the
paperwork
requirements
entail
notices
and
reports
that
are
obscure,
inconsequential
or
infrequently
submitted.
In
addition,
the
proposal
would
give
facilities
added
flexibility
in
how
they
can
comply
with
the
regulations.
For
example,
the
proposal
would
let
facilities
choose
between
hiring
a
certified
hazardous
materials
manager
or
licensed
professional
engineer
to
perform
specified
activities
(
e.
g.,
certifications).
The
proposal
also
would
streamline
certain
requirements,
such
as
contingency
planning
and
personnel
training,
that
are
essential
to
a
facility's
protectiveness.
Such
flexibility
and
streamlining
will
make
it
easier
for
facilities
to
comply
with
the
regulations.
Despite
eliminating
a
number
of
paperwork
requirements
based
on
interviews
and
comments,
we
leave
intact
the
basic
environmentally
protective
activities
that
facilities
are
currently
undertaking.
That
is,
we
would
require
facilities
to
continue
performing
their
technical
activities,
but
require
them
to
submit
less
information
to
us
on
their
daily
activities.
Note,
however,
that
the
proposal
would
not
curtail
the
right
of
regulatory
agencies
to
request
any
of
the
information
we
are
proposing
to
eliminate.
Facilities
must
continue
to
keep
on­
site
records
of
their
waste
management
activities
and
make
them
available
to
regulators
when
requested.
As
such,
the
rule
would
not
limit
regulators'
or
the
public's
ability
to
learn
what
is
happening
at
a
facility.
In
addition,
basic
information
about
a
facility
will
still
be
readily
accessible
to
the
public
via
the
Agency
Web
site
and
non­
Agency
Web
sites
such
as
the
``
Right
to
Know
Network''
Web
site
(
www.
rtknet.
org).
However,
we
specifically
request
comment
on
VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
11:
32
Jan
16,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00015
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
17JAP2.
SGM
pfrm06
PsN:
17JAP2
2532
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
12
/
Thursday,
January
17,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
whether
today's
proposals
in
any
way
diminishes
protection
of
human
health
and
the
environment.

C.
Executive
Order
13045:
Protection
of
Children
From
Environmental
Health
Risks
and
Safety
Risks
Executive
Order
13045:
``
Protection
of
Children
from
Environmental
Health
Risks
and
Safety
Risks''
(
62
FR
19885,
April
23,
1997)
applies
to
any
rule
that:
(
1)
Is
determined
to
be
``
economically
significant''
as
defined
under
Executive
Order
12866,
and
(
2)
concerns
an
environmental
health
or
safety
risk
that
EPA
has
reason
to
believe
may
have
a
disproportionate
effect
on
children.
If
the
regulatory
action
meets
both
criteria,
the
Agency
must
evaluate
the
environmental
health
or
safety
effects
of
the
planned
rule
on
children,
and
explain
why
the
planned
regulation
is
preferable
to
other
potentially
effective
and
reasonably
feasible
alternatives
considered
by
the
Agency.
This
proposed
rule
is
not
subject
to
the
Executive
Order
because
it
is
not
economically
significant
as
defined
in
Executive
Order
12866,
and
because
the
Agency
does
not
have
reason
to
believe
the
environmental
health
or
safety
risks
addressed
by
this
action
present
a
disproportionate
risk
to
children.
The
proposal
would
eliminate
or
modify
paperwork
requirements
that
have
been
deemed
unnecessary
because
there
is
no
evidence
suggesting
they
contribute
in
a
substantial
way
to
the
protectiveness
of
the
regulations.
In
particular,
we
propose
eliminating
notices
and
reports
that
are
redundant,
inconsequential
for
compliance
with
technical
requirements,
or
only
rarely
required
to
be
sent
in
to
regulatory
authorities.
Most
of
the
reports
we
propose
cutting
or
modifying
are
reports
notifying
the
regulatory
agency
that
some
other
regulatory
requirement
was
performed.
The
proposal
would
leave
intact
the
basic
environmentally
protective
activities
that
facilities
are
currently
undertaking.

D.
National
Technology
Transfer
and
Advancement
Act
of
1995
Section
12(
d)
of
the
National
Technology
Transfer
and
Advancement
Act
of
1995
(``
NTTAA''),
Public
Law
104
 
113,
section
12(
d)
(
15
U.
S.
C.
272
note)
directs
EPA
to
use
voluntary
consensus
standards
in
its
regulatory
activities
unless
to
do
so
would
be
inconsistent
with
applicable
law
or
otherwise
impractical.
Voluntary
consensus
standards
are
technical
standards
(
e.
g.,
materials
specifications,
test
methods,
sampling
procedures,
and
business
practices)
that
are
developed
or
adopted
by
voluntary
consensus
standards
bodies.
The
NTTAA
directs
EPA
to
provide
Congress,
through
OMB,
explanations
when
the
Agency
decides
not
to
use
available
and
applicable
voluntary
consensus
standards.
This
proposed
rulemaking
does
not
involve
technical
standards.
Therefore,
EPA
is
not
considering
the
use
of
any
voluntary
consensus
standards.
EPA
welcomes
comments
on
this
aspect
of
the
proposed
rulemaking
and,
specifically,
invites
the
public
to
identify
potentially­
applicable
voluntary
consensus
standards
and
to
explain
why
such
standards
should
be
used
in
this
regulation.

E.
Regulatory
Flexibility
Act
(
RFA),
as
Amended
by
the
Small
Business
Regulatory
Enforcement
Fairness
Act
of
1996
(
SBREFA)
The
RFA
generally
requires
an
agency
to
prepare
a
regulatory
flexibility
analysis
of
any
rule
subject
to
notice
and
comment
rulemaking
requirements
under
the
Administrative
Procedure
Act
or
any
other
statute
unless
the
agency
certifies
that
the
rule
will
not
have
a
significant
economic
impact
on
a
substantial
number
of
small
entities.
Small
entities
include
small
businesses,
small
organizations,
and
small
governmental
jurisdictions.
For
purposes
of
assessing
the
impacts
of
today's
rule
on
small
entities,
small
entity
is
defined
as:
(
1)
A
small
business;
(
2)
a
small
governmental
jurisdiction
that
is
a
government
of
a
city,
county,
town,
school
district
or
special
district
with
a
population
of
less
than
50,000;
and
(
3)
a
small
organization
that
is
any
not­
for­
profit
enterprise
which
is
independently
owned
and
operated
and
is
not
dominant
in
its
field.
After
considering
the
economic
impacts
of
today's
final
rule
on
small
entities,
I
certify
that
this
action
will
not
have
a
significant
economic
impact
on
a
substantial
number
of
small
entities.
In
determining
whether
a
rule
has
a
significant
economic
impact
on
a
substantial
number
of
small
entities,
the
impact
of
concern
is
any
significant
adverse
economic
impact
on
small
entities,
since
the
primary
purpose
of
the
regulatory
flexibility
analyses
is
to
identify
and
address
regulatory
alternatives
``
which
minimize
any
significant
economic
impact
of
the
proposed
rule
on
small
entities''.
5
U.
S.
C.
603
and
604.
Thus,
an
agency
may
certify
that
a
rule
will
not
have
a
significant
economic
impact
on
a
substantial
number
of
small
entities
if
the
rule
relieves
regulatory
burden,
or
otherwise
has
a
positive
economic
effect
on
small
entities
subject
to
the
rule.
Today's
proposal
is
specifically
intended
to
be
deregulatory
and
to
reduce,
not
increase,
the
paperwork
and
related
burdens
of
the
RCRA
hazardous
waste
program.
For
businesses
in
general,
including
all
small
businesses,
the
proposed
changes
would
reduce
the
labor
time
and
other
costs
of
preparing,
keeping
records
of,
and
submitting
reports
to
the
Agency.
The
proposed
rule,
for
example,
would
reduce
the
frequency
by
which
businesses
must
conduct
specified
recordkeeping
and
reporting
activities.
It
also
would
eliminate
certain
recordkeeping
and
reporting
requirements
altogether,
i.
e.,
in
cases
where
the
documents
are
little
used
by
the
public
or
regulators.
In
addition,
the
rule
would
eliminate
redundancies
between
the
RCRA
regulations
and
other
regulatory
programs
(
e.
g.,
RCRA
and
OSHA
requirements
for
personnel
training),
thereby
streamlining
facilities'
compliance
activities.
Finally,
the
rule
would
provide
increased
flexibility
in
how
waste
handlers
may
comply
with
the
regulations.
For
example,
we
would
allow
waste
handlers
to
seek
relief,
on
a
case­
by­
case
basis,
from
the
inspection
frequencies
in
the
regulations.
Facilities
successfully
demonstrating
that
the
regulatory
frequencies
are
not
necessary
(
e.
g.,
because
of
site­
specific
mitigating
factors)
would
be
granted
a
reduced
inspection
frequency
by
the
Agency.
We
have
therefore
concluded
that
today's
proposed
rule
will
relieve
regulatory
burden
for
small
entities.

F.
Executive
Order
13132
(
Federalism)
Executive
Order
13132,
entitled
``
Federalism''
(
64
FR
43255,
August
10,
1999),
requires
EPA
to
develop
an
accountable
process
to
ensure
``
meaningful
and
timely
input
by
State
and
local
officials
in
the
development
of
regulatory
policies
that
have
federalism
implications.''
``
Policies
that
have
federalism
implications''
are
defined
in
the
Executive
Order
to
include
regulations
that
have
``
substantial
direct
effects
on
the
States,
on
the
relationship
between
the
national
government
and
the
States,
or
on
the
distribution
of
power
and
responsibilities
among
the
various
levels
of
government.''
This
proposed
rule
does
not
have
federalism
implications.
It
will
not
have
substantial
direct
effects
on
the
States,
on
the
relationship
between
the
national
government
and
the
States,
or
on
the
distribution
of
power
and
responsibilities
among
the
various
levels
of
government,
as
specified
in
Executive
Order
13132.
As
explained
above,
today's
proposal
eliminates
or
relaxes
many
of
the
paperwork
requirements
in
the
regulations.
Because
these
changes
are
equivalent
to
or
less
VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
16:
56
Jan
16,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00016
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
17JAP2.
SGM
pfrm04
PsN:
17JAP2
2533
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
12
/
Thursday,
January
17,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
stringent
than
the
existing
Federal
program,
States
would
not
be
required
to
adopt
and
seek
authorization
for
them.
Thus,
Executive
Order
13132
does
not
apply
to
this
proposed
rule.
In
the
spirit
of
Executive
Order
13132,
and
consistent
with
EPA
policy
to
promote
communications
between
EPA
and
State
and
local
governments,
we
specifically
solicit
comment
on
this
proposed
rule
from
State
and
local
officials.

G.
Unfunded
Mandates
Reform
Act
Title
II
of
the
Unfunded
Mandates
Reform
Act
of
1995
(
UMRA),
Public
Law
104
 
4,
establishes
requirements
for
Federal
agencies
to
assess
the
effects
of
their
regulatory
actions
by
State,
local,
and
tribal
governments
and
the
private
sector.
Under
section
202
of
UMRA,
EPA
generally
must
prepare
a
written
statement,
including
a
cost­
benefit
analysis,
for
proposed
rules
and
final
rules
for
which
the
Agency
published
a
notice
of
proposed
rulemaking
if
those
rules
contain
``
Federal
mandates''
that
may
result
in
the
expenditure
by
State,
local,
and
tribal
governments,
in
the
aggregate,
or
to
the
private
sector,
of
$
100
million
or
more
in
any
one
year.
If
a
written
statement
is
needed,
section
205
of
the
UMRA
generally
requires
EPA
to
identify
and
consider
a
reasonable
number
of
regulatory
alternatives.
Under
section
205,
EPA
must
adopt
the
least
costly,
most
costeffective
or
least
burdensome
alternative
that
achieves
the
objectives
of
the
rule,
unless
the
Administrator
publishes
with
the
final
rule
an
explanation
why
that
alternative
was
not
adopted.
The
provisions
of
section
205
do
not
apply
when
they
are
inconsistent
with
applicable
law.
EPA
has
determined
that
this
rule
will
not
result
in
the
expenditure
of
$
100
million
or
more
by
State,
local,
and
tribal
governments,
in
the
aggregate,
or
by
the
private
sector
in
any
one
year
because
this
is
a
burden
reduction
rulemaking
which
reduces
costs.

H.
Executive
Order
13175:
Consultation
and
Coordination
With
Indian
and
Tribal
Governments
Executive
Order
13175,
entitled
``
Consultation
and
Coordination
with
Indian
Tribal
Governments''
(
65
FR
67249,
November
6,
2000),
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.''
``
Policies
that
have
tribal
implications''
are
defined
in
the
Executive
Order
to
include
regulations
that
have
``
substantial
direct
effects
on
one
or
more
Indian
tribes,
on
the
relationship
between
the
Federal
government
and
the
Indian
tribes,
or
on
the
distribution
of
power
and
responsibilities
between
the
Federal
government
and
Indian
tribes.''
This
proposed
rule
does
not
have
tribal
implications.
It
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
Federal
government
and
Indian
tribes,
as
specified
in
Executive
Order
13175.
As
explained
above,
today's
proposal
eliminates
or
relaxes
many
of
the
paperwork
requirements
in
the
regulations.
Accordingly,
the
requirements
of
section
3(
b)
of
Executive
Order
13084
do
not
apply
to
this
proposed
rule.
Thus,
Executive
Order
13175
does
not
apply
to
this
proposed
rule.
In
the
spirit
of
Executive
Order
13175,
and
consistent
with
EPA
policy
to
promote
communications
between
EPA
and
tribal
governments,
EPA
specifically
solicits
additional
comment
on
this
proposed
rule
from
tribal
officials.

I.
Paperwork
Reduction
Act
We
have
prepared
a
document
listing
the
information
collection
requirements
of
this
proposed
rule,
and
have
submitted
it
for
approval
to
the
Office
of
Management
and
Budget
(
OMB)
under
the
provisions
of
the
Paperwork
Reduction
Act,
44
U.
S.
C.
3501
et
seq.
We
calculate
the
reporting
and
recordkeeping
burden
reduction
for
this
rule
as
929,000
hours
and
$
120,000,000.
Burden
means
total
time,
effort,
or
financial
resources
expended
by
persons
to
generate,
maintain,
retain,
disclose,
or
provide
information
to
or
for
a
Federal
agency.
That
includes
the
time
needed
to
review
instructions;
develop,
acquire,
install,
and
utilize
technology
and
systems
for
the
purposes
of
collecting,
validating,
and
verifying
information,
processing
and
maintaining
information,
and
disclosing
and
providing
information;
adjust
the
existing
ways
to
comply
with
any
previously
applicable
instructions
and
requirements;
train
personnel
to
be
able
to
respond
to
a
collection
of
information;
search
data
sources;
complete
and
review
the
collection
of
information;
and
transmit
or
otherwise
disclose
the
information.

J.
Executive
Order
13211
(
Energy
Effects)
This
proposed
rule
is
not
a
``
significant
energy
action''
as
defined
in
Executive
Order
13211,
``
Actions
Concerning
Regulations
That
Significantly
Affect
Energy
Supply,
Distribution,
or
Use''
(
66
FR
28355
(
May
22,
2001))
because
it
is
not
likely
to
have
a
significant
adverse
effect
on
the
supply,
distribution,
or
use
of
energy.
Further,
we
have
concluded
that
this
proposed
rule
is
not
likely
to
have
any
adverse
energy
effects.

List
of
Subjects
40
CFR
Part
260
Environmental
protection,
Administrative
practice
and
procedure,
Confidential
business
information,
Hazardous
waste
Reporting
and
recordkeeping
requirements.

40
CFR
Part
261
Comparable
fuels,
Syngas
fuels,
Excluded
hazardous
waste,
Hazardous
waste,
Reporting
and
recordkeeping
requirements.

40
CFR
Part
264
Air
pollution
control,
Hazardous
waste,
Insurance,
Packaging
and
containers,
Reporting
and
recordkeeping
requirements,
Security
measures,
Surety
bonds.

40
CFR
Part
265
Air
pollution
control,
Hazardous
waste,
Insurance,
Packaging
and
containers,
Reporting
and
recordkeeping
requirements,
Security
measures,
Surety
bonds,
Water
supply.

40
CFR
Part
266
Energy,
Hazardous
waste,
Recycling,
Reporting
and
recordkeeping
requirements.

40
CFR
Part
268
Hazardous
waste,
Reporting
and
recordkeeping
requirements.

40
CFR
Part
270
Administrative
practice
and
procedure,
Confidential
business
information,
Hazardous
materials
transportation,
Hazardous
waste,
Reporting
and
recordkeeping
requirements,
Water
pollution
control,
Water
supply.

40
CFR
Part
271
Administrative
practice
and
procedure,
Confidential
business
information,
Hazardous
materials
transportation,
Hazardous
waste,
Indians­
lands,
Intergovernmental
relations,
Penalties,
Reporting
and
recordkeeping
requirements,
Water
pollution
control,
Water
supply.

Dated:
December
20,
2001.
Christine
Todd
Whitman,
Administrator.

For
the
reasons
set
out
in
the
preamble,
it
is
proposed
that
title
40
of
VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
16:
56
Jan
16,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00017
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
17JAP2.
SGM
pfrm04
PsN:
17JAP2
2534
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
12
/
Thursday,
January
17,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
the
Code
of
Federal
Regulations
be
amended
as
follows:

PART
260
 
HAZARDOUS
WASTE
MANAGEMENT
SYSTEM:
GENERAL
1.
The
authority
citation
for
part
260
continues
to
read
as
follows:

Authority:
42
U.
S.
C.
6905,
6912(
a),
6921
 
6927,
6930,
6934,
6935,
6937,
6938,
6939,
and
6974.

Subpart
C
 
Rulemaking
Petitions
§
260.31
[
Amended]
2.
Section
260.31
is
amended
by
removing
paragraph
(
b)(
2)
and
redesignating
paragraphs
(
b)(
3)
through
(
b)(
8)
as
(
b)(
2)
through
(
b)(
7).

PART
261
 
IDENTIFICATION
AND
LISTING
OF
HAZARDOUS
WASTE
3.
The
authority
citation
for
part
261
continues
to
read
as
follows:

Authority:
42
U.
S.
C.
6905,
6912(
a),
6921,
6922,
6924(
y),
and
6938.

Subpart
A
 
General
§
261.4
[
Amended]
4.
Section
261.4
is
amended
by
removing
paragraphs
(
a)(
9)(
iii)(
E)
and
(
f)(
9);
and
redesignating
paragraphs
(
f)(
10)
and
(
f)(
11)
as
(
f)(
9)
and
(
f)(
10).
5.
Section
261.38
is
amended
by
removing
the
last
sentence
of
paragraph
(
c)(
1)
introductory
text
and
removing
and
reserving
paragraph
(
c)(
1)(
i).

PART
264
 
STANDARDS
FOR
OWNERS
AND
OPERATORS
OF
HAZARDOUS
WASTE
TREATMENT,
STORAGE,
AND
DISPOSAL
FACILITIES
6.
The
authority
citation
for
part
264
continues
to
read
as
follows:

Authority:
42
U.
S.
C.
6905,
6912(
a),
6924,
and
6925.

Subpart
B
 
General
Facility
Standards
7.
Section
264.16
is
amended
by
revising
paragraphs
(
a)(
1),
(
a)(
3)
and
(
d)
to
read
as
follows
(
the
Comment
following
paragraph
(
a)(
1)
is
unchanged):

§
264.16
Personnel
training.
(
a)(
1)
Facility
personnel
must
successfully
complete
a
program
of
classroom
instruction
or
on­
the­
job
training
that
teaches
them
to
perform
their
duties
in
a
way
that
ensures
the
facility's
compliance
with
the
requirements
of
this
part.
*
*
*
*
*
(
3)
The
owner
or
operator
of
the
facility
shall
ensure
that
all
personnel
potentially
involved
in
emergency
response
at
the
facility:
(
i)
Have
received
training
required
by
the
Occupational
Safety
and
Health
Administration
at
29
CFR
1910.120(
p)(
8)
or
1910.120(
q)
as
applicable;
and
(
ii)
Have
been
trained
in
all
elements
of
the
facility's
contingency
plan
applicable
to
their
roles
in
emergency
response.
*
*
*
*
*
(
d)
The
owner
or
operator
must
maintain
at
the
facility
records
documenting
the
training
or
job
experience
required
under
paragraphs
(
a),
(
b),
and
(
c)
of
this
section
that
has
been
given
to
and
completed
by
facility
personnel.
*
*
*
*
*

Subpart
D
 
Contingency
Plan
and
Emergency
Procedures
8.
Section
264.52
is
amended
by
revising
paragraph
(
b)
to
read
as
follows:

§
264.52
Content
of
contingency
plan.

*
*
*
*
*
(
b)
If
the
owner
or
operator
has
already
prepared
a
Spill
Prevention,
Control,
and
Countermeasures
(
SPCC)
Plan
in
accordance
with
part
112
of
this
chapter,
or
part
1510
of
chapter
V,
or
some
other
emergency
or
contingency
plan,
he
need
only
amend
that
plan
to
incorporate
hazardous
waste
management
provisions
that
are
sufficient
to
comply
with
the
requirements
of
this
part.
The
owner
or
operator
should
consider
developing
one
contingency
plan
based
on
the
National
Response
Team's
Integrated
Contingency
Plan
Guidance
(``
One
Plan'')
which
meets
all
regulatory
requirements.
*
*
*
*
*

§
264.56
[
Amended]
9.
Section
264.56
is
amended
by
removing
paragraph
(
i)
and
redesignating
paragraph
(
j)
as
paragraph
(
i).

Subpart
E
 
Manifest
System,
Recordkeeping,
and
Reporting
10.
Section
264.73
is
amended
by
revising
paragraphs
(
b)
introductory
text,
(
b)(
1),
(
b)(
2),
(
b)(
6),
(
b)(
8),
and
(
b)(
10)
to
read
as
follows
(
the
Comment
following
paragraph
(
b)(
2)
is
unchanged):

§
264.73
Operating
record.

*
*
*
*
*
(
b)
The
following
information
must
be
recorded,
as
it
becomes
available,
and
maintained
in
the
operating
record
for
three
years
after
it
is
entered
into
the
operating
record
unless
noted
otherwise
as
follows:
(
1)
A
description
and
the
quantity
of
each
hazardous
waste
received,
and
the
method(
s)
and
date(
s)
of
its
treatment,
storage,
or
disposal
at
the
facility.
This
information
must
be
maintained
in
the
operating
record
until
closure
of
the
facility;
(
2)
The
location
of
each
hazardous
waste
within
the
facility
and
the
quantity
at
each
location.
For
all
facilities,
this
information
must
include
cross­
references
to
manifest
document
numbers
if
the
waste
was
accompanied
by
a
manifest.
For
disposal
facilities,
the
location
and
quantity
of
each
hazardous
waste
must
be
recorded
on
a
map
or
diagram
that
shows
each
cell
or
disposal
area.
All
of
this
information
must
be
maintained
in
the
operating
record
until
closure
of
the
facility.
*
*
*
*
*
(
6)
Monitoring,
testing,
or
analytical
data,
and
corrective
action
data
where
required
by
subpart
F
of
this
part
and
§
§
264.19,
264.191,
264.193,
264.195,
264.222,
264.223,
264.226,
264.252
through
264.254,
264.276,
264.278,
264.280,
264.302
through
264.304,
264.309,
264.347,
264.602,
264.1034(
c)
through
264.1034(
f),
264.1035,
264.1063(
d)
through
264.1063(
i),
264.1064,
and
264.1082
through
264.1090.
All
of
this
information
must
be
maintained
in
the
operating
record
until
closure
of
the
facility.
*
*
*
*
*
(
8)
All
closure
cost
estimates,
and
for
disposal
facilities,
all
post­
closure
cost
estimates.
This
information
must
be
maintained
in
the
operating
record
until
closure
of
the
facility.
*
*
*
*
*
(
10)
Records
of
the
quantities
and
date
of
placement
for
each
shipment
of
hazardous
waste
placed
in
land
disposal
units
under
an
extension
to
the
effective
date
of
any
land
disposal
restriction
granted
pursuant
to
§
268.5
of
this
chapter,
a
petition
pursuant
to
§
298.6
of
this
chapter,
or
a
certification
under
§
268.8
of
this
chapter,
and
the
applicable
notice
required
by
a
generator
under
§
268.7(
a)
of
this
chapter.
This
information
must
be
maintained
in
the
operating
record
until
closure
of
the
facility.
*
*
*
*
*
11.
Section
264.90
is
amended
by
revising
paragraph
(
a)(
2)
to
read
as
follows:

§
264.90
Applicability.

(
a)
*
*
*
(
2)
All
solid
waste
management
units
must
comply
with
the
requirements
in
§
264.101.
A
surface
impoundment,
waste
pile,
land
treatment
unit,
or
landfill
must
comply
with
the
VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
11:
32
Jan
16,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00018
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
17JAP2.
SGM
pfrm06
PsN:
17JAP2
2535
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
12
/
Thursday,
January
17,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
requirements
of
§
§
264.91
through
264.100
in
lieu
of
§
264.101
for
purposes
of
detecting,
characterizing
and
responding
to
releases
to
the
uppermost
aquifer.
The
financial
assurance
responsibility
requirements
of
§
264.101
apply
to
all
regulated
units.
*
*
*
*
*
12.
Section
264.98
is
amended
by
revising
paragraphs
(
c),
(
g)(
5)(
ii),
(
g)(
6)(
i),
and
(
g)(
6)(
ii)
to
read
as
follows:

§
264.98
Detection
monitoring
program.

*
*
*
*
*
(
c)
The
owner
or
operator
must
conduct
and
maintain
records
for
a
ground­
water
monitoring
program
for
each
chemical
parameter
and
hazardous
constituent
specified
in
their
permit.
The
Regional
Administrator,
on
a
discretionary
basis,
may
allow
sampling
for
a
site­
specific
subset
of
constituents
from
the
Appendix
IX
list
of
this
part
and
other
representative/
related
waste
constituents.
The
owner
or
operator
must
maintain
a
record
of
ground­
water
analytical
data
as
measured
and
in
a
form
necessary
for
the
determination
of
statistical
significance
under
§
264.97(
h).
(
g)
*
*
*
(
5)
*
*
*
(
ii)
Note
in
the
operating
record
whether
this
contamination
was
caused
by
a
source
other
than
the
regulated
unit
or
from
an
error
in
sampling,
analysis,
or
evaluation;
*
*
*
*
*
(
6)
*
*
*
(
i)
Note
in
the
operating
record
that
statistically
significant
evidence
of
contamination
was
found;
(
ii)
Enter
into
the
operating
record
a
report
demonstrating
that
a
source
other
than
a
regulated
unit
caused
the
contamination,
or
that
the
contamination
resulted
from
an
error
in
sampling,
analysis,
or
evaluation;
*
*
*
*
*
13.
Section
264.99
is
amended:
a.
Revising
paragraph
(
g);
b.
Removing
and
reserving
paragraph
(
h)(
1);
c.
Removing
paragraphs
(
i)(
1)
and
(
i)(
2)
and
redesignating
paragraphs
(
i)(
3)
and
(
i)(
4)
as
(
i)(
1)
and
(
i)(
2).
The
revision
reads
as
follows:

§
264.99
Compliance
monitoring
program.

*
*
*
*
*
(
g)
The
owner
or
operator
must
analyze
samples
from
monitoring
wells
at
the
compliance
point.
The
number
of
wells
and
samples
will
be
worked
out
on
a
case­
by­
case
basis
with
the
Regional
Administrator.
The
specific
constituents
from
Appendix
IX
of
part
264
to
be
analyzed
will
also
be
worked
out
on
a
case­
by­
case
basis
with
the
Regional
Administrator.
This
analysis
must
be
done
annually
to
determine
whether
additional
hazardous
constituents
are
present
in
the
uppermost
aquifer
and,
if
so,
at
what
concentration,
pursuant
to
procedures
in
§
264.98(
f).
If
the
owner
or
operator
finds
Appendix
IX
constituents
in
the
ground
water
that
are
not
already
identified
in
the
permit
as
monitoring
constituents,
the
owner
or
operator
may
resample
within
one
month
and
repeat
the
Appendix
IX
analysis.
If
the
second
analysis
confirms
the
presence
of
new
constituents,
the
owner
or
operator
must
report
the
concentration
of
these
additional
constituents
to
the
Regional
Administrator
within
seven
days
after
the
completion
of
the
second
analysis
and
add
them
to
the
monitoring
list.
If
the
owner
or
operator
chooses
not
to
resample,
then
he
or
she
must
report
the
concentrations
of
these
additional
constituents
to
the
Regional
Administrator
within
seven
days
after
completion
of
the
initial
analysis,
and
add
them
to
the
monitoring
list.
*
*
*
*
*
14.
Section
264.113
is
amended
by
revising
paragraph
(
e)(
5)
to
read
as
follows:

§
264.113
Closure;
time
allowed
for
closure.

*
*
*
*
*
(
e)
*
*
*
(
5)
During
the
period
of
corrective
action,
the
owner
or
operator
shall
provide
an
annual
report
to
the
Regional
Administrator
describing
the
progress
of
the
corrective
action.
This
report
shall
include
all
ground­
water
monitoring
data,
and
an
evaluation
of
the
effect
of
the
continued
receipt
of
non­
hazardous
wastes
on
the
corrective
action.
*
*
*
*
*
15.
Section
264.120
is
revised
to
read
as
follows:

§
264.120
Certification
of
completion
of
post­
closure
care.
No
later
than
60
days
after
completion
of
the
established
post­
closure
care
period
for
each
hazardous
waste
disposal
unit,
the
owner
or
operator
must
submit
to
the
Regional
Administrator
a
certification
that
the
post­
closure
care
period
was
done
in
accordance
with
the
specifications
in
the
post­
closure
plan.
The
certification
must
be
signed
by
the
owner
or
operator
and
an
independent
registered
professional
engineer
or
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager.
Documentation
supporting
the
certification
must
be
furnished
to
the
Regional
Administrator
upon
request
until
he
releases
the
owner
or
operator
from
the
financial
assurance
requirements
for
post­
closure
care
under
§
264.145(
i).

Subpart
I
 
Use
and
Management
of
Containers
16.
Section
264.174
is
revised
to
read
as
follows:

§
264.174
Inspections.

At
least
weekly,
or
less
frequently
as
determined
by
the
Director,
the
owner
or
operator
must
inspect
areas
where
containers
are
stored.
In
all
cases,
inspections
must
occur
at
least
monthly.
Director
decisions
about
less
frequent
inspections
will
be
based
on
an
evaluation
of
the
compliance
record
of
a
facility.
The
owner
or
operator
must
look
for
leaking
containers
and
for
deterioration
of
containers
and
the
containment
system
caused
by
corrosion
or
other
factors.

Subpart
J
 
Tank
Systems
17.
Section
264.191
is
amended
by
revising
paragraphs
(
a)
and
(
b)(
5)(
ii)
to
read
as
follows
(
the
Note
following
paragraph
(
b)(
5)(
ii)
is
unchanged):

§
264.191
Assessment
of
existing
tank
system's
integrity.

(
a)
For
each
existing
tank
system
that
does
not
have
secondary
containment,
the
owner
or
operator
must
determine
that
the
tank
system
is
not
leaking
or
is
unfit
for
use.
Except
as
provided
in
paragraph
(
c)
of
this
section,
the
owner
or
operator
must
obtain
and
keep
an
assessment
reviewed
and
certified
by
an
independent,
qualified
registered
professional
engineer
or
a
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager
attesting
to
the
tank
system's
integrity.
(
b)
*
*
*
(
5)
*
*
*
(
ii)
For
other
than
non­
enterable
underground
tanks
and
for
ancillary
equipment,
this
assessment
must
include
a
leak
test
or
other
integrity
examination
that
is
certified
by
an
independent,
qualified
registered
professional
engineer
or
a
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager
that
addresses
cracks,
leaks,
corrosion,
or
erosion.
*
*
*
*
*
18.
Section
264.192
is
amended
by
revising
paragraphs
(
a)
introductory
text
and
(
b)
introductory
text
to
read
as
follows:

§
264.192
Design
and
installation
of
new
tank
systems
or
components.

(
a)
Owners
or
operators
of
new
tank
systems
or
components
must
obtain
and
submit
to
the
Regional
Administrator,
at
the
time
of
submittal
of
part
B
VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
11:
32
Jan
16,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00019
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
17JAP2.
SGM
pfrm06
PsN:
17JAP2
2536
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
12
/
Thursday,
January
17,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
information,
an
assessment,
reviewed
and
certified
by
an
independent,
qualified,
registered
professional
engineer
or
a
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager
attesting
that
the
tank
system
has
sufficient
structural
integrity
and
is
acceptable
for
the
storing
and
treating
of
hazardous
waste.
The
assessment
must
show
that
the
foundation,
structural
support,
seams,
connections,
and
pressure
controls
(
if
applicable)
are
adequately
designed
and
that
the
tank
system
has
sufficient
structural
strength,
compatibility
with
the
waste(
s)
to
be
stored
or
treated,
and
corrosion
protection
to
ensure
that
it
will
not
collapse,
rupture,
or
fail.
This
assessment,
which
will
be
used
by
the
Regional
Administrator
to
approve
or
disapprove
the
acceptability
of
the
tank
system
design,
must
include,
at
a
minimum,
the
following
information:
*
*
*
*
*
(
b)
The
owner
or
operator
of
a
new
tank
system
must
ensure
that
proper
handling
procedures
are
adhered
to
in
order
to
prevent
damage
to
the
system
during
installation.
Prior
to
covering,
enclosing,
or
placing
a
new
tank
system
or
component
in
use,
an
independent,
qualified
registered
professional
engineer
or
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager
or
independent,
qualified
installation
inspector
must
inspect
the
system
or
component
for
the
presence
of
any
of
the
following
items:
*
*
*
*
*
19.
Section
264.193
is
amended:
a.
By
revising
paragraph
(
a);
b.
By
revising
paragraphs
(
c)(
3)
and
(
c)(
4);
(
the
Note
following
paragraph
(
c)(
4)
is
unchanged);
c.
By
revising
paragraph
(
e)(
3)(
iii)
(
the
Note
following
paragraph
(
e)(
3)(
iii)
is
unchanged);
d.
By
revising
paragraph
(
g)
introductory
text
and
paragraph
(
g)(
1);
e.
By
removing
paragraph
(
h)
and
redesignating
paragraph
(
i)
as
(
h).
The
revisions
read
as
follows:

§
264.193
Containment
and
detection
of
releases.
(
a)
Secondary
containment
must
be
provided
for
all
existing
and
new
tank
systems
and
components.
*
*
*
*
*
(
c)
*
*
*
(
3)
Provided
with
a
leak­
detection
system
that
is
designed
and
operated
so
that
it
will
detect
the
failure
of
either
the
primary
or
secondary
containment
structure
or
the
presence
of
any
release
of
hazardous
waste
or
accumulated
liquid
in
the
secondary
containment
system
within
24
hours,
or
at
the
earliest
practicable
time;
and
(
4)
Sloped
or
otherwise
designed
or
operated
to
drain
and
remove
liquids
resulting
from
leaks,
spills,
or
precipitation.
Spilled
or
leaked
waste
and
accumulated
precipitation
must
be
removed
from
the
secondary
containment
system
within
24
hours,
or
in
as
timely
a
manner
as
is
possible
to
prevent
harm
to
human
health
and
the
environment.
*
*
*
*
*
(
e)
*
*
*
(
3)
*
*
*
(
iii)
Provided
with
a
built­
in,
continuous
leak­
detection
system
capable
of
detecting
a
release
within
24
hours,
or
at
the
earliest
practicable
time.
*
*
*
*
*
(
g)
The
owner
or
operator
is
not
required
to
comply
with
the
requirements
of
this
section
if
he
or
she
implements
alternate
design
and
operating
practices
and
keeps
records
at
the
facility
describing
these
practices.
Such
alternate
design
and
operating
practices,
together
with
location
characteristics,
must
prevent
the
migration
of
any
hazardous
waste
or
hazardous
constituents
into
the
ground
water
or
surface
water
at
least
as
effectively
as
secondary
containment,
during
the
active
life
of
the
tank
system;
or,
in
the
event
of
a
release
that
does
migrate
to
ground
or
surface
water,
no
substantial
present
or
potential
hazard
will
be
posed
to
human
health
or
the
environment.
New
underground
tank
systems
may
not
be
exempted
from
the
secondary
containment
requirements
of
this
section.
(
1)
The
owner
or
operator
who
uses
these
alternate
tank
design
and
operating
practices
and
who
has
a
release
must:
(
i)
Comply
with
the
requirements
of
§
264.196
and
(
ii)
Decontaminate
or
remove
contaminated
soil
to
the
extent
necessary
to:
(
A)
Enable
the
tank
system
to
resume
operation
with
the
capability
for
the
detection
of
releases
at
least
equivalent
to
the
capability
it
had
prior
to
the
release;
and
(
B)
Prevent
the
migration
of
hazardous
waste
or
hazardous
constituents
to
ground
or
surface
water.
(
iii)
If
contaminated
soil
cannot
be
removed
or
decontaminated,
the
owner
or
operator
must
comply
with
the
requirements
of
§
264.197(
b).
*
*
*
*
*
20.
Section
264.195
is
amended
by
revising
paragraph
(
b)
to
read
as
follows
(
the
Note
following
paragraph
(
b)
is
unchanged):

§
264.195
Inspections.

*
*
*
*
*
(
b)
The
owner
or
operator
must
inspect
at
least
weekly,
or
less
frequently
as
determined
by
the
Director.
In
all
cases,
inspections
must
occur
at
least
monthly.
Director
decisions
about
less
frequent
inspections
will
be
based
on
an
evaluation
of
the
compliance
record
of
a
facility.
*
*
*
*
*
21.
Section
264.196
is
amended
by
removing
paragraph
(
d);
redesignating
paragraphs
(
e)
and
(
f)
as
paragraphs
(
d)
and
(
e),
respectively;
and
revising
newly
designated
paragraph
(
e)
to
read
as
follows:

§
264.196
Response
to
leaks
or
spills
and
disposition
of
leaking
or
unfit­
for­
use
tank
systems.

*
*
*
*
*
(
e)
Certification
of
major
repairs.
If
the
owner/
operator
has
repaired
a
tank
system
in
accordance
with
paragraph
(
d)
of
this
section,
and
the
repair
has
been
extensive
(
e.
g.,
installation
of
an
internal
liner;
repair
of
a
ruptured
primary
containment
or
secondary
containment
vessel),
the
tank
system
must
not
be
returned
to
service
unless
the
owner/
operator
has
obtained
a
certification
by
an
independent,
qualified,
registered,
professional
engineer
or
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager
that
the
repaired
system
is
capable
of
handling
hazardous
wastes
without
release
for
the
intended
life
of
the
system.

Subpart
K
 
Surface
Impoundments
22.
Section
264.223
is
amended
by
removing
paragraphs
(
b)(
1),
(
b)(
2)
and
(
b)(
6);
redesignating
paragraphs
(
b)(
3)
through
(
b)(
5)
as
paragraphs
(
b)(
1)
through
(
b)(
3),
respectively;
and
revising
paragraph
(
c)
introductory
text
to
read
as
follows:

§
264.223
Response
actions.

*
*
*
*
*
(
c)
To
make
the
leak
and/
or
remediation
determinations
in
paragraphs
(
b)(
1),
(
2),
and
(
3)
of
this
section,
the
owner
or
operator
must:
*
*
*
*
*

Subpart
L
 
Waste
Piles
23.
Section
264.251
is
amended
by
revising
paragraph
(
c)
introductory
text
to
read
as
follows:

§
264.251
Design
and
operating
requirements.

*
*
*
*
*
(
c)
The
owner
or
operator
of
each
new
waste
pile,
each
lateral
expansion
of
a
waste
pile
unit,
and
each
replacement
of
an
existing
waste
pile
unit
must
install
two
or
more
liners,
and
a
leachate
VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
16:
56
Jan
16,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00020
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
17JAP2.
SGM
pfrm04
PsN:
17JAP2
2537
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
12
/
Thursday,
January
17,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
collection
and
removal
system
above
and
between
the
liners.
*
*
*
*
*
24.
Section
264.253
is
amended
by
removing
paragraphs
(
b)(
1),
(
b)(
2)
and
(
b)(
6);
redesignating
paragraphs
(
b)(
3)
through
(
b)(
5)
as
(
b)(
1)
through
(
b)(
3),
respectively;
and
revising
paragraph
(
c)
introductory
text
to
read
as
follows:

§
264.253
Response
actions.

*
*
*
*
*
(
c)
To
make
the
leak
and/
or
remediation
determinations
in
paragraphs
(
b)(
1),
(
2),
and
(
3)
of
this
section,
the
owner
or
operator
must:
*
*
*
*
*

Subpart
M
 
Land
Treatment
§
264.278
[
Amended]

25.
Section
264.278
is
amended
by
removing
and
reserving
paragraph
(
g)(
1);
removing
paragraphs
(
h)(
1)
and
(
h)(
2)
and
redesignating
paragraphs
(
h)(
3)
and
(
h)(
4)
as
(
h)(
1)
and
(
h)(
2).

Subpart
N
 
Landfills
26.
Section
264.304
is
amended
by
removing
paragraphs
(
b)(
1),
(
b)(
2)
and
(
b)(
6);
redesignating
paragraphs
(
b)(
3)
through
(
b)(
5)
as
(
b)(
1)
through
(
b)(
3);
and
revising
paragraph
(
c)
introductory
text,
to
read
as
follows:

§
264.304
Response
actions.

*
*
*
*
*
(
c)
To
make
the
leak
and/
or
remediation
determinations
in
paragraphs
(
b)(
1),
(
2),
and
(
3)
of
this
section,
the
owner
or
operator
must:
*
*
*
*
*
27.
Section
264.314
is
amended
by
removing
paragraph
(
a)
and
redesignating
paragraphs
(
b)
through
(
f)
as
paragraphs
(
a)
through
(
e)
and
by
revising
newly
designated
paragraphs
(
a)
and
(
e)
introductory
text
to
read
as
follows:

§
264.314
Special
requirements
for
bulk
and
containerized
liquids.

(
a)
The
placement
of
bulk
or
noncontainerized
liquid
hazardous
waste
or
hazardous
waste
or
hazardous
waste
containing
free
liquids
(
whether
or
not
sorbents
have
been
added)
in
any
landfill
is
prohibited.
*
*
*
*
*
(
e)
The
placement
of
any
liquid
that
is
not
a
hazardous
waste
in
a
landfill
is
prohibited
unless
the
owner
or
operator
of
the
landfill
demonstrates
to
the
Regional
Administrator,
or
the
Regional
Administrator
determines
that:
*
*
*
*
*
Subpart
O
 
Incinerators
§
264.343
[
Amended]
28.
Section
264.343
is
amended
by
removing
the
last
sentence
of
paragraph
(
a)(
2).

Subpart
W
 
Drip
Pads
29.
Section
264.571
is
amended
by
revising
paragraphs
(
a),
(
b),
and
(
c)
to
read
as
follows:

§
264.571
Assessment
of
existing
drip
pad
integrity.
(
a)
For
each
existing
drip
pad,
the
owner
or
operator
must
determine
whether
it
meets
all
of
the
requirements
of
this
subpart,
except
the
requirements
for
liners
and
leak
detection
systems
of
§
264.573(
b).
The
owner
or
operator
must
obtain
an
assessment
reviewed
and
certified
by
an
independent,
qualified
registered
professional
engineer
or
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager.
The
assessment
must
be
updated
and
recertified
annually
until
all
upgrades,
repairs,
or
modifications
necessary
to
achieve
compliance
with
the
standards
of
§
264.573
are
complete.
(
b)
The
owner
or
operator
must
develop
a
plan
for
upgrading,
repairing,
and
modifying
the
drip
pad
to
meet
the
requirements
of
§
264.573(
b).
This
plan
must
describe
all
changes
to
be
made
to
the
drip
pad
in
sufficient
detail
to
document
compliance
with
the
requirements
of
§
264.573.
The
plan
must
be
completed
no
later
than
two
years
before
the
date
that
all
repairs,
upgrades,
and
modifications
are
complete.
The
plan
must
be
reviewed
and
certified
by
an
independent
qualified
registered
professional
engineer
or
a
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager.
(
c)
Upon
completion
of
all
upgrades,
repairs,
and
modifications,
the
owner
or
operator
must
develop
as­
built
drawings
for
the
drip
pad
together
with
a
certification
by
an
independent
qualified
registered
professional
engineer
or
a
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager
that
the
drip
pad
conforms
to
the
drawings.
*
*
*
*
*
30.
Section
264.573
is
amended
by
revising
paragraphs
(
a)(
4)(
ii),
(
g),
and
(
m)(
1)(
iii)
and
removing
paragraphs
(
m)(
1)(
iv)
and
(
m)(
3)
and
removing
and
reserving
paragraph
(
m)(
2)
to
read
as
follows:

§
264.573
Design
and
operating
requirements.
(
a)
*
*
*
(
4)
*
*
*
(
ii)
The
owner
or
operator
must
obtain
and
keep
on
file
an
assessment
of
the
drip
pad
reviewed
and
certified
by
an
independent,
qualified,
registered
professional
engineer
or
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager
attesting
to
the
results
of
the
evaluation.
The
assessment
must
be
reviewed,
updated,
and
recertified
annually.
The
evaluation
must
document
the
extent
to
which
the
drip
pad
meets
the
design
and
operating
standards
of
this
section,
except
for
paragraph
(
b)
of
this
section.
*
*
*
*
*
(
g)
The
owner
or
operator
must
evaluate
the
drip
pad
to
determine
that
it
meets
the
requirements
of
paragraphs
(
a)
through
(
f)
of
this
section
and
must
obtain
a
certification
of
this
by
an
independent,
qualified,
registered
professional
engineer
or
a
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager
and
maintain
this
certification
on­
site.
*
*
*
*
*
(
m)
*
*
*
(
1)
*
*
*
(
iii)
Determine
what
steps
must
be
taken
to
repair
the
drip
pad
and
clean
up
any
leakage
from
below
the
drip
pad,
and
establish
a
schedule
for
accomplishing
the
repairs.
Records
that
repairs
were
completed
on
schedule
must
be
kept
at
the
facility.
*
*
*
*
*
31.
Section
264.574
is
amended
by
revising
paragraph
(
a)
to
read
as
follows:

§
264.574
Inspections.
(
a)
During
construction
or
installation,
liners
and
cover
systems
(
for
example,
membranes,
sheets,
or
coatings)
must
be
inspected
for
uniformity,
damage
and
imperfections.
Immediately
after
construction
or
installation,
liners
must
be
inspected
and
certified
to
meet
the
requirements
in
§
264.573
by
an
independent,
qualified
registered
professional
engineer
or
a
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager.
This
certification
must
be
maintained
at
the
facility
as
part
of
the
facility
operating
record.
After
installation,
liners
and
covers
must
be
inspected
to
ensure
tight
seams
and
joints
and
the
absence
of
tears,
punctures,
or
blisters.
*
*
*
*
*

Subpart
AA
 
Air
Emission
Standards
for
Process
Vents
§
264.1036
[
Removed
and
Reserved]
32.
Remove
and
reserve
§
264.1036.

Subpart
BB
 
Air
Emission
Standards
for
Equipment
Leaks
§
264.1062
[
Amended]
33.
Section
264.1061
is
amended
by
removing
paragraph
(
b)(
1);
redesignating
paragraphs
(
b)(
2)
and
(
b)(
3)
as
paragraphs
(
b)(
1)
and
(
b)(
2),

VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
17:
24
Jan
16,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00021
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
17JAP2.
SGM
pfrm04
PsN:
17JAP2
2538
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
12
/
Thursday,
January
17,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
respectively;
and
removing
paragraph
(
d).

§
264.1062
[
Amended]

34.
Section
264.1062
is
amended
by
removing
paragraph
(
a)(
2)
and
redesignating
paragraph
(
a)(
1)
as
paragraph
(
a).

§
264.1065
[
Removed
and
Reserved]

35.
Remove
and
reserve
§
264.1065.

Subpart
DD
 
Containment
Buildings
36.
Section
264.1100
is
amended
by
revising
the
introductory
text
to
read
as
follows:

§
264.1100
Applicability.

The
requirements
of
this
subpart
apply
to
owners
or
operators
who
store
or
treat
hazardous
waste
in
units
designed
and
operated
under
§
264.1101
of
this
subpart.
The
owner
or
operator
is
not
subject
to
the
definition
of
land
disposal
in
RCRA
section
3004(
k)
provided
that
the
unit:
*
*
*
*
*
37.
Section
264.1101
is
amended
by
revising
paragraphs
(
c)(
2),
(
c)(
3)(
i)(
C)
and
(
c)(
4),
removing
paragraphs
(
c)(
3)(
i)(
D)
and
(
c)(
3)(
iii)
and
removing
and
reserving
paragraph
(
c)(
3)(
ii)
to
read
as
follows:

§
264.1101
Design
and
operating
standards.

*
*
*
*
*
(
c)
*
*
*
(
2)
Obtain
certification
by
an
independent
qualified
registered
professional
engineer
or
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager
that
the
containment
building
design
meets
the
requirements
of
paragraphs
(
a),
(
b),
and
(
c)
of
this
section.
(
3)
*
*
*
(
i)
*
*
*
(
C)
Determine
what
steps
must
be
taken
to
repair
the
containment
building,
remove
any
leakage
from
the
secondary
containment
system,
and
establish
a
schedule
for
accomplishing
the
clean­
up
and
repairs.
Records
that
repairs
were
completed
on
schedule
must
be
kept
at
the
facility.
(
ii)
[
Reserved]
(
4)
Inspect
and
record
in
the
facility's
operating
record
at
least
once
every
seven
days,
or
less
frequently
as
determined
by
the
Director,
data
gathered
from
monitoring
and
leak
detection
equipment
as
well
as
the
containment
building
and
the
area
immediately
surrounding
the
containment
building
to
detect
signs
of
releases
of
hazardous
waste.
In
all
cases,
inspections
must
occur
at
least
monthly.
Director
decisions
about
less
frequent
inspections
will
be
based
on
an
evaluation
of
the
compliance
record
of
a
facility.
*
*
*
*
*

PART
265
 
INTERIM
STATUS
STANDARDS
FOR
OWNERS
AND
OPERATORS
OF
HAZARDOUS
WASTE
TREATMENT,
STORAGE,
AND
DISPOSAL
FACILITIES
38.
The
authority
citation
for
part
265
continues
to
read
as
follows:

Authority:
42
U.
S.
C.
6905,
6906,
6912,
6922,
6923,
6924,
6925,
6935,
6936,
and
6937,
unless
otherwise
noted.

Subpart
B
 
General
Facility
Standards
39.
Section
265.1
is
amended
by
revising
paragraph
(
b)
to
read
as
follows
(
the
Comment
following
paragraph
(
b)
is
unchanged):

§
265.1
Purpose,
scope,
and
applicability.

*
*
*
*
*
(
b)
Except
as
provided
in
§
265.1080(
b),
the
standards
of
this
part,
§
§
264.552,
264.553,
and
264.554
of
this
chapter
apply
to
owners
and
operators
of
facilities
that
treat,
store,
or
dispose
of
hazardous
waste
and
who
have
complied
with
the
requirements
for
interim
status
under
RCRA
section
3005(
e)
and
§
270.10
of
this
chapter.
*
*
*
40.
Section
265.16
is
amended
by
revising
paragraphs
(
a)(
1)
and
(
a)(
3)
and
(
d)
to
read
as
follows:

§
265.16
Personnel
training.
(
a)(
1)
Facility
personnel
must
successfully
complete
a
program
of
classroom
instruction
or
on­
the­
job
training
that
teaches
them
to
perform
their
duties
in
a
way
that
ensures
the
facility's
compliance
with
the
requirements
of
this
part.
*
*
*
*
*
(
3)
The
owner
or
operator
of
the
facility
shall
ensure
that
all
personnel
potentially
involved
in
emergency
response
at
the
facility:
(
i)
Have
received
training
required
by
the
Occupational
Safety
and
Health
Administration
at
29
CFR
1910.120(
p)(
8)
or
1910.120(
q)
as
applicable;
and
(
ii)
Have
been
trained
in
all
elements
of
the
facility's
contingency
plan
applicable
to
their
roles
in
emergency
response.
*
*
*
*
*
(
d)
The
owner
or
operator
must
maintain
at
the
facility
records
documenting
the
training
or
job
experience
required
under
paragraphs
(
a),
(
b),
and
(
c)
of
this
section
that
has
been
given
to
and
completed
by
facility
personnel.
*
*
*
*
*
Subpart
D
 
Contingency
Plans
and
Emergency
Procedures
41.
Section
265.52
is
amended
by
revising
paragraph
(
b)
to
read
as
follows:

§
265.52
Content
of
contingency
plan.

*
*
*
*
*
(
b)
If
the
owner
or
operator
has
already
prepared
a
Spill
Prevention,
Control,
and
Countermeasures
(
SPCC)
Plan
in
accordance
with
part
112
of
this
chapter,
or
part
1510
of
chapter
V,
or
some
other
emergency
or
contingency
plan,
he
need
only
amend
that
plan
to
incorporate
hazardous
waste
management
provisions
that
are
sufficient
to
comply
with
the
requirements
of
this
Part.
The
owner
or
operator
should
consider
developing
one
contingency
plan
based
on
the
National
Response
Team's
Integrated
Contingency
Plan
Guidance
(
One
Plan)
which
meets
all
regulatory
requirements.
*
*
*
*
*
42.
Section
265.56
is
amended
by
removing
paragraph
(
i)
and
redesignating
paragraph
(
j)
as
paragraph
(
i)
43.
Section
265.73
is
amended
by
revising
paragraphs
(
b)
introductory
text,
(
b)(
1),
(
b)(
2),
(
b)(
6),
(
b)(
8),
and
(
b)(
10)
to
read
as
follows
(
the
Comment
following
paragraph
(
b)(
6)
is
unchanged):

§
265.73
Operating
record.

*
*
*
*
*
(
b)
The
following
information
must
be
recorded,
as
it
becomes
available,
and
maintained
in
the
operating
record
for
three
years
after
it
is
entered
into
the
operating
record
unless
noted
otherwise
as
follows:
(
1)
A
description
and
the
quantity
of
each
hazardous
waste
received,
and
the
method(
s)
and
date(
s)
of
its
treatment,
storage,
or
disposal
at
the
facility.
This
information
must
be
kept
in
the
operating
record
until
closure
of
the
facility;
(
2)
The
location
of
each
hazardous
waste
within
the
facility
and
the
quantity
at
each
location.
For
all
facilities,
this
information
must
include
cross­
references
to
manifest
document
numbers
if
the
waste
was
accompanied
by
a
manifest.
For
disposal
facilities,
the
location
and
quantity
of
each
hazardous
waste
must
be
recorded
on
a
map
or
diagram
that
shows
each
cell
or
disposal
area.
All
of
this
information
must
be
maintained
in
the
operating
record
until
closure
of
the
facility;
*
*
*
*
*
(
6)
Monitoring,
testing
or
analytical
data,
and
corrective
action
where
required
by
subpart
F
of
this
part
and
by
VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
11:
32
Jan
16,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00022
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
17JAP2.
SGM
pfrm06
PsN:
17JAP2
2539
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
12
/
Thursday,
January
17,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
§
§
265.19,
265.90,
265.94,
265.191,
265.193,
265.195,
265.222,
265.223,
265.226,
265.255,
265.259,
265.260,
265.276,
265.278,
265.280(
d)(
1),
265.302
through
265.304,
265.347,
265.377,
265.1034(
c)
through
265.1034(
f),
265.1035,
265.1063(
d)
through
265.1063(
i),
265.1064,
and
265.1083
through
265.1090
of
this
part.
All
of
this
information
must
be
maintained
in
the
operating
record
until
closure
of
the
facility;
*
*
*
*
*
(
8)
Records
of
the
quantities
(
and
date
of
placement)
for
each
shipment
of
hazardous
waste
placed
in
land
disposal
units
under
an
extension
to
the
effective
date
of
any
land
disposal
restriction
granted
pursuant
to
§
268.5
of
this
chapter,
monitoring
data
required
pursuant
to
a
petition
under
§
268.6
of
this
chapter,
or
a
certification
under
§
268.8
of
this
chapter,
and
the
applicable
notice
required
by
a
generator
under
§
268.7(
a)
of
this
chapter.
All
of
this
information
must
be
maintained
in
the
operating
record
until
closure
of
the
facility.
*
*
*
*
*
(
10)
For
an
on­
site
treatment
facility,
the
information
contained
in
the
notice
(
except
the
manifest
number),
and
the
certification
and
demonstration
if
applicable,
required
by
the
generator
or
the
owner
or
operator
under
§
268.7
or
§
268.8
of
this
chapter.
All
of
this
information
must
be
maintained
in
the
operating
record
until
closure
of
the
facility.
*
*
*
*
*

Subpart
F
 
Groundwater
Monitoring
44.
Section
265.90
is
amended
by
revising
paragraph
(
d)(
1)
and
(
d)(
3)
to
read
as
follows:

§
265.90
Applicability.

*
*
*
*
*
(
d)
*
*
*
(
1)
Within
one
year
after
[
the
effective
date
of
the
final
rule],
develop
a
specific
plan,
certified
by
a
qualified
geologist
or
geotechnical
engineer,
which
satisfies
the
requirements
of
§
265.93(
d)(
3),
for
an
alternate
ground­
water
monitoring
system;
*
*
*
*
*
(
3)
Prepare
a
report
in
accordance
with
§
265.93(
d)(
4);
*
*
*
*
*
45.
Section
265.93
is
amended:
a.
By
revising
paragraph
(
c)(
1);
b.
Redesignating
paragraph
(
d)(
1)
as
paragraph
(
d)
introductory
text,
and
redesignating
paragraphs
(
d)(
2)
through
(
d)(
7)
as
(
d)(
1)
through
(
d)(
6),
respectively;
c.
Revising
newly
designated
paragraphs
(
d)
introductory
text,
(
d)(
1),
(
d)(
2)
introductory
text,
(
d)(
3)
introductory
text,
(
d)(
4),
(
d)(
5),
(
d)(
6),
and
paragraph
(
e)
and
(
f).
The
revisions
read
as
follows:

§
265.93
Preparation,
evaluation
and
response.

*
*
*
*
*
(
c)(
1)
If
the
comparisons
for
the
upgradient
wells
made
under
paragraph
(
b)
of
this
section
show
a
significant
increase
(
or
pH
decrease),
the
owner
or
operator
must
note
this
in
the
operating
record.
*
*
*
*
*
(
d)
If
the
analyses
performed
under
paragraph
(
c)(
2)
of
this
section
confirm
a
significant
increase
(
or
pH
decrease),
the
owner
or
operator
must:
(
1)
Develop
a
specific
plan,
based
on
the
outline
required
under
paragraph
(
a)
of
this
section
and
certified
by
a
qualified
geologist
or
geotechnical
engineer,
for
a
ground­
water
quality
assessment
program
at
the
facility.
(
2)
The
plan
to
be
developed
under
§
265.90(
d)(
1)
or
paragraph
(
d)(
1)
of
this
section
must
specify:
*
*
*
*
*
(
3)
The
owner
or
operator
must
implement
the
ground­
water
quality
assessment
program
which
satisfies
the
requirements
of
paragraph
(
d)(
2)
of
this
section,
and,
at
a
minimum,
determine:
*
*
*
*
*
(
4)
The
owner
or
operator
must
make
his
first
determination
under
paragraph
(
d)(
3)
of
this
section
as
soon
as
technically
feasible,
and
prepare
a
report
containing
an
assessment
of
the
ground­
water
quality.
This
report
must
be
kept
in
the
facility
operating
record.
(
5)
If
the
owner
or
operator
determines,
based
on
the
results
of
the
first
determination
under
paragraph
(
d)(
3)
of
this
section,
that
no
hazardous
waste
or
hazardous
waste
constituents
from
the
facility
have
entered
the
ground
water,
then
he
may
reinstate
the
indicator
evaluation
program
described
in
§
265.92
and
paragraph
(
b)
of
this
section.
(
6)
If
the
owner
or
operator
determines,
based
on
the
first
determination
under
paragraph
(
d)(
3)
of
this
section,
that
hazardous
waste
or
hazardous
waste
constituents
from
the
facility
have
entered
the
ground
water,
then
he:
(
i)
Must
continue
to
make
the
determinations
required
under
paragraph
(
d)(
3)
of
this
section
on
a
quarterly
basis
until
final
closure
of
the
facility,
if
the
ground­
water
quality
assessment
plan
was
implemented
prior
to
final
closure
of
the
facility;
or
(
ii)
May
cease
to
make
the
determinations
required
under
paragraph
(
d)(
3)
of
this
section,
if
the
ground­
water
quality
assessment
plan
was
implemented
during
the
postclosure
care
period.
(
e)
Notwithstanding
any
other
provision
of
this
subpart,
any
groundwater
quality
assessment
to
satisfy
the
requirements
of
paragraph
(
d)(
3)
of
this
section
which
is
initiated
prior
to
final
closure
of
the
facility
must
be
completed
in
accordance
with
paragraph
(
d)(
4)
of
this
section.
(
f)
Unless
the
ground
water
is
monitored
to
satisfy
the
requirements
of
paragraph
(
d)(
3)
of
this
section,
at
least
annually
the
owner
or
operator
must
evaluate
the
data
on
ground­
water
surface
elevations
obtained
under
§
265.92(
e)
to
determine
whether
the
requirements
under
§
265.91(
a)
for
locating
the
monitoring
wells
continue
to
be
satisfied.
If
the
evaluation
shows
that
§
265.91(
a)
is
no
longer
satisfied,
the
owner
or
operator
must
immediately
modify
the
number,
location,
or
depth
of
the
monitoring
wells
to
bring
the
groundwater
monitoring
system
into
compliance
with
this
requirement.
46.
Section
265.94
is
amended
by
revising
the
section
heading
and
paragraphs
(
a)
introductory
text,
(
a)(
2),
and
(
b),
to
read
as
follows:

§
265.94
Recordkeeping
requirements.
(
a)
Unless
the
ground
water
is
monitored
to
satisfy
the
requirements
of
§
265.93(
d)(
3),
the
owner
or
operator
must:
*
*
*
*
*
(
2)
Keep
records
of
the
following:
(
i)
During
the
first
year
when
initial
background
concentrations
are
being
established
for
the
facility:
concentrations
or
values
of
the
parameters
listed
in
§
265.92(
b)(
1)
for
each
ground­
water
monitoring
well.
(
ii)
Concentrations
or
values
of
the
parameters
listed
in
§
265.92(
b)(
3)
for
each
ground­
water
monitoring
well,
along
with
the
required
evaluations
for
these
parameters
under
§
265.93(
b).
The
owner
or
operator
must
separately
identify
any
significant
differences
from
initial
background
found
in
the
upgradient
wells,
in
accordance
with
§
265.93(
c)(
1).
(
iii)
Results
of
the
evaluations
of
ground­
water
surface
elevations
under
§
265.93(
f),
and
a
description
of
the
response
to
that
evaluation,
where
applicable.
(
b)
If
the
ground
water
is
monitored
to
satisfy
the
requirements
of
§
265.93(
d)(
3),
the
owner
or
operator
must
keep
records
of
the
following:
(
1)
Analyses
and
evaluations
specified
in
the
plan,
which
satisfies
the
VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
11:
32
Jan
16,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00023
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
17JAP2.
SGM
pfrm06
PsN:
17JAP2
2540
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
12
/
Thursday,
January
17,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
requirements
of
§
265.93(
d)(
2),
throughout
the
active
life
of
the
facility,
and,
for
disposal
facilities,
throughout
the
post­
closure
care
period
as
well;
and
(
2)
Results
of
his
or
her
ground­
water
quality
assessment
program,
which
includes,
but
is
not
limited
to,
the
calculated
(
or
measured)
rate
of
migration
of
hazardous
waste
or
hazardous
waste
constituents
in
the
ground
water.

Subpart
G
 
Closure
and
Post­
Closure
47.
Section
265.113
is
amended
by
revising
paragraph
(
e)(
5)
to
read
as
follows:

§
265.113
Closure;
time
allowed
for
closure.

*
*
*
*
*
(
e)
*
*
*
(
5)
The
owner
or
operator
must
provide
annual
reports
to
the
Regional
Administrator
describing
the
progress
of
the
corrective
action
program.
These
reports
must
include
ground­
water
monitoring
data
and
an
analysis
of
the
effect
of
continued
receipt
of
nonhazardous
waste
on
the
effectiveness
of
the
corrective
action.
*
*
*
*
*
48.
Section
265.120
is
revised
as
follows:

§
265.120
Certification
of
completion
of
post­
closure
care.

No
later
than
60
days
after
the
completion
of
the
established
postclosure
care
period
for
each
hazardous
waste
disposal
unit,
the
owner
or
operator
must
submit
to
the
Regional
Administrator
a
certification
that
the
post­
closure
care
period
for
the
hazardous
waste
disposal
unit
was
performed
in
accordance
with
the
specifications
in
the
approved
postclosure
plan.
The
certification
must
be
signed
by
the
owner
or
operator
and
by
an
independent,
qualified
registered
professional
engineer
or
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager.
Documentation
supporting
the
certification
must
be
furnished
to
the
Regional
Administrator
upon
request
until
he
releases
the
owner
or
operator
from
the
financial
assurance
requirements
for
post­
closure
care
under
§
265.145(
h).

Subpart
I
 
Use
and
Management
of
Containers
49.
Section
265.174
is
revised
to
read
as
follows:

§
265.174
Inspections.

At
least
weekly,
or
less
frequently
as
determined
by
the
Director,
the
owner
or
operator
must
inspect
areas
where
containers
are
stored.
In
all
cases,
inspections
must
occur
at
least
monthly.
Director
decisions
about
less
frequent
inspections
will
be
based
on
an
evaluation
of
the
compliance
record
of
a
facility.
The
owner
or
operator
must
look
for
leaking
containers
and
for
deterioration
of
containers
and
the
containment
system
caused
by
corrosion
or
other
factors.

Subpart
J
 
Tank
Systems
50.
Section
265.191
is
amended
by
revising
paragraphs
(
a)
and
(
b)(
5)(
ii)
to
read
as
follows
(
the
Note
following
paragraph
(
b)(
5)(
ii)
is
unchanged):

§
265.191
Assessment
of
existing
tank
system's
integrity.

(
a)
For
each
existing
tank
system
that
does
not
have
secondary
containment
meeting
the
requirements
of
§
265.193,
the
owner
or
operator
must
determine
that
the
tank
system
is
not
leaking
or
is
unfit
for
use.
Except
as
provided
in
paragraph
(
c)
of
this
section,
the
owner
or
operator
must
obtain
and
keep
an
assessment
reviewed
and
certified
by
an
independent,
qualified
registered
professional
engineer
or
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager
attesting
to
the
tank
system's
integrity.
*
*
*
*
*
(
b)
*
*
*
(
5)
*
*
*
(
ii)
For
other
than
non­
enterable
underground
tanks
and
for
ancillary
equipment,
this
assessment
must
be
either
a
leak
test,
as
described
in
paragraph
(
b)(
5)(
i)
of
this
section,
or
an
internal
inspection
and/
or
other
tank
integrity
examination
certified
by
an
independent,
qualified
registered
professional
engineer
or
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager
that
addresses
cracks,
leaks,
corrosion,
and
erosion.
*
*
*
*
*
51.
Section
265.192
is
amended
by
revising
paragraphs
(
a)
introductory
text
and
(
b)
introductory
text
to
read
as
follows:

§
265.192
Design
and
installation
of
new
tank
systems
or
components.

(
a)
Owners
or
operators
of
new
tank
systems
or
components
must
ensure
that
the
foundation,
structural
support,
seams,
connections,
and
pressure
controls
(
if
applicable)
are
adequately
designed
and
that
the
tank
system
has
sufficient
structural
strength,
compatibility
with
the
waste(
s)
to
be
stored
or
treated,
and
corrosion
protection
so
that
it
will
not
collapse,
rupture,
or
fail.
The
owner
or
operator
must
obtain
an
assessment
by
an
independent,
qualified
registered
professional
engineer
or
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager
attesting
that
the
system
has
sufficient
structural
integrity
and
is
acceptable
for
the
storing
and
treating
of
hazardous
waste.
This
assessment
must
include
the
following
information:
*
*
*
*
*
(
b)
The
owner
or
operator
of
a
new
tank
system
must
ensure
that
proper
handling
procedures
are
adhered
to
in
order
to
prevent
damage
to
the
system
during
installation.
Prior
to
covering,
enclosing,
or
placing
a
new
tank
system
or
component
in
use,
an
independent,
qualified
registered
professional
engineer
or
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager
or
independent,
qualified
installation
inspector
must
inspect
the
system
or
component
for
the
presence
of
any
of
the
following
items:
*
*
*
*
*
52.
Section
265.193
is
amended:
a.
By
revising
paragraphs
(
a);
b.
By
revising
paragraph
(
e)(
3)(
iii)
(
the
Note
following
paragraph
(
e)(
3)(
iii)
is
unchanged);
c.
By
revising
paragraphs
(
g)
introductory
text
and
(
g)(
1);
d.
Removing
paragraph
(
h);
e.
Redesignating
paragraph
(
i)
as
(
h).
The
revisions
read
as
follows:

§
265.193
Containment
and
detection
of
releases.

(
a)
Secondary
containment
must
be
provided
for
all
existing
and
new
tank
systems
and
components.
*
*
*
*
*
(
e)
*
*
*
(
3)
*
*
*
(
iii)
Provided
with
a
built­
in,
continuous
leak­
detection
system
capable
of
detecting
a
release
within
24
hours,
or
at
the
earliest
practicable
time.
*
*
*
*
*
(
g)
The
owner
or
operator
is
not
required
to
comply
with
the
requirements
of
this
section
if
he
or
she
implements
alternate
design
and
operating
practices
and
keeps
records
at
the
facility
describing
these
practices.
Such
alternate
design
and
operating
practices,
together
with
location
characteristics,
must
prevent
the
migration
of
any
hazardous
waste
or
hazardous
constituents
into
the
ground
water
or
surface
water
at
least
as
effectively
as
secondary
containment,
during
the
active
life
of
the
tank
system;
or,
in
the
event
of
a
release
that
does
migrate
to
ground
or
surface
water,
no
substantial
present
or
potential
hazard
will
be
posed
to
human
health
or
the
environment.
New
underground
tank
systems
may
not
be
exempted
from
the
VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
16:
56
Jan
16,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00024
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
17JAP2.
SGM
pfrm04
PsN:
17JAP2
2541
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
12
/
Thursday,
January
17,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
secondary
containment
requirements
of
this
section.
(
1)
The
owner
or
operator
who
uses
these
alternate
tank
design
and
operating
practices
and
who
has
a
release
must:
(
i)
Comply
with
the
requirements
of
§
264.196
of
this
chapter
and
(
ii)
Decontaminate
or
remove
contaminated
soil
to
the
extent
necessary
to:
(
A)
Enable
the
tank
system
to
resume
operation
with
the
capability
for
the
detection
of
releases
at
least
equivalent
to
the
capability
it
had
prior
to
the
release;
and
(
B)
Prevent
the
migration
of
hazardous
waste
or
hazardous
constituents
to
ground
or
surface
water.
(
iii)
If
contaminated
soil
cannot
be
removed
or
decontaminated,
the
owner
or
operator
must
comply
with
the
requirements
of
§
264.197(
b)
of
this
chapter.
*
*
*
*
*
53.
Section
265.195
is
amended
by
revising
paragraph
(
a)
to
read
as
follows
(
the
Note
following
paragraph
(
a)
is
unchanged):

§
265.195
Inspections.

(
a)
The
owner
or
operator
must
inspect
at
least
weekly,
or
less
frequently
as
determined
by
the
Director.
In
all
cases,
inspections
must
occur
at
least
monthly.
Director
decisions
about
less
frequent
inspections
will
be
based
on
an
evaluation
of
the
compliance
record
of
a
facility.
*
*
*
*
*
54.
Section
265.196
is
amended
by
removing
paragraph
(
d);
redesignating
paragraphs
(
e)
and
(
f)
as
paragraphs
(
d)
and
(
e),
respectively;
and
revising
newly
designated
paragraph
(
e),
to
read
as
follows
(
the
Note
following
newly
designated
paragraph
(
e)
is
unchanged):

§
265.196
Response
to
leaks
or
spills
and
disposition
of
leaking
or
unfit­
for­
use
tank
systems.

*
*
*
*
*
(
e)
Certification
of
major
repairs.
If
the
owner/
operator
has
repaired
a
tank
system
in
accordance
with
paragraph
(
d)
of
this
section,
and
the
repair
has
been
extensive
(
e.
g.,
installation
of
an
internal
liner;
repair
of
a
ruptured
primary
containment
or
secondary
containment
vessel),
the
tank
system
must
not
be
returned
to
service
unless
the
owner/
operator
has
obtained
a
certification
by
an
independent,
qualified,
registered,
professional
engineer
or
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager
that
the
repaired
system
is
capable
of
handling
hazardous
wastes
without
release
for
the
intended
life
of
the
system.
*
*
*
*
*

Subpart
K
 
Surface
Impoundments
55.
Section
265.221
is
amended
by
revising
paragraph
(
a)
to
read
as
follows:

§
265.221
Design
and
operating
requirements.

(
a)
The
owner
or
operator
of
each
new
surface
impoundment
unit,
each
lateral
expansion
of
a
surface
impoundment
unit,
and
each
replacement
of
a
surface
impoundment
unit
must
have
two
or
more
liners,
and
a
leachate
collection
and
removal
system
between
the
liners.
The
leachate
collection
and
removal
system
must
be
operated
in
accordance
with
§
264.221(
c)
of
this
chapter,
unless
exempted
under
§
264.221(
d),
(
e),
or
(
f)
of
this
chapter.
*
*
*
*
*
56.
The
second
section
designated
as
§
265.223
is
amended:
a.
By
revising
the
first
sentence
of
paragraph
(
a);
b.
Removing
paragraphs
(
b)(
1),
(
b)(
2),
and
(
b)(
6)
and
redesignating
paragraphs
(
b)(
3)
through
(
b)(
5)
as
paragraphs
(
b)(
1)
through
(
b)(
3),
respectively;
c.
Revising
paragraph
(
c)
introductory
text.
The
revisions
read
as
follows:

§
265.223
Response
actions.

(
a)
The
owner
or
operator
of
surface
impoundment
units
subject
to
§
265.221(
a)
must
develop
a
response
action
plan.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
(
c)
To
make
the
leak
and/
or
remediation
determinations
in
paragraphs
(
b)(
1),
(
2),
and
(
3)
of
this
section,
the
owner
or
operator
must:
*
*
*
*
*

Subpart
L
 
Waste
Piles
57.
Section
265.259
is
amended:
a.
By
revising
the
first
sentence
of
paragraph
(
a);
b.
Removing
paragraphs
(
b)(
1),
(
b)(
2),
and
(
b)(
6)
and
redesignating
paragraphs
(
b)(
3)
through
(
b)(
5)
as
(
b)(
1)
through
(
b)(
3),
respectively;
and
c.
Revising
paragraph
(
c)
introductory
text.
The
revisions
read
as
follows:

§
265.259
Response
actions.

(
a)
The
owner
or
operator
of
waste
pile
units
subject
to
§
265.254
must
develop
a
response
action
plan.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
(
c)
To
make
the
leak
and/
or
remediation
determinations
in
paragraphs
(
b)(
1),
(
2),
and
(
3)
of
this
section,
the
owner
or
operator
must:
*
*
*
*
*

Subpart
M
 
Land
Treatment
§
265.276
[
Amended]

58.
Section
265.276
is
amended
by
removing
paragraph
(
a)
and
redesignating
paragraphs
(
b)
and
(
c)
as
paragraphs
(
a)
and
(
b),
respectively.

Subpart
N
 
Landfills
59.
Section
265.301
is
amended
by
revising
paragraph
(
a)
to
read
as
follows:

§
265.301
Design
and
operating
requirements.

(
a)
The
owner
or
operator
of
each
new
landfill
unit,
each
lateral
expansion
of
a
landfill
unit,
and
each
replacement
of
an
existing
landfill
unit
must
install
two
or
more
liners
and
a
leachate
collection
and
removal
system
above
and
between
the
liners.
The
leachate
collection
and
removal
system
must
be
operated
in
accordance
with
§
264.301(
d),
(
e),
or
(
f)
of
this
chapter.
*
*
*
*
*
60.
Section
265.303
is
amended:
a.
By
revising
the
first
sentence
of
paragraph
(
a);
b.
Removing
paragraphs
(
b)(
1),
(
b)(
2),
and
(
b)(
6)
and
redesignating
paragraphs
(
b)(
3)
through
(
b)(
5)
as
(
b)(
1)
through
(
b)(
3),
respectively;
and
c.
Revising
paragraph
(
c)
introductory
text.
The
revisions
read
as
follows:

§
265.303
Response
actions.

(
a)
The
owner
or
operator
of
landfill
units
subject
to
§
265.301(
a)
must
develop
a
response
action
plan.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
(
c)
To
make
the
leak
and/
or
remediation
determinations
in
paragraphs
(
b)(
1),
(
2),
and
(
3)
of
this
section,
the
owner
or
operator
must:
*
*
*
*
*
61.
Section
265.314
is
amended
by
removing
paragraphs
(
a),
redesignating
paragraphs
(
b)
through
(
g)
as
paragraphs
(
a)
through
(
f),
and
revising
newly
designated
paragraphs
(
a)
and
(
f)
introductory
text
to
read
as
follows:

§
265.314
Special
requirements
for
bulk
and
containerized
liquids.

(
a)
The
placement
of
bulk
or
noncontainerized
liquid
hazardous
waste
or
hazardous
waste
containing
free
liquids
(
whether
or
not
sorbents
have
been
added)
in
any
landfill
is
prohibited.
*
*
*
*
*
(
f)
The
placement
of
any
liquid
which
is
not
a
hazardous
waste
in
a
landfill
is
prohibited
unless
the
owner
or
operator
VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
11:
32
Jan
16,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00025
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
17JAP2.
SGM
pfrm06
PsN:
17JAP2
2542
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
12
/
Thursday,
January
17,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
of
the
landfill
demonstrates
to
the
Regional
Administrator
or
the
Regional
Administrator
determines
that:
*
*
*
*
*

Subpart
W
 
Drip
Pads
62.
Section
265.441
is
amended
by
revising
paragraph
(
a),
(
b),
and
(
c)
to
read
as
follows:

§
265.441
Assessment
of
existing
drip
pad
integrity.

(
a)
For
each
existing
drip
pad,
the
owner
or
operator
must
determine
whether
it
meets
the
requirements
of
this
subpart,
except
for
the
requirements
for
liners
and
leak
detection
systems
of
§
265.443(
b).
The
owner
or
operator
must
obtain
and
keep
an
assessment
of
the
drip
pad,
reviewed
and
certified
by
an
independent,
qualified
registered
professional
engineer
or
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager
attesting
to
the
results
of
the
evaluation.
The
assessment
must
be
reviewed,
updated,
and
recertified
annually
until
all
upgrades,
repairs,
or
modifications
necessary
to
achieve
compliance
with
all
the
standards
of
§
265.443
are
complete.
(
b)
The
owner
or
operator
must
develop
a
plan
for
upgrading,
repairing,
and
modifying
the
drip
pad
to
meet
the
requirements
of
§
265.443(
b),
and
submit
the
plan
to
the
Regional
Administrator
no
later
than
2
years
before
the
date
that
all
repairs,
upgrades,
and
modifications
are
complete.
This
plan
must
describe
all
changes
to
be
made
to
the
drip
pad
in
sufficient
detail
to
document
compliance
with
the
requirements
of
§
265.443.
The
plan
must
be
reviewed
and
certified
by
an
independent
qualified
registered
professional
engineer
or
a
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager.
(
c)
Upon
completion
of
all
repairs
and
modifications,
the
owner
or
operator
must
submit
to
the
Regional
Administrator
or
State
Director
the
asbuilt
drawings
for
the
drip
pad
together
with
a
certification
by
an
independent
qualified
registered
professional
engineer
or
a
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager
attesting
that
the
drip
pad
conforms
to
the
drawings.
*
*
*
*
*
63.
Section
265.443
is
amended
by
revising
paragraphs
(
a)(
4)(
ii)
and
(
g)
and
removing
paragraph
(
m)(
1)(
iv),
removing
and
reserving
paragraph
(
m)(
2),
and
removing
paragraph
(
m)(
3)
to
read
as
follows:

§
265.443
Design
and
operating
requirements.

(
a)
*
*
*
(
4)
*
*
*
(
ii)
The
owner
or
operator
must
obtain
and
keep
an
assessment
of
the
drip
pad,
reviewed
and
certified
by
an
independent,
qualified
registered
professional
engineer
or
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager
that
attests
to
the
results
of
the
evaluation.
The
assessment
must
be
reviewed,
updated
and
recertified
annually.
The
evaluation
must
document
the
extent
to
which
the
drip
pad
meets
the
design
and
operating
standards
of
this
section,
except
for
paragraph
(
b)
of
this
section.
*
*
*
*
*
(
g)
The
drip
pad
must
be
evaluated
to
determine
that
it
meets
the
requirements
of
paragraphs
(
a)
through
(
f)
of
this
section
and
a
certification
of
this
by
an
independent,
qualified,
registered
professional
engineer
or
a
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager
must
be
obtained
and
kept
on­
site.
*
*
*
*
*
64.
Section
265.444
is
amended
by
revising
paragraph
(
a)
to
read
as
follows:

§
265.444
Inspections.

(
a)
During
construction
or
installation,
liners
and
cover
systems
(
e.
g.,
membranes,
sheets,
or
coatings)
must
be
inspected
for
uniformity,
damage
and
imperfections.
Immediately
after
construction
or
installation,
liners
must
be
inspected
and
certified
as
meeting
the
requirements
of
§
265.443
by
an
independent,
qualified
registered
professional
engineer
or
a
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager.
This
certification
must
be
maintained
at
the
facility
as
part
of
the
facility
operating
record.
After
installation,
liners
and
covers
must
be
inspected
to
ensure
tight
seams
and
joints
and
the
absence
of
tears,
punctures,
or
blisters.
*
*
*
*
*

Subpart
BB
 
Air
Emission
Standards
for
Equipment
Leaks
§
265.1061
[
Amended]

65.
Section
265.1061
is
amended
by
removing
paragraph
(
b)(
1);
redesignating
paragraphs
(
b)(
2)
and
(
b)(
3)
as
paragraphs
(
b)(
1)
and
(
b)(
2),
respectively;
and
removing
paragraph
(
d).
66.
Section
265.1062
is
amended
by
removing
paragraph
(
a)(
2)
and
redesignating
paragraph
(
a)(
1)
as
paragraph
(
a).

Subpart
DD
 
Containment
Buildings
67.
Section
265.1100
is
amended
by
revising
the
introductory
text
to
read
as
follows:
§
265.1100
Applicability.

The
requirements
of
this
subpart
apply
to
owners
or
operators
who
store
or
treat
hazardous
waste
in
units
designed
and
operated
under
§
265.1101
of
this
subpart.
The
owner
or
operator
is
not
subject
to
the
definition
of
land
disposal
in
RCRA
section
3004(
k)
provided
that
the
unit:
*
*
*
*
*
68.
Section
265.1101
is
amended
by
removing
paragraphs
(
c)(
3)(
i)(
D),
and
(
c)(
3)(
iii)
and
removing
and
reserving
paragraph
(
c)(
3)(
ii);
and
revising
paragraphs
(
c)(
2),
(
c)(
3)(
i)(
C),
and
(
c)(
4)
to
read
as
follows:

§
265.1101
Design
and
operating
standards.

*
*
*
*
*
(
c)
*
*
*
(
2)
Obtain
and
keep
a
certification
by
an
independent,
qualified
registered
professional
engineer
or
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager
that
the
containment
building
design
meets
the
requirements
of
paragraphs
(
a)
through
(
c)
of
this
section.
(
3)
*
*
*
(
i)
*
*
*
(
C)
Determine
what
steps
must
be
taken
to
repair
the
containment
building,
remove
any
leakage
from
the
secondary
containment
system,
and
establish
a
schedule
for
accomplishing
the
clean­
up
and
repairs.
Records
that
repairs
were
completed
on
schedule
must
be
kept
at
the
facility.
(
ii)
[
Reserved]
(
4)
Inspect
and
record
in
the
facility's
operating
record
at
least
once
every
seven
days,
or
less
frequently
as
determined
by
the
Director
data
gathered
from
monitoring
and
leak
detection
equipment
as
well
as
the
containment
building
and
the
area
immediately
surrounding
the
containment
building
to
detect
signs
of
releases
of
hazardous
waste.
In
all
cases,
inspections
must
occur
at
least
monthly.
Director
decisions
about
less
frequent
inspections
will
be
based
on
an
evaluation
of
the
compliance
record
of
a
facility.
*
*
*
*
*

PART
266
 
STANDARDS
FOR
THE
MANAGEMENT
OF
SPECIFIC
HAZARDOUS
WASTES
AND
SPECIFIC
TYPES
OF
HAZARDOUS
WASTE
MANAGEMENT
FACILITIES
69.
The
authority
citation
for
part
266
continues
to
read
as
follows:

Authority:
42
U.
S.
C.
1006,
2002(
a),
3001
 
3009,
3014,
6905,
6906,
6912,
6921,
6922,
6924
 
6927,
6934,
and
6937.

VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
11:
32
Jan
16,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00026
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
17JAP2.
SGM
pfrm06
PsN:
17JAP2
2543
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
12
/
Thursday,
January
17,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
Subpart
H
 
Hazardous
Waste
Burned
in
Boilers
and
Industrial
Furnaces
70.
Section
266.102
is
amended
by
revising
paragraph
(
e)(
10)
to
read
as
follows:

§
266.102
Permit
standards
for
burners.

*
*
*
*
*
(
e)
*
*
*
(
10)
Recordkeeping.
The
owner
or
operator
must
keep
in
the
operating
record
of
the
facility
all
information
and
data
required
by
this
section
for
three
years.
*
*
*
*
*
71.
Section
266.103
is
amended
by
revising
paragraphs
(
b)(
2)(
ii)(
D),
(
d),
and
(
k)
to
read
as
follows:

§
266.103
Interim
status
standards
for
burners.

*
*
*
*
*
(
b)
*
*
*
(
2)
*
*
*
(
ii)
*
*
*
(
D)
When
best
engineering
judgment
is
used
to
develop
or
evaluate
data
and
make
determinations,
it
must
be
done
by
an
independent
qualified,
registered
professional
engineer
or
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager,
and
a
certification
of
his
or
her
determinations
must
be
provided
in
the
certification
of
precompliance.
*
*
*
*
*
(
d)
Periodic
recertifications.
The
owner
or
operator
must
conduct
compliance
testing
and
submit
to
the
Director
a
recertification
of
compliance
under
provisions
of
paragraph
(
c)
of
this
section
within
five
years
from
submitting
the
previous
certification
or
recertification.
If
the
owner
or
operator
seeks
to
recertify
compliance
under
new
operating
conditions,
he/
she
must
comply
with
the
requirements
of
paragraph
(
c)(
8)
of
this
section.
*
*
*
*
*
(
k)
Recordkeeping.
The
owner
or
operator
must
keep
in
the
operating
record
of
the
facility
all
information
and
data
required
by
this
section
for
three
years.
*
*
*
*
*
72.
Section
266.111
is
amended
by
revising
paragraph
(
e)(
2)(
i)
to
read
as
follows:

§
266.111
Standards
for
direct
transfer.

*
*
*
*
*
(
e)
*
*
*
(
2)
Requirements
prior
to
meeting
secondary
containment
requirements.
(
i)
For
existing
direct
transfer
equipment
that
does
not
have
secondary
containment,
the
owner
or
operator
shall
determine
whether
the
equipment
is
leaking
or
is
unfit
for
use.
The
owner
or
operator
shall
obtain
and
keep
on
file
at
the
facility
a
certified
assessment
from
a
qualified,
registered
professional
engineer
or
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager
that
attests
to
the
equipment's
integrity.
*
*
*
*
*

Subpart
M
 
Military
Munitions
73.
Section
266.205
is
amended
by
revising
paragraph
(
a)(
1)(
v)
to
read
as
follows:

§
266.205
Standards
applicable
to
the
storage
of
solid
waste
military
munitions.

(
a)
*
*
*
(
1)
*
*
*
(
v)
The
owner
or
operator
must
provide
notice
to
the
Director
within
24
hours
from
the
time
the
owner
or
operator
becomes
aware
of
any
loss
or
theft
of
the
waste
military
munitions,
or
any
failure
to
meet
a
condition
of
this
section.
*
*
*
*
*

PART
268
 
LAND
DISPOSAL
RESTRICTIONS
74.
The
authority
citation
for
part
268
continues
to
read
as
follows:

Authority:
42
U.
S.
C.
6905,
6912(
a),
6921,
and
6924.

75.
Section
268.7
is
amended
by
revising
paragraphs
(
b)(
6)
and
(
d)(
1);
removing
paragraphs
(
a)(
1)
and
(
a)(
6);
and
redesignating
paragraphs
(
a)(
2)
through
(
a)(
5)
as
(
a)(
1)
through
(
a)(
4)
and
(
a)(
7)
through
(
a)(
10)
as
(
a)(
5)
through
(
a)(
8):

§
268.7
Testing,
tracking
and
recordkeeping
requirements
for
generators,
treaters,
and
disposal
facilities.

*
*
*
*
*
(
b)
*
*
*
(
6)
Where
the
wastes
are
recyclable
materials
used
in
a
manner
constituting
disposal
subject
to
the
provisions
of
40
CFR
266.20(
b)
regarding
treatment
standards
and
prohibition
levels,
the
owner
or
operator
of
a
treatment
facility
(
i.
e.,
the
recycler)
must,
for
the
initial
shipment
of
waste,
prepare
a
one­
time
certification
described
in
paragraph
(
b)(
4)
of
this
section,
and
a
one­
time
notice
which
includes
the
information
in
paragraph
(
b)(
3)
of
this
section
(
except
the
manifest
number).
The
certification
and
notification
must
be
placed
in
the
facility's
on­
site
files.
If
the
waste
or
the
receiving
facility
changes,
a
new
certification
and
notification
must
be
prepared
and
placed
in
the
on­
site
files.
In
addition,
the
recycling
facility
must
also
keep
records
of
the
name
and
location
of
each
entity
receiving
the
hazardous
wastederived
product.
*
*
*
*
*
(
d)
*
*
*
(
1)
A
one­
time
notification,
including
the
following
information,
must
be
prepared
and
placed
in
the
facility's
on
site
files.
*
*
*
*
*
76.
Section
268.9
is
amended
by
revising
paragraphs
(
a)
and
(
d)
introductory
text
to
read
as
follows:

§
268.9
Special
rules
regarding
wastes
that
exhibit
a
characteristic.

(
a)
A
generator
of
hazardous
waste
must
determine,
following
the
requirements
of
§
262.11
of
this
chapter,
or
if
applicable,
§
264.13
of
this
chapter,
and
including
the
ability
to
use
knowledge
of
the
waste,
if
the
waste
has
to
be
treated
before
it
can
be
land
disposed.
(
1)
This
is
done
by
determining
if
the
hazardous
waste
meets
the
treatment
standards
in
§
§
268.40,
268.48,
and
268.49.
In
addition,
some
hazardous
wastes
must
be
treated
by
particular
treatment
methods
before
they
can
be
land
disposed.
These
methods
of
treatment
are
specified
in
§
268.40,
and
are
described
in
detail
in
§
268.42,
Table
1.
Wastes
with
required
treatment
methods
do
not
need
to
meet
concentration
levels.
(
2)
For
purposes
of
this
part
268,
the
waste
will
carry
the
waste
code
for
any
applicable
listed
waste
(
40
CFR
part
261,
subpart
D).
In
addition,
where
the
waste
exhibits
a
characteristic,
the
waste
will
carry
one
or
more
of
the
characteristic
waste
codes
(
40
CFR
part
261,
subpart
C),
except
when
the
treatment
standard
for
the
listed
waste
operates
in
lieu
of
the
treatment
standard
for
the
characteristic
waste,
as
specified
in
paragraph
(
b)
of
this
section.
(
3)
If
the
generator
determines
that
their
waste
displays
a
hazardous
characteristic
(
and
is
not
D001
nonwastewater
treated
by
CMBST,
RORGS,
or
POLYM
of
§
268.42,
Table
1),
the
generator
must
meet
treatment
standards
for
all
underlying
hazardous
constituents
(
as
defined
at
§
268.2(
i))
in
the
characteristic
waste.
*
*
*
*
*
(
d)
Wastes
that
exhibit
a
characteristic
are
also
subject
to
§
268.7
requirements,
except
that
once
the
waste
is
no
longer
hazardous,
a
one­
time
notification
and
certification
must
be
placed
in
the
generators
or
treaters
files.
The
notification
and
certification
must
be
updated
if
the
process
or
operation
generating
the
waste
changes
and/
or
if
VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
11:
32
Jan
16,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00027
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
17JAP2.
SGM
pfrm06
PsN:
17JAP2
2544
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
12
/
Thursday,
January
17,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
the
subtitle
D
facility
receiving
the
waste
changes.
*
*
*
*
*

PART
270
 
EPA
ADMINISTERED
PERMIT
PROGRAMS:
THE
HAZARDOUS
WASTE
PERMIT
PROGRAM
77.
The
authority
citation
for
part
270
continues
to
read
as
follows:

Authority:
42
U.
S.
C.
6905,
6912,
6924,
6925,
6927,
6939,
and
6974.

78.
Section
270.16
is
amended
by
revising
paragraph
(
a)
to
read
as
follows:

§
270.16
Specific
part
B
information
requirements
for
tank
systems.

*
*
*
*
*
(
a)
An
assessment
by
an
independent,
registered
professional
engineer
or
a
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager
of
the
structural
integrity
and
suitability
for
handling
hazardous
waste
of
each
tank
system,
as
required
under
§
§
264.191
and
264.192
of
this
chapter.
*
*
*
*
*
79.
Section
270.17
is
amended
by
revising
paragraph
(
d)
to
read
as
follows:

§
270.17
Specific
part
B
information
requirements
for
surface
impoundments.

*
*
*
*
*
(
d)
A
certification
by
a
qualified
engineer
or
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager
of
the
structural
integrity
of
each
dike.
For
new
units,
the
owner
or
operator
must
submit
a
statement
by
a
qualified
engineer
or
a
Certified
Hazardous
Materials
Manager
that
construction
will
be
completed
in
accordance
with
the
plans
and
specifications.
*
*
*
*
*

PART
271
 
REQUIREMENTS
FOR
AUTHORIZATION
OF
STATE
HAZARDOUS
WASTE
PROGRAMS
80.
The
authority
citation
for
part
271
continues
to
read
as
follows:

Authority:
42
U.
S.
C.
6905,
6912(
a)
and
6926.

81.
Section
271.1
is
amended
by
adding
the
following
entry
to
Table
1
in
chronological
order
by
date
of
publication
in
the
Federal
Register,
to
read
as
follows:

§
271.1
Purpose
and
scope.

*
*
*
*
*
(
j)
*
*
*

TABLE
1.
 
REGULATIONS
IMPLEMENTING
THE
HAZARDOUS
AND
SOLID
WASTE
AMENDMENTS
OF
1984
Promulgation
date
Title
of
regulation
Federal
Register
reference
Effective
date
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
[
Date
of
publication
of
final
rule
in
the
Federal
Register
(
FR)].
Office
of
Solid
Waste
Burden
Reduction
Project.
[
FR
page
numbers]
.......................
[
Date
of
X
months
from
date
of
publication
of
final
rule].

*
*
*
*
*
*
*

82.
Section
271.21
is
amended
by
adding
the
following
entry
to
Table
1
in
chronological
order
by
date
of
publication
in
the
Federal
Register,
to
read
as
follows:

§
271.21
Procedures
for
revision
of
State
programs.

*
*
*
*
*

TABLE
1
TO
§
271.21
Title
of
regulation
Promulgation
date
Federal
Register
reference
*
*
*
*
*
*
*

*
*
*
*
*
*
*

Resource
Conservation
and
Recovery
Act
Burden
Reduction
Initiative
*
*
*
*
*
*
*

[
FR
Doc.
02
 
191
Filed
1
 
16
 
02;
8:
45
am]

BILLING
CODE
6560
 
50
 
P
VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
16:
56
Jan
16,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00028
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
17JAP2.
SGM
pfrm04
PsN:
17JAP2