Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Requirements for Generators, Transporters, and Waste Management Facilities Under the RCRA Hazardous Waste Manifest System, 2854-2858 [2019-01538]
Download as PDF
2854
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 27 / Friday, February 8, 2019 / Notices
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[EPA–HQ–OLEM–2018–0756, FRL–9988–67–
OLEM]
Agency Information Collection
Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Requirements for
Generators, Transporters, and Waste
Management Facilities Under the
RCRA Hazardous Waste Manifest
System
Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is planning to submit the
information collection request (ICR),
Requirements for Generators,
Transporters, and Waste Management
Facilities Under the RCRA Hazardous
Waste Manifest System (EPA ICR No.
0801.23, OMB Control No. 2050–0039)
to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review and approval in
accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA). Before doing so,
the EPA is soliciting public comments
on specific aspects of the proposed
information collection as described
below. This is a proposed extension of
the ICR, which is currently approved
through May 31, 2019. An Agency may
not conduct or sponsor, and a person is
not required to respond to, a collection
of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number.
DATES: Comments must be submitted on
or before April 9, 2019.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
referencing by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
OLEM–2018–0756, online using
www.regulations.gov (our preferred
method), by email to rcra-docket@
epa.gov, or by mail to: EPA Docket
Center, Environmental Protection
Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC
20460.
EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes profanity, threats,
information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Bryan Groce, Office of Resource
Conservation and Recovery, Program
Implementation and Information
Division, (5304P), Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460;
telephone number: (703) 308–8750; fax
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Feb 07, 2019
Jkt 247001
number: (703) 308–0514; email address:
groce.bryan@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Supporting documents which explain in
detail the information that EPA will be
collecting are available in the public
docket for this ICR. The docket can be
viewed online at www.regulations.gov
or in person at the EPA Docket Center,
WJC West, Room 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC.
The telephone number for the Docket
Center is 202–566–1744. For additional
information about EPA’s public docket,
visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of
the PRA, EPA is soliciting comments
and information to enable it to: (i)
Evaluate whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary
for the proper performance of the
functions of the Agency, including
whether the information will have
practical utility; (ii) evaluate the
accuracy of the Agency’s estimate of the
burden of the proposed collection of
information, including the validity of
the methodology and assumptions used;
(iii) enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and (iv) minimize the burden
of the collection of information on those
who are to respond, including through
the use of appropriate automated
electronic, mechanical, or other
technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology,
e.g., allowing electronic submission of
responses.
EPA is also proposing and soliciting
comments and information to: (1)
Improve the precision of waste
quantities and units of measure reported
in Items 11 and 12 of the hazardous
waste manifest (both paper and
electronic), respectively; (2) enhance the
quality of international shipment data
reported on the manifest; and (3) assist
EPA with integrating e-Manifest and
biennial reporting (BR) requirements.
These improvements are discussed in
more detail below.
Abstract: The hazardous waste
manifest (paper and electronic) and
system cover recordkeeping and
reporting activities under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
and the Hazardous Waste Electronic
Manifest Establishment Act (Pub. L.
112–195). EPA’s authority to require use
of a manifest system stems primarily
from RCRA 3002(a)(5) (also RCRA
Sections 3003(a)(3) and 3004.)
Regulations are found in 40 CFR part
262 (registrant organizations and
generators), part 263 (transporters), and
parts 264 and 265 (TSDFs). The
manifest lists the wastes that are being
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
shipped and the treatment, storage, or
disposal facility (TSDF) to which the
wastes are bound. Generators,
transporters, and TSDFs handling
hazardous waste are required to
complete the data requirements for
manifests and other reports primarily to:
(1) Track each shipment of hazardous
waste from the generator to a designated
facility; (2) provide information
requirements sufficient to allow the use
of a manifest in lieu of a DOT shipping
paper or bill of lading, thereby reducing
the duplication of paperwork to the
regulated community; (3) provide
information to transporters and waste
management facility workers on the
hazardous nature of the waste; (4)
inform emergency response teams of the
waste’s hazard in the event of an
accident, spill, or leak; and (5) ensure
that shipments of hazardous waste are
managed properly and delivered to their
designated facilities. The Hazardous
Waste Electronic Manifest
Establishment Act provided EPA
authority to establish the national
electronic hazardous waste manifest
system to track hazardous waste
shipments electronically. The Act also
provided EPA authority to adopt
regulations that (1) allow it to accept
electronic-manifests originated in the eManifest system as the legal equivalent
to paper manifests; (2) require manifest
users to submit paper copies of the
manifest to the system for data
processing; (3) collect manifests in the
e-Manifest system for hazardous waste
subject to federal or state law; and (4)
set up user fees to offset the costs of
developing and operating the e-Manifest
system.
Pursuant to the Act, EPA modified the
manifest regulations on February 7,
2014 (The e-Manifest ‘‘One Year Rule’’),
to authorize use of electronic manifests
(or e-Manifests) for tracking offsite
shipments of hazardous waste from a
generator’s site to the site of the receipt
and disposition of the hazardous waste.
On January 3, 2018, EPA finalized the
e-Manifest User Fee Final Rule which
established the fee methodology that
EPA uses to determine the user fees
applicable to the electronic and paper
manifests submitted to the national
system. EPA launched the e-Manifest
system on June 30, 2018. TSDF and
other receiving facilities must submit
manifests, both paper and electronic, to
EPA. In addition to fees for RCRA
wastes, EPA is charging TSDFs and
other facilities receiving state-only
regulated wastes a fee for each manifest
submitted to the system. Regulations
regarding copy submission requirements
for interstate shipments and the
E:\FR\FM\08FEN1.SGM
08FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 27 / Friday, February 8, 2019 / Notices
applicability of e-Manifest system and
fees to facilities receiving state-only
regulated wastes are found in 40 CFR
part 260 (Hazardous Waste Management
System). Regulations regarding
imposition of user fees on receiving
facilities for their manifest submissions,
with references to key fee methodology,
fee dispute, and fee sanction
requirements are found in Parts 264 and
265.
For this renewal, EPA is proposing
several improvements/enhancements,
discussed below.
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
I. Improve Precision of Waste
Quantities and Units of Measure
A. Use of Decimals
EPA is proposing to modify the
manifest instructions to Item 11 of the
manifest to grant manifest users the
option to report waste quantities using
decimals or fractions. The effect of this
change would afford generators, and
others completing the manifest, the
ability to report more accurate wastes
quantities in Item 11 of the manifest
using decimals, rather than rounding
partial units to the nearest whole unit or
selecting smaller units of measure (e.g.,
pounds instead of tons).
EPA has provided guidance on this
issue in past manifest rulemakings. In
March 2001, we explained that the
Agency has historically discouraged use
of fractions or decimals and referenced
EPA’s March 1984 Uniform Manifest
Rule, which stated quantity descriptions
should be as accurate as possible
without using fractions or decimals. We
also said that states reasonably may
have relied upon EPA’s 1984 guidance
recommending against fractions and
decimals when they designed their data
systems. As a result, many state
databases are not set up to receive data
reported as fractions or decimals. The
March 2001 proposal, however,
acknowledged that a strict exclusion of
fractional quantities could cause waste
handlers to report waste quantities that
lacked precision. For example, for waste
quantities reported in tons, a waste
quantity reported as 1.5 tons is far more
precise than the alternative of truncating
the quantity reported to only 1 ton or
rounding up the quantity reported to 2
tons. As a result, we proposed to revise
the manifest instructions to require only
whole numbers to describe non-bulk
shipments but allow use of fractions for
bulk shipments, where necessary.
In its March 2005 final rule, EPA
decided against allowing use of
fractions or decimals to report waste
quantities on the manifest based on a
few adverse comments received to the
proposal. First, state commenters
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Feb 07, 2019
Jkt 247001
confirmed that many state databases are
not set up to receive data reported as
fractions or decimals. Second, states
argued frequent use of fractional or
decimal entries could cause a significant
number of errors resulting from attempts
to interpret the fractions or to determine
when and where a decimal point was
present. Finally, states argued waste
quantity reporting entries on the
manifest could be misinterpreted and
accuracy and precision compromised,
because decimals or fractions may not
transmit clearly to the bottom copies of
the carbonless and non-carbon papers of
the manifest forms.
Although EPA elected not to adopt
use of fractions or decimals in the
March 2005 final rule, we are revisiting
this issue in light of implementation of
the e-Manifest system, which the
Agency launched on June 30, 2018. The
issue of whether to allow decimals was
also raised during the September 2017
e-Manifest Advisory Board meeting.
Hazardous waste shipments now can be
tracked electronically in e-Manifest and,
unlike the paper manifest form, the eManifest system could be designed to
accept fractions or decimal entries in
Item 11 of the manifest without concern
of misinterpretation of waste quantities
due to decimal misplacement.
Additionally, all manifests, paper and
electronic, are now submitted to one
central system—EPA’s e-Manifest
system, which is then used to
disseminate manifest data to the states.
This central collection may alleviate
some of the state-specific issues related
to integrating decimals into the state
databases. Furthermore, EPA believes
the allowance of decimals in Item 11 of
the manifest will greatly enhance the
accuracy of waste quantities reported to
EPA. Consequently, EPA requests
comment on whether the agency should
revise the manifest instructions to allow
reporting of decimals or fractions in
Item 11 of the manifest.
Specifically, EPA asks, would use of
decimals or fractions present issues for
paper manifests? Should EPA limit use
of decimals for certain shipment types—
i.e., limit use of fractions and decimals
to certain shipments as proposed in
March 2001 by granting use of decimals
for bulk shipments (greater than 119
gallons), but require use of whole
numbers for non-bulk shipments (less
than or equal to 119 gallons)? What are
the impacts to state and industry
database systems, if EPA elects to allow
use of decimals for waste quantity
descriptions?
B. Alternative Set of Units of Measure
In addition, or as an alternative, to
using decimals or fractions on the
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
2855
manifest, we believe the regulated
community could more precisely report
waste quantity by also using smaller
units of measure (e.g., ounces, grams,
milliliters). The current set of units of
measure specified in the manifest
instructions to Item 12 of the manifest
limit use to gallons, kilograms, liters,
metric tons, cubic meters, pounds, tons,
or cubic yards. This set can cause waste
quantity reporting imprecision if waste
quantity data must be rounded to the
nearest whole number. If, however, the
current set also included smaller units
of measure, waste quantity reporting
precision may possibly be improved if
quantities are expressed as whole
numbers. EPA requests comment on
whether the agency should revise Table
II of the manifest instructions to Item 12
to include ounces, grams, and
milliliters. Additionally, EPA asks what
other smaller units of measure could
offer greater waste quantity reporting
precision?
II. Enhance Quality of International
Shipment Data
A. Addition of a New Field for Consent
Numbers for Import and Export
Shipments
EPA is proposing to add a new data
field on the paper and electronic
manifest so hazardous waste stream
consent numbers can be recorded in a
separate, distinct field on a manifest.
Current export regulations at 40 CFR
262.83(c)(3) require exporters to record
the consent numbers on the manifest for
each waste stream listed in Item 9b of
the manifest. Similarly, import-related
regulations at 40 CFR 264.71(a)(3)(i)
require U.S. facilities receiving
hazardous waste subject to 40 CFR part
262, subpart H, from a foreign entity to
record the relevant waste stream
consent number from consent
documentation supplied by EPA to the
facility for each waste listed on the
manifest. Currently, EPA has
recommended listing the consent
numbers in Item 14 ‘‘Special Handling
Instructions and Additional
Information’’ on the paper manifest
form due to the lack of dedicated fields
for listing such numbers. For electronic
manifests, consent numbers are
collected in e-Manifest for each waste
stream as part of Item 9b, the U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT)
shipping description.
EPA believes the addition of a
separate data field to the paper and
electronic manifest for consent numbers
would facilitate the electronic upload or
manual data entry of data from paper
export and import manifests as the
manifest would more clearly list the
E:\FR\FM\08FEN1.SGM
08FEN1
2856
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 27 / Friday, February 8, 2019 / Notices
consent number for each waste stream.
The additional field would also
facilitate the retrieval of import manifest
data from e-Manifest for all manifested
import shipments; the retrieval of export
manifest data could also occur once
EPA begins collecting export manifests
in the e-Manifest system.
EPA requests comment on its
proposal to add a new data element on
the manifest for the consent number for
each waste stream.
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
B. Capturing Exporter EPA ID Number
on the Manifest
EPA explained in the 2018 e-Manifest
User Fee Final Rule that it has not yet
determined who in the export shipment
chain of custody (i.e., primary exporter
vs. transporter moving waste from U.S.
or other entity) is best suited for making
the submission of the export manifest to
the system and paying the requisite
processing fee. EPA also explained that
the Agency plans to consult the
Advisory Board on future e-Manifest
system enhancements and expansions
and thus will bring the issue of export
manifests before the Advisory Board in
the near future. If, however, EPA
ultimately decides that the exporter is
the party best suited to be billed for
export manifests collected in e-Manifest,
the current manifest doesn’t provide
adequate information required to
invoice them.
While EPA has designated a specific
data element on the manifest form to
report transporter ID numbers (Items 6
and 7 for Transporter 1 and Transporter
2), it has not designated a similar data
element for exporter ID numbers.
Current export regulations at 40 CFR
262.83(c) require the exporter to comply
with the manifest requirements of 40
CFR 262.20 through 262.23 except that
in lieu of the name, site address, and
EPA ID number of the designated
permitted facility, the exporter must
enter the name and site address of the
foreign receiving facility, the exporter
must check the export box and enter the
U.S. port of exit (city and state) from the
United States in Item 16, and as
previously discussed, the exporter must
record the waste stream consent number
for each waste listed on the manifest. If
the exporter is the generator or the site
from where the export manifest is
initiated, the exporter’s information will
be listed in Item 1 and Item 5. But if the
exporter is a recognized trader located
separate from the site initiating the
export shipment, then while the
exporter must ensure that the items
noted above are recorded on the
manifest, Item 1 and Item 5 will reflect
the generator or shipping site’s
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Feb 07, 2019
Jkt 247001
information rather than the exporter’s
information.
Therefore, in anticipation of
promulgating a regulation requiring the
collection of export manifests in eManifest, we are considering revising
the manifest instructions for both the
paper and electronic forms so that if the
responsible exporter is separate from the
site initiating the export shipment, the
exporter can clearly identify itself by
entering its EPA ID number on the
manifest, either in addition to or in lieu
of the EPA ID number for the generator
site. Alternatively, EPA could rely on
the waste stream consent numbers
already required to be recorded on the
manifest, as each waste stream consent
number is associated with a unique U.S.
exporter in EPA’s Waste Import Export
Tracking System (WIETS). Relying on
the waste stream consent numbers
would require e-Manifest obtaining
reference data on the exporter EPA ID
number for each waste stream consent
number from WIETS, while adding a
new element for entering the exporter’s
EPA ID number could be used directly
by e-Manifest.
EPA requests comment on whether
the agency should revise the
instructions for export manifests to
clarify that the primary exporter must
enter its EPA ID in Item 1 and its name
and address on the left side of Item 5
and supply the name and address of the
generator site on the right side of Item
5, if not the same as primary exporter,
or, if an additional field should be
added to capture the primary exporter’s
EPA ID number so that the generator
site’s EPA ID number is retained in Item
1 of the manifest. Or, alternatively,
should EPA rely on the waste stream
consent numbers from WIETS instead of
adding a new data element on the
manifest?
C. How To Incorporate New Fields on
Manifest and Whether To Consolidate
With Movement Document
How To Incorporate New Fields on
Paper Manifests
As mentioned above, EPA is
considering several data element
additions to the manifest (both paper
and electronic) for international
shipments. While the proposed
additions for consent numbers are being
implemented easily in the e-Manifest
system for electronic tracking, these
additions would be problematic with
the paper forms. The one-page paper
manifest is already full of many data
elements and does not have much space
left for new additions. EPA requests
comment on whether there are other
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
options to accommodate these additions
on the paper forms.
For example, is another option for
international shipments to add space to
Item 16, the International Shipment
field, on the paper manifest to
accommodate the four, 12-digit consent
numbers corresponding to each of the
four waste streams listed in Item 9 of the
manifest? As an alternative, could we
revise the Continuation Sheet so that the
International Shipment Field is
removed from the paper manifest and
appears instead on a Continuation Sheet
with an expanded area that is able to
more easily accommodate four 12-digit
consent numbers and the primary
exporter’s EPA ID number, if necessary?
This would free up space on the paper
manifest form for other tracking
elements, including data elements
needed for biennial reporting, or
additional space needed for Item 14
entries. Both options would require
revisions to the instructions for export
manifests to clarify that the primary
exporter must enter its EPA ID in Item
1 and its name and address on the left
side of Item 5 and supply the name and
address of the generator site on the right
side of Item 5, if not the same as the
primary exporter. Alternatively, we
could modify the instructions under
both options to clarify that the primary
exporter must enter its EPA ID number
in a separate new data field so that the
generator site’s EPA ID number is
retained in Item 1 of the manifest. With
respect to import manifests, the
manifest instructions would also need
to be revised to instruct the receiving
facility to list the consent numbers for
each waste stream.
How To Incorporate Import and Export
Data for the Movement Document on the
Manifest
Besides the proposed revision to the
Continuation Sheet for international
shipment information, should EPA also
revise the Continuation Sheet with a
more expanded International Field that
is sufficient to collect all the
information that is required on a
movement document? For hazardous
waste shipments leaving the U.S., the
hazardous waste export regulations
require both an export manifest and
movement document to accompany the
shipment. For hazardous waste
shipments entering the U.S., the
hazardous waste import regulations
similarly require both an import
manifest and movement document to
accompany the shipment. The
movement document must accompany
the shipment from its initiation in the
country of export to its delivery to the
receiving facility in the country of
E:\FR\FM\08FEN1.SGM
08FEN1
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 27 / Friday, February 8, 2019 / Notices
import. The movement document
contains many of the same data required
on the manifest; both documents
identify the site from which the
shipment originates in the country of
export, the wastes being exported or
imported, the applicable consent
number for each waste stream from the
relevant Acknowledge of Consent
letters, the transporters or other persons
taking custody of the waste during its
movement, and the receiving facility in
the country of import.
The movement document also
includes some additional information
currently not required on export
manifests. The additional information
includes, but is not limited to, (1) more
contact information for the company
originating the shipment (if different
than the exporter), exporter, transporters
and handlers of the export shipment,
foreign importer (if different than the
foreign receiving facility), and foreign
receiving facility; (2) international
recovery or disposal operation codes for
the hazardous waste management
processes to be used at the consignee
facility, as defined in 40 CFR 262.81; (3)
and international waste codes from the
OECD Decision’s Green, or Amber Lists,
as incorporated by reference in 40 CFR
260.11. Both the manifest and
movement document require the name
and identifying information about the
company initiating the waste shipment
(i.e., EPA identification number,
address, telephone). The export
manifest, however, would not include
the exporter’s information if the
exporter is not the generator but is a
recognized trader located separate from
the site initiating the export shipment;
the movement document includes this
information and also requires the email
address, phone number and fax number
(if they have one) for the exporter,
shipping site company (if different than
the exporter), transporters, foreign
importer (if different than the receiving
facility) and receiving site. Second, the
movement document also requires
additional information regarding the
technologies to be employed by the
foreign receiving facility, and the
applicable international recovery or
disposal operations must be included on
the movement document as defined in
40 CFR 262.81; these codes serve the
same purpose as the management
method codes for domestic hazardous
shipments, which describe the type of
hazardous waste management system
used to treat, recover, or dispose of a
hazardous waste. Third, both the export
manifest and movement document must
include in the description of waste
sections of the documents the RCRA
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Feb 07, 2019
Jkt 247001
waste codes and the applicable UN/DOT
identification numbers. Besides this
description information, the movement
document must also include the
applicable OECD waste codes from the
Green or Amber Lists of wastes as set
forth in the OECD Council Decision and
incorporated by reference in 40 CFR
260.11(g). Finally, another difference
between export manifests and
movement documents is that movement
documents must also be signed by the
foreign receiving facility. The signed
copy is then used to provide the
exporter with confirmation of receipt.
Lastly, any rejection of a waste in the
shipment must be noted on the
movement document.
If EPA expanded the continuation
sheet to include space for: (1)
Additional contact information for the
generator, exporter, transporters and
handlers, importer (if different than the
receiving facility) and receiving facility;
(2) additional international codes for the
recovery or disposal processes to be
used at the consignee facility; (3)
additional international waste codes
from the OECD Decision’s Green or
Amber Lists; and (4) the foreign
receiving facility’s signature, it would
eliminate the necessity for export
shipments to be tracked with separate
manifests and movement documents.
Expansion of the Continuation Sheet to
accommodate these movement
document data elements would also aid
in the electronic sharing of shipment
data with the waste handlers and the
national governments involved in the
exports.
III. Biennial Reporting and e-Manifest
Integration
Pursuant to the Hazardous Waste
Electronic Manifest Establishment Act,
EPA is required to build the e-Manifest
system to afford users the ability to
report hazardous waste receipt data
applicable to the biennial hazardous
waste report in e-Manifest. To meet the
conditions under the e-Manifest Act,
EPA is proposing to revise the paper
manifest and continuation sheet (EPA
Form 8700–22 and 8700–22A) to
include source and form codes and
density information.
The current manifest form already
collects certain waste receipt data for
biennial reporting: Facility’s EPA ID
number (Item 1); facility’s name and
address (Item 5); total quantities of
waste shipped off-site for hazardous
management (Item 11); and management
method codes for hazardous waste
treatment, storage, and disposal (Item
19). Generators and other manifest
preparers can voluntarily report specific
gravity or density for each waste stream
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
2857
in Item 14 ‘‘Special Handling
Instructions and Additional
Information’’ on the paper manifest
form due to the lack of dedicated fields
for listing such information. However,
the paper manifest form does not
provide BR data that describes how the
hazardous waste originated (source
code) nor does it provide waste
information about the physical form or
chemical composition of the hazardous
waste (form code). The densities for
each waste stream must also be reported
for BR purposes if total hazardous waste
quantities are reported using volumetric
measure (gallons, liters, or cubic yards).
(Note: The e-Manifest system allows
users to voluntarily report source and
form codes, and density data in the
system.) If adopted, certain hazardous
waste generators would be required to
enter source and form codes and density
information on the manifest for each
RCRA waste listed on paper and
electronic manifests. Currently, federal
regulations only require large quantity
generators (LQGs) to submit the
Biennial Report (see § 262.41). Small
quantity generators (SQGs) and very
small quantity generators (VSQGs) are
not subject to the federal biennial
reporting requirements, but such
generators could be subject to BR
requirements under state law since
states can have more stringent reporting
requirements. Thus, hazardous waste
generators who are required to complete
the Waste Generation and Management
(GM) Form under federal law or state
law would be expected to enter source
and form codes and density
information, if necessary, on paper and
electronic manifests. Because the eManifest Act extends to federally and
state-regulated wastes requiring
manifests, the e-Manifest system also
collects manifests for state-only
regulated hazardous wastes shipped on
a manifest. Therefore, if a waste has a
manifesting requirement under the law
of either the origination (generator) state
or the destination state, EPA would also
require the generator of such wastes to
enter source and form codes and density
information, if applicable, on paper and
electronic manifests. Similarly, an entity
preparing a manifest on behalf of the
generator, meeting the BR conditions
above, would be expected to also enter
source and form codes and density
information, if applicable, on the paper
and electronic manifests.
EPA believes the addition of these BR
data elements to the paper manifest
form is an important step towards full
integration of e-Manifest with BR. These
codes will enable users to report waste
receipt data in the e-Manifest system
E:\FR\FM\08FEN1.SGM
08FEN1
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
2858
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 27 / Friday, February 8, 2019 / Notices
and ultimately assist them in the
preparation of their biennial hazardous
waste report. EPA requests comment on
its proposal to require the reporting of
form and source codes and density
information, if applicable, on the
manifest; these codes and density data
would also be mandatory for manifest
completion in e-Manifest. EPA requests
comment on how the Agency should
add the new data elements on the paper
manifest for BR integration. Should EPA
expand Item 19 of the manifest to
include source code, form code, and
density information, or create separate
new data fields for each? Are the
additions of these elements to the
manifest sufficient enough to ensure
that waste receipt data can be collected
in the e-Manifest system and ultimately
used for biennial hazardous waste
reporting? If these additions are
insufficient for BR integration, what
other data entries must be recorded on
the manifest for Biennial Reporting
purposes?
EPA will consider the comments
received and amend the ICR as
appropriate. The final ICR package will
then be submitted to OMB for review
and approval. At that time, EPA will
issue another Federal Register notice to
announce the submission of the ICR to
OMB and the opportunity to submit
additional comments to OMB.
Form numbers: Form 8700–22 and
8700–22A.
Respondents/affected entities:
Business or other for-profit.
Respondent’s obligation to respond:
Mandatory (RCRA 3002(a)(5)).
Estimated number of respondents:
203,927.
Frequency of response: Each
shipment.
Total estimated burden: 2,608,292
hours per year. Burden is defined at 5
CFR 1320.03(b).
Total estimated cost: $131,925,993
(per year), includes $38,784,093
annualized capital and operation &
maintenance costs.
Changes in estimates: The burden
hours are likely to increase but not
substantially, if EPA adopts the
proposed manifest modifications
detailed above in the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section.
Dated: December 11, 2018.
Barnes Johnson,
Director, Office of Resource Conservation and
Recovery.
[FR Doc. 2019–01538 Filed 2–7–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Feb 07, 2019
Jkt 247001
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2018–0226; FRL–9989–06–
OAR]
RIN 2060–AT97
Public Hearing and Reopening of
Comment Period for Proposed
Determinations of Attainment by the
Attainment Date, Extensions of the
Attainment Date and Reclassification
of Several Areas Classified as
Moderate for the 2008 Ozone National
Ambient Air Quality Standards
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of public hearing and
reopening of public comment period.
AGENCY:
On November 14, 2018, the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
proposed a rule titled ‘‘Determinations
of Attainment by the Attainment Date,
Extensions of the Attainment Date and
Reclassification of Several Areas
Classified as Moderate for the 2008
Ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standards,’’ which allowed for a 30-day
public review and comment period that
closed on December 14, 2018. In the
proposal, the EPA offered to hold a
public hearing if one was requested by
November 29, 2018. The EPA received
multiple requests for a public hearing,
and, therefore, is announcing in this
notice details for a scheduled public
hearing. The hearing will provide the
public with an opportunity to present
oral testimony on the proposal. In
addition, the EPA is reopening the
public comment period on the proposed
rule. The additional comment period
will ensure the public has sufficient
time to comment on the proceedings of
the public hearing and the proposal.
DATES: The public hearing will be held
on Friday, February 15, 2019, from 9
a.m. until 5 p.m. Eastern Standard Time
(EST). The public comment period for
the proposal will reopen beginning on
the date this notice is published in the
Federal Register and will close 7 days
following the public hearing, on
February 22, 2019.
ADDRESSES: The public hearing will be
held at the William Jefferson Clinton
East Building, 1301 Constitution
Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20004, in
Room 1153. Individuals planning to
attend or testify at the hearing should be
prepared to show valid picture
identification, such as a driver’s license,
to the security staff to gain access to the
meeting room (see under
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION the
subsection, ‘‘Identification
Requirements Under the REAL ID Act’’).
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
If
you have any questions about the public
hearing, you may contact Ms. Yvonne
W. Johnson at (919) 541–3921 or
johnson.yvonnew@epa.gov. If you need
further information about this notice or
the proposed rule, please contact Ms.
Virginia Raps, Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards (OAQPS), Air
Quality Policy Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Mail
Code C539–01, Research Triangle Park,
NC 27711; telephone number: (919)
541–4383; fax number: (919) 541–5315;
email: raps.virginia@epa.gov.
Please note that any updates made to
any aspect of the hearing will be posted
online at https://www.epa.gov/groundlevel-ozone-pollution/2008-ozonenational-ambient-air-quality-standardsnaaqs-nonattainment. While the EPA
expects the hearing to go forward as set
forth under DATES, please monitor the
website or contact Ms. Yvonne W.
Johnson at (919) 541–3921 or
johnson.yvonnew@epa.gov. The EPA
does not intend to publish a document
in the Federal Register announcing
updates.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
November 14, 2018, the EPA proposed
to make determinations for eleven areas
classified as Moderate nonattainment
for the 2008 ozone National Ambient
Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and
determine whether each area attained
the standards by the attainment date,
July 20, 2018 (see 83 FR 56781). The
EPA proposed to determine attainment
by the attainment date, grant attainment
date extensions, or identify areas that
will be reclassified, by operation of law,
from Moderate to Serious nonattainment
for failure to attain the standards. The
EPA also proposed new State
Implementation Plan (SIP) due dates for
the seven areas that failed to attain the
standards by the attainment date. In its
proposal, the EPA offered to hold a
public hearing to hear public testimony
on the proposal if one was requested by
November 29, 2018. The EPA received
multiple requests for a public hearing
that are posted in the docket for the
rulemaking (EPA–HQ–OAR–2018–
0226).
Testifying at the Public Hearing. If
you would like to present oral testimony
at the public hearing, please register by
contacting Ms. Yvonne W. Johnson at
(919) 541–3921 or johnson.yvonnew@
epa.gov. The hearing schedule,
including the list of speakers, periodic
breaks in the testimony throughout the
day, and a lunch hour will be posted
prior to the hearing on the EPA’s
website at https://www.epa.gov/groundlevel-ozone-pollution/2008-ozoneFOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
E:\FR\FM\08FEN1.SGM
08FEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 27 (Friday, February 8, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2854-2858]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-01538]
[[Page 2854]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[EPA-HQ-OLEM-2018-0756, FRL-9988-67-OLEM]
Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Requirements for Generators, Transporters, and Waste
Management Facilities Under the RCRA Hazardous Waste Manifest System
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is planning to
submit the information collection request (ICR), Requirements for
Generators, Transporters, and Waste Management Facilities Under the
RCRA Hazardous Waste Manifest System (EPA ICR No. 0801.23, OMB Control
No. 2050-0039) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review
and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA).
Before doing so, the EPA is soliciting public comments on specific
aspects of the proposed information collection as described below. This
is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through
May 31, 2019. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays
a currently valid OMB control number.
DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before April 9, 2019.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OLEM-2018-0756, online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred
method), by email to rcra-docket@epa.gov, or by mail to: EPA Docket
Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460.
EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bryan Groce, Office of Resource
Conservation and Recovery, Program Implementation and Information
Division, (5304P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (703) 308-8750; fax
number: (703) 308-0514; email address: groce.bryan@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents which explain in detail
the information that EPA will be collecting are available in the public
docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center is 202-566-1744. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA is soliciting
comments and information to enable it to: (i) Evaluate whether the
proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility; (ii) evaluate the accuracy of
the Agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of
information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions
used; (iii) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (iv) minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who are to respond, including
through the use of appropriate automated electronic, mechanical, or
other technological collection techniques or other forms of information
technology, e.g., allowing electronic submission of responses.
EPA is also proposing and soliciting comments and information to:
(1) Improve the precision of waste quantities and units of measure
reported in Items 11 and 12 of the hazardous waste manifest (both paper
and electronic), respectively; (2) enhance the quality of international
shipment data reported on the manifest; and (3) assist EPA with
integrating e-Manifest and biennial reporting (BR) requirements. These
improvements are discussed in more detail below.
Abstract: The hazardous waste manifest (paper and electronic) and
system cover recordkeeping and reporting activities under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and the Hazardous Waste Electronic
Manifest Establishment Act (Pub. L. 112-195). EPA's authority to
require use of a manifest system stems primarily from RCRA 3002(a)(5)
(also RCRA Sections 3003(a)(3) and 3004.) Regulations are found in 40
CFR part 262 (registrant organizations and generators), part 263
(transporters), and parts 264 and 265 (TSDFs). The manifest lists the
wastes that are being shipped and the treatment, storage, or disposal
facility (TSDF) to which the wastes are bound. Generators,
transporters, and TSDFs handling hazardous waste are required to
complete the data requirements for manifests and other reports
primarily to: (1) Track each shipment of hazardous waste from the
generator to a designated facility; (2) provide information
requirements sufficient to allow the use of a manifest in lieu of a DOT
shipping paper or bill of lading, thereby reducing the duplication of
paperwork to the regulated community; (3) provide information to
transporters and waste management facility workers on the hazardous
nature of the waste; (4) inform emergency response teams of the waste's
hazard in the event of an accident, spill, or leak; and (5) ensure that
shipments of hazardous waste are managed properly and delivered to
their designated facilities. The Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest
Establishment Act provided EPA authority to establish the national
electronic hazardous waste manifest system to track hazardous waste
shipments electronically. The Act also provided EPA authority to adopt
regulations that (1) allow it to accept electronic-manifests originated
in the e-Manifest system as the legal equivalent to paper manifests;
(2) require manifest users to submit paper copies of the manifest to
the system for data processing; (3) collect manifests in the e-Manifest
system for hazardous waste subject to federal or state law; and (4) set
up user fees to offset the costs of developing and operating the e-
Manifest system.
Pursuant to the Act, EPA modified the manifest regulations on
February 7, 2014 (The e-Manifest ``One Year Rule''), to authorize use
of electronic manifests (or e-Manifests) for tracking offsite shipments
of hazardous waste from a generator's site to the site of the receipt
and disposition of the hazardous waste. On January 3, 2018, EPA
finalized the e-Manifest User Fee Final Rule which established the fee
methodology that EPA uses to determine the user fees applicable to the
electronic and paper manifests submitted to the national system. EPA
launched the e-Manifest system on June 30, 2018. TSDF and other
receiving facilities must submit manifests, both paper and electronic,
to EPA. In addition to fees for RCRA wastes, EPA is charging TSDFs and
other facilities receiving state-only regulated wastes a fee for each
manifest submitted to the system. Regulations regarding copy submission
requirements for interstate shipments and the
[[Page 2855]]
applicability of e-Manifest system and fees to facilities receiving
state-only regulated wastes are found in 40 CFR part 260 (Hazardous
Waste Management System). Regulations regarding imposition of user fees
on receiving facilities for their manifest submissions, with references
to key fee methodology, fee dispute, and fee sanction requirements are
found in Parts 264 and 265.
For this renewal, EPA is proposing several improvements/
enhancements, discussed below.
I. Improve Precision of Waste Quantities and Units of Measure
A. Use of Decimals
EPA is proposing to modify the manifest instructions to Item 11 of
the manifest to grant manifest users the option to report waste
quantities using decimals or fractions. The effect of this change would
afford generators, and others completing the manifest, the ability to
report more accurate wastes quantities in Item 11 of the manifest using
decimals, rather than rounding partial units to the nearest whole unit
or selecting smaller units of measure (e.g., pounds instead of tons).
EPA has provided guidance on this issue in past manifest
rulemakings. In March 2001, we explained that the Agency has
historically discouraged use of fractions or decimals and referenced
EPA's March 1984 Uniform Manifest Rule, which stated quantity
descriptions should be as accurate as possible without using fractions
or decimals. We also said that states reasonably may have relied upon
EPA's 1984 guidance recommending against fractions and decimals when
they designed their data systems. As a result, many state databases are
not set up to receive data reported as fractions or decimals. The March
2001 proposal, however, acknowledged that a strict exclusion of
fractional quantities could cause waste handlers to report waste
quantities that lacked precision. For example, for waste quantities
reported in tons, a waste quantity reported as 1.5 tons is far more
precise than the alternative of truncating the quantity reported to
only 1 ton or rounding up the quantity reported to 2 tons. As a result,
we proposed to revise the manifest instructions to require only whole
numbers to describe non-bulk shipments but allow use of fractions for
bulk shipments, where necessary.
In its March 2005 final rule, EPA decided against allowing use of
fractions or decimals to report waste quantities on the manifest based
on a few adverse comments received to the proposal. First, state
commenters confirmed that many state databases are not set up to
receive data reported as fractions or decimals. Second, states argued
frequent use of fractional or decimal entries could cause a significant
number of errors resulting from attempts to interpret the fractions or
to determine when and where a decimal point was present. Finally,
states argued waste quantity reporting entries on the manifest could be
misinterpreted and accuracy and precision compromised, because decimals
or fractions may not transmit clearly to the bottom copies of the
carbonless and non-carbon papers of the manifest forms.
Although EPA elected not to adopt use of fractions or decimals in
the March 2005 final rule, we are revisiting this issue in light of
implementation of the e-Manifest system, which the Agency launched on
June 30, 2018. The issue of whether to allow decimals was also raised
during the September 2017 e-Manifest Advisory Board meeting. Hazardous
waste shipments now can be tracked electronically in e-Manifest and,
unlike the paper manifest form, the e-Manifest system could be designed
to accept fractions or decimal entries in Item 11 of the manifest
without concern of misinterpretation of waste quantities due to decimal
misplacement. Additionally, all manifests, paper and electronic, are
now submitted to one central system--EPA's e-Manifest system, which is
then used to disseminate manifest data to the states. This central
collection may alleviate some of the state-specific issues related to
integrating decimals into the state databases. Furthermore, EPA
believes the allowance of decimals in Item 11 of the manifest will
greatly enhance the accuracy of waste quantities reported to EPA.
Consequently, EPA requests comment on whether the agency should revise
the manifest instructions to allow reporting of decimals or fractions
in Item 11 of the manifest.
Specifically, EPA asks, would use of decimals or fractions present
issues for paper manifests? Should EPA limit use of decimals for
certain shipment types--i.e., limit use of fractions and decimals to
certain shipments as proposed in March 2001 by granting use of decimals
for bulk shipments (greater than 119 gallons), but require use of whole
numbers for non-bulk shipments (less than or equal to 119 gallons)?
What are the impacts to state and industry database systems, if EPA
elects to allow use of decimals for waste quantity descriptions?
B. Alternative Set of Units of Measure
In addition, or as an alternative, to using decimals or fractions
on the manifest, we believe the regulated community could more
precisely report waste quantity by also using smaller units of measure
(e.g., ounces, grams, milliliters). The current set of units of measure
specified in the manifest instructions to Item 12 of the manifest limit
use to gallons, kilograms, liters, metric tons, cubic meters, pounds,
tons, or cubic yards. This set can cause waste quantity reporting
imprecision if waste quantity data must be rounded to the nearest whole
number. If, however, the current set also included smaller units of
measure, waste quantity reporting precision may possibly be improved if
quantities are expressed as whole numbers. EPA requests comment on
whether the agency should revise Table II of the manifest instructions
to Item 12 to include ounces, grams, and milliliters. Additionally, EPA
asks what other smaller units of measure could offer greater waste
quantity reporting precision?
II. Enhance Quality of International Shipment Data
A. Addition of a New Field for Consent Numbers for Import and Export
Shipments
EPA is proposing to add a new data field on the paper and
electronic manifest so hazardous waste stream consent numbers can be
recorded in a separate, distinct field on a manifest. Current export
regulations at 40 CFR 262.83(c)(3) require exporters to record the
consent numbers on the manifest for each waste stream listed in Item 9b
of the manifest. Similarly, import-related regulations at 40 CFR
264.71(a)(3)(i) require U.S. facilities receiving hazardous waste
subject to 40 CFR part 262, subpart H, from a foreign entity to record
the relevant waste stream consent number from consent documentation
supplied by EPA to the facility for each waste listed on the manifest.
Currently, EPA has recommended listing the consent numbers in Item 14
``Special Handling Instructions and Additional Information'' on the
paper manifest form due to the lack of dedicated fields for listing
such numbers. For electronic manifests, consent numbers are collected
in e-Manifest for each waste stream as part of Item 9b, the U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT) shipping description.
EPA believes the addition of a separate data field to the paper and
electronic manifest for consent numbers would facilitate the electronic
upload or manual data entry of data from paper export and import
manifests as the manifest would more clearly list the
[[Page 2856]]
consent number for each waste stream. The additional field would also
facilitate the retrieval of import manifest data from e-Manifest for
all manifested import shipments; the retrieval of export manifest data
could also occur once EPA begins collecting export manifests in the e-
Manifest system.
EPA requests comment on its proposal to add a new data element on
the manifest for the consent number for each waste stream.
B. Capturing Exporter EPA ID Number on the Manifest
EPA explained in the 2018 e-Manifest User Fee Final Rule that it
has not yet determined who in the export shipment chain of custody
(i.e., primary exporter vs. transporter moving waste from U.S. or other
entity) is best suited for making the submission of the export manifest
to the system and paying the requisite processing fee. EPA also
explained that the Agency plans to consult the Advisory Board on future
e-Manifest system enhancements and expansions and thus will bring the
issue of export manifests before the Advisory Board in the near future.
If, however, EPA ultimately decides that the exporter is the party best
suited to be billed for export manifests collected in e-Manifest, the
current manifest doesn't provide adequate information required to
invoice them.
While EPA has designated a specific data element on the manifest
form to report transporter ID numbers (Items 6 and 7 for Transporter 1
and Transporter 2), it has not designated a similar data element for
exporter ID numbers. Current export regulations at 40 CFR 262.83(c)
require the exporter to comply with the manifest requirements of 40 CFR
262.20 through 262.23 except that in lieu of the name, site address,
and EPA ID number of the designated permitted facility, the exporter
must enter the name and site address of the foreign receiving facility,
the exporter must check the export box and enter the U.S. port of exit
(city and state) from the United States in Item 16, and as previously
discussed, the exporter must record the waste stream consent number for
each waste listed on the manifest. If the exporter is the generator or
the site from where the export manifest is initiated, the exporter's
information will be listed in Item 1 and Item 5. But if the exporter is
a recognized trader located separate from the site initiating the
export shipment, then while the exporter must ensure that the items
noted above are recorded on the manifest, Item 1 and Item 5 will
reflect the generator or shipping site's information rather than the
exporter's information.
Therefore, in anticipation of promulgating a regulation requiring
the collection of export manifests in e-Manifest, we are considering
revising the manifest instructions for both the paper and electronic
forms so that if the responsible exporter is separate from the site
initiating the export shipment, the exporter can clearly identify
itself by entering its EPA ID number on the manifest, either in
addition to or in lieu of the EPA ID number for the generator site.
Alternatively, EPA could rely on the waste stream consent numbers
already required to be recorded on the manifest, as each waste stream
consent number is associated with a unique U.S. exporter in EPA's Waste
Import Export Tracking System (WIETS). Relying on the waste stream
consent numbers would require e-Manifest obtaining reference data on
the exporter EPA ID number for each waste stream consent number from
WIETS, while adding a new element for entering the exporter's EPA ID
number could be used directly by e-Manifest.
EPA requests comment on whether the agency should revise the
instructions for export manifests to clarify that the primary exporter
must enter its EPA ID in Item 1 and its name and address on the left
side of Item 5 and supply the name and address of the generator site on
the right side of Item 5, if not the same as primary exporter, or, if
an additional field should be added to capture the primary exporter's
EPA ID number so that the generator site's EPA ID number is retained in
Item 1 of the manifest. Or, alternatively, should EPA rely on the waste
stream consent numbers from WIETS instead of adding a new data element
on the manifest?
C. How To Incorporate New Fields on Manifest and Whether To Consolidate
With Movement Document
How To Incorporate New Fields on Paper Manifests
As mentioned above, EPA is considering several data element
additions to the manifest (both paper and electronic) for international
shipments. While the proposed additions for consent numbers are being
implemented easily in the e-Manifest system for electronic tracking,
these additions would be problematic with the paper forms. The one-page
paper manifest is already full of many data elements and does not have
much space left for new additions. EPA requests comment on whether
there are other options to accommodate these additions on the paper
forms.
For example, is another option for international shipments to add
space to Item 16, the International Shipment field, on the paper
manifest to accommodate the four, 12-digit consent numbers
corresponding to each of the four waste streams listed in Item 9 of the
manifest? As an alternative, could we revise the Continuation Sheet so
that the International Shipment Field is removed from the paper
manifest and appears instead on a Continuation Sheet with an expanded
area that is able to more easily accommodate four 12-digit consent
numbers and the primary exporter's EPA ID number, if necessary? This
would free up space on the paper manifest form for other tracking
elements, including data elements needed for biennial reporting, or
additional space needed for Item 14 entries. Both options would require
revisions to the instructions for export manifests to clarify that the
primary exporter must enter its EPA ID in Item 1 and its name and
address on the left side of Item 5 and supply the name and address of
the generator site on the right side of Item 5, if not the same as the
primary exporter. Alternatively, we could modify the instructions under
both options to clarify that the primary exporter must enter its EPA ID
number in a separate new data field so that the generator site's EPA ID
number is retained in Item 1 of the manifest. With respect to import
manifests, the manifest instructions would also need to be revised to
instruct the receiving facility to list the consent numbers for each
waste stream.
How To Incorporate Import and Export Data for the Movement Document on
the Manifest
Besides the proposed revision to the Continuation Sheet for
international shipment information, should EPA also revise the
Continuation Sheet with a more expanded International Field that is
sufficient to collect all the information that is required on a
movement document? For hazardous waste shipments leaving the U.S., the
hazardous waste export regulations require both an export manifest and
movement document to accompany the shipment. For hazardous waste
shipments entering the U.S., the hazardous waste import regulations
similarly require both an import manifest and movement document to
accompany the shipment. The movement document must accompany the
shipment from its initiation in the country of export to its delivery
to the receiving facility in the country of
[[Page 2857]]
import. The movement document contains many of the same data required
on the manifest; both documents identify the site from which the
shipment originates in the country of export, the wastes being exported
or imported, the applicable consent number for each waste stream from
the relevant Acknowledge of Consent letters, the transporters or other
persons taking custody of the waste during its movement, and the
receiving facility in the country of import.
The movement document also includes some additional information
currently not required on export manifests. The additional information
includes, but is not limited to, (1) more contact information for the
company originating the shipment (if different than the exporter),
exporter, transporters and handlers of the export shipment, foreign
importer (if different than the foreign receiving facility), and
foreign receiving facility; (2) international recovery or disposal
operation codes for the hazardous waste management processes to be used
at the consignee facility, as defined in 40 CFR 262.81; (3) and
international waste codes from the OECD Decision's Green, or Amber
Lists, as incorporated by reference in 40 CFR 260.11. Both the manifest
and movement document require the name and identifying information
about the company initiating the waste shipment (i.e., EPA
identification number, address, telephone). The export manifest,
however, would not include the exporter's information if the exporter
is not the generator but is a recognized trader located separate from
the site initiating the export shipment; the movement document includes
this information and also requires the email address, phone number and
fax number (if they have one) for the exporter, shipping site company
(if different than the exporter), transporters, foreign importer (if
different than the receiving facility) and receiving site. Second, the
movement document also requires additional information regarding the
technologies to be employed by the foreign receiving facility, and the
applicable international recovery or disposal operations must be
included on the movement document as defined in 40 CFR 262.81; these
codes serve the same purpose as the management method codes for
domestic hazardous shipments, which describe the type of hazardous
waste management system used to treat, recover, or dispose of a
hazardous waste. Third, both the export manifest and movement document
must include in the description of waste sections of the documents the
RCRA waste codes and the applicable UN/DOT identification numbers.
Besides this description information, the movement document must also
include the applicable OECD waste codes from the Green or Amber Lists
of wastes as set forth in the OECD Council Decision and incorporated by
reference in 40 CFR 260.11(g). Finally, another difference between
export manifests and movement documents is that movement documents must
also be signed by the foreign receiving facility. The signed copy is
then used to provide the exporter with confirmation of receipt. Lastly,
any rejection of a waste in the shipment must be noted on the movement
document.
If EPA expanded the continuation sheet to include space for: (1)
Additional contact information for the generator, exporter,
transporters and handlers, importer (if different than the receiving
facility) and receiving facility; (2) additional international codes
for the recovery or disposal processes to be used at the consignee
facility; (3) additional international waste codes from the OECD
Decision's Green or Amber Lists; and (4) the foreign receiving
facility's signature, it would eliminate the necessity for export
shipments to be tracked with separate manifests and movement documents.
Expansion of the Continuation Sheet to accommodate these movement
document data elements would also aid in the electronic sharing of
shipment data with the waste handlers and the national governments
involved in the exports.
III. Biennial Reporting and e-Manifest Integration
Pursuant to the Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest Establishment
Act, EPA is required to build the e-Manifest system to afford users the
ability to report hazardous waste receipt data applicable to the
biennial hazardous waste report in e-Manifest. To meet the conditions
under the e-Manifest Act, EPA is proposing to revise the paper manifest
and continuation sheet (EPA Form 8700-22 and 8700-22A) to include
source and form codes and density information.
The current manifest form already collects certain waste receipt
data for biennial reporting: Facility's EPA ID number (Item 1);
facility's name and address (Item 5); total quantities of waste shipped
off-site for hazardous management (Item 11); and management method
codes for hazardous waste treatment, storage, and disposal (Item 19).
Generators and other manifest preparers can voluntarily report specific
gravity or density for each waste stream in Item 14 ``Special Handling
Instructions and Additional Information'' on the paper manifest form
due to the lack of dedicated fields for listing such information.
However, the paper manifest form does not provide BR data that
describes how the hazardous waste originated (source code) nor does it
provide waste information about the physical form or chemical
composition of the hazardous waste (form code). The densities for each
waste stream must also be reported for BR purposes if total hazardous
waste quantities are reported using volumetric measure (gallons,
liters, or cubic yards). (Note: The e-Manifest system allows users to
voluntarily report source and form codes, and density data in the
system.) If adopted, certain hazardous waste generators would be
required to enter source and form codes and density information on the
manifest for each RCRA waste listed on paper and electronic manifests.
Currently, federal regulations only require large quantity generators
(LQGs) to submit the Biennial Report (see Sec. 262.41). Small quantity
generators (SQGs) and very small quantity generators (VSQGs) are not
subject to the federal biennial reporting requirements, but such
generators could be subject to BR requirements under state law since
states can have more stringent reporting requirements. Thus, hazardous
waste generators who are required to complete the Waste Generation and
Management (GM) Form under federal law or state law would be expected
to enter source and form codes and density information, if necessary,
on paper and electronic manifests. Because the e-Manifest Act extends
to federally and state-regulated wastes requiring manifests, the e-
Manifest system also collects manifests for state-only regulated
hazardous wastes shipped on a manifest. Therefore, if a waste has a
manifesting requirement under the law of either the origination
(generator) state or the destination state, EPA would also require the
generator of such wastes to enter source and form codes and density
information, if applicable, on paper and electronic manifests.
Similarly, an entity preparing a manifest on behalf of the generator,
meeting the BR conditions above, would be expected to also enter source
and form codes and density information, if applicable, on the paper and
electronic manifests.
EPA believes the addition of these BR data elements to the paper
manifest form is an important step towards full integration of e-
Manifest with BR. These codes will enable users to report waste receipt
data in the e-Manifest system
[[Page 2858]]
and ultimately assist them in the preparation of their biennial
hazardous waste report. EPA requests comment on its proposal to require
the reporting of form and source codes and density information, if
applicable, on the manifest; these codes and density data would also be
mandatory for manifest completion in e-Manifest. EPA requests comment
on how the Agency should add the new data elements on the paper
manifest for BR integration. Should EPA expand Item 19 of the manifest
to include source code, form code, and density information, or create
separate new data fields for each? Are the additions of these elements
to the manifest sufficient enough to ensure that waste receipt data can
be collected in the e-Manifest system and ultimately used for biennial
hazardous waste reporting? If these additions are insufficient for BR
integration, what other data entries must be recorded on the manifest
for Biennial Reporting purposes?
EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as
appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for
review and approval. At that time, EPA will issue another Federal
Register notice to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the
opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB.
Form numbers: Form 8700-22 and 8700-22A.
Respondents/affected entities: Business or other for-profit.
Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (RCRA 3002(a)(5)).
Estimated number of respondents: 203,927.
Frequency of response: Each shipment.
Total estimated burden: 2,608,292 hours per year. Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).
Total estimated cost: $131,925,993 (per year), includes $38,784,093
annualized capital and operation & maintenance costs.
Changes in estimates: The burden hours are likely to increase but
not substantially, if EPA adopts the proposed manifest modifications
detailed above in the Supplementary Information section.
Dated: December 11, 2018.
Barnes Johnson,
Director, Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery.
[FR Doc. 2019-01538 Filed 2-7-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P