List of Revisions

to September 14, 2006 OMB Review Draft

of the Definition of Solid Waste Supplemental Proposal

Page numbers refer to March 2, 2007 redline version.

The Agency responsible for suggesting each revision is indicated in
parentheses.  All minor editorial corrections not listed here were made
by EPA.

p. 1-2	New boilerplate language.  (EPA)

p. 4 – 5	[Preamble outline and subsequent section headings]  Clarify
how the proposed changes in the preamble track with the regulatory
language (OMB)

p.5	Clarify statutory authority.  (EPA)

p.5-7	Revise preamble language so that the description of the regulatory
revisions better match the regulations.  (OMB)

p. 7	[Inserted sentence starting “It is important to note. . .”]   
Explain that the tolling exclusion is not subject to the requirements of
the transfer-based exclusion (e.g., financial assurance) (DOC)

p. 21	Remove phrase referring to a plan to investigate the need for peer
review (EPA)

p. 21,23, 45,

51 	Replace the term “responsible” with “many”(OMB)

p. 27 – 29, 36	Update discussion of environmental problems study with
QA/QC’d data (EPA)

p. 38 – 39	Revise the preamble to match the regulatory language (SBA)

p. 39	[Paragraph beginning “EPA notes. . .”] Clarify that the
“tolling” exclusion is not limited to just to specialty batch
contracts.  If other industries have contracts that perform similarly
they should also be eligible (OMB)

p. 42	Clarify how the notification requirement for the exclusion of
materials recycled under the control of the generator is not a condition
of the exclusion, and explain EPA’s authority for this requirement. 
(OMB)

p. 45	Replace “ample” with “sufficient” and “Agency” with
“generator” (OMB)

p. 46	Add further explanation of why brokers would not be allowed (SBA)

p. 49-50	 Ask for comment on requiring generators to retain
“confirmation of receipt” instead of proposing it. (SBA)

p. 50, 53-54	Ask for comment on recordkeeping and certification
requirements for “reasonable efforts” instead of proposing them. 
(OMB)

p. 51-52	Revise discussion of current auditing practices (OMB)

p. 52-60	Revise “reasonable efforts” discussion to ask for comment
on including questions in the regulation instead of proposing them. 
Revise questions to be more objective and add discussion clarifying how
they would be implemented. Add discussion of using third-party
information for reasonable efforts (OMB)

p. 53	Remove irrelevant paragraph [Beginning with “It should be noted
that...”] regarding permits not being a guarantee there will be no
problems (OMB)

p. 60-61	Clarify requirement for transfer-based exclusion that materials
managed in a land-based unit must be contained, parallel to the
generator-controlled exclusion.  [Section labeling “Storage
conditions”] (SBA)

p. 64	Provide more information on Subpart H financial assurance (SBA)

p. 65-66	Provide more information on whether Subpart H requirements are
appropriate to recycling facilities (OMB)

p. 66	Provide more information on the possible $5 million alternative
financial assurance requirements. (SBA, OMB)

p. 66-67	[Paragraph beginning “Finally, the Agency anticipates that. .
.”]  Clarify that reclamation facility may claim the exclusion even if
the generator does not. (EPA)

p. 67	[new section titled “Enforcement”]   Make the potential break
in RCRA liability for generators who perform reasonable efforts clearer.
(DOD) 

p. 70-71	Request comment on the benefits and drawbacks of codifying
legitimacy. (OMB)

p. 72	Revise legitimacy discussion to match new regulatory language. 
(OMB) 	

p. 73	Make clear that management in “supersacks” would not preclude
a legitimacy determination.  (SBA)

p. 74	Explain that TARS are most relevant when they affect the product
performance or human health and the environment.  (SBA)

p. 80	Make it clear how the non-waste determinations are different from
the proposed exclusions. (SBA)

p. 80	Explain that regulated community can still request policy guidance
on solid waste determinations.  (DOD)

p. 82	Remove requirement that material be “integrated” into the
production process (for the non-waste determination for material
recycled in a continuous industrial process). (SBA)

p. 83, 84, 85	Clarify that releases are significant “from either a
statistical or from a health and environmental risk perspective.”
(SBA)

p. 85	Replace “tolling arrangement” with “contractual
arrangement” (SBA)

p. 88	Clarify that the scrap metal exclusion would be retained (DOD)

p. 90-91	Clarify that there are alternatives to a corrective action
permit (DOD)

p. 95-96	Delete discussion of possibly requiring additional data
reporting burden solely for performance measurement purposes (OMB)

p. 99-100	Revise State Authorization section to clarify how the proposed
rule relates to state programs. (OMB)

p. 102-106	Provide additional information on the impacts of other
options and why we chose the proposed options and the uncertainties
involved. (OMB)

p. 106	Add ICR number (OMB)

p. 113	Revise regulations for consistency with current CFR (EPA)

p. 114	Remove requirement that material be “essential” and
“integrated” into the production process (for the non-waste
determination for material recycled in a continuous industrial process)
(SBA)

p. 115	Clarify that releases are significant “from either a
statistical or from a health and environmental risk perspective” (SBA)

p. 116-117	Move notification requirement for materials recycled under
the control of the generator out of 40 CFR 261.2 to make clear it is a
requirement, not a condition.

p. 117	260.10 defines “hazardous secondary material generated and
reclaimed under the control of the generator.”  Make sure subsequent
regulatory text matches.  (DOD)

p. 119	Revised legitimacy regulatory language to make clear that
although the proposed factors in 40 CFR 261.2(g)(3) need to be
considered, they are not mandatory. (OMB)

p. 119-120	Revise regulatory language to keep exclusions parallel (SBA)

p. 120-121	Revise reasonable efforts requirement, removing questions,
recordkeeping and certification provisions and adding a provision that
third-party information can be used. (OMB)

p. 121	Add requirement to transfer-based exclusion that materials
managed in a land-based unit must be contained, parallel to the
generator-controlled exclusion (SBA)

p. 121	Clarify that reclaimers can choose practices that contain the
materials rather than having to use analogous raw material practices.
(SBA)

p. 122	Clarify that reclamation facility may claim the exclusion even if
the generator does not. (EPA)

DRAFT – DELIBERATIVE – FOIA EXEMPT

