1
SUPPORTING
STATEMENT
FOR
EPA
INFORMATION
COLLECTION
REQUEST
#
1381.07
"
SOLID
WASTE
DISPOSAL
FACILITY
CRITERIA
(
RCRA
PART
258)"
2
3
SUPPORTING
STATEMENT
FOR
EPA
INFORMATION
COLLECTION
REQUEST
#
1381
"
SOLID
WASTE
DISPOSAL
FACILITY
CRITERIA
(
RCRA
PART
258)"
******************************************************************************
1.
IDENTIFICATION
OF
THE
INFORMATION
COLLECTION
4
1(
a)
TITLE
AND
NUMBER
OF
THE
INFORMATION
COLLECTION
4
1(
b)
CHARACTERIZATION
OF
THE
INFORMATION
COLLECTION
4
2.
NEED
FOR
AND
USE
OF
THE
COLLECTION
6
2(
a)
NEED
AND
AUTHORITY
FOR
THE
COLLECTION
6
2(
b)
USE
AND
USERS
OF
THE
DATA
6
3.
THE
RESPONDENTS
AND
THE
INFORMATION
REQUESTED
6
3(
a)
RESPONDENTS/
SIC
CODES
6
3(
b)
INFORMATION
REQUESTED
7
4.
THE
INFORMATION
COLLECTED­­
AGENCY
ACTIVITIES,
COLLECTION
METHODOLOGY,
AND
INFORMATION
MANAGEMENT
14
4(
a)
AGENCY
ACTIVITIES
14
4(
b)
COLLECTION
METHODOLOGY
AND
MANAGEMENT
15
4(
c)
SMALL
ENTITY
FLEXIBILITY
15
4(
d)
COLLECTION
SCHEDULE
15
5.
NON­
DUPLICATION,
CONSULTATIONS,
AND
OTHER
COLLECTION
CRITERIA
5(
a)
NON­
DUPLICATION
15
5(
b)
CONSULTATIONS
16
5(
c)
EFFECTS
OF
LESS
FREQUENT
COLLECTION
16
5(
d)
GENERAL
GUIDELINES
16
5(
e)
CONFIDENTIALITY
16
5(
f)
SENSITIVE
QUESTIONS
16
6.
ESTIMATING
THE
BURDEN
AND
COST
OF
THE
COLLECTION
16
6(
a)
ESTIMATING
RESPONDENT
BURDEN
16
6(
b)
ESTIMATING
RESPONDENT
COSTS
23
6(
c)
ESTIMATING
AGENCY
BURDEN
AND
COST
24
6(
d)
BOTTOM
LINE
BURDEN
HOURS
AND
COSTS
25
6(
e)
REASONS
FOR
CHANGE
IN
BURDEN
25
6(
f)
BURDEN
STATEMENT
26
7.
EXHIBITS
27
4
1.
IDENTIFICATION
OF
THE
INFORMATION
COLLECTION
l(
a)
TITLE
AND
NUMBER
OF
THE
INFORMATION
COLLECTION
This
ICR
is
entitled
"
Solid
Waste
Disposal
Facility
Criteria"
(
RCRA
Part
258),
ICR
#
1381.

l(
b)
CHARACTERIZATION
OF
THE
INFORMATION
COLLECTION
The
1984
Hazardous
and
Solid
Waste
Amendments
(
HSWA)
of
the
Resource
Conservation
and
Recovery
Act
(
RCRA),
as
amended,
mandated
that
the
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
EPA)
revise
the
Criteria
for
Solid
Waste
Disposal
Facilities
that
may
receive
household
hazardous
waste
and
(
conditionally
exempt)
small
quantity
generator
wastes.
EPA
submitted
a
Report
to
Congress
in
October
1988
that
assessed
the
impacts
on
human
health
and
the
environment
associated
with
Subtitle
D
facilities.
The
study
found
that
the
revised
Criteria
for
municipal
solid
waste
landfills
(
MSWLFs)
were
necessary
to
protect
human
health
and
the
environment.

On
August
30,
1988,
EPA
proposed
the
Solid
Waste
Disposal
Facility
Criteria
that
delineate
requirements
for
MSWLFs,
including
those
that
co­
dispose
of
sewage
sludge
and
that
receive
ash
from
municipal
waste
combustion
(
MWC)
facilities
(
including
ash
monofills).
The
final
rule
was
promulgated
on
October
9,
1991
and
the
final
regulations
implementing
these
criteria
are
codified
in
the
Code
of
Federal
Regulations
(
CFR)
Title
40,
Part
258.

When
the
Agency
promulgated
the
solid
waste
disposal
facility
criteria
final
rule
on
October
9,
1991
(
56
FR
50978),
it
included
an
exemption
for
owners
and
operators
of
certain
small
MSWLF
units
from
the
design
and
groundwater
monitoring
requirements
of
the
criteria.
To
qualify
for
the
exemption,
the
small
landfill
could
only
accept
less
than
twenty
tons
of
municipal
solid
waste
per
day
(
based
on
an
annual
average),
have
no
evidence
of
existing
groundwater
contamination,
and
either:
(
1)
serve
a
community
that
experiences
an
annual
interruption
of
at
least
three
consecutive
months
of
surface
transportation
that
prevents
access
to
a
regional
waste
management
facility,
or
(
2)
be
located
in
an
area
that
annually
receives
less
than
or
equal
to
25
inches
of
precipitation
and
serve
a
community
that
has
no
practicable
waste
management
alternative.
In
adopting
this
limited
exemption,
the
Agency
believed
it
had
complied
with
the
statutory
requirement
to
protect
human
health
and
the
environment,
taking
into
account
the
practicable
capabilities
of
small
landfill
owners
and
operators.

In
January
1992,
the
Sierra
Club
and
the
Natural
Resources
Defense
Council
(
NRDC)
filed
a
petition
with
the
U.
S.
Court
of
Appeals,
District
of
Columbia
Circuit,
for
review
of
the
Subtitle
D
criteria.
On
May
7,
1993,
the
Court
of
Appeals
determined
in
Sierra
Club
v.
United
States
Environmental
Protection
Agency
992
F.
2d
337
(
D.
C.
Cir.
1993)
that
under
RCRA
§
4010(
c),
the
only
factor
EPA
could
consider
in
determining
whether
facilities
must
monitor
groundwater
was
whether
such
monitoring
was
"
necessary
to
detect
contamination,"
not
whether
such
monitoring
is
"
practicable."
Thus,
the
Court
vacated
the
small
landfill
exemption
as
it
5
pertained
to
groundwater
monitoring,
and
remanded
that
portion
of
the
final
rule
to
the
Agency
for
further
consideration.

Consequently,
as
part
of
the
Agency's
October
1,
1993
final
rules
delaying
the
effective
date
of
the
MSWLF
criteria
(
58
FR
51536;
October
1,
1993),
EPA
rescinded
the
exemption
from
groundwater
monitoring
for
qualifying
small
MSWLFs.
Also
at
that
time,
EPA
delayed
the
effective
date
of
the
MSWLF
criteria
for
qualifying
small
MSWLFs
for
two
years
(
until
October
9,
1995)
to
allow
owners
and
operators
of
such
small
MSWLFs
adequate
time
to
decide
whether
to
continue
to
operate
in
light
of
the
Court's
ruling,
and
to
prepare
financially
for
the
added
costs
if
they
decided
to
continue
to
operate.
On
October
1,
1995
issued
a
final
rule
extending
the
general
compliance
date
of
the
MSWLF
criteria
until
October
9,
1997,
for
qualifying
small
MSWLFs.

On
March
26,
1996,
the
President
signed
the
"
Land
Disposal
Program
Flexibility
Act
of
1996"
(
LDPFA)
that
reinstated
the
exemption
from
groundwater
monitoring
for
qualifying
small
MSWLFs.
EPA
codified
this
requirement
on
September
25,
1996
(
61
FR
50410).
The
LDPFA
also
directed
the
Agency
to
provide
additional
flexibility
to
small
MSWLFs
in
the
form
of
the
minimum
frequency
of
daily
cover,
the
minimum
frequency
of
monitoring
for
methane,
and
the
infiltration
barriers
in
the
final
cover.
These
requirements
were
codified
on
July
29,
1997
(
62
FR
40708).
The
effective
date
of
these
requirements
was
confirmed
to
be
October
27,
1997
on
October
2,
1997
(
62
FR
5160).

On
October
1,
1993,
EPA
issued
a
final
rule
that
delayed
the
compliance
date
for
the
Financial
Assurance
(
Subpart
G)
requirements
until
April
9,
1995.
On
October
18,
1994,
the
Agency
extended
the
compliance
date
for
the
financial
assurance
requirements
until
April
9,
1996.
The
compliance
date
for
financial
assurance
was
again
extended
by
the
Agency
on
April
7,
1995.
A
requirement
of
the
LDPFA
directed
the
Agency
to
establish
additional
flexibility
for
Financial
Assurance.
The
additional
flexibility
was
codified
by
establishing
Financial
Assurance
Mechanisms
for
Local
Governments
(
61
FR
60328,
November
27,
1996)
and
Financial
Assurance
Mechanisms
for
Corporate
Owners
and
Operators
(
63
FR
17706,
April
10,
1998).
The
effective
date
for
the
financial
assurance
requirements
was
April
10,
1998.

Public
Notice
In
compliance
with
the
Paperwork
Reduction
Act
(
44
U.
S.
C.
3501
et
seq.),
the
Agency
notified
the
public
through
a
Federal
Register
notice
on
the
resubmission
of
this
ICR
on
March
6,
2003
(
68
FR
10721).
No
comments
were
received.

The
attached
supporting
statement
provides
justification
for
the
information
collection
requirements
included
in
the
final
Part
258
MSWLF
Criteria.
This
supporting
statement
updates
the
ICRs
that
were
approved
by
Office
of
Management
and
Budget
(
OMB)
on
March
4,
1992;
June
21,
1995;
January
27,
1997;
and
August
28,2000.

In
general,
the
Part
258
Criteria
require
that
the
following
information
be
recorded
in
the
6
MSWLF
operating
record
as
it
becomes
available
and
that
this
information
be
retained
by
the
owner
or
operator
of
each
MSWLF
unit
and
made
available
to
the
State
upon
request:

(
1)
Demonstrations
that
facilities
meet
the
requirements
for
the
"
small"
landfill
exemption
(
Section
258.1(
f)(
2));

(
2)
Any
location
restriction
demonstration
required
by
Subpart
B
(
Sections
258.10
­
258.16);

(
3)
Training
procedures,
monitoring
results,
and
demonstrations
required
by
Subpart
C
(
Sections
258.20,
21,
and
23);

(
4)
Demonstrations
required
by
Subpart
D
(
Sections
258.40­
258.41);

(
5)
Any
monitoring,
testing,
or
analytical
data
required
by
Subpart
E
(
Sections
258.50
­
258.58);

(
6)
Closure
and
post­
closure
care
plans
and
any
monitoring,
testing,
or
analytical
data
required
by
Sections
258.60
and
258.61;
and
(
7)
Any
cost
estimates
and
financial
assurance
documentation
required
under
Subpart
G
(
Sections
258.71
­
258.73).

A
brief
summary
of
the
information
collection
requirements
associated
with
the
above­
listed
areas
is
provided
in
Section
3.
A
more
specific
discussion
of
the
data
elements
and
respondent
activities
associated
with
each
of
the
information
collection
requirements
is
presented
in
Section
6.

2.
NEED
FOR
AND
USE
OF
THE
COLLECTION
2(
a)
NEED
AND
AUTHORITY
FOR
THE
COLLECTION
Owners
or
operators
of
new
MSWLFs,
existing
MSWLFs,
and
lateral
expansions
of
existing
MSWLFs,
in
complying
with
40
CFR
Part
258,
are
required
to
record
information
in
the
facility
operating
record,
pursuant
to
§
258.29,
as
it
becomes
available.
The
operating
record
must
be
supplied
to
the
State
as
requested
and
retained
until
the
end
of
the
post­
closure
care
period
of
the
MSWLF.

2(
b)
USE
AND
USERS
OF
THE
DATA
The
information
collected
will
be
used
primarily
by
the
States
to
regulate
and
ensure
that
owners
or
operators
of
MSWLFs
are
complying
with
the
Part
258
Criteria.
The
information
collected
will
be
used
by
the
State
Director
to
confirm
owner
or
operator
compliance
with
the
7
regulations
under
Part
258.

3.
THE
RESPONDENTS
AND
THE
INFORMATION
REQUESTED
3(
a)
RESPONDENTS/
SIC
CODES
The
groups
affected
by
the
requirements
in
Part
258
are
owners
or
operators
of
new
MSWLFs,
existing
MSWLFs,
and
lateral
expansions
of
existing
MSWLFs.
These
owners
or
operators
could
include
Federal,
State,
and
local
governments,
and
private
waste
management
companies.
Facilities
in
the
following
SIC
codes
may
be
affected
by
this
rule:

922
Local
governments
495
Sanitary
services
282
Industrial
inorganic
chemicals
281
Industrial
organic
chemicals
287
Miscellaneous
These
five
groups
represent
the
most
identifiable
of
the
several
hundred
SIC
codes.
Other
major
groups
affected
by
these
requirements
are
construction,
manufacturing,
services,
and
agricultural
products
and
are
included
under
the
"
miscellaneous"
designation.

This
information
request
covers
the
time
period
from
September
1,
2003
until
August
31,
2006.
The
earlier
version
of
ICR
#
1381
reported
the
one­
time
burden
for
all
MSWLFs;
therefore,
this
burden
is
not
reported
in
this
update.
One­
time
burdens
are
reported
for
new
MSWLFs,
but
the
one­
time
burdens
for
existing
MSWLFs
are
not
included.

3(
b)
INFORMATION
REQUESTED
The
following
subsections
summarize
the
recordkeeping
requirements,
as
well
as
reporting
(
notification)
requirements
included
in
the
MSWLF
Criteria.
EPA
deliberately
did
not
use
design
standards
to
prescribe
specific
conditions
or
components.
This
will
allow
owners
and
operators
maximum
flexibility
in
developing
site
specific
procedures,
which
satisfy
existing
State
requirements
and
provisions
of
the
revised
Criteria.

SUBPART
A
­
GENERAL
Section
258.1(
f)(
2)
­
Small
or
Remote
MSWLFs
Owners
or
operators
of
new
MSWLFs,
existing
MSWLFs,
and
lateral
expansions
of
existing
MSWLFs
that
receive
less
than
20
tons
of
waste
per
day,
show
no
evidence
of
groundwater
contamination,
and
is
either
in
a
remote
area
or
in
an
arid
area
of
the
country
can
be
exempted
from
Subpart
D
(
Design)
and
Subpart
E
(
Ground­
Water
Monitoring
and
Corrective
Action)
of
the
MSWLF
Criteria.
Owners
or
operators
of
these
qualifying
small
MSWLFs
must
place
in
their
operating
record
documentation
demonstrating
that
they
meet
the
exemption
8
qualifications.
Remote
areas
are
defined
at
§
258.1(
f)(
1)(
i)
as
"
a
community
that
experiences
an
annual
interruption
of
at
least
three
consecutive
months
of
surface
transportation
that
prevents
access
to
a
regional
waste
management
facility."
An
arid
area
is
defined
at
§
258.1(
f)(
1)(
ii)
as
"
an
area
that
annually
receives
less
than
or
equal
to
25
inches
of
precipitation"
and
"
has
no
practicable
waste
management
alternative."

Section
258.1(
f)(
3)
­
Small
or
Remote
MSWLFs
Owners
or
operators
of
new
MSWLFs,
existing
MSWLFs,
and
lateral
expansions
of
existing
MSWLFs
that
receive
the
exemption
in
§
258.1(
f)(
2),
and
subsequently
discover
groundwater
contamination
resulting
from
their
MSWLF
unit,
must
notify
the
State
Director
of
such
contamination
and,
thereafter,
comply
with
Subpart
D
and
E.

SUBPART
B
­
LOCATION
RESTRICTIONS
Section
258.10
­
Airport
Safety
Owners
or
operators
of
new
MSWLFs,
existing
MSWLFs,
and
lateral
expansions
must
document
(
record)
in
their
operating
record
demonstrations
that
show
the
MSWLF
meets
the
location
restrictions
regarding
airports
(
§
258.10).
The
owner
or
operator
must
notify
the
State
Director
when
an
exemption
demonstration
is
recorded
in
the
operating
record.
Owners
or
operators
of
new
MSWLFs
and
lateral
expansions
that
are
regulated
under
the
location
requirements
pertaining
to
airports
(
§
258.10(
b))
must
notify
the
affected
airport
and
the
Federal
Aviation
Administration
as
part
of
the
siting
process.

Section
258.11
­
Floodplains
Owners
or
operators
of
new
MSWLFs,
existing
MSWLFs,
and
lateral
expansions
must
document
(
record)
in
their
operating
record
demonstrations
that
show
the
MSWLF
meets
the
location
restrictions
regarding
floodplains
(
§
258.11).
The
owner
or
operator
must
notify
the
State
Director
when
an
exemption
demonstration
is
recorded
in
the
operating
record.

Section
258.12
­
Wetlands
Owners
or
operators
of
new
MSWLFs
and
lateral
expansions
must
demonstrate
(
report)
to
the
Director
of
an
approved
State
that
the
MSWLF
meets
the
requirements
addressing
wetlands
(
258.12).

Section
258.13
­
Fault
Areas
Owners
or
operators
of
new
MSWLFs
and
lateral
expansions
must
demonstrate
(
report)
to
the
Director
of
an
approved
State
that
the
MSWLF
meets
the
requirements
addressing
fault
areas
(
§
258.13).
9
Section
258.14
­
Seismic
Impact
Zones
Owners
or
operators
of
new
MSWLFs
and
lateral
expansions
must
demonstrate
to
the
Director
of
an
approved
State
that
the
MSWLF
meets
the
requirements
addressing
seismic
impact
zones
(
§
258.14).
The
demonstration
must
be
placed
in
the
operating
record.

Section
258.15
­
Unstable
Areas
Owners
or
operators
of
new
MSWLFs,
existing
MSWLFs,
and
lateral
expansions
must
document
(
record)
in
their
operating
record
demonstrations
that
show
the
MSWLF
meets
the
location
restrictions
regarding
unstable
areas
(
§
258.15).
The
owner
or
operator
must
notify
the
State
Director
when
an
exemption
demonstration
is
recorded
in
the
operating
record.

Section
258.16
­
Closure
of
Existing
MSWLFs
Owners
or
operators
of
existing
MSWLFs
that
are
located
near
airports
(
§
258.10(
a)),
floodplains
(
§
258.11(
a)),
or
in
unstable
areas
(
§
258.15(
a))
must
close
by
October
9,
1996.
The
deadline
for
closure
may
be
extended
(
but
not
beyond
10/
9/
98)
by
a
Director
of
an
approved
State
if
the
owner
or
operator
demonstrates
(
records)
in
their
operating
record
that
1)
there
is
no
other
alternative
capacity
and
2)
there
is
no
immediate
threat
to
human
health
and
the
environment.

SUBPART
C
­
OPERATING
CRITERIA
Section
258.20
­
Procedures
to
Exclude
Hazardous
Wastes
Owners
or
operators
of
MSWLFs
must
implement
a
program
for
detecting
and
preventing
the
disposal
of
regulated
hazardous
wastes
not
exempt
under
40
CFR
Part
261.4
(
b)
and
PCBs
at
the
facility.
This
program
includes:
(
1)
random
inspections
of
incoming
loads,
(
2)
records
of
any
inspections,
(
3)
training
of
facility
personnel
to
recognize
unacceptable
loads,
and
(
4)
notification
procedures.
Owners
or
operators
must
document
(
record)
results
of
inspections,
training,
and
notification
procedures.
In
addition,
MSWLF
owners
or
operators
must
notify
the
Director
of
an
approved
State,
or
the
EPA
Regional
Administrator
if
in
an
unapproved
State,
if
a
regulated
hazardous
waste
or
PCB
waste
is
discovered
at
the
facility.

Section
258.21
­
Cover
Material
Requirements
The
Director
of
an
approved
State
may
allow
owners
or
operators
to
use
for
daily
cover
alternative
materials
of
alternative
thicknesses
other
than
six
inches
of
soil.
The
owner
or
operator
must
demonstrate
(
document),
however,
that
the
alternative
daily
cover
is
as
effective
as
six
inches
of
soil.

Owners
and
operators
of
MSWLFs
in
approved
States
may
be
granted
a
temporary
waiver
of
the
daily
cover
requirement.
To
be
granted
the
temporary
waiver,
the
owner
or
operator
must
10
demonstrate
(
document)
that
extreme
seasonal
climatic
conditions
make
daily
cover
impractical.

The
Director
of
an
approved
State
may
establish
alternative
frequencies
for
cover
requirements
for
owners
and
operators
of
MSWLFs
that
dispose
of
20
TPD
or
less
of
MSW.

Section
258.23
­
Explosive
Gases
Control
Where
the
MSWLF
owner
or
operator
detects
that
methane
gas
concentrations
exceed
specified
limits
at
the
MSWLF,
§
258.23
requires
that
the
owner
or
operator
immediately
take
all
steps
necessary
to
protect
human
health
and
that
the
owner
or
operator
immediately
notify
the
State
Director.
Within
7
days
of
detection,
the
owner
or
operator
must
place
in
the
operating
record
documentation
of
the
methane
gas
levels
and
a
description
of
the
interim
steps
that
were
taken.
Moreover,
the
owner
or
operator
has
60
days
(
from
detection)
to
implement
a
remediation
plan,
place
a
copy
of
this
remediation
plan
in
the
operating
record,
and
notify
the
State
Director
that
the
plan
has
been
implemented.
This
will
allow
the
State
to
ensure
that
the
owner
or
operator
takes
steps
to
reduce
methane
gas
levels
as
well
as
alerting
the
State
to
a
possible
health
and
safety
threat.

The
Director
of
an
approved
State
may
establish
alternative
monitoring
frequencies
for
owners
and
operators
of
MSWLFs
that
dispose
of
20
TPD
(
annual
average)
or
less
of
MSW.

Section
258.28
­
Liquids
Restrictions
Section
258.28
prohibits
bulk
or
non­
containerized
liquid
waste
from
being
disposed
of
in
a
MSWLF
unless:
(
1)
the
waste
is
a
household
waste
other
than
septic
waste,
or
(
2)
the
waste
is
leachate
or
gas
condensate
derived
from
a
unit
designed
with
a
composite
liner
as
described
in
§
258.40.
The
owner
or
operator
must
place
in
the
operating
record
documentation
that
the
landfill
is
designed
with
a
composite
liner
and
must
notify
the
State
Director
that
this
documentation
has
been
placed
in
the
operating
record.

Section
258.28(
3)
requires
that
owners
or
operators
of
Project
XL
MSWLF
units
must
place
documentation
of
the
landfill
design
in
the
operating
record
and
must
notify
the
State
Director
that
this
documentation
has
been
placed
in
the
operating
record.

Section
258.29
­
Recordkeeping
Requirements
Owners
and
operators
of
MSWLFs
must
notify
the
State
Director
when
any
of
the
demonstrations
(
documentation)
required
by
other
sections
of
this
rule
has
been
added
to
the
facility
operating
record.
Section
258.12
(
Wetlands),
§
258.13
(
Fault
areas),
and
§
258.16
(
Closure
of
existing
units)
contain
reporting
requirements
but
do
not
contain
recordkeeping
requirements.
Those
recordkeeping
requirements
are
included
in
this
section.

SUBPART
D
­
DESIGN
CRITERIA
11
Section
258.40(
c)
­
Alternative
Liner
Design
The
Director
of
an
approved
State
may
allow
owners
or
operators
of
MSWLFs
to
use
an
alternative
liner
design.
The
owner
or
operator
must
demonstrate
(
document)
that
the
alternative
liner
design
meets
the
performance
standard
in
§
258.40(
a)(
1).

Section
258.40(
d)
­
Alternative
Point
of
Compliance
The
Director
of
an
approved
State
may
specify
an
alternative
point
of
compliance
anywhere
from
the
MSWLF
unit
including
up
to
150
meters
from
the
MSWLF
unit
boundary.
The
Director
of
an
approved
State
must
consider
the
factors
at
§
258.40(
d)(
1)­(
8)
in
determining
the
point
of
compliance.

Section
258.41
­
Project
XL
Bioreactor
Landfill
Projects
Section
258.41(
a)(
7)
­
Buncombe
County,
North
Carolina
Project
XL
Bioreactor
landfill
shall
monitor
and
submit
an
annual
report
to
the
EPA
Regional
Administrator
and
the
State
Director
that
includes,
at
a
minimum,
the
following
data:
i)
Amount
of
landfill
gas
generated;
ii)
Percent
capture
of
landfill
gas,
if
known;
iii)
Quality
of
the
landfill
gas,
amount
and
type
of
liquids
applied
to
the
landfill;
iv)
Method
of
liquids
application
to
the
landfill;
v)
Quantity
of
waste
placed
in
the
landfill;
vi)
Quantity
and
quality
of
leachate
collected;
vii)
Quantity
of
leachate
recirculated
back
into
the
landfill;
viii)
Information
on
the
pretreatment
of
waste
applied
to
the
landfill;
ix)
Data
collected
on
landfill
temperature
and
moisture
content;
x)
Data
on
the
leachate
pressure
(
head)
on
the
liner;
xi)
Observations,
information,
and
studies
made
on
the
physical
stability
of
the
MSWLF
units
that
are
developed
during
the
project
term,
if
any.

Section
258.41(
b)(
5)
­
Yolo
County
Central
Landfill
owned
and
operated
by
the
County
of
Yolo,
California,
or
its
successors
shall
submit
an
annual
report
to
the
EPA
Regional
Administrator
and
the
State
Director.
The
annual
report
will
include;
i)
Amount
of
landfill
gas
generated;
ii)
Percent
capture
of
landfill
gas;
iii)
Quality
of
the
landfill
gas;
iv)
Amount
and
type
of
liquids
applied
to
the
landfill;
v)
Method
of
liquids
application
to
the
landfill;
vi)
Quantity
of
waste
placed
in
the
landfill;
vii)
Quantity
and
quality
of
leachate
collected,
including
at
least
the
following
parameters,
monitored,
at
a
minimum,
on
an
annual
basis:
(
A)
pH;
(
B)
Conductivity;
(
C)
Dissolved
oxygen;
(
D)
Dissolved
solids;
(
E)
Biochemical
oxygen
demand;
(
F)
Chemical
oxygen
demand;
(
G)
Organic
carbon;
(
H)
Nutrients;
(
I)
Common
ions;
(
J)
Heavy
metals;
(
K)
Organic
priority
pollutants;
and
(
L)
Flow
rate;
viii)
Quantity
of
leachate
recirculated
back
into
the
landfill;
ix)
Information
on
the
pretreatment
of
solid
and
liquid
waste
applied
to
the
landfill;
x)
Landfill
temperature;
xi)
Landfill
moisture
content;
xii)
Data
on
the
leachate
pressure
(
head)
on
the
liner;
xiii)
The
amount
of
aeration
of
the
waste;
xiv)
Data
on
landfill
settlement;
xv)
Any
information
on
the
performance
of
the
landfill
cover;
and
xvi)
Observations,
information,
or
studies
made
on
the
physical
stability
of
the
landfill.

SUBPART
E
­
GROUND­
WATER
MONITORING
AND
CORRECTIVE
ACTION
12
Section
258.50(
a)
­
"
No
Migration
Petitions"

In
an
approved
State,
owners
and
operators
of
MSWLFs
may
demonstrate
(
document)
that
there
is
no
potential
for
migration
of
hazardous
constituents
from
the
MSWLF
unit.
The
demonstration
is
to
be
based
on
site­
specific
data
and
fate
and
transport
modeling
as
presented
in
§
258.50(
a)(
1)­(
2).

Section
258.51
­
§
258.53
­
Establish
GWM
Systems
Owners
and
operators
must
notify
the
State
Director
that
documentation
pertaining
to
measurement,
sampling,
and
analytical
devices
has
been
placed
in
the
operating
record.
The
numbering,
spacing,
and
depth
of
monitoring
systems
shall
be
certified
by
a
qualified
groundwater
scientist
or
approved
by
the
Director
of
an
approved
State.
Within
14
days
of
the
certification,
the
owner
or
operator
must
notify
the
State
Director
that
certification
has
been
placed
in
the
operating
record.

Owners
or
operators
must
notify
the
State
Director
that
the
description
of
the
sampling
and
analysis
program
documentation
has
been
placed
in
the
operating
record.

The
owner
or
operator
must
specify
in
the
operating
record
a
statistical
method
from
§
258.53(
g),
to
be
used
in
evaluating
groundwater
monitoring
data
for
each
hazardous
constituent.
If
another
statistical
method
that
meets
the
performance
standards
of
§
258.53(
h)
is
used,
the
owner
or
operator
must
place
a
justification
for
this
alternative
in
the
operating
record
and
notify
the
State
Director
of
use
of
this
alternative
test.

Section
258.54
­
Detection
Monitoring
Program
If
the
owner
or
operator
determines
that
there
is
a
statistically
significant
increase
over
background
for
one
or
more
of
the
Appendix
I
constituents,
the
owner
or
operator
must,
within
14
days
of
this
finding,
place
a
notice
in
the
operating
record
and
notify
the
State
Director
indicating
which
constituents
have
shown
statistically
significant
changes
from
the
background
levels.

The
owner
or
operator
may
demonstrate
pursuant
to
§
285.54(
c)
that
a
source
other
than
a
MSWLF
unit
or
an
error
has
caused
the
statistically
significant
changes
in
background
levels
of
one
or
more
of
the
constituents.
This
demonstration
must
be
certified
by
a
qualified
ground­
water
scientist
or
approved
by
the
Director
of
an
approved
State
and
be
placed
in
the
operating
record.

Section
258.55
­
Assessment
Monitoring
Program
If
sampling
results
indicate
that
Appendix
II
constituents
that
have
been
detected,
the
owner
or
operator
must
place
a
notice
in
the
operating
record
identifying
the
Appendix
II
constituents
that
have
been
detected
and
notify
the
State
Director
that
this
notice
has
been
placed
in
the
operating
record,
the
owner
or
operator
must
resample
and
record
the
concentrations
of
13
detected
Appendix
II
constituents.
If
concentrations
of
all
Appendix
II
constituents
are
shown
to
be
at
or
below
background
values
for
two
consecutive
sampling
events,
the
owner
or
operator
must
notify
the
State
Director
of
this
finding.

Section
258.55(
g)(
2)
­
"
False
Positives"

The
owner
or
operator
may
voluntarily
attempt
to
demonstrate
that
a
source
other
than
the
MSWLF
caused
the
contamination
or
that
a
sampling
error
occurred
and
that
it
is
not
required
to
move
into
remedy
selection
under
the
corrective
action
requirements.

Section
258.57
­
Selection
of
Remedy
The
owner
or
operator
must
discuss
results
of
the
corrective
measure
assessment,
prior
to
the
selection
of
remedy,
in
a
public
meeting
with
interested
and
affected
parties.
The
owner
or
operator
must
notify
the
State
Director
that
a
report
describing
the
selected
remedy
has
been
placed
in
the
operating
record
and
how
it
meets
the
standards
of
§
258.57(
b).

If
the
owner
or
operator
determines
that
compliance
with
requirements
under
§
258.57(
b)
cannot
be
practically
achieved
with
any
currently
available
methods,
the
owner
or
operator
must
obtain
certification
of
a
qualified
ground­
water
scientist
or
approval
by
the
Director
of
an
approved
State
that
compliance
cannot
be
meet.
The
owner
or
operator
must
document
in
the
operating
record
the
alternative
measure
or
schedule
selected
in
consideration
of
§
258.57(
d).

The
owner
or
operator
may
document
in
the
operating
record
that
no
clean­
up
is
required
if
the
conditions
of
§
258.57(
e)
are
met
and
the
State
Director
is
notified.

Section
258.58
­
Implementation
of
the
Corrective
Action
Program
The
owner
or
operator
may
determine
that
corrective
action
cannot
be
achieved
with
any
currently
available
remedy,
if
so,
the
owner
or
operator
must
document
in
the
operating
record
that
a
report
justifying
alternative
corrective
action
measures
has
been
placed
in
the
operating
record
in
compliance
with
the
requirements
of
§
258.58(
c)(
4)
and
notify
the
State
Director.

Upon
completion
of
the
requirements
of
§
258.58(
e),
the
owner
or
operator
must
document
in
the
operating
record
that
the
remedy
has
been
completed
in
compliance
with
the
requirements
of
§
258.58(
e)
and
notify
the
State
Director.

SUBPART
F
­
CLOSURE
AND
POST­
CLOSURE
CARE
Section
258.60
­
Closure
Criteria
Owners
or
operators
will
be
required
to
maintain
in
the
facility
operating
record
copies
of
the
closure
plans.
The
closure
plans
describe
the
steps
necessary
to
close
each
MSWLF
unit
in
14
accordance
with
the
closure
requirements
in
§
258.60
including
all
recordkeeping
and
reporting
requirements.

The
Director
of
an
approved
State
may
establish
alternative
infiltration
barriers
for
owners
and
operators
of
MSWLFs
that
dispose
of
20
TPD
or
less
of
MSW.

Section
258.61
­
Post­
Closure
Care
Requirements
Owners
or
operators
will
be
required
to
maintain
in
the
facility
operating
record
copies
of
the
post­
closure
care
plans.
The
post­
closure
care
plan
describes
the
steps
to
be
taken
by
the
owner
or
operator
to
ensure
that
monitoring
and
routine
maintenance
activities
are
carried
out
at
each
MSWLF
unit
in
accordance
with
the
requirements
in
§
258.61
including
all
recordkeeping
and
reporting
requirements.

SUBPART
G
­
FINANCIAL
ASSURANCE
CRITERIA
Section
258.71
­
Financial
Assurance
for
Closure
The
owner
or
operator
of
the
MSWLF
unit
must
place
in
the
operating
record
the
up­
to­
date
cost
estimates
for
closure.
The
cost
estimates
must
be
annually
adjusted
for
inflation.

Section
258.72
­
Financial
Assurance
for
Post­
Closure
Care
The
owner
or
operator
of
the
MSWLF
unit
must
place
in
the
operating
record
the
up­
to­
date
cost
estimates
for
post­
closure
care.
The
cost
estimates
must
be
annually
adjusted
for
inflation.

Section
258.73
­
Financial
Assurance
for
Corrective
Action
The
owner
or
operator
of
the
MSWLF
unit
must
place
in
the
operating
record
the
up­
to­
date
cost
estimates
for
corrective
action.
The
cost
estimates
must
be
annually
adjusted
for
inflation.

Section
258.74
­
Allowable
Mechanisms
The
owner
or
operator
of
the
MSWLF
unit
must
select
a
mechanism
for
carrying
out
financial
assurance.
Options
are
specified
in
§
258.74(
a)­(
j)

4.
THE
INFORMATION
COLLECTED­­
AGENCY
ACTIVITIES,
COLLECTION
METHODOLOGY,
AND
INFORMATION
MANAGEMENT
The
following
subsections
discuss
how
the
information
will
be
collected.
The
most
important
factor
is
that
the
information
is
not
to
be
sent
to
or
collected
by
the
Agency.
The
owners
or
operators
of
MSWLFs
are
to
collect
the
information,
compile
it
in
an
operating
record,
and
notify
the
State
Director
when
the
documentation
is
placed
in
the
operating
record.
The
15
operating
record
is
intended
to
be
equivalent
to
a
permit
file
that
is
routinely
kept
by
the
State
permitting
agency.
The
Agency
did
not
intend
for
these
rules
to
create
additional
recordkeeping
except
when
more
stringent
Federal
standards
replace
State
requirements.

4(
a)
AGENCY
ACTIVITIES
This
program
is
implemented
by
approved
States
and
all
information
will
be
reported
to
the
States
and/
or
kept
in
an
operating
record;
EPA
will
not
collect
information
for
individual
MSWLF
units.
In
unapproved
States,
the
MSWLF
Criteria
are
self­
implementing;
that
is,
the
owner
or
operator
documents
compliance
with
the
Criteria
and
places
this
documentation
in
the
operating
record.
EPA
does
have
enforcement
authority
in
States
where
EPA
has
made
a
determination
that
the
State
permit
program
is
not
adequate.
In
enforcement
situations,
the
EPA
may
request
information
from
the
owner
or
operator.

4(
b)
COLLECTION
METHODOLOGY
AND
MANAGEMENT
EPA
has
not
specified
how
these
records
are
to
be
developed
and
maintained,
thus
ensuring
maximum
flexibility
and
minimizing
burden
in
meeting
these
requirements.

4(
c)
SMALL
ENTITY
FLEXIBILITY
Respondents
may
include
small
businesses;
all
data
requested
are
essential
for
both
large
and
small
businesses.
The
information
burden
was
minimized
to
the
extent
possible
for
all
potential
respondents
through
the
rule's
self­
implementing
format.
Furthermore,
the
Part
258
Criteria
contains
a
small
landfill
exemption
from
the
costly
design
requirements
that
also
will
minimize
the
recordkeeping
burden
on
small
businesses.
Further,
the
Agency
is
in
the
process
of
reinstating
the
exemption
from
the
costly
ground­
water
monitoring
and
corrective
actions
requirements.

4(
d)
COLLECTION
SCHEDULE
All
collection
requirements
discussed
in
this
ICR
are
for
the
period
September
1,
2003
through
August
31,
2006.
The
dates
for
compliance
for
Subtitle
D
requirements
is
prior
to
April
10,
1998.

The
records
and
reports
will
be
maintained
on
an
ongoing
basis
in
the
facility
operating
record,
however,
the
Part
258
Criteria
allow
approved
States
the
discretion
to
establish
alternative
schedules
for
recordkeeping
and
notification
requirements.

5.
NON­
DUPLICATION,
CONSULTATIONS,
AND
OTHER
COLLECTION
CRITERIA
5(
a)
NON­
DUPLICATION
EPA
took
steps
to
minimize
duplication
of
information
collection.
EPA
proposed
the
16
recordkeeping
and
reporting
requirements
and
carefully
considered
all
comments.
The
final
rule
includes
minimum
recordkeeping
and
reporting
necessary
to
document
compliance
with
the
rule's
provisions.

EPA
deliberately
did
not
prescribe
specific
recordkeeping
procedures
or
formats.
This
will
allow
States
and
owners
or
operators
maximum
flexibility
in
developing
site­
specific
procedures
that
satisfy
existing
State
requirements
and
the
provisions
of
the
MSWLF
Criteria.
Furthermore,
the
Part
258
Criteria
provide
additional
flexibility
to
approved
States:
approved
States
have
flexibility
in
establishing
the
location
of
the
operating
record
and
establishing
alternative
schedules
for
recordkeeping
and
notification
requirements.

5(
b)
CONSULTATIONS
Owners
and
operators
of
MSWLFs,
State
personnel,
EPA
personnel
(
Headquarters
and
Regional)
and
consultants
working
for
EPA
on
the
hazardous
and
solid
waste
program
were
interviewed
to
characterize
the
time
the
owner
or
operator
(
as
well
as
the
State)
would
need
to
spend
on
each
separate
requirement.
Based
on
the
results
of
these
interviews,
the
Agency
prepared
the
time
estimates
for
recordkeeping.

5(
c)
EFFECTS
OF
LESS
FREQUENT
COLLECTION
The
Agency
believes
that
less
frequent
recordkeeping
and
reporting
could
hamper
State
enforcement
and
compliance
efforts,
especially
in
States
that
are
not
allowed
to
be
more
stringent
than
the
Federal
minimum.
However,
the
Part
258
Criteria
allow
approved
States
the
discretion
to
establish
alternative
schedules
for
recordkeeping
and
notification
requirements.

5(
d)
GENERAL
GUIDELINES
This
collection
does
not
violate
any
of
the
Paperwork
Reduction
Act
(
50
CFR
1320.6)
general
guidelines.

5(
e)
­
5(
f)
CONFIDENTIALITY
AND
SENSITIVE
QUESTIONS
No
data
requested
are
believed
to
be
confidential.
The
Agency
is
not
requesting
any
trade
secret
information
and
believes
that
the
information
collection
complies
with
the
Privacy
Act
of
1974
and
OMB
Circular
A­
108.

The
recordkeeping
and
reporting
requirements
do
not
request
information
that
is
of
a
sensitive
nature.

6.
ESTIMATING
THE
BURDEN
AND
COST
OF
THE
COLLECTION
6(
a)
ESTIMATING
RESPONDENT
BURDEN
17
The
total
universe
of
MSWLF's
has
steadily
declined
for
at
least
the
past
decade.
EPA
estimates
that
by
September
1,
2003
there
will
be
approximately1900
MSWLFs
and
that
this
number
of
MSWLFs
will
remain
constant
over
the
reporting
period
covered
by
this
supporting
statement.
The
estimated
number
of
MSWLFs
is
consistent
with
the
estimate
contained
in
the
supporting
statement
for
the
previous
ICRs
for
this
rule.
EPA
projected
that
there
would
be
4000
MSWLFs
when
the
rule
became
fully
effective
and
the
estimate
is
reasonably
accurate
and
has
been
confirmed
by
an
independent
consultation
with
the
States
that
resulted
in
a
published
list
if
MSWLFs
(
EPA,
1996),
information
published
in
a
trade
magazines
(
Biocycle,
1999;
Waste
Age
1996),
and
a
Directory
and
Atlas
of
Solid
Waste
Disposal
Facilities
(
Chartwell
Information
Publishers,
1998).
The
number
of
landfills
affected
by
each
recordkeeping
and
reporting
requirements
will
vary
and
each
requirement
is
discussed
in
this
statement.
For
example,
a
number
of
reporting
requirements
generally
will
apply
only
to
new
MSWLF
units
and
lateral
expansions
of
existing
units
rather
than
to
the
entire
total.
Information
supplied
by
State
permitting
officials
indicate
that
the
number
of
new
MSWLF's
that
open
or
existing
MSWLF's
that
actually
expand
is
a
small
number
due
to
difficulties
in
sitting
new
units
and
expanding
existing
ones.
As
for
this
continuing
ICR,
it
is
assumed
that
40
new
units
and
or
lateral
expansions
will
occur
each
year.
Included
in
this
supporting
statement
(
but
not
separately
identified)
is
a
one­
time
burden
of
35
hours
per
respondent
(
40
per
year)
to
read
the
October
9,
1991
Federal
Register
publication.

SUBPART
A
­
GENERAL
Section
258.1(
f)(
2)
­
Small
or
Remote
MSWLFs
The
Agency
estimates
that
the
total
burden
would
apply
to
approximately
425
"
small"
MSWLFs
located
in
remote
and/
or
arid
regions.
The
requirement
is
that
the
MSWLF
owner
or
operator
make
the
determination
that
they
meet
the
criteria
in
§
258.1(
f)(
2).
There
is
a
one­
time
recordkeeping
burden
of
10
hours
per
facility
and
a
one­
time
reporting
burden
of
two
hours
per
facility.

Section
258.1(
f)(
3)
­
Small
or
Remote
MSWLFs
EPA
estimates
that
5%
(
22)
of
the
total
number
of
small
facilities
will
discover
ground­
water
contamination
and
must
notify
the
State
Director
and
comply
with
the
liner
requirements
in
Subpart
B.
This
would
occur
over
an
estimated
10
years
or
3
facilities
per
year
for
purposes
of
this
estimate.
The
one­
time
recordkeeping
burden
is
estimated
to
be
30
hours
per
facility.
There
would
be
no
annual
burden.
There
is
a
one­
time
reporting
burden
of
two
hours
per
facility.

SUBPART
B
­
LOCATION
RESTRICTIONS
Section
258.10
­
Airport
Safety
Of
the
estimated
40
new
MSWLF
units
and
lateral
expansions
that
are
affected
by
this
requirement,
approximately
50%
are
expected
to
be
within
the
areas
of
airport
safety.
EPA
has
18
estimated
a
one­
time
recordkeeping
requirement
for
this
location
restriction
of
10
hours
per
facility.
There
is
a
one­
time
reporting
burden
of
two
hours
per
facility.

Section
258.11
­
Floodplains
Of
the
estimated
40
new
MSWLF
units
and
lateral
expansions
that
are
affected
by
this
requirement,
approximately
20%
are
expected
to
be
within
the
100­
year
floodplain.
EPA
has
estimated
a
one­
time
recordkeeping
requirement
for
this
location
restriction
of
10
hours
per
facility.
There
is
a
one­
time
reporting
burden
of
two
hours
per
facility.

Section
258.12
­
Wetlands
The
requirements
for
the
wetlands
location
restriction
comes
from
the
Clean
Water
Act
(
CWA)
and
incorporates
EPA
guidelines
developed
pursuant
to
the
CWA.
Any
recordkeeping
requirement
is
attributable
to
implementing
the
CWA
and
not
the
MSWLF
Criteria.
Therefore,
in
order
to
avoid
double
counting,
no
recordkeeping
requirements
for
this
location
provision
are
included
in
this
estimate.
The
reporting
and
recordkeeping
requirements
are
reported
under
OMB
Control
Number
2040­
0086.

Section
258.13
­
Fault
Areas
Of
the
estimated
40
new
MSWLF
units
and
lateral
expansions
that
are
affected
by
this
requirement
less
than
10%
are
expected
to
be
in
a
fault
area.
EPA
has
estimated
a
one­
time
recordkeeping
requirement
for
this
location
restriction
of
10
hours
per
facility,
however,
the
recordkeeping
requirement
is
included
under
§
258.29
because
there
is
no
authority
under
§
258.13
to
require
recordkeeping.
There
is
a
one­
time
reporting
burden
of
two
hours
per
facility.

Section
258.14
­
Seismic
Impact
Zones
Of
the
estimated
40
new
MSWLF
units
and
lateral
expansions
that
are
affected
by
this
requirement,
less
than
10%
are
expected
to
be
in
a
seismic
impact
zone.
EPA
has
estimated
a
one­
time
recordkeeping
requirement
for
this
location
restriction
of
10
hours
per
facility.
There
is
a
one­
time
reporting
burden
of
two
hours
per
facility.

Section
258.15
­
Unstable
Areas
Of
the
estimated
40
new
MSWLFs
and
lateral
expansions
that
are
affected
by
this
requirement
less
than
10%
are
expected
to
be
in
an
unstable
area.
EPA
assumes
that
owners
and/
or
operators
of
existing
units
would
have
made
the
appropriate
demonstration
prior
to
January
1997.
EPA
has
estimated
a
one­
time
recordkeeping
requirement
for
this
location
restriction
of
10
hours
per
facility.
There
is
a
one­
time
reporting
burden
of
two
hours
per
facility.

Section
258.16
­
Closure
of
Existing
MSWLFs
19
Of
the
existing
1900
MSWLFs,
EPA
estimates
that
less
than
2%
of
the
owners
or
operators
of
existing
MSWLFs
that
are
located
near
airports
(
§
258.10(
a)),
floodplains
(
§
258.11(
a)),
or
in
unstable
areas
(
§
258.15(
a))
and
extended
the
deadline
for
closure
until
October
9,
1998.
This
burden
has
already
been
accounted
for
and
does
not
happen
in
this
reporting
period
from
September
1,
2003
to
August
31,
2006.

SUBPART
C
­
OPERATING
CRITERIA
Section
258.20
­
Procedures
to
Exclude
Hazardous
Wastes
EPA
estimates
an
annual
recordkeeping
burden
of
10
hours
per
year
for
each
of
the
1900
landfills
for
training
and
an
annual
reporting
burden
of
two
hours
per
facility.
In
addition
there
is
a
one­
time
two
hour
reporting
burden
for
each
of
the
42
landfills
that
are
estimated
to
detect
regulated
quantities
of
hazardous
or
PCB
waste.
These
42
MSWLF
owners
or
operators
must
notify
the
State
Director
(
or
the
EPA
Regional
Administrator)
if
a
regulated
hazardous
waste
or
PCB
waste
is
discovered
at
the
facility.
This
adds
a
one­
time
recordkeeping
burden
of
two
hours
for
those
42
facilities.

Section
258.21
­
Cover
Material
Requirements
EPA
assumes
that
owners
and/
or
operators
of
existing
units
would
have
made
the
appropriate
demonstration
prior
to
January,
2000
therefore,
there
is
no
burden
for
existing
units.
Of
the
estimated
40
new
MSWLFs
and
lateral
expansions
that
are
eligible
for
these
demonstrations,
EPA
estimates
that
less
than
10%
are
expected
to
conduct
the
demonstrations.
For
MSWLF
units
making
the
demonstration,
EPA
has
estimated
a
one­
time
recordkeeping
burden
of
24
hours
per
facility.
There
is
a
one­
time
reporting
burden
of
two
hours
for
those
4
facilities.

Section
258.23
­
Explosive
Gases
Control
EPA
estimates
a
one
time
recordkeeping
burden
of
24
hours
to
set
up
a
methane
monitoring
program
for
the
40
new
units
and
6
hours
per
year
reporting
burden
to
report
the
results
of
the
monitoring
for
each
of
the
1940
operating
units(
1900
existing
and
40
new).

The
requirement
to
develop
a
remediation
plan
and
report
to
the
State
would
only
apply
to
those
facilities
that
exceed
the
standards
for
methane
at
the
facility.
EPA
estimates
that
this
will
occur
at
20
of
the
1900
operating
facilities
per
year
and
that
each
of
these
facilities
would
have
a
one­
time
recordkeeping
burden
of
16
hours
per
year.
There
is
a
one­
time
reporting
burden
of
two
hours
for
those
20
facilities.

Section
258.28
­
Liquids
Restrictions
This
one­
time
reporting
requirement
will
apply
only
to
the
facilities
that
recirculate
gas
condensate
or
leachate
and
that
have
composite
liners.
Of
the
40
new
MSWLFs,
EPA
estimates
20
that
there
are
20
such
facilities.
EPA
assumes
that
the
required
recordkeeping
would
take
2
hours
per
facility
and
that
the
one­
time
reporting
requirement
will
take
2
hours
per
facility.

Section
258.29
­
Recordkeeping
Requirements
Owners
and
operators
of
MSWLFs
must
notify
the
State
Director
when
any
of
the
demonstrations
(
documentation)
required
by
other
sections
of
this
rule
have
been
added
to
the
facility
operating
record.
There
is
a
one­
time
10
hour
recordkeeping
burden
in
addition
to
a
onetime
2
hour
reporting
burden
for
all
40
new
facilities.

SUBPART
D
­
DESIGN
CRITERIA
Section
258.40(
c)
­
Alternative
Liner
Design
Owners
or
operators
of
MSWLFs
in
approved
States
may
be
permitted
to
use
an
alternative
liner
design.
The
owner
or
operator
must
demonstrate
(
document)
that
the
alternative
liner
design
meets
the
performance
standard
in
§
258.40(
a)(
1).
To
date,
this
design
option
has
been
chosen
by
only
a
very
few
MSWLFs,
EPA
estimates
that
5%
of
the
40
new
MSWLFs
will
undertake
this
onetime
reporting
requirement
and
EPA
estimates
the
burden
at
40
hours
per
facility.
There
is
no
recordkeeping
requirement
under
the
Part
258
rules
for
§
258.40(
c).

Section
258.40(
d)
­
Alternative
Point
of
Compliance
This
one­
time
reporting
requirement
is
the
responsibility
of
the
Director
of
an
approved
State.
There
is
no
recordkeeping
or
reporting
requirement
for
the
owner
or
operator.
The
Director
of
an
approved
State
may
voluntarily
chose
to
use
an
alternative
point
of
compliance.
The
Director
of
an
approved
State
must
consider
the
factors
at
§
258.40(
d)(
1)­(
8)
in
demonstrating
(
documenting)
that
the
alternative
point
of
compliance
meets
the
performance
standard.
EPA
assumes
that
all
States
that
are
considering
this
approach
will
have
made
the
appropriate
demonstration
prior
to
January,
1998
and
there
will
be
no
burden
from
this
requirement.

Section
258.41
­
Project
XL
Bioreactor
Landfill
Projects
The
one­
time
recordkeeping
requirements
for
a
Bioreactor
landfill
will
not
be
included
here
to
avoid
double
counting,
and
have
been
included
in
the
existing
and
new
estimates.
Currently,
EPA
has
certified
2
Bioreactor
landfills
and
expects
4
more
to
apply
for
certification
during
this
recordkeeping
period.
The
Agency
estimates
that
the
annual
requirement
for
recordkeeping
is
20
hours
and
annual
reporting
is
30
hours,
for
a
total
of
50
hours
per
facility.

SUBPART
E
­
GROUND­
WATER
MONITORING
AND
CORRECTIVE
ACTION
Section
258.50(
a)
­
"
No
Migration
Petitions"
21
Owners
and
operators
of
MSWLFs
may
demonstrate
(
document)
that
there
is
no
potential
for
migration
of
hazardous
constituents
from
the
facility.
The
demonstration
is
to
be
based
on
site­
specific
data
and
fate
and
transport
modeling.
EPA
estimates
no
more
than
4
owners
or
operators
will
attempt
this
demonstration
per
year.
EPA
assumes
that
the
required
documentation
would
result
in
a
one­
time
reporting
requirement
of
100
hours
per
facility.
Section
258.50(
a)
does
not
contain
recordkeeping
requirements,
however,
the
one­
time
recordkeeping
requirements
of
2
hours
per
facility
that
are
contained
in
§
258.29
have
been
included
here
for
simplicity.

Section
258.51
­
258.53
­
Establish
GWM
systems
EPA
reviewed
State
permit
programs
and
found
that
80%
of
the
States
had
requirements
to
set­
up
groundwater
monitoring
systems
prior
to
the
promulgation
of
Part
258;
therefore,
the
Agency
assumed
the
one­
time
reporting
requirement
of
20
hours
per
facility
would
result
for
20%
of
the
40
(
8)
new
facilities.
There
are
one­
time
recordkeeping
requirements
at
§
§
258.51(
d)(
1)(
ii),
258.53(
a)
and
258.53(
g).
Each
of
the
three
sections
has
a
2
hour
per
facility
recordkeeping
requirement
for
a
total
of
6
hours
per
facility.

Section
258.54
­
Detection
Monitoring
Program
Of
the
1900
operating
facilities,
425
are
qualifying
"
small"
MSWLFs
that
will
be
exempted
from
Subpart
E.
EPA
estimates
that
the
total
annual
reporting
burden
for
detection
monitoring
to
be
32
hours
per
year.
As
discussed
above,
EPA
estimates
that
80%
of
the
States
required
ground­
water
monitoring
prior
to
the
promulgation
of
Part
258,
however,
Part
258
contains
monitoring
parameters
not
usually
found
in
State
rules.
For
the
purposes
of
this
analysis,
EPA
assumed
that
current
State
regulations
already
captured
5
hours
per
year
of
the
total
annual
reporting
burden
for
detection
monitoring;
therefore,
this
rule
imposes
an
incremental
burden
of
27
hours
per
year
for
landfills
in
the
States
with
monitoring
requirements
(
i.
e.,
80%
of
the
landfills
or
1520
landfills).
For
the
remaining
380
landfills
in
States
without
groundwater
monitoring
requirements
and
the
40
new
MSWLF
units
per
year,
EPA
assumed
that
all
would
incur
the
entire
annual
reporting
burden
of
32
hours
per
year.
There
is
an
annual
recordkeeping
requirement
of
2
hours
for
each
facility.

Section
258.55
­
Assessment
Monitoring
Program
EPA
assumes
that
the
only
facilities
that
will
need
to
establish
an
assessment
monitoring
program
are
existing
MSWLF
units.
None
of
the
new
MSWLF
units
are
expected
to
require
assessment
monitoring
prior
to
September,
2003.

For
assessment
monitoring,
EPA
estimated
that
this
rule
would
impose
an
annual
reporting
burden
of
32
hours
per
occurrence
per
year.
The
Agency's
Regulatory
Impact
Analysis
assumes
that
approximately
one
third
of
the
facilities
will
contaminate
ground
water
such
that
assessment
monitoring
and
corrective
action
are
required.
The
number
impacted
would
not
include
the
425
"
qualifying"
small
MSWLFs
because
will
be
exempted,
therefore,
about
500
facilities
[
a
(
1900­
425)]
are
included
in
the
reporting
estimate.
This
estimate
includes
the
22
facilities
that
voluntarily
chose
to
make
the
"
false
positives"
demonstration
at
§
258.55(
g)(
2).
There
is
an
annual
recordkeeping
requirement
of
2
hours
for
each
facility.

Section
258.55(
g)(
2)
­
"
False
Positives"

See
the
discussion
for
§
258.55
­
Assessment
Monitoring
Program.

Section
258.57
­
Selection
of
Remedy
For
corrective
action,
EPA
estimated
an
annual
burden
of
200
hours
per
year
to
document
progress
in
clean­
up
activities.
Approximately
one­
half
of
the
States
have
corrective
action
rules;
therefore,
the
Agency
assumes
that
250
facilities
(
approximately
½
of
500
facilities)
would
have
increased
reporting
burdens.

The
estimated
reporting
burden
includes
consideration
of
§
258.57(
d),
the
requirement
to
establish
a
schedule
for
implementing
and
completing
remedial
measures.
The
estimated
burden
also
includes
consideration
of
§
258.57(
e),
the
conditions
that
would
allow
no
ground­
water
clean­
up.

There
are
annual
recordkeeping
burdens
at
§
§
258.57(
b),
258.58(
d),
and
258.58(
e).
Each
of
these
annual
recordkeeping
burdens
requires
2
hours
per
facility
per
year
for
a
total
of
6
hours.

Section
258.58
­
Implementation
of
the
Corrective
Action
Program
EPA
assumes
that
no
owner
or
operator
will
have
completed
Corrective
Action
and,
therefore,
be
required
to
comply
with
§
258.58(
f)
prior
to
August,
2006.
Section
258.58(
f)
is
the
only
recordkeeping
or
reporting
burden
in
§
258.58
that
is
not
included
in
the
recordkeeping
and
reporting
estimates
for
§
258.57
of
the
rule,
therefore,
this
section
contains
no
additional
reporting
or
recordkeeping
requirements.

SUBPART
F
­
CLOSURE
AND
POST­
CLOSURE
CARE
Section
258.60
­
Closure
Criteria
EPA
estimates
that
a
one­
time
burden
of
16
hours
per
facility
is
required
to
document
the
closure
plan.
A
review
of
the
State
rules
indicated
that
80%
of
the
current
State
requirements
contain
a
similar
provision
that
would
require
the
owner
or
operator
to
submit
the
same
type
of
information
that
EPA
would
require
in
a
closure
plan.
Therefore,
8
facilities
(
20%
of
40)
would
have
increased
reporting
burdens.
EPA
assumes
that
all
existing
and
lateral
expansions
will
have
developed
the
closure
plan
prior
to
January,
1998.
There
is
a
one­
time
recordkeeping
burden
of
2
hours
per
facility.

Section
258.61
­
Post­
Closure
Care
Requirements
23
EPA
estimates
the
annual
reporting
burden
for
the
post­
closure
care
plan
to
be
16
hours
per
facility.
The
review
of
State
rules
found
that
60%
of
the
current
State
rules
contained
similar
requirements
that
would
require
the
owner
or
operator
to
submit
the
same
type
of
information
that
EPA
would
require
in
the
post­
closure
care
plans.
Therefore,
760
facilities
(
40%
of
1900)
would
have
reporting
and
recordkeeping
burdens.
There
is
an
annual
recordkeeping
burden
of
2
hours
per
facility
for
the
existing
1,140
facilities
plus
the
40
new
facilities.

SUBPART
G
­
FINANCIAL
ASSURANCE
CRITERIA
Section
258.71
­
Financial
Assurance
for
Closure
The
estimated
annual
reporting
burden
for
the
financial
assurance
requirements
is
4
hours
per
year
per
facility
for
all
financial
assurance
requirements.
This
includes
annually
adjusting
cost
estimates
for
inflation
for
closure,
post­
closure
care
(
§
258.72),
and
known
corrective
actions
(
§
258.73).
A
review
of
State
rules
indicated
that
40%
of
the
States
had
requirements
for
financial
assurance,
therefore,
1140
facilities
(
60%
of
1900)
are
included
in
the
estimate.
There
is
an
annual
recordkeeping
burden
of
2
hours
per
existing
facility
plus
the
40
new
facilities.

Section
258.72
­
Financial
Assurance
for
Post­
Closure
Care
See
Section
258.71.

Section
258.73
­
Financial
Assurance
for
Corrective
Action
See
Section
258.71.

Section
258.74
­
Allowable
Mechanisms
See
Section
258.71.

6(
b)
ESTIMATING
RESPONDENT
COSTS
For
estimated
labor
costs
to
respondents,
see
Exhibits
1
through
4.
For
capital
and
operations
and
maintenance
costs
EPA
has
made
the
assumptions
that
40
new
or
lateral
expansions
will
occur
for
the
period
of
September
01,
2003
until
August
31,
2006.
These
40
new
or
lateral
expansions
will
need
to
perform
a
hydrogeologic
study
in
order
to
assess
where
to
establish
ground
water
monitoring
wells.
The
study
would
cost
$
137,350
per
site
for
a
total
of
$
5,494,000.
This
total
cost
spread
out
over
the
3­
year
period
would
be
$
1,831,333
per
year.
For
these
new
or
lateral
expansions,
they
will
need
to
establish
4
wells
per
site
for
the
purpose
of
ground
water
monitoring.
The
capital
cost
for
a
total
of
160
wells,
at
a
depth
of
50
feet,
would
total
$
1,138,560.
This
total
spread
out
over
the
3­
year
period
would
cost
$
379,520
per
year.

For
the
purpose
of
preparing
the
cost
and
burden
estimates
for
this
ICR,
EPA
referenced
the
U.
S.
Department
of
Labor;
Bureau
of
Labor
Statistics
for
the
current
year
data
(
2001)
for
SIC
24
industry
group
Code
495,
Sanitary
Services
(
private
sector
wage
rates)
and
SIC
Code
902
(
State
Government
wage
rates)
for
the
cost
burdens
associated
with
their
respective
groups.
Cost
for
respondents
were
estimated
based
on
the
following
wage
rates.

Estimated
Respondent
and
Agency/
State
Wage
Rates
Labor
Category
Respondent
Wage
Rate
(
SIC
#
495)
Agency/
State
Wage
Rate
(
SIC
#
902)

Legal
89.77
54.03
Managerial
55.91
50.23
Technical
28.91
26.91
Clerical
19.73
21.10
6(
c)
ESTIMATING
STATE
AND
AGENCY
BURDEN
AND
COST
The
annual
and
one
time
recordkeeping
and
reporting
burden
for
State
agencies
is
summarized
in
the
table
below.
The
total
estimated
recordkeeping
and
reporting
burden
for
clerical
staff
is
2.5
hours
per
notification
and
the
total
estimated
burden
for
technical
staff
is
one
hour
per
notification.
For
both
recordkeeping
and
reporting
estimates,
the
Agency
assumes
that
neither
the
legal
nor
managerial
staff
will
be
responsible
for
any
additional
burden
or
cost.

Estimated
State
Recordkeeping
/
Reporting
Burden
Cost
Annual
Number
of
Notifications
8,554
Legal@
$
54.03
per
hour
0
Managerial
@
$
50.23
per
hour
0
Technical
@
$
26.91
per
hour
1.0
Clerical
@
$
21.10
per
hour
2.5
Total
Cost
per
Year
$
4,038,514
25
One
Time
Number
of
Notifications
1,416
Legal@
$
54.03
per
hour
0
Managerial
@
$
50.23
per
hour
0
Technical
@
$
26.91
per
hour
1.0
Clerical
@
$
21.10
per
hour
2.5
Total
Cost
per
Year
$
112,799
All
information
is
submitted
to
the
States;
therefore,
Agency
burden
and
cost
is
negligible.
The
State
burden
for
recordkeeping
will
be
to
process
the
notifications
of
the
State
Directors
sent
by
the
owners
and/
or
operators
of
the
MSWLFs,
review
of
MSWLFs
demonstrations,
and
certification
of
requirements.
States
will
be
notified,
as
specified
previously
under
3(
I).

6(
d)
BOTTOM
LINE
BURDEN
HOURS
AND
COST/
MASTER
TABLES
The
estimated
annual
burden
and
labor
cost
are
shown
in
Exhibits
1
and
3.
The
total
annual
burden
for
respondents
is
182,360
hours
and
the
estimated
cost
is
$
4,873,142.

The
estimated
one­
time
burden
and
labor
cost
are
shown
in
Exhibits
2
and
4.
The
one­
time
burden
for
respondents
is
8,668
hours
and
the
estimated
cost
is
$
252,376.
The
total
annual
nonlabor
costs
are
$
2,210,859
which
includes
$
379,520
for
capital
and
$
1,831,333
for
operations
and
maintence.

6(
e)
REASONS
FOR
CHANGE
IN
BURDEN
This
is
a
revised
ICR.
In
developing
burden
estimates,
EPA
met
with
EPA
Regional
and
State
permit
writers
who
provided
burden
estimates
for
this
ICR.
Because
of
these
revisions,
the
total
bottom­
line
burden
to
respondents
has
decreased
over
the
previous
ICR.
Whereas
the
previous
ICR
estimated
a
total
burden
of
239,858
hours,
with
an
average
of
104
hours
per
response.
EPA
believes
that
the
current
burden
estimate
reflects
a
more
comprehensive
and,
therefore,
more
accurate
portrait
of
the
existing
burden
on
the
regulated
community.

In
developing
the
annual
reporting
and
recordkeeping
cost
burden,
EPA
evaluated
data
from
the
States
and
other
commercial
sources.

OMB
requested
that
EPA
verify
that
non­
labor
costs
were
to
be
incurred
by
respondents
in
complying
with
this
collection.
EPA
estimates
annual
capital
costs
of
$
379,520
and
annual
operations
and
maintence
costs
of
$
1,831,333.
EPA
has
revised
the
ICR
to
address
these
additional
costs
associated
with
performing
a
hydrogeologic
study,
installation
of
ground­
water
monitoring
wells,
and
sampling
costs
associated
with
sampling
of
ground
water
wells.
Lastly,
the
costs
associated
with
the
40
new
or
lateral
expansion
sites
requiring
sampling
and
analytical
work
would
be
a
total
of
$
2,481,300
per
year.
This
assumes
that
the
sampling
and
analytical
work
is
26
not
performed
by
facility
personal
and
that
analytical
work
is
for
analysis
of
VOC's
only.
EPA
could
not
determine
how
to
convert
from
dollars
to
hours
for
an
event
that
will
most
likely
be
performed
by
at
least
one
contractor
and
one
laboratory
service,
and
not
the
owner/
operator.

6(
f)
BURDEN
STATEMENT
The
total
annual
public
reporting
burden
for
this
collection
of
information
is
estimated
to
be
191,028
hours
with
an
average
of
101
hours
per
response.
Burden
means
the
total
time,
effort,
or
financial
resources
expended
by
persons
to
generate,
maintain,
retain,
or
disclose
or
provide
information
to
or
for
a
Federal
agency.
This
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.
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.
The
OMB
control
numbers
for
EPA's
regulations
are
listed
in
40
CFR
part
9
and
48
CFR
chapter
15.

To
comment
on
the
Agency's
need
for
this
information,
the
accuracy
of
the
provided
burden
estimates,
and
any
suggested
methods
for
minimizing
respondent
burden,
including
the
use
of
automated
collection
techniques,
EPA
has
established
a
public
docket
for
this
ICR
under
Docket
ID
No.
RCRA­
2003­
0008,
which
is
available
for
public
viewing
at
the
Office
of
Solid
Waste
and
Emergency
Response
(
OSWER)
Docket
in
the
EPA
Docket
Center
(
EPA/
DC),
EPA
West,
Room
B102,
1301
Constitution
Ave.,
NW,
Washington,
DC.
The
EPA
Docket
Center
Public
Reading
Room
is
open
from
8:
30
a.
m.
to
4:
30
p.
m.,
Monday
through
Friday,
excluding
legal
holidays.
The
telephone
number
for
the
Reading
Room
is
(
202)
566­
1744,
and
the
telephone
number
for
the
OSWER
Docket
is
(
202)
566­
0270.
An
electronic
version
of
the
public
docket
is
available
through
EPA
Dockets
(
EDOCKET)
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
edocket.
Use
EDOCKET
to
submit
or
view
public
comments,
access
the
index
listing
of
the
contents
of
the
public
docket,
and
to
access
those
documents
in
the
public
docket
that
are
available
electronically.
Once
in
the
system,
select
"
search,"
then
key
in
the
docket
ID
number
identified
above.
Also,
you
can
send
comments
to
the
Office
of
Information
and
Regulatory
Affairs,
Office
of
Management
and
Budget,
725
17th
Street,
NW,
Washington,
DC
20503,
Attention:
Desk
Office
for
EPA.
Please
include
the
EPA
Docket
ID
No.
(
RCRA­
2003­
0008)
and
OMB
control
number
(
2050­
0122)
in
any
correspondence.
27
