[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 27 (Tuesday, February 10, 1998)] [Notices] [Pages 6752-6754] From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov] [FR Doc No: 98-3324] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-5964-8] Information Collection Request for the Land Disposal Restrictions Surface Impoundment Study AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this document announces that EPA is planning to submit the following proposed Information Collection Request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Before submitting the ICR to OMB for review and approval, EPA is soliciting comments on specific aspects of the proposed information collection as described below. DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before April 13, 1998. ADDRESSES: Commenters must send an original and two copies of their comments referencing docket number F-98-SIIP-FFFFF to: RCRA Docket Information Center, Office of Solid Waste (5305G), U.S. EPA, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, D.C. 20460. Hand deliveries of comments should be made to the Arlington, VA, address below. Comments may also be submitted electronically through the Internet to: [email protected]. Comments in electronic format should also be [[Page 6753]] identified by the docket number F-98-SIIP-FFFFF. All electronic comments must be submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the use of special characters and any form of encryption. Commenters should not submit electronically any confidential business information (CBI). An original and two copies of CBI must be submitted under separate cover to: RCRA CBI Document Control Officer, Office of Solid Waste (5305W), U.S. EPA, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, D.C. 20460. Public comments and supporting materials are available for viewing in the RCRA Information Center (RIC), located at Crystal Gateway I, First Floor, 1235 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA. The RIC is open from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding federal holidays. To review docket materials, it is recommended that the public make an appointment by calling (703) 603-9230. The public may copy a maximum of 100 pages from any regulatory docket at no charge. Additional copies cost $0.15/page. The index and some supporting materials are available electronically. The ICR is available on the Internet. Follow these instructions to access the information electronically: On the World Wide Web: http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/osw/laws-reg.htm#ldr On FTP: ftp.epa.gov Login: anonymous Password: your Internet address Files are located in /pub/epaoswer The official record for this action will be kept in paper form. Accordingly, EPA will transfer all comments received electronically into paper form and place them in the official record, which will also include all comments submitted directly in writing. EPA responses to comments, whether the comments are written or electronic, will be in a background document to a notice in the Federal Register. EPA will not immediately reply to commenters electronically other than to seek clarification of electronic comments that may be garbled in transmission or during conversion to paper form, as discussed above. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information, contact the RCRA Hotline at 1-800-424-9346 or TDD 1-800-553-7672 (hearing impaired). In the Washington, D.C., metropolitan area, call (703) 412- 9810 or TDD (703) 412-3323. For more detailed information on specific aspects of this information collection, contact Peggy Vyas, Office of Solid Waste (5302W), U.S. EPA, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, D.C. 20460, telephone: (703) 308-5477, E-mail: [email protected]. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background The Land Disposal Program Flexibility Act (LDPFA) of 1996 requires EPA to conduct a study characterizing risks to human health and the environment associated with management of decharacterized wastes 1 in impoundments that are part of Clean Water Act treatment systems. On July 25, 1996, EPA published a notice requesting draft methodologies that would reflect the conceptual design and objectives of the study, including the best method to collect data, data quality assurance/quality control, risk assessment, and peer review (see 61 FR 38684, July 25, 1996). EPA concurrently developed its own draft methodology, which the Agency intended to compare with draft methodologies received from commenters. EPA received eight public comments in response to the July 25, 1996 notice; six were fairly general and two were quite detailed. EPA used many of the comments in developing the methodology for this study. This methodology is described in detail in the background document for this notice, entitled ``Background and Response to Comments Document: Surface Impoundment Study,'' available in the RCRA docket. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ Decharacterized wastes are formerly characteristic wastes (wastes for which the hazardous characteristic of ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, or toxicity has been removed). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Two commenters stated that existing data are inadequate to conduct this study and that additional data would need to be collected. The Chemical Manufacturers Association (CMA) commented that ``The study cannot be completed with existing data. * * * CMA is willing to assist in ensuring that current and usable data is collected.'' Union Carbide stated that ``The survey should focus on collecting * * * site-specific information and supplementing it, as-needed [sic], with appropriate site-specific modeling. * * * Union Carbide understands and accepts that a survey using a case-by-case approach will may [sic] require more work and expense for owners and operators of surface impoundments than a generic national model would. We think the extra value is worth the extra work: regulatory agencies and the public need to understand real risks and actual regulatory circumstances rather than hypothetical cases.'' EPA has chosen to design and implement a study that is consistent with these comments: a study which characterizes risks at a representative sample of actual sites located across the country. To do so, we must first administer a ``screener'' survey to a representative sample of facilities, in order to locate those with surface impoundments that are within the study's scope. Then, for those facilities with surface impoundments within the study's scope, we would need to collect current, site-specific information from data sources in the public domain, and also rather detailed information which will be available only from the facility owners/operators, in order to perform the site-specific modeling suggested by these commenters. Thus, EPA expects to mail out the screener survey to approximately 1500 facilities to determine if they actually have surface impoundments that fall within the scope of the study. Upon identifying 415 facilities that respond positively to the screener questionnaire, EPA will then send those 415 facilities the more detailed information-gathering questionnaire. An important note is that EPA has decided to expand the study's scope beyond that which was mandated in the original legislation. Although the LDPFA only requires EPA to study decharacterized nonhazardous wastes, EPA believes it would be necessary to study the risks from surface impoundments managing non-decharacterized nonhazardous wastes as well, to provide comparison with a group of waste management units that are regulated in a similar manner. In addition, as a result of the re-negotiation of a consent decree between EPA and the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF v. Reilly, Cir. No. 89- 0598, D.D.C.), EPA has now committed to studying the risks associated with air emissions from nonhazardous wastes managed in surface impoundments. That study is to be completed by March 26, 2001. On April 30, 1997, EPA presented a proposed study methodology to a special subcommittee of the EPA Science Advisory Board (SAB)'s Environmental Engineering Committee. The purpose was to obtain peer review on: (1) the technical merits of the overall study structure; (2) the technical merits of the proposed risk assessment; and (3) use of technical experts/peer review. On May 1, 1997, the subcommittee gave EPA verbal feedback on the proposed approach. The written report from the subcommittee's peer review is expected to be available in 1998. CMA expressed interest in assisting EPA with the study's implementation, and requested the opportunity to review and comment on the information-gathering questionnaire. After revising [[Page 6754]] the information-gathering questionnaire to reflect CMA's comments, EPA used this revised questionnaire in a pilot study, and received both comments and burden estimates from the seven facilities 2 that participated in the pilot study. EPA revised the information- gathering questionnaire again, upon completion of the pilot study. Both the screener questionnaire and the information-gathering questionnaire are part of the background document for this notice. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \2\ Of the nine facilities (four CMA volunteers, one American Forest and Paper Association volunteer, and four non-volunteers) that were sent pilot questionnaires, seven responded. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The proposed risk modeling framework, described in ``Technical Memorandum--Proposed Risk Assessment Modeling Framework for the Surface Impoundment Study,'' is available in the RCRA docket for this notice. The model used in the pilot study, described in ``Technical Memorandum--Modifications to the Pilot Study Model for the Surface Impoundment Study,'' is available in the RCRA docket for this notice. The Agency also conducted a sensitivity analysis on the proposed risk modeling framework. The sensitivity analysis identifies the ``risk-driving variables'' and their relative importance in the model outputs. Copies of the sensitivity analysis, entitled ``Technical Memorandum--Preliminary Sensitivity Analyses for the Surface Impoundment Study,'' are available in the RCRA docket for this notice. 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. II. Burden Statement EPA estimates each respondent will take 4 hours to respond to the screener questionnaire, at a cost of $193 per respondent. The total hour burden of the screener questionnaire is estimated to be 6000 hours. The total cost of the screener questionnaire is estimated to be $288,750. EPA estimates each respondent will take 89.5 hours to respond to the information-gathering questionnaire, at a cost of $4415 per respondent. The total hour burden of the information-gathering questionnaire is estimated to be 37,142.5 hours. The total cost of the information-gathering questionnaire is estimated to be $1,832,225. 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. III. Request for Comment The EPA solicits comments on: (I) 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) 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) the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (iv) how to 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 information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. Dated: February 3, 1998. Elizabeth Cotsworth, Acting Director Office of Solid Waste. [FR Doc. 98-3324 Filed 2-9-98; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P