[Federal Register: April 1, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 63)]
[Notices]
[Page 17145-17148]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr01ap04-68]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[Docket No. RCRA-2001-0032; FRL-7642-1]
Announcement of a Public Meeting on Development and
Implementation of Electronic Manifests To Accompany Hazardous Waste
Shipments
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of public meeting.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA's Office of Solid Waste is holding a two-day public
meeting on May 19-20, 2004, to discuss and obtain public input on a
national electronic manifest (``e-manifest'') system. Specifically, the
purpose of this meeting is to present our rulemaking progress to date
and to solicit input and preferences from stakeholders and other
interested persons on the development and implementation of the e-
manifest, as well as on alternative information technology (IT)
systems. Interested parties are encouraged to attend the meeting and
participate actively in these discussions. An agenda is provided in
section III of this notice; this agenda may change as the Agency
continues to identify topics that may be of interest. The meeting will
consist of a plenary session supplemented by concurrent breakout
sessions. The meeting structure will be governed by four main areas of
e-manifest system development:
(1) Business processes and functionalities or ``work flow;'
(2) Governance implications (management, maintenance);
(3) IT system architecture and implications; and,
(4) Funding sources and mechanisms for deploying such a system.
The Agency's primary objective is to collect creative feedback from
stakeholders on the merits of different approaches to establishing an
electronic manifest system capability. In order to meet the goals of
the meeting, we encourage meeting participants from a variety of
professional backgrounds to attend, such as IT vendors, state
governmental and IT staff, and hazardous waste handlers (generators,
transporters, waste management firms). Based on the input received at
this meeting, from comments received, and from our own internal
discussions, the Agency will decide whether to proceed with an e-
manifest rule, and if so, how it should be designed and implemented. If
the Agency decides to proceed with such a rule, the Agency will re-
propose and solicit additional comments before any final decisions/
rules are promulgated.
DATES: The stakeholder meeting is scheduled for May 19-20, 2004.
ADDRESSES: EPA will hold the meeting in Washington, DC, at our EPA East
Public Hearing Room, with nearby meeting rooms also being used for the
breakout sessions. The Public Hearing Room is located at Room 1153 EPA
East, 1201 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rachel White, Office of Solid Waste,
telephone: (703) 306-0023; fax: (703) 308-0514; e-mail:
white.rachel@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does This Meeting Apply to Me?
While the meeting is open to the public in general, the identified
topics may be of particular interest to persons who use the RCRA
Uniform Manifest, persons who are interested in developing IT solutions
to implement an electronic manifest system, or persons who are
concerned about the implementation of RCRA in these settings.
Potentially interested parties may include but are not limited to:
hazardous waste generators; hazardous waste treatment, storage and
disposal facilities (TSDFs); hazardous waste transporters; Federal,
State and local environmental and transportation regulators;
enforcement personnel; IT vendors interested in hazardous waste
[[Page 17146]]
applications and products; non-governmental organizations; and trade
associations dealing with hazardous waste transportation issues. People
with specific technical expertise, such as computer system specialists,
information officers, IT managers and others are encouraged to attend.
If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this meeting
to a particular entity, organization or occupational discipline,
consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
B. How May I Participate in This Meeting?
For security purposes, all persons wishing to attend the meeting
must register in advance no later than May 12, 2004 with the contact
person listed above or online at: http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/gener/manifest/e-man.htm.
Access to the meeting for non-registered
attendees may be denied by EPA building security or by limited seating
capacity. When registering, please provide your name, affiliation,
mailing address, telephone number, and e-mail address if you have one.
A valid photo ID will be required to gain access to the EPA meeting
rooms. Any person needing special accessibility accommodations at this
meeting should inform the contact person above when registering.
C. May I Submit Comments on This Meeting?
We are not accepting comments prior to the stakeholder meeting,
because we believe that participation in the meeting itself is critical
to understanding the various approaches on which we are seeking
feedback. However, if you wish to bring materials to the meeting for
submission to the public record, we will include them in the official
meeting proceedings package, which will be submitted to the docket
following the meeting. In addition, meeting participants may also
submit their written comments to the docket following the stakeholder
meeting; participants will have 30 days after the meeting to submit
their comments to the EPA Docket (Docket ID No. RCRA 2001-0032) that we
created for the May 2001 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), which
can be found at http:/www.epa.gov/edocket. Documents in the official
public docket are listed in the index list in EPA's electronic public
docket and comment system, EDOCKET. Documents may be available either
electronically or in hard copy. Electronic documents may be viewed
through EDOCKET. Hard copy documents may be viewed at 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) 566-1742,
and the telephone number for the EPA Docket Center is (202) 566-0270.
In addition to providing a written summary of the meeting, we will
submit contributed discussion materials to EDOCKET a few weeks after
the meeting. We also will enter the proceedings from this meeting into
EDOCKET (Docket ID No. RCRA 2001-0032).
An electronic version of the public docket is available through
EDOCKET. You may use EDOCKET at http://www.epa.gov/edocket/ to submit
or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of
the official 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 appropriate docket identification number.
Certain types of information will not be placed in EDOCKET.
Information claimed as CBI and other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute, which is not included in the official public
docket, will not be available for public viewing in EPA's electronic
public docket. EPA's policy is that copyrighted material will not be
placed in EPA's electronic public docket but will be available only in
printed, paper form in the official public docket. Publicly available
docket materials that are not available electronically may be viewed at
the docket facility identified in Unit I.C.
For public commenters, it is important to note that EPA's policy is
that public comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper,
will be made available for public viewing in EPA's electronic public
docket as EPA receives them and without change, unless the comment
contains copyrighted material, CBI, or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. When EPA identifies a comment
containing copyrighted material, EPA will provide a reference to that
material in the version of the comment that is placed in EPA's
electronic public docket. The entire printed comment, including the
copyrighted material, will be available in the public docket.
Public comments submitted on computer disks that are mailed or
delivered to the docket will be transferred to EPA's electronic public
docket. Public comments that are mailed or delivered to the Docket will
be scanned and placed in EPA's electronic public docket. Where
practical, physical objects will be photographed, and the photograph
will be placed in EPA's electronic public docket along with a brief
description written by the docket staff.
D. How and To Whom Do I Submit Comments After the Meeting?
You may submit comments electronically, by mail, or through hand
delivery/courier. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, identify the
appropriate docket identification number in the subject line on the
first page of your comment. Please ensure that your comments are
submitted within the specified comment period.
1. Electronically. If you submit an electronic comment as
prescribed below, EPA recommends that you include your name, mailing
address, and an e-mail address or other contact information in the body
of your comment. Also include this contact information on the outside
of any disk or CD-ROM you submit, and in any cover letter accompanying
the disk or CD-ROM. This ensures that you can be identified as the
submitter of the comment and allows EPA to contact you in case EPA
cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties or needs further
information on the substance of your comment. EPA's policy is that EPA
will not edit your comment, and any identifying or contact information
provided in the body of a comment will be included as part of the
comment that is placed in the official public docket, and made
available in EPA's electronic public docket. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment.
Your use of EPA's electronic public docket to submit comments to
EPA electronically is EPA's preferred method for receiving comments. Go
directly to EDOCKET at http://www.epa.gov/edocket, and follow the
online instructions for submitting comments. To access EPA's electronic
public docket from the EPA Internet Home Page, select ``Information
Sources,'' ``Dockets,'' and ``EDOCKET.'' Once in the system, select
``search,'' and then key in Docket ID No. RCRA-2001-0032. The system is
an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity, e-mail address, or other contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. Electronic comments may also be
sent
[[Page 17147]]
through the Federal wide eRulemaking Web site at http://www.regulations.gov.
Comments may be sent by electronic mail (e-mail) to
rcra-docket@epa.gov, Attention Docket ID No. RCRA-2001-0032. In contrast to
EPA's electronic public docket, EPA's e-mail system is not an
``anonymous access'' system. If you send an e-mail comment directly to
the Docket without going through EPA's electronic public docket, EPA's
e-mail system automatically captures your e-mail address. E-mail
addresses that are automatically captured by EPA's e-mail system are
included as part of the comment that is placed in the official public
docket, and made available in EPA's electronic public docket.
2. By Mail. You may submit comments on a disk or CD-ROM that you
mail to the mailing address identified below. These electronic
submissions will be accepted in WordPerfect or ASCII file format. Avoid
the use of special characters and any form of encryption. Send your
comments to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency,
Mailcode: 5305T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460,
Attention Docket ID No. RCRA-2001-0032.
3. By Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to: OSWER
Docket, Environmental Protection Agency, EPA West, 1301 Constitution
Ave, NW., Room B102, Washington, DC, Attention Docket ID No. RCRA-2001-
0032. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal
hours of operation as identified in Unit 1.C.
II. Background
For more than 20 years, the hazardous waste manifest system has
provided a paper trail to track hazardous waste shipments from ``cradle
to grave.'' Waste generators, transporters, and treatment, storage and
disposal facilities (TSDFs) each participate in documenting the
movement of waste shipments through the use of the current paper
manifest system. About 28 states currently collect completed manifest
copies from hazardous waste generators and TSDFs, manually keying or
scanning the data into state tracking databases. These states utilize
manifest data for program management, for identifying trends in waste
management, for enforcement and for assessing waste management fees.
Because of the volume of manifests circulated each year (our 2002
estimates range between 2.5 million and 5 million), and the number of
copies that must be signed sequentially and retained in files for
inspection, the paperwork burden attributed to the manifest system is
among the largest that results from current EPA-required data
collections. We estimate that the current paper-based system results in
annual costs to waste handlers and states of between $193 million and
$404 million. Thus, for several years, EPA has sought to transform the
manifest system from its current paper-based approach to one that takes
greater advantage of electronic information technologies. We believe
that successful implementation of an e-manifest system could
substantially reduce the costs and paperwork burden associated with the
current manifest system, while improving the ability to track waste
shipments and improving the quality and timeliness of manifest data.
In May 2001, EPA published an NPRM which included proposed changes
that would standardize the manifest form, and which proposed standards
that would enable manifests to be completed, signed and transmitted
electronically (See 66 FR 28240, http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-WASTE/2001/May/Day-22/f11909.htm
). Specific to the e-manifest, we proposed
alternative IT approaches involving: (1) Standardized data exchange
format using XML schema and style sheet and Electronic Data Interchange
(EDI) formats; (2) digital and digitized electronic signatures; and,
(3) computer security requirements aimed at ensuring data integrity,
authentication and non-repudiation. The proposed approach assumed that
EPA's role would be limited to setting the e-manifest system standards,
while actual e-manifest systems would be deployed by private parties,
including waste firms and IT vendors wishing to establish and market
this type of product or service. This assumption was based on EPA's
desire to maintain its current policy role vis a vis the manifest.
However, public comments on the proposed rule indicated diverse and
substantial levels of support for an e-manifest system, but cast doubt
on the viability of EPA's assumption that waste handlers or others
would develop and broadly deploy low-cost, interoperable systems.
Commenters from the waste management sector indicated that these
private systems could be costly, duplicative and possibly inconsistent
with one another. Additionally, the rigor and prescriptiveness of the
technical and security standards we proposed as necessary to support a
decentralized or distributed e-manifest approach raised questions for
commenters about the feasibility of going forward with this approach.
As a result, EPA decided to defer final action on the e-manifest
portion of the May 2001 proposed rule. Instead, we conducted additional
analyses related to the e-manifest and decided to look more closely at
alternatives to our proposed approach. Several commenters, for example,
expressed the view that a national, web-based system hosted by EPA
would be a much more practical and workable solution to the e-manifest
work flow. However, this would require EPA to assume a more centralized
manifest collection role that it does not now play with respect to the
paper manifest, and it would involve substantial start-up and
maintenance costs for which EPA would need to identify stable sources
of funding. This alternative approach also raises the question whether
EPA is the party best suited to develop a consistent, national solution
or whether other parties might more appropriately develop and host such
a system.
Given this background, the purpose of this meeting is to engage
interested stakeholders in a two-day public idea exchange aimed at
helping us identify how best to proceed with selecting and implementing
the future direction of the e-manifest, if the Agency decides to
proceed with such a rulemaking. We plan to structure and conduct the
meeting to reach our objectives of receiving broad, rigorous input and
assessment of alternative design and implementation approaches to a
national e-manifest system and, where possible, identify if there is
public support for the key components of such a system. Additional
background information about the May 2001 proposed rule, including the
proposed electronic manifest approach, is available at: http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/gener/manifest/mods.htm.
General
background information about the hazardous waste manifest system is
available at: http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/gener/manifest/index.htm
.
III. Agenda
The two-day stakeholder meeting will consist of a plenary session
supplemented by concurrent breakout sessions. As the meeting date
approaches, we will post more detailed information on the meeting
agenda and discussion materials on EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/gener/manifest/e-man.htm.
Generally, the
agenda will focus discussion in four key areas:
1. E-Manifest Business Process: This discussion will focus on the
e-manifest business process flow, addressing existing requirements and
new opportunities (potential roles and functions) of the various types,
locations and sizes of stakeholders involved in
[[Page 17148]]
each step of the RCRA manifest process and their geographic or other
dependencies. The e-manifest could serve as a mechanism for
consolidating a number of functions currently performed by hazardous
waste generators, transporters, TSDFs, State regulators, enforcement
personnel and Federal regulators. For example, reporting requirements
for the RCRA Biennial Report and other data collection programs could
be incorporated into one function through the e-manifest which, if
implemented under a ``shared IT services'' approach, would allow for
integrated reporting and faster data collection and analysis.
Stakeholders include, but are not limited to, hazardous waste
generators, transporters and TSDFs, as well as State government
environmental agencies, international organizations, IT vendors,
hazardous waste brokers, and various Federal agencies such as U.S.
Customs and the Department of Justice.
2. E-Manifest Information Technology Architecture: This discussion
will focus on the information technology (IT) and other technical
aspects of different e-manifest system approaches (i.e., software and
hardware architectures). Within this area, four main IT subsystems will
be explored:
E-manifest data subsystem: key assumptions,
questions and issues to be resolved related to manifest data (e.g.,
input, transfer, output, storage, archive).
E-manifest system services subsystem: key
components of the IT application architecture and how they interrelate
(i.e., interoperability), as well as defining discrete transactions
that comprise the entire process.
E-manifest data security subsystem: how manifest
data and IT applications will be kept secure.
E-manifest infrastructure subsystem: how data
and IT applications will be managed (maintained, updated).
3. E-Manifest Governance: This discussion area supplements the
business process discussion, addressing the major issues associated
with who will design, implement, manage, maintain, certify and approve
e-manifest system IT software, hardware, guidance, administrative
processes, modifications, upgrades, interfaces and technical formats.
We are interested in assessing institutional arrangements for
governance of the e-manifest system, paying attention to their benefits
and costs (trade-offs). For purpose of this meeting discussion, we have
identified two fundamentally different approaches, which we refer to as
``shared services'' and ``distributed services.'' The ``distributed
services'' approach, under which private firms develop e-manifest
systems that adhere to a set of promulgated standards, was proposed in
the May 2001 proposed rule.
Another approach we have identified calls for a ``shared services''
system in which EPA or some other entity establishes an e-manifest
system that is accessed through a shared central portal. This would
mean that the entire manifest work flow would be hosted by EPA or
another entity on a Web-based system.
4. E-Manifest Funding Approaches: This discussion will identify
alternative funding approaches for both system start-up and annual
life-cycle maintenance costs that may be needed to implement any
``shared services'' type of system. Clearly, EPA will not be able to
move forward with any ``shared services'' approach involving our
developing and hosting new applications or systems unless we are able
to identify a stable source of funding for the entire life cycle of
such a system. During this discussion, the Agency will present
materials describing a variety of possible funding mechanisms (e.g.,
user fees, share-in-savings and other cost-recovery contracts, new
Federal appropriations earmarked for system development, and
reallocation/earmarking of EPA State grants), and discuss how such
funding mechanisms might be suited for system development or for
operating and maintenance costs. We will seek from our stakeholders
their creative ideas, suggestions, and feedback on these funding
mechanisms, as well as any additional mechanisms suggested by
stakeholders during the meeting.
Based on the information received at this meeting, from public
comments, and our own internal discussions, the Agency will decide
whether to proceed with an e-manifest rule, and if so, how it should be
designed and implemented. Again, if the Agency decides to proceed with
such a rule, the Agency will re-propose and solicit additional comment
before we proceed with any final decisions.
Dated: March 12, 2004.
Matt Hale,
Acting Director, Office of Solid Waste.
[FR Doc. 04-7329 Filed 3-31-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P