( d) " Loaded" costs above are not intended to double count clerical labor costs in overhead. Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 57 Step 4: Annual burden reduction: This step involved the multiplication of the monetary ( dollar) value of burden hour subtotals per permit action generated in Step 3 ( displayed in a table below), times the respective future annual nationwide frequency of permit actions ( arrayed in Attachment A) associated with:

° Four types of permit actions.

° Three types of eligible units.

Future permit actions and associated burden reduction cost savings are arrayed according to a consequence flow diagram or schedule, consisting of two timeline elements:

Attachment A at the end of this document present the respective estimated cost savings ( i. e. combined savings,

TSFs savings only, and permitting authorities savings only). A Table below presents the estimated future average annual frequency of the four types of RCRA permitting actions, as expected to apply to eligible TSFs. Attachment B arrays these annual actions according to the 30 year POA. This future average frequency is a borrowed working assumption in this economic analysis from ICR " Source C". ( Note that Section IV of this document presents a sensitivity analysis of cost savings to alternative non constant, future permit action frequencies).

A Table below summarizes the AAE results of this step separately for both eligible TSFs and for permitting authorities, as well as on combined national cost savings basis ( i. e. eligible TSFs + permitting authorities).

Estimate of Potential National Cost Savings Associated With the Paperwork Burden Reduction Features for OSW's RCRA " Standardized" Permit Final Rule ( 2001$)

Burden Reduction Cost Savings Recipient Average Annual Savings* ($ millions/ year) Percentag e Share Scope # 1:

On site units only Scope # 2:

On site & off site units 1. Eligible hazardous waste TSFs $ 0.74 $ 0.94 35%

2. USEPA Regional Offices & State Permit Authorities $ 1.35 $ 1.68 65%

Combined National Savings ( 1+ 2) = $ 2.09 $ 2.62 100%

With Estimation Uncertainty Assigned**:

Lower bound estimate ( 10%)= $ 1.88 $ 2.36 Upper bound estimate (+ 30%) = $ 2.72 $ 3.41 Explanatory Notes:

( a) * Average annual savings estimated over a future 30 year period 2005 2034, at constant 2001$ using 7% discount rate.

( b) * Uncertainty: An overall cost savings estimation uncertainty bound of  10% to + 30% applied per " Recommended Practice Nr. 18R

97" ( 15 June 1998, Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering http:// www. aacei. org ). Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 58 Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 59 On a per permit basis, the " standardized" permit will affect a decrease in average RCRA permitting costs ( i. e. a reduction in administrative burden),

ranging in combined value to eligible TSFs and to permitting authorities, from about $ 100 to $ 20,800 per permit action ( 2001$), depending upon the type of permit action involved ( i. e. a reduction ranging from 2 to 480 hours per permit action).

The potential economic incentive to eligible TSFs of converting ( i. e. switching) to a standardized permit is evidenced by the average $ 459 permit conversion cost being almost completely offset by the $ 400 savings to TSFs of a single " significant" modification ( or of the savings from about four " routine" modifications: 4 x $ 106 = $ 424). At a very minimum in absence of future permit modification savings, the $ 6,020 savings to TSFs from future permit renewals after conversion, results in a minimum net savings of $ 5,561 per permit ( i. e. $ 6,020  $ 459).

In contrast to expected cost savings, permit conversion actions ( i. e. switching conventional RCRA permits to " standardized" RCRA permits before expiration), are expected to result in a temporary increase in permitting costs of about $ 500 per conversion action because conversion actions would not occur under the conventional RCRA permitting process baseline.

The next table compares the estimated cost savings for a standardized permit action, to the average burden cost associated with conventional RCRA permit actions. The average burden reduction ranges between 4% to 40%, depending upon ( a) the type of permit action, and ( b) whether burden hours or burden cost are used as a comparative measure of burden.

Estimated Reduction in RCRA Permit Burden, as a Percentage of Average Burden for a Conventional RCRA Permit Action Type of Permit Action % Hour Savings % Cost Savings A. New Permits & Permit Renewals:

A1. Containers 33% 25%

A2. Tank systems 34% 26%

A3. Cont bldgs 40% 31%

B. Permit modifications:

B1. Routine 9% 8%

B2. Significant 4% 4%

Explanatory Notes:

( a) Source: See supporting data and computations in Table provided as Attachment to this document.

( b) Percentage hour and percentage cost savings are slightly different because of differences in labor category wage rates and the relative proportion of four labor categories in contributing to savings. Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 60 II D. Impact Category # 2:

Changes to Closure Financial Assurance Requirements Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 61 RCRA Standardized Permit Financial Assurance for Facility Closure Effect of a Shorter Trust Fund** Pay in Period ( 3 Years Compared to 10 Years)

Item POA Year A. 10 Year Pay In B. 3 Year Pay In Annual Management Fee*** Capital Investment Installments**** Annual Management Fee*** Capital Investment Installments****

Base fee* Low end Median High end Low end Median High end Base fee** Low end Median High end Low end Median High end 1 2005 $ 637 $ 15 $ 651 $ 17,049 $ 1,414 $ 60,813 $ 3,983,373 $ 637 $ 50 $ 2,169 $ 56,829 $ 4,714 $ 202,711 $ 13,277,911 2 2006 $ 0 $ 30 $ 1,272 $ 33,339 $ 1,252 $ 53,851 $ 3,527,317 $ 0 $ 101 $ 4,333 $ 113,520 $ 4,372 $ 188,024 $ 12,315,926 3 2007 $ 0 $ 43 $ 1,867 $ 48,905 $ 1,098 $ 47,198 $ 3,091,550 $ 0 $ 141 $ 4,257 $ 159,335 $ 3,141 $ 135,078 $ 8,847,866 4 2008 $ 0 $ 58 $ 2,483 $ 65,050 $ 1,055 $ 45,379 $ 2,972,412 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 5 2009 $ 0 $ 72 $ 3,115 $ 81,605 $ 995 $ 42,810 $ 2,804,107 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 6 2010 $ 0 $ 87 $ 3,753 $ 98,326 $ 913 $ 39,267 $ 2,572,053 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 7 2011 $ 0 $ 102 $ 4,384 $ 114,861 $ 801 $ 34,431 $ 2,255,262 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 8 2012 $ 0 $ 116 $ 4,988 $ 130,698 $ 647 $ 27,811 $ 1,821,674 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 9 2013 $ 0 $ 129 $ 3,876 $ 145,060 $ 432 $ 18,595 $ 1,217,990 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 10 2014 $ 0 $ 141 $ 4,257 $ 159,335 $ 342 $ 14,698 $ 962,767 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 11 2015 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 12 2016 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 13 2017 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 14 2018 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 15 2019 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 16 2020 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 17 2021 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 18 2022 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 19 2023 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 20 2024 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 21 2025 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 22 2026 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 23 2027 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 24 2028 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 25 2029 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 26 2030 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 27 2031 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 28 2032 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 29 2033 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 30 2034 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 Nondiscounted totals = $ 637 $ 794 $ 30,645 $ 894,228 $ 8,949 $ 384,852 $ 25,208,507 $ 637 $ 293 $ 10,759 $ 329,684 $ 12,227 $ 525,813 $ 34,441,703 Net present value = $ 637 $ 537 $ 21,147 $ 605,407 $ 7,189 $ 309,143 $ 20,249,450 $ 637 $ 268 $ 9,936 $ 302,092 $ 11,543 $ 496,417 $ 32,516,191 Avg annual equivalent = $ 51 $ 43 $ 1,704 $ 48,788 $ 579 $ 24,913 $ 1,631,830 $ 51 $ 22 $ 801 $ 24,345 $ 930 $ 40,004 $ 2,620,363 Difference Between Pay In Periods: Fees Funding Total NPV = ($ 11,211) $ 187,273 $ 176,062 AAE = ($ 903) $ 15,092 $ 14,188 Explanatory Notes:

( a) * Trust funds represent one of seven different types of facility closure financial assurance mechanisms, used by about 12% of RCRA TSDFs.

( b) ** Base fee is an initial administrative cost only in the first year to set up the trust fund ( from ICR " Source C" Exhibit 8).

( c) *** Annual management fee is variable in relation to cumulative value of trust fund.

Fee Cumulative Value 1.0% < $ 500,000 0.7% < $ 1,000,000 0.5% < $ 1,500,000 0.4% >$ 1,500,000 Source: " Financial Responsibility for Hazardous Waste Facilities", ICF Inc., 09 Nov 1993, p. 9.

( d) **** Capital investment installments ( annual payments) based on two components: Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 62 ( 1) TSF closure financial assurance trustfund payment formula required by 40 CFR 264.143( a)( 3) & 265.143( a)( 3) for interim status TSFs.

( 2) 15 Oct 1996 USEPA Region 4 study containing facility closure cost estimates made by a non random sample of 100 TSDF owners/ operators between 1988 1995 ( Table 1, p. 7):

Annual interest payout possible when cumulative value of trustfund exceeds closure cost estimate, upon written request ( 40 CFR 264.143( a)( 7)) & 265.143( a)( 7) for interim status TSFs).

The following inflation adjusted closure cost estimates are used above as trustfund investment total pay in target values ( although high end value may not apply to eligible TSFs):

1994$ 2002$

Low end $ 11,697 $ 14,141 Median $ 503,025 $ 608,132 High end $ 32,949,040 $ 39,833,732 Closure cost inflation update factor ( 2002$/ 1994$) is based on the Engineering News Record magazine " Construction Cost Index" for the USA = 1.209 ( e) Discount rate for computation of net present value ( NPV) and average annual equivalent ( AAE) over the period of analysis = 7% Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 63 " Standardized" RCRA Permit Financial Assurance for Facility Closure Computation of Annual Pay in Investment Required Under 10 Year and 3 Year Pay In Periods Item Period of analysis ( POA)

year I. Year end Investment Cumulative Value Ii. Remaining Closure Cost to Fund at Year end A. 10 Year Pay In B. 3 Year Pay In A. 10 Year Pay In B. 3 Year Pay In Low end Median High end Low end Median High end Low end Median High end Low end Median High end 1 2005 $ 1,513 $ 65,070 $ 4,262,209 $ 5,044 $ 216,900 $ 14,207,364 $ 12,628 $ 543,062 $ 35,571,523 $ 9,097 $ 391,232 $ 25,626,368 2 2006 $ 2,959 $ 127,245 $ 8,334,793 $ 10,075 $ 433,269 $ 28,379,921 $ 11,182 $ 480,887 $ 31,498,939 $ 4,066 $ 174,863 $ 11,453,811 3 2007 $ 4,340 $ 186,654 $ 12,226,187 $ 14,141 $ 608,132 $ 39,833,732 $ 9,801 $ 421,478 $ 27,607,545 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 4 2008 $ 5,773 $ 248,276 $ 16,262,502 $ 8,368 $ 359,856 $ 23,571,230 5 2009 $ 7,243 $ 311,461 $ 20,401,271 $ 6,899 $ 296,671 $ 19,432,461 6 2010 $ 8,726 $ 375,279 $ 24,581,457 $ 5,415 $ 232,853 $ 15,252,275 7 2011 $ 10,194 $ 438,389 $ 28,715,290 $ 3,947 $ 169,743 $ 11,118,443 8 2012 $ 11,600 $ 498,834 $ 32,674,552 $ 2,542 $ 109,297 $ 7,159,181 9 2013 $ 12,874 $ 553,649 $ 36,265,020 $ 1,267 $ 54,483 $ 3,568,712 10 2014 $ 14,141 $ 608,132 $ 39,833,732 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 Explanatory Notes:

( a) Capital investment installments ( annual payments) based on two components:

! TSF closure financial assurance trustfund payment formula required by 40 CFR 264.143( a)( 3) & 265.143( a)( 3) for interim status TSFs.

! Source: 15 Oct 1996 USEPA Region 4 study containing facility closure cost estimates based on a non random sample of 100 TSDF owners/ operators between 1988 1995 ( Table 1, p. 7).

( b) Annual interest payout possible when cumulative value of trustfund exceeds closure cost estimate, upon written request ( 40 CFR 264.143( a)( 7)) & 265.143( a)( 7) for interim status TSFs).

( c) The following inflation adjusted closure cost estimates are used above as trustfund investment total pay in target values:

1994$ 2002$

Low end $ 11,697 $ 14,141 Median $ 503,025 $ 608,132 High end $ 32,949,040 $ 39,833,732 ( d) Closure cost inflation update factor ( 2002$/ 1994$) is based on the Engineering News Record magazine " Construction Cost Index" for the USA = 1.209 ( e) Discount rate for computation of net present value ( NPV) and average annual equivalent ( AAE) over the period of analysis = 7% Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 64 Estimate of National Total Annual Increased Cost From Reduction in Pay In Period from 10 Years to 3 Years Associated with Closure Financial Assurance Using Trust Funds for RCRA " Standarized" Permits Final Rule Scope Annual Number of Affected Facilities Median Impact Per Facility ( Added Cost)* National Impact ( Added Cost)

# 1: If on site only TSFs 2 new permits/ year $ 14,200/ year per TSF $ 28,400 # 2 If on site + off site TSFs 3 new permits/ year $ 14,200/ year per TSF $ 42,600 * Derivation of median impact per facility provided in a table in the Attachments to this document. Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 65 Financial Test for " Standardized" RCRA Permits Savings for Not Requiring an Independent Audit Report Item Year Scope # 1: If on site waste units only Scope # 2: If on site & off site waste units Avg annual eligible new TSFs* Average %

using financial test** Average annual applicable TSFs Average annual cost savings Avg annual eligible new TSFs* Average %

using financial test** Average annual applicable TSFs Average annual cost savings 1 2005 2 45% 0.9 $ 222 3 45% 1.4 $ 333 2 2006 2 45% 0.9 $ 222 3 45% 1.4 $ 333 3 2007 2 45% 0.9 $ 222 3 45% 1.4 $ 333 4 2008 2 45% 0.9 $ 222 3 45% 1.4 $ 333 5 2009 2 45% 0.9 $ 222 3 45% 1.4 $ 333 6 2010 2 45% 0.9 $ 222 3 45% 1.4 $ 333 7 2011 2 45% 0.9 $ 222 3 45% 1.4 $ 333 8 2012 2 45% 0.9 $ 222 3 45% 1.4 $ 333 9 2013 2 45% 0.9 $ 222 3 45% 1.4 $ 333 10 2014 2 45% 0.9 $ 222 3 45% 1.4 $ 333 11 2015 2 45% 0.9 $ 222 3 45% 1.4 $ 333 12 2016 2 45% 0.9 $ 222 3 45% 1.4 $ 333 13 2017 2 45% 0.9 $ 222 3 45% 1.4 $ 333 14 2018 2 45% 0.9 $ 222 3 45% 1.4 $ 333 15 2019 2 45% 0.9 $ 222 3 45% 1.4 $ 333 16 2020 2 45% 0.9 $ 222 3 45% 1.4 $ 333 17 2021 2 45% 0.9 $ 222 3 45% 1.4 $ 333 18 2022 2 45% 0.9 $ 222 3 45% 1.4 $ 333 19 2023 2 45% 0.9 $ 222 3 45% 1.4 $ 333 20 2024 2 45% 0.9 $ 222 3 45% 1.4 $ 333 21 2025 2 45% 0.9 $ 222 3 45% 1.4 $ 333 22 2026 2 45% 0.9 $ 222 3 45% 1.4 $ 333 23 2027 2 45% 0.9 $ 222 3 45% 1.4 $ 333 24 2028 2 45% 0.9 $ 222 3 45% 1.4 $ 333 25 2029 2 45% 0.9 $ 222 3 45% 1.4 $ 333 26 2030 2 45% 0.9 $ 222 3 45% 1.4 $ 333 27 2031 2 45% 0.9 $ 222 3 45% 1.4 $ 333 28 2032 2 45% 0.9 $ 222 3 45% 1.4 $ 333 29 2033 2 45% 0.9 $ 222 3 45% 1.4 $ 333 30 2034 2 45% 0.9 $ 222 3 45% 1.4 $ 333 Column totals= 60 27 $ 6,669 90 42 $ 10,004 Net Present Value ( NPV) = $ 2,952 $ 4,427 Average Annual Equivalent ( AAE) = $ 238 $ 357 Explanatory Notes:

( a) * Average annual eligible new TSFs obtaining a standardized permit from ICR " Source C".

( b) ** Percent of eligible new TSFs using financial test or corporate guarantee financial assurance for TSF closure, based on 1996 USEPA Region 4 study of 100 TSFs.

( c) Assumed average burden cost reduction per permit action based on the same burden as preparation and submittal of a CFO letter ( from 1999 ICR " Source C" Exhibit 8) = Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 66 $ 247 ( d) NPV and AAE computed using discount rate = 7% Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 67 II E. Impact Category # 3:

Potential Added Cost for Site Audit Report for Compliance Certification Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 68 Option A: Self Audit The following assumptions constitute the basis for developing a cost estimate for the final rule's site audit and audit report requirements ( 40 CFR 270.275( f) & 270.280) for submitting a notice of intent compliance certification.

Compliance Certification Self Audit Unit Cost Assumptions ( includes cost of conducting audit & writing/ submitting an audit report)

Facility Waste Unit Size Type of Personnel Involved Audit Tasks & Labor Time Assumption* Estimated Cost**

Small unit Assume similar labor mix as medium size Assume 50% of medium size cost:*

56 hours x 50% = 28 hours Assume 50% of medium size cost:*

$ 2,840 x 50% = $ 1,420 Medium unit Geologist/ engineer/ scientist 3 days inspecting site ( 30 hours) + 16 hours in office ( 46 hours) x ($ 53/ hour) = $ 2,440 Program manager/ lawyer 2 hours ( review, meetings) ( 2 hours) x ($ 88/ hour) = $ 180 Staff assistant/ typist 8 hours ( typing, graphics, maps) ( 8 hours) x ($ 27/ hour) = $ 220 Medium unit subtotals = 56 hours $ 2,840 Large unit Assume similar labor mix as medium size Assume 135% of medium size cost:***

56 hours x 135% = 76 hours Assume 135% of medium size cost:***

$ 2,840 x 135% = $ 3,840 Prevalence weighted averages = 50 hours $ 2,500 Explanatory Notes:

( e) * Small and medium size unit labor time assumptions formulated 29 Oct 2002 by Ross Elliott, Environmental Protection Specialist, USEPA Office of Solid Waste Hazardous Waste Identification Division, based on prior professional experience in conducting industry site audits.

( f) ** Labor wage rates ($/ hour) are from the labor wage rate table for legal, managerial, technical, and clerical labor categories, as displayed elsewhere in this background document, which includes labor fringe benefits and labor overhead costs. The labor wage applied in this table for the program manager/ lawyer line item ( medium unit size) represents the average wage for managers and lawyers from the labor wage rate reference table displayed elsewhere in this background document.

( g) *** Large size unit cost 135% multiplier assumption developed by Office of Solid Waste, Economics, Methods & Risk Analysis Division, based on analysis of a 1997 cost data for 64 RCRA hazardous waste management permitting paperwork requirements in the USEPA report " Estimating Costs for the Economic Benefits of RCRA Noncompliance", Sept 1997, Office of Enforcement & Compliance Assistance ( http:// www. epa. gov/ epaoswer/ hazwaste/ gener/ f006/ s0004. pdf). A table in Attachment A to this document presents the data spreadsheet.

( h) Prevalence weights: small units = 43%; medium units = 28%; large units = 29%. Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 69 Option B: Third Party Audit Compared to the final rule's self audit procedure for compliance certification, another audit option considered by OSW was to require a third party audit including the following audit requirements:

( a) Independent third party audit personnel ( e. g. contractor or consultant)

( b) ISO 14012 audit personnel certification ( c) The auditor must follow the procedures and instructions in USEPA Office of Enforcement & Compliance Assistance ( OECA) audit guidance.

As displayed in the next table, the US Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics ( BLS) provides national average wage rate data for three alternative occupational categories which are specific ( unique) to the activity of compliance auditing/ certification ( http:// www. bls. gov/ oes/ 2000/ oes_ nat. htm). The second table below presents an estimate of the total cost for a third party compliance audit according to small, medium, and large waste management unit size categories.

Labor Wage Rates for Compliance Auditing Personnel Standard Occupational Classification ( SOC) Code Occupational Description Year 2000 US mean wage ($/ hour)

SOC 13 1041 Compliance officers Examine, evaluate and investigate eligibility for or conformity with laws and regulations governing licenses and permits; excludes financial examiners. $ 21.22 SOC 13 2011 Auditors Examine, analyze, and interpret accounting records ( e. g. costs or other financial &

budgetary data) for purpose of giving advice or preparing statements. $ 23.12 SOC 19 2041 Environmental specialists Conduct research or perform investigation for the purpose of identifying, abating, or eliminating sources of pollutants or hazards that affect either the environment or the health of the population. $ 23.12 Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 70 Estimate of Average Cost for Third Party Certification of Compliance with RCRA " Standardized Permit" Part 267 Facility Standards At Time of Permit Application Item Type of Audit Cost Element Average Cost Per Audit ( year 2000$)

Small unit Medium unit Large unit 1* Third party auditor labor cost ( contractor or consultant) $ 6,400 $ 18,800 $ 25,400 2 Auditor equipment cost ( estimated as @ 5% x item 1 for pro rated equipment purchase/ depreciation cost) $ 300 $ 900 $ 1,300 3** Auditor travel to facility & over night lodging $ 500 $ 1,000 $ 1,500 4** Auditor's per diem ( a range representing one to five workdays) $ 50 $ 150 $ 250 5 Auditor's miscellaneous costs for telephone, fax, photocopies, etc.

( estimated as @ 3% x item 1) $ 200 $ 550 $ 750 Column totals = $ 7,450 $ 21,400 $ 29,200 Prevalence weighted average = $ 17,700 Explanatory Notes:

( b) * Item 1 costs based on the September 1997 USEPA Office of Compliance & Enforcement Assistance ( OECA) report " Estimating Costs for the Economic Benefits of RCRA Noncompliance", which presents an environmental audit cost range of $ 5,639 to $ 16,616 for small to medium sized facilities for hiring a third party certified auditor ( in 1996$). This 1997 OECA cost range is based on labor costs that include wages, fringe benefits @ 50% of wage rate, and labor overhead + profit @ 100% of wage rate. Updated to year 2000$ using a labor cost update multiplier of 1.133 derived from the US Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics ( BLS) wage and compensation data on private sector service industry " white collar: professional specialty & technical occupations" ( http:// www. bls. gov/ ncs/ ect/ home. htm). The update multiplier is based on this relatively more generic occupational classification rather than on specific audit related occupational classification codes because the BLS website database does not contain 1996 historical data for use as a denominator in this 2000: to: 1996 update multiplier:

[( year 2000 mean wage rate = $ 31.64 per hour) / ( year 1996 mean wage rate = $ 27.93 per hour)] = 1.133 update multiplier Because the upper end of the 1997 OECA report environmental audit cost range represents a medium size facility, the upper end is extended in this table to represent the cost to a typical large size facility, by multiplying the 1997 OECA report upper end cost by 1.35. This large: to: medium facility size multiplier represents an average ratio from 64 unit costs for paperwork burden activities concerning RCRA contingency plans, RCRA Part A permit preparation, and RCRA Part B permit preparation also presented in the 1997 OECA report. Atable in Attachment A to this document presents these 1997 reference cost data and derivation of this multiplier.

( c) ** Item 3 & 4 costs developed from estimate for medium sized facility formulated 29 Oct 2002 by Ross Elliott, Environmental Protection Specialist, USEPA Office of Solid Waste Hazardous Waste Identification Division, based on prior professional experience in conducting industry site audits. OSW EMRAD formulated an estimate for small and large sized facilities for these cost items by scaling relative to medium size estimate.

( d) Prevalences for weighting: small units = 43%; medium units = 28%; large units = 29% Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 71 Estimate of Added Cost for Conducting Site Audit of Waste Management Unit for Permit Application Notice of Intent Certification Alternative Scope for Audits Option A: If Self Audit Option B: If Third Party Audit Average annual number of audits Average Annual Cost of Audits Average annual number of audits Average Annual Cost of Audits Scope # 1:

onsite units only Scope # 2:

onsite + of site units Scope # 1:

onsite units only Scope # 2:

onsite + of site units If new permits only 2 $ 5,000 $ 5,000 2 $ 35,000 $ 35,000 If both new + renewals 110 $ 290,000 $ 364,000 139 $ 2,054,000 $ 2,574,000 Source: Based on multiplying the unit costs displayed in the prior two tables, by the number of annual audits for each type of permit. Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 72 II F. Impact Category # 4:

Potential Enhancement of Financial Return to Hazardous Waste Management Facilities Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 6 For example, as of Dec 2002, the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission ( TNRCC) characterized its RCRA permitting process as consisting of 633 days ( 21.1 months) for both hazardous waste management new permit applications and for permit renewals ( i. e. " Path 1" of the RCRA permit processing flowchart at http:// www. tnrcc. state. tx. us/ permitting/ wasteperm/ ihwperm/ new. pdf). The RCRA permit processing time period findings from both the FY1999 and the prior 1996 studies are summarized in a 30 March 1999 USEPA Office of Inspector General memorandum " EPA Controls Over RCRA Permit Renewals" ( report no. E1DSF9 11 0002 9100115, 8 pages,

http:// www. epa. gov/ oigearth/ ereading_ room/ list399/ 9100115. pdf). 73 In Fiscal Year 1999, the USEPA Office of Inspector General ( OIG) released a survey assessment report of the time required to complete the RCRA hazardous waste management permitting process. The OIG conducted its assessment in November 1998, based on: ( a) RCRA permit renewals in ( b) USEPA Region 3 and in two states ( Pennsylvania & West Virginia). The time to complete original ( initial) new RCRA permit applications was not included in the assessment.

The OIG assessment found that the time required to complete the RCRA permit renewals ranged from 450 to 1,090 days ( i. e. 15.0 to 36.3 months). In comparison, an earlier 1996 study of RCRA permit processing time in 16 states revealed an overall processing time range of 195 to 760 days ( i. e. 6.5 to 25.3 months). 6 For purpose of this impact category, the overall range implied by both studies of 195 to 1,090 days ( i. e. 6.5 to 36.3 months) is applied in this document as the baseline permit processing time for all three existing types of RCRA permit actions ( i. e. new permits, permit renewals, and permit modifications).

In comparison, the RCRA " standardized" permit restricts the permit processing time to a maximum of 120 days ( 4.0 months), with possibility for a one time extension for state authority review of a permit application of an additional 120 days ( thereby totaling 8.0 maximum months). The 2.5 to 28.3 months difference between the baseline permit processing time of 6.5 to 36.3 months compared to the standardized permit processing time of 4.0 to 8.0 months constitutes the quantitative basis for this impact category ( i. e. 6.5 minus 4.0 months, to 36.3 minus 8.0 months).

The economic basis for this impact category is the faster on set of financial return on investments made in waste management plant &

equipment assets. Under both the RCRA conventional permit process and the RCRA " standardized" permit process, construction and installation of new waste management units is prohibited until the permitting process is complete ( 40 CFR 270.1( b)). Consequently, the financial return on capital investments in waste management units may begin 2.5 to 28.3 months earlier under the " standardized" permit process, compared to the conventional RCRA permit process.

The economic benefit of an earlier on set of financial return may be monetized as the improvement in the time discounted future financial return on plant assets. Return on assets is a ratio that measures the sum of annual interest expense and annual net income to a company ( as numerator), compared to the average total assets of the company over the same year ( as denominator). The table below presents assumptions about the value of investments ( i. e. purchase or construction costs) for the three types of waste management units ( i. e. plant & equipment assets)

eligible for RCRA " standardized" permits Based on the capital cost assumptions presented in the table below, which range from $ 1,060 to $ 5,244,000 per eligible type of waste management unit, the average annual return on assets ( ROA) ranges from $ 90 to $ 434,700 per unit, computed at the five year ( 1997 2001)

average annual 8.29% ROA for the S& P500. On a monthly equivalent basis, the ROA ranges from $ 10 to $ 37,810 per unit. The earlier on set of operations provided by the permit processing time period threshold under the " standardized" permit, results in a 3% to 35% (@ 3% discount rate)

to 4% to 43% (@ 7% rate) improvement in the ROA ( i. e. company profitability) over a 10 year period beginning at the time of permit application submission to the state reviewing agency, equivalent to $ 23 to $ 1,025,000 (@ 3% discount rate) to $ 22 to $ 950,000 (@ 7% rate) in 10 year net present value of improved profits per waste management unit. The supporting spreadsheets for these computations are provided in Attachment C to this document.

Based on the assumption that an average of two new units are permitted annually, the average annual economic benefit to improvement in financial return on assets is estimated at $ 13,000 to $ 121,000 per year (@ 3% discount rate) to $ 16,000 to $ 138,000 per year (@ 7% rate). Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 74 Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 75 Average Purchase or Construction Costs for the Three Types of Hazardous Waste Management Units Eligible for RCRA " Standardized" Permits Type of Unit Size Category Typical Size* of Unit Typical Cost for Purchase or Construction of Unit Financial Return on Asset**

Annual Monthly Containers Small ( 55 gallon/ drum) x ( 10 drums/ unit) ($ 106/ drum) x ( 10 drums/ unit) = $ 1,060 $ 90 $ 10 Medium ( 20 cubic yard roll off bin) x ( 2 bins/ unit) ($ 6,600/ bin) x ( 2 bins/ unit) = $ 13,200 $ 1,100 $ 100 Large ( 20 cubic yard roll off bin) x ( 10 bins/ unit) ($ 6,600/ bin) x ( 10 bins/ unit) = $ 66,000 $ 5,500 $ 480 Tank Systems Small ( 3,000 gallons/ tank) x ( 4 tanks/ unit) ($ 12,000/ tank) x ( 4 tanks) = $ 48,000 $ 4,000 $ 350 Medium ( 10,000 gallons/ tank) x ( 4 tanks/ unit) ($ 25,000/ tank) x ( 4 tanks) = $ 100,000 $ 8,300 $ 720 Large ( 125,000 gallons/ tank) x ( 4 tanks/ unit) ($ 185,000/ tank) x ( 4 tanks) = $ 740,000 $ 61,400 $ 5,340 Containment Buildings Small ( 1,500 square feet) x ( 1 bldg/ unit) $ 439,000/ bldg $ 36,400 $ 3,170 Medium ( 8,200 square feet) x ( 1 bldg/ unit) $ 1,008,000/ bldg $ 83,600 $ 7,270 Large ( 68,000 square feet) x ( 1 bldg/ unit) $ 5,244,000/ bldg $ 434,700 $ 37,810 Explanatory Notes:

( a) * Data sources for typical sizes and costs:

! Containers: Costs per container from cost item examples F. 6.1 and F. 6.2 for containers provided in the USEPA Office of Solid Waste " Unit Cost Compendium"

( 30 Sept 2000). Number of containers per container unit based on EMRAD judgement.

! Tanks: Typical tank sizes and tank costs ( with secondary containment, updated to year 2000$) from size classes for above ground hazardous waste tanks from USEPA Office of Solid Waste report " Economic Analysis of RCRA Regulations for Hazardous Waste Tank Facilities", ( prepared by ICF Inc.),

June 1986, Exhibit 2 7 ( page 2 9). Four tanks/ unit is median number for hazardous waste storage tanks from USEPA Office of Solid Waste report " Hazardous Waste Tanks Risk Analysis", ( prepared by ICF Inc. & Pope Reid Associates), June 1986, page 4 21.

! Cntmt Bldgs: Sizes based on floor area dimensions displayed in Exhibit 3 12 in the USEPA Office of Solid Waste report " Cost and Economic Impact Analysis of Land Disposal Restrictions for Newly Listed Wastes and Contaminated Debris ( Phase I LDRs) Final Rule", Regulatory Analysis Branch, 10 June 1992 ( page 3 17). Construction costs updated to year 2000$ from Appendix E of the same reference report.

( b) ** Return on assets: Return on plant assets ( ROA) is used as a key financial indicator for measuring the profitability of a company. It is a numerical ratio which compares net profits ( i. e. net income and interest expenses) after taxes, with average total assets used to earn such profits. Total assets may include both depreciated value of:

! physical assets ( land, buildings, machinery & equipment, land improvements, natural resources) and ! intangible assets ( patents, copyrights, trademarks, tradenames, franchises, licenses, leaseholds, goodwill).

This table applies the 8.29% average annual rate of return on assets for the Standard & Poor's ( S& P) 500 industrial company five year average 1997 2001, which is assumed for application in this document to be an " effective" rate rather than a " nominal" rate ( http:// www. marketguide. com/ MGI/ education. asp? target=% 2Fstocks% 2Feducation% 2Fratio). This annual effective rate is equivalent to a 0.67%

effective monthly rate. Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 76 II G. Impact Category # 5:

Potential Reduction in State Government Fees ( State Revenues)

for Processing RCRA Permits Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 77 Although this impact category represents a " transfer effect" within the framework of this economic analysis because it potentially overlaps ( i. e.

double counts in part or in whole) the " real resource" administrative paperwork economic Impact Category # 1, it is included in this document because of public request for estimation of impact on state fees in public response to the October 2001 proposed rule.

The table below presents a summary of a non random convenience sample of state government fees for issuing and renewing RCRA hazardous waste permits. The sample is based on eight states which collectively represent 32% of the 1999 universe of RCRA hazardous waste management facilities ( i. e. 498 of the 1,575 RCRA TSDF universe in year 1999; another table below presents a state by state descending ranking count of TSDFs). This overall range in state fees is applied in this document for purpose of estimating potential impacts of the " standardized"

permit process on the payment of state fees by applicants ( i. e. potential reduction in annual revenues to state governments from RCRA permitting). Summary of State Government Fees for RCRA Hazardous Waste Permits for Operation of Storage or Non Thermal Treatment Units ( Excluding Waste Disposal, Unit Closure, Unit Post Closure, or Unit Corrective Action Permit Fees)

Item State Type of RCRA Permit Action Initial Application Fee ($/ unit) Annual Recurring Fee ($/ unit)

Minimum fee Maximum fee Minimum fee Maximum fee A. Internet Search Sample of State Fees for RCRA Permits:

1 California New permit $ 24,965 $ 88,108 $ 5,779 $ 69,351 Permit renewal $ 12,483 $ 44,054 Permit mod class 1 $ 0 Permit mod class 2 $ 3,745 $ 17,622 Permit mod class 3 $ 7,490 $ 35,243 2 Illinois New permit & renewal $ 0 $ 250 $ 1,000 3 Louisiana New permit $ 3,300 $ 33,000 $ 6,270 $ 22,836 Permit mod class 1 or 2 $ 240 Permit mod class 3 $ 900 4 Michigan New permit $ 7,000 $ 10,000 $ 500 5 Ohio New permit & renewals $ 1,500 $ 500 $ 700 6 Oregon New permit Varies: based on actual cost to state $ 18,750 $ 37,500 7 Tennessee New permit $ 12,000 $ 27,000 $ 5,000 $ 20,000 Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 Item State Type of RCRA Permit Action Initial Application Fee ($/ unit) Annual Recurring Fee ($/ unit)

Minimum fee Maximum fee Minimum fee Maximum fee 78 Permit renewal $ 10,400 $ 25,400 Permit mod class 1 $ 500 $ 3,000 Permit mod class 2 $ 7,000 $ 9,000 Permit mod class 3 $ 10,000 $ 12,000 8 Texas New permit $ 2,050 $ 2,500 $ 25,000 Permit renewal $ 2,015 Permit mod class 1 $ 150 Permit mod class 2 or 3 $ 550 $ 8,050 B. Summary of State Fee Sample: Summary metrics = Avg min Midpoint Avg max Avg min Midpoint Avg max New permit $ 7,300 $ 15,200 $ 23,100 $ 4,900 $ 13,500 $ 22,100 Permit renewal $ 5,300 $ 9,900 $ 14,600 Permit mod class 1 $ 200 $ 500 $ 800 Permit mod class 2 $ 2,900 $ 5,800 $ 8,700 Permit mod class 3 $ 4,700 $ 9,300 $ 14,000 Explanatory Notes:

( a) Data source: USEPA Office of Solid Waste ( EMRAD Division) internet search in Nov/ Dec 2002 using the " State And Local Government on the Net" website ( http:// www. statelocalgov. net/).

( b) Fee ranges: Ranges in state government hazardous waste management permit fees usually reflect fees for different:

! Size of waste unit ( i. e. waste flow capacities)

! Type of waste unit ( e. g. storage or treatment)

! Locations ( i. e. on site or off site) of storage and non thermal treatment units ! Renewal of existing facility permit or new permit application ! RCRA permit part ( i. e Part A or Part B   in such cases this table presents fees for both Part A and Part B)

! Operating, closure, or post closure permits ( in such cases this table presents fees for operating permits).

In comparison to the state fee sample summary ranges displayed in the table above, the potential reduction in RCRA permit fees paid under the " standardized" permit, may be estimated by subtracting the fee for processing " Part B" of the conventional RCRA permit, because Part B will not Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 79 be submitted to state governments under the " standardized" permit; it will be maintained at the applicant's site. Based on the two state government examples below, the implied reduction in RCRA permit fees could range from to 49% to 96% reduction in initial fees ( midpoint =

72%), and 60% to 83% reduction in annual fees ( midpoint = 72%), for the " standardized" permit fee, compared to the conventional RCRA permit fee:

! California: Initial fee: Charges $ 6,238 to $ 37,497 initial fee for this State's existing version of a " standardized" RCRA hazardous waste new permit, compared to $ 24,965 to $ 88,108 initial fee for a conventional RCRA new permit. This represents a 49% to 75% reduction in initial permit fees ( midpoint =

62%).

Annual fee: Charges $ 2,308 to $ 11,730 annual fee for this State's existing version of a " standardized" RCRA hazardous waste new permit, compared to $ 5,779 to $ 69,351 annual fee for a conventional RCRA new permit. This represents a 60% to 83% reduction in annual permit fees ( midpoint =

72%).

! Tennessee: Initial fee: Charges $ 400 to $ 2,000 for processing " Part A" of a RCRA hazardous waste new permit application, compared to $ 10,000 to $ 25,000 for processing " Part B" of a new permit application.

Removing the " Part B" portion of the fee represents a 93% to 96% reduction ( midpoint = 94%).

Estimation of Potential Reduction in Annual State Fee Revenues for RCRA Hazardous Waste Permitting Item Type of RCRA permit action Average state fee for conventional RCRA permit actions ( from prior table) Potential reduction in average state fee* Two Alternative Future Average Annual Permit Action Scenarios Potential Future Average Annual Impact on State Fee Permitting Revenues ($/ year)

Scope # 1:

if on site units only Scope # 2:

if on &

offsite units % of states charging fees**** Scope # 1 impact ( if on site only) Scope # 2 impact ( if on & off site)

A. Impact on Initial Fee for Permit Applications:

1 New permit $ 15,200 $ 10,900 2 2 57% $ 12,500 $ 16,500 2 Permit renewal $ 9,900 $ 7,100 94 123 $ 382,000 $ 495,900 3 Permit mod class 1 $ 500 $ 400 9 12 $ 2,300 $ 2,900 4 Permit mod class 2 $ 5,800 $ 4,200 9 12 $ 21,700 $ 27,900 5 Permit mod class 3 $ 9,300 $ 6,700 7 9 $ 26,800 $ 34,800 6 Conversions** $ 9,900** $ 7,100** 14** 15** $ 57,000 $ 60,400 Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 80 Column totals = 135 173 $ 501,500/ yr $ 638,400/ yr B. Impact on Annual Fee for Permit Maintenance:

7 Permit maintenance $ 13,500/ yr $ 9,700/ yr 1,393*** 1,688*** 57% $ 6,719,000/ yr $ 8,164,000/ yr Average annual total impact on state fees = $ 7,221,000/ yr $ 8,802,000/ yr Explanatory Notes:

( a) * Potential fee reduction based on average 72% reduction for both initial RCRA permit application fees and annual recurring RCRA permit fees, as computed in this background document based on a sample of eight states.

( b) Range in number of permit actions based on two alternative eligibility scopes:

! Scope # 1: On site units only: 866 facility baseline ( 3,532 hazardous waste management units)

! Scope # 2: On & off site units: 1,133 facility baseline ( 4,622 hazardous waste management units)

( c) ** Permit conversions ( switchting) from conventional RCRA permits to " standardized" RCRA permits expected to occur during the initial six years after final rule promulgation, at a rate of 79 to 103/ year, after which conversions are simulated to drop to zero in this document. The number of units shown above are the average annualized counts over the 30 year period of analysis applied in this document.

( d) *** Annual permit maintenance fee impact based on cumulative count of existing permit renewal + permit oonversion units up to 10 year phase in period ( after which all permits will have come up for renewal), plus all future annual new " standardized" permits.

( e) **** Based on OSW's count of state's which have hazardous waste permitting fees using the Army Corps of Engineers' hazardous waste state tax/ fee database at http:// www. environmental. usace. army. mil/ library/ pubs/ tsdf/ sec8 2/ sec8 2. html), only 24 states charge fees for RCRA permits. These 24 states* accounted for 1,404 ( 57%) of the 2,479 RCRA TSDFs in 2001. Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 81 State Count Descending Sort of the Universe of RCRA Hazardous Waste Treatment, Storage & Disposal Facilities ( TSDFs)

Source: USEPA Office of Solid Waste 1999 RCRA Hazardous Waste Biennial Report ( http:// www. epa. gov/ epaoswer/ hazwaste/ data/ brs99/ index. htm)

Rank State TSDF Count Cumulative count Cumulative % Rank State TSDF Count Cumulative count Cumulative %

1 California 144 144 9.1% 30 West Virginia 22 1,400 88.9%

2 Texas 105 249 15.8% 31 Connecticut 20 1,420 90.2%

3 Illinois 86 335 21.3% 32 Mississippi 19 1,439 91.4%

4 North Carolina 75 410 26.0% 33 Wisconsin 18 1,457 92.5%

5 Louisiana 68 478 30.3% 34 Colorado 18 1,475 93.7%

6 Michigan 61 539 34.2% 35 Arizona 16 1,491 94.7%

7 New York 59 598 38.0% 36 Maine 10 1,501 95.3%

8 Missouri 51 649 41.2% 37 Vermont 7 1,508 95.7%

9 Pennsylvania 51 700 44.4% 38 North Dakota 7 1,515 96.2%

10 Ohio 49 749 47.6% 39 New Mexico 7 1,522 96.6%

11 Alabama 47 796 50.5% 40 Nebraska 6 1,528 97.0%

12 Florida 46 842 53.5% 41 Idaho 6 1,534 97.4%

13 New Jersey 44 886 56.3% 42 Alaska 6 1,540 97.8%

14 Virginia 43 929 59.0% 43 Nevada 6 1,546 98.2%

15 Massachusetts 43 972 61.7% 44 Oregon 6 1,552 98.5%

16 Minnesota 40 1,012 64.3% 45 Delaware 5 1,557 98.9%

17 Georgia 37 1,049 66.6% 46 Rhode Island 3 1,560 99.0%

18 Arkansas 35 1,084 68.8% 47 New Hampshire 3 1,563 99.2%

19 Puerto Rico 31 1,115 70.8% 48 Hawaii 3 1,566 99.4%

20 Indiana 30 1,145 72.7% 49 Guam 2 1,568 99.6%

21 Oklahoma 30 1,175 74.6% 50 Wyoming 2 1,570 99.7%

22 Tennessee 28 1,203 76.4% 51 CBI data 1 1,571 99.7%

23 Utah 27 1,230 78.1% 52 Virgin Islands 1 1,572 99.8%

24 Kentucky 27 1,257 79.8% 53 Trust Territories 1 1,573 99.9%

25 Iowa 26 1,283 81.5% 54 South Dakota 1 1,574 99.9%

26 South Carolina 26 1,309 83.1% 55 District of Columbia 1 1,575 100.0%

27 Kansas 24 1,333 84.6% 56 Montana 0 1,575 100.0%

28 Washington 23 1,356 86.1% 57 Navajo Nation 0 1,575 100.0%

29 Maryland 22 1,378 87.5% Column total = 1,575 Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 82 III. SENSITIVITY ANALYSES This section illustrates how the estimated national cost savings associated with the paperwork burden reduction features of fthe RCRA standardized permit, varies according to four parameters ( Attachment D at the end of this document provides supporting data and computation spreadsheets). The other features of the standardized rule are not included in this sensitivity analysis because the average annual values for those other economic effects are constant and thus not affected by discount rate; only the net present values are affected, but not illustrated in this section. Note that the two alternative scenarios of affected entities ( i. e. 866 on site facilities versus 1,133 on site + off site facilities) are presented as eligibility scope options rather than as a sensitivity analysis; the sensitivity analyses below only apply to " Scope # 1" ( n = 866 on site eligible facilities).

Item Sensitivity Parameters Minimum Mid Range Maximum 1 Future period of analysis ( POA) 10 years 20 years 30 years ( base case)

2 Future discount rate ( per annum) 0% 3% 7% ( base case) 10%

3 Annual number of future RCRA standardized permit actions  2.9% annual reduction 166 permit actions per year ( base case) + 2.9% annual increase 4 Future labor cost inflation rate ( per annum) 0% ( base case) None + 2.1% annual increase III A. Does National Burden Cost Savings Depend Upon the Period of Analysis and the Discount Rate Applied?

Yes, as illustrated in the next table, the aggregate economic impact results are sensitive to both the discount rate and to the period of analysis.

Sensitivity Analysis of Estimated National Paperwork Burden Cost Savings ( to Both Eligible TSFs and to Permitting Authorities Combined),

According to Alternative Discount Rates and Period of Analyses ($ millions)

Discount Rates> 0% 3% 5% 7% ( base case) 10%

A. Average Annual Equivalent ( AAE):

10 year POA $ 1.57 $ 1.67 $ 1.65 $ 1.68 $ 1.72 20 year POA $ 1.96 $ 1.98 $ 1.99 $ 1.99 $ 2.01 Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 83 30 year POA ( base case) $ 2.09 $ 2.09 $ 2.09 $ 2.09 $ 2.08 Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 84 B. Net Present Value ( NPV):

10 year POA $ 15.7 $ 13.8 $ 12.7 $ 11.8 $ 10.6 20 year POA $ 39.1 $ 29.4 $ 24.8 $ 21.1 $ 17.1 30 year POA ( base case) $ 62.7 $ 41.1 $ 32.2 $ 25.9 $ 19.6 Explanatory Notes:

( a) The zero percent ( 0%) discount rate represents non discounted total cost savings over the respective POAs.

( b) It is important to note that discounting which introduces " consumer time preference" or " investor opportunity cost of resources" into analyses, is distinctly different from the phenomenon and analytical treatment of price inflation. It is also particularly important within the context of environmental economics, to indicate that discounting is a controversial topic amongst economists. For example, in contrast to its accepted and almost universally prescribed application in Federal economic analyses and in other public and private sector financial investment decision making contexts, some economists argue that the practice of discounting applied in an environmental decision making context is inappropriate, in that discounting denies human intergenerational and ecological equity, and excludes natural resource preservation, among other reasons. For contemporary surveys of reasons for and against the practice of discounting, see: ( a) Portney, Paul R. & John P. Weyant, eds,

Discounting and Intergenerational Equity, Resources for the Future ( RFF) Press, 1999, 186pp., and ( b) Price, Colin, Time, Discounting & Value, Blackwell Publishers Oxford UK, 1993, 411pp.

III B. Does National Cost Savings Depend Upon the Level of Future RCRA Permitting Actions?

Although a constant average annual future stream of RCRA permit actions is applied in this document as the analytical base case, it is conceivable that the future annual RCRA permit action frequency may deviate from this historical permit action trend, because of numerous economic factors including but not limited to the following:

Eligible TSFs: Future change ( i. e. net increase or net decrease) in the US national number of operating TSFs eligible for " standardized" RCRA permits. Among other factors, this is determined by the number of new TSF construction starts and the number of future TSF closures.

Permit Actions: Future change in the number and type of RCRA permit actions involving eligible TSFs.

RCRA rules: Future additions/ subtractions to the universe of RCRA wastecodes and other standards, which ultimately determine the number and annual quantity of wastestreams which may be managed by eligible hazardous waste TSFs.

Consequently, the estimate of national cost savings developed in this study is sensitive to the direction of change in these and other factors affecting annual count of RCRA permit actions. Attachment D provides supporting data and computations to illustrate this sensitivity.

To illustrate this point, the number of US national RCRA permitted TSDFs as reported in the USEPA " Biennial Reporting System" ( BRS)

national survey database for the 13 year period 1985 1997 ( as displayed in a prior Table in this document), are presented in the form of timeseries data graphs in Attachment D at the end of this document. This Attachment presents two alternative graphs, each containing two lines:

one line which connects the raw BRS datapoints, and a second line which depicts the linear regression trend based on the datapoints ( Attachment D presents the regression results): Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 7 One way to decide quantitatively how well a straight trendline fits a set of datapoints, is to note the extent to which the individual datapoints deviate above or below the trendline. This deviation is measured as the difference in numerical values between the datapoint and the corresponding value along the trendline. Deviations from trend are expressed by the regression " R squared" value, which may range from 0% ( i. e. " no fit") to 100% ( i. e " perfect fit"), as the representation in a single number, of the " goodness of fit" of a regression trendline relative to its datapoints.

8 Extreme datapoints ( observations) that are detached from the remainder of the data are called " outliers", and they usually receive special attention in statistical analyses. Although outliers may represent legitimate measurements, they are more often " mistakes", i. e. incorrectly recorded observations, miscoded input into a computer, or measurements from a different population than the population from which the rest of the sample data was selected. In other cases when outlying data are correct, further analysis of outliers may reveal special cases, factors or other considerations. Because the BRS survey, particularly in its earlier years is subject to national sampling variability and to other sources of survey errors ( e. g. because of data flaws, the USEPA did not release the 1981 and 1983 BRS databases), the exclusion of outlying data is reasonable for the purpose of establishing overall time trends in the BRS database. On the other hand, there are also " curvilinear" regression trendlines which may better " fit" all of the seven BRS datapoints, by accounting for trend curvature over time. Because most data relationships ( i. e. correlations or associations) with another data variable ( such as years) possess some curvature,

curvilinear trend models will often better " fit" a dataset. For additional information on data outliers and data regression, see J. T. McClave & P. G. Benson, Statistics for Business and Economics, Dellen Macmillan, 1988.

9 It is important to distinguish between two fundamentally different conceptual orientations to forecasting:

° Prediction: Indicating what the future will ( probably or presumably) be by informative specifications attempting to preindicate what will happen ( i. e.

concern with actualities).

° Scenario projection: Indicating what the future might be by surveying possible courses of future developments by formulating imaginative speculations about what might happen ( i. e. concern with possibilities).

The latter rather than the former is the conceptual orientation applied in the historical data trendline projections of this study for purpose of sensitivity analysis. One recent academic reference to the theory of forecasting is Nicholas Rescher, Predicting the Future: An Introduction to the Theory of Forecasting, State University of New York 85 All data: The first graph displayed in Attachment D plots all seven BRS datapoints ( i. e. the national number of TSDFs for BRS datayears 1985, 1987, 1989, 1991, 1993, 1995, 1997). Visual inspection of this first graph indicates that four of the BRS datapoints appear to fall along the same downward sloping trendline,

while three BRS datapoints appear as " outliers" located above or below this trendline. The overall " fit" of the linear regression trendline to these seven datapoints is only 76%. 7 Non outlying data: The second graph displayed in Attachment D plots five non outlying datapoints from the seven ( i. e. the national number of TSDFs for BRS datayears 1987, 1989, 1993, 1995, 1997). The two " outlying"

datapoints ( i. e. BRS datayears 1985 and 1991) represent deviations greater than +/ 10% from the linear regression expected trend value for those years based on the overall linear regression trendline established by the other four " non outlying" datapoints. Removal of the two outlier datapoints improves the overall " fit" of the regression trendline to 95%. 8 Both the datapoint lines and the simple linear regression trendlines in each graph show that the US national number of all RCRA permitted TSDFs has declined significantly during this 13 year data period ( 1985 to 1997).

Linear Scenario Projection These historical BRS data provide one simple and convenient basis for establishing a scenario for the future number of eligible TSFs, which may serve as a proxy or indicator for the possible number of future RCRA permitting actions. Although the activity of forecasting is often controversial, from an inferential statistics theoretical perspective9, one of the most prominent and least expensive of formal forecasting methods Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 Press, 1998, 315pp. 86 is afforded by trend projection involving linear extrapolation of prevailing ( i. e. historical and current) trends. ( However, forecasting theorists warn that the crucial premisses of this trend projection reasoning   the continuation of present trends   is usually very unlikely to be realized.)

Trend projection involves extrapolation of the timeseries trendline inherent in the past and current datapoints. As displayed in Attachment D to this document, using linear ( i. e. straight line) trend projection as alternatively applied to both the full BRS dataset ( i. e. seven datapoints) and to the non outlying dataset ( i. e. five BRS datapoints), the forecasted future number of RCRA TSDFs is projected ( unreasonably)

to decrease to zero by the year 2007 and 2011, respectively.

This unreasonable linear trend projection result suggests that a " curvilinear" ( i. e. second or third order) rather than a " linear" ( i. e.

firstorder regression   upon which to base a trend projection forecast   may better " fit" a more reasonable trendline to the historical data, as well as provide a more reasonable scenario projection of the future national number of TSDF.

Curvilinear Scenario Projection The subfield of statistical science associated with trend projection is called " model building", which is defined as developing a statistical model that will: ° Provide a good fit to a set of data ° Give good projections or predictions of future values of the data.

Statistical models may take many different mathematical functional forms, but at the risk of oversimplification, the most common models are usually the following linear ( single variable) and two curvilinear ( polynomial variable) forms:

First order ( linear)

=   +  1*   or Log(

) =   +  1*   Second order ( curvilinear)

=   +  1*   +  2*   2 Third order ( curvilinear)

=   +  1*   +  2*   2 +  3*   3 Where:

= dependent data variable ( annual count of TSDFs)

  = constant term ( estimated by statistical regression)

  = coefficient ( estimated by statistical regression)

  = independent data variable ( data year in time series)

Log = either natural or base 10 logarithm.

In general, a graph of a nth order polynomial ( curvilinear) model will contain a total of ( n 1) peaks and troughs ( i. e inflexion points), such that time series data which exhibit a single change in curve slope may be fit with a second order curvilinear model, whereas data which exhibit two or more changes in curve slopes may be better fit with a third order ( or higher) curvilinear model.

Attachment D presents the resultant curvilinear trend projection graphs and data associated with second and third order curvilinear modeling based on the 13 year TSDF universe historical data ( i. e. 1985 1997), along with a scenario projection for the future 30 year period of Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 87 analysis ( i. e. 2005 2034 POA). As shown by both the resultant data fit curves and the R squared values in Attachment D, the third order curvilinear model both:

Historical data fit Better " fits" the data ( as evidenced by an R squared value of 86% for the third order model, compared to 80% for the second order model).

Future projection Provides a reasonable scenario projection out to the year 2030 ( the third order model reasonably projects a slightly declining TSDF universe at an average annual rate of 2.9%, whereas the second order model unreasonably projects a zero TSDF universe by the year 2013).

It is important to emphasize that in contrast to this regression projected decrease in the future TSDF universe, it is possible that this declining scenario projection is not an accurate prediction, because the number of TSDFs in the USA may grow overtime as a result of future economic factors such as: Demand side ° Annual hazardous waste generation quantities may increase overtime as industries and markets grow domestically and globally, thereby increasing the market demand for TSDFs.

° Expansion over time of the number of industrial wastestreams brought into the RCRA " hazardous" waste regulated universe, which may place an increased demand for TSDF services, and a consequent growth in the size and/ or number of TSDFs.

Supply side The universe of TSDFs may grown as a result of regulatory streamlining such as the RCRA standardized permit or other " deregulatory" actions within the RCRA program, which makes the cost of permitting and operating an affected TSDF relatively less expensive, thereby increasing the supply of such facilities.

Consequently, it is important to consider this sensitivity analysis exercise as a projection rather than prediction.

As shown in Attachment D, applying the projected 2.9% average annual decline in the TSDF universe to the base case   consisting of the 30 year ( 2005 2034) POA and 7% discount rate  the estimate of national cost savings decreases slightly, as summarized in the next Table.

For purpose of scenario bounding, applying a symmetric 2.9% average annual increase as a second alternative scenario projection relative to the base case, increases national cost savings slightly, as also displayed in the next Table.

Sensitivity Analysis:

Effect of Alternative Future Annual Levels of Eligible Permitting Actions on the Paperwork Burden Reduction Features of the RCRA Standardized Permit ($ millions over the 30 year POA 2005 2034)

Cost Savings Metric Base Case* Alternative Scenarios**

 2.9% + 2.9%

Non discounted total savings $ 62.7 $ 60.8 $ 64.5 Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 88 Net present value savings $ 25.9 $ 25.2 $ 26.7 Average annual equivalent savings $ 2.09 $ 2.03 $ 2.15 Explanatory Notes:

( a) * Base Case = Beginning with 200 average annual eligible RCRA permit actions in baseyear 2005, leveling off ( after 79 average annual conversion actions phase out after the sixth year ( 2006)), to 121 average annual actions through the end of the 30 year POA ( 2034), for an overall average annual 166 permit actions over the POA ( for " Scope # 1 n= 866 eligible facilities).

( b) ** Alternative scenarios reflect /+ bounding projections in the future annual count of eligible RCRA permitting actions, relative to the constant annual count " base case".

III C. How Does Monetary Inflation Affect Estimated Cost Savings?

The next Table displays the results of relaxing the " constant dollar" economic analysis valuation framework, by applying inflation to the labor wage rates which underlie the cost savings estimates. In general, inflation is defined as an increase in either a specific ( i. e. single price) or general ( i. e. weighted average) price level of goods and services available in a particular market, or on a broader multi market, regional or national basis. Another way to describe inflation is in terms of decreasing purchasing power of a unit of currency ( e. g. one dollar).

Inflation is usually measured by a price level index that assigns a value of 100 to a reference base year. The most widely used general inflation index in the USA is the " Consumer Price Index" ( CPI), which is based on the weighted average of prices in a sample of food, clothing,

shelter, transportation, and other items purchased by the average urban consumer ( see the following website for the Department of Labor Bureau of Statistics " CPI" and other types of price indexes: http:// stats. bls. gov/ datahome. htm ).

Apart from this sensitivity analysis, this study did not apply inflation in the " base case", because economic analyses usually apply a constant dollar valuation framework with time discounting, for the purpose of standardizing monetized values ( e. g. monetized benefits and monetized costs) to a single " base year" reference. The analytical method of discounting provides time value " economic equivalence" of cash flows which occur at different points in time.

However, for purpose in this study of supplying an estimate of the potential financial cost savings in relation to the nominal dollar value of cost savings in future budget years, the inflation rate is included as a fourth sensitivity analysis element.

Sensitivity Analysis:

Effect of Inflation on Estimated National Cost Savings Associated With the Paperwork Burden Reduction Features of the RCRA Standardized Permit ($ millions for the 30 Year POA 2005 to 2034)

Cost Savings Metric Base Case* Inflation**

1. Non discounted total POA savings $ 62.7 $ 89.6 2. Non discounted average annual savings $ 2.09 $ 2.99 Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 89 Explanatory Notes:

( a) Attachment D at the end of this document provides detailed inflation computations.

( b) * Base Case = 0% inflation rate or " constant" dollars ( shaded cells above).

( c) ** Inflation = projection and application of white collar employment cost index to estimated future cost savings.

( d) Values in this table have not been discounted as in previous tables in this report.

There are two general causal mechanisms for inflation:

" Cost push" inflation: Occurs when prices are largely determined by the cost of producing them ( e. g. raw materials,

labor, energy, overhead).

" Demand pull" inflation: Occurs when the recipients of increasing disposable income attempt to spend the additional income on a fixed flow ( i. e. static or constrained supply) of goods and services.

Because labor costs underlie the monetary value of permitting cost savings in this study, a cost push type inflation is modeled and applied.

This effect of applying inflation to future cost savings, is based on applying the US Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics " Employee Cost Index" ( ECI), to the future stream of estimated cost savings, for both RCRA permitting authorities and for eligible TSFs. As displayed in Attachment D at the end of this document, 1983 1999 historical ECI data for " white collar total compensation" for both:

° State and local governments, and ° Private industry,

were used as a basis of producing regression fit trendline projections over the 30 year POA. The resultant regression trendline projections selected as the basis of a cost push inflation factor are indicated by column shading in the associated tables in Attachment D, as well as in the accompanying graphs in Attachment D. The overall average annual percentage inflation rate assigned to the respective inflation rates are 2.10%

and 2.06%, based on regression projected inflation indexes ranging from 1.000 to 1.826 and from 1.000 to 1.808, respectively, over the years 2005 to 2034 in the POA. Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 90 ATTACHMENTS ATTACHMENT A: RCRA PERMIT UNIT HOUR BURDEN COMPUTATION SPREADSHEETS ATTACHMENT B: NATIONAL COST SAVINGS COMPUTATION SPREADSHEETS FOR RCRA PAPERWORK REDUCTION ATTACHMENT C: IMPROVEMENT IN FINANCIAL RETURN ON PLANT ASSETS ( ROA)

FOR HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITIES ATTACHMENT D: SENSITIVITY ANALYSES SPREADSHEETS Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 91 ATTACHMENT A UNIT HOUR ADMINISTRATIVE BURDEN REDUCTION DATA AND COMPUTATION SPREADSHEETS Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 92 ATTACHMENT A 1 USEPA RCRA " Standardized" Permit for Hazardous Waste Units Computation Spreadsheet for Unit Hour Burden Reduction Assumptions:

Starting Computational Elements 40 CFR Type of RCRA Permit Eligible TSFs ( Burden Hours): Permit Authorities ( Burden Hours):

Data source* Legal Mngrl Tech Clerical Row subtotals Data source* Legal Mngrl Tech Clerical Row subtotals 1. Public notice at Part B application submittal 124.32 Conventional permit> B Ex3 0.00 0.25 1.00 0.25 1.50 NR NR NR NR NR NR Standardized permit> NA 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NR NR NR NR NR NR CP less SP= 0.00 0.25 1.00 0.25 1.50 NR NR NR NR NR NR 2. Review Part B application for completeness 124.3 Conventional permit> NR NR NR NR NR NR A Ex2+ 0.00 0.00 6.84 0.57 7.40 Standardized permit> NR NR NR NR NR NR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CP less SP= NR NR NR NR NR NR 0.00 0.00 6.84 0.57 7.40 + Includes ICR source data multiplied by NOD burden multiplier = 2.28 3. Issue Part B notice of deficiency ( NOD) as necessary 124.3 Conventional permit> NR NR NR NR NR NR A Ex2+ 0.00 0.00 1.14 0.23 1.37 Standardized permit> NR NR NR NR NR NR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CP less SP= NR NR NR NR NR NR 0.00 0.00 1.14 0.23 1.37 + Includes ICR source data multiplied by NOD burden multiplier = 2.28 4. Permit applicant responds to Part B notice of deficiency ( NOD) as necessary 124.3 Conventional permit> A Ex1+ 0.00 1.14 4.56 2.28 7.97 NR NR NR NR NR NR Standardized permit> NA 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NR NR NR NR NR NR CP less SP= 0.00 1.14 4.56 2.28 7.97 NR NR NR NR NR NR + Includes ICR source data multiplied by NOD burden multiplier = 2.28 5. Determine Part B permit application is complete 124.3 Conventional permit> NR NR NR NR NR NR A Ex2 0 0 1.71 0 1.71 Standardized permit> NR NR NR NR NR NR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CP less SP= NR NR NR NR NR NR 0.00 0.00 1.71 0.00 1.71 + Includes ICR source data multiplied by NOD burden multiplier = 2.28 6. Part B permit content requirements 270.10 Conventional permit> B Ex2 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 2.00 NR NR NR NR NR NR Standardized permit> C Ex1 0.00 0.50 0.50 0.00 1.00 NR NR NR NR NR NR CP less SP= 1.00  0.50 0.50 0.00 1.00 NR NR NR NR NR NR Item 6 unit hours represent difference for " read the regulations" estimated in reference documents under Exhibit item " Permit Application 270.10".

7. Submittal & review of Part B application ( assumes excludes burden for reviewing groundwater monitoring 270.14( c) & SWMUs 270.14( d))

270.10 Conventional permit> B Ex2 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.50 7.50 CP> B Ex6 0.00 4.56 320.69 12.87 338.12 < If containers Standardized permit> NA 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CP> B Ex6 0.00 4.56 343.47 12.87 360.90 < If tanks CP less SP= 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.50 7.50 CP> B Ex6 0.00 4.56 443.73 12.87 461.16 < If cont. bldgs SP> NA 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 + Includes ICR source data multiplied by NOD burden multiplier = 2.28 CP less SP= 0.00 4.56 320.69 12.87 338.12 < If containers CP less SP= 0.00 4.56 343.47 12.87 360.90 < If tanks CP less SP= 0.00 4.56 443.73 12.87 461.16 < If cont. bldgs Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 93 Note: OSW EMRAD estimated clerical hours in red cell by multiplying 0.5 unit hours per submittal, times 15 Part B submittal items listed in B Ex2.

Item 7 ( Part B submittal) is large source of savings to permit authorities because they no longer will review Part B which remains at the TSF.

8. Permit modification requirements 270.42 Conventional permit> B Ex3 3.00 2.25 12.00 2.35 19.60 < Cls1 B Ex7 0.00 0.75 3.00 0.10 3.85 Standardized permit> C Ex2 3.00 2.25 10.00 2.25 17.50 < Cls1 C Ex11 0.00 0.75 3.00 0.10 3.85 CP less SP= 0.00 0.00 2.00 0.10 2.10 < Cls1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 < If class 1or 2 Conventional permit> B Ex3 7.00 17.00 88.00 13.60 125.60 < Cls3 B Ex7 20.00 1.25 41.00 0.10 62.35 Standardized permit> C Ex2 7.00 16.25 82.00 12.25 117.50 < Cls3 C Ex11 20.00 1.25 41.00 0.10 62.35 Discrepanc y CP less SP= 0.00 0.75 6.00 1.35 8.10 < Cls3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 < If class 3 9. Permit renewals:

270.51 Conventional permit> B Ex3 5.50 15.10 80.15 12.00 112.75 B Ex6& 7+ 0.00 3.99 288.79 9.80 302.58 Standardized permit> C Ex1 0.50 1.25 2.25 0.50 4.50 C Ex10 0.00 1.00 40.00 0.50 41.50 CP less SP= 5.00 13.85 77.90 11.50 108.25 0.00 2.99 248.79 9.30 261.08 + Includes ICR source data multiplied by NOD burden multiplier = 2.28 13a. Submit closure plan:

264.112 Conventional permit> C Ex7*** 0.00 2.25 34.25 4.00 40.50 No data 0.00 0.00 23.00 0.00 23.00 Standardized permit> C Ex7 0.00 2.25 34.25 4.00 40.50 C Ex16 0.00 0.00 23.00 0.00 23.00 CP less SP= 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 *** Note: SP data used for CP in this case because closure plan required under both, but plan may be deferred under SP.

13b. Submit closure cost estimate:

264.142 Conventional permit> B Ex2 0.00 1.00 8.00 1.00 10.00 B Ex6 4.00 1.00 16.00 0.00 21.00 Standardized permit> C Ex7 0.00 0.25 0.25 0.00 0.50 C Ex17** 2.00 0.50 8.00 0.00 10.50 CP less SP= 0.00 0.75 7.75 1.00 9.50 2.00 0.50 8.00 0.00 10.50 ** Assumes EPA's closure cost estimating models provide 50% reduction Explanatory Notes:

( a) CP= Conventional ( i. e. " existing" or " baseline") RCRA TSF permit process.

SP= Standardized RCRA TSF permit ( i. e. proposed streamlined alternative RCRA permit process).

NR= Not relevant to labor category and/ or permit activity.

( b) * Source= First letter designates identity of reference document, " Ex" designates the unit hour data exhibit number in the reference document.

Source A: USEPA Office of Solid Waste ICR Nr. 262.09 ( RCRA Part A Permit Application Requirements), 22 Oct 1999.

Source B: USEPA Office of Solid Waste ICR Nr. 1573 ( RCRA Part B Permit Application Requirements), 27 Oct 1999.

Source C: USEPA Office of Solid Waste ICR Nr. 1935.01 ( RCRA " Standardized" Permit Application Requirements), 16 Nov 1999.

( c) Burden savings items correspond to the same numbered savings items as listed in a table contained in the " Economics Background Document".

( d) Burden hour items above may represent subtotals based on more than one burden hour item from the ICR reference document exhibits.

( e) To reconcile SP data discrepancy, blue cell in item 8 assumed identical to CP burden hours.

( f) NA= This permit activity not applicable ( i. e. not required) under standardized permit, so zero unit hours assigned for SP. Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 94 ATTACHMENT A 2 Computation of Cost Savings per Permit Action For Administrative Burden under the RCRA " Standardized" Permit Intermediate Computational Elements I. Burden Hour Changes per Permit Action to:

Savings Items Item Eligible TSFs: Permit Authorities: Totals Legal Mngrl Tech Clerical Subtotal Legal Mngrl Tech Clerical Subtotal 1 0.00 0.25 1.00 0.25 1.50 NR NR NR NR NR 1.50 2 NR NR NR NR NR 0.00 0.00 6.84 0.57 7.40 7.40 3 NR NR NR NR NR 0.00 0.00 1.14 0.23 1.37 1.37 4 0.00 1.14 4.56 2.28 7.97 NR NR NR NR NR 7.97 5 NR NR NR NR NR 0.00 0.00 1.71 0.00 1.71 1.71 6 1.00  0.50 0.50 0.00 1.00 NR NR NR NR NR 1.00 Containers> 7a 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.50 7.50 0.00 4.56 320.69 12.87 338.12 345.62 Tanks> 7b 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.50 7.50 0.00 4.56 343.47 12.87 360.90 368.40 Cont. bldgs> 7c 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.50 7.50 0.00 4.56 443.73 12.87 461.16 468.66 Routine mods> 8a 0.00 0.00 2.00 0.10 2.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.10 Signfnct mods> 8b 0.00 0.75 6.00 1.35 8.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.10 Renewals> 9 5.00 13.85 77.90 11.50 108.25 0.00 2.99 248.79 9.30 261.08 369.33 13a 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 13b 0.00 0.75 7.75 1.00 9.50 2.00 0.50 8.00 0.00 10.50 20.00 Subtotals for Items Relevant to New Permits: Items in subtotals Containers> 7a 1.00 1.64 13.81 11.03 27.47 2.00 5.06 338.37 13.67 359.10 <<( 1+...+ 6+ 7a+ 13a+ 13b) 386.58 Tanks> 7b 1.00 1.64 13.81 11.03 27.47 2.00 5.06 361.16 13.67 381.88 <<( 1+...+ 6+ 7b+ 13a+ 13b) 409.36 Cont. bldgs> 7c 1.00 1.64 13.81 11.03 27.47 2.00 5.06 461.41 13.67 482.14 <<( 1+...+ 6+ 7c+ 13a+ 13b) 509.61 Switching**> 0.50 1.25 2.25 0.50 4.50 0.00 0.25 1.00 0.00 1.25 5.75 II. Value of Burden Hour Changes per Permit Action:

Loaded wage*> $ 110 $ 85 $ 52 $ 21 $ 60 $ 51 $ 41 $ 21 1 $ 0 $ 21 $ 52 $ 5 $ 79 NR NR NR NR NR $ 79 2 NR NR NR NR NR $ 0 $ 0 $ 280 $ 12 $ 292 $ 292 3 NR NR NR NR NR $ 0 $ 0 $ 47 $ 5 $ 51 $ 51 4 $ 0 $ 97 $ 237 $ 48 $ 382 NR NR NR NR NR $ 382 5 NR NR NR NR NR $ 0 $ 0 $ 70 $ 0 $ 70 $ 70 6 $ 110 ($ 43) $ 26 $ 0 $ 94 NR NR NR NR NR $ 94 Containers> 7a $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 158 $ 158 $ 0 $ 232 $ 13,148 $ 270 $ 13,651 $ 13,809 Tanks> 7b $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 158 $ 158 $ 0 $ 232 $ 14,082 $ 270 $ 14,585 $ 14,743 Cont. bldgs> 7c $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 158 $ 158 $ 0 $ 232 $ 18,193 $ 270 $ 18,695 $ 18,853 Routine mods> 8a $ 0 $ 0 $ 104 $ 2 $ 106 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 106 Signfnct mods> 8b $ 0 $ 64 $ 312 $ 28 $ 404 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 404 Renewals> 9 $ 550 $ 1,177 $ 4,051 $ 242 $ 6,020 $ 0 $ 152 $ 10,200 $ 195 $ 10,548 $ 16,568 13a $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 95 13b $ 0 $ 64 $ 403 $ 21 $ 488 $ 120 $ 26 $ 328 $ 0 $ 474 $ 961 Subtotals for Items Relevant to New Permits:

Containers> 7a $ 110 $ 139 $ 718 $ 232 $ 1,199 $ 120 $ 258 $ 13,873 $ 287 $ 14,538 <<( 1+...+ 6+ 7a+ 13a+ 13b) $ 15,737 Tanks> 7b $ 110 $ 139 $ 718 $ 232 $ 1,199 $ 120 $ 258 $ 14,807 $ 287 $ 15,472 <<( 1+...+ 6+ 7b+ 13a+ 13b) $ 16,671 Cont. bldgs> 7c $ 110 $ 139 $ 718 $ 232 $ 1,199 $ 120 $ 258 $ 18,918 $ 287 $ 19,583 <<( 1+...+ 6+ 7c+ 13a+ 13b) $ 20,782 Switching**> $ 55 $ 138 $ 248 $ 55 $ 495 $ 0 $ 13 $ 41 $ 0 $ 54 $ 549 Explanatory Notes:

( a) For definition of savings items numbers, see explanatory footnotes in the tables within the text of the " Economics Background Document".

( b) Negative dollar values ( in parentheses) indicate additional incremental cost under the standardized permit, not a cost savings.

( c) Green shaded cells above indicate subtotals to be carried over as intermediate computational elements in estimation of national cost savings.

( d) * 2001 " loaded wage" rates in red shaded cells above derived from US Dept of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment Statistics.

( e) ** " Switching" involves converting a conventional permit to a standardized permit prior to its 10 year expiration date ( ICR " Source C" Exh1 &

Exh11):

Note: In contrast to burden hour reduction, " switching" ( or conversion) involves added burden hours because switching would not occur in the baseline.

Potential benefits to some facilities of switching to a " standardized" permit before conventional permit expiration are:

( 1) Subsequent permit modification actions will be less burdensome ( i. e. less costly).

( 2) Subsequent annual state fees for permit maintenance ( i. e. permit operating fees) may be less.

( f) NR = Not relevant to affected entity under the RCRA standardized permit. Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 96 ATTACHMENT A 3 Comparison of RCRA Administrative Compliance Unit Costs by Facility Size Category Data source: USEPA OECA " Estimating Costs for the Economic Benefits of RCRA Noncompliance", Sept 1997 ( http:// www. epa. gov/ epaoswer/ hazwaste/ gener/ f006/ s0004. pdf)

Item Regulatory Administrative Category Paperwork or Activity Required Unit Cost by Facility Size Large as multiple of medium Unit Cost Source*

Small ( 1997$) Medium ( 1997$) Large ( 1997$)

1 Contingency plan Oversight of plan development $ 152 $ 304 $ 456 1.50 OECA Sept 1997 Tables 8 1, 8 2, 8 3 2 Contingency plan Actions of facility's emergency coordinator $ 1,234 $ 2,057 $ 2,880 1.40 OECA Sept 1997 Tables 8 1, 8 2, 8 3 3 Contingency plan Prepare facility familiarization fact sheet $ 411 $ 1,234 $ 2,469 2.00 OECA Sept 1997 Tables 8 1, 8 2, 8 3 4 Contingency plan Assist project manager $ 149 $ 248 $ 347 1.40 OECA Sept 1997 Tables 8 1, 8 2, 8 3 5 Contingency plan Assist project engineer ( consultant) $ 318 $ 529 $ 688 1.30 OECA Sept 1997 Tables 8 1, 8 2, 8 3 6 Contingency plan Meet with local authorities & facility staff $ 206 $ 309 $ 411 1.33 OECA Sept 1997 Tables 8 1, 8 2, 8 3 7 Contingency plan Assist project engineer ( facility) $ 101 $ 96 $ 204 2.13 OECA Sept 1997 Tables 8 1, 8 2, 8 3 8 Contingency plan Describe arrangements in contingency plan $ 309 $ 617 $ 926 1.50 OECA Sept 1997 Tables 8 1, 8 2, 8 3 9 Contingency plan Names & addresses of qualified ECs $ 53 $ 53 $ 53 1.00 OECA Sept 1997 Tables 8 1, 8 2, 8 3 10 Contingency plan Emergency equipment at the facility $ 159 $ 265 $ 371 1.40 OECA Sept 1997 Tables 8 1, 8 2, 8 3 11 Contingency plan Assist engineering assistant $ 50 $ 99 $ 149 1.51 OECA Sept 1997 Tables 8 1, 8 2, 8 3 12 Contingency plan Describe evacuation plan $ 309 $ 514 $ 720 1.40 OECA Sept 1997 Tables 8 1, 8 2, 8 3 13 Contingency plan Review plan & technical support $ 610 $ 1,106 $ 1,644 1.49 OECA Sept 1997 Tables 8 1, 8 2, 8 3 14 Contingency plan Assist project manager $ 166 $ 300 $ 447 1.49 OECA Sept 1997 Tables 8 1, 8 2, 8 3 15 Contingency plan Submit copies of plan to local authorities $ 106 $ 106 $ 106 1.00 OECA Sept 1997 Tables 8 1, 8 2, 8 3 16 Part A Permit Provide info to consutant $ 405 $ 607 $ 810 1.33 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 2 17 Part A Permit Complete part A form $ 823 $ 1,234 $ 1,646 1.33 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 2 18 Part A Permit Prepare scale drawing $ 99 $ 198 $ 297 1.50 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 2 19 Part A Permit Photos of facility $ 106 $ 106 $ 212 2.00 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 2 20 Part A Permit Topographical map $ 206 $ 411 $ 617 1.50 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 2 21 Part A Permit Topographical map assistance $ 212 $ 424 $ 635 1.50 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 2 22 Part A Permit Review info & provide support $ 369 $ 595 $ 850 1.43 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 2 23 Part A Permit Clerical support $ 100 $ 162 $ 231 1.43 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 2 24 Permit B Permit  General facility  1. General info Brief description of facility $ 206 $ 309 $ 411 1.33 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 3 25 Permit B Permit  General facility  1. General info Description of haz waste managed $ 206 $ 617 $ 823 1.33 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 3 26 Permit B Permit  General facility  1. General info Copy laboratory report $ 26 $ 26 $ 26 1.00 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 3 27 Permit B Permit  General facility  1. General info Copy waste analysis report $ 26 $ 26 $ 26 1.00 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 3 28 Permit B Permit  General facility  1. General info Description of security procedures $ 206 $ 411 $ 617 1.50 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 3 29 Permit B Permit  General facility  1. General info Copy general inspection schedule $ 26 $ 26 $ 26 1.00 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 3 30 Permit B Permit  General facility  1. General info Copy of contingency plan $ 26 $ 26 $ 26 1.00 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 3 31 Permit B Permit  General facility  1. General info Description of procedures, structure or equipment $ 617 $ 1,234 $ 1,646 1.33 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 3 32 Permit B Permit  General facility  1. General info Description of precautions to prevent ignition $ 103 $ 411 $ 617 1.50 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 3 33 Permit B Permit  General facility  1. General info Description of traffic patterns $ 206 $ 411 $ 617 1.50 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 3 34 Permit B Permit  General facility Traffic pattern drawings $ 50 $ 99 $ 198 2.00 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 3 Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 Item Regulatory Administrative Category Paperwork or Activity Required Unit Cost by Facility Size Large as multiple of medium Unit Cost Source*

Small ( 1997$) Medium ( 1997$) Large ( 1997$)

97  1. General info 35 Permit B Permit  General facility  1. General info Identify political jurisdiction $ 103 $ 103 $ 103 1.00 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 3 36 Permit B Permit  General facility  1. General info Review published reports $ 411 $ 617 $ 823 1.33 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 3 37 Permit B Permit  General facility  1. General info Review published reports ( assistance) $ 635 $ 847 $ 953 1.13 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 3 38 Permit B Permit  General facility  1. General info Obtain aerial published photographs $ 212 $ 318 $ 424 1.33 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 3 39 Permit B Permit  General facility  1. General info Analyze aerial photographs $ 206 $ 411 $ 617 1.50 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 3 40 Permit B Permit  General facility  1. General info Analyze aerial photographs ( assistance) $ 424 $ 635 $ 847 1.33 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 3 41 Permit B Permit  General facility  1. General info Walking reconnaissance $ 411 $ 617 $ 823 1.33 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 3 42 Permit B Permit  General facility  1. General info Report preparation $ 1,234 $ 1,851 $ 2,469 1.33 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 3 43 Permit B Permit  General facility  1. General info Report preparation ( assistance) $ 212 $ 318 $ 424 1.33 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 3 44 Permit B Permit  General facility  1. General info Obtain & review FIA maps $ 411 $ 617 $ 823 1.33 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 3 45 Permit B Permit  General facility  1. General info Obtain & review FIA maps ( assistance) $ 106 $ 159 $ 212 1.33 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 3 46 Permit B Permit  General facility  1. General info Option1: engineering study of 100 yr flood $ 1,648 $ 2,472 $ 3,296 1.33 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 3 47 Permit B Permit  General facility  1. General info Option1: engineering study of 100 yr flood $ 212 $ 265 $ 318 1.20 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 3 48 Permit B Permit  General facility  1. General info Option1: engineering study of 100 yr flood $ 200 $ 300 $ 400 1.33 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 3 49 Permit B Permit  General facility  1. General info Option2: detailed flood removal plan $ 1,236 $ 2,472 $ 4,120 1.67 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 3 50 Permit B Permit  General facility  1. General info Option2: detailed flood removal plan $ 200 $ 300 $ 400 1.33 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 3 51 Permit B Permit  General facility  1. General info Plan & schedule to comply with floodplain $ 824 $ 1,236 $ 1,648 1.33 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 3 52 Permit B Permit  General facility  1. General info Plan & schedule to comply with floodplain $ 200 $ 300 $ 400 1.33 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 3 53 Permit B Permit  General facility  1. General info Outline of intro & training plan $ 618 $ 824 $ 1,236 1.50 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 3 54 Permit B Permit  General facility  1. General info Copy of closure plan & cost estimate $ 26 $ 26 $ 26 1.00 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 3 55 Permit B Permit  General facility  1. General info Copy of post closure plan & cost estimate $ 26 $ 26 $ 26 1.00 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 3 56 Permit B Permit  General facility  1. General info Copy of closure financial assurance $ 26 $ 26 $ 26 1.00 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 3 57 Permit B Permit  General facility  1. General info Copy of 3rd party liability financial mechanism $ 26 $ 26 $ 26 1.00 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 3 58 Permit B Permit  General facility  1. General info Provide oversight of topographical map prep $ 412 $ 618 $ 824 1.33 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 3 59 Permit B Permit  General facility Obtain map & assist with research $ 848 $ 1,272 $ 1,696 1.33 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 3 Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 Item Regulatory Administrative Category Paperwork or Activity Required Unit Cost by Facility Size Large as multiple of medium Unit Cost Source*

Small ( 1997$) Medium ( 1997$) Large ( 1997$)

98  1. General info 60 Permit B Permit  General facility  1. General info Prepare may with information $ 400 $ 600 $ 800 1.33 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 3 61 Permit B Permit  General facility  1. General info Copy of notice of approval for LDRs $ 26 $ 26 $ 26 1.00 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 3 62 Permit B Permit  General facility  1. General info Review info & provide support $ 2,130 $ 3,266 $ 4,402 1.35 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 3 63 Permit B Permit  General facility  1. General info Clerical support $ 598 $ 910 $ 1,196 1.31 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 3 64 Permit B Permit  General facility  1. General info Assist consultant $ 765 $ 1,173 $ 1,581 1.35 OECA Sept 1997 Table 9 3 Statistical Summary: Minimum = $ 26 $ 26 $ 26 1.00 Maximum = $ 2,130 $ 3,266 $ 4,402 2.13 Average = $ 362 $ 591 $ 831 1.35 Median = $ 206 $ 411 $ 617 1.33 Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 99 ATTACHMENT A 4 Estimation of RCRA Hazardous Waste Management Part B Permit Application " Notice of Deficiency" ( NOD) Burden Multiplier For Adjustment of the ICR Data Applied in this " Economics Background Document"

to Include Multiple NOD Iterations Per Permit Application, Rather Than Only One Iteration ( ICR Assumption)

A. Source: ICR 1573 ( 27 Oct 1999) Exhibit 2  Respondent Burden Per Permit Burden Averages Item ICR page Number of respondents Burden hours per year Total burden ( hours/ yr x 3) Burden cost per year Total cost ( cost/ year x 3) Total hours per applicant Total cost per applicant Implied avg cost $/ hour 1 Page 68 subtotal  general facility requirements 943 36,611 109,833 $ 4,327,360 $ 12,982,080 116 $ 13,767 $ 118.20 2 Page 69 subtotal  general facility requirements ( continued) 1,172 8,865 26,595 $ 1,696,515 $ 5,089,545 23 $ 4,343 $ 191.37 3 Page 70 subtotal  general facility requirements ( continued) 728 7,481 22,443 $ 2,831,728 $ 8,495,184 31 $ 11,669 $ 378.52 4a Page 71 subtotal  containers 754 5,026 15,078 $ 1,205,534 $ 3,616,602 20 $ 4,797 $ 239.86 4b Page 71 subtotal  tank systems 1,122 39,718 119,154 $ 6,680,394 $ 20,041,182 106 $ 17,862 $ 168.20 4c Page 74 subtotal  misc units ( assume applies to containmt bldgs) 103 7,276 21,828 $ 2,669,934 $ 8,009,802 212 $ 77,765 $ 366.95 5 Total  containers ( items 1+ 2+ 3+ 4a) = 57,983 173,949 $ 10,061,137 $ 30,183,411 190 $ 34,575 $ 181.98 6 Total  tank systems ( items 1+ 2+ 3+ 4b) = 92,675 255,582 $ 15,535,997 $ 46,607,991 276 $ 47,641 $ 172.49 7 Total  misc units ( assume applies to containment bldgs  item 5) = 57,983 173,949 $ 10,061,137 $ 30,183,411 190 $ 34,575 $ 181.98 B. Source: OECA Sept 1997 report " Estimating Costs for the Economic Benefits of RCRA Noncompliance"

( as updated in the 30 Sept 2000 USEPA Office of Solid Waste EMRAD " Unit Cost Compendium" to year 2000$)

RCRA Part B Permit Cost for: One time cost Difference between Source B minus A Implied multiplier ( Sources B/ A)

8 General facility requirements $ 47,014 9 Container requirements $ 10,083 10 Tank system requirements $ 9,447 11 Containment bldg requirements: assume multiplier of container based on ICR 1573 = $ 106,855 12 Total  containers ( items 8+ 9) = $ 57,097 $ 22,522 1.65 13 Total  tank systems ( items 8+ 10) = $ 56,461 $ 8,820 1.19 14 Total  containment bldgs ( items 8+ 11) = $ 153,869 $ 119,294 4.45 Composite multiplier based on respective prevalence weights > 2.28 Containers & Cont. bldgs > 58.6%

Tank systems > 41.4% Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 100 ATTACHMENT B COMPUTATION OF NATIONAL COST SAVINGS FOR RCRA PAPERWORK BURDEN REDUCTION   SAVINGS COMBINED ( TSDFs + AUTHORITIES)

  SAVINGS TO ELIGIBLE RCRA TSDFs   SAVINGS TO RCRA PERMIT AUTHORITIES Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 101 ATTACHMENT B 1 ( if Scope # 1: n = 866 on site eligible facilities)

RCRA Standardized Permits:

Assumed Annual Number of Future " Standardized" Permit Actions Prevalence > 55% 43% 2% Universe count of existing eligible RCRA permitted hazardous waste units > 866 Item POA*

Year Renewals** Conversions Interim Status** New Facilities** Modifications** Row totals Contrs Tanks Cnt. Bldg Contrs Tanks Cnt. Bldg Contrs Tanks Cnt. Bldg Routine Signfct 1 2005 6 8 0 79 9 67 4 1 1 0 18 7 200 2 2006 6 8 0 79 9 67 4 1 1 0 18 7 200 3 2007 6 8 0 79 9 67 4 1 1 0 18 7 200 4 2008 6 8 0 79 9 67 4 1 1 0 18 7 200 5 2009 6 8 0 58 9 67 4 1 1 0 18 7 179 6 2010 6 8 0 58 9 67 4 1 1 0 18 7 179 7 2011 6 8 0 0 9 67 4 1 1 0 18 7 121 8 2012 6 8 0 0 9 67 4 1 1 0 18 7 121 9 2013 6 8 0 0 9 67 4 1 1 0 18 7 121 10 2014 6 8 0 0 9 67 4 1 1 0 18 7 121 11 2015 50 43 2 0 9 67 4 1 1 0 18 7 202 12 2016 50 43 2 0 9 67 4 1 1 0 18 7 202 13 2017 50 43 2 0 9 67 4 1 1 0 18 7 202 14 2018 50 43 2 0 9 67 4 1 1 0 18 7 202 15 2019 39 34 1 0 9 67 4 1 1 0 18 7 181 16 2020 39 34 1 0 9 67 4 1 1 0 18 7 181 17 2021 7 9 0 0 9 67 4 1 1 0 18 7 123 18 2022 7 9 0 0 9 67 4 1 1 0 18 7 123 19 2023 7 9 0 0 9 67 4 1 1 0 18 7 123 20 2024 7 9 0 0 9 67 4 1 1 0 18 7 123 21 2025 51 44 2 0 9 67 4 1 1 0 18 7 204 22 2026 51 44 2 0 9 67 4 1 1 0 18 7 204 23 2027 51 44 2 0 9 67 4 1 1 0 18 7 204 24 2028 51 44 2 0 9 67 4 1 1 0 18 7 204 25 2029 40 35 1 0 9 67 4 1 1 0 18 7 183 26 2030 40 35 1 0 9 67 4 1 1 0 18 7 183 27 2031 6 8 0 0 9 67 4 1 1 0 18 7 121 28 2032 6 8 0 0 9 67 4 1 1 0 18 7 121 29 2033 6 8 0 0 9 67 4 1 1 0 18 7 121 30 2034 6 8 0 0 9 67 4 1 1 0 18 7 121 Column totals= 678 634 17 433 270 2010 120 30 30 0 540 210 4972 Avg annual = 23 21 1 14 9 67 4 1 1 0 18 7 166 Limit> 433 Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 102 Explanatory Notes:

( a) Source: Count of average annual permit action for standardized permits from Table 2 of ICR reference " Source C".

( b) * POA = Period of analysis ( 30 years), relative to base year ( 2001) which represents first possible year of implementation.

( c) ** Translation of unit based data from ICR " Source C" ( Table 2), to facility based annual permit action count data in table above, based on using tank and container bldg units as facility permit counts, then assigning residual facility count as container facility permits:

ICR " Source C" unit count distribution: Translated facility permit count basis:

Contnrs Tanks C. bldgs Facilities Contnrs Tanks C. bldgs Facilities Renewals: 12 8 0 14 6 8 0 14 Interim status: 79 67 4 80 9 67 4 80 New permits: 2 1 0 2 1 1 0 2 Modifications annual count from Section 6( d) " Maintaining a Standardized Permit" of ICR reference " Source C".

( d) *** Conversion involves switching an existing individual permit before expiration to a standardized permit.

Conversions limited to six years and 433, because total number is limited to 50% of existing permitted eligible TSFs:

Existing fully permitted eligible TSFs: 584 x 50% = 292 Existing interim status eligible TSFs: 281 x 50% = 140 Total number of possible future conversions = 292 + 141 = 433 Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 103 ATTACHMENT B 2 ( if Scope # 2: n = 1,133 eligible on site & off site facilities)

STANDARDIZED RCRA PERMITS:

Assumed Annual Number of Future " Standardized" Permit Actions Prevalence > 55% 43% 2% Universe count of existing eligible RCRA permitted hazardous waste units > 1133 Item POA*

Year Renewals** Conversions Interim Status** New Facilities** Modifications** Row totals Contrs Tanks Cnt. Bldg Contrs Tanks Cnt. Bldg Contrs Tanks Cnt. Bldg Routine Signfct 1 2005 8 10 0 103 12 88 5 1 1 0 24 9 261 2 2006 8 10 0 103 12 88 5 1 1 0 24 9 261 3 2007 8 10 0 103 12 88 5 1 1 0 24 9 261 4 2008 8 10 0 103 12 88 5 1 1 0 24 9 261 5 2009 8 10 0 10 12 88 5 1 1 0 24 9 167 6 2010 8 10 0 10 12 88 5 1 1 0 24 9 167 7 2011 8 10 0 0 12 88 5 1 1 0 24 9 158 8 2012 8 10 0 0 12 88 5 1 1 0 24 9 158 9 2013 8 10 0 0 12 88 5 1 1 0 24 9 158 10 2014 8 10 0 0 12 88 5 1 1 0 24 9 158 11 2015 66 56 2 0 12 88 5 1 1 0 24 9 263 12 2016 66 56 2 0 12 88 5 1 1 0 24 9 263 13 2017 66 56 2 0 12 88 5 1 1 0 24 9 263 14 2018 66 56 2 0 12 88 5 1 1 0 24 9 263 15 2019 14 16 0 0 12 88 5 1 1 0 24 9 169 16 2020 14 16 0 0 12 88 5 1 1 0 24 9 169 17 2021 9 11 0 0 12 88 5 1 1 0 24 9 160 18 2022 9 11 0 0 12 88 5 1 1 0 24 9 160 19 2023 9 11 0 0 12 88 5 1 1 0 24 9 160 20 2024 9 11 0 0 12 88 5 1 1 0 24 9 160 21 2025 67 57 2 0 12 88 5 1 1 0 24 9 265 22 2026 67 57 2 0 12 88 5 1 1 0 24 9 265 23 2027 67 57 2 0 12 88 5 1 1 0 24 9 265 24 2028 67 57 2 0 12 88 5 1 1 0 24 9 265 25 2029 15 17 0 0 12 88 5 1 1 0 24 9 171 26 2030 15 17 0 0 12 88 5 1 1 0 24 9 171 27 2031 8 10 0 0 12 88 5 1 1 0 24 9 158 28 2032 8 10 0 0 12 88 5 1 1 0 24 9 158 29 2033 8 10 0 0 12 88 5 1 1 0 24 9 158 30 2034 8 10 0 0 12 88 5 1 1 0 24 9 158 Column totals= 733 708 17 433 353 2630 157 30 30 0 706 275 6072 Avg annual = 24 24 1 14 12 88 5 1 1 0 24 9 202 Limit> 433 For Explanatory Notes, see prior table. Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 104 ATTACHMENT B 3 ( if Scope # 1 n = 866 facilities) Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 105 ATTACHMENT B 4 ( if Scope # 2: n = 1,133 eligible facilities) Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 106 ATTACHMENT B 5 ( if Scope # 1: n = 866 eligible facilities) Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 107 ATTACHMENT B 6 ( if Scope # 2: n = 1,133 eligible facilities) Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 108 ATTACHMENT B 7 ( if Scope # 1: n = 866 eligible facilities) Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 109 ATTACHMENT B 8 ( if Scope # 2: n = 1,133 eligible facilities) Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 110 ATTACHMENT B 9 Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 111 ATTACHMENT B 10 Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 112 ATTACHMENT C IMPROVEMENT IN FINANCIAL RETURN ON PLANT ASSETS ( ROA)

FOR HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITIES COMPUTATION SPREADSHEETS Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 113 ATTACHMENT C 1 Improvement in Financial Return on Plant Assets ( ROA)

for Hazardous Waste Management Facilities Computation of Non Discounted Total Value of ROA Future Streams Over 10 year RCRA Permit Maximum Validation Period I. Capital Cost & ROA Rate Assumptions: Containers: Tank Systems: Containment Buildings:

Size Class of Waste Management Unit = Small Medium Large Small Medium Large Small Medium Large Asset capital cost = $ 1,060 $ 13,200 $ 66,000 $ 48,000 $ 100,000 $ 740,000 $ 439,000 $ 1,008,000 $ 5,244,000 Given annual effective ROA rate = 8.29% $ 88 $ 1,094 $ 5,471 $ 3,979 $ 8,290 $ 61,346 $ 36,393 $ 83,563 $ 434,728 Compute monthly effective ROA rate = 0.67% $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 II. ROA Future Streams:

Alternative Periods for RCRA Permit Processing ( assume applies to both new permits & renewals) Month Containers: Tank Systems: Containment Buildings:

Small Medium Large Small Medium Large Small Medium Large Submit RCRA permit application> 1 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 2 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 3 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 Case A: Earliest ROA start under " standardized" permit> 4 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 5 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 6 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 Case B: 2.5 month minimum delay for conventional permit> 7 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 8 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 9 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 10 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 11 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 12 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 13 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 14 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 15 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 16 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 17 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 18 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 19 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 20 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 21 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 22 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 23 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 24 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 25 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 26 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 27 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 28 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 29 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 30 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 31 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 Case C: 28.3 month maximum delay for conventional permit> 32 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 33 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 34 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 35 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 36 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 37 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 Alternative Periods for RCRA Permit Processing ( assume applies to both new permits & renewals) Month Containers: Tank Systems: Containment Buildings:

Small Medium Large Small Medium Large Small Medium Large 114 38 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 39 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 40 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 41 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 42 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 43 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 44 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 45 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 46 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 47 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 48 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 49 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 50 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 51 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 52 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 53 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 54 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 55 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 56 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 57 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 58 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 59 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 60 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 61 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 62 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 63 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 64 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 65 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 66 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 67 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 68 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 69 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 70 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 71 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 72 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 73 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 74 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 75 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 76 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 77 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 78 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 79 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 80 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 81 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 82 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 83 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 84 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 85 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 86 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 87 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 88 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 Alternative Periods for RCRA Permit Processing ( assume applies to both new permits & renewals) Month Containers: Tank Systems: Containment Buildings:

Small Medium Large Small Medium Large Small Medium Large 115 89 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 90 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 91 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 92 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 93 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 94 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 95 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 96 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 97 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 98 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 99 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 100 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 101 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 102 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 103 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 104 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 105 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 106 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 107 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 108 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 109 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 110 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 111 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 112 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 113 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 114 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 115 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 116 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 117 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 118 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 119 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 120 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 Non Discounted Sums of Alternative ROA Period Streams:

Sum w/ standardized permit Case A = $ 894 $ 11,137 $ 55,683 $ 40,497 $ 84,369 $ 624,327 $ 370,378 $ 850,435 $ 4,424,286 Sum w/ minimum delay for conventional permit Case B = $ 871 $ 10,851 $ 54,255 $ 39,459 $ 82,205 $ 608,319 $ 360,881 $ 828,629 $ 4,310,843 Percent improvement compared to conventional permit Case B = 2.6% 2.6% 2.6% 2.6% 2.6% 2.6% 2.6% 2.6% 2.6%

Sum w/ maximum delay for conventional permit Case C = $ 680 $ 8,471 $ 42,357 $ 30,805 $ 64,178 $ 474,916 $ 281,740 $ 646,912 $ 3,365,483 Percent improvement compared to conventional permit Case C = 31.5% 31.5% 31.5% 31.5% 31.5% 31.5% 31.5% 31.5% 31.5% Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 116 ATTACHMENT C 2 Improvement in Return on Assets ( ROA)

for Hazardous Waste Management Facilities Case A: ROA Streams for RCRA Standardized Permit ( over 10 years permit validation lifespan)

Alternative Processing Periods Month Containers: Tank Systems: Containment Buildings:

Small Medium Large Small Medium Large Small Medium Large Submit RCRA permit application> 1 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 2 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 3 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 Case A: Earliest ROA start under " standardized" permit> 4 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 5 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 6 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 Case B: 2.5 month minimum delay for conventional permit> 7 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 8 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 9 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 10 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 11 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 12 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 13 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 14 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 15 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 16 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 17 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 18 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 19 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 20 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 21 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 22 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 23 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 24 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 25 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 26 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 27 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 28 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 29 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 30 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 31 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 Case C: 28.3 month maximum delay for conventional permit> 32 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 33 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 34 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 35 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 36 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 37 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 38 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 39 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 40 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 41 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 42 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 43 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 Alternative Processing Periods Month Containers: Tank Systems: Containment Buildings:

Small Medium Large Small Medium Large Small Medium Large 117 44 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 45 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 46 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 47 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 48 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 49 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 50 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 51 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 52 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 53 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 54 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 55 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 56 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 57 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 58 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 59 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 60 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 61 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 62 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 63 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 64 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 65 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 66 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 67 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 68 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 69 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 70 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 71 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 72 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 73 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 74 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 75 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 76 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 77 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 78 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 79 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 80 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 81 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 82 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 83 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 84 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 85 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 86 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 87 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 88 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 89 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 90 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 91 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 92 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 93 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 94 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 Alternative Processing Periods Month Containers: Tank Systems: Containment Buildings:

Small Medium Large Small Medium Large Small Medium Large 118 95 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 96 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 97 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 98 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 99 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 100 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 101 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 102 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 103 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 104 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 105 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 106 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 107 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 108 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 109 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 110 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 111 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 112 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 113 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 114 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 115 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 116 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 117 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 118 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 119 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 120 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 Case A: Discounted Net Present Value of Streams: NPV = $ 635 $ 7,905 $ 39,524 $ 28,744 $ 59,884 $ 443,144 $ 262,892 $ 603,633 $ 3,140,331 Improvement over conventional permit Case B = $ 22 $ 275 $ 1,373 $ 998 $ 2,080 $ 15,389 $ 9,129 $ 20,962 $ 109,054 % improvement over conventional permit Case B = 3.6% 3.6% 3.6% 3.6% 3.6% 3.6% 3.6% 3.6% 3.6%

Improvement over conventional permit Case C = $ 192 $ 2,390 $ 11,951 $ 8,692 $ 18,107 $ 133,994 $ 79,491 $ 182,522 $ 949,548 % improvement over conventional permit Case C = 43.3% 43.3% 43.3% 43.3% 43.3% 43.3% 43.3% 43.3% 43.3%

Average Annual Equivalents: AAE = $ 90 $ 1,125 $ 5,627 $ 4,093 $ 8,526 $ 63,094 $ 37,430 $ 85,944 $ 447,112 Improvement over conventional permit Case B = $ 3 $ 39 $ 195 $ 142 $ 296 $ 2,191 $ 1,300 $ 2,985 $ 15,527 Size prevalence = 43% 28% 29% 43% 28% 29% 43% 28% 29%

Prevalence weighted average for size of unit = $ 69 $ 779 $ 5,897 Type prevalence = 45% 54% 1%

Prevalence weighted average for type of unit = $ 511 Improvement over conventional permit Case C = $ 27 $ 340 $ 1,702 $ 1,237 $ 2,578 $ 19,078 $ 11,318 $ 25,987 $ 135,194 Size prevalence = 43% 28% 29% 43% 28% 29% 43% 28% 29%

Prevalence weighted average for size of unit = $ 600 $ 6,787 $ 51,349 Type prevalence = 45% 54% 1%

Prevalence weighted average for type of unit = $ 4,448 Annual discount rate for computing NPV = 7.0%

Effective monthly discount rate = 0.6% Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 119 ATTACHMENT C 3 Improvement in Return on Assets ( ROA)

for Hazardous Waste Management Facilities Case B: ROA Streams for Minimum Delay For Conventional RCRA Permit ( Over 10 Years Permit Validation Lifespan)

Alternative Processing Periods Month Containers: Tank Systems: Containment Buildings:

Small Medium Large Small Medium Large Small Medium Large Submit RCRA permit application> 1 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 2 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 3 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 Case A: Earliest ROA start under " standardized" permit> 4 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 5 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 6 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 Case B: 2.5 month minimum delay for conventional permit> 7 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 8 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 9 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 10 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 11 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 12 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 13 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 14 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 15 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 16 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 17 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 18 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 19 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 20 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 21 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 22 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 23 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 24 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 25 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 26 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 27 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 28 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 29 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 30 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 31 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 Case C: 28.3 month maximum delay for conventional permit> 32 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 33 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 34 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 35 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 36 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 37 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 38 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 39 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 40 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 41 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 42 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 43 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 Alternative Processing Periods Month Containers: Tank Systems: Containment Buildings:

Small Medium Large Small Medium Large Small Medium Large 120 44 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 45 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 46 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 47 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 48 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 49 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 50 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 51 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 52 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 53 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 54 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 55 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 56 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 57 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 58 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 59 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 60 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 61 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 62 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 63 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 64 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 65 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 66 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 67 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 68 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 69 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 70 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 71 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 72 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 73 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 74 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 75 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 76 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 77 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 78 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 79 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 80 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 81 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 82 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 83 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 84 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 85 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 86 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 87 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 88 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 89 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 90 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 91 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 92 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 93 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 94 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 Alternative Processing Periods Month Containers: Tank Systems: Containment Buildings:

Small Medium Large Small Medium Large Small Medium Large 121 95 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 96 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 97 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 98 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 99 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 100 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 101 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 102 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 103 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 104 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 105 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 106 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 107 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 108 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 109 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 110 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 111 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 112 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 113 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 114 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 115 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 116 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 117 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 118 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 119 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 120 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 Discount Net Present Value ( NPV) of ROA Streams: Net Present Value = $ 613 $ 7,630 $ 38,151 $ 27,746 $ 57,805 $ 427,755 $ 253,762 $ 582,671 $ 3,031,277 Average Annual Equivalent ( AAE) = $ 87 $ 1,086 $ 5,432 $ 3,950 $ 8,230 $ 60,903 $ 36,130 $ 82,959 $ 431,586 Annual discount rate for computing NPV = 7%

Effective monthly discount rate = 0.6% Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 122 ATTACHMENT C 4 Improvement in Return on Assets ( ROA)

for Hazardous Waste Management Facilities Case C: ROA Streams for Maximum Delay For Conventional RCRA Permit ( Over 10 Years Permit Validation Lifespan)

Alternative Processing Periods Month Containers: Tank Systems: Containment Buildings:

Small Medium Large Small Medium Large Small Medium Large Submit RCRA permit application> 1 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 2 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 3 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 Case A: Earliest ROA start under " standardized" permit> 4 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 5 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 6 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 Case B: 2.5 month minimum delay for conventional permit> 7 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 8 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 9 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 10 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 11 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 12 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 13 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 14 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 15 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 16 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 17 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 18 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 19 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 20 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 21 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 22 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 23 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 24 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 25 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 26 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 27 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 28 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 29 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 30 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 31 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 Case C: 28.3 month maximum delay for conventional permit> 32 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 33 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 34 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 35 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 36 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 37 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 38 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 39 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 40 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 41 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 42 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 43 $ 8 $ 95 $ 476 $ 346 $ 721 $ 5,336 $ 3,166 $ 7,269 $ 37,814 Economics Background Document: RCRA Standardized Permit 29 March 2005 Alternative Processing Periods Month Containers: Tank Systems: Containment Buildings: