RIA for Exclusion 2.  However, both RIAs indirectly include estimation
of potential impacts on offsite recycling under tolling arrangements, by
using NAICS industry code 32519 "Other Organic Chemical Manufacturing"
as a proxy indicator for recycling tolling arrangements.  This NAICS
code most closely (narrowly) represents the specialty batch chemical
manufacturing industry.  The 2005 BR database indicates that a
relatively small fraction of 2,125 tons/year (i.e., 0.06%) of the 3.82
million tons/year reported for 187 waste streams generated by the NAICS
32519 industry, was managed by offsite recycling (i.e., by management
codes H010, H020, or H039).

We concur that the cost savings impact (i.e., reduced waste disposal
costs and reduced materials purchasing costs) to small businesses from
this rule may be under-estimated in our RIAs for this rule.  In order to
communicate the numerical uncertainty surrounding our impact estimates,
we added a "Sensitivity Analysis" section to both our 2007 and 2008 RIAs
for this rulemaking.  For example, one of the uncertainty factors
identified in the sensitivity analysis section of our 2008 RIA for the
DSW final rule indicates that our RIA is based on a limited amount of
detailed cost data.  Typically, OSW RIAs for the RCRA program are
designed to provide semi-detailed estimates rather than exact
engineering cost and benefit estimates for each of the nationwide 100s
of different industries consisting of 1,000s of facilities which are
generating and managing 10,000s of individual waste streams which may be
affected by this rule.  Relative to the ANSI Standard Reference
Z94.2-1989 and AACE Recommended Practice No. 18R-97 cost estimation
accuracy classification system
(http://www.aacei.org/technical/rps/18r-97.pdf), the semi-detailed level
of the DSW RIAs corresponds to a "Class 3" estimate with expected cost
estimation accuracy range of -20% to +30%.

In our 2008 RIA for the DSW final rule EPA did revise the methodology
for estimating potential baseline disposal switchover to future
recycling to help correct for the alleged under-estimation bias of the
methodology in our 2007 RIA.  This revision consisted of expanding the
scope of our estimation methodology in our 2008 RIA by (a) dropping
NAICS code restrictions to baseline disposal data evaluated for
potential switchover (5 of the 12 waste types evaluated in the 2007 RIA
were restricted to only five NAICS codes 32411, 331111, 332813, 33412,
334412), (b) increasing from a count of 56 in our 2007 RIA, to a count
of 85 in our 2008 RIA, the total count of RCRA Biennial Report database
codes applied for identifying baseline disposed wastes for recycling
evaluation, and (c) broadening our waste types according to three
commodity groups (i.e., metals, solvents, other (acids, carbon,
catalysts, etc.)) and determining potentially valuable materials for
recovery within each group using an empirical basis rather than
engineering judgment or secondary literature sources (the empirical
basis is OSW's "National Hazardous Waste Constituent Survey"; see item 4
at: http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/id/hwirwste/economic.htm).
This third element of our methodology revision resulted in an increase
from 11 (2007 RIA) to 15 (2008 RIA) in the count of disposed waste
constituents (i.e., specific types of chemicals and materials such as
chromium, copper, lead, nickel, zinc, sulfuric acid, etc.) that we
evaluated for potential switchover to recycling in our 2008 RIA, as
compared to our 2007 RIA.

Include Incineration in Baseline Costs

EPA agrees with the points made by the commenter on the various RCRA
regulatory cost factors applied in the 2003 DSW RIA (e.g., landfill
costs and incineration baseline).  We attempted to update these costs
and include other disposal methods and associated assumptions in both
our 2007 and 2008 RIAs for this rulemaking to reflect these points.  We
also appreciate the additional information from this commenter about
small businesses and toll contractor waste solvents, which we added as
examples to our 2008 RIA for the DSW final rule.

Consideration of Transport Costs

EPA agrees that materials quality and specifications are an important
consideration in addition to price and could influence the distances
materials are transported.  This is one stated limitation in our RIAs
for this rule which are based on price (cost) and other quantifiable
factors.  To account for possible perceived or real lower quality in
recovered materials compared to virgin materials, we assume in our 2008
RIA for the final rule that the potential future market value of
material constituents (e.g., metals, solvents, carbon, acids) that might
be recovered from currently disposed hazardous wastes under this rule is
90% of the market price.

Impacts to the Cement Kiln Recycling Industry and to Energy Recovery

EPA's response contains eight parts corresponding to the eight areas of
potential adverse consequences to the cement kiln recycling industry
identified in this comment.

(1) In our 2008 RIA for this rule we revised our methodology for
estimating potential adverse impacts on the future availability of
hazardous wastes for energy recovery by the US cement manufacturing
industry (NAICS 32731) and eliminated our prior assumption as stated in
our 2007 RIA (page 167) that "OSW does not expect adverse effects on the
cement industry from the DSW rule...."

(2) We replaced the "worst case" impact scenario calculations presented
in our 2007 RIA (pages 167-168), with an impact estimate grounded in the
RCRA Biennial Report database according to actual reported annual
tonnages and associated industrial generation sources (Gxxx codes) and
physical/chemical forms (Wxxx codes) and RCRA regulatory codes (Dxxx,
Fxxx, Kxxx) of hazardous waste which are reported as being managed for
energy recovery by the cement manufacturing industry.

(3) The "Sensitivity Analysis #2" of our 2007 RIA (pages 133-134)
identified future changes to the RCRA regulatory program as a factor
that may influence the dollar value of future annual cost savings to
industry from the DSW final rule.  We revised "Sensitivity Analysis #2"
of our 2008 RIA for the DSW final rule to explicitly identify the 15
RCRA-related regulatory changes listed in EPA's Fall 2007 "Regulatory
Plan and Semiannual Regulatory Agenda," which includes the proposed
comparable fuel exclusion.  Nevertheless, single agency "regulatory
actions" rather than bundles of multiple regulatory actions or entire
regulatory programs are the unit-of-analysis addressed by OMB's
September 2003 "Circular A-4" best practices guidance to Federal
regulatory agencies for implementing the regulatory analysis
requirements of the 1993 Executive Order 12866.

(4)  In our 2008 RIA for the final rule, we expanded the scope of the
prior "Potential Business Impacts" Chapter 8 of our 2007 RIA, by
including a "Distributional Effects" chapter which includes additional
potentially indirectly-affected industries.  One such added indirectly
impacted industry is NAICS 2121 "Coal Mining." The analysis provides an
estimate of potential increased cost for additional coal purchase as a
result of this rule.  The expanded scope also includes addition of three
other indirectly impacted industries: NAICS 325188 - all other basic
inorganic chemical mfg, NAICS 331419 - other nonferrous metal primary
smelting & refining, and NAICS 325199 - All Other Basic Organic Chemical
Mfg, for estimation of the potential reduction in costs for purchase of
virgin metals, virgin solvents, and virgin acids as a result of the DSW
rule.  This cost reduction also represents an indicator of resource
conservation.

(5) We added a qualitative screening evaluation of potential
countervailing risks to our 2008 RIA for the DSW final rule, which
evaluates potential adverse environmental and other types of potential
countervailing impacts and effects identified by public commenters on
both our 2003 and 2007 RIAs for this rulemaking.  In part, it is based
on a qualitative screening evaluation of the historical industrial
recycling damage cases identified in our March 2007 supplemental
proposal for the DSW rule ("An Assessment of Environmental Problems
Associated with Recycling of Hazardous Secondary Materials", 11 January
2007, http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/dsw/abr-rule/env-prob.pdf).
Our 2008 RIA for the DSW final rule examines 12 potential countervailing
risks (some of which are over-lapping): 1. recycling environmental
damages, 2. materials testing, 3. community & groundwater, 4. training &
traffic, 5. human exposure, 6. material shipments, 7. compliance
enforcement, 8. abandoned sites, 9. site inspections, 10. coal mining,
11. bankruptcy, 12. other environmental programs,  (6) Our 2007 RIA
(Appendix D "Case #1" pages 239 to 261) contains a lifecycle analysis
(LCA) which compares the relative unitized energy (per ton) and
environmental pollution for solvent recovery compared to solvent
incineration as well as compared to burning solvents in a cement kiln
for energy recovery (see pages 258 to 261 of the 2007 RIA).
Unfortunately, sufficient and comprehensive LCA data and
sufficiently-detailed models for estimating these comparative impacts
are not available for all solvent-related scenarios.

(7) We added an evaluation of potential countervailing risks to our 2008
RIA for the DSW final rule, which evaluates potential adverse
environmental and other types of potential countervailing impacts and
effects identified by public commenters on both our 2003 and 2007 RIAs
for this rulemaking.  In part, it is based on a qualitative screening
evaluation of the historical industrial recycling damage cases
identified in our March 2007 supplemental proposal for the DSW rule ("An
Assessment of Environmental Problems Associated with Recycling of
Hazardous Secondary Materials", 11 January 2007,
http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/dsw/abr-rule/env-prob.pdf).  Our
2008 RIA for the DSW final rule examines 12 potential countervailing
risks (some of which are over-lapping): 1. recycling environmental
damages, 2. materials testing, 3. community & groundwater, 4. training &
traffic, 5. human exposure, 6. material shipments, 7. compliance
enforcement, 8. abandoned sites, 9. site inspections, 10. coal mining,
11. bankruptcy, 12. other environmental programs.

(8) We included in both our 2007 RIA ("Sensitivity Analysis #1, Exhibit
6F, page 145) and 2008 RIA for this rulemaking an estimate of the number
of state governments which may not elect to adopt this final rule based
on state government comments on the 2003 and 2007 DSW proposals.  We
alaso included an associated estimate of how such hypothetical
non-adoption may decrease the future annual economic impact potential of
this rule, relative to our state government full-adoption impact
estimate.

Proposed Rule is "Significant"

EPA agrees that this action is a "significant" action according to
Executive Order 12866 Section 3(f)(4) because it raises novel legal or
policy issues.  In addition, based on the results of our updated and
revised 2008 RIA for the DSW final rule, although our best estimate is
this action is likely to have a $95 million average "annual effect"
(i.e., net cost savings benefit to industry) which is $5 million less
than the $100 million or more "economically significant" threshold of
Section 3(f)(1)) in Executive Order 12866, we also classify this action
as “economically significant" because the upper-bound of the $19
million to $333 million cost savings estimate uncertainty range in the
"Sensitivity Analysis" section of our 2008 RIA, exceeds the $100 million
threshold.

Transportation Assumption

EPA's transportation assumptions were based on recently available data,
including shipments reported in the 1999 Biennial Report.  For more
detailed discussion of the assumptions used to develop transportation
costs, see Appendix D to the 2008 RIA.

12.2 - Paperwork reduction act (ICR)

12.2 - Summary

One commenter discussed EPA's Information Collection Request (ICR)
burden estimate.  The commenter noted that the ICR burden estimates are
based on the minimal notice and record-keeping provisions in the
supplemental proposed rule.  These estimates do not take into account
EPA's repeated requests for public comment on more detailed notice and
record-keeping provisions. See 72 Fed. Reg. at 14,189.  There is a
distinct possibility, therefore, that the final rule could differ
markedly from the supplemental proposed rule by including more onerous
recordkeeping and notice requirements.

The commenter believes that at this juncture in the rulemaking process,
the ICR's burden estimates are highly speculative and could well have
little or no relation to actual burdens imposed by the final rule.  If
additional recordkeeping and notice requirements are included in the
final rule, the commenter encourages - and in fact expects - EPA to file
an amended ICR that examines the likely burdens associated with the
finalized requirements.  Without an amended ICR, OMB and the public will
not have an accurate assessment of the hour and cost burden of these
requirements.

The commenter also noted that the ICR's Supporting Statement declares
that the agency consulted with three companies - all resource recovery
operations using hazardous waste as their feedstocks.  See Supporting
Statement for EPA Information Collection Request Number 1189.19:
Revisions to the Definition of Solid Waste (Proposed Rule), at 10 (Oct.
2, 2006).  Apparently, EPA did not consult with any of the other
thousands of companies in the score (or more) of industries affected by
the supplemental proposed rule.  See Supporting Statement at 12
(providing a list of affected industries by NAICS codes); see also 72
Fed. Reg. at 14,172 (describing the number of regulated entities).

EPA estimates in the proposed rule itself that about 4,600 facilities in
530 industries in 17 economic sectors could be affected by the
supplemental proposed rule.  72 Fed. Reg. at 14,172.  Yet the agency
consulted with only three companies from a single industry. By no means
should such consultation be considered adequate to support a rulemaking
of this scope.  EPA's minimal level of "consultation" is inadequate
given the agency's estimations of the number of parties annually that
will make use of the rule's various provisions on exclusions, non-waste
determination, export notifications, etc.  See Supporting Statement at
28-29.

The commenter also said that the ICR makes no mention of the potentially
wide variation in how states might adopt this rule, and indeed which of
the rule's provisions states might or might not adopt.  EPA views this
rule as "de-regulatory" in nature.  To the extent that the final rule is
less stringent than current RCRA regulations, states authorized to
implement their own RCRA programs will not be bound to adopt the final
federal rule. Thus it is conceivable that great variation may result
among the states in whether and how much of the final rule they adopt.
While this is a major policy issue ranging far beyond "information
collection requirements," the notice and record-keeping requirements
(and thus the burden on affected industries) will be significantly
affected by states' decisions to adopt or not to adopt the final rule.

[0438-1, 0438-4, 0438-5]

12.2 - Response

In response to comments on EPA's estimated Information Collection
Request (ICR) burden estimates, the Agency agrees that our draft ICR
burden estimates for the DSW proposed rule must be revised to reflect
the actual burdens imposed by the final rule.  In 2008 we modified our
draft ICR burden estimate to reflect the exact paperwork burden
requirements of the exclusions included in the final rule.  This ICR
estimates the burden associated with all of the final rule's
recordkeeping and reporting requirements.  Refer to Section 6 of the
final rule ICR supporting statement for the burden estimates.
Furthermore, post-promulgation performance measures should allow us to
measure the actual paperwork burden and other effects of this rule, so
that we may modify our initial ICR estimates when the ICR comes up for
mandatory 3-year OMB clearance renewal in year 2011 or 2012.

EPA also agrees that our draft ICR burden estimates were based on a very
small sample size in relation to the potential 100s of different
nationwide industries consisting of 1,000s of facilities which may be
affected by this final rule and that further consultations were
warranted.    In preparing the ICR for the supplemental proposal, EPA
was mindful that it could not contact more than nine organizations to
collect burden estimates for the ICR.  The 1995 Paperwork Reduction Act
prevents a Federal agency from collecting information from more than
nine organizations, unless clearance is obtained from the U.S. Office of
Management and Budget.  Obtaining clearance for purposes of preparing
this ICR is not practicable.  Given this constraint on the number of
organizations that could be contacted, the Agency consulted three large,
multi-state reclamation facilities and one trade association in
preparing the ICR for the supplemental proposal.  EPA recognized that
these organizations have a broad knowledge of the reclamation industry
because they work with both small and large generators in many
industries.  For example, reclaimers routinely perform technical and
paperwork activities on behalf of their generator customers, such as
packaging their wastes and materials for shipment, preparing manifests
and notices, and supporting customers in making reasonable efforts to
audit the reclamation process.  As a result, they were able to speak
about their own activities and burdens, as well as those of their
generator customers.  Notwithstanding this, EPA was persuaded by the
commenter that additional consultations were warranted and contacted
four additional organizations in preparing this ICR for the final rule.
These organizations are hazardous secondary materials generators in the
following industries:  automobile manufacturing, information technology,
agricultural products, and metals production.  EPA believes these
additional consultations address the commenter's request to contact
other industries affected by the rule.  Refer to the table in Section
3(c) of the final rule ICR for the list of all organizations contacted.

EPA also agrees that State adoption rates will affect burden impacts
under the rule.  Essentially, the commenter raises two points that need
an Agency response: (i) should EPA estimate burden impacts based on an
assumption of full State adoption and (ii) should this assumption be
made more clear in this supporting statement?

On the first point, it has been EPA's belief that ICRs for rulemakings
should be based on full State adoption.  Normally, EPA cannot reliably
identify States that will not adopt a final rule.  Although a State may
express concerns or opposition to a proposed rule (or portions of it)
such as during the public comment period, modifications made in response
to the public's comments may make the State more inclined to adopt the
final version.  In addition, a State's decision to adopt the final rule
(as well as the timing of the adoption) may be based on factors that are
not known at the time of the ICR's preparation (e.g., the State's
regulatory needs and priorities).  Therefore, EPA continues to believe
that the burden impacts estimated in the ICR should be based on an
assumption of full State adoption.  When the ICR is renewed three years
from now, EPA will be in a better position to reflect variations in
States' adoption of the final rule.

On the second point, EPA agrees that additional clarification is needed
in this supporting statement of the Agency's assumptions regarding full
State adoption of the final rule.  This clarification has been included
in Section 6(e) of the final rule ICR supporting statement.

12.3 - Unfunded mandates reform act

12.3 - Summary

One commenter questioned EPA's statement that: "EPA has determined that
this rule does not include a Federal mandate that may result in
expenditures of 100 million dollars or more for State, local, or tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or the private sector in any one year.
This is because this supplemental proposal imposes no enforceable duty
on any State, local, or tribal governments. EPA also has determined that
this rule contains no regulatory requirements that might significantly
or uniquely affect small governments."   For States currently authorized
to enforce RCRA through RCRA Grants or Performance Partnership Grants
received from the Federal Government, there is uncertainty that this
supplemental proposal if made law does, in fact, impose no enforceable
duty on any State, and that that this rule contains no regulatory
requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. While States are granted certain latitude in enforcing the
RCRA program, there is understandably, a certain push for conformity.
For States, like New Jersey, that have modeled their RCRA Programs on
USEPA and incorporate the Code of Federal Reguations (CFR) by reference,
it would make no sense not to adopt these requirements should this
proposal become law. However, if this occurs we would anticipate that
EPA would look to modify our Performance Partnership Agreement currently
in place, seeking assistance in activities related to this proposal,
including but not limited to legitimacy determinations and measurement
of performance outcomes. Failure of the States to assist in these
endeavors or meet its Performance Partnership Agreement commitments
regarding these activities could possibly endanger grant funding status.
Thus the commenter believes there could be a significant or unique
effect on State governments. [0563-18]

One commenter on the 2003 proposal stated that, without financial
assurance, the cost of cleanup at excluded sites will initially fall on
the states. Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, Public Law
104-4, EPA is required to estimate those costs for states that have not
been delegated the RCRA program.  [0119-79]

12.3 - Response

EPA disagrees with comments stating that the proposed revisions to the
definition of solid waste include "Federal mandates" that may result in
expenditures to state, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any one year.  This
rule imposes no enforceable duty on any state, local, or tribal
governments. Although one public commenter noted that many states choose
to incorporate EPA's regulations by reference, EPA does not require them
to do so. EPA has also determined that the conditions and restrictions
in the final rule, including financial assurance, address concerns about
the cost of cleanups falling to state governments.   A discussion of
EPA's analysis of countervailing risk and how the final rule addresses
those risks can be found in Chapter 11 of the Regulatory Impact
Analysis. Therefore, EPA has determined that this rule contains no
regulatory requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. In addition, the private sector is not expected to
incur costs exceeding $100 million. Therefore, today's rule is not
subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of UMRA.

12.4 - EO 13132: Federalism

12.4 - Summary

Three commenters stated that they believed that EPA failed to comply
with Executive Order 13132 (Federalism). One commenter noted that while
States are granted certain latitude in enforcing the RCRA program, there
is understandably, a certain push for conformity. For States, like New
Jersey, that have modeled their RCRA Programs on USEPA and incorporate
CFR by reference, it would make no sense to not adopt these requirements
should this proposal become law. However, if this occurs we would
anticipate that EPA would look to modify our Performance Partnership
Agreement currently in place, seeking assistance in activities related
to this proposal, including but not limited to legitimacy determinations
and measurement of performance outcomes. Legitimacy determinations can
be time consuming activities often involving multiple site inspections
and reviews of copious data. Measurement of performance outcomes may
involve some reprogramming of existing State data systems and creation
of new fields for data capture and analysis as well as modification of
current State data systems to address any changes to RCRAINFO, BRS or
TRI data systems to maintain established data transfer flows. Thus by
implementing these requirements, States may incur direct compliance
costs by this rulemaking unless current Performance Partnership
Agreement commitments are reduced to accommodate these new activities or
Grant funding is increased to address these new requirements should the
existing requirements not be reduced. [0563-19]

One commenter said the final rule will have Federalism impacts on
States, such as Maine, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts and others that have
opted to impose stringent recycling standards as mandated by the RCRA
and ensuing HSWA. While states with more stringent recycling laws will
retain their control over wastes generated within their border, the
intent of their laws which is to protect human health and the
environment will be jeopardized as these materials are recycled into
consumer products and sold within the state.  [0561-4]

One commenter stated that removing approximately 1,570,000 tons (p.
61591) of wastes from the hazardous waste universe will reduce fees
collected by states that have such programs, which could significantly
impact certain state regulatory agencies' ability to protect human
health and the environment. Because many states derive significant
funding for their RCRA regulatory programs from hazardous waste fees and
it clearly would be EPA's intent to "encourage" the states to adopt the
revised DSW once it is finalized, it is false to claim that this rule
will not have "substantial...effects on the states." Also, with respect
to state implementation of this rule, if the new rules are adopted or
applied in an inconsistent manner, which is typical, then more costs
will be incurred to track and figure out all the disjointed regulatory
requirements and issues. This result flies in the face of the Agency's
claims that one benefit of this rule will be burden and cost reduction
resulting from reduced recordkeeping. [0172-24]

12.4 - Response

Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure
meaningful and timely input by state and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.
Policies that have federalism implications are defined in the Executive
Order to include regulations that have substantial direct effects on the
states, on the relationship between the national government and the
states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government.

This final rule does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as
specified in Executive Order 13132. There are no state and local
government bodies that incur direct compliance costs by this rulemaking.
State and local government implementation expenditures are expected to
be less than $500,000 in any one year. Thus, the requirements of Section
6 of the Executive Order do not apply to this final rule. Although one
public commenter noted that many states choose to incorporate EPA's
regulations by reference, EPA does not require them to do so.   Also,
EPA disagrees with the comment stating that the hazardous secondary
materials reclaimed under the exclusion would result in unsafe consumer
products in sold in states that do not adopt the exclusion.  Although
generally not regulated under RCRA, the products of hazardous secondary
materials recycling are addressed in evaluations of the legitimacy of
recycling activities.  As is discussed in the preamble to the final
rule, the final provisions addressing legitimacy are not significantly
different than current regulations and policies and thus this rule does
not significantly change these evaluations.  While EPA agrees that
States who choose to adopt the rule and who currently collect hazardous
waste generator fees could lose those fees, and has documented that
potential effect in the Regulatory Impact Analysis, this is not a direct
impact and States can compensate by changing their fee structure.

12.5 - EO 13045:  Children's Health

12.5 - Summary

One commenter stated that the proposed rule violates the requirement
under Executive Order 13045 "Protection of Children from Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks" to consider the unique vulnerabilities of
the proposed rule on children.  In this rule, as in many others, the EPA
claims that because the rule is not significant (by their interpretation
of EO 12866) the agency is not required to consider the impacts of their
actions on children's health.  This statement is patently not true.  The
rule clearly provides an either or situation, i.e., either 100 million
dollars or "adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of
the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State (emphasis added), local, or tribal
governments or communities" [Sec. 4(f)(1)]. Executive Order 12866 also
provides that regulations only be promulgated that are "required by law"
- which this rule is neither required nor consistent with existing law -
and that a rule becomes "significant" if it raises novel legal policy or
is inconsistent with the EO 12866 [(Sec. 4 (f)(4)].  The Revision to
Solid Waste is therefore by definition significant.

[0561-4, 0561-5]

12.5 - Response

EPA disagrees that the proposed rule violates Executive Order 13045
"Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks."  This action is not subject to EO 13045 (62 F.R. 19885, April
23, 1997) because the Agency does not believe the environmental health
risks or safety risks addressed by this action present a
disproportionate risk to children. An assessment of countervailing risk
and a discussion of how today's rule addresses those risks can be found
in Chapter 11 of the Regulatory Impact Analysis, found in the docket for
the rulemaking.

12.6 - EO 12898:  Environmental justice

12.6 - Summary

One commenter stated that EPA failed to comply with Executive Order
12898 entitled “Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in
Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations” (59 FR 7629, February
16, 1994).  Under Executive Order 12898, each Federal agency must make
achieving environmental justice part of its mission by identifying and
addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human
health or environmental effects of its programs, policies, and
activities on minorities and low-income populations. Executive Order
12898 requires EPA to take into account the environmental justice
consequences of their actions. Id. EPA states that its goals are "to
ensure that no segment of the population, regardless of race, color,
national origin, income, or net worth bears disproportionately high and
adverse human health and environmental impacts as a result of EPA's
policies, programs and activities."  72 Fed. Reg. at 14214.

EPA claims, without supporting evidence or rational basis, that
"overall, no disproportionate impacts to minorities or low income
communities are expected" as a result of their supplemental proposal.
Id. EPA, however, violates Executive Order 12898 by failing to provide
any analysis to support this statement.  The evidence in the record, in
fact, points definitively to an opposite conclusion.  EPA's
Environmental Assessment indicates that environmental damage at
facilities recycling hazardous secondary materials are likely to
increase as a result of the rulemaking.  The Environmental Assessment
identified over 100 CERCLA sites, 47 of which were listed on the
National Priorities List.  Id. Because these industrial facilities and
Superfund sites are located disproportionately in low-income and
minority neighborhoods, it is inevitable that this deregulation will
have an adverse impact on such communities.  It is incumbent upon EPA to
determine the nature of this adverse impact, i.e., to identify and
address the disproportionately high and adverse human health and
environmental impacts.  The commenter believes that because the Agency's
failed to do so, EPA failed to comply with Executive Order 12898.

The commenter also asserts that EPA failed to follow its own guidance
regarding compliance with Executive Order 12898. EPA's Office of Solid
Waste and Emergency Response in their Integration of Environmental
Justice into OSWER Policy, Guidance, and Regulatory Development states
that "It is OSWER's policy that environmental justice be considered as
an integral part in the development of all OSWER policies, guidances and
regulations." (OSWER Directive 9200.3-18FS, EPA540/F-95/023,
http://www.epa.gov/oswer/ej/htmldoc/ejpolicy.htm.) The OSWER Directive,
in fact, specifically requires that EPA staff take specific steps to
comply with Executive Order 12898.  The Directive mandates that:

(1) Environmental justice issues should be considered at all stages of
policy, guidance and regulation development, beginning with preliminary
efforts. Staff should first evaluate the subject matter for the
possibility of disproportionately high and adverse impacts on minority
and low-income communities. Offices may wish to develop methods for
determining which are the most important topics requiring consideration
of environmental justice.

(2) Where environmental justice concerns or the potential for concerns
are identified, staff should conduct an appropriate analysis of the
issue(s). To the extent practicable, staff should evaluate the
ecological, human health (taking into account subsistence patterns and
sensitive populations) and socioeconomic impacts of the proposed
decision document in minority and low-income communities.

(3) At all critical stages of development, there should be meaningful
input from stakeholders, including members of the environmental justice
community and members of the regulated community. Federal, state or
local government agencies may also be stakeholders and should be
consulted, as appropriate.

(4) When policies, guidance and regulations are sent forward for [the
signature of the Assistant Administrator for OSWER], that of the Deputy
Assistant Administrators, or that of the Administrator or her Deputy,
the transmittal memorandum or "action memorandum" that accompanies them
should document the actions that have been taken to carry out this
directive. Specifically, these memoranda should describe the issues that
have been identified, the options that have been developed and analyzed,
as well as any consultation that has been conducted. They should
describe comments that have been received and how issues were resolved.

Id.

Despite the requirements described above, EPA has not documented any
actions  taken to carry out this objective, identified any memoranda
describing the issues, developed or analyzed any options, or held any
meetings with members of the environmental justice community, regulated
community, or Federal, state or local government agencies.  The
commenter believes that pursuant to Executive Order 12898 and the OSWER
Directive, EPA must take these actions immediately.

The commenter states that there is little doubt that EPA's supplemental
proposal indeed raises significant environmental justice issues.  In
addition to EPA's own findings in its Environmental Assessment, recent
studies concerning the inequitable distribution of environmental hazards
have found that the disparities around hazardous waste facilities are
far greater than what previous studies have shown. We are appending to
these comments the 2007 report entitled "Toxic Wastes and Race at
Twenty, 1987-2007, A Report Prepared for the United Church of Christ
Justice and Witness Ministries" by Robert D. Bullard, Ph.D; Paul Mohai,
Ph.D.; Robin Saha, Ph.D., and Beverly Wright, Ph.D.  This report
examines the locations of hazardous waste treatment, storage and
disposal facilities in the U.S. and assesses the race and socioeconomic
status of the host communities.  The report identified 413 facilities,
which represents all the commercial hazardous waste facilities operating
in the U.S. in 1999. Id. at 51. By using 2000 census data, the report
determined the racial and socioeconomic characteristics of neighborhoods
containing these facilities. Id.

Although this report did not look specifically at hazardous waste
recycling facilities, its findings and conclusions are highly relevant.
The report found:

(1) More than nine million people are estimated to live within 1.8 miles
of the nation's 413 commercial hazardous waste facilities.

(2) Host neighborhoods are densely populated with more than 2300 persons
per square mile, compared to 77 persons per square mile in non-host
areas.

(3) Host neighborhoods with commercial hazardous waste facilities are
56% people of color whereas non-host areas are 30% people of color.
Percentages of people of color as a whole are 1.9 times greater in host
neighborhoods than in non-host areas.

(4) Poverty rates in the host neighborhoods are 1.5 times greater than
those in non-host areas and mean annual household incomes in host
neighborhoods are 15% lower.

Id. at 52.

The report concludes that:

[S]ignificant racial and socioeconomic disparities persist in the
distribution of the nation's commercial hazardous waste facilities.
People of color and persons of low socioeconomic status are still
disproportionately impacted and are particularly concentrated in
neighborhoods and communities with the greatest number of facilities.
Indeed a watershed moment has occurred in the last decade. People of
color now comprise a majority in neighborhoods with commercial hazardous
waste facilities, and much larger (over two-thirds) majorities can be
found in neighborhoods with clustered facilities.

Significant racial and socioeconomic disparities exist today despite the
considerable societal attention to the problem noted in previous
chapters. These findings raise serious questions about the ability of
current policies and institutions to adequately protect people of color
and the poor from toxic threats.

Id. at 63.

The commenter states that the failure of EPA to put forth even the
smallest effort to comply with Executive Order 12898 was a violation of
Agency guidance and an unfortunate validation of the report's conclusion
that current institutions and policies are not working to adequately
protect people of color and the poor from toxic threats.  If EPA's
deregulation of hazardous waste has a high potential to create more
superfund sites and toxic releases in areas that are predominantly
neighborhoods of color and people of low income, this circumstance must
be explored and options must be considered that could prevent the
disproportionate impact.  Pursuant to Executive Order 12898, EPA must
complete this analysis and convene shareholder groups, as required, to
discuss solutions that could avoid this outcome.

The Executive Order and OSWER Directive requires that this analysis
occur prior to publishing a proposed rule. Therefore EPA must withdraw
the rule until completion of the required analysis and outreach.

[0559-86]

12.6 - Response

EPA disagrees with the comment that EPA failed to comply with Executive
Order 12898 entitled “Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice
in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations” (59 FR 7629,
February 16, 1994).  The final rule would streamline the requirements
for certain hazardous secondary materials sent for reclamation.
Facilities that would be affected by today's final rule include
manufacturing-type and other facilities generating hazardous secondary
materials, as well as facilities that reclaim such materials. Disposal
and treatment facilities would not be affected by this final rule. In
fact, some quantities of secondary hazardous secondary materials are
expected to be diverted from disposal facilities to other recycling
facilities.  In addition, commenters assert that minorities now comprise
a majority in neighborhoods with commercial hazardous waste facilities,
and much larger (over two-thirds) majorities can be found in
neighborhoods with clustered facilities. However, EPA does not believe
that neighborhoods will be adversely impacted by today's rule. As
explained in Chapter 11 of the Regulatory Impact Analysis found in the
docket to today's rule, EPA has performed an assessment of potential
countervailing risks and has determined that the conditions included in
the rule address those potential risks and no net impact is expected.
Thus, overall, no disproportionate impacts to minorities or low income
communities are expected.

In addition, EPA disagrees with the comment that EPA failed to follow
its own guidance regarding compliance with Executive Order 12898. As
discussed above, in developing the conditions and restrictions for the
final rule, EPA addressed potential risks to communities, which include
minority and low-income communities. The development of and rationale
for the conditions and restrictions are explained in the preamble to the
final rule and in the evaluation of countervailing risks in Chapter 11
of the  2008 RIA.  The Environmental Justice concerns raised by the
commenter and EPA's response were discussed with EPA management and
documented in the internal "action memorandum" that accompanies them
should document the actions that was sent forward with the final rule to
the Administrator for signature.

13 - Other/Miscellaneous

13 - Summary

On April 24, 2007, EPA extended the comment period on the March 2007
supplemental proposal until June 25, 2007 in response to several
requests.  (72 FR 20304).  After that comment period extension, EPA
received one comment requesting that the comment period be further
extended.  [0480-1]

13 - Response

EPA decided against a second extension of the comment period,
determining that further delay in addressing the longstanding issue of
when recycling does and does not involve solid waste management was
unwarranted.

13.1 - Other suggested revisions

13.1.1 - Alternatives to proposed exclusions

13.1.1 - Summary

EPA received several comments on alternatives to the proposed
exclusions.

Alternative Hazardous Waste Standards

Many commenters suggested that, EPA should consider an approach that
maintains core waste management standards, while falling short of
complete deregulation (e.g., an approach similar to that of the
Universal Waste Rule).  In particular, standards could be established
for recyclable hazardous wastes that would include basic safeguards for
the physical management of such wastes, while minimizing or eliminating
some of the purely administrative requirements that may constitute a
barrier to recycling. Commenters also suggested EPA consider streamlined
recycling regulations, or a National Recycling Certification Program
similar to those enacted by certain states, rather than the broad
exemption from the definition of solid waste.  For example, since 1982,
Missouri has regulated certain recyclers that reclaim or reuse hazardous
wastes or transform hazardous wastes into new products that are not
hazardous wastes. Missouri recyclers operate under a Resource Recovery
Certification issued by the state following review and approval of the
facility's application and operation plans. The stringency of the
regulations varies by whether one is an on-site or off-site recycler and
the amount of waste recycled, and the regulations include financial
assurance requirements for closure to protect taxpayer interests if the
facility goes bankrupt or attempts to abandon hazardous waste.  One
commenter suggested specific regulatory language which would add a new
subpart to CFR Part 270 that would specify reduced permit requirements
for reclamation facilities.  One commenter noted that such an approach
would avoid potential impacts of this rule change on the term "discarded
material," noting that while the regulatory status of the material may
change, its basic waste-like characteristics have not changed. The
definition of "discarded material" is one of the key definitions in the
United States' hazardous waste regulatory program, and any action that
impacts that definition has the potential to have a significant impact.
One commenter suggested EPA use the concentration-based standard
proposed for the Hazardous Waste Identification Rule.  64 FR 63382

[0098, 0110, 0124, 0171, 0172, 0450, 0462, 0470, 0479, 0488, 0536, 0541,
0561]

Broader Re-Definition of Solid Waste

Other commenters urged EPA to look more broadly at the definition of
solid waste, rather than just focus on developing exclusions for
hazardous secondary materials being reclaimed.  The commenters suggested
that such exemptions have grown into a long and confusing list.
Commenters suggested that rather than attempting to define situations
and circumstances that are exempt from consideration and control under
RCRA, EPA should instead concentrate on defining the instances to which
RCRA does apply and over which the Agency has been given clear statutory
jurisdiction.  One commenter offered detailed regulatory language
revising 40 CFR 261.2, removing "recycled" from the definition of
discarded material and replacing it with specific instances where the
commenter believed EPA has clear authority to regulate.  Another
commenter requested that EPA create an "even-handed national recycling
regulatory framework" rather than the current hodgepodge of regulations
that govern characteristically similar materials depending on their
origin or how they are managed.

[0082, 0101, 0129, 0179, 0484, 0488, 0500, 0537]

Focus on Specific Waste streams or Facilities.

Other commenters suggested approaches that would focus on specific waste
streams.  One commenter suggested that EPA adopt simple "safe harbor"
exclusions to simplify the evaluation of common recycling scenarios. For
example, the commenter believes EPA should adopt a simple exclusion for
the bona fide sale of material with substantial positive economic value.
 The commenter suggested that the proposed exclusion for on-site
reclamation, without restrictions on material management and the burdens
of the new "legitimacy" rule, would be another good candidate.  Another
commenter requested EPA focus only on a "benign class of commodity-like
recyclable materials that are reasonably incapable of causing
significant environmental damage, even if mishandled" which would
include "hazardous secondary materials that are not characteristically
ignitable, self-heating, spontaneously combustible, reactive, highly
corrosive or capable of releasing noxious, or toxic fumes prior to being
recycled, if inhaled, or otherwise mismanaged." Another commenter
requested different standards for spent solvents than from metal-bearing
secondary materials since the two have different physical and chemical
properties. One commenter suggested EPA propose recycling exclusions
specific for Performance Track Facilities.

[0199, 0479, 0537, 0536]

Re-Name Hazardous Waste Sent to Reclamation

Other commenters suggested EPA address the "stigma" issue by designating
materials sent to recycling as recyclable materials or hazardous
secondary materials.

[0176, 0488, 0564]

Revise Land Disposal Restrictions or Use Other Statutes to Encourage
Recycling

Other commenters suggested that EPA encourage recycling via revisions to
the land disposal restrictions, noting that a facility’s decision to
recycle rather than land dispose is not governed by whether the waste
contains toxic constituents or whether there is enough oil for
recycling, but rather whether the secondary material is classified as
hazardous waste under RCRA regulations and therefore subject to land
disposal restriction requirements.  Commenters believe that exemptions
and exclusions do not drive recycling to the extent that land disposal
restrictions do.  Commenters also noted that EPA has often mandated
recycling as the required treatment technology.  Commenters also stated
that EPA could exercise its powers under other statutes to fully
regulated resource extraction activities, thereby making recycling more
economically attractive.

[0231, 0484]

13.1.1 - Response

EPA appreciates the commenter's suggested alternatives to the proposed
rule, but, for the reasons explained in the preamble, has decided to
finalize the basic approach described in the March 2007 supplemental
proposal.

Alternative Hazardous Waste Standards

EPA decided not to pursue an alternative hazardous waste regulatory
scheme similar to Universal Waste or state certification programs or a
concentration-based hazardous waste exemption because such an approach
would not address the key issue of determining when hazardous secondary
materials intended for reclamation are discarded and therefore solid
wastes.  EPA agrees that the definition of discarded material is
fundamental to the RCRA program, and believes that this rulemaking is
the appropriate vehicle to resolve this long-standing issue.

Broader Re-Definition of Solid Waste

EPA also decided not to pursue a more comprehensive approach that would
go beyond looking at reclamation, because such an approach would involve
issues outside the scope of the rulemaking.   The exclusions in the
supplemental proposal focused on reclamation activities, and to go
beyond that could have unintended consequences and require additional
public notice.

Focus on Specific Waste streams or Facilities.

Similarly, EPA decided against a focus on specific waste streams or
facilities.  The final rule sets conditions and restrictions that
appropriately define when a hazardous secondary material intended for
reclamation is being discarded and are appropriate for a wide range of
reclamation processes.

Re-Name Hazardous Waste Sent to Reclamation

EPA has decided to use the term "hazardous secondary materials" for the
purpose of final rule exclusions, but the final rule goes beyond a name
change and identifies the circumstances in which such materials are not
discarded and therefore not solid waste.

Revise Land Disposal Restrictions or Use other Statutes to Encourage
Recycling

EPA appreciates the suggestion to re-visit land disposal restrictions or
use other statutes to regulate resource extraction in order to encourage
recycling, but such an approach is outside the scope of the rulemaking.

13.1.2 - Other suggested changes to regulations

13.1.2 - Summary

EPA received many suggestions on revising the existing RCRA regulations
or otherwise improving the RCRA program.  These suggested improvements
include:

-Clarifying the regulatory status of off-specification and expired shelf
life hazardous materials under existing regulations.

- Making several targeted improvements to the Petrochemical Recovered
Oil Exclusion to remove constraints to legitimate recycling
opportunities, including transitioning from SIC Codes to NAICS Codes;
changing the language that the petroleum refinery "provides hydrocarbon
feedstocks to the organic chemical manufacturing facility;" and
broadening the exclusion to include materials other than D001 and D018
since other quality controls are in place;

- Providing guidance on the distinction between a by-product and a
commercial chemical product (including an off-specification variant);

- Adopting either a conditional exemption or a conditional listing for
spent catalyst sent for recycling;

- Modifying precious metals recovery regulations at 40 CFR 266 subpart F
to exempt such materials from the definition of solid waste.

- Examining whether the terms "solid waste" and "discarded material,"
which appear in several different places within RCRA, truly merit
different definitions and usages in those places.

- Exempting non-hazardous waste, such as paper and scrap tires, from the
definition of solid waste.

- Providing a specific exclusion for thermal reclamation of foundry
sands within the sand loop.

- Clarifying the parenthetical phrase found at 40 CFR 261.6(c)(1), which
exempts recycling processes themselves from RCRA regulation, by
recodifying it at 40 CFR parts 264, 265 and 270 and expanding it to
clarify exactly which types of recycling treatment processes are
intended to be exempted from RCRA permitting and other requirements.

- Expanding the proposed notification requirement to apply to generators
of secondary materials that are reclaimed and that are excluded from
regulation as a solid waste under existing provisions of the hazardous
waste regulations, e.g. characteristic sludges, by-products, and
commercial chemical products excluded per 40 CFR 261.2(e)(3).

- Revising the current provisions of the definition of solid waste
concerning "use constituting disposal" (including use as fertilizer) to
focus only on those uses on the land that constitute discard.

- Recognizing that burning for energy recovery, even if it has "elements
of discard," is not primarily a method of waste disposal, but rather is
a legitimate form of recycling, and for TRI reporting purposes energy
recovery should not be classified as waste management.

- More consistently interpreting "reclamation" so that minor processing
of a material prior to use would not be considered reclamation.

- Modifying 40 CFR 261.2(b)(2) and (c)(3) to address metal bearing
wastes containing significant concentrations of non-metallic inorganic
hazardous constituents.

- Revisiting the scope of "materials that are inherently waste-like" at
40 CFR 261.2(d), if such materials are not to receive the reclamation
exclusion, because materials that are considered "waste-like" to one
industry or one facility may be considered a valuable resource to
another.

- Adding unprocessed obsolete scrap metal to the definition of "excluded
scrap metal" at 40 CFR §261.1(c)(9) to provide for its exclusion as
"excluded scrap metal being recycled" from the definition of "solid
waste" at 40 CFR §261.4(a)(13).

- Providing funding to the states to assist the regulated community in
using computers for training and record keeping to provide relief to
those who wish to recycle, rather than propose deregulation for the
management and treatment of wastes that have some value after treatment.

- Revising the closed loop exclusion to clarify that it is intended to
include the production of products (such as pesticides) that are
ultimately applied to the land if that is their intended purpose.

- Modifying 40 CFR 261.2(c)(l)(ii) to clarify the definition of
commercial chemical products to include all commercial chemical products
in addition to those listed at 231.33.

- Streamlining and shorten the permitting and permit modification
processes.

- Clarifying that reclamation does not encompass the separation of
foreign objects, dirt and grit from materials that can otherwise be used
directly.

- Ending the imposition of site-specific risk assessments on hazardous
waste recycling cement kilns and specifically and publicly recognizing
the benefits of energy recovery in cement kilns.

- Exempting hazardous secondary materials generated at terminal
operations.

- Applying financial assurance to all currently exempted hazardous waste
recyclers.

[0048, 0053, 0064, 0082, 0083, 0093, 0097, 0111, 0122, 0124, 0138, 0140,
0141, 0144, 0172, 0186, 0197, 0203, 0204, 0475, 0492, 0492.1, 0505,
0518, 0530, 0540, 0547, 0559, 0563]

13.1.2 - Response

EPA appreciates the many comments suggesting additional improvements to
the RCRA regulations and the RCRA program.  However, these additional
improvements are outside the scope of today's final definition of solid
waste rule.  Once the final rule is implemented, EPA will consider if
additional changes are still needed to the RCRA program. (In some cases,
such as developing a proposed conditional exclusion for spent petroleum
catalysts, EPA has already begun such changes.)

13.1.3 - Regulatory interpretations for specific hazardous secondary
materials

13.1.3 - Summary

Many commenters requested that EPA clarify that their specific hazardous
secondary materials or reclamation processes are not considered solid
wastes under the rule, and that the final rule does not supersede any
prior determinations or variances.

Many commenters, particularly in the mining and mineral processing
industries, were concerned that the conditions and restrictions in the
exclusions in the final rule would impact past determinations. Because
the mining industry utilizes land-based production units as critical
elements of their production processes, commenters were concerned over
the intended application of the proposed "generator control" and
"transfer-based" exclusions, in particular the provisions on "land-based
units," to the mining and mineral processing industry's land-based
production units, as well as the use of secondary materials in the
production process to recover target metals and minerals from natural
ores.  In particular, commenters were concerned that the
generator-controlled exclusion restriction that a hazardous secondary
material must be "contained" in a unit contradicts EPA's conclusion in
the Phase IV Land Disposal Restriction (LDR) Rule:

"EPA also disagrees that it is compelled to assert control over
land-based units that are actual production units, i.e. that actually
recover product. The Agency is aware of only two land-based units which
recover metals; gold heap leach piles and copper dump leach piles. . . .
The Agency believes that regulating such units could pose the
possibility of interdicting actual production steps which was the
particular focus of the AMC I court."

63 Fed. Reg. 28,556, 582 (May 26, 1998).

Commenters also believe that EPA failed to respect the jurisdictional
bounds of its authority as set forth in RCRA and endorsed by the D.C.
Circuit. See ABR, 203 F.3d at 1051. Commenters believe that when the
mining and mineral processing industry uses secondary acid streams, or
other secondary materials, in land-based production units, they are not
discarded.  Because both the "generator control" exclusion and the
"transfer-based" exclusion provide that if a secondary material "is
managed in a land-based unit as defined in § 260.10, the material must
be contained."  72 Fed. Reg. at 14,216-14,217 (proposed 40 C.F.R. §
261.4(a)(23)(i) & 261.4(a)(24)(iv)(C)).  Commenters are concerned that
EPA's use of the phrase "managed" in this context could cause confusion
in the minds of regulators and others as to whether land-based
production units in the mining and mineral processing industry could be
subject to RCRA Subtitle C regulation.

Specific materials of concern to commenters include (1) reverts, both
"large" and "fine;" (2) used furnace brick; (3) vanadium pentoxide
catalysts and quartz rock, (4) leach operations wherein acid solutions
are reused for acid, water, and metals values, (5) acid plant blowdown
used both in the smelter or mercury retort process and in copper
leaching operations, (6) spent solvent sold to a manufacturer who
reclaims and then uses it as an azeotropic distillation agent in a
manufacturing process, (7) foundry sand recycled via a thermal sand
reclamation system within the sand loop, (8) purge solvent from paint
booths, (9) material generated and reused at a phosphate fertilizer
production facility as a raw material substitute with acid, sulfur or
phosphate values, (9) spent potliner recycled in cement kilns, (10) ion
exchange canisters sent for regeneration, (11) electroplating wastewater
treatment sludges, (12) beneficially recycled water, (13) clarified
slurry oil sludge, (14) reusable shop towels, (15) recycling of solvents
similar to manufacture of a product, (16) reconditioning of "RCRA-empty"
reusable industrial containers, (17) acid plant liquids/solids/sludges,
(18) facility runoff/washdown water, (19) air pollution
sludges/residuals, (20) wet scrubber sludges, and (21) flue dust.
Commenters provided detailed information on each of these materials and
explanations of why they believe they are not (or in some cases should
not be) solid wastes.  Some commenters also noted EPA inspections and
enforcement cases that they believe are erroneously impacting materials
that are not solid wastes.  Commenters believe that EPA should clearly
state in the preamble to the final redefinition of solid waste rule that
these specific materials are not "wastes" and, as such, the reuse of
these materials is not subject to RCRA regulation.

Other commenters simply asked clarifying questions on whether specific
materials or processes are regulated, including  (1) is a plasma arc
(with or without an afterburner) an industrial furnace if materials are
recovered? (2) how does air bag deactivation prior to recycling fit
within the definition of legitimacy? (3) would solvent-contaminated
wipes be eligible for the solid waste exclusions?

[0086, 0087, 0121, 0123, 0136, 0144, 0169, 0186, 0197, 0454, 0478, 0481,
0491, 0492, 0493, 0500, 0507, 0513, 0524, 0525, 0526, 0528, 0552. 0560]

13.1.3 - Response

The definition of solid waste exclusions in the final rule will not
supersede any prior solid waste determinations or variances, including
determinations made in letters of interpretation and inspection reports.
  If a hazardous secondary material has been determined not to be a
solid waste, for whatever reason, such a determination will remain in
effect.  However, the final rule also does not limit the regulatory
agency's authority to revisit regulatory determinations for other
reasons.

In regards to commenters concern about the effect of the restriction
that hazardous secondary materials must be "contained" in order to be
excluded under the final rule, EPA notes that the comments do not
address the self-evident fact that hazardous secondary materials
released to the environment (e.g., causing soil and groundwater
contamination) are not "destined for recycling" or "recycled in a
continuous process" or even being used in a production process; they are
part of the waste management problem. [Footnote:  In a meeting with EPA
officials, representatives of the commenters stated that "the fact
pattern they were describing did not involve any release into the
environment.  Instead, materials may move from one unit into another
unit."  In such a case, the issue of "contained" would presumably be
moot.  (See Memorandum to the Record, Meeting with the National Mining
Association, from Susan Parker Bodine, June 4, 2008.)]

In regards to comments on specific materials and recycling process, such
individual determinations are beyond the scope of today's rulemaking,
which is focused on defining the definition of solid waste regardless of
the specific hazardous secondary material or generating industry
affected.  EPA also notes, as it has in other places in the preamble to
the final rule and in the response to comments document, that the
general thrust of AMC I and ABR is only to point out that EPA
regulations are too broad and cover materials reclaimed in a continuous
process within an industry.  Neither of those cases make any
determination as to any specific recycled material and neither case has
any res judicata effect in that respect.  Any particular processes still
need to be evaluated with respect to whether the secondary materials are
wastes or not, using the general regulation provisions in the final
rule.

EPA notes that the exclusions being promulgated in today's final rule
apply to all hazardous secondary materials sent to reclamation (provided
that the conditions and restrictions of the exclusions are met), with
the exception of K171, K172, spent lead acid batteries, and hazardous
secondary materials subject to specific management standards under 40
CFR 261.4(a) when recycled.

13.2 - Burning for energy recovery and use constituting disposal are
outside the scope of the proposed regulations

13.2 - Summary

Requests to Expand the Scope to Include Burning for Energy Recovery and
Use Constituting Disposal

Comments on both the October 2003 proposal and the March 2007
supplemental proposal requested that the scope of the proposed rules be
expanded to include hazardous secondary materials used in a manner
constituting disposal and hazardous secondary materials burned for
energy recovery. Commenters presented detailed arguments that these
operations do not involve discard, and that they can have many
environmental benefits, including resource conservation and reduction in
greenhouse gas emissions.

One sent of commenters on the 2003 proposal stated that EPA must provide
a legitimate and substantive technical and environmental basis for the
divergence between its regulatory conclusions for cement kilns that
perform energy recovery recycling in a bona fide manufacturing process
vs. the recycling activities proposed to be exempt from RCRA in this
proposal.  Commenters argued that energy recovery by units that are
"integral components" of a manufacturing process (such as cement kilns)
should be eligible for the exclusions. They believe dismissing energy
recovery as "akin to discard" is technically wrong and
counterproductive.  Commenters also believe that this assumption was at
least implicitly rejected as long ago as the D.C. Circuit 1987 decision
in AMC I.  If in fact there is valid energy recovery from burning an
industrial byproduct in another industry's manufacturing process, how
can it be said that "discard" is happening in that case any more than
when a manufacturing facility burns a fuel that does not happen to be an
industrial byproduct? In both cases, a manufacturing facility is burning
a material as a legitimate fuel to make a product. If it is not
discarding coal to burn it as a valid source of energy in a
manufacturing process, how can it be discarding an industrial byproduct
to burn it as a source of energy in the same process? In the cement
manufacturing process, energy-bearing industrial byproducts are burned
for the purpose of creating the high temperature necessary to produce
portland cement, a valuable commodity. How does that essentially differ
from other industrial processes that use other types of byproducts as
sources of necessary process inputs to produce other legitimate products
or commodities? Commenters believe EPA has failed to engage in reasoned
decision-making and provides no rationale for the conclusion that energy
recovery is "akin to discard." If EPA truly believes it has a rational
basis for concluding that energy recovery is more closely "akin to
discard" than other forms of recycling that it is proposing to exempt,
commenters believe that EPA is legally obliged to publish a supplemental
notice of proposed rulemaking articulating the facts behind such a
conclusion so that we and others might have a meaningful opportunity to
comment on EPA's asserted basis. Commenters also believe the Agency
provided no scientific rationale for not including energy recovery and
note that EPA specifically concluded that cement kilns are "ideally
suited" for the safe destruction of hazardous organics wastes and are
fully protective of human health and the environment.

Other commenters argued that hazardous waste that is indistinguishable
from a commercial fuel or that is generated within the petroleum
industry and inserted into the refining process should not be a solid
waste.  Commenters included specific information on why their materials
should be considered equivalent to commercial fuel.   One commenter
requested that used oils managed in on-site space heaters be eligible
for the exclusion.  Another commenter requested that recycling of
corrosive secondary materials in a process that neutralizes the
corrosivity (i.e. fertilizer manufacture) should not be considered use
constituting disposal.  Another requested that electroplating sludge
used as feedstock for cement be considered legitimate recycling.
Another supported a national recycling framework that limits, but does
not universally prohibit the land application of Universal Treatment
Standard constituents.  Another comment would like products where the
toxic contaminants are permanently bound up in the finished article to
be allowed to be applied to the land.

Commenters acknowledged that EPA has already excluded many oil-bearing
materials used in fuel production within the petroleum industry. See 40
C.F.R § 261.4(a)(12).  Specifically, EPA has excluded oil-bearing
hazardous secondary materials generated at a petroleum refinery and
inserted into the refining process at the same or another refinery.  40
C.F.R. § 261.4(a)(12)(i). Also, EPA has excluded recovered oil from
throughout most of the industry that is inserted into a petroleum
refining process.  40 C.F.R. § 261.4(a)(12)(ii). Additionally, EPA has
stated that off-specification fuels used to produce fuels do not require
an exclusion, because they are not otherwise considered solid wastes
under 40 C.F.R. § 261.2(c)(2) and Table 1.  However, there remain some
oil-bearing materials that could be returned to refineries that
currently are not typically so managed, because they most likely are
classified as "oil-bearing hazardous secondary materials."

Commenters also acknowledge that EPA finalized a comparable fuel
exclusion in 1997, but believe that the result has been that many
perfectly acceptable fuels are not included in the narrow definition of
a "261.38 Comparable Fuel."  Commenters also believe that the recently
proposed expansion of the comparable fuel rule (June 15, 2007) includes
a number of management conditions and burning restrictions that stifle
innovation and competitiveness.

Commenters also noted that the leading authority mandating that EPA not
adopt a hard and fast rule prohibiting the exclusion for recycled
materials applied to the land is Safe Food. There, the D.C. Circuit
upheld the Agency's determination that RCRA Subtitle C does not apply to
recycled materials used to make zinc fertilizers, or the fertilizers
themselves, provided they meet certain management and reporting
conditions, and that concentrations of specified substances are below
certain limits. Central to the court's reasoning was the notion that
materials destined for recycling by another industry may be discarded if
they can reasonably be considered part of the waste disposal problem
[(Safe Food and Fertilizer, 350 F.3d at 1268, citing Am. Petroleum Inst.
v. EPA, 906 F.2d 729, 740-41 (D.C. Cir. 1990); Am. Mining Congo V. EPA,
907 F.2d 1179, 1186-87 (D.C. Cir. 1990)]. However, the court explicitly
noted that RCRA does not compel "the conclusion that material destined
for recycling in another industry is necessarily 'discarded."  The court
held that consideration of the identity principle, market valuation, and
management practices, combined with EPA imposed conditions, could be
sufficient to find that zinc fertilizers, which contain secondary
materials and are applied to the land, and those secondary materials
themselves, are not "discarded" and therefore, cannot be regulated as
"solid waste" under RCRA Subtitle C.

Therefore, the commenters believe it is not appropriate, or legal, for
EPA to state in this supplemental proposal that recycled secondary
materials applied to the land can never be excluded from regulation as
solid waste.

[0052, 0064, 0082, 0112, 0125, 0131, 0172, 0204, 0208, 0216, 0436, 0448,
0458, 0464, 0472, 0473, 0476, 0478, 0484, 0485, 0486, 0492, 0510, 0523,
0529, 0534, 0546, 0548, 0550]

Support for not including Burning for Energy Recovery and Use
Constituting Disposal in the scope of the exclusions

Other commenters supported keeping the exclusion focused on reclamation
and not including use constituting disposal and burning for energy
recovery. Commenters noted that these types of activities, in some
cases, are akin to discard, that precedents exist for regulation of
these hazardous secondary materials, and that recycling and reclamation
are higher on the waste management hierarchy and more likely to conserve
resources than burning for energy recovery.

[0048, 0072, 0091, 0092, 0101, 0457, 0527, 0553, 0555]

Request for clarification

Some commenters requested clarification of how to determine if a
material is being used in a manner constituting disposal or burned for
energy recovery or used to make a fuel.  Other commenters asked if a
residual from reclamation is burned for energy recovery (e.g., still
bottoms) would that mean the hazardous secondary material is used to
make a fuel.  Other commenters asked EPA to clarify that burning in a
thermal treatment device other than a boiler or industrial furnace even
if energy or materials are recovered is not legitimate recycling.  One
commenter asked EPA to clarify whether the exclusion would be applicable
a hazardous secondary material reclaimed to produce a product not
applied to the land, even though a land-applied co-product also is
generated.  One commenter asked that EPA clarify that the exclusions
would not preclude the use of the transfer-based exclusion for recycled
wood preservative solutions to produce treated wood products, such as
fence posts, that could involve contact with the ground, noting that
such an outcome would contravene EPA's long-standing position that
"regulating reclaimed spent preservative and products made with
reclaimed spent preservative was not and is not EPA's intent." (55 FR
50460, December 6, 1990).  Failing to do so would lead to the illogical
result that preserved wood products, such as fence posts, that are
treated with wood preserving solutions recycled on site in accordance
with 261.(4)(a)(9) can be placed on the land. Whereas posts treated with
the same recycled solution, except that it is obtained through the
proposed transfer-based exclusion would be prohibited from use.

[0104, 0116, 0118, 0160, 0178, 0449]

13.2 - Response

EPA notes that comments on use constituting disposal and burning for
energy are outside the scope of the solid waste exclusions in today's
final rule, which are focused on reclamation. EPA agrees that hazardous
secondary materials that are comparable to commercial fuels should not
be solid wastes, and the Agency has already promulgated an exclusion for
certain of these materials (40 CFR 261.4(a)(16)). However, such
materials are outside the scope of today's final exclusions and are best
addressed under separate rulemaking efforts.

In response to comments on the language in the 2003 proposal that stated
that recycling of materials that are ''inherently waste-like'' (see 40
CFR 261.2(d)), materials used in ''a manner constituting disposal'' (see
40 CFR 261.2(c)(1) and part 266, subpart C), or materials that are
''burned for energy recovery'' (see 40 CFR 261.2(c)(2))  "have been
identified by the Agency as being akin to discard, and therefore
materials that are recycled in these specific ways are explicitly
identified as wastes under the current regulations" (68 FR 61565), EPA
was simply providing historical context for these regulatory provisions
while at the same time identifying them to be outside the scope of the
proposal.   As noted by the commenters, EPA has already identified many
types of burning as not involving solid waste (e.g., 40 CFR
261.2(c)(2)(ii), 40 CFR 261.4(a)(12), 40 CFR 261.4(a)(16)), and is in
the process of developing a separate final rule to expand the comparable
fuels exclusion in 261.4(a)(16).

EPA disagrees with the comment characterizing the rulemaking as stating
that "secondary materials applied to the land can never be excluded from
regulation as solid waste."  EPA has said no such thing; as the
commenter recognized, EPA has already promulgated an exclusion for zinc
fertilizers.  EPA has simply stated that use constituting disposal is
outside the scope of these final rule exclusions from the definition of
solid waste, which are focused on reclamation.

In response to comments requesting clarification on the implementation
of use constituting disposal and burning for energy determinations, the
final rule does not affect the implementation of 40 CFR 261.2(c)(1) and
(2) and all existing guidance remains in effect.  As always, specific
question about how those provisions apply to a particular activity
should be addressed to the appropriate regulatory agency.  In the case
of wood preserving solutions excluded under the transfer-based
exclusion, such solutions would be evaluated in the same manner as those
excluded under 40 CFR 261.(4)(a)(9).

Index of Commenters to the October 2003 Proposed

Rule and the March 2007 Supplemental Proposal

Note: Use this index to find your comments in the document above.
Comments are organized by the comment number in the docket to this
rulemaking, EPA-HQ-RCRA-2002-0031. Comment numbers are determined by the
order in which comments were submitted to the docket by commenters.
Comment numbers 0028–0349 were submitted in response to the October
2003 Proposed Rule (68 FR 61558, October 28, 2003). Comments 0430–0564
were submitted in response to the March 2007 Supplemental Proposal (72
FR 14172, March 26, 2007). Organizations or individuals that submitted
comments on both the Proposed Rule and the Supplemental Proposal will
find their comments in both places.

To locate your comments in the document above, find your comment number
and note which section numbers address are connected to it. The Response
to Comment Document is organized by section number.

Comment Number	Commenter Name	Section Number

2002-0031-0028	None	4

2002-0031-0029	Sashaw, B	6.4

2002-0031-0031	None

2002-0031-0033	Eastman Kodak Company

2002-0031-0034	None	4.1

2002-0031-0035	SQG Specialists Inc.	<IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0039	Hutchins, Rosemary	4

2002-0031-0040	None	7.5.2

2002-0031-0041	Academy of Certified Hazardous Materials Managers	4, 4.1,
8.1

2002-0031-0043	Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality	4, 4.1, 6.1,
6.2, 5.2, 5.1, 5.2.1, 7.6.1, 8.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.3,
7.1.1, 7.6

2002-0031-0044	Wesco Parts Cleaners	4, 4.1, 6.1.1, 6.2, 5.1, 8.2.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>, 9.3.1, 9.6, 11

2002-0031-0046	United States Department of Defense

2002-0031-0047	United States Department of Defense

2002-0031-0048	United Stated Department of Defense	4, 4.1, 6.1, 5.2,
6.5, 7.8, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.8, <IP_ADDRESS>.9, 7.1.1, 13.2, <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 13.1.2

2002-0031-0049	B & B Concrete Co., Inc.	4

2002-0031-0050	State of Colorado, Department of Public Health and
Environment

2002-0031-0051	US Marine	<IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0052	Aaron Oil Company, Inc.	4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>.8, 7.1.1,
13.2

2002-0031-0053	Texas Oil & Gas Association	7.1.1, 13.1.2

2002-0031-0054	National Marine Manufacturers Association	4, 4.1

2002-0031-0055	None	4, 6.2, 7.6.3

2002-0031-0056	Twitty, William C.	4

2002-0031-0057	WTS, Inc.	4

2002-0031-0058	Mitcham, Michael	4, 6.1

2002-0031-0059	Colorado Ready Mixed Concrete Association	4

2002-0031-0060	Bristol-Myers Squibb Company	3.1.3, 4, 4.1, 5.2, 7.6.1,
7.8, 9.1.2, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.3, 10.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, 7.1.1, 7.6, 7.6.3

2002-0031-0061	Deere & Company	4, 4.1, 5.2, 5.2.3, 5.2.4, 8.1, 7.6,
5.2.5, 7.6.3

2002-0031-0062	Veolia Water North America	4.1, 5.2, 5.1, 5.2.1, 5.2.4,
8.2.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.3, 7.1.1, 7.6, 7.6.3

2002-0031-0063	Nadler, Lawrence

2002-0031-0064	ExxonMobil Companies	4, 4.1, 6.2, 13.2, 13.1.2

2002-0031-0065	Nadler, Lawrence, et al	4, 4.1, 6.1, 6.1.1, 6.3, 5.2.1,
9.3.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.4.1, 7.1.2

2002-0031-0066	Aggregate Industries	4

2002-0031-0067	State of North Carolina Hazardous Waste Section	3.2, 4,
4.1, 6.1, 6.2, 5.2.1, 8.2.1, 10.2.1, 10.2.2, 10.3, 12.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, 7.6,
7.6.3, <IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0068	Georgia Department of Natural Resources	3.2, 4, 4.1, 6.1,
6.2, 5.2, 5.2.2, 5.1, 5.2.1, 5.2.3, 7.6.1, 8.2.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>,
10.2.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, 7.1.2, 7.6, 5.2.5, 7.6.3

2002-0031-0069	Illinois Environmental Protection Agency	4.1, 5.2, 5.2.2,
6.5, 5.1, 5.2.1, 8.2.2, 9.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.6, <IP_ADDRESS>.7, <IP_ADDRESS>.4.4,
<IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.9, 5.2.5

2002-0031-0070	Texas Chemical Council	4, 4.1, 5.2, 5.2.1, 5.2.3,
<IP_ADDRESS>, 9.2, 9.3, 9.4.2, 10.1, 11, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3,
<IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.10, <IP_ADDRESS>.12,
5.2.5

2002-0031-0071	Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings	4

2002-0031-0072	Gage Products Company	1, 4, 4.1, 6.1, 8.2.1, 9.5,
<IP_ADDRESS>, 7.1.1, 13.2, <IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0073	Association of Battery Recyclers	3.2, <IP_ADDRESS>, 10.1.2,
10.3, 11, 7.1.2

2002-0031-0074	Dow Chemical Company	4, 4.1, 6.1, 6.1.1, 6.2, 5.2, 5.2.1,
9.1.2, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.2, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.3, 9.5, 10.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.2,
<IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.3,
<IP_ADDRESS>.4, <IP_ADDRESS>.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.7, <IP_ADDRESS>.8, <IP_ADDRESS>.10, <IP_ADDRESS>.12,
7.1.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0075	Reclaimed Energy Co., Inc.	4

2002-0031-0076	Ross Environmental Services, Inc.	4, 4.1, 6.1, 6.5, 5.1,
5.2.1, 7.5.3, 9, 9.5, 7.5.5, 7.6, 2.1.3, 7.6.3

2002-0031-0077	Delaware Department of Natural Resources and
Environmental Control	4, 4.1, 5.2.2, 5.1, 8.2.2, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>,
10.2.1, 7.6, 7.6.3

2002-0031-0078	Weyerhaeuser Company	10.1

2002-0031-0079	BHP Copper Company	4, 4.1, 9.6, 2.1.2

2002-0031-0080	National Recycling Coalition, Inc.	4, 7.6, 7.6.3, <IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0081	Ashland Inc.	4, 7.3, 7.7, 7.1.1

2002-0031-0082	ConocoPhillips	4, 4.1, 7.1.1, 13.2, <IP_ADDRESS>, 13.1.1,
13.1.2

2002-0031-0083	Dupont Company	4, 4.1, 6.1, 6.2, 5.2, 5.1, 7.3, 5.2.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>, 8.2.1, 8.2.2, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.3, 10.1, 7.7, 11, <IP_ADDRESS>.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.4, <IP_ADDRESS>.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.8,
<IP_ADDRESS>.12, 7.1.1, 7.6, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 5.3, 7.6.3, <IP_ADDRESS>, 13.1.2

2002-0031-0084	Ohio Environmental Service Industries	4, 4.1, 6.1, 6.5,
5.1, 7.6.1, 7.5.3, 7.5.3, 8.2.1, 9.2, 7.5.5, 7.6

2002-0031-0085	Graphic Arts Coalition	4, 4.1, 5.2, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.3,
<IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.7, <IP_ADDRESS>.8,
<IP_ADDRESS>.11, <IP_ADDRESS>.14, 7.1.1, 7.6, 7.6.3

2002-0031-0086	Arizona Mining Association	4.1, 2.1.2, 2.2.1, 13.1.3

2002-0031-0087	Phelps Dodge Corporation	4, 4.1, 7.1.1, 2.1.2, 2.2.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 13.1.3

2002-0031-0089	Newmont Mining Corporation	4, 4.1, 5.1, 8.2.1, <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>, 9.2.2, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.3, 9.3.1, 9.3.3, 9.4.2, 10.1, 10.1.2, 12.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.4, <IP_ADDRESS>.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.6, <IP_ADDRESS>.7, <IP_ADDRESS>.2,
<IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.4, <IP_ADDRESS>.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.6, <IP_ADDRESS>.7, <IP_ADDRESS>.8,
<IP_ADDRESS>.10, <IP_ADDRESS>.11, <IP_ADDRESS>.12, <IP_ADDRESS>.14, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.1.1, 7.6,
2.1.2, 7.6.3

2002-0031-0090	R.S.A. Corp.	4, 4.1, 6.3, 5.2, 7.8, 7.1.1, 7.6, 7.6.3

2002-0031-0091	Metals Industries Recycling Coalition	2.2, 4, 4.1, 6.1,
5.2, 5.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.8, 9.1.4, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.3, 10.1, 10.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.3,
<IP_ADDRESS>.4, <IP_ADDRESS>.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>.4, <IP_ADDRESS>.7, <IP_ADDRESS>.8, <IP_ADDRESS>.12, <IP_ADDRESS>.14, 7.1.1, 7.6,
13.2, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.6.3, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0092	Florida Department of Environmental Protection	4, 4.1, 6,
6.4, 5.2, 6.5, 5.1, 5.2.1, 5.2.3, 7.6.1, 8.1, 8.2.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.7, 7.1.2, 7.6, 13.2, 5.2.5

2002-0031-0093	American Chemistry Council	1, 2.2, 3.1.3, 4, 4.1, 6.1,
6.2, 5.2, 5.1, 5.2.1, 5.2.3, 7.8, 8.1, 9.1.2, 9.1.4, 9.1.4, <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>, 9.3, 10.1, 10.2.1, 10.2.2, 12.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.4, <IP_ADDRESS>.5,
<IP_ADDRESS>.7, <IP_ADDRESS>.8, <IP_ADDRESS>.9, <IP_ADDRESS>.10, <IP_ADDRESS>.12, 7.1.1, 7.6,
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 2.2.1, 7.6.3, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 13.1.2,
<IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0094	Von Roll America, Inc.	4,

2002-0031-0095	Maine Department of Environmental Protection	4, 4.1, 6.1,
5.2, 5.1, 5.2.1, 7.5.3, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 10.2.1, 7.7, 11, 12.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.7, 7.6, 5.2.5, 7.6.3

2002-0031-0096	Anderson Development Company	4.1, 6.3, 5.2, 7.8, 7.1.1,
7.6, 7.6.3

2002-0031-0097	Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries, Inc.	4, 4.1,
6.1, 7.3, <IP_ADDRESS>, 10.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.4.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.4, <IP_ADDRESS>.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.7, <IP_ADDRESS>.8,
<IP_ADDRESS>.14, 7.1.1, 7.6, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 13.1.2

2002-0031-0098	Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection	3.2,
3.3, 4, 4.1, 6.1, 6.4, 5.2, 5.2.2, 5.1, 5.2.1, 5.2.3, 7.6.1, <IP_ADDRESS>,
8.1, 8.2.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.3, 10.2.1, 11, 12.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.4,
<IP_ADDRESS>.6, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.6, <IP_ADDRESS>.7, <IP_ADDRESS>.8, 7.1.2,
5.2.5, 7.6.3, 13.1.1

2002-0031-0099	Crompton Corporation	4, 4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0100	Multi-Industry DSW Group	4, 4.1, 7.1.1, <IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0101	Michigan Chemistry Council	4, 4.1, 6.1, 8.2.1, <IP_ADDRESS>,
7.1.1, 13.2, <IP_ADDRESS>, 13.1.1

2002-0031-0102	Eastman Chemical Company	4, 4.1, 5.2, 5.2.3, 7.8,
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.2, 9.3, 9.3.1, 9.5, 9.6, 10.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.2,
<IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.4, <IP_ADDRESS>.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.6, <IP_ADDRESS>.7, <IP_ADDRESS>.8,
<IP_ADDRESS>.10, <IP_ADDRESS>.12, <IP_ADDRESS>.14, 7.1.1, 7.6, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 2.2.1,
5.2.5, 7.6.3, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0103	None	9

2002-0031-0104	Ohio Environmental Protection Agency	4, 4.1, 6.1, 5.2,
5.1, 7.3, 5.2.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.2, 10.1, 10.2.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.4.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3,
<IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.7, <IP_ADDRESS>.8, <IP_ADDRESS>.12,
<IP_ADDRESS>, 7.1.1, 7.6, 13.2, 5.2.5, 7.6.3, <IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0105	None	10.1.1

2002-0031-0106	Horsehead Corp	4, 4.1, 5.2, 9.2, 7.1.1, <IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0107	Lone Star Steel Company	<IP_ADDRESS>.4, <IP_ADDRESS>.14, <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0108	None	10.1.1

2002-0031-0109	Association of Battery Recyclers	<IP_ADDRESS>, 10.1.2, 11,
7.1.2

2002-0031-0110	Missouri Department of Natural Resources	4, 4.1, 6.1,
5.2, 5.1, 7.3, 5.2.1, 7.6.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.2, 9.3, 9.5, 2.1.3, 5.2.5,
13.1.1

2002-0031-0111	Paper Recycling Coalition	13.1.2

2002-0031-0112	IPC	1, 4, 4.1, 5.2, 5.1, 7.6.1, 7.8, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>,
9.2, 12.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3,
<IP_ADDRESS>.7, <IP_ADDRESS>.8, <IP_ADDRESS>.14, 7.1.1, 7.6, 13.2, <IP_ADDRESS>, 2.2.1,
7.6.3, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0113	Rhodia Inc., et al	10.1

2002-0031-0114	Georgia Pacific Corporation	10.1

2002-0031-0115	American Forest & Paper Association	9.1.2, 9.4, 10.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.6, <IP_ADDRESS>.7

2002-0031-0116	None	13.2

2002-0031-0117	Clean Harbors Environmental Services, Inc.	4, 4.1, 8.2.1,
11, 12.1, 7.6, 2.1.3, 7.6.3

2002-0031-0118	None	10.1.1, 13.2

2002-0031-0119	Environmental Technology Council	3.2, 4, 4.1, 6.1, 5.2,
5.1, 5.2.1, 5.2.3, 7.6.1, 7.5.3, 8.2.1, 9, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.2.4,
10.1, 10.2.1, 7.7, 10.3, 11, 12.1, 12.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.3,
<IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.4, <IP_ADDRESS>.7,
<IP_ADDRESS>.8, <IP_ADDRESS>.11, 7.6, <IP_ADDRESS>, 2.1.3, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>, 2.2.1, 5.2.5, 7.6.3, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 2.1.

2002-0031-0120	Rhodia Inc.	4, 10.1

2002-0031-0121	None	13.1.3

2002-0031-0122	Chaparral Steel Midlothian, L.P.	1, 4, 4.1, 6.1, 5.2,
5.1, 8.2.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, 10.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.4, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3,
<IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.4, <IP_ADDRESS>.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.7, <IP_ADDRESS>.8,
<IP_ADDRESS>.14, 7.1.1, 7.6, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.6.3, <IP_ADDRESS>, 13.1.2

2002-0031-0123	Arizona Association of Industries	4, 9, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.2,
9.4.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.10, 7.1.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>, 13.1.3

2002-0031-0124	American Airlines, Inc	4, 6.1, 7.6.1, 9, <IP_ADDRESS>.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.6, <IP_ADDRESS>.13,
13.1.1, 13.1.2

2002-0031-0125	NORA	4, 4.1, 5.2, 7.6, 13.2, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0126	Western Business Roundtable	4.1, 5.1, 8.2.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, 11,
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0127	United States Business Council for Sustainable
Development	4, 4.1, 9, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.12, 7.1.1, 7.6, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0128	Non-Ferrous Founders’ Society

2002-0031-0129	Non-Ferrous Founders’ Society	4, 4.1, 6.1, 8.2.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>, 9.3, 10.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.4, <IP_ADDRESS>.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.3,
<IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.4, <IP_ADDRESS>.14, 7.1.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 13.1.1

2002-0031-0130	Kentucky Environmental and Public Protection Cabinet	4,
4.1, 6.1, 6.5, 7.6.1, 9, <IP_ADDRESS>, 11, 12.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, 7.1.2, 2.1.3

2002-0031-0131	National Automobile Dealers Association	4, 4.1, 6.1, 5.2,
5.2.2, 5.1, 7.3, 7.1.1, 7.6, 13.2

2002-0031-0135	Systech Environmental Corporation	4, 6.1

2002-0031-0136	Foundry Association of Michigan	4, 4.1, 7.1.1, 13.1.3

2002-0031-0137	Koch Hydrocarbon Southwest LLC	4, 4.1, 9.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.3,
<IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.14, 7.1.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0138	American Foundry Society	4, 4.1, 6.1, 5.1, 5.2.1, 5.2.3,
7.6.1, 8.1, 8.2.1, 9.1.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.2, 9.3, 10.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.3,
<IP_ADDRESS>.7, <IP_ADDRESS>.8, 7.1.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.6.3, <IP_ADDRESS>, 13.1.2

2002-0031-0139	Ohio Cast Metals Association	4.1, 7.3, 7.1.1

2002-0031-0140	New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection	4, 4.1,
6.1, 5.2.1, 8.2.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.2, 7.1.2, 7.6, 5.2.5, 13.1.2

2002-0031-0141	Giant Cement Holding Inc.	4, 7.1.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>,
13.1.2

2002-0031-0142	Pasminco Zinc, Incorporated	4.1

2002-0031-0143	Doe Run Company	4, 5.1, 9.2, <IP_ADDRESS>, 10.1.2, 10.2.1,
7.7, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.14

2002-0031-0144	Vanadium Producers and Reclaimers Association	4, 4.1,
6.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.3.1, 10.1.2, 10.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.6, 7.1.2, <IP_ADDRESS>, 13.1.2,
13.1.3

2002-0031-0145	The Aluminum Association	4, 4.1, 8.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.2, 7.1.1

2002-0031-0146	Safety-Kleen Systems, Inc.	4, 4.1, 4.1, 9, <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>, 12.1, 7.1.1, <IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0147	Hogan & Hartson LLP	4, 4.1, 6.1, 8.1, 9.6, 7.1.1

2002-0031-0148	Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management	4,
4.1, 6.1, 5.2, 5.1, 5.2.1, 5.2.3, 7.6.1, 8.2.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>.3,
7.1.2

2002-0031-0149	Utility Solid Waste Activities Group, et al	4, 4.1, 5.2,
5.1, 7.3, 7.8, 8.1, 8.2.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 10.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3,
<IP_ADDRESS>.4, <IP_ADDRESS>.7, <IP_ADDRESS>.8, <IP_ADDRESS>.14, 7.1.1, 7.5.5, 7.6, <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0150	The Vinyl Institute	4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0151	Univar USA Inc	4, 8.2.1

2002-0031-0152	National Mining Association	4, 4.1, 6.1, 6.2, 5.2, 5.1,
7.8, 8.2.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.3, 9.3.1, 9.4.1, 11, <IP_ADDRESS>.2,
<IP_ADDRESS>.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.6, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.4.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.4.3,
<IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.6,
<IP_ADDRESS>.10, <IP_ADDRESS>.11, <IP_ADDRESS>.12, 7.1.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 2.1.2,
2.1.2, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0153	ASTSWMO	4, 4.1, 6.1, 6.2, 5.2, 5.2.2, 5.1, 5.2.1, 5.2.3,
7.6.1, 8.1, 8.2.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.5, 11, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.3,
<IP_ADDRESS>.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.7, 7.1.2, 7.5.5,
7.6, 5.2.5, 7.6.3, <IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0154	Electronic Industries Alliance, et al	4, 4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, 7.1.1

2002-0031-0155	Treated Wood Council	10.1, 7.1.1

2002-0031-0156	Milestone Contractors, L.P.	9.3, 9.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3,
<IP_ADDRESS>.10

2002-0031-0157	Ford Motor Company	4, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.3, 7.1.1

2002-0031-0158	Dow Corning Corporation	4.1, 6.1, 6.2, 5.2

2002-0031-0159	Micronutrients	9, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.4, <IP_ADDRESS>.9

2002-0031-0160	Michigan Department of Environmental Quality	4, 8.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>, 9.6, <IP_ADDRESS>.4.3, 7.1.1, 13.2

2002-0031-0161	Heritage Research Group	4, 4.1, 5.2, 5.2.5, 7.6.3

2002-0031-0162	Arizona Public Service Company	4, 6.1, 7.3, <IP_ADDRESS>, 11,
<IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.4, <IP_ADDRESS>.7,
<IP_ADDRESS>.8, <IP_ADDRESS>.12, 7.1.1

2002-0031-0163	Heritage Environmental Services, LLC	4.1, 9.6

2002-0031-0164	Vermont Hazardous Waste Management Program	4, 6.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>, 9.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.1.2

2002-0031-0165	RQAW Corporation	4, 5.2, 5.2.1, 9.2, 9.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.5,
<IP_ADDRESS>.9, <IP_ADDRESS>.10, 7.5.5, 7.6.3

2002-0031-0167	Alabama Department of Environmental Management	6.1, 5.2,
8.2.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, 10.1, 7.6

2002-0031-0168	ChevronTexaco	1, 4, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.6,
<IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.10, <IP_ADDRESS>.12,
7.1.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0169	Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers	4, 4.1, 7.8,
<IP_ADDRESS>, 7.1.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, 13.1.3

2002-0031-0170	Occidental Chemical Corporation	4.1, 9, <IP_ADDRESS>.2,
<IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.12, 7.1.1

2002-0031-0171	Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation	2.2,
4, 4.1, 6.5, 7.6.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.5, 10.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3,
7.6.3, 13.1.1

2002-0031-0172	Cement Kiln Recycling Coalition	1, 4, 4.1, 5.2, 5.1, 9,
9.3, 9.4.2, 12.1, 12.4, <IP_ADDRESS>.8, 7.1.2, 7.6, 13.2, <IP_ADDRESS>, 13.1.1,
13.1.2

2002-0031-0173	JR Simplot Company	4.1, 6.1, 7.8, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.3, <IP_ADDRESS>,
2.1.2, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0174	The Sherwin Williams Company	4.1, 5.2, 7.8, 10.1, 7.1.1,
7.6, 7.6.3

2002-0031-0175	Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality	4, 4.1,
8.2.1, 9.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.4.4, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.3

2002-0031-0176	Hukill Chemical Corporation	4, 4.1, 5.1, 11, 7.1.2,
<IP_ADDRESS>, 13.1.1

2002-0031-0177	Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection	3.2,
4.1, 6.1, 5.2, 5.2.2, 5.1, 5.2.1, 7.6.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>.3,
<IP_ADDRESS>.7, <IP_ADDRESS>.8, 5.2.5

2002-0031-0178	International Metals Reclamation Company, Inc	4, 4.1,
5.1, 5.2.1, 7.6.1, 7.8, 8.2.1, 9, <IP_ADDRESS>, 10.2.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3,
<IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.4, <IP_ADDRESS>.8, <IP_ADDRESS>.10, <IP_ADDRESS>.12,
<IP_ADDRESS>, 7.1.1, 13.2, 7.6.2, 7.6.3, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0179	American Petroleum Institute	4, 4.1, 6.1, 6.4, 5.2, 5.1,
7.3, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.3, 10.1, 10.2.1, 10.2.2,
<IP_ADDRESS>.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.4, <IP_ADDRESS>.8, 7.1.1, 7.6, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 13.1.1, <IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0180	ASARCO Incorporated	4.1, 6.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.2,
9.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.11, 7.1.1

2002-0031-0181	Precious Metals Producers	4.1, 6.1, 5.1, 7.8, 8.2.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0182	NYSDEC	4, 4.1, 6.1, 5.2, 5.2.1, 5.2.3, 5.2.4, <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.8, <IP_ADDRESS>.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.4, <IP_ADDRESS>.9,
<IP_ADDRESS>, 7.1.2, 5.2.5

2002-0031-0183	L&L Redi Mix Inc	4

2002-0031-0184	Delta Laboratories, Inc	1, 4.1, 5.2, 7.8, 10.1, 7.1.1,
7.6, 7.6.3

2002-0031-0185	State of Washington Department of Ecology	4, 4.1, 6.1,
5.2.2, 5.1, 5.2.1, 5.2.3, 7.6.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.2, 9.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.3,
<IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.8, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.1.1, 7.6, 5.2.5, 7.6.3

2002-0031-0186	Knauss, Elizabeth	4, 4.1, 5.2, 6.5, 5.1, 7.5.2, 9,
<IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.7, 13.1.2, 13.1.3

2002-0031-0187	Flexible Packaging Association	4, 4.1, 8.2.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.4

2002-0031-0188	Minnesota Pollution Control Agency	4, 5.2, 9.2

2002-0031-0189	Bayer CropScience	10.1

2002-0031-0190	Brush Wellman Inc.	1, 3.2, 4, 4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.3, 9.5,
<IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.5, <IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0191	State of Colorado Department of Public Health and
Environment	4, 4.1, 7.5.3, 10.3, 2.1.3, 7.6.3

2002-0031-0192	National Waste Disposal Association	4, 5.1, 7.5.3, 7.5.5

2002-0031-0193	American Ecology Corporation	3.2, 4, 4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, 12.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0194	Texas Commission on Environmental Quality	4, 6.1, 5.2,
5.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, 10.1, 11, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, 7.1.1, 7.6

2002-0031-0195	New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection

2002-0031-0196	Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources	4, 7.6.1,
8.2.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.4, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.6

2002-0031-0197	Fertilizer Institute	4, 4.1, 5.2, 6.5, 5.1, 7.8, 8.2.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.4.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.3,
<IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.6, <IP_ADDRESS>.11, 7.1.1, <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>, 2.1.5, 2.2.1, 13.1.2, 13.1.3

2002-0031-0198	Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America	4,
4.1

2002-0031-0199	National Paint  Coatings Association Inc.	4, 4.1, 6.1,
5.2, 5.1, 5.2.4, 7.8, 9.1.3, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.2, 9.3, 10.1, 11,
<IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.3,
<IP_ADDRESS>.4, <IP_ADDRESS>.7, <IP_ADDRESS>.8, <IP_ADDRESS>.14, 7.1.1, 7.6, <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>, 5.2.5, 7.6.3, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 13.1.1

2002-0031-0200	Air Products and Chemicals, Inc.	<IP_ADDRESS>, 10.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.2

2002-0031-0201	Rohm and Haas Company

2002-0031-0202	PPG Industries, Inc

2002-0031-0203	PPG Industries, Inc	4, 4.1, 6.1, 6.2, 5.2, <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.2.4, 10.1, 10.2.1, 12.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.4.4, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3,
<IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.4, <IP_ADDRESS>.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.7, <IP_ADDRESS>.8, <IP_ADDRESS>.12,
7.1.1, 7.6, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 13.1.2

2002-0031-0204	National Petrochemical & Refiners Association	3.3, 4,
4.1, 5.2, 5.1, 7.3, 7.8, 8.2.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, 10.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, 7.6, 13.2,
7.6.3, 13.1.2

2002-0031-0205	Valspar Corporation	4.1, 6.1, 7.8, 10.1, 7.1.1, 7.6,
7.6.3

2002-0031-0206	American Coke and Coal Chemicals Institute	4.1, 10.1

2002-0031-0207	American Iron and Steel Institute	4, 4.1, 5.2.1, 7.6.1,
10.1, 7.1.1

2002-0031-0208	CF Industries	6.4, 7.1.1, 13.2

2002-0031-0209	Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, et al

2002-0031-0210	Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection	4,
4.1, 6.1, 5.2, 5.2.1, 5.2.3, 7.6.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, 7.1.2

2002-0031-0211	International Precious Metals Institute	4, 5.2, 9,
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, 7.1.1, 2.2.1

2002-0031-0212	United States Department of Energy	4, 4.1, 5.2, 5.1, 7.8,
8.1, 9.2, 10, <IP_ADDRESS>.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.6, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, 7.1.1, 7.6.3

2002-0031-0213	NEWMOA	4, 6.5, 8.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, 11

2002-0031-0214	Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, et
al

2002-0031-0215	Heritage Crystal Clean, LLC	4, 7.1, 7.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.4,
<IP_ADDRESS>.6, <IP_ADDRESS>.10, <IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0216	Trinity Consultants	4, 4.1, 5.1, 7.3, 7.8, 10.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>.8, <IP_ADDRESS>.12, 13.2

2002-0031-0217	California Department of Toxic Substances Control	4, 4.1,
4.1, 6.1, 5.2, 7.2, 5.1, 7.3, 5.2.1, 8.2.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.1.1, 7.6, 5.2.5,
7.6.3

2002-0031-0219	ASTSWMO	6.1, 5.2, 5.2.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, 11, <IP_ADDRESS>, 5.2.5,
7.6.3

2002-0031-0221	Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturers Association	4.1,
7.1.1

2002-0031-0222	Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturers Association	1,
3.2, 4, 4.1, 4.1, 6.1, 6.3, 5.2, 5.2.2, 5.1, 5.2.1, 7.8, <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>, 9.2.4, 9.3, 10.1, 11, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, 7.1.1, 7.6, <IP_ADDRESS>, 5.2.5,
7.6.3, <IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0225	Kennecott Utah Copper Corporation	4, 4.1, 6.1, 6.2, 5.2,
5.1, 7.4.1, 7.8, 8.2.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.5,
<IP_ADDRESS>.6, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.4.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.4.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.5, 7.1.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, 2.1.2, <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0227	Safe Food and Fertilizer	4, 2.1.3, <IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0231	Sierra Club et al	3.2, 4, 4.1, 6.1, 5.2, 5.1, 5.2.1,
5.2.3, 5.2.4, 7.5.3, 8.2.1, 9.2, 9.5, 10.2.1, 10.2.2, 10.3, 11, 12.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>.4.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, 2.1.3, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>, 5.2.5, 7.6.3, 2.1.6, 13.1.1

2002-0031-0232	Shimensky, Terri	7.1.1

2002-0031-0233	Kolb, Monica	4

2002-0031-0341	None	4

2002-0031-0342	None	4

2002-0031-0343	Congress of the United States	2.2, 4, 10.3, 10.3, 12.1

2002-0031-0349	Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturers Association	4,
6.3

2002-0031-0430	Anonymous	1

2002-0031-0436	WRR Environmental Services Co., Inc.	3.1.3, 3.2.1, 3.2.2,
7.1.1, 13.2

2002-0031-0438	National Mining Association	7.7.1, 7.7, 11, 12.2, 7.7.3

2002-0031-0439	US Army Center for Health Promotion and Preventive
Medicine (USACHPPM)	5.2, 5.2.4, 10.1.2, 7.6, 7.6.3

2002-0031-0441	Metallix Refining Inc.	1, 5.2.1, 10.1

2002-0031-0442	Oak Ridge National Laboratory	6.2, 6.4, 5.2, 5.2.4,
7.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.5.4, 9.1.2, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.3, 9.3.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.6, 5.3,
7.6.3, 7.6.5

2002-0031-0443	Council on Safe Transportation of Hazardous Articles,
Inc.	1

2002-0031-0444	Krimmel, Jim	<IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0446	American Forest and Paper Association	9.1.2, 10.1

2002-0031-0447	Intel Corporation	5.2.2, 7.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.4, <IP_ADDRESS>.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.6, <IP_ADDRESS>, 8.1,
5.2.5, 7.6.2, 7.6.3, 7.6.4, 7.6.5

2002-0031-0448	Ciba Specialty Chemicals	8.1, 13.2

2002-0031-0449	Treated Wood Council	9.1.2, 10.1, 10.1.2, 13.2

2002-0031-0450	World Resources Company	1, 11, 13.1.1

2002-0031-0451	Water Services Department (City of Phoenix, AZ)	1, 6.3

2002-0031-0452	International Metals Reclamation Company, Inc. (Imetco)
1, 4, 4.1, 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 5.2, 5.1, 7.3, 7.6.1, 7.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.6,
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.5.4, 7.8, 8.1, 8.4, 9.1.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 10.2, 10.2.1, 2.1.4, 7.6.2, 7.6.5, <IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0453	RCRA Corrective Action Project	1, 8.1, 10.2.2, 2.1.4

2002-0031-0454	Aluminum Association	1, 4, 8.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.1,
7.6, 7.6.3, 13.1.3

2002-0031-0455	Air Products and Chemicals, Inc.

2002-0031-0456	Alcoa	1, 5.2, 8.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.6

2002-0031-0457	Ohio Environmental Service Indiustries	1, 3.1.3, 3.2.2,
6.1.1, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4, 6.4, 5.2, 5.2.2, 6.5, 5.1, 7.3, 5.2.1, 7.6.1,
7.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.4, <IP_ADDRESS>.5,
<IP_ADDRESS>.6, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.8,
8.1, 9.1.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.2, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.5, 11, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.1.2, 7.5.5, 13.2, 7.6.2, 7.6.4, 7.6.5

2002-0031-0458	IPC- Association Connecting Electronics Industries	1, 4,
6.3, 6.4, 5.2, 5.2.2, 6.5, 7.3, 5.2.1, 7.6.1, 7.7.1, 7.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 12.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.7, <IP_ADDRESS>.12,
<IP_ADDRESS>.13, <IP_ADDRESS>.14, 7.1.1, 7.5.5, 7.6, 13.2, 7.6.2, 7.6.3, 7.6.5,
<IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0459	Monsanto Company	1, 3.2.2, 6.4, 2.1.2, <IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0460	Superior and Reclaimed Energy	1, 5.2, 5.2.2, 7.3, 5.2.1,
5.2.3, 7.6.1, 7.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.1.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>, 9.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.12, 7.1.1, 7.5.5, 7.6.2, 7.6.3, 7.6.4,
7.6.5

2002-0031-0461	NASA	1, 6.1.1, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4, 5.2.2, 5.2.1, 7.4.1,
10.1.2, 7.5.5, 7.6, 7.6.3

2002-0031-0462	Solid Waste Management Coordinating Board	1, 3.2.3, 6.3,
6.4, 5.2, 7.7.2, 6.5, 5.1, 5.2.1, 5.2.3, 7.6.1, 7.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 10, 11, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, 7.1.2, 7.5.5, 7.6.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.4,
13.1.1

2002-0031-0463	American Iron and Steel Institute	1, 4.1, 6.1.1, 6.2,
6.4, 6.4, 5.2, 5.2.2, 7.3, 7.6.1, 7.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>, 9.1.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 11, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, 7.6, 2.1.4, 7.6.4,
7.6.5,

2002-0031-0464	Chevron	1, 7.4.1, 8.1, 12.1, 7.1.1, 13.2

2002-0031-0465	Kennecott Utah Copper Corporation	3.1, 3.1.3, 6.4,
<IP_ADDRESS>, 9.1.4, 9.2.2, 10.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.2,
<IP_ADDRESS>.4, <IP_ADDRESS>.11, 2.1.2

2002-0031-0466	Los Alamos National Security LLC	6.2, 6.4, 7.4.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.6.4, 7.6.5

2002-0031-0467	American Foundry Society	1, 6, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4, 5.2, 5.2.2,
6.5, 7.3, 5.2.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, 8.1, 8.5, 9.1.1, 10.1, 7.1.1, 7.6

2002-0031-0468	National Paint and Coatings Association	3.1.3, 6.1,
6.1.1, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4, 5.2, 5.1, 7.3, 7.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>,
7.8, 8.1, 8.5, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 10.1, 10.1.2, 11, 7.1.1,
7.5.5, 7.6, 2.1.4, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.6.3, <IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0469	Wesco Parts Cleaners	5.2, 10.1

2002-0031-0470	Florida Department of Environmental Protection	1, 3.1.3,
3.1.4, 3.2.2, 3.2.3, 6.1, 6.1.1, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4, 5.2, 5.2.2, 7.7.2, 6.5,
5.1, 7.3, 5.2.1, 5.2.3, 5.2.4, 7.6.1, 7.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.4, <IP_ADDRESS>.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.6, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 8.1, 8.2.2, 8.2.3, 8.4, 8.5, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.5,
10.1.2, 7.7, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.6,
<IP_ADDRESS>.13, 7.1.2, 7.5.5, 7.6, 5.2.5, 7.6.2, 7.6.3, 7.6.4, 7.6.5,
<IP_ADDRESS>.1, 13.1.1

2002-0031-0471.1	Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturers Association	1,
6, 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 7.1.1, 2.1.4

2002-0031-0471.2	Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturers Association
(SOCMA)	1, 4.1, 6, 6.1, 6.1.1, 6.1.2, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4, 6.4, 5.2, 5.2.2,
5.1, 5.2.1, 5.2.4, 7.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 8.1, 8.5,
9.1.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.2.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 10.1, 11, 12.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.1.1,
7.6, 5.2.5, 7.6.3

2002-0031-0472	American Chemistry Council	4.1, 6, 6.1.1, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4,
6.4, 5.2, 5.2.2, 7.7.2, 5.1, 7.3, 5.2.1, 5.2.3, 7.6.1, 7.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.5.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.8, 8.1, 9.1.1, <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.3, 9.3.1, 10.1.2, 7.7, <IP_ADDRESS>.4,
<IP_ADDRESS>.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.12, 7.1.1, 7.6, 13.2, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 2.1.4,
<IP_ADDRESS>, 7.6.3, 7.6.4, 7.6.5, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>,

2002-0031-0473	ConocoPhillips Company	1, 6.4, 5.2, 5.2.2, 7.7.2, 7.3,
5.2.1, 8.1, 9.1.1, 9.1.2, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.3, 10.1.2, 10.2.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, 13.2, 7.6.3,

2002-0031-0474	Arkema Inc.	6.1.1, 7.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.8

2002-0031-0475	Vanadium Producers and Reclaimers Association	1, 3.2.2,
3.3, 6.1, 6.1.1, 6.3, 5.2, 7.7.2, 5.1, 7.3, 5.2.1, 5.2.3, 5.2.4, 7.6.1,
7.7.1, 7.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.5.4, 9,
9.2.2, 9.4, 9.5, 10.1.2, 7.7, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, 7.5.5, 7.6, 7.6.3, 7.6.4,
7.6.5, <IP_ADDRESS>, 13.1.2

2002-0031-0476	Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers	6, 6.1.1, 6.2, 6.4,
5.2, 5.2.2, 5.2.1, 7.6.1, 7.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.2,
<IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.4, <IP_ADDRESS>.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.6, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>,
7.8, 8.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.2.2, 11, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.4.5,
<IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.4, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, 7.1.1, 7.5.5,
7.6, 13.2, 2.1.4, 7.6.2, 7.6.4, 7.6.5

2002-0031-0478	National Association for Surface Finishing	1, 6.1, 6.2,
6.3, 6.4, 7.3, 7.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.8, 9.1.1,
9.2.2, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 11, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.12, 7.1.1, 13.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.5, 13.1.3

2002-0031-0479	Anonymous	1, 3.1.3, 3.2.2, 3.2.3, 6.1.1, 6.3, 6.4, 5.2.2,
7.7.2, 7.3, 7.6.1, 7.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.6,
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.5.3, 7.5.4, 8.2.1, 8.3, 8.4, 8.5, 9.1.2, 9.1.4,
9.3.1, 10.1.2, 7.7, 12.1, 7.1.2, 7.5.5, 7.6, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.6.2, 7.6.3,
7.6.4, 7.6.5, <IP_ADDRESS>, 13.1.1

2002-0031-0480	Missouri Coalition for the Environment	1, 3.2.2, 6, 13,
7.1.2

2002-0031-0481	National Mining Association	3.1, 3.1.1, 3.1.3, 3.1.4,
3.2.1, 3.2.2, 4, 4.1, 6.1.1, 6.1.1, 6.1.2, 6.1.2, 6.2, 6.4, 5.2, 7.7.2,
6.5, 5.1, 5.2.1, 7.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.8, 8.1,
8.2.3, 9.1.1, 9.1.2, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.3, 9.3.1,
10.1, 10.1.1, 10.1.2, 7.7, 11, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.5,
<IP_ADDRESS>.8, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.4, <IP_ADDRESS>.2,
<IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.6, <IP_ADDRESS>.11, <IP_ADDRESS>.12, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.6,
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 2.1.2, 2.1.4, 2.1.5, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>, 2.2.1, 5.3, 7.7.3, 7.6.3, 7.6.5, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 13.1.3,
<IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0482	Clean Harbors Environmental Services	1, 3.1.3, 3.2.2,
3.3, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4, 5.2, 7.7.2, 5.1, 7.3, 5.2.1, 7.6.1, 7.7.1, 7.4.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.5.4,
<IP_ADDRESS>, 7.1.2, 7.5.5, 7.6.2, 7.6.4

2002-0031-0483	Doe Run Resource Corporation	10.1.2, 7.7,

2002-0031-0484	DuraTherm, Inc.	1, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.5.3, 9, 9.2, <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.3, 10.2.1, 7.7, <IP_ADDRESS>.4, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.9, 7.1.2, 7.5.5, 7.6, 13.2, 13.2, 7.6.3, <IP_ADDRESS>,
13.1.1

2002-0031-0485	Rohm and Haas Company	1, 4.1, 6, 6.1.1, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4,
5.2, 5.1, 7.3, 5.2.3, 7.6.1, 7.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.1.1,
7.5.5, 7.6, 13.2, 7.6.5

2002-0031-0486	Dow Chemical Company	1, 3.2.2, 4.1, 6, 6.1.1, 6.2, 6.3,
6.4, 5.2, 5.2.2, 7.7.2, 5.1, 7.3, 5.2.1, 5.2.3, 7.6.1, 7.7.1, 7.4.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.5.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.8, 8.1, 9.1.1,
9.1.2, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.3, 9.3.1, 9.3.2, 10.1, 10.1.2, 7.7,
<IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.4, <IP_ADDRESS>.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.12, 7.1.1, 7.5.5, 7.6, 13.2,
13.2, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 2.1.4, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.6.4, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0487	Battery Council International	6, 10.1, 10.1.2, 7.1.1

2002-0031-0488	Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation	6.4,
5.2, 7.3, 7.6.1, 7.8, 8.1, 8.3, 8.5, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.5, 12.1, 5.3, 5.3,
7.6.3, 13.1.1

2002-0031-0489	Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality	6.1, 6.2,
6.3, 6.4, 5.2, 5.2.2, 7.7.2, 5.2.1, 7.6.1, 7.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>.3,
<IP_ADDRESS>.6, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.5.3, 7.5.4, 8.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 10.2, 10.2.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>.4, 7.5.5, 7.6, 7.6.2, 7.6.3, 7.6.4, 7.6.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0490	Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 	6.4, <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>, 8.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.4

2002-0031-0491	Dupont Company	1, 4, 4.1, 6.1.1, 6.1.2, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4,
5.2, 5.2.2, 7.7.2, 6.5, 5.1, 7.3, 5.2.1, 7.6.1, 7.7.1, 7.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 8.2.2, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 10.1.2, 7.7, 2.1.4,
<IP_ADDRESS>, 7.7.3, 7.6.2, 7.6.3, 7.6.4, 7.6.5, 13.1.3

2002-0031-0492	American Petroleum Institute	1, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4, 5.2,
5.2.2, 7.7.2, 7.3, 5.2.1, 5.2.4, 7.6.1, 7.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.5.4, 7.8, 8.1, 9.1.1, 9.1.2,
9.1.4, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 10.1.2, 10.2.1, 10.2.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.1,
7.1.1, 7.5.5, 7.6, 13.2, <IP_ADDRESS>, 2.1.4, 2.1.5, <IP_ADDRESS>, 5.3, <IP_ADDRESS>,
7.6.2, 7.6.3, 7.6.4, 7.6.5, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 13.1.3, <IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0492.1	American Petroleum Institute	13.1.2

2002-0031-0493	Uniform and Textile Service Association	1, 6.3, 9.4,
<IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.9, 13.1.3

2002-0031-0494	NORA, An Association of Responsible Recyclers	1, 4, 5.2,
5.1, 8.1, 8.5, 10.1, 7.1.1, 7.6, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>.6

2002-0031-0495	Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection	1,
3.1.3, 6.1, 6.3, 6.4, 5.2, 7.7.2, 7.3, 5.2.1, 5.2.3, 7.6.1, 7.4.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.5, <IP_ADDRESS>, 8.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 10.1.2,
11, 7.1.2, 5.2.5, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.6.2, 7.6.3, 7.6.4, 7.6.5

2002-0031-0496	Warner Norcross & Judd Attorneys at Law	6.2

2002-0031-0500	Department of Defense	1, 6.3, 7.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>,
7.5.4, 8.1, 5.3, 13.1.1, 13.1.3

2002-0031-0501	Agmet Metals	1, 6.4, 7.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, 11, <IP_ADDRESS>.1

2002-0031-0502	Basel Action Network	1, 3.2.2, 7.7.1, 7.7, 7.7.3

2002-0031-0503	Univar USA Inc.	1, 7.3, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.5.5

2002-0031-0505	Paper Recycling Coalition (PRC)	8.1, 13.1.2

2002-0031-0506	Eastman Chemical Company	3.1, 3.2.2, 5.2, 5.2.3, 9.1.2,
9.1.4, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.4.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.4,
<IP_ADDRESS>.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.10, <IP_ADDRESS>.12, 5.3, 7.6.3

2002-0031-0507	Safety-Kleen Systems, Inc.	1, 3.1.3, 6.1.1, 6.4, 5.2,
5.2.2, 7.7.2, 7.2, 5.1, 7.3, 5.2.1, 5.2.3, 7.6.1, 7.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.4, <IP_ADDRESS>.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.6,
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.5.4, 8.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.5, 7.7, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, 7.5.5, 7.6, 7.6.2,
7.6.4, 7.6.5, 13.1.3

2002-0031-0509	Illinois Environmental Protection Agency	3.1.3, 3.2.3,
6.3, 6.4, 5.2.2, 7.6.1, 7.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>.4, <IP_ADDRESS>.5, <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.5.4, 8.2.3, 8.4, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.2.4, 9.5, 10.2.1,
10.2.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.8, 7.5.5, 7.6.2, 7.6.4, 7.6.5

2002-0031-0510	US Chamber of Commerce	1, 3.2.2, 9.1.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.1.1,
7.6, 13.2

2002-0031-0511	3M	1, 6.1.1, 6.2, 7.3, 8.1

2002-0031-0512	Honda of America Mfg., Inc.	5.2.2, 7.6.1, 7.7.1, <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.5.5, 7.6.3, 7.6.5

2002-0031-0513	Reusable Industrial Packaging Association (RIPA)	3.1.1,
3.2.2, 9, 13.1.3

2002-0031-0514	Association of Battery Recyclers, Inc.	10.1.2, 7.7

2002-0031-0515	RCRAInfo Change Management Process Site Identification
Program Group	5.2, 5.2.2, 5.2.5, 7.6.3

2002-0031-0516	New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
6.1.2, 6.3, 6.4, 5.2, 5.1, 5.2.1, 7.6.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>,
7.5.4, 8.1, 8.2.2, 8.3, 8.4, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.3, 10.1.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.4,
<IP_ADDRESS>.9, 7.5.5, 7.6.2, 7.6.4, 7.6.5, <IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0517	Oil Re-Refining Company (ORRCO)	1, 8.1, 8.5, 7.1.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>.6

2002-0031-0518	Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries, Inc.	3.1, 3.1.3,
6.1, 5.2, 7.3, 7.7.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.3, 11, 7.1.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 13.1.2

2002-0031-0519	Ford Motor Company	1, 7.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.4,
<IP_ADDRESS>.5, 8.1, 11, 7.6.5

2002-0031-0520	Precious Metals Producers	1, 3.2.2, 5.2, 9.1.2, <IP_ADDRESS>,
9.5, 7.6, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.6.3, <IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0521	Minnesota Pollution Control Agency	1, 3.1.3, 6.4, 5.2,
5.2.2, 7.7.2, 7.3, 7.6.1, 7.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.5.4, 7.8,
7.8, 8.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.8, <IP_ADDRESS>.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.4, <IP_ADDRESS>.13, 7.1.2, 7.5.5,
5.2.5, 7.6.2, 7.6.3

2002-0031-0523	National Automobile Dealers Association	1, 4, 6.3, 5.2,
7.2, 5.1, 5.2.4, 11, 13.2

2002-0031-0524	ASARCO LLC 	4, 4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.3,
9.3.1, 9.4.1, 10.1, 10.1.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.3,
<IP_ADDRESS>.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.6, <IP_ADDRESS>.11, 7.1.1, 2.1.2, 2.1.4, 13.1.3, 13.1.3

2002-0031-0525	General Electric Company	1, 3.2.2, 7.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.1.2, <IP_ADDRESS>, 10.2.2, <IP_ADDRESS>, 5.3, 7.6.4,
7.6.5, <IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0526	Fertilizer Institute	4, 6.2, 6.4, 5.2, 7.3, 7.4.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>, 8.1, 8.2.2, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.2,
<IP_ADDRESS>.4, <IP_ADDRESS>.11, <IP_ADDRESS>.12, <IP_ADDRESS>, 2.1.4, <IP_ADDRESS>, 13.1.3

2002-0031-0527	Heritage Environment Services, LLC	3.2.2, 4, 5.2, 5.2.2,
5.1, 5.2.1, 5.2.3, 7.6.1, 7.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>.10, 7.1.1, 7.5.5,
13.2, 7.6.3, 7.6.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.7

2002-0031-0528	Freeport-McMoRan Copper & Gold, Inc.	1, 6.1, 6.2, 6.4,
5.2, 5.1, 7.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 8.1, 8.2.2, 8.2.3, 9.1.2, <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>, 9.3, 10.1, 10.1.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.7, <IP_ADDRESS>.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.4, <IP_ADDRESS>.11, <IP_ADDRESS>.12, <IP_ADDRESS>, 2.1.2,
<IP_ADDRESS>, 13.1.3

2002-0031-0529	Metals Industries Recycling Coalition	6.3, 6.4, 5.2,
5.2.2, 6.5, 5.1, 7.3, 5.2.1, 7.6.1, 7.7.1, 7.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>, 7.8, 8.1, 9.1.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.7, 12.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>.4, 7.1.1, 7.6, 13.2, 2.1.4, 7.6.2, 7.6.4, 7.6.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.5

2002-0031-0530	Maine Department of Environmental Protection	1, 6.3, 5.2,
5.2.2, 6.5, 5.2.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, 5.2.5, 13.1.2

2002-0031-0531	Commonwealth of Pennsylvania	1, 4, 6.4, 5.2, 5.2.2, 7.3,
5.2.1, 7.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, 8.1, 8.5, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.5, 11, <IP_ADDRESS>.2,
7.5.5, 7.6, 7.6.2, <IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0532	US Department of the Interior	1, 3.1.3, 3.2.1, 3.2.2,
3.3, 6.4, 6.5, 7.4.1

2002-0031-0533	DeWitt Barrels, Inc.	3.1.4, 3.2.2

2002-0031-0534	Utility Solid Waste Activities Group (USWAG)	6, 5.2, 7.3,
5.2.1, 7.6.1, 7.4.1, 7.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.8, 8.1, 8.2.3, 9.1.1,
9.1.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.3, 9.3.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, 7.1.1, 7.6, 13.2, 2.1.4, 7.6.2, 7.6.3, 7.6.4,
7.6.5

2002-0031-0535	Brush Wellman, Inc.	1, 6.1.1, 6.2, 7.8, 8.1, 8.2.3,
9.2.2, <IP_ADDRESS>, 10.1, 10.1.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.8, <IP_ADDRESS>.3

2002-0031-0536	Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality	1, 3.1.3,
3.3, 6.1, 6.3, 6.4, 6.5, 5.1, 8.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.2, 9.3, 11, <IP_ADDRESS>.4.4,
<IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, 7.1.1, 7.5.5, 7.6.3, 13.1.1

2002-0031-0537	Arizona Association of Industries (AAI)	1, 6.1, 6.2, 6.4,
7.7.2, 8.1, 8.2.3, 9, 9.1.2, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.2.2, 9.3, 9.3.1, 9.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.2,
<IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.5,
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 13.1.1

2002-0031-0538	Georgia Department of Natural Resources	6.1, 6.2, 6.3,
6.4, 5.2, 5.2.2, 6.5, 5.1, 7.3, 5.2.1, 5.2.3, 7.6.1, 7.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.5.4, 8.1, <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>, 9.5, 10.2.1, 7.7, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.6, <IP_ADDRESS>.13,
5.2.5, 7.6.3, 7.6.4, 7.6.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.4, <IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0539	Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment	1,
6.1.1, 6.3, 6.4, 5.2, 5.2.2, 5.1, 7.6.1, 7.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>, 8.2.1, 8.3, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.2.4, 9.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, 7.6, 2.1.3, 7.6.2,
7.6.5

2002-0031-0540	Rubber Manufacturers Association	13.1.2

2002-0031-0541	Northeast Waste Management Officials’ Association
(NEWMOA)	6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 5.2, 7.6.1, 8.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 11, 7.1.2,
13.1.1

2002-0031-0543	Association of State and Territorial Solid Waste
Management Officials	1, 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4, 5.2, 5.2.2, 5.1, 7.3, 5.2.1,
5.2.3, 7.6.1, 7.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 8.1, 8.2.2,
8.2.3, 8.4, 8.5, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.5, 7.7, 11, <IP_ADDRESS>.2,
<IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.8, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3,
<IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.4, <IP_ADDRESS>.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.6, <IP_ADDRESS>.7,
<IP_ADDRESS>.13, 7.5.5, 7.6, 5.3, 5.2.5, 7.6.3, 7.6.4, 7.6.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.1,
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0544	Michigan Department of Environmental Quality	1, 6.4,
5.2.1, 7.6.1, 8.1, 8.5, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.5, 7.5.5, 7.6.3, <IP_ADDRESS>

2002-0031-0545	Zinc Nacional S.A.	1, 7.7.1, 7.4.1, 7.7

2002-0031-0546	J.R. Simplot Company	1, 13.2

2002-0031-0547	Bayer CropScience LP (BCS)	10.1, 13.1.2

2002-0031-0548	Cement Kiln Recycling Coalition	3, 3.1.1, 3.1.2, 3.1.3,
6.3, 7.3, 5.2.1, 7.6.1, 7.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.5.3, 7.5.4, 8.5, <IP_ADDRESS>, 11,
12.1, 7.1.2, 7.5.5, 13.2, 7.6.3, 7.6.4, 7.6.5

2002-0031-0549	Nissan North America, Inc.	6.1.1, 6.3, 6.4, 5.2, 5.2.2,
5.1, 7.3, 5.2.3, 7.6.1, 7.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>,
8.1, 8.5, 7.5.5, 7.6, <IP_ADDRESS>, 2.1.4, 7.6.2, 7.6.3, 7.6.4, 7.6.5

2002-0031-0550	Occidental Chemical Corporation (OxyChem)	7.3, <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>, 7.7, <IP_ADDRESS>.4, 13.2, <IP_ADDRESS>, 2.1.4

2002-0031-0551	Horsehead Corporation	1, 6.4, <IP_ADDRESS>, 11, 7.1.1, 7.5.5

2002-0031-0552	Twin City Container, Inc.	3.1.4, 3.2.2, 13.1.3

2002-0031-0553	Heritage-Crystal Clean, LLC	6.3, 7.7.2, 5.1, 7.3, 8.1,
8.5, 10.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.4, 13.2, 2.1.4

2002-0031-0554	Arizona Mining Association	4, 2.1.2

2002-0031-0555	Gage Products Company	1, 6, 6.3, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.3, 9.5, <IP_ADDRESS>, 13.2, 7.6.3

2002-0031-0557	Barrick Gold of North America, Inc.	<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>, 5.3

2002-0031-0558	Environmental Technology Council	3.1.3, 3.2.2, 3.3, 6,
6.1, 6.1.1, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4, 5.2, 5.2.2, 7.7.2, 7.2, 5.1, 7.3, 5.2.1,
7.6.1, 7.7.1, 7.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.3,
<IP_ADDRESS>.4, <IP_ADDRESS>.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.6, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>, 7.5.3, <IP_ADDRESS>, 7.5.4, 7.8, 8.1, 8.2.3, 8.4, 8.5, <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.3.1, 9.5, 12.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.9,
7.5.5, 7.6, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 5.2.5, 7.6.2, 7.6.3, 7.6.4, 7.6.5,
<IP_ADDRESS>, 2.1.6

2002-0031-0559	Earthjustice	1, 3, 3.2.2, 3.3, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4, 5.2, 5.2.2,
7.7.2, 5.2.1, 5.2.3, 7.6.1, 7.7.1, 7.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>.1, <IP_ADDRESS>.2,
<IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.4, <IP_ADDRESS>.5, <IP_ADDRESS>.6, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 8.1, 8.5, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.2, 9.2.2, 9.5, 10, 7.7,
10.3, 11, 12.1, 12.6, <IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, <IP_ADDRESS>.3, 7.1.2, 7.5.5,
7.6, 2.1.3, <IP_ADDRESS>, 5.2.5, 7.6.2, 7.6.3, 7.6.4, 7.6.5, <IP_ADDRESS>, 2.1.6,
13.1.2

2002-0031-0560	Non-Ferrous Founders' Society	<IP_ADDRESS>, 10.1, 13.1.3

2002-0031-0561	Safe Food and Fertilizer	11, 12.1, 12.4, 12.5, 2.1.3,
13.1.1

2002-0031-0562	Wisconsin DNR and MMP	6.4, 7.4.1, 8.1, 7.7, 11, 7.1.2

2002-0031-0563	New Jersey DEP	1, 6.1, 6.1.1, 6.2, 6.4, 5.2, 5.2.2,
5.2.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 8.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 9.2, 12.3, 12.4,
<IP_ADDRESS>.9, 7.1.2, 7.5.5, 7.6.2, 7.6.3, 7.6.4, 13.1.2

2002-0031-0564	EOG Environmental, Inc.	1, 3.1.3, 3.2.1, 3.2.3, 4.1, 5.2,
5.2.2, 7.7.2, 6.5, 5.1, 7.3, 7.4.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>.5, 7.5.3, 7.8, 8.1,
8.4, 9, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, 10.1.2, 10.3, 12.1, 7.1.2, 7.5.5, <IP_ADDRESS>,
7.6.3, 7.6.5, 2.1.6, 13.1.1

 See, for example the ABR decision, where the Court acknowledged that
the term "discard" could be "ambiguous as applied to some situations,
but not as applied to others," and particularly cited the difficulty in
examining the details of the many processes in the mineral processing
industry (208 F.3d at 1056).

 Estimates are from the Regulatory Impact Analysis for U.S. EPA’s 2008
Final Rule Amendments to the Industrial Recycling Exclusions from the
Definition of Solid Waste.

 Under the transfer-based exclusion in the final rule, a reclaimer
should also anticipate that a hazardous secondary material generator
will inquire as to whether the reclaimer intends to legitimately reclaim
hazardous secondary material (40 CFR 261.4(a)(24)(v)(B)(1)). Reasonable
effort inquiries will vary by generator and may include a request for
information or documentation of legitimacy.

 Section 3004(a), 42 U.S.C. 6921(a), only applies to hazardous wastes
“identified or listed under this subchapter” and, as such, only
applies to wastes listed under RCRA Subtitle C regulations. Section
3007(a) allows information gathering and inspections to enforce this
“chapter,” meaning all of RCRA and, thus, is not limited to wastes
that EPA has determined to be hazardous under section 3004.

 PAGE

 PAGE   3