EPA hazardous waste regulations discourage recycling: RCRA, Superfund regulations "complicated" and "convoluted," concedes EPA.

LOS ANGELES--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Nov. 15, 1995--Federal hazardous waste regulations, such as the Resource Conservation Recovery Act (RCRA) and Superfund, have burdened the hazardous waste recycling industry, damaging the economic viability of recycled products like lead batteries and used oil, according to the study Recycling Hazardous Waste: How RCRA has Recyclers Running Around In CERCLAs, released Wednesday by the Los Angeles-based Reason Foundation.

"Hazardous waste law is expensive, irrational and confusing," said Alexander Volokh, assistant policy analyst for the Reason Foundation and author of the study. According to the EPA, the total cost of complying with RCRA, which regulates hazardous wastes, is estimated at over $40 billion. In addition, treatment, storage or disposal facilities are subject to a federal permitting process which can take two to three years. Costs associated with compliance of RCRA stand at $100,000 to $200,000 per facility.

The study examines the EPA's "unnecessarily conservative risk assessment methods," which emphasize the potential impact rather than the actual risks of hazardous waste disposal. Since there are few published scientific reports of health effects clearly attributable to chemicals from disposal sites, there is a great deal of uncertainty about the effects of hazardous wastes.

According to Volokh, "This speculation has created a disincentive to getting permits for companies that want to send their wastes to be recycled, but are afraid that the recycling facility may eventually be declared a hazardous waste site under Superfund." Under Superfund, which regulates the cleanup of toxic waste sites, whoever arranges for the treatment or disposal of a hazardous substance can be liable for cleanup of the entire site.

"If a scrap metal recycling facility goes bankrupt and becomes a Superfund site, everyone who ever sold scrap metal to the recycler is considered to be `arranging' for the disposal of the scrap metal," said Volokh. "And they can all become responsible for the cleanup of the hazardous waste site."

The report notes that used lead batteries sitting in someone's garage aren't considered hazardous until the time the batteries enter the recycling plant. Lead batteries, whether recycled or made from scratch, produce a substance known as slag. While both are almost identical physically and chemically, the "virgin" slag material is not considered hazardous waste -- while the slag produced from the recycled lead battery is. According to the study, even the EPA concedes that the current regulations are both "complicated" and "convoluted."

Don R. Clay, assistant administrator for the EPA Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, has called RCRA "a regulatory cuckoo land of definition," in which a substance that "wasn't hazardous yesterday...is hazardous tomorrow."

As Volokh suggests, "If products are more heavily regulated after they are thrown out, why should it surprise us that people prefer to use virgin materials rather than recycle? There are already environmental safeguards in place to protect human health and the environment, but sometimes these barriers lead to superfluous safety regulations. Regulatory barriers do exist, and their elimination or modification ought to be the starting place for trying to expand and develop recycling markets."

Recycling Hazardous Waste: How RCRA Has Recyclers Running Around in CERCLAs is the second study in a series to be released by the Reason Foundation on the regulatory barriers to recycling. The first study in the series, The FDA vs. Recycling: Has Food Packaging Law Gone Too Far?, was released last month. Related studies on hazardous waste law include Cleaning Up Superfund: The Case for State Environmental Leadership, and Redesigning CERCLA Liability: An Analysis of the Issues. Copies of each study may be obtained by contacting the Reason Foundation at 310/391-2245.

The Reason Foundation is a national public-policy research organization with a practical, market-based approach and an outside-Washington perspective. Founded in 1978 and based in Los Angeles, the Reason Foundation has earned a reputation for sound economic research and a how-to approach that benefits policy makers and elected officials who require practical solutions.

CONTACT: Reason Foundation

Rich Phillips, 310/391-2245