299 



tions. The RCRA Land Disposal Restrictions require treatment technologies and ca- 

 pacity be developed for mixed waste. 



DOE, within 180 days of October 6, must submit two inventory reports: 1) a na- 

 tional inventory of all of its mixed wastes regardless of the time they were generat- 

 ed, on a state-by-state basis; and 2) a national inventory of its mixed waste treat- 

 ment capacities and technologies. DOE has submitted these reports to EPA and the 

 appropriate states. Both EPA and the states have 90 days to comment. DOE shall 

 consider and publish the comments before finalizing the two inventories. 



At each site at which DOE has generated or has stored mixed waste, DOE will 

 then develop a PLAN for developing treatment technologies for treating the inven- 

 tory wastes where no treatment exists and also for developing more treatment ca- 

 pacities where technologies are available. DOE will submit the plan to either EPA 

 or the State. 



Upon approval of the plan, EPA or the delegated state shall issue an Order or 

 permit requiring compliance with the approved plan. 



In the FFCA, Congress further instructed EPA to create new regulations for mu- 

 nitions within 24 months of April 6, 1992. The Office of Solid Waste has convened a 

 workgroup to address the munitions requirements, and the workgroup has met with 

 representatives from the Department of Defense. 



Q. 29: A good example of EPA's lack of adequate resources is its approach to 

 implementing plans for addressing pollution. The agency believes that nonpoint 

 sources of pollution resulting from agn'iculture and urban runoff are what account 

 for our nation's water quality problems. EPA has a plan to deal with nonpoint 

 pollution. However, the plan has gone basically unimplemented, mainly for want 

 of adequate resources. Where else has this been a problem in the agency? 



A. 29: As you know, all Federal departments and agencies — including all the of- 

 fices and programs within the Environmental Protection Agency — are making ex- 

 traordinary efforts to effectively manage necessarily limited resources in meeting its 

 statutory and regulatory obligations. For example, at the Environmental Protection 

 Agency, the risk-based and watershed protection approaches are being developed 

 and refined to focus Congressionally appropriated resources on priority environmen- 

 tal problems identified at the National, state and sub-state levels. The risk-based 

 and watershed approaches seek to focus efforts on the most serious environmental 

 problems first. The watershed protection approach seeks to identify priority pollu- 

 tion problems in a discrete geographic area and to then concentrate available Feder- 

 al, state, local government, and private resources to address the problems. 



Q. 30: A) Will you make it a priority to address the needs and concerns of small 

 governments when developing these alternative approaches? (Refers to Administra- 

 tor's statement in confirmation hearing that there was a need to move away from 

 prescriptive "command and control" regulation toward alternative regulatory ap- 

 proaches) 



A. 30: A) Yes, in many cases, achievement of our nation's environmental goals is 

 dependent on implementation at the local government level, and the vast majority 

 of these governments are small governments. So it is essential that their needs, con- 

 cerns and ideas are carefully considered when we design and implement environ- 

 mental programs. I am committed to forging the type of Federal, State and local 

 government partnership that will ensure we all get the most bang for the buck and 

 that environmental programs truly work at the local level where they matter most. 



Q. 30: B) Will you keep the Reg-Flex policies and functions of the previous Ad- 

 ministration in place? 



A. 30: B) I strongly support the mandate of the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980: 

 when developing regulations. Federal agencies must fully consider any significant 

 economic impacts on small businesses, small governments, and other small organi- 

 zations. And I want EPA to be a leader in demonstrating that the Nation can 

 achieve environmental quality goals while benefiting the economy. This inherently 

 includes minimizing adverse economic impacts of regulations on small business and 

 small governments. As 1 mentioned previously, one of my goals is to build partner- 

 ships that succeed in designing and implementing environmental programs that are 

 effective and efficient in use of resources. 



In April, 1992, my predecessor adopted new agency guidelines for implementing 

 the Regulatory Flexibility Act. These guidelines actually go beyond the minimum 

 requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The Act requires consideration of 

 regulatory alternatives only if the Agency believes there would be a "significant 

 impact on a substantial number" of small entities. In contrast, with new environ- 

 mental statutes, we will consider regulatory alternatives if there would be any 

 impact on any small entity. I support this approach, because I believe it will help us 

 find the most cost effective means of achieving the Nation's environmental goals. 



