A review of the methods used by the US Environmental Protection Agency to assess the financial impacts of the repository regulations

PDF Version Also Available for Download.

Description

All Federal agencies must consider the financial impacts of their regulations. When costs significantly outweigh benefits, the Office of Management and Budget can recommend that Congress not provide the funds needed to implement the regulation. Without funds, the agency is forced to either revise or retract the regulation. This has happened previously with a regulation on uranium mill tailings proposed by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and it could happen again with the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations that govern the disposal of high-level radioactive waste (HLW). The EPA (1985, 1992) claims that its regulation: ``Environmental Standards for ... continued below

Physical Description

24 p.

Creation Information

Pflum, C.G.; Mattson, S.R. & Matthusen, A.C. February 16, 1994.

Context

This report is part of the collection entitled: Office of Scientific & Technical Information Technical Reports and was provided by UNT Libraries Government Documents Department to Digital Library, a digital repository hosted by the UNT Libraries. More information about this report can be viewed below.

Who

People and organizations associated with either the creation of this report or its content.

Sponsor

Publisher

Provided By

UNT Libraries Government Documents Department

Serving as both a federal and a state depository library, the UNT Libraries Government Documents Department maintains millions of items in a variety of formats. The department is a member of the FDLP Content Partnerships Program and an Affiliated Archive of the National Archives.

Contact Us

What

Descriptive information to help identify this report. Follow the links below to find similar items on the Digital Library.

Description

All Federal agencies must consider the financial impacts of their regulations. When costs significantly outweigh benefits, the Office of Management and Budget can recommend that Congress not provide the funds needed to implement the regulation. Without funds, the agency is forced to either revise or retract the regulation. This has happened previously with a regulation on uranium mill tailings proposed by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and it could happen again with the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations that govern the disposal of high-level radioactive waste (HLW). The EPA (1985, 1992) claims that its regulation: ``Environmental Standards for the Management and Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel, High-Level and Transuranic Radioactive Waste`` (40 CFR Part 191 or standards) does not increase costs above what the US Department of Energy (DOE) would spend anyway or, at most, what the DOE would spend to comply with 10 CFR Part 60: a regulation promulgated by the NRC. This report reviews and disputes the EPA claim. In Chapter 2 a summary of the basis for the EPA claim is presented and in Chapter 3 a critique of the basis of the claim is presented. This critique finds the EPA basis unrealistic, incomplete, and misleading. According to the EPA, a repository at Yucca Mountain would easily meet 40 CFR Part 191 even without the use of special engineered barriers. Because the NRC regulation (10 CFR Part 60) requires engineered barriers, the EPA places the onus for regulatory costs on the NRC. We disagree; the EPA standards drive regulatory costs as much as NRC regulations. The EPA has the higher responsibility for setting the overall standard for safety while the NRC can only implement this standard.

Physical Description

24 p.

Notes

INIS; OSTI as DE95012991

Source

  • Other Information: PBD: 16 Feb 1994

Language

Item Type

Identifier

Unique identifying numbers for this report in the Digital Library or other systems.

  • Other: DE95012991
  • Report No.: SAIC--94-002
  • DOI: 10.2172/70824 | External Link
  • Office of Scientific & Technical Information Report Number: 70824
  • Archival Resource Key: ark:/67531/metadc703269

Collections

This report is part of the following collection of related materials.

Office of Scientific & Technical Information Technical Reports

Reports, articles and other documents harvested from the Office of Scientific and Technical Information.

Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI) is the Department of Energy (DOE) office that collects, preserves, and disseminates DOE-sponsored research and development (R&D) results that are the outcomes of R&D projects or other funded activities at DOE labs and facilities nationwide and grantees at universities and other institutions.

What responsibilities do I have when using this report?

When

Dates and time periods associated with this report.

Creation Date

  • February 16, 1994

Added to The UNT Digital Library

  • Sept. 12, 2015, 6:31 a.m.

Description Last Updated

  • Aug. 2, 2016, 2:32 p.m.

Usage Statistics

When was this report last used?

Yesterday: 0
Past 30 days: 0
Total Uses: 4

Interact With This Report

Here are some suggestions for what to do next.

Start Reading

PDF Version Also Available for Download.

Citations, Rights, Re-Use

Pflum, C.G.; Mattson, S.R. & Matthusen, A.C. A review of the methods used by the US Environmental Protection Agency to assess the financial impacts of the repository regulations, report, February 16, 1994; Las Vegas, Nevada. (digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc703269/: accessed April 24, 2018), University of North Texas Libraries, Digital Library, digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.