1. Environmental Health and Safety Committee 4-30 Bret Bruhn, Merix Corporation Febuary 2004

2. Legislative & Regulatory Review TRI Program Issues RCRA Proposed Rules

3. RCRA Program F006  Possible exemption  Stalled until late 2005 DSW  Proposed changes to the Definition of Solid Waste (DSW)  Word is no action until 2006

4. RCRA Program / F006 In January 2003 we learned that EPA was considering issuing an exemption for select F006 sludges Background  the F006 classification was established in 1980  PCB F006 materials seldom meet the criteria used to justify development of the classification  subsequent EPA guidance has provided no relief, but has actually expanded the scope of coverage  past efforts to obtain broad-based regulatory relief have failed, however a few manufacturers and brokers have secured State or Regional de-listings and variances

5. RCRA Program / F006 EPA is considering 4 options:  1 - Generator Relief  2 - High Metals Concentration  3 - Low Metals Concentration  4 - Hybrid All options share the following requirements:  Generators must notify their State  Normal business records must be maintained  Cyanide limits must be met  Metals must be recycled  No speculative accumulation  Shipments must meet minimum metal levels

6. RCRA Program / F006 Option 1 / Generator Relief  F006 would remain a hazardous waste and could only be treated by a RCRA RSDF  Use of manifests and certified transporters not required  Recycled F006 would not count towards a facility’s generator status Option 2 / High Metals  F006 would be excluded from RCRA (not considered solid waste)  generators and subsequent handlers not subject to RCRA management standards  land management and use constituting disposal prohibited  shipments must contain > 5% recoverable metals

7. RCRA Program / F006 Option 3 / Low Metals Conc.  F006 would be excluded from RCRA (not considered solid waste), but lower metals concentrations would result in additional management requirements  shipments must meet minimum recoverable metals levels  States must be notified of missing shipments  no more than one non-conforming shipment allowed per 3-year period Option 4 / Hybrid  options 2 & 3 would both be available based upon metals content

8. RCRA Program / F006 What are our goals?  a federal exemption  ability to use intermediary processors and brokers, as well as, to market directly  reasonable standards for metals concentrations Recent WRC variance (granted Aug 13, 2002) provides useful information  www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/id/wrc.htm  Docket Number F-1999-WRCP-FFFFF

9. RCRA Program / F006 Status  Last major exchange with Agency occurred in August of 2003  Some stakeholders (primarily metal finishers) are heavily lobbying for the Low Metals Concentration option  EPA set a target release moved to Winter 2005 with the intent to finish this rule prior to DSW. Near-term action appears unlikely.

10. RCRA Program / DSW EPA released proposed rule changes to the definition of solid waste (DSW) on October 28, 2003 68 Fed Register 61557 For information access  www.epa.gov/fedrgstr  www.epa.gov/edocket/  www.regulations.gov

11. RCRA Program / DSW Background  Precipitated by EPA vs. ABR court decision  Ruled that EPA had exceeded its authority in attempting to classify materials as hazardous wastes IPC Activities  Analyzed the proposed rule  Held discussions with Paul Borst EPA OSWER Economist  Drafted and filed extensive comments

12. RCRA Program / DSW Issues/Comments  Proposed rule is too narrow and could limit opportunities based on definitions of  continuous process  same generating industry (NAICS code)  EPA overestimates the benefits of the proposed rule  Would undercut recycling infrastructure  Asked for comments on a “Broader Rule” based on four-point legitimacy criteria

13. RCRA Program / DSW Legitimacy Criteria  Manage materials as a valuable commodity or analogous raw material  Provides a useful contribution to the process or product  Provides reasonable economic incentives  TAR (toxics-along-for-the-ride)  “bright line” approach (i.e. numeric limits)  “risk-based” approach  meet product or feedstock specifications

14. RCRA Program / DSW Legitimacy Criteria  Manage as a valuable commodity or analogous raw material  Provides a useful contribution to the process or product  Provides reasonable economic incentives  TAR (toxics-along-for-the-ride)  “bright line” approach (i.e. numeric limits)  “risk-based” approach  meet product or feedstock specifications Storage One Time notification Recordkeeping, reporting, documentation, & manifesting questions

15. RCRA Program / DSW Other potential issues  Storage  One Time notification  Recordkeeping  Reporting  Documentation / manifesting Status  Proposal unlikely to move forward until after the election.  Entrenched opposition within the Agency along with concerns from outside interest groups could impede progress

16. Keep in Touch with EHS Visit the Website at www.ipc.org under “Legislative and Regulatory Affairs” Subscribe to the EHS Update Join Compliance Net email forum Contact: Bret Bruhn, EHS Committee Chairman (503) 992-4689, bret.bruhn@merix.combret.bruhn@merix.com Jeff Instone, EHS Committee Vice Chairman (310) 649-2411, jeffrey.instone@tycoelectronics.com Fern Abrams, IPC Director of Environmental Policy (202) 962-0460, fabrams@ipc.org