This past January, the DSW Rule came under attack by the Sierra Club, an environmental group, with allegations of a “midnight regulation” and a petition to reopen the rule. As a result, the EPA requested the public meeting to seek guidance on the matter. (If the rule is reopened, observers say, the increase in recycling of valuable metals and other materials would be potentially lost. In addition, the $95 million in savings per year that the current DSW rule would provide affected industries—including electronics manufacturers, as originally projected by the EPA—would be in jeopardy.)
Abrams’ testimony focused on how the DSW rule removes regulatory barriers that inhibit the recycling of manufacturing wastes while simultaneously providing an environmental benefit by reducing waste. “This regulation provides a rare win-win situation for both industry and the environment,” Abrams said. “We urge EPA to re-examine the strong regulatory record it has amassed in support of this carefully calibrated rule and deny the Sierra Club’s petition.”
The Sierra Club claims that the DSW rule does not provide an environmental benefit and that the requirements under the rule should be stricter. The group also expressed opposition to the transfer-based exclusion, which allows secondary materials to be recycled off-site, outside of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act’s (RCRA) onerous hazardous waste regulations.
"The EPA has been working on the DSW rule for more than a decade, and it is grossly incorrect for Sierra Club to categorize it as a midnight rule,” Abrams stated. "The purpose of RCRA is to encourage resource conservation and reduce the amount of waste, and the DSW rule accomplishes those goals.”
Although there are a number of materials that are likely to be recycled under the transfer-based provisions of the DSW rule, Abrams focused on one particular waste stream derived from the manufacture of electronics to exemplify the benefits of that provision. As Abrams explained: “Metal sludge, created through the treatment of wastewater from the electroplating of PCBs and other items, is one of the secondary materials that will more commonly be recycled under the provisions of DSW. [It] is one of the largest sources of untapped metal-bearing secondary material in the U.S.”
It is
IPC’s position that the burdensome nature of the RCRA hazardous regulations has created monopoly-like conditions and monopolistic prices for the recycling of electroplating sludge. As a result, Abrams explained, it can be more costly to recycle electroplating sludge than to dispose of it in a landfill. “The transfer-based exclusion in the DSW rule empowers the marketplace to create new and cost-effective recycling options that produce a win-win situation in reducing the mining of virgin metals and saving money.”
IPC will provide a more detailed opinion in written comments that will be submitted separately. The deadline for written comments is Aug. 13, 2009. For more information on the DSW rule or to view IPC’s written comments, please visit
www.ipc.org/DSW. Industry members are strongly encouraged to submit individual comments and may use IPC’s comments as a template. Questions should be directed to Stephanie Castorina, IPC manager of environmental programs, at
scastorina@ipc.org or (703) 522-0225.