Author: Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages :
Book Description
A Review of the Methods Used by the US Environmental Protection Agency to Assess the Financial Impacts of the Repository Regulations
Author: A Review of the Methods Used by the US Environmental Protection Agency to Assess the Financial Impacts of the Repository Regulations
Author: Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages : 24
Book 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.
Radioactive Waste Management
Author: Publisher:
ISBN:
Category : Radioactive waste disposal
Languages : en
Pages : 622
Book Description
Framework for environmental health risk management
Author: United States. Presidential/Congressional Commission on Risk Assessment and Risk ManagementPublisher:
ISBN:
Category : Administrative agencies
Languages : en
Pages : 80
Book Description
Reforming Regulatory Impact Analysis
Author: Winston HarringtonPublisher: Routledge
ISBN: 1136526331
Category : Nature
Languages : en
Pages : 243
Book Description
Over the past decades, considerable debate has emerged surrounding the use of cost-benefit analysis (CBA) to analyze and make recommendations for environmental and safety regulations. Critics argue that CBA forces values on unquantifiable factors, that it does not adequately measure benefits across generations, and that it is not adaptable in situations of uncertainty. Proponents, on the other hand, believe that a well-done CBA provides useful, albeit imperfect, information to policymakers precisely because of the standard metrics that are applied across the analysis. Largely absent from the debate have been practical questions about how the use of CBA could be improved. Relying on the assumption that CBA will remain an important component in the regulatory process, this new work from Resources for the Future brings together experts representing both sides of the debate to analyze the use of CBA in three key case studies: the Clean Air Interstate Rule, the Clean Air Mercury Rule, and the Cooling Water Intake Structure Rule (Phase II). Each of the case studies is accompanied by critiques from both an opponent and a proponent of CBA and includes consideration of complementary analyses that could have been employed. The work's editors - two CBA supporters and one critic - conclude the report by offering concrete recommendations for improving the use of CBA, focusing on five areas: technical quality of the analyses, relevance to the agency decision-making process, transparency of the analyses, treatment of new scientific findings, and balance in both the analyses and associated processes, including the treatment of distributional consequences.
Government Reports Announcements & Index
Author: Cost-benefit Analysis and Environmental Regulations
Author: Daniel SwartzmanPublisher:
ISBN:
Category : Law
Languages : en
Pages : 228
Book Description
Author: 
Author: 
Author: