The RCRA Hazardous Waste Part B permit application is the detailed, narrative document you submit to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or your authorized state agency to prove your facility can safely treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. Any owner or operator of a treatment, storage, or disposal facility (TSDF) must file it, and the rules that govern it live in 40 CFR Part 270. It is the half of the application that decides whether you get a permit at all.
Unlike the short Part A form, the Part B is not a fixed set of boxes. It is a written package of plans, drawings, and engineering reports that can run hundreds or even thousands of pages. EPA reports that some Part B applications take years to review, and a single missing plan, such as a closure cost estimate or a waste analysis plan, can stall the whole file. Getting it right the first time saves you months of back-and-forth notices of deficiency.
Here is what you will learn in this guide:
- 📋 What the Part B is, who must file it, and the exact 40 CFR sections that control each piece
- 🗂️ The full pre-filing checklist of documents and data you must gather before you start
- ✍️ A section-by-section walkthrough of every required part of the application, with sample entries
- 👥 Three filled-out scenarios following real facilities from start to finish
- ⚠️ The mistakes that trigger notices of deficiency and how to dodge them
What the Form Is and Who Must File It
The Part B application is the technical and narrative half of the two-part RCRA permit application. The first half, the Part A form (EPA Form 8700-23), collects basic facts like your facility name, location, and the waste codes you handle. The Part B then proves, in detail, that you can manage that waste in line with the operating standards in 40 CFR Part 264. Together they form one complete application, but the Part B is where the real engineering work lives.
You must file a Part B if you own or operate a facility that treats, stores, or disposes of hazardous waste, as the EPA hazardous waste permitting program explains. Generators who only accumulate waste for short, limited periods on-site usually do not need a permit. The line between a “generator” and a “storage facility” is one of the most misread parts of the whole program, and crossing it without a permit is a violation that can bring civil penalties of tens of thousands of dollars per day.
The agency that receives your application depends on where you are. Most states are RCRA-authorized, meaning the state environmental agency, not EPA, runs the program and reviews your Part B. In California, for example, the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) is the permitting authority. The federal rules in 40 CFR Part 270 set the floor, but your state may add stricter requirements, so always confirm which version applies to your site.
The statute behind all of this is the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, which Congress passed to control hazardous waste “from cradle to grave.” The deadline that governs your filing is set by the permitting agency, often six months after a formal “call-in” letter. Miss that deadline and you can lose interim status, which is the temporary authority that lets existing facilities keep operating while their permit is under review.
Before You Start: Documents and Information You Need
The Part B is a research project as much as a form. Gathering everything first prevents the most common cause of delay, which is submitting an application that the reviewer must reject as incomplete. The general application requirements in 40 CFR 270.10 and the contents list in 40 CFR 270.14 tell you exactly what must be in the package. Below is the pre-filing checklist every applicant should complete before opening a single document.
- EPA Identification Number. This 12-character number ties your application to your facility; without it, the agency cannot match your Part B to your Part A.
- A complete waste inventory with EPA waste codes. You need chemical and physical analyses of every waste stream, because the reviewer uses them to judge whether your units can handle the waste safely.
- A licensed Professional Engineer (PE). Design drawings, specifications, and engineering studies must be certified by a qualified PE under 40 CFR 270.14(a), and finding one late delays everything.
- A topographic map. You must show 1,000 feet around the facility at the correct scale, and missing contours or a missing wind rose forces a resubmittal.
- Closure and post-closure cost estimates. These dollar figures drive your financial assurance, and an outdated estimate undercuts the whole package.
- Financial assurance documentation. A trust fund, surety bond, letter of credit, or insurance policy proves you can pay for cleanup, and the agency will not issue a permit without it.
- Groundwater monitoring data. Facilities with regulated units must characterize the uppermost aquifer, and gaps here trigger lengthy technical comments.
- Your contingency plan and waste analysis plan. These operating documents are required by Part 264, and reviewers check them line by line against the standards.
- A summary of the pre-application meeting. Under 40 CFR 270.14(b)(22) you must document the public meeting, including attendees and comments, or the application is incomplete.
Pull every item together in a labeled binder or electronic folder that mirrors the order of 40 CFR 270.14. If even one item is missing, the agency issues a Notice of Deficiency (NOD), the clock resets, and your project can slip by months.
Where to Get the Form and How to Access It
There is no single downloadable “Part B form,” because the Part B is a narrative application built from regulatory requirements, not a fillable PDF. Your starting point is the EPA Part A and Part B permit application page, which hosts the Part A form and the instructions that frame the whole submission. The content of your Part B comes directly from the requirements in 40 CFR 270.14 through 270.29.
EPA also offers an optional RCRA Part B Application Checklist (xls), a spreadsheet that walks you and your reviewer through every administrative and technical content item. Using it is the single best way to confirm you have addressed each section before you submit. Many applicants build their table of contents straight from this checklist so nothing falls through the cracks.
If your state is authorized, get the form package from the state agency instead of EPA. Pennsylvania, for instance, posts Word-document forms and instructions for its Hazardous Waste Storage, Treatment, or Disposal Permit Application. California applicants work through DTSC’s permitting program, and other states such as Ohio EPA and Tennessee run their own portals and contacts.
To be sure you have the current rules, read the Part B requirements on the eCFR, which updates as regulations change. The eCFR shows the live version, so check the “current as of” date at the top of the page before you rely on any section. Confirming the version up front protects you from drafting to an outdated standard.
Step-by-Step: How to Fill Out the RCRA Part B Application Section by Section
The Part B is organized around the information requirements in 40 CFR 270.14, which apply to all hazardous waste management facilities, plus unit-specific sections in 40 CFR 270.15 through 270.21. Each numbered item below corresponds to a paragraph of the regulation. Use the exact paragraph labels, such as “270.14(b)(1),” as your section headers so the reviewer can match your application to the rule.
Section 270.14(b)(1): General Description of the Facility
What it asks in plain English. This opening section asks you to describe what your facility is and what it does with hazardous waste. It sets the stage for everything that follows.
How to answer it. Write a clear narrative that names the facility, states its purpose, lists the processes used, and gives the design capacity of each process. Keep it factual and tie each statement to the units you will describe later.
Example entry. Greenline Recovery LLC operates a hazardous waste container storage facility that stores up to 1,200 fifty-five-gallon drums of spent solvents (F001–F005) prior to off-site recycling.
A nuance or edge case. If your facility runs more than one process, such as both container storage and tank treatment, describe each separately so the reviewer can route each to the correct unit-specific section.
A common mistake and its consequence. Writing a vague description that does not match your Part A capacity numbers triggers an immediate inconsistency comment, and the reviewer will hold the file until the two parts agree.
A misconception people hold. Many applicants think this section is just a cover paragraph, but reviewers treat it as the master index, so a sloppy description signals a sloppy application.
Section 270.14(b)(2)–(3): Waste Analysis and Waste Analysis Plan
What it asks in plain English. This section asks for the chemical and physical analyses of every waste you handle, plus the written plan, required by 40 CFR 264.13, for how you analyze incoming waste.
How to answer it. List each waste stream with its EPA waste codes, attach the lab analyses, and include a waste analysis plan that states the parameters tested, the test methods, the sampling frequency, and the rationale for each.
Example entry. Greenline tests each inbound drum for flash point using SW-846 Method 1010A and for halogenated solvents using Method 8260D, sampling one drum per shipment.
A nuance or edge case. If you accept off-site waste, your plan must also describe how you verify a generator’s waste matches its manifest before you accept it.
A common mistake and its consequence. Listing waste codes without supporting analytical data leaves a gap the reviewer cannot close, and the section comes back as deficient.
A misconception people hold. Some filers believe a generic, boilerplate plan is fine, but the agency expects a plan tailored to your exact waste streams and processes.
Section 270.14(b)(4)–(5): Security and Inspection Schedule
What it asks in plain English. This part asks how you keep unauthorized people out, under 40 CFR 264.14, and how often you inspect your equipment and units, under 40 CFR 264.15(b).
How to answer it. Describe your fences, gates, warning signs, and surveillance, then attach a written inspection schedule listing each item inspected, what you look for, and how often.
Example entry. Greenline maintains a 24-hour locked gate, perimeter fencing, and “Danger — Unauthorized Personnel Keep Out” signs at every entrance.
A nuance or edge case. If you want a waiver of the security requirement, you must justify it by showing that contact with waste would not injure people, which is rare and hard to prove.
A common mistake and its consequence. Submitting an inspection schedule that omits unit-specific items, such as tank overfill controls, leads to a focused technical comment for each missing item.
A misconception people hold. Filers often assume signs alone meet the security rule, but the agency wants a layered barrier-plus-control approach.
Section 270.14(b)(7): Contingency Plan
What it asks in plain English. This section asks for your written plan to respond to fires, explosions, or releases, required by 40 CFR Part 264, Subpart D.
How to answer it. Attach a contingency plan that names the emergency coordinator, lists emergency equipment, describes evacuation routes, and explains arrangements with local police, fire, and hospitals.
Example entry. Greenline names Maria Delgado as primary emergency coordinator, reachable at a 24-hour number, with a backup coordinator listed second.
A nuance or edge case. If you already have a SPCC or emergency plan for another program, you may amend it to cover RCRA rather than write a separate document.
A common mistake and its consequence. Failing to document that you sent the plan to local responders means the section is incomplete, even if the plan itself is strong.
A misconception people hold. Some applicants think the plan only matters after an incident, but reviewers read it closely as a sign of overall preparedness.
Section 270.14(b)(8)–(12): Prevention, Traffic, Location, and Training
What it asks in plain English. This cluster asks how you prevent hazards during unloading, control runoff, protect water supplies, manage traffic, address seismic and floodplain risks, and train your staff.
How to answer it. Address each subitem in order, using berms and dikes for runoff, protective clothing for personnel, and a training program that matches each job task to the standards in 40 CFR 264.16.
Example entry. Greenline routes all tanker traffic through a single bermed unloading pad and trains every operator within six months of hire, with annual refreshers.
A nuance or edge case. New facilities in a seismic zone listed in Appendix VI must run a geologic study to prove no active fault passes within 200 feet of the waste units.
A common mistake and its consequence. Skipping the 100-year floodplain identification under 270.14(b)(11) is a frequent omission that forces the reviewer to request an FIA flood map.
A misconception people hold. Many believe training can be informal on-the-job coaching, but the rule requires a documented, written program tied to actual duties.
Section 270.14(b)(13)–(18): Closure, Post-Closure, and Financial Assurance
What it asks in plain English. This section asks for your closure plan, post-closure plan where applicable, the cost estimates for both, and proof you can pay for them.
How to answer it. Attach the closure plan, the most recent closure cost estimate prepared under 40 CFR 264.142, and one of the allowed financial mechanisms such as a trust fund or surety bond.
Example entry. Greenline submits a $310,000 closure cost estimate backed by a fully funded standby trust fund held by a national bank.
A nuance or edge case. A new facility may submit the financial assurance documentation up to 60 days before it first receives waste, rather than with the initial Part B.
A common mistake and its consequence. Using a cost estimate based on your own staff’s labor rather than third-party cleanup costs understates the figure and draws a correction demand.
A misconception people hold. Filers often think a parent company’s general financial strength is enough, but the rule requires specific, dedicated mechanisms that meet the financial test.
Section 270.14(b)(19): Topographic Map
What it asks in plain English. This item asks for a topographic map covering 1,000 feet around the facility at a scale where one inch equals no more than 200 feet.
How to answer it. Produce a map with contours, the 100-year floodplain, surface waters, surrounding land uses, a wind rose, a north arrow, facility boundaries, access control, and the location of every waste unit.
Example entry. Greenline’s map uses a 2-foot contour interval, shows a wind rose with prevailing winds from the northwest, and marks all twelve required features.
A nuance or edge case. Very large facilities may request a different scale on a case-by-case basis if the standard scale would be unreadable.
A common mistake and its consequence. Leaving off the wind rose or the north arrow is a small error that still forces a map resubmittal, delaying review.
A misconception people hold. Many assume any site plan will do, but the rule lists twelve specific features the map must show, and reviewers check each one.
Section 270.14(c): Groundwater Protection for Regulated Units
What it asks in plain English. Facilities with regulated units, such as surface impoundments or landfills, must describe how they will monitor groundwater and respond to contamination.
How to answer it. Identify the uppermost aquifer, give flow direction and rate, propose monitoring well locations on the topographic map, and submit an engineering report for the monitoring program required by 40 CFR 264.97.
Example entry. A landfill applicant identifies the uppermost aquifer at 38 feet, proposes one upgradient and three downgradient wells, and sets the point of compliance at the waste boundary.
A nuance or edge case. If contamination is already detected, you must propose a compliance monitoring or corrective action program, not just a detection program.
A common mistake and its consequence. Underbuilding the well network leaves blind spots, and the agency will require additional wells before issuing the permit.
A misconception people hold. Container-storage-only facilities sometimes complete this section needlessly, but it applies only to regulated units, not to every facility.
Section 270.15: Specific Requirements for Containers
What it asks in plain English. If you store waste in containers like drums, this section, 40 CFR 270.15, asks you to prove your containment system can catch leaks and spills.
How to answer it. Describe the secondary containment system’s design, dimensions, and materials, show how it drains, give its capacity relative to the drums stored, and explain how you manage run-on and remove accumulated liquids.
Example entry. Greenline’s coated-concrete containment holds 1,320 gallons, equal to 10 percent of total stored volume plus the largest container, sloped to a collection sump.
A nuance or edge case. For wastes with no free liquids, you can show compliance with 264.175(c) instead of providing full liquid-capacity containment.
A common mistake and its consequence. Sizing containment below the required volume is a direct design failure that the reviewing engineer will reject outright.
A misconception people hold. Some filers think a painted floor counts as containment, but the rule requires a system that demonstrably holds the required liquid volume.
Sections 270.16–270.21: Tanks, Impoundments, Incinerators, and Landfills
What it asks in plain English. Each waste unit type has its own information section: tanks under 270.16, surface impoundments under 270.17, waste piles under 270.18, incinerators under 270.19, and landfills under 270.21.
How to answer it. Complete only the sections that match your units, supplying design drawings, integrity assessments, liner and leak-detection details, trial burn plans for incinerators, and operating parameters, each certified by a PE where required.
Example entry. A tank-treatment facility submits a PE-certified integrity assessment showing its 20,000-gallon steel tank has 0.25-inch walls and full secondary containment.
A nuance or edge case. An incinerator applicant must propose a trial burn plan or submit data from a comparable unit to set destruction and removal efficiency limits.
A common mistake and its consequence. Filling out a unit section that does not apply to your facility wastes review time and signals confusion about your own operations.
A misconception people hold. Filers sometimes assume one generic “treatment” section covers all units, but each unit type has separate, detailed requirements.
Three Filled-Out Examples Using Real Scenarios
These three scenarios follow named operators through the major sections of the Part B so you can see what real entries look like. Each table shows the section and the entry that operator provides.
Scenario 1: Maria Delgado, container storage facility (Greenline Recovery LLC)
| Form Section | What Maria Enters |
|---|---|
| Facility description (270.14(b)(1)) | Container storage of up to 1,200 drums of spent solvents F001–F005 |
| Waste analysis plan (270.14(b)(3)) | Flash point by Method 1010A; one drum per shipment sampled |
| Security (270.14(b)(4)) | 24-hour locked gate, perimeter fence, danger signs |
| Contingency plan (270.14(b)(7)) | Maria Delgado, primary emergency coordinator, 24-hour line |
| Closure cost estimate (270.14(b)(15)) | $310,000, backed by a fully funded standby trust fund |
| Topographic map (270.14(b)(19)) | 2-foot contours, wind rose NW, all 12 features shown |
| Container containment (270.15(a)) | 1,320-gallon coated-concrete containment, sloped to sump |
| Training (270.14(b)(12)) | Written program, training within 6 months, annual refresher |
Scenario 2: David Chen, tank treatment facility (ChenTech Industrial)
| Form Section | What David Enters |
|---|---|
| Facility description (270.14(b)(1)) | Neutralization of corrosive waste (D002) in two 20,000-gallon tanks |
| Waste analysis (270.14(b)(2)) | pH by Method 9040C on every inbound load |
| Tank integrity (270.16) | PE-certified assessment, 0.25-inch steel walls, secondary containment |
| Inspection schedule (270.14(b)(5)) | Daily check of tank overfill controls and containment |
| Closure cost estimate (270.14(b)(15)) | $465,000, backed by a surety bond |
| Financial assurance (270.14(b)(16)) | Surety bond meeting the financial test |
| Air emissions (270.27) | Subpart CC controls on tank vents |
| Training (270.14(b)(12)) | Tank-specific spill response training documented per employee |
Scenario 3: Aisha Bello, hazardous waste landfill (Northgate Disposal)
| Form Section | What Aisha Enters |
|---|---|
| Facility description (270.14(b)(1)) | Land disposal of stabilized metal sludges in a double-lined cell |
| Groundwater monitoring (270.14(c)) | Uppermost aquifer at 38 feet; 1 upgradient, 3 downgradient wells |
| Topographic map (270.14(b)(19)) | Waste management area, property line, and point of compliance marked |
| Landfill design (270.21) | Double composite liner with leachate collection, PE-certified |
| Closure plan (270.14(b)(13)) | Final cover design with cap and vegetation |
| Post-closure cost (270.14(b)(16)) | $2.4 million, 30-year care, backed by a trust fund |
| Land disposal restrictions (270.14(b)(21)) | Copy of approved treatment standard documentation |
| Pre-application meeting (270.14(b)(22)) | Summary, attendee list, and public comments attached |
How to File the Completed Form
How you file depends on whether EPA or your state runs the program. In every case, you submit the Part B to the same “Director” who received your Part A, and the application must be signed under 40 CFR 270.11 by an authorized facility official. Keep a date-stamped copy of everything you send as your proof of filing.
- By mail or courier. Most states still accept paper or bound copies sent to the agency’s hazardous waste permitting office; confirm the exact mailing address and the number of copies on the agency’s permit page. There is generally no separate “form fee” for the federal Part B, though some states charge application fees. Expect a written acknowledgment of receipt, which you should keep.
- Through a state portal. States like Pennsylvania and Ohio provide electronic submission or downloadable form packages; follow the portal’s upload steps and save the confirmation page or email.
- In person. Some agencies accept hand-delivered applications at the regional office, which gives you a stamped receipt on the spot.
- Federal sites. Where EPA is the permitting authority, submit to the appropriate EPA Regional Office, using the contact in the application instructions.
Whatever the channel, processing is slow because the Part B is technical. Reviews routinely take one to several years, with rounds of Notices of Deficiency in between. Your proof of filing, whether a stamped receipt, a certified-mail card, or a portal confirmation, is your safeguard if the agency later questions when you submitted.
What Happens After You File
Once the agency receives your Part B, a permit writer checks it for administrative and technical completeness, often using the same EPA Part B checklist you used to build it. If anything is missing, you receive a Notice of Deficiency that lists each gap and gives you a deadline to respond. Each NOD round can add months, so a complete first submission is the best way to speed things up.
When the technical review is satisfied, the agency drafts either a permit or a notice of intent to deny. The draft permit then goes out for public comment under the procedures in 40 CFR Part 124, which usually includes a 45-day comment period and the chance for a public hearing. The agency must respond to significant comments before issuing the final decision.
A final RCRA permit typically lasts up to ten years for land disposal facilities and must be reviewed at the five-year mark. Holding interim status while you wait does not guarantee a permit; if your Part B fails review, the agency can deny it and order closure. That is why the quality of the application directly shapes your facility’s future.
Mistakes to Avoid When Filling Out the Form
- Submitting before you have a PE certification on design drawings; the agency rejects uncertified engineering data outright.
- Letting the Part B contradict the Part A on capacity or waste codes; inconsistencies stall the file until they match.
- Using a boilerplate waste analysis plan; a plan not tailored to your wastes draws a technical deficiency.
- Omitting the 100-year floodplain identification; the reviewer cannot finish the location review without it.
- Leaving required features off the topographic map; a missing wind rose or north arrow forces a resubmittal.
- Understating closure cost estimates with in-house labor rates; the agency demands third-party cost figures.
- Filing without financial assurance documentation; no permit issues until the mechanism is in place.
- Completing unit sections that do not apply; this signals confusion and wastes review time.
- Forgetting the pre-application meeting summary required by 270.14(b)(22); the application is deemed incomplete.
- Skimping on groundwater monitoring well coverage at a regulated unit; the agency requires more wells before issuance.
- Missing the signature requirements of 270.11; an unsigned application is not a valid submission.
- Ignoring state-specific add-ons; meeting only the federal floor can still leave a state application short.
Do’s and Don’ts
Do’s
- Do build your table of contents from the EPA Part B checklist so every required section appears in order, because reviewers map your file against it.
- Do hire a qualified Professional Engineer early, since their certification is mandatory and hard to obtain on short notice.
- Do keep your Part A and Part B perfectly consistent, because any mismatch triggers a deficiency comment.
- Do document the pre-application public meeting in full, since the rule makes it a completeness requirement.
- Do save dated proof of filing, because review takes years and you may need to prove your submission date.
- Do confirm your state’s added requirements, since authorized states often exceed the federal minimum.
Don’ts
- Don’t submit an incomplete package hoping to “fix it later,” because each Notice of Deficiency adds months.
- Don’t reuse another facility’s plans verbatim, since reviewers spot generic documents and reject them.
- Don’t understate closure or post-closure costs, because the agency recalculates using real cleanup rates.
- Don’t skip the financial assurance mechanism, since no permit issues without it in place.
- Don’t ignore the public comment stage, because unanswered community concerns can delay or derail the permit.
- Don’t assume interim status guarantees a permit, since a failed Part B can end in denial and forced closure.
Pros and Cons of Filing on Your Own vs. With Help
Most TSDF operators use an environmental consulting firm to prepare the Part B, but some larger companies handle it in-house. The right choice depends on your staff’s expertise and the complexity of your units.
| Filing With Professional Help | Filing On Your Own (In-House) |
|---|---|
| Pro: Consultants know the 40 CFR Part 264 standards cold, reducing deficiency rounds | Pro: Lower out-of-pocket cost when you have qualified staff already |
| Pro: Access to PEs and modelers for drawings and groundwater work | Pro: Full institutional knowledge of your own processes |
| Pro: Faster turnaround on NOD responses because the team is experienced | Pro: No external markup on every revision |
| Pro: Better chance of a clean first submission, saving months overall | Pro: Direct control over timing and priorities |
| Pro: Familiarity with your specific state agency’s expectations | Pro: Easier to keep proprietary process details internal |
| Con: Consulting fees for a full Part B can be substantial | Con: A missed requirement can cost far more in delay than consultant fees |
| Con: Less internal knowledge transfer if staff stay hands-off | Con: Staff may underestimate the engineering and PE certification load |
FAQs
Do I need a Part B if I only generate hazardous waste and ship it off-site quickly?
No. Generators who accumulate waste within the short time limits set by the rules generally do not need a permit, so most do not file a Part B.
Is the Part B a single fillable form I can download?
No. The Part B is a narrative application built from the requirements in 40 CFR 270.14 through 270.29, not one fixed PDF form.
Do I have to file Part A and Part B at the same time?
No. Part A is usually filed first or earlier in interim status, and the Part B is submitted later, often after a formal call-in letter.
Does a Professional Engineer really have to certify my drawings?
Yes. Under 40 CFR 270.14(a), design drawings, specifications, and engineering studies must be certified by a qualified Professional Engineer.
Do I list every waste code in Section 270.14(b)(2), even rarely handled wastes?
Yes. You must provide analyses for every hazardous waste you handle, because the reviewer judges whether your units can manage each one safely.
In Section 270.14(b)(19), can I just attach my existing site plan as the topographic map?
No. The map must show twelve specific features, including contours, a wind rose, and a north arrow, so a basic site plan is rejected.
Do I complete the container section (270.15) if I only store waste in tanks?
No. You complete only the unit-specific sections that match your actual units, so a tanks-only facility uses 270.16, not 270.15.
In the closure cost estimate, can I use my own staff’s hourly rates?
No. The estimate must reflect third-party cleanup costs, because the agency assumes a contractor, not your staff, may perform closure.
Does my facility need the groundwater section in 270.14(c)?
Yes. If your facility contains a regulated unit such as a landfill or surface impoundment, you must complete the groundwater protection requirements.
Will I get a chance to fix problems before denial?
Yes. The agency issues a Notice of Deficiency listing gaps and giving you time to respond before any decision to deny.
Is there a public comment period before my permit is issued?
Yes. Under 40 CFR Part 124, the draft permit goes out for public comment, usually 45 days, with a possible public hearing.
Does interim status guarantee I will get a final permit?
No. Interim status only lets you operate during review, and the agency can still deny the permit and require closure if the Part B fails.
Do I have to document the pre-application meeting in my Part B?
Yes. Section 270.14(b)(22) requires a summary of the meeting, a list of attendees, and copies of any comments submitted.
Does my state version of the Part B match the federal rules exactly?
No. Authorized states adopt the federal floor but often add stricter requirements, so always confirm your state agency’s specific rules.
Related reading
- How to Fill Out EPA Form 8700-12 (w/ Examples) + FAQs
- How to Fill Out EPA Form 8700-22 (w/Examples) + FAQs
- How to Fill Out Ohio EPA Solid Waste Permit Application (w/Examples) + FAQs
- How to Fill Out the EPA Notification of Hazardous Waste Activity (Form 8700-12) + FAQs
- How to Fill Out the NPDES Individual Permit Application (Form 1) + FAQs
- How to Fill Out the RCRA Hazardous Waste Part A Permit (w/Examples) + FAQs
- How to Fill Out the Washington Ecology Water Quality Modification Permit + FAQs