United States
         Environmental Protection
         Agency
Office of Emergency and
Remedial Response
Washington DC 20460
EPA/540/G-89/006
August 1988
         CERCLA Compliance with
         Other Laws Manual:

         Interim Final
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                EPA/540/G-89/006
                                                August 1988
              CERCLA COMPLIANCE WITH  OTHER  LAWS MANUAL

                             DRAFT GUIDANCE
                               August 8,  198!
                United States Environmental Protection Agency
                  Office  of Emergency  and Remedial Response
                           Washington,  D.  C.  20460
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                       NOTICE

Development of this document was funded, wholly or in part, by the United States
Environmental Protection Agency under contract No. 68-01-7090 to ICF, Incorporated.

The policies and procedures set out in this document are intended solely for the
guidance of Government personnel. They are not intended, nor can they be relied
upon, to create any rights, substantive or procedural, enforceable by any party in
litigation with the United States.  The Agency reserves the right to act at variance
with these policies and procedures and to change them at any time without public
notice.
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                          m


                                 TABLE  OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 	  xi

1 .    GENERAL  PROCEDURES FOR CERCLA COMPLIANCE WITH
     OTHER STATUTES	1-1

1.0  INTRODUCTION	1-1

1.1  OVERVIEW OF REQUIREMENTS CONCERNING CERCLA COMPLIANCE
     WITH OTHER LAWS    	1-2

1.2  GENERAL  PROCEDURES FOR DETERMINING IF REQUIREMENT IS
     APPLICABLE OR RELEVANT AND APPROPRIATE (ARAR)   	   1-5

     COORDINATION BETWEEN CERCLA (SUPERFUND)  AND OTHER PROGRAM
     OFFICES    	1-6

     DIAGRAM  OF CRITICAL POINTS FOR IDENTIFICATION AND
     COMMUNICATION OF  ARARs  	   1-7

     1.2.1 WHERE  AND  WHEN  ARARS  SHOULD  BE ATTAINED	1-8

        1.2.1.1  Requirements for Handling of Investigation-
                 Derived Laboratory Wastes   	   1-9

     1.2.2       DEFINITIONS OF APPLICABLE AND RELEVANT AND
           APPROPRIATE	1-10

        1.2.2.1  Definitions of Substantive and Administrative
                 Requirements  	  1-11

     1.2.3 TYPES  OF ARARS    	1-13

        1.2.3.1  Chemical-Specific Requirements  	  1-13

        1.2.3.2   Location-Specific Requirements   	  1-25

        1.2.3.3  Action-Specific Requirements  	  1-29

     1.2.4 GENERAL PROCEDURE  FOR IDENTIFICATION AND
           ANALYSIS OF  ARARS	1-55

        1.2.4.1  Procedure  for Identifying ARARs   	  1-59

        1.2.4.2  General Procedure for Determining if a
                 Requirement is Applicable   	  1-60
                            ***AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT *
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
        1.2.4.3  General Procedure for Determining if a
                 Requirement is Relevant  and Appropriate   	  1-65

1.3  CERCLA WAIVER CRITERIA FOR ARARS  	  1-71

1.4  OTHER CRITERIA OR GUIDELINES TO BE CONSIDERED   	1-76

1.5 DOCUMENTATION	1-78

2.   GUIDANCE FOR CERCLA COMPLIANCE WITH  RCRA	2-1

2.0 INTRODUCTION	2-1

2.1  COORDINATION BETWEEN CERCLA  (SUPERFUND) AND  RCRA OFFICES  	   2-2

2.2  OVERVIEW OF RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND  RECOVERY ACT (RCRA)    	   2-2

2.3 JURISDICTIONAL REQUIREMENTS  FOR  SUBTITLE C APPLICABILITY   	   2-4

     2.3.1.  DEFINITION OF HAZARDOUS WASTE  	   2-7

     2.3.2  TREATMENT,  STORAGE,  AND DISPOSAL OF HAZARDOUS
            WASTE	2-8

     2.3.3  ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS IN  DETERMINING
            SUBTITLE  C ARARs   	2-10

2.4  FEDERAL AND STATE RCRA REQUIREMENTS    	2-11

2.5  RCRA STORAGE REQUIREMENTS   	2-12

2.6  RCRA TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS   	  2-14

2.7  RCRA REQUIREMENTS TRIGGERED BY DISPOSAL   	  2-15

     2.7.1  DESIGN  AND OPERATING REQUIREMENTS TRIGGERED
            BY  DISPOSAL	2-18

     2.7.2  CLOSURE REQUIREMENTS   	  2-19

     2.7.3  SPECIAL RESTRICTIONS APPLICABLE TO LAND
            DISPOSAL    	2-21

     2.7.4  CORRECTIVE ACTION AND GROUND-WATER PROTECTION
            REQUIREMENTS   	  2-24

        2.7.4.1  Ground-water Monitoring  Requirements under
                 Subpart F   	2-25

        2.7.4.2  Ground-water Protection  Standards under
                 Subpart F   	2-25


                             ***AUGUST 8,  1988  DRAFT ***
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                          V

3.    GUIDANCE  FOR COMPLIANCE WITH CLEAN WATER ACT REQUIREMENTS   	3-1

3.0 INTRODUCTION	3-1

     3.0.1  ON-SITE ACTIONS:  COMPLIANCE  WITH SUBSTANTIVE
           REQUIREMENTS    	
     3.0.2  OFF-SITE ACTIONS;  COMPLIANCE  WITH SUBSTANTIVE AND
           ADMINISTRATIVE  REQUIREMENTS   	   3-2

3.1  OVERVIEW OF  THE  CLEAN WATER ACT  	3-3

     3.1.1  REGULATED SOURCES  AND POLLUTANTS    	   3-3

     3.1.2  LIMITATIONS AND STANDARDS	3-4

3.2 GUIDANCE FOR COMPLIANCE WITH  DIRECT  DISCHARGE  REQUIREMENTS   	   3-6

     3.2.1  TYPES OF DIRECT DISCHARGES    	   3-6

     3.2.2  OVERVIEW OF NPDES  PERMITS  	   3-7

     3.2.3  GUIDELINES FOR  DETERMINING SUBSTANTIVE
           REQUIREMENTS    	   3-7

        3.2.3.1   Technology-Based Standards  	   3-7

        3.2.3.2   Water Quality Criteria   	   3-9

        3.2.3.3   Water Quality Standards    	  3-11

        3.2.3.4   Antidegradation Policy   	  3-14

        3.2.3.5   Requirements  Regarding Water Quality
                 Standards  Imposed by the 1987 Amendments to
                 the  CWA    	3-14

        3.2.3.6   Ocean Discharge Standards   	  3-15

        3.2.3.7   Other Substantive Requirements  	  3-17

     3.2.4  COORDINATION BETWEEN CERCLA  (SUPERFUND)  AND WATER
           OFFICES FOR ON-SITE  ACTIONS   	
     3.2.5  ADMINISTRATIVE  REQUIREMENTS  OF THE  NPDES PROGRAM

3.3  GUIDANCE  FOR  COMPLIANCE WITH INDIRECT DISCHARGE
     REQUIREMENTS  	  3-21

     3.3.1  PRETREATMENT  STANDARDS    	  3-21
                            ***AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT *
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                          VI

     3.3.2  GUIDANCE  FOR  DETERMINING WHETHER TO DISCHARGE
           CERCLA WASTEWATER  TO A POTW	3-23

     3.3.3  POTW CONTROL MECHANISMS   	3-27

3.4  COMPLIANCE WITH  DREDGE AND FILL REQUIREMENTS	3-28

     3.4.1  DREDGE AND  FILL ACTIVITIES    	3-28

     3.4.2  AUTHORITIES  FOR REGULATING  DREDGE AND FILL
           ACTIVITIES    	3-28

     3.4.3  THE  ARMY  CORPS  OF  ENGINEERS/EPA PERMIT PROGRAM   	3-29

     3.4.4. SUBSTANTIVE REQUIREMENTS   	 3-30

        3.4.4.1  Dredged and Fill Material Disposal Under CWA
                 Section 404 and Rivers and Harbors Act
                 Section 10	3-30

        3.4.4.2  Dredged Material Disposal under Section 103,
                 MPRSA   	3-34

        3.4.4.3  Dredged and Fill Material Disposal Under
                 40 CFR Part 6, Appendix   	3-35

     3.4.5  COORDINATION BETWEEN SUPERFUND AND THE 404/
           WETLANDS  PROTECTION PROGRAM OFFICES OR OCEAN
           DISPOSAL  PROGRAM   	 3-35

4 .    GUIDANCE  FOR COMPLIANCE WITH REQUIREMENTS OF THE SAFE
     DRINKING  WATER ACT	4-1

4.0  INTRODUCTION	4-1

4.1  OVERVIEW  OF THE  SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT   	4-1

4.2     SUMMARY OF SDWA ARARS  FOR CERCLA ACTIONS   	4-2

     4.2.1  DRINKING  WATER STANDARDS   	  4-3

     4.2.2  UNDERGROUND  INJECTION CONTROL (UIC)  PROGRAM  	  4-9

        4.2.2.1  Guidance for  Determining Substantive
                 Requirements   	 4-12

        4.2.2.2  Administrative Requirements of the UIC
                 Program   	4-14

        4.2.2.3  Coordination  Between CERCLA Program and UIC
                 Office	4-14
                            ***AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT *
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                             Vll

     4.2.3  SOLE  SOURCE AQUIFER  (SSA)  PROGRAM	4-16

     4.2.4  WELLHEAD PROTECTION PROGRAM  	  4-17

5.   GROUND WATER PROTECTION POLICIES  	   5-1

5.0  OVERVIEW OF THE GROUND-WATER  PROTECTION STRATEGY  	   5-1

5.1  OGWP GROUND-WATER  CLASSIFICATION GUIDELINES   	   5-1

5.2  SUPERFUND APPROACH TO GROUND-WATER PROTECTION   	   5-2

HYPOTHETICAL SCENARIO FOR ILLUSTRATING HOW APPLICABLE OR
RELEVANT AND APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS  ARE IDENTIFIED  AND USED	H-l

     SITE CONDITIONS    	H-l

     IDENTIFICATION AND ANALYSIS OF  CHEMICAL-SPECIFIC
     REQUIREMENTS  	   H-3

     IDENTIFICATION AND ANALYSIS OF  LOCATION-SPECIFIC
     REQUIREMENTS  	   H-7

     IDENTIFICATION AND ANALYSIS OF  ACTION-SPECIFIC
     REQUIREMENTS  	   H-7

APPENDIX - OVERVIEW OF MAJOR ENVIRONMENTAL STATUTES AND
REGULATIONS	A-l

1.   OVERVIEW OF RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT  	   A-l

1.1  OFFICE OF SOLID WASTE   	A-l

1.2  OVERVIEW OF RCRA	A-l

1.3  REGULATIONS PERTAINING TO HAZARDOUS WASTE    	   A-3

1.4  OTHER RCRA REGULATIONS	A-12

2.   OVERVIEW OF CLEAN  WATER ACT AND THE WATER QUALITY ACT    	A-13

2.1  OVERVIEW OF THE CWA   	A-13

2.2  CWA REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO  CERCLA DISCHARGES  	  A-14

3.   THE SAFE DRINKING  WATER ACT   	A-17

3.1  OVERVIEW OF THE SDWA	A-17

3.2   SDWA REGULATIONS  PERTAINING  TO CERCLA ACTIVITIES   	   A- 18

LIST OF ACRYONMS USED IN MANUAL


                               ***AUGUST 8,  1988 DRAFT  ***
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
Preceding page blank
                                           IX
                                  TABLE  OF  EXHIBITS
Exhibit
Number
Exhibit
Page
Number
     DIAGRAM OF CRITICAL POINTS FOR  IDENTIFICATION
     AND COMMUNICATION OF ARARs	1-7

1-1  SELECTED  CHEMICAL-SPECIFIC POTENTIAL APPLICABLE OR
     RELEVANT AND APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS   	 1-16

1-2  SELECTED LOCATION-SPECIFIC POTENTIAL APPLICABLE OR
     RELEVANT AND APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS   	 1-27

1-3  SELECTED ACTION-SPECIFIC POTENTIAL APPLICABLE OR
     RELEVANT AND APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS   	 1-31

1-4  PROCEDURE FOR IDENTIFYING ARARs   	 1-57

1-5  GENERAL PROCEDURE FOR DETERMINING IF REQUIREMENT IS
     APPLICABLE	1-62

1-6  ARAR JURISDICTIONAL PREREQUISITES   	 1-63

1-7  GENERAL PROCEDURE FOR DETERMINING IF REQUIREMENT IS
     RELEVANT AND APPROPRIATE  	 1-66

1-8  GENERAL PROCEDURE FOR DETERMINING IF GUIDANCE OR
     CRITERIA SHOULD BE CONSIDERED   	 1-77

1-9  UNIVERSE OF APPLICABLE OR RELEVANT AND  APPROPRIATE
     REQUIREMENTS  	 1-80

1-10 OTHER  FEDERAL AND STATE  CRITERIA,  ADVISORIES, AND
     GUIDANCE TO BE CONSIDERED   	1-85

2-1  CERCLA ACTIONS CONSTITUTING DISPOSAL  	 2-17

3-1  CLEAN WATER ACT EFFLUENT GUIDELINES DEVELOPMENT
     DOCUMENTS   	3-36

4-1  PROPOSED MAXIMUM CONTAMINANT LEVEL GOALS  (MCLGs)  UNDER
     THE SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT   	4-4

4-2  LIST OF 83 CONTAMINANTS FOR WHICH MCLs  MUST BE
     PROMULGATED BY JUNE 1989	4-6

4-3  SECONDARY MAXIMUM CONTAMINANT LEVELS  (SMCLs)  UNDER THE
     SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT   	4-7
Preceding page blank
                             ***AUGUST  8,  1988 DRAFT *
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         XI

                                  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

PURPOSE

      The CERCLA Compliance with Other Environmental Laws Manual has been developed
to provide guidance to Remedial Project Managers  (RPMs), State personnel at
State-lead Superfund sites, On-Scene Coordinators  (OSCs), and other persons
responsible for planning response actions under §§104,  106, and 122 of the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act  (CERCLA). The
guidance is intended to assist in the selection of on-site remedial actions that
meet the applicable, or relevant and appropriate requirements  (ARARs) of the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act  (RCRA), Clean Water Act  (CWA), Safe Drinking
Water Act (SDWA),  Clean Air Act (CAA) ,  and other Federal and State environmental
laws, as required by CERCLA §§121.1

      The manual has been developed for use by lead or  support agencies for remedial
actions. The lead agency may be either EPA or a State.  For timely identification and
to ensure compliance with ARARs, it is important to provide for early and continuous
coordination between lead and support agencies throughout the remedy selection
process.2

      This manual will also be used by potentially responsible parties  (PRPs)
whenever they have the lead for identifying potential ARARs. In cases where
potential ARARs are identified by the PRP, the actual ARARs will be decided by the
lead agency. Further information concerning PRP involvement in the remedial
investigation/feasibility study may be obtained from the "Interim Guidance on
Potentially Responsible Party Participation in Remedial Investigations and
Feasibility Studies." (April, 1988,  OSWER Directive 9835.1A) or from the lead
agency.
        This volume covers requirements of RCRA, CWA, SDWA and ground-water
protection policies. Another volume under development (Volume 3)  will add
requirements under the Clean Air Act and other environmental statutes.

        Specific EPA and State roles will be specified either in a Superfund
Memorandum of Agreement (SMOA) or Cooperative Agreement  (CA). The SMOA is a
procedural agreement that outlines cooperative efforts between States and EPA
Regions and defines the roles and responsibilities of each party in the conduct of a
Superfund program in a State. For more information, see Draft Guidance on Preparing
a Superfund Memorandum of Agreement (SMOA) (OSWER #9375.0-01). A Cooperative
Agreement is a contractual agreement between the EPA and a State, in which the EPA
provides money from the Fund to a State to conduct remedial  action in compliance
with the NCP.

                          * * * AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT * * *

     Preceding page blank


  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        Xll
      The requirements of §121 generally apply as a matter of law only to remedial
actions. However, as a matter of policy, EPA will attain ARARs to the greatest
extent practicable considering the exigencies of the situation at the site when
carrying out removal actions. This manual may be used to assist OSCs in identifying
potential ARARs for removal sites.

      CERCLA §121 also requires on-site remedial actions to attain promulgated State
ARARs that are more stringent than Federal ARARS. Specific issues related to
identifying State ARARs will be addressed in a separate chapter at a later date.

      Requirements for off-site actions are discussed to some extent in this manual.
For a more detailed discussion of off-site requirements, the reader should consult
"Revised Procedures for Planning and Implementing Off-Site Response Actions"  (issued
November 13, 1987, EPA Directive 9834.11).

      CERCLA defines situations in which the use of ARARs may be waived in
particular circumstances. Waivers are described in this manual. Further guidance on
the use of waivers may be added at a later date.

      The manual is intended to be used in conjunction with other EPA guidance
documents, including the following:

           Draft  Guidance for Conducting Remedial  Investigations  and Feasibility
           Studies under  CERCLA (May  1988,  OSWER Directive  9335.3-01);

           Superfund  Public  Health Evaluation  Manual  (October  1986,  OSWER
           Directive  9285.4-1);

      "    Draft  Guidance on Preparing  Superfund Decision  Documents:  The  Proposed
           Plan and Record of Decision  (March  1988,  OSWER  Directive  9355.3-02);

           Draft  Guidance the Administrative Record for  SARA Response Actions
           (November  1986,  OSWER  Directive 9833.1A);

           Interim Guidance  on Potentially Responsible  Party Participation in
           Remedial Investigations and  Feasibility Studies  (April  1988,  OSWER
           Directive  9835.1A);  and

      "    Draft  Guidance on Remedial Actions  for  Contaminated Ground Water at
           Superfund  sites.  (No date, OSWER Directive  9283.1-02).
                                AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        Xlll

Contents

      Chapters 1 and 2 of the manual discuss the overall procedures for identifying
ARARs and provide guidance on the interpretation and analysis of RCRA requirements.
Chapter 1 defines "applicable" and "relevant and appropriate," provides matrices
listing potential chemical-specific, location-specific, and action-specific
requirements from RCRA, the Clean Water Act, and the Safe Drinking Water Act, and
provides general procedures for identifying and analyzing requirements. Chapter 2
discusses special issues of interpretation and analysis involving RCRA requirements,
and provides guidance on when RCRA requirements will be ARARs for CERCLA remedial
actions. Chapter 3 provides guidance for compliance with Clean Water Act substantive
(for on-site and off-site actions) and administrative  (for off-site actions)
requirements for direct discharges, indirect discharges, and dredge and fill
activities. Chapter 4 provides guidance for compliance with requirements of the Safe
Drinking Water Act that may be applicable or relevant and appropriate to CERCLA
sites. Chapter 5 provides guidance on consistency with policies for ground-water
protection. The manual also contains a hypothetical scenario illustrating how
applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements are identified and used, and an
appendix summarizing the provisions of RCRA, the CWA and SDWA.

KEY POINTS

Definition of ARARs

      A requirement under other environmental laws may be either "applicable"
or "relevant and appropriate," but not both. Identification of ARARs must be done on
a site-specific basis and involves a two-part analysis: first, a determination
whether a given requirement is applicable; then, if it is not applicable, a
determination whether it is nevertheless both relevant and appropriate.

      Applicable requirements are those cleanup standards, standards of control, and
other substantive environmental protection requirements, criteria, or limitations
promulgated under Federal or State law that specifically address a hazardous
substance, pollutant, contaminant, remedial action, location, or other circumstance
at a CERCLA site.

      Relevant and appropriate requirements are those cleanup standards, standards
of control, and other substantive environmental protection requirements, criteria,
or limitations promulgated under Federal or State law that, while not "applicable"
to a hazardous substance, pollutant, contaminant, remedial action, location, or
other circumstance at a CERCLA site, address problems or situations sufficiently
similar to those encountered at the CERCLA site that their use is well suited to the
particular site.

      The determination that a requirement is relevant and appropriate is a two-step
process:  (1) determination if a requirement is relevant and  (2) determination if a
requirement is appropriate. In general, this involves
                                AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        XIV

a comparison of a number of site-specific factors, including the characteristics of
the remedial action, the hazardous substances present at the site, or the physical
circumstances of the site,  with those addressed in the statutory or regulatory
requirement. In some cases, a requirement may be relevant, but not appropriate,
given site-specific circumstances; such a requirement would not be ARAR for the
site. In addition,  there is more discretion in the determination of relevant and
appropriate; it is possible for only part of a requirement to be considered relevant
and appropriate in a given case. When the analysis results in a determination that a
requirement is both relevant and appropriate, such a requirement must be complied
with to the same degree as if it were applicable.

      To-be-Considered Material (TBCs) are non-promulgated advisories or guidance
issued by Federal or State government that are not legally binding and do not have
the status of potential ARARs.  However, as described below, in many circumstances
TBCs will be considered along with ARARs as part of the site risk assessment and may
be used in determining the necessary level of cleanup for protection of health or
the environment.

Types of ARARs

      There are several different types of requirements that CERCLA actions may have
to comply with. The classification of ARARs below was developed to provide guidance
on how to identify and comply with ARARs;  however, some requirements may not fall
neatly into this classification system.

      "   Ambient  or  chemical-specific requirements  are  usually  health-  or
          risk-based  numerical  values or  methodologies which,  when  applied  to
          site-specific  conditions,  result  in  the establishment  of  numerical
          values.  These  values  establish  the acceptable  amount or concentration  of
          a  chemical  that  may be  found in,  or  discharged to,  the ambient
          environment.

          Performance, design,  or other action-specific  requirements  are  usually
          technology- or activity-based requirements  or  limitations  on  actions
          taken with  respect to hazardous wastes.

      "   Location-specific  requirements  are restrictions placed on  the
          concentration  of hazardous substances  or the conduct of activities  solely
          because  they occur in special locations.

Developing Protective Remedies Using Risk Assessment, ARARs, and TBCs

      CERCLA §121 requires selection of a remedial action that is protective of
human health and the environment.  EPA's approach to determining protectiveness
involves risk assessment, considering both ARARs and to-be-considered materials
(TBCs). The risk assessment includes consideration of site-specific factors such as
types of hazardous substances present, potential for exposure, and presence of
sensitive populations. Acceptable exposure levels are generally determined by
applicable or relevant and appropriate
                                AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         XV

Federal and State environmental requirements, if available, and the following
factors:  (1) for systemic toxicants, concentration levels to which the human
population  (including sensitive subgroups) could be exposed on a daily basis without
appreciable risk of significant adverse effects during a lifetime;  (2) for known or
suspected carcinogens, concentration levels that represent an excess upperbound
lifetime cancer risk to an individual of between ICr4  and ICr7;  (3)  other  factors
related to exposure (such as multiple contaminants at a site or multiple exposure
pathways)  or to technical limitations (such as detection/quantification limits  for
contaminants). The Superfund Public Health Evaluation Manual provides guidance  on
determining acceptable levels.3

      ARARs will define the cleanup goals when they set an acceptable level with
respect to site-specific factors. For example, MCLs under the Safe Drinking Water
Act are normally acceptable levels for specific contaminants. However, cleanup  goals
for some substances may have to be based on non promulgated criteria and advisories
(for example, health advisories such as reference doses (RfD))  rather than on ARARs
because ARARs do not exist for those substances or because an ARAR alone would  not
be sufficiently protective in the given circumstances, e.g., where additive effects
from several chemicals are involved. In these situations,  the cleanup requirements,
in order to meet the cleanup goals, will not be based on ARARs alone but also on
TBCs.  Similarly, State criteria, advisories, and guidance should also be considered
for the State in which a site is located.

Using ARARs

      Different ARARs that may apply to a site and its remedial action should be
identified at multiple points in the remedy selection process.  During the scoping of
the RI/FS and the site characterization phase, the lists of potential ARARs in
Exhibits 1-1, 1-2, and 1-9 and the appropriate Regional or State program office
should be consulted to determine what ARARs may apply to the site. At this stage
potential chemical- and location-specific ARARs should be identified. Exhibits  1-3
and 1-9 and the appropriate Regional or State program office should be consulted in
identifying action-specific ARARs for each proposed alternative during the
development of remedial alternatives in the Feasibility Study.  During the detailed
design the technical specifications must ensure attainment of ARARs.

When and Where Protectiveness Must Be Attained

      ARARs  (and TBCs necessary for protection) must be attained for hazardous
substances, pollutants, or contaminants remaining on-site at the completion of  the
remedial action, unless waiver of an ARAR is justified. In addition, EPA intends
that the implementation of remedial actions should also comply with ARARs  (and  TBCs
as appropriate)  to protect public health and the environment.
        Superfund Public Health Evaluation Manual,  OSWER Directive 9285.4-1,October,
1986.

                          * * * AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT * * *
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        XVI
      ARARs  (and TBCs necessary for protection),  pertaining both to contaminant
levels and to performance or design standards, should generally be attained at all
points of potential exposure, or at the point specified by the ARAR itself. CERCLA
requires, to the maximum extent practicable, the use of permanent solutions and
alternative treatment technologies. Any waste left in place should either be brought
to health-based levels or managed according to performance or design specifications.
At sites where a TBC value is used to set a protective level of cleanup or where the
ARAR does not specify the point of compliance, there is discretion to determine
where the requirement shall be attained to ensure protectiveness.  At each potential
point of exposure, a reasonable maximum exposure scenario should be assumed, and
cleanup goals set accordingly to ensure protectiveness, using best professional
judgment. Restrictions on use or access should not be a substitute for remediation
to appropriate protective health-based or design levels. If active measures are not
practicable  (or cost-effective), exposure to the waste must be controlled through
legally enforceable institutional means. "Non-engineered" or "exposure" controls may
be used in certain circumstances in combination with "engineered" controls and/or
treatment in the management and cleanup of the site where it is determined that such
controls are necessary to be protective. In such circumstances, where exposure
controls are used, restrictions should be employed to ensure that the controls
remain in place, that they remain protective, and that they are effective in
preventing exposure to hazardous substances for as long as the substances at the
site remain hazardous.

      In ground water, cleanup goals should generally be attained throughout the
contaminated plume, or at the edge of the waste management area when waste is left
in place. However, if the waste is left on-site under a hybrid-type closure scenario
(see p. 2-20 for discussion of hybrid closure), where the waste does not threaten
ground water, the goal should be to reach health-based levels underneath the waste
as well.

      In surface water, cleanup goals should generally be attained at the point or
points where the release enters the surface water. In air, cleanup goals should
generally be achieved at the maximum exposed individual, considering the reasonably
expected uses of the site and surrounding area. For soils, cleanup goals should
generally be attained wherever direct contact might reasonably occur.

Compliance with Substantive and Administrative Requirements

      CERCLA §121(e)  exempts any response action conducted entirely on-site from
having to obtain a Federal, State, or local permit, where the action is carried out
in compliance with §121.

      In general, on-site actions need comply only with the substantive aspects of
ARARs,  not with the corresponding administrative requirements. That is, permit
applications and other administrative procedures, such as administrative reviews and
reporting and recordkeeping requirements, are not considered ARARs for actions
conducted entirely on-site. However, the

                          * * * AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT * * *
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        XV11

Feasibility Study, the Proposed Plan, the Record of Decision, the Community
Relations Plan, and the Administrative Record should demonstrate full compliance
with all substantive requirements that are ARARs, unless a waiver is used.

      Off-site actions must comply with all legally applicable requirements, both
substantive and administrative. The concept of "relevant and appropriate" is not
available for off-site actions.

Coordination/Consultation With Other Federal and State Programs

      Sources of potential ARARs include other Federal environmental laws
administered by EPA and authorized States and by other Federal agencies, and more
stringent State environmental or facility siting laws. Therefore, to ensure that
remedies comply with substantive aspects of identified ARARs, other Federal and
State program offices should be consulted as appropriate, particularly for on-site
actions where no permit will be obtained.

RCRA Requirements

      Prerequisites for Applicability of RCRA Hazardous Waste Management Regulations

      RCRA requirements for treatment, storage,  or disposal of hazardous wastes
apply to a Superfund site if the site contains RCRA listed or characteristic
hazardous waste that was treated or disposed of after the effective date of the RCRA
regulations that are under consideration as potential ARARs for the site, or if the
CERCLA activity at the site constitutes current treatment, storage, or disposal of
RCRA hazardous waste. In some cases, it may not be possible to determine whether a
CERCLA hazardous substance at a site is a hazardous waste under RCRA, or whether it
was disposed at the site after the effective date; these prerequisites should not be
assumed. In such cases, RCRA requirements will not be applicable, but may
nevertheless be relevant and appropriate, if the CERCLA action involves treatment,
storage, or disposal and if the wastes are similar or identical to RCRA hazardous
waste.

      Definition of Disposal

      EPA has concluded that moving RCRA hazardous waste  (including hazardous
waste that was originally disposed before the requirements' effective date)
constitutes land disposal when that waste is placed into a land disposal unit. At
CERCLA sites, there are areas of contamination with differing levels of
concentration of hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants. In such cases,
when RCRA hazardous waste is moved into an area of contamination, RCRA disposal
requirements (such as for closure)  are applicable to the area where the waste is
received. In addition, EPA has determined that disposal and placement are synonymous
for purposes of determining the applicability of the land disposal restrictions
under RCRA.
                                AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                       XV111

      Corrective Action

      RCRA contains several authorities under which corrective action requirements
will be promulgated.4  Because of the similarity of corrective action under RCRA to
CERCLA cleanup, these requirements are likely to be applicable or relevant and
appropriate in many remedial action situations. This manual will be updated to
include RCRA corrective action requirements and their bearing on CERCLA remedial
activities.

      Ground-water Protection

      RCRA currently contains ground-water monitoring and protection standards. In
general, EPA will use MCLs as protection levels for ground water that is currently
or potentially used for drinking. The Agency may establish site-specific
exposure-based ACLs at particular sites where the ground water cannot be used for
drinking because of high salinity or naturally occurring widespread contamination,
or where cleanup is not practicable or cost-effective and where the circumstances
fulfill the conditions of CERCLA §121(d)(B)(ii).

      The Superfund Program's goal is to restore ground water to its beneficial uses
based in large part on their vulnerability, use, and value. The Ground-Water
Protection Strategy and draft Office of Ground-Water Protection Classification
Guidelines serve as useful guidance. The program uses the classification scheme on a
site-specific basis to assist in the characterization of a ground water's
vulnerability, use, and value. Ground-water classifications performed at Superfund
sites are limited in scope to the Superfund action that will be taken and do not
apply to the geographical area in general.  More stringent promulgated State
requirements will be used as standards when they exist. Additional guidance on Clean
Water Act, Safe Drinking Water Act, and other water-related requirements is
presented in Chapters 3,  4, and 5 of this manual.

Clean Water Act Requirements

      Direct Discharge to Surface Waters

      Both on-site and off-site direct discharges from CERCLA sites to surface
waters are required to meet the substantive requirements of the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System  (NPDES) program. These substantive requirements include
discharge limitations (both technology and water quality based), certain monitoring
requirements, and best management practices. These requirements will be contained in
an NPDES permit for off-site CERCLA
    4
      Corrective action requirements for regulated units have been
 promulgated in 40 CFR Part 264,  Subpart F.  Additional requirements for
 corrective action for solid waste management units  (SWMUs)  at RCRA facilities
 seeking permits  are  currently being  developed  for promulgation  in 40  CFR  Part
 264  Subpart  S.

                           * * * AUGUST  8, 1988  DRAFT  *  *  *
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        XIX

discharges. For on-site direct discharges from a CERCLA site, these substantive
requirements must be identified and complied with even though on-site discharges are
not required to have an NPDES permit. For purposes of this guidance, a direct
discharge of CERCLA wastewaters would be "on-site" if the receiving water body is in
the area of contamination or is in very close proximity to the site and necessary
for implementation of the response action (even if the water body flows off-site).

      Indirect Discharge to POTWs

      In general, the discharge of CERCLA wastewaters to publicly owned treatment
works (POTWs)  is considered an off-site activity. Therefore, CERCLA responses
required to comply with all applicable  (both substantive and administrative)
requirements of the national pretreatment program including the general and specific
discharge prohibitions. Further, all local pretreatment regulations must be complied
with before discharging wastewater to a POTW. These local pretreatment regulations
include local discharge limitations and prohibitions. When considering discharge of
CERCLA wastewater to a POTW, the POTW's record of compliance with the NPDES permit
and pretreatment program requirements should be assessed.

      Discharge of Dredged or Fill Material

      Under CERCLA §121(e), no Federal, State, or local permit is required for
response actions conducted entirely on-site; however, consultation with the Corps
remains important in developing the CERCLA response. Under the CWA §404 guidelines,
no discharge of dredged or fill material will be allowed unless appropriate and
practicable steps are taken that minimize potential adverse impacts of the discharge
on the aquatic ecosystem.

Safe Drinking Water Act Requirements

      Use of MCLs

      For cleaning up ground water or surface water that is or may be used for
drinking, the Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) set under the Safe Drinking Water
Act are generally the applicable or relevant and appropriate standard. MCLs are
applicable where the water will be provided directly to 25 or more people or will be
supplied to 15 or more service connections.  When MCLs are applicable they should at
least be met at the tap.  MCLs are relevant and appropriate in other cases where
surface water or ground water is or may be directly used for drinking water, and in
such cases, the MCLs should be met in the surface water or groundwater itself.

      Use of MCLGs

      A standard for drinking water more stringent than an MCL may be needed in
special circumstances, such as where multiple contaminants in groundwater or
multiple pathways of exposure present extraordinary risks (i.e., individual lifetime
cancer risk above 10~4) .  In  setting a  level more  stringent than the
                                AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         XX

MCL in such cases, a site-specific determination should be made by considering
Maximum Contaminant Level Goals  (MCLGs), the Agency's policy on the use of
appropriate risk ranges for carcinogens, levels of quantification, and other
pertinent guidelines. Prior consultation with Headquarters contacts in the Office of
Emergency and Remedial Response or the Office of Waste Programs Enforcement, as
appropriate, is encouraged in such cases.

      Underground Injection Control Program

      CERCLA sites where underground injection wells are constructed on-site are not
required to comply with the administrative requirements of the UIC program. However,
they must meet the substantive requirements that are determined to be applicable or
relevant and appropriate to the CERCLA remedial action. Examples of substantive UIC
program requirements include RCRA manifest and corrective action requirements for
the underground injection of hazardous wastes, well construction requirements, well
operating requirements, and well closure requirements. Other information should also
be reported to the Region UIC program regarding the operation of an injection well.
(This information in described in Chapter 4).
                                AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                      CHAPTER 1

            GENERAL PROCEDURES FOR CERCLA COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER STATUTES

1.0   INTRODUCTION

      This chapter describes general procedures for Superfund compliance with
applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements (ARARs) of other environmental
and public health statutes when conducting remedial actions. Currently, the most
important requirements for compliance are set by the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980  (CERCLA) itself, as amended by the
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA), particularly §121. The
current National Contingency Plan (NCP)l  and the "Memorandum on CERCLA Compliance
with Other Environmental Laws" (the Compliance Policy) , which was published as an
appendix to the November 1985 NCP Preamble, remain in effect regarding cleanup
standards except when superceded by the new CERCLA requirements. However, because
the NCP is being revised, it is generally not described in this chapter, which is
organized as follows:

      Section 1.1 provides an overview of the statutory requirements concerning
      CERCLA compliance with other laws.

      Section 1.2 describes general procedures for identifying particular
      requirements in other laws that may be applicable or relevant and appropriate
      requirements (ARARs)  for a CERCLA remedial action. In order to facilitate
      identification of ARARs, Section 1.2 provides matrices of chemical-specific,
      location-specific, and action-specific potential ARARs from several different
      laws.  Finally,  Section 1.2 provides a procedure for analyzing the probable
      ARARs to determine whether they are, in fact, applicable or relevant and
      appropriate requirements for the particular site in question.

      Section 1.3 provides a short description of the situations listed in CERCLA
      that may justify waiving particular requirements that have been determined to
      be ARARs. More detailed guidance on waivers will be provided at a later date.

      Section 1.4 describes how materials that are not potential ARARs, but which do
      provide useful guidance or information, should be considered, analyzed, and
      used.

      Section 1.5 provides guidance on documenting the consideration of ARARs in
      developing remedial actions.
         1  See 40 CFR Part 300.
                          * * * AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT * * *
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         1-2

1.1   OVERVIEW OF REQUIREMENTS CONCERNING CERCLA COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER LAWS

      CERCLA, as it was passed in 1980, did not contain a specific requirement
pertaining to the compliance of on-site CERCLA actions with other laws. CERCLA §105,
which authorizes EPA to prepare the National Contingency Plan  (NCP) for Hazardous
substance response, says only that the NCP shall include "methods and criteria for
determining the appropriate extent of removal, remedy, and other measures." EPA,
however, stated in the NCP  (as revised in 1985)2  and in its policy memorandum on
CERCLA compliance with other environmental statutes, which was attached to the
preamble to the 1985 NCP, that it would attain or exceed applicable or relevant and
appropriate Federal environmental and public health standards in CERCLA response
actions unless one of five specifically enumerated situations was present.

      CERCLA §121, added by Congress in SARA in 1986, in effect codifies EPA's
existing approach to compliance with other laws.  Section 121 establishes cleanup
standards for remedial actions under §§104 and 106 of CERCLA. Remedial actions must
attain a general standard of cleanup that assures protection of human health and the
environment, must be cost effective, and must use permanent solutions and
alternative treatment technologies or resource recovery technologies to the maximum
extent practicable. In addition, for any material remaining on-site,3 the level or
standard of control that must be met for the hazardous substance, pollutant, or
contaminant is at least that of any applicable or relevant and appropriate standard,
requirement, criteria, or limitation under any Federal environmental law, or any
more stringent standard, requirement, criteria, or limitation promulgated pursuant
to a State environmental statute.4
           40 CFR §300.68 (50 FR 47969, November 20, 1985).

         3 CERCLA §121(c)(3)(B) requires off-site storage, destruction,
treatment, or secure disposition of hazardous substances  from  Superfund  sites
to be carried out only at hazardous waste disposal  facilities  that are in
compliance with Subtitle  C  of RCRA. CERCLA §121(d)(3)  requires that  transfer
of hazardous substances be made only to facilities  that are operating in
compliance with §§3004 and  3005 of the Solid Waste  Disposal Act  (or, where
applicable, in compliance with the Toxic Substances Control Act  or other
applicable Federal  law)  and all applicable State  requirements. Requirements
for off-site actions are  discussed to  some extent in this  manual. For more
detailed discussion of off-site requirements, the reader  should  consult
"Revised Procedures for  Planning and Implementing Off-site Response  Actions
(issued November 13, 1987,  EPA Directive 9834.11).

         4 Applicable  or  relevant  and appropriate requirements  include more
 stringent currently promulgated State requirements  (See CERCLA  §121
 (d) (2) (A) (ii)) .  The proposed NCP  will  define "promulgated" State requirements
 as those laws or regulations that are of general applicability  and  are  legally
 enforceable. Coordination  with State  governments to identify  State  ARARs  will
 be  addressed at a  later date.
                          * * * AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT * * *
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         1-3

      Congress added several new categories of potential ARARs, particularly State
standards, which the NCP had previously included in the category of requirements to
be considered, but not necessarily attained.  In addition, remedial actions are now
required by §121 to at least attain levels or standards of control established by
Maximum Contaminant Level Goals under the Safe Drinking Water Act and Federal Water
Quality Criteria under the Clean Water Act, when those standards or goals are
relevant and appropriate under the circumstances of the release.5 Section 121 also
establishes special requirements for the use of alternate concentration limits.

      CERCLA §121(e) provides that no Federal, State, or local permit shall be
required "for the portion of any removal or remedial action conducted entirely on
site," when the action is selected and carried out in compliance with the cleanup
standards requirements in §121. EPA interprets "on-site" to include the "areal
extent of contamination and all suitable areas in very close proximity to the
contamination necessary for implementation of the response action." As a matter of
policy, this definition would be implemented with certain limitations. Generally,
best professional judgment should be used to determine that the area is within "very
close proximity" to the contamination and is necessary for implementation of the
portion of the response action addressing the nearby contamination.6

      Finally, §121(d)(4)  provides that under six specific circumstances, described
below, legally applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements can be waived.
However, the requirement that the remedy be protective of human health and the
environment cannot be waived.

      ARARs and Removal Actions

      The requirements of CERCLA §121 generally apply as a matter of law only to
remedial actions. EPA's policy for removal actions, however, is that ARARs will be
identified and attained to the extent practicable. This manual may be used as a
reference by On-Scene Coordinators (OSCs) to assist in identifying potential ARARs
for removal sites.  Three factors will be applied to determine whether the
identification and attainment of ARARs is practicable in a particular removal
situation: (1) the exigencies of the situation; (2) the scope of the removal action
to be taken;  and (3) the effect of ARAR attainment on the statutory limits for
removal action duration and cost. These factors are outlined below.
        Details concerning these categories of standards are provided in section
1.2.3.1 below. CERCLA §121(d)(2)(B)(i) lists four factors that must be considered
in determining whether or not any water quality criteria under the Clean Water
Act are relevant and appropriate.

        Federal,  State,  or potentially responsible parties undertaking removal or
remedial actions under CERCLA §§104, 106, or 122 are covered by the §121(e)
permit exemption.
                          * * * AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT * * *
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         1-4

      Exigencies of the situation. OSCs must often act quickly to provide protection
of public health and the environment and any delay would compromise this objective
of the removal action. Where urgent conditions constrain or preclude efforts to
identify and attain ARARs, the OSC's documentation of these conditions will be
considered sufficient as justification for not attaining all ARARs. To illustrate, a
site may contain leaking drums that pose a danger of fire or explosion in a
residential area. The drums should be removed or stabilized imediately, without
attempting to identify and comply with all potential ARARs. The OSC's documentation
should describe the time critical nature of the situation and the remedial action
taken.

      Scope of the removal action. Removal actions generally focus on the
stabilization of a release or threat of release and mitigation of near-term threats.
ARARs that are within the scope of such removal actions, therefore, are only those
ARARs that must be attained in order to eliminate the near-term threats. For
example,  a removal action may be conducted to remove large numbers of leaking drums
and associated contaminated soil. In this situation, because the removal focuses
only on partial control, chemical-specific ARARS for groundwater restoration would
not be considered.

      Statutory limits. CERCLA sets time and money limitations on a removal action.
Attainment of all ARARs for a removal response may not be possible within the 12
months or $2 million limits set in the statute. For instance, a removal action may
be undertaken at a site where there is widespread soil and ground water
contamination. This response might involve removal of surface debris and excavation
of highly-contaminated soil necessary to reduce the direct contact threat and
further deterioration of the ground water. If the statutory limits were reached or
approached as a result of the debris removal and limited excavation, more extensive
excavation of low-level soil contamination as part of the removal action may not be
warranted. Although the statutory limits may preclude removals from attaining all
identified ARARs, OSCs will give greater emphasis to those ARARs that are most
crucial to the proper stabilization of the site and protection of public health and
the environment.  (Exemptions to the $2 million/12 month statutory limits may be
granted where sites meet the criteria for approving the "emergency" or "consistency"
exemptions.)

      In addition to the three factors for determining whether it is practicable to
identify and attain ARARs for removal actions, the statutory waivers in CERCLA
§121(d)(4) would apply to removal as well as to remedial actions. For example, State
ARARs do not have to be attained where the State standard, requirement, criterion,
or limitation has not been consistently applied in circumstances similar to the
response in question. If a State standard is identified as an ARAR for a removal
action, attainment of that ARAR may be waived if the State has inconsistently
applied it in similar circumstances. The ARARs waivers generally may be used as they
are used for remedial activities.
                          * * * AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT * * *
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         1-5

Developing Protective Remedies Using Risk Assessment, ARARs, and TBCs

      CERCLA §121 requires selection of a remedial action that is protective of
human health and the environment. EPA's approach to determining protectiveness
involves assessment, considering both ARARs and to-be-considered materials  (TBCs).
The risk assessment includes consideration  of site-specific factors such as types of
hazardous substances present, potential for exposure, and presence of sensitive
populations. Acceptable exposure levels are generally determined by applicable or
relevant and appropriate Federal and State  environmental requirements, if available,
and the following factors: (1) for systemic toxicants, concentration levels to which
the human population (including sensitive subgroups) could be exposed on a daily
basis without appreciable risk of significant adverse effects during a lifetime;  (2)
for known or suspected carcinogens, concentration levels that represent an excess
upperbound lifetime cancer risk to an individual of between ICr4 and  ICr7;  (3)  other
factors related to exposure  (such as multiple contaminants at a site or multiple
exposure pathways) or to technical limitations  (such as detection/quantiiication
limits for contaminants).  The Superfund Public Health Evaluation Manual provides
guidance on determining acceptable levels.7

1.2   GENERAL PROCEDURES FOR DETERMINING IF REQUIREMENT IS APPLICABLE OR RELEVANT
      AND APPROPRIATE

      CERCLA §121 requires, for hazardous substances left on-site at the conclusion
of remedial actions, that the action require a level or standard of control which at
least attains applicable or relevant and appropriate Federal or State environmental
or public health requirements, except in certain limited circumstances. A
requirement in applicable if the specific terms  (or "jurisdictional prerequisites")
of the law or regulation directly address the circumstances at a site. If not
applicable, a requirement may nevertheless be relevant and appropriate if
circumstances at the site are, based on best professional judgment  (BPJ) ,
sufficiently similar to the problems or situations regulated by the requirement.

      Exhibit 1-9 to this chapter lists the universe of ARARs,8 without reference to
particular situations where they may apply.  Exhibits 1-1, 1-2, and 1-3 of this
chapter list potential chemical-specific, location-specific, and action-specific
ARARs, respectively; these potential ARARs  should be analyzed to determine ARARs  for
a specific CERCLA site.
      7 Superfund Public Health Evaluation Manual, OSWER Directive  9285.4-1,
October, 1986.
        EPA has identified a comprehensive list of statutory and regulatory
requirements from which potential ARARs for a particular CERCLA site may be
drawn. While every effort has been made to develop a complete list, some
requirements, such as those recently promulgated, may not be included.
                          * * * AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT * * *
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         1-6

      Because of the varied and unpredictable situations at CERCLA sites, EPA cannot
specify in advance which requirements will be ARAR for each site. Applicable or
relevant and appropriate requirements must be identified in connection with the
characteristics of the particular site, the substances at the site, and the remedial
action alternatives that are suggested by the circumstances of the site. In order to
identify ARARs correctly and in a timely manner for on-site actions where permits
are not required,  each EPA Region should establish procedures, protocols, or
memoranda of understanding to ensure early and continuous cooperation and
coordination with Regional Superfund staff, appropriate Regional and State offices
and other Federal arencies. These procedures should not recreate the administrative
and procedural aspects of the permit process, but should ensure that all substantive
requirements are attained. Section 3.2.4 of this Compliance Manual addresses key
areas for recommended coordination between Superfund and Water Offices, and includes
a detailed discussion that may be adopted as needed for other environmental laws.

      The diagram on p. 1-7 provides an overview of critical points for
identification of ARARs and for communication/coordination with other EPA offices,
States, and other Federal agencies as appropriate to identify and ensure compliance
with ARARs. Superfund staff should also consider Federal and State environmental and
public health criteria, advisories,  guidance, and proposed standards
("to-be-considered" materials,  or TBCs).  TBCs will be evaluated along with ARARs as
part of the risk assessment conducted for each CERCLA site, and may be used to set
protective cleanup level targets.

Coordination between CERCLA (Superfund) and other Program Offices

      In order to identify ARARs correctly and in a timely manner, each EPA Region
should establish procedures, protocols or memoranda of understanding that, while not
recreating the administrative aspects of a permit, ensure early and continuous
cooperation and coordination between the Regional Superfund and other program
offices. In addition, State Superfund and other program offices may be involved
where there is a State-lead action or where the State has been delegated authority
under the Clean Water Act or under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. Other
Federal agencies may assist in ARARs determination for laws which they administer,
e.g., the Endangered Species Act.  Coordination among all appropriate offices should
be established. Such coordination will be particularly important for on-site actions
where no Federal,  State, or local permit is required.

      The process of identifying ARARs for remedial actions essentially begins after
the site characterization  (during the remedial investigation)  and may continue
through the remedial design phase. ARARs are identified in increments of increasing
certainty as more information regarding the site is developed. The appropriate scope
and extent of each Region's coordination procedures for identifying ARARs should be
determined by the Region. It is recommended that the description of roles and
responsibilities should identify those steps in the Superfund remedy selection
process where coordination will occur and the level of involvement anticipated for
each of these stops  (e.g., written comments at certain stages, routing procedures,
and agreement as
                          * * * AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT * * *
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                    1-7
                                Points Where  ARARs are Identified and Communicated
   Remedial Investigation:
 *
 *
n
-J
o
*
*
*

Scoping of
the RI/FS
• Initiate
preliminary
discussion
of probable
ARARs by
lead and
support
agencies2



Site
Characterisation
When data complete:
• Identify location-,
and chemical- '
specific ARARs
• Coordination:
-between lead and
support attack*
-between lead/
support agencies
and other
program offices or
other Federal/
State agencies

Development
of Alternatives
• Preliminary
consideration
of action-
specific
ARARs




Post-Screening
Investigation

i



Screening of
Alternatives
• Notify support
agencies, other
program offices
and other Federal/
Slate agencies of the
alternatives passing
initial screening
• Begin identification
of action-specific
ARARs





Detailed Analysis
of Alternatives
• Complete
cation of i
specific A
before con
analysis b<
• For each a
discuss rat
aNARARi
detenninal
(including
RI/FS Rep
(see RI/FS

identifi-
iclion-
RARs
iparative
egins
Itemative,
onale for
ions
waivers) in
orl
Guidance)




Selection of
Preferred
Alternative
• State in Proposed Plan
whether each alternative
will comply with all
Identified ARARs and/or
provide grounds for
invoking waivers
• Provide Proposed
Plan and RI/FS report to
support agency for review
• And for Enforcement -
Lead Sites:
- 30 day notice to
State required if
remedy not to attain
ARAR (use of waiver)
- If Stale does not concur
it may intervene under
$106 to "seek to" have the
remedial action conform
to ARAR

-•



Record of Decision
(ROD)
• Summarize ARAR
compliance in ROD
• Provide ROD to
support agencies
for review
*
Remedial Design/
Action
• If appropriate, identify
additional ARARs
based upon design
specifications/changes
• Verify protect! veness
of remedy if signifi-
cant new ARARs are
promulgated
• Review ARARs if re-
medial action is sig-
nificantly different
than ROD

   Feasibility Study:


         ' This chart highlights critical points for communication between lead and support agencies in identifying ARARs and TBCs.  As noted, EPA and the State should provide
           opportunities for consultation with other FtderallStalt program offices, and with other Federal/State agencies as appropriate to assist in identification of ARARs:
           The Region or State may determine that the RI/FS report. Proposed Plan, or ROD should be shared with other EPA/State program offices or other Federal agencies.
           In general. Federal and Stale agencies should assume responsibility for coordinating tht involvement of their respective program offices and other agencies in developing
           information on ARARs.  The appropriate proctdurts for such consultation should bt developed by EPA Regional offices and by tht Federal and Slate programs/agencies
           respectively.

           Copies of draft and final RI/FS workplan sent to other EPA/State offices as appropriate.
    Word-searchable version — Not a true copy

-------
                                         1-8

to what constitutes timely notification and timely response between Superfund and
other Regional and State program offices, and other Federal agencies).

      1.2.1    WHERE AND WHEN ARARs SHOULD BE ATTAINED

      ARARs (and materials "to be considered" for protectiveness — TBCs) must be
attained for hazardous substances remaining on-site at the completion of the
remedial action. In addition, EPA intends that the implementation of remedial
actions should also comply with ARARs  (and TBCs as appropriate) to protect public
health and the environment. All remedial actions should attain action-specific
requirements that have been identified as ARAR while the remedial action is being
conducted,  unless a waiver is justified. However, if ARARs are not being met before
the commencement of a remedial action, it is not necessary to invoke a waiver to
justify their non-attainment during the action.

      Generally, EPA's policy is to attain ARARs (and TBCs necessary for protection)
pertaining either to contaminant levels or to performance or design standards to
ensure protection at all points of potential exposure. At sites where a TBC value is
used to set a protective level of cleanup or where the ARAR does not specify the
point of compliance, there is discretion to determine where the requirement shall be
attained to ensure protectiveness. At each potential point of exposure, a reasonable
maximum exposure scenario should be assumed,  and cleanup goals set accordingly to
ensure protectiveness, using best professional judgment. Restrictions on use or
access should not be a substitute for remediation to appropriate protective
health-based or design levels. If active measures are not practicable  (or
cost-effective), exposure to the waste must be controlled through legally
enforceable institutional means. "Non-engineered" or "exposure" controls may be used
in certain circumstances in combination with "engineered" controls and/or treatment
in the management and cleanup of the site where it is determined that such controls
are necessary to be protective. In such circumstances, where exposure controls are
used, restrictions should be employed to ensure that the controls remain in place,
that they remain protective, and that they are effective in preventing exposure to
hazardous substances for as long as the substances at the site remain hazardous. Any
waste left in place should either be brought to health-based levels or managed
according to performance or design specifications.

      For ground water,  remediation levels should generally be attained throughout
the contaminated plume,  or at and beyond the edge of the waste management area when
waste is left in place.  For air, the selected level(s) should be established for the
maximum exposed individual, considering reasonably expected use of the site and
surrounding area. For surface waters, the selected level(s) should be attained at
the point or points where the release enters the surface waters.
                          * * * AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT * * *
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         1-9

      1.2.1.1  Requirements for Handling of Investigation-Derived or Laboratory
               Wastes

      The handling, treatment, or disposal of investigation-derived wastes produced
during remedial activities such as the Site Investigation  (SI) or Remedial
Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) must be carried out in compliance with
Federal and State ARARs.  Field investigation teams should use best professional
judgment in determining when investigation-derived wastes may contain hazardous
wastes in hazardous amounts, and should handle such wastes in accordance with all
Federal and State ARARs.9  Similarly,  if the hazards of investigation-derived wastes
are not known, EPA expects that field investigation teams will make a reasonable
effort to comply with all requirements that may be relevant and appropriate, as
necessary to protect public health and the environment.10
        Specifically, there are several ways that investigation-derived wastes
may result from such remedial activities:  (1) ground water or surface water
samples that must be disposed of after analysis;  (2) drill cuttings or core
samples from soil boring or monitoring well installations; (3) purge water
removed from sampling wells before ground water samples are collected; move  (4)
water, solvents, or other fluids used to decontaminate field equipment such as
backhoes,  drilling rigs, and pipes;  (5)  condensation from pipes used for gas
sampling in landfills; and  (6) waste produced by on-site pilot-scale facilities
constructed to test technologies best suited for remediation of the site. Note
that the activities conducted as part of the Superfund Innovative Technologies
Evaluation (SITE) program under CERCLA §311(b)  are not response actions and
therefore are not required to comply with ARARs. Nonetheless, in order to ensure
protection of human health and the environment, SITE demonstration projects
taking place at Superfund sites should comply with the substantive requirements
of all applicable or relevant and appropriate Federal and State environmental
laws unless a waiver is justified.

      10  The  handling,  treatment,  or disposal of any such investigation-derived
wastes must satisfy Federal and State requirements that are applicable or
relevant and appropriate to the site location and the amount and concentration of
the hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants involved. For example, if
ground water samples containing hazardous substances are to be disposed of by
discharge into surface water, they may require treatment before disposal so that
water quality standards are not violated. Also, if it is known or suspected that
purge waters are drawn from an area with significant dioxin contamination, such
investigation-derived wastes should be containerized, tested, and disposed of in
accordance with all ARARs.  (Consistent with established practice,
investigation-derived materials may remain on-site until the remedial action
commences.) In contrast, the routine placement in containers of large volumes of
drilling muds and purge waters which are not suspected to contain hazardous
substances may be unnecessary because they result only in delays to investigation
with no attendant public health or environmental benefit.
                          * * * AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT * * *
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        1-10

      1.2.2    DEFINITIONS OF APPLICABLE AND RELEVANT AND APPROPRIATE

      The following definitions of "applicable" and "relevant and appropriate" will
be proposed in the new NCP and retain the essential features of definitions in the
current NCP:

          Applicable  requirements  means those  cleanup standards,  standards of
          control,  and other substantive  environmental protection requirements,
          criteria, or limitations promulgated under  Federal or State law that
          specifically address  a hazardous  substance,  pollutant,  contaminant,
          remedial  action,  location,  or other  circumstance at a CERCLA site.

"Applicability" implies that the remedial action or the circumstances at the  site
satisfy all of the jurisdictional prerequisites of a requirement. For example, the
minimum technology requirement for landfills under RCRA would apply if a new
hazardous waste landfill unit or a lateral expansion of an existing unit as
defined11 were to be built on a CERCLA site.

      If a requirement is not applicable, one must consider whether it is  both
relevant and appropriate.

          Relevant  and appropriate requirements means those cleanup standards,
          standards of control,  and other substantive environmental protection
          requirements,  criteria,  or limitations promulgated under Federal or State
          law  that, while not  "applicable"  to  a hazardous substance,  pollutant,
          contaminant,  remedial  action,  location,  or  other circumstance  at a  CERCLA
          site,  address  problems or situations sufficiently similar to those
          encountered at the CERCLA site  that  their use is well suited to the
          particular  site.  However,  in  some circumstances,  a requirement may  be
          relevant  but not  appropriate  for  the site-specific situation.

      The determination that a requirement is relevant and appropriate is  a two-step
process: (1) determination if a requirement is  relevant and  (2) determination if a
requirement is appropriate.  In general,  this involves a comparison of a number of
site-specific factors, including the characteristics of the remedial action,  the
hazardous substances present at the site, or the physical circumstances of the site,
with those addressed in the statutory or regulatory requirement. In some cases, a
requirement may be relevant, but not appropriate, given site-specific circumstances;
such a requirement would not be ARAR for the site. In addition, there is more
discretion in the determination of relevant and appropriate; it is possible for only
part of a requirement to be considered relevant and appropriate in a given case.
      11 Defined in RCRA §3015 (b) and  40  CFR  264.301(c)  and  265.301(a)
                          * * * AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT * * *
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        1-11

      The first step of this determination is a screen of the requirements based on
the factors listed in Exhibit 1-7 to determine if the requirement is potentially
relevant at the site. If the requirement is relevant, then the comparison should be
further refined to determine if the requirement is appropriate, focusing on the
characteristics of the site and the proposed remedial action. The determination that
a requirement is relevant and appropriate is site-specific and must rely on best
professional judgment.

      When the analysis results in a determination that a requirement is both
relevant and appropriate, such a requirement must be complied with to the same
degree as if it were applicable.

      More detailed discussion of the determination of relevance and appropriateness
is provided in section 1.2.4.3 following.

      1.2.2.1  Definitions of Substantive and Administrative Requirements

      Section 121(e) of CERCLA codifies EPA's earlier policy that on-site response
actions may proceed without obtaining permits. This permit exemption allows the
response action to proceed in an expeditious manner, free from potential lengthy
delays of approval by administrative bodies. This permit exemption applies to all
administrative requirements, whether or not they are actually styled as "permits."
Thus,  in determining the extent to which on-site CERCLA response actions must comply
with other environmental and public health laws, one should distinguish between
substantive requirements, which may be applicable or relevant and appropriate and
administrative requirements, which are not. The determination of whether a
requirement is substantive need not be documented.

      Substantive requirements are those requirements that pertain directly to
actions or conditions in the environment. Examples of substantive requirements
include quantitative health- or risk-based restrictions upon exposure to types of
hazardous substances  (e.g. MCLs establishing drinking water standards for particular
contaminants), technology-based requirements for actions taken upon hazardous
substances (e.g. incinerator standards requiring particular destruction and removal
efficiency),  and restrictions upon activities in certain special locations  (e.g.
standards prohibiting certain types of facilities in floodplains).

      Administrative requirements are those mechanisms that facilitate the
implementation of the substantive requirements of a statute or regulation.
Administrative requirements include the approval of, or consultation with
administrative bodies, consultation, issuance of permits, documentation,
reporting,12 recordkeeping,  and enforcement. In  general, administrative  requirements
prescribe methods and procedures by which substantive requirements are made
effective for purposes of a particular environmental or
         12  Note that some requirements may be written to contain substantive
   requirements in sections which primarily address administrative requirements
   such as reporting.

                           * *  * AUGUST  8,  1988 DRAFT  *  *  *
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        1-12
public health program. For example, the requirement of the Fish and Wildlife
Coordination Act to consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife service, Department of
the Interior, and appropriate State agency before controlling or modifying any
stream or other water body is administrative.

      This distinction is important because while off-site remedies must obtain all
necessary permits and fulfill all administrative procedures, cleanup activities that
remain on-site are statutorily exempted by CERCLA §121(e) from obtaining permits.
While Superfund cleanups will comply with all the substantive requirements that
permits enforce, on-site CERCLA cleanups are not required to obtain the actual
permit papers, or to obtain the approval of State or local administrative boards.
Instead, the Feasibility Study, the Proposed Plan, the ROD, the Community Relations
Plan, and the Administrative Record will document that the substantive requirements
of other Federal and State laws have been identified and will be complied with.

      The CERCLA program has its own set of administrative procedures which assure
proper implementation of CERCLA. The application of additional or conflicting
administrative requirements could result in delay or confusion.

      In most cases, the classification of a particular requirement as substantive
or administrative will be clear, but some requirements may fall in the area between
provisions related primarily to program administration and those concerned primarily
with environmental and human health goals. The following considerations may be
balanced in determining whether such requirements are substantive or administrative:

      •• The basic purpose of the requirement;

      •   Any adverse effect on the ability of the action to protect human health and
         the environment if the requirement were not met;

      •   The existence of other requirements  (e.g., CERCLA procedures) at the site
         that would provide functionally equivalent compliance;

      •   Classification of similar or identical requirements as substantive or
         administrative in other CERCLA situations.
                          * * * AUGUST  8,  1988 DRAFT  *  *  *
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        1-13

      1.2.3    TYPES OF ARARs

      The laws and regulations that establish the universe of applicable or relevant
and appropriate requirements are listed in Exhibit 1-9 at the end of this chapter.
Exhibit 1-9 offers an overview of ARARs and is provided for reference purposes.
Exhibits 1-1, 1-2, and 1-3 present potential chemical-, location-, and
action-specific ARARs respectively, and must be examined in light of site-specific
circumstances to determine the actual ARARs for each site. These exhibits will be
expanded or revised as necessary to reflect changes in the laws or in regulations.
An automated Federal ARARs database will be developed.

      The manual also includes in Exhibit 1-10 other Federal  (and selected State)
criteria, advisories, and guidance to be considered (TBCs). TBCs are not ARARs, but
chemical-specific TBC values such as health advisories and reference doses will be
used in the absence of ARARs or where ARARs are not sufficiently protective to
develop cleanup goals (see discussion of risk assessment in Section 1.2.3.1 below).
In addition, other TBC materials such as guidance or policy documents developed to
implement regulations may be considered and used as appropriate, where necessary to
ensure protectiveness.

      1.2.3.1  Chemical-Specific Requirements

      Chemical-specific ARARs are usually health- or risk-based numerical values or
methodologies which, when applied to site-specific conditions, result in the
establishment of numerical values. These values establish the acceptable amount or
concentration of a chemical that may be found in, or discharged to, the ambient
environment.13 If  a chemical has more than one such requirement that is ARAR,  the
most stringent generally should be complied with. There are, at present, only a
limited number of chemical-specific requirements.

      The results of a risk assessment, following the procedures in the Superfund
Public Health Evaluation Manual (SPHEM), are used in setting cleanup goals that are
protective. As described in the SPHEM,  the total carcinogenic risk or hazard index
for all chemicals of concern in a medium in calculated in this risk assessment. As a
starting point for setting cleanup goals, the risk calculations are developed using
chemical-specific requirements. If there are no chemical-specific ARARs, then
specified Federal or State TBC values are used in the calculations.

      In general, chemical-specific requirements are set for a single chemical or
closely-related group of chemicals. Those requirements typically do not consider the
mixtures of chemicals that may be found at Superfund sites. Therefore, due to
site-specific factors,  cleanup goals set at the levels of
         13  Some Federal or State statutes,  such as the Clean Water Act, may
establish a methodology  for  setting  site-specific  discharge  limitations.  Such
requirements  may also  be ARARs,  depending on site-specific considerations.

                           *  *  * AUGUST  8, 1988  DRAFT  *  *  *
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        1-14

single chemical-specific requirements may not adequately protect human health or the
environment at that site. In these instances, cleanup goals would be set below the
chemical-specific requirements  (i.e., at more stringent levels). Similarly, cleanup
goals at a site may also be set below the TBC value in order to protect human health
and the environment.

      Exhibit 1-1 provides a matrix of chemical-specific standards established under
several statutes. These chemical-specific requirements will generally be more likely
to be relevant and appropriate rather than applicable to CERCLA actions. Chapters 2
through 4 provide detailed guidance in evaluating these potential ARARs. It will be
necessary to examine these standards in light of site-specific circumstances to
determine actual ARARs for each site. At present, Exhibit 1-1 contains standards
developed under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act  (RCRA), the Safe Drinking
Water Act (SDWA), and the Clean Water Act (CWA),  but does not include standards
developed under other environmental laws, such as programs  for the protection of air
quality (e.g., National Ambient Air Quality Standards).  As  additional statutes are
analyzed,  the matrix will be expanded to include any standards established under
those statutes that are potential ARARs.

      The following chemical-specific standards are included in the matrix:

      RCRA Maximum Concentration Limits.  Standards  (abbreviated as RCRA MCLs) for 14
      toxic compounds, primarily toxic metals and pesticides, have been adopted as a
      part of RCRA ground-water protection standards  (40 CFR §264.94). These
      ground-water protection standards are equal to MCLs established under the
      National Primary Drinking Water Standards,  based on the 1962 Public Health
      Service Regulations under the Safe Drinking Water Act  (SDWA).  The basic
      jurisdictional prerequisites for RCRA MCLs are part of the RCRA ground-water
      monitoring and response requirements,  which apply to  RCRA regulated units
      subject to permitting (landfills, surface impoundments, waste piles, and land
      treatment units) that received RCRA hazardous waste after July 26, 1982. If a
      comparison of indicator concentrations from background and downgradient wells
      shows a statistically significant increase, a ground-water protection standard
      is established for all hazardous constituents. The baseline protection
      standard is the background level of the constituent,  or one of the 14 RCRA
      MCLs,  whichever is higher. Alternatively,  an alternate concentration limit
      (ACL)  may be applied for and granted on a site-specific basis, if the
      constituent (in the quantity specified in the ACL) will not pose a substantial
      present or potential hazard to human health and the environment.

      SDWA Maximum Contaminant Levels. Standards (also abbreviated as MCLs) for 30
      toxic compounds, including the 14 compounds adopted as RCRA MCLs, have been
      adopted as enforceable standards for public drinking  water systems  (40 CFR
      §§141.11-141.16). MCLs for non-carcinogens are based  in part on the allowable
      lifetime exposure to the contaminant for a 70 kg  (154 pound) adult who is
      presumed to consume 2 liters (0.53 gallons) of water  per day.  In addition to
                          * *  * AUGUST  8,  1988 DRAFT  *  *  *
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                       1-15

    health factors, an MCL is required to reflect the technical  and  economic
    feasibility of removing the contaminant  from the water  supply. MCLs  for each
    contaminant regulated must be  set  as close as feasible  to  the MCL  Goal for
    that contaminant, given the best available technology and  treatment
    techniques. The basic jurisdictional prerequisite for MCLs is that they apply
    to "public water systems," defined as systems for the provision  of piped water
    for human consumption with at  least 15 service connections or serving at least
    25 persons. The SDWA Amendments of 1986  require EPA  to  promulgate  National
    Primary Drinking Water Standards for 83  contaminants within  three  years.
    Thereafter, EPA is required to promulgate standards  for 25 more  contaminants
    every three years.

    SDWA MCL Goals. MCL Goals  (MCLGs)  (formerly known as recommended MCLs or
    RMCLs) are non-enforceable health  goals  for public water systems.  EPA has
    promulgated MCLGs for 9 contaminants  (40 CFR §§141.50-141.51), and has
    proposed MCLGs for 40 others  (50 FR 46936). MCLGs are set  at levels  that would
    result in no known or anticipated  adverse health effects with an adequate
    margin of safety. MCLGs for substances considered to be probable human
    carcinogens are set at the zero level, and MCLGs for substances  that are not
    probable human carcinogens are set based upon chronic toxicity or  other data.
    MCLGs are potentially relevant and appropriate standards under CERCLA §121.

    Water Quality Criteria  (WOO .  CERCLA §121 states that remedial actions shall
    attain Federal water quality criteria where they are relevant and  appropriate
    under the circumstances of the release or threatened release. This
    determination is to be based on the designated or potential  use  of the water,
    the media affected, the purposes of the  criteria, and current information.
    Water quality criteria are non-enforceable guidance  developed under  Clean
    Water Act  (CWA) §304 and are used  by the State, in conjunction with  a
    designated use for a stream segment, to  establish water quality  standards
    under §303. In determining the applicability or relevance  and appropriateness
    of water quality criteria, the most important factors to consider  are the
    designated uses of the water and the purposes for which the  potential
    requirements are intended. A water quality criteria  component for  aquatic life
    may be found relevant and appropriate when there are environmental factors
    that are being considered at a site, such as protection of aquatic organisms.
    With respect to the use of water quality criteria for protection of  human
    health, levels are provided for exposure both from drinking  the  water and from
    consuming aquatic organisms (primarily fish) and from fish consumption alone.
    Whether a water quality criterion  is relevant and appropriate and  which form
    of the criterion is appropriate depends  on the likely route(s) of  exposure. A
    summary of water quality criteria  may be found in Quality  Criteria for Water
    1986, EPA 44/5-86-001, May 1,  1986 (51 Federal Register 43665) - commonly
    referred to as the "Gold Book."
                         *  *  *  AUGUST  8,  1988  DRAFT  *  *  *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                1-16





                                                             EXHIBIT 1-1





                      SELECTED CHEMICAL-SPECIFIC POTENTIAL APPLICABLE OR RELEVANT AND APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS ,





                                                         RCRA AND SDWA MCLS







                                                            Potential ARARs b/
Chemical Name
Arsenic
Barium
Benzene
Beta Particle Photon Radioactivity
Cadmium
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chromium
Coliform Bacteria
p-Dichlorobenzene
1,2-Dichloroethane
1 , 1 -Dichloroethylene
2-4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic Acid (2,4-D)
Endrin
Fluoride
Lead
Lindane
Total Mercury
Methoxychlor
Nitrate (as N)
Radionuclides, gross alpha particle activity
Radium-226 + Radium-226
Selenium
Silver
Toxaphene
2,4,5-TP Silvex
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
Trichloroethylene
Total Trihalomethanes
Turbidity
Vinyl Chloride
RCRA Maximum
Concentration
Limits
(mg/1)
5. Ox 10'2
1.0


l.Ox 10'2

5. Ox 10'2




l.Ox 10'1
2. Ox 10'4

5. Ox 10'2
4. Ox 10'3
2. Ox 10'3
l.Ox 10'1



l.Ox 10'2
5. Ox 10'2
5. Ox 10'3
1.0 x 10"2





SDWA Maximum
Contaminant
Levels
(mg/1)
5. Ox 10'2
1.0
5. Ox 10'3
4 millirems
l.Ox 10'2
5. Ox 10'3
5. Ox 10'2
1 per 100ml
7.5 x 10'2
5. Ox 10'3
7. Ox 10'3
l.Ox 10'1
2. Ox 10'4
4.0
5. Ox 10'2
4. Ox 10'3
2. Ox 10'3
l.Ox 10'1
10
15 pCi/1
5 pCi/1
l.Ox 10'2
5. Ox 10'2
5. Ox 10'3
l.Ox 10'2
2. Ox 10'1
5. Ox 10'3
l.Ox 10'1
1 Tu
2. Ox 10'3
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy
                                                      AUGUST
                                                                   1988 DRAFT

-------
                                                                              1-17

                                                                      EXHIBIT 1-1 (continued)

                            SELECTED CHEMICAL-SPECIFIC POTENTIAL APPLICABLE OR RELEVANT AND APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS a/




Potential ARARs




Chemical Name
Acenapthene
Acenaphthylene
Acrolein
Acrylonitrile
Aldrin
Anthracene
Antimony and Compounds
Arsenic and Compounds
Arsenic (V) and Compounds
Arsenic (III) and Compounds
CWA Water
for Protection
Water and
Fish Ingestion
(mg/1)


3.2x10-01
5.8x10-05
7.4x10-08

1.5x10-01
2.2x10-06
Quality Criteria
of Human Health
Fish Consumption
Only
(mg/1)


7.8x10-01
6.5x10-04
7.9x10-08

45
1.8x10-05
CWA

Freshwater
For Use In Special
b/ Circumstances
Ambient Water Quality Criteria for
Protection of Aquatic Life c/
Marine
Acute/Chronic Acute/Chronic SDWA/MCL Goal
(mg/1)
1.7*/0.5*

6.8xlO-02*/2
7.5*/2.6*
3.0x10-03

9.0/1.6

(mg/1) (mg/1) d/
0.9*/0.7*
3.0x10-01*
.1x10-02* 5.5x10-02*

1.3x10-03



0.8*/4. 8x10-02* 2.3*/l. 3x10-02


0.3/0.1
6.9x10-02/3.6x10-02
Asbestos
Barium and Compounds
Benz(a)anthracene
Benz(c)acridine
Benzene
Benzidine
Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Benzo (k) fluorantene
Beryllium and Compounds
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether
Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether
Bis(chloromethyl)ether
6.6x10-04
1.2x10-04
4.0x10-02
5.3x10-04
                 1.2x10-04
5.3*
2.5*
                                    0.1*/5.3x10-03*
                                                            5.1*/0.7*
                                                                  AUGUST  8,  1988  DRAFT  *  *  *
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                1-18





                                                         EXHIBIT 1-1 (continued)




                      SELECTED CHEMICAL-SPECIFIC POTENTIAL APPLICABLE OR RELEVANT AND APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS a/



Potential ARARs b/




Chemical Name
Cadmium and Compounds
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chlordene
Chlorinated Benzenes
Chlorinated Napththalenes
Chloroalkyl Ethers
Chlorobenzene (Mono)
Chlorodibromom ethane
Chloroform
2-Chlorophenol
Chromium III and Compounds
Chromium VI and Compounds
Copper and Compounds
Cyanides
DDT
Dibutyl Phthalate
Dichlorobenzenes
1 ,2-Dichlorobenzene
1,3-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,4-Dichlorobenzene
3 ,3 '-Dichlorobenzidine
1,2-Dichloroethane (EDC)
Dichloroethylene s
CWA Water Quality Criteria
for Protection of Human Health
Water and Fish Consumption
Fish Ingestion Only
(mg/1) (mg/1)
1.0x10-02
4.0x10-04 6.9x10-03
4.6x10-07 4.8x10-07





1.9x10-04 1.8x10-02

170 3433
5.0x10-02

2x10-01
2.4x10-08 2.4x10-08
35 154
4x10-01 2.6



1x10-04 2x10-05
9.4x10-04 2.4x10-01
3.3x10-05 1.9x10-03
CWA Ambient Water
For Use In Special
Circumstances
Quality Criteria for
Protection of Aquatic Life c/
Freshwater
Acute/Chronic
(mg/1)
3. 9xlO-03+/l. 1x10-03+
3.5x10+01
2.4x10-03/4.3x10-06
2. 5xlO-01*/5. 0x10-02*
1.6*
2.3x10+02*


2.8xlO+01*/1.2*
4.3*/2.0*
1.7+/0.2+
1.6x10-02/1.1x10-03
1.8xlO-02+/l. 2x10-02+
2.2x10-02/5.2x10-03
1.1x10-03/1.0x10-06

1.1*11. 6x10-01*




l.lxlO+02*/2. 0x10+01*
Marine
Acute/Chronic SDWA/MCL Goal
(mg/1) (mg/1) d/
4.3x10-02/9.3x10-02
5.0x10+01 0
9.0x10-05/4.0x10-06
1.6xlO-01*/l. 2x10-01*
7.5x10-03*





1.0x10+01
1.1/5.0x10-02
2.9x10-03/2.9x10-03
1.0x10-03/1.0x10-03
1.3x10-04/1.0x10-06

1.9*

7.5x10-01


1.1x10+02* 0
1.1x10+1* 2.2+02*
                                                *  * *
                                                      AUGUST 8,  1988  DRAFT
                                                                                * *  *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                 1-19

                                                                         EXHBIT 1-1 (continued)

                             SELECTED CHEMICAL-SPECIFIC POTENTIAL APPLICABLE OR RELEVANT AND APPROPRIATE REQURIEMENTS a/


                                                                                  Potential ARARs b/
                                                                                                       For Use In Special
                                                                                                         Circumstances
                                                      CWA Water Quality Criteria
                                                    for Protection of Human Health
                                             CWA Ambient Water Quality Criteria for
                                                  Protection of Aquatic Life c/


Chemical Name
1 , 1 -Dichloroethylene
2,4-Dichlorophenol
Water and
Fish Ingestion
(mg/1)
3.1

Fish Consumption
Only
(mg/1)


Freshwater
Acute/Chronic
(mg/1)
1.1x10+01*
2.0*/0.3*
Marine
Acute/Chronic
(mg/1)
2.2x10+02*


SDWA/MCL Goal
(mg/1) d/
7.0x10-03

2,6-Dichlorophenol
3,4-Dichlorophenol
2,3-Dichlorophenol
2,5-Dichlorophenol
2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic Acid (2,4-D)
1,3-Dichloropropene
Dieldrin
Diethylphthalate
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP)
Diethylnitrosamine
7,12-Dimethylbenz(a)anthracene
Dimethylnitrosamine
2,4-Dimethylphenol
Dimethylphthalate
4,6-Dinitro-o-cresol
2,4-Dinitrophenol
1,2-Diphenylhydrazine
Endosulfan
Endrin
Ethylbenzene
Fluoranthene
Fluorides
 8.7x10-02
 7.1x10-08
 350
313
 7.4x10-02
 1x10-03
 1.4
 4.2x10-02
14.1
7.6x10-08
1800
                  2900
1.6x10-01

3.3
5.4x10-02
4.0
6.0*/0.2*
2.5x10-03/1.9x10-06
0.7*
0.7x10-03/1.9x10-06
                                                                                                      7.0x10-03
                                      2.1*
2.2x10-04/5.6x10-05
1.8x10-04/2.3x10-06
3.2x10+01
3.9*
3.4x10-05/8.7x10-06
3.7x10-05/2.3x10-06
4.3x10-01*
4.OxlO-02*/l.6x10-02*
                                                                     AUGUST
                                                                                    1988 DRAFT
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                  1-20





                                                           EXHIBIT 1-1 (continued)




                      SELECTED CHEMICAL-SPECIFIC POTENTIAL APPLICABLE OR RELEVANT AND APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS a/









                                                                   Potential ARARs b/
                                                                                                                              Circumstances
CWA Water Quality Criteria CWA Ambient Water Quality Criteria for
for Protection of Human Health Protection of Aquatic Life c/
Water and Fish Consumption Freshwater Marine
Fish Ingestion Only Acute/Chronic Acute/Chronic SDWA/MCL Goal
Chemical Name
Heptachlor
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexacalorobutadiene
alpha-Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCCH)
gamma-HCCH (Lindane)
Technical-HCCH
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Hexachloroethane
lodomethane
Isophorone
Lead and Compounds (Inorganic)
Mercury and Compounds (Alkyl)
Mercury and Compounds (Inorganic)
Methoxychlor
Methyl Chloride
2-Methyl-4-chlorophenol
3 -Methyl-4-chlorophenol
3-Methyl-6-chlorophenol
3-Monochlorophenol
4-Monochlorophenol
Nickel and Compounds
Nitrate (as N)
Nitrobenzene
Nitrophenols
(mg/1) (mg/1)
2.8x10-07 2.9x10-07
7.2x10-07 7.4x10-07
4.5x10-04 5x10-02
9.2x10-06 3.1x10-05

1.2x10-05 4.1x10-05
2.1x10-01
1.9x10-03 8.74x10-03


5x10-02

1.4x10-04 1.5x10-04
1x10-01






1.3x10-10 1x10-01
10
20

(mg/1)
5.2x10-04/3.8x10-06

9.0x10-02/9.3x10-03*



7. OxlO-03*/5. 2x10-03*
9. 8xlO-01*/5. 4x10-01*

1.17x10+02*
8.0x10-02/3.2x10-03*
2.4x10-03/1.2x10-05
2.4x10-03/1.2x10-05
0.3x10-04*






1.4+/1. 6x10-01 +

2.7x10+01*
2. 3xlO-01*/l. 5x10-01*
(mg/1) (mg/1) d/
5.3x10-05/3

3.2x10-02*



7.0x10-03*
9.4x10-01*

1.2x10+01*
.6x10-06









0.1/5.6x10-03
2.14xlO-03/
2.1x10-03/2
0.3x10-04*






7.5x10-02/8

6.6
4.8*
2.5x10-05
.5x10-05







.3x10-03



                                                 *  * * AUGUST
1988  DRAFT  *  *  *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                1-21





                                                         EXHBIT 1-1 (continued)




                      SELECTED CHEMICAL-SPECIFIC POTENTIAL APPLICABLE OR RELEVANT AND APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS a/




Potential ARARs b/




Chemical Name
Nitrosamines
n-Nitrosodiphenylamine
N-Nitrosopyrrolidine
Para Dichorobenzene
Pentachlorinated Ethanes
Pentachlorobenzene
Pentachlorophenol
Phenanthrene
Phenol
Phthalate Esters
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs)
Radionuclides, Gross alpha activity
Radium 226 and 228
Selenium and Compounds
Silver and Compounds
Strontium-90
2,3,7,8-TCDD (Dioxin)
Tetrachlorinated Ethanes
1, 2,4,5 -Tetrachlorobenzene
1 , 1 ,2,2-Tetrachlorethane
Tetrachloroethanes
Tetrchloroethylene
2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol
Thallium Compounds
CWA Water
for Protection
Water and
Fish Ingestion
(mg/1)

4.9x10-03
1.6x10-05


7.4x10-02
1

3.5

7.9x10-08


1.0x10-02
5.0x10-02



3.8x10-02
1.7x10-04

8x10-04

1.3x10-02
Quality Criteria
of Human Health
Fish Consumption
Only
(mg/1)

1.6x10-02
9.2x10-02


8.5x10-02




7.9x10-08
15 pCil
5 pCi/1
1.0x10-02
5.0x10-02
8 pCi/1


4.8x10-02
1.1x10-02

8.9x10-03

4.8x10-02
For Use In Special
Circumstances
CWA Ambient Water Quality Criteria for
Protection of Aquatic Life c/
Freshwater
Acute/Chronic
(mg/1)
5.8*



7.2*/l.l*

2.0x10-02/1.3x10-02

1.0x10+01/2.5
9. 4xlO-01*/3. 0x10-03*
2.0x10-03/1.4x10-05


2.6x10-01/3.5x10-02
4. lxlO-03+/l. 2x10-04

<1.0xlO-05*/
-------
                                                                                  1-22

                                                                          EXHIBIT 1-1 (continued)

                             SELECTED CHEMICAL-SPECIFIC POTENTIAL APPLICABLE OR RELEVANT AND APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS a/
Potential ARARs b/
CWA Water Quality Criteria



Chemical Name
Toluene
Toxaphene
Tribromomethane (Bromoform)
Trichlorinated Ethanes
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
1 , 1 ,2-Trichloroethane
Trichloroethylene
for Protection
Water and
Fish Ingestion
(mg/1)
14
7.1x10-07


18
6x10-04
2.7x10-03
of Human Health
Fish Consumption
Only
(mg/1)
420
7.3x10-07


1000
4.2x10-02
8.1x10-02
CWA Ambient Water Quality Criteria for
Protection of Aquatic Life c/
Freshwater Marine
Acute/Chronic Acute/Chronic
(mg/1) (mg/1)
1.7x10+01* 6.3*/5.0*
7.3x10-04/2.0x10-07 2.1x10-04/2x10-7

1.8x10+01*
3.1x10+01*
9.4*
4. 5xlO+01*/2. 1x10+01* 2.0*
For Use In Special
Circumstances



SDWA/MCL Goal
(mg/1) d/




2.0x10-01

0
Trichloromonofluoromethane
2,4,5-Trichlorophenol
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
2,4,5-Trichlorophenoxypropionic Acid
Trihalomethanes (Total) b
Tritium
Vinyl Chloride
Zinc and Compounds
1.2x10-03
2x10-03
                  3.6x10-03
                  5.3x10-01
                                      9.7X10-01*
                                      1.3x10-01/1.1x10-01
                                                                9.6x10-02/8.6x10-02
a/ Additional chemical-specific requirements will be added (e.g. National Ambient Air Quality Criteria) after analysis of additional statutes.

b/ When two or more values conflict, the lower value generally should be used.

c/ Federal water quality criteria (FWQC) are not legally enforceable standards, but are potentially relevant and appropriate to CERCLA actions. CERCLA §121(d)(2)(B)(i) requires consideration
of four factors when determining whether FWQC are relevant and appropriate: 1 the designated or potential use of the surface or groundwater, 2) the environmental media affected, 3) the
purposes for which such criteria were developed, and 4) the latest information available.
                                                              *  *  *
                                                                       AUGUST  8,   1988  DRAFT
                                                                                                      *  *  *
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
d/ For water that is to be used for drinking, the MCLs set under the SDWA are generally the applicable or relevant and appropriate standards. A standard for drinking water more stringent than an
MCL may be needed in special circumstances, such as where multiple contaminants in ground water or multiple pathways of exposure present extraordinary risks. In setting a level more stringent
than the MCL in such cases, a site-specific determination should be made by considering MCLGs, the Agency's policy on the use of appropriate risk ranges for carcinogens (10-04 to 10-7
individual lifetime risk), levels of quantification, and other pertinent guidelines. Prior consultation with Headquarters is encouraged in  such cases.

* Lowest Observed Effect level.
+ Hardness dependent criteria (100 mg/1 used); refer to specific criteria documents for equations to calculate criteria based on other water hardness values.

Sources: U.S. EPA, Superfund Public Health Evaluation Manual. EPA 540/1-86/060 (OSWER Directive 9285.4-1) October 1986 and U.S. EPA, Quality Criteria for Water 1986. EPA 440/5-86-
001, May 1986 (51 Federal Register 43665).
                                                                         AUGUST  8,  1988  DRAFT
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
         Preceding page blank            1-25


      1.2.3.2  Location-Specific Requirements

      A site's location is a fundamental determinant of its impact on human health
and the environment. Location-specific ARARs are restrictions placed on the
concentration of hazardous substances or the conduct of activities solely because
they are in specific locations. Some examples of special locations include
floodplains, wetlands,  historic places, and sensitive ecosystems or habitats. An
example of a location-specific requirement is the substantive CWA §404 prohibitions
of the unrestricted discharge of dredged or fill material into wetlands.

      Exhibit 1-2 provides a matrix of location-specific requirements, established
under several statutes,  that are potential ARARs. At present, the matrix contains
requirements established under a number of different environmental statutes. As
additional statutes are analyzed, the matrix will be expanded to include their
location-specific requirements.

      The following location-specific requirements are included in the matrix:

      RCRA Location Requirements. RCRA contains a number of explicit limitations on
      where on-site storage, treatment, or disposal of hazardous waste may occur. In
      addition to the location criteria already contained in RCRA regulations, the
      Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA) also mandate the
      development of location requirements concerning vulnerable hydrogeology  (see
      RCRA §3004(o)(7)).  When those regulations are promulgated, they will be added
      to the matrix. It should be emphasized that guidance issued under RCRA also
      should be considered when necessary to achieve protectiveness,  but is not
      binding (i.e., is not ARAR) for determining what actions should be taken at a
      particular location.14 HSWA land disposal restrictions  also prohibit placement
      of hazardous wastes in certain formations  (salt domes, salt bad formations,
      and underground mines or caves) and list certain wastes, which will be
      evaluated for prohibition by EPA under RCRA by August 8, 1988,  June 8, 1989,
      and May 8, 1990 (40 CFR §265.18, 40 CPR Part 268)
      National Historic Preservation Act of 1966  (NHPA)*.  Requires action to take
      into account effects on properties included in or eligible for the National
      Register of Historic Places and to minimize harm to National Historic
      Landmarks.
         14  RCRA guidance which may be considered includes:  Permit Writers'
 Guidance Manual  for  the  Location  of Hazardous  Waste  Land Storage and Disposal
 Facilities:  Phase  I,  Criteria  for Location  Acceptability and Existing
 Regulations  for  Evaluating  Locations    (final draft), February  1985; Permit
 Applicants'  Guidance Manual for the General Facility Standards of 40 CFR 264  ,
 SW-968,  October 1983; and Guidelines for Ground-Water Classification Under the
 EPA Ground-Water Protection Strategy  ,   (final draft), December 1986.

                         *  * * AUGUST 8,  1988  DRAFT * * *
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        1-26

      ^Endangered Species Act. Requires action to avoid jeopardizing the continued
      existence of listed endangered or threatened species or modification of their
      habitat.

      ^Wilderness Act. Establishes nondegradation, maximum restoration, and
      protection of wilderness areas as primary management principles.

      *Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act. Requires action to protect  fish and
      wildlife from actions modifying streams or areas affecting streams.

      *Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. Requires action to avoid adverse effects on
      designated wild or scenic rivers.

      *Coastal Zone Management Act. Requires activities affecting land or water uses
      in a coastal zone to certify noninterference with coastal zone management.

      Clean Water Act. Section 404 prohibits discharge of dredged or fill material
      into navigable waters without a permit. CERCLA on-site actions do not require
      a permit, but the substantive requirements of §404 regarding such a discharge
      would be ARAR.15

      40 CFR Part 6 Appendix A. Sets forth EPA policy for carrying out the
      provisions of Executive Orders 11988  (Floodplain Management) and 11990
      (Protection of Wetlands).16

*These and other statutes will be addressed in a later addition to this manual.
      Note that Section 118(a)(1) of the CWA as amended by the Water Quality Act
 (WQA) of 1987 specifically provides that the United States should seek to attain
the goals of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement  (GLWQA), with particular
emphasis on the goals related to toxic pollutants. Section 118 (a) (1) also
provides that EPA should take the lead in the effort to meet the GLWQA goals.
Accordingly, the GLWQA will be very pertinent to sites having discharges to the
Great Lake drainage basin.
   16
      Executive orders are binding on the section of the government for which they
are issued.
                          *  *  *
                               AUGUST  8,  1988  DRAFT
                                                    * * *
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                   1-27

                                                                                EXHIBIT 1-2

                             SELECTED LOCATION-SPECIFIC POTENTIAL APPLICABLE OR RELEVANT AND APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS a/
Location
                                            Requirement
                                            Prerequisite
                                                                                                                                   Citation
Within 61 meters (200 feet) of a fault
displaced in Honocene time

Within 100-year floodplain
Within floodplain b/
New treatment, storage, or disposal of
hazardous waste prohibited

Facility must be designed, constructed,
operated, and maintained to avoid washout

Action to avoid adverse effects, minimize
potential harm, restore and preserve natural
and beneficial values
RCRA hazardous waste; treatment, storage,
or disposal

RCRA hazardous waste; treatment, storage,
or disposal

Action that will occur in a floodplain, i.e.,
lowlands, and relatively flat areas adjoining
inland and coastal waters and other flood
prone areas
40 CFR264.18(a)
40CFR264.18(b)
Protection of floodplains, b/ (40 CFR 6,
Appendix A); Fish and Wildlife Coordination
Act (16 USC 661 et sea.); 40 CFR 6.302
Within salt dome formation, underground
mine, or cave

Within area where action may cause
irreparable harm, loss, or destruction of
significant artifacts

Historic project owned or controlled by
Federal agency
Critical habitat upon which endangered
species or threatened species depends
Placement of non-containerized or bulk
liquid hazardous waste prohibited

Action to recover and preserve artifacts
Action to preserve historic properties;
planning of action to minimize harm to
National Historic Landmarks

Action to conserve endangered species or
threatened species, including consultation
with the Department of Interior
RCRA hazardous waste; placement
40 CFR264.18(c)
Alteration of terrain that threatens significant   National Historical Preservation Act (16 USC
scientific, prehistorical, historical or            Section 469); 36 CFR Part 65
archaeological data
Property included in or eligible for the
National Register of Historic Places
Determination of presence of endangered or
threatened species
National Historic Preservation Act, Section
106 (16 USC 470 et sea.); 36 CFR Part 800
Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 USC
1531 et sea.) 50 CFR Part 200, 50 CFR part
402 Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16
USC 661 et sea.(; 33 CFR Parts 320-330.
                                                            *  *   *
                                                                     AUGUST
                                                                                     1988  DRAFT  *  *  *
 Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                    1-28

                                                                           EXHIBIT 1-2 (Continued)

                              SELECTED LOCATION-SPECIFIC POTENTIAL APPLICABLE OR RELEVANT AND APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS
Location
                                            Requirement
                                            Prerequisite
                                                                                                                                     Citation
Wetlands b/
Wilderness area
Wildlife refuge
Area affecting stream or river
Action to prohibit discharge of dredged or
fill material into wetlands without permit

Action to avoid adverse effects, minimize
potential harm, and preserve and enhance
wetlands, to the extent possible (see
discussion in section 3.4.4.1)

Areas must be administered in  such manner
as will leave it unimpaired as wilderness and
to preserve its wilderness

Only actions allowed under the provisions of
16 USC Section 668 dd(c) may be
undertaken in areas that are part of the
National Wildlife Refuge System

Action to protect fish or wildlife
Within area affecting national wild, scenic, or   Avoid taking or assisting in action that will
recreational river                             have direct adverse effect on scenic river
Within coastal zone
Within designated coastal barrier
                                            Conduct activities in manner consistent with
                                            approved State management programs
Prohibits any new Federal expenditure within
the Coastal Barrier Resource System
                                                                                        Wetland as defined in U.S. Army Corps of
                                                                                        Engineers regulations
                                            Clean Water Act section 404; 40 CFR Parts
                                            230, 33 CFR Parts 320-330.
                                                                                        Action involving construction of facilities or    40 CFR Part 6, Appendix A
                                                                                        management of property in wetlands, as
                                                                                        defined by 40 CFR Part 6, Appendix A,
                                                                                        section 4 (j)
                                                                                        Federally-owned area designated as
                                                                                        wilderness area
Area designated as part of National Wildlife
Refuge System
Diversion, channeling or other activity that
modifies a stream or river and affects fish or
wildlife

Activities that affect or may affect any of the
rivers specified in section 1276(a)

Activities affecting the coastal zone including
lands therein and thereunder and adjacent
shorelands

Activity within the Coastal Barrier Resource
System
Wilderness Act (16 USC 1131 et sefl.); 50
CFR 35.1 st seq.


16USC668dd et sea.; 50 CFR Part 27
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16 USC
661 et sea.); 40 CFR 6.302
                                                                                        Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (16 USC 1271 et
                                                                                        seq. section 7 (a)); 40 CFR 6.302(e)

                                                                                        Coastal Zone Management Act (16 USC
                                                                                        Section 1451 et seq.)
Coastal Barrier Resources Act (16 USC 3501
et sea.)
a/ Additional location-specific requirements will be added after analysis of additional sources and will be included in a subsequent draft of this manual.

b/ 40 CFR Part 6 Subpart A sets forth EPA policy for carrying out the provisions of Executive Order 11988 (Floodplain Management) and 11990 (Protection of Wetlands). Executive orders are
binding on the level (e.g., Federal, State) or government for which they are issued.
                                                             *  *  *
                                                                      AUGUST
                                                                                      1988  DRAFT  *  *  *
 Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        1-29
      1.2.3.3  Action-Specific Requirements

      Action-specific ARARs are usually technology- or activity-based requirements
or limitations on actions taken with respect to hazardous wastes. These requirements
are triggered by the particular remedial activities that are selected to accomplish
a remedy. Since there are usually several alternative actions for any remedial site,
very different requirements can come into play. These action-specific requirements
do not in themselves determine the remedial alternative; rather, they indicate how a
selected alternative must be achieved.

      Exhibit 1-3 provides a matrix of action-specific requirements established
under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act  (RCRA)  and the Clean Water Act. As
the statute that is directed toward the management of hazardous waste, RCRA provides
the largest number of pertinent action-specific requirements. However, detailed
corrective action requirements, which would provide action-specific requirements for
the types of actions most similar to CERCLA remedies, have not yet been promulgated.
RCRA corrective action requirements and other action-specific requirements in other
statutes will be added to subsequent drafts of this matrix as requirements are
promulgated or as the other statutes are analyzed.

      The actions described in Exhibit 1-3 were identified as potential CERCLA
remedial alternatives from past Records of Decision  (RODs).  The terms used below to
describe remedial actions are explained more fully in later chapters.  They include
the following:

      Air Stripping
      Capping
      Closure with No Post-Closure Care (e.g.,  Clean Closure - removal or
         decontamination of all residuals such that health-based standards are met)
      Closure with Waste In Place (i.e., capping or disposal closure)
      Closure of Land Treatment Units
      Consolidation within Unit
      Consolidation between Units
      Container Storage
      Construction of New Landfill On-Site
      Construction of New Surface Impoundment On-Site
      Dike Stabilization
      Discharge of Treatment System Effluent
      Direct Discharge to Ocean
      Discharge to Publicly Owned Treatment Works  (POTW)
      Discharge of Dredge and Fill Material to Waters of the U.S. or Ocean Waters
      Dredging
      Excavation
      Gas Collection
      Ground-Water Diversion

                           * * * AUGUST  8,  1988 DRAFT * * *
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                      1-30

    Incineration (on-site)
    Land Treatment
    Operation and Maintenance (O&M)  (post-closure care)
    Placement of Liquid Waste in Landfill
    Placement of Waste in Land Disposal Unit
    Slurry Wall
    Surface Water Control
    Tank Storage (on-site)
    Treatment (in a unit)
    Treatment (when waste will be land disposed)
    Underground Injection of Wastes and Treated Ground Water
    Waste Pile
                                 AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                   1-31

                                                                                EXHIBIT 1-3

                              SELECTED ACTION-SPECIFIC POTENTIAL APPLICABLE OR RELEVANT AND APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS a/
  Actions b/
                                       Requirements
                                                 Prerequisites for Applicability c/ ,d/
                                                                                                                                                  Citation
Air Stripping

Capping
(See also Closure with Waste
in Place for additional
associated requirements)
[CAA requirements to be provided.]

Placement of a cap over waste (e.g., closing a
landfill, or closing a surface impoundment or
waste pile as a landfill, or similar action)
requires a cover designed and constructed to:

• • Provide long-term minimization of
  migration of liquids through the capped
  area;

• • Function with minimum maintenance;
  Promote drainage and minimize erosion or
  abrasion of the cover;

• • Accommodate settling and subsidence so
  that the cover's integrity is maintained; and

•• Have a permeability less than or equal to the
  permeability of any bottom liner system or
  natural sub-soils present.
RCRA hazardous waste placed at site after the
effective date of the requirements, or placement of
hazardous waste into another unit will make
requirements applicable when the waste is being
covered with a cap for the purpose of leaving it
behind after the remedy is completed. Capping
without such placement will not make requirements
applicable, d/
40CFR264.288(a)
(Surface Impoundments)
40 CFR 264.258(b) (Waste
Piles)
40 CFR 264.310(a)
(Landfills)
  a/ Currently only RCRA, CWA, and SDWA requirements are included. Additional action-specific requirements will be added as additional statutes are analyzed.

  b/ Action alternatives from ROD keyword index, FY1986 Record of Decision Annual Report. January 1987, Hazardous Site Control Division, EPA.

  c/ Requirements have been proposed but not promulgated for air stripping, hybrid closure, gas collection and miscellaneous unit treatment. When these regulations are promulgated, they
will be included in the matrix.

  d/ Some action-specific requirements listed may be relevant and appropriate even if RCRA definitions of storage, disposal, or hazardous waste are not met, or if the waste at the site is
similar to but not identifiable as a RCRA hazardous waste. See Chapter 2 for information on relevant and appropriate RCRA requirements.
                                                                     AUGUST  8,   1988     DRAFT
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                   1-32

                                                                          EXHIBIT 1-3 (continued)

                              SELECTED ACTION-SPECIFIC POTENTIAL APPLICABLE OR RELEVANT AND APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS a/
      Actions b/
                                             Requirements
                                               Prerequisites for Applicability c/ ,d/
                                                                                                                                                   Citation
Capping (continued)
Closure with No Post-Closure
Care (e.g. Clean Closure)
Eliminate free liquids, stabilize wastes
before capping (surface impoundments).

Restrict post-closure use of property as
necessary to prevent damage to the cover.

Prevent run-on and run-off from damaging
cover.

Protect and maintain surveyed benchmarks
used to locate waste cells (landfills, waste
piles).

General performance standard requires
elimination of need for further maintenance
and control; elimination of post-closure
escape of hazardous waste, hazardous
constituents, leachate, contaminated run-off,
or hazardous waste decomposition products.
                                   Disposal or decontamination of equipment,
                                   structure, and soils.

                                   Removal or decontamination of all waste
                                   residue, contaminated containment system
                                   components (e.g., liners, dikes),
                                   contaminated subsoils, and structures and
                                   equipment contaminated with waste and
                                   leachate, and management of them as
                                   hazardous waste.

                                   Meet health-based levels at unit.
Applicable to land-based unit containing hazardous
waste. -' Applicable to RCRA hazardous waste (listed or
characteristic) placed at site after the effective date of the
requirements, or placed into another unit. Not applicable
to material treated, stored, or disposed only before the
effective date of the requirements, or if treated in-situ, or
consolidated within area of contamination. Designed for
cleanup that will not require long-term management.
Designed for cleanup to health-based standards.

May apply to surface impoundments and container or
tank liners and hazardous waste residues, and to
contaminated soil,  including soil from dredging or soil
disturbed in the course of drilling or excavation, and
returned to land.
                                                           40 CFR 264.228(a)
                                                                                                                                             40 CFR264.117(c)
                                                                                                                                             40 CFR 264.228(b)
                                                                                                                                             40CFR264.310(b)

                                                                                                                                             40CFR264.310(b)
                                                                                                                                             40 CFR 264.111
                                                                                                          40 CFR 264.111
                                                                                                          40 CFR 264.178
                                                                                                          40 CFR 264.197
                                                                                                          40 CFR 264.288(o) (1) and
                                                                                                          40 CFR 264.258
                                                                                                          40 CFR 244.111
   d/ Some action-specific requirements listed may be relevant and appropriate even if RCRA definitions of storage, disposal, or hazardous waste are not met, or if the waste at the site
is similar to but not identifiable as a RCRA hazardous waste. See Chapter 2 for information on relevant and appropriate RCRA requirements.
                                                                 * * *  AUGUST 8, 1988  DRAFT
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                  1-33

                                                                         EXHIBIT 1-3 (continued)

                             SELECTED ACTION-SPECIFIC POTENTIAL APPLICABLE OR RELEVANT AND APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS a/
       Actions b/
                                            Requirements
                                            Prerequisites for Applicability c/ ,d/
                                                                                                                                                Citation
Closure with Waste In Place
                                   Eliminate free liquids by removal or
                                   solidification.

                                   Stabilization of remaining waste and
                                   waste residues to support cover.
                                            Applicable to land disposal of hazardous waste. -
                                            Applicable to RCRA hazardous waste (listed or
                                            characteristic) placed at site after the effective date of
                                            the requirements, or placed into another unit. Not
                                            applicable to material treated, stored, or disposed only
                                            before the effective date of the requirements, or if
                                            treated in-situ or consolidated within area of
                                            contamination.
40CFR264.228(a)(2)
40CFR264.228(a)(2)
40CFR264.258(b)
                                   Installation of final cover to provide
                                   long-term minimization of infiltration
                                   (see Capping).

                                   30-year post-closure care and
                                   groundwater monitoring, e/
                                                                                                                                       40 CFR264.310
                                                                                                    40 CFR264.310
Closure of Land Treatment
Units
Maximize degradation, transformation, or
immobilization of hazardous constituents
within the treatment zone, minimize run-
off of constituents, maintain run-on
control system and run-off management
system, control wind dispersal of
hazardous waste, maintain unsaturated
zone monitoring, establish vegetative
cover, and establish background soil
values to determine consistency with
permit values.
                                                                               Closure of land treatment units.
                                                                                                                                       40 CFR264.280
Consolidation within a Unit
None applicable. -'
                                                                               Consolidation within a unit. -
  e/ Regional administrator may revise length of post-closure care period (40 CFR 264.117).
                                                                 * * *   AUGUST 8, 1988  DRAFT
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                    1-34

                                                                          EXHIBIT 1-3 (continued)
                              SELECTED ACTION-SPECIFIC POTENTIAL APPLICABLE OR RELEVANT AND APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS a/
     Actions b/
                                                  Requirements
                                             Prerequisites for Applicability c/ ,d/
                                                                                                                                                   Citation
Consolidation between Units
Container Storage
With respect to the waste that is moved,
see requirements in the following
sections: Capping, Closure with Waste in
Place, Container Storage, Construction of
a New Landfill On-Site, Construction of a
New Surface Impoundment On-Site,
Incineration (On-Site), Land Treatment,
Operation and Maintenance, Tank
Storage, and Treatment.

Containers of RCRA hazardous waste
must be:

• • Maintained in good condition;

• • Compatible with hazardous waste to be
  stored; and
                                        •• Closed during storage (except to add or
                                          remove waste).

                                        Inspect container storage areas weekly for
                                        deterioration.

                                        Place containers on a sloped, crack-free
                                        base, and protect from contact with
                                        accumulated liquid. Provide containment
                                        system with a capacity of 10 percent of
                                        the volume of containers of free liquids.
                                        Remove spilled or leaked waste in a
                                        timely manner to prevent overflow of the
                                        containment system.
                                                                                    Movement of hazardous waste and placement into
                                                                                    another unit.
Storage of RCRA hazardous waste (listed or
characteristic) not meeting small quantity generator
criteria held for a temporary period greater than 90
days before a treatment, disposal, or storage elsewhere
(40 CFR 264.10), in a container (i.e., any portable
device in which a material is stored, transported,
disposed of, or handled). A generator who
accumulates or stores hazardous waste on-site for 90
days or less in compliance with 40 CFR 262.34(a)(l-
4) is not subject to full RCRA storage requirements.
Small quantity generators are not subject to the 90 day
limit (40 CFR 262.34(c),(d), and (e)).
                                                        See Capping, Closure with Waste
                                                        in Place, Container Storage,
                                                        Construction of a New Landfill
                                                        On-Site, Construction of a New
                                                        Surface Impoundment On-Site,
                                                        Incineration (On-Site), Land
                                                        Treatment, Operation and
                                                        Maintenance, Tank Storage, and
                                                        Treatment in this exhibit.
                                                                                                                                            40 CFR 264.171

                                                                                                                                            40 CFR 264.172
                                                                                                     40 CFR 264.173

                                                                                                     40 CFR 264.174

                                                                                                     40 CFR 264.175
  f/ In many cases, there are no defined "units" at a CERCLA site. Instead, there are areas of contamination with differing concentration levels (including hot spots) of hazardous substances,
pollutants, or contaminants. When RCRA hazardous wastes are moved into or out of an area of contamination, RCRA disposal requirements are applicable to the waste being managed and
certain treatment, storage, or disposal requirements (such as for closure) are applicable  to the area where the waste is received.
                                                                  ***   AUGUSTS, 1988  DRAFT
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                  1-35

                                                                         EXHIBIT 1-3 (continued)

                              SELECTED ACTION-SPECIFIC POTENTIAL APPLICABLE OR RELEVANT AND APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS a/
     Actions b/
                                                Requirements
                                            Prerequisites for Applicability c/ ,d/
                                                                                                                                                  Citation
Container Storage
(continued)
Keep containers of ignitable or reactive
waste at least 50 feet from the facility's
property line.

Keep incompatible materials separate.
Separate incompatible materials stored
near each other by a dike or other barrier.

At closure, remove all hazardous waste
and residue from the containment system,
and decontaminate or remove all
containers, liners.

Storage of banned wastes must be in
accordance with 40 CFR 268. When such
storage occurs beyond one year, the
owner/operator bears the burden or
proving that such storage is solely for the
purpose of accumulating sufficient
quantities to allow for proper recovery,
treatment, and disposal.
                                                                                                                                          40 CFR 264.176
                                                                                                                                          40 CFR 264.177
                                                                                                                                          40 CFR 264.178
                                                                                                                                          40 CFR 268.50
Construction of New Landfill On-
Site (see Closure with Waste in
Place).
Minimum Technology Requirements :

Install two liners or more, a top liner that
prevents waste migration into the liner,
and a bottom liner that prevents waste
migration through the liner.h/

Install leachate collection systems above
and between the liners.
RCRA hazardous waste (listed or characteristic)
currently being placed in a new, replacement, or
expanded landfill.
                                                                                                                                          40 CFR 264.301
                                                                                                                                          40 CFR 264.301
  h/ Landfill units meeting the requirements of 40 CFR 264.310(f) are not subject to RCRA minimum technology requirements.
                                                                ***  AUGUSTS, 1988  DRAFT
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                1-36

                                                                       EXHIBIT 1-3 (continued)

                             SELECTED ACTION-SPECIFIC POTENTIAL APPLICABLE OR RELEVANT AND APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS a/
     Actions b/
                                              Requirements
                                           Prerequisites for Applicability c/ ,d/
                                                                                                                                            Citation
Construction of New Landfill
(see Closure with Waste in Place).
(continued)
Construct run-on and run-off control
system capable of handling the peak
discharge of a 25-year storm.

Control wind dispersal of particulates.

Operation and maintenance.

Close each cell with a final cover after the
last waste has been received.

Ground-water Monitoring

Establish a detection monitoring program
(264.98). Establish a compliance
monitoring program (264.99) and
corrective action monitoring program
(264.100) when required by 40  CFR
264.91. All monitoring program must
meet RCRA general ground-water
monitoring requirements (264.97)
                                                                               Creation of a new landfill unit to treat, store, or
                                                                               dispose of RCRA hazardous wastes as part of a
                                                                               response action.
40 CFR 264.301


40 CFR 264.301

40 CFR 264.303-304

40 CFR 264.310




40 CFR 264.91- 264.100
                                                               ***   AUGUSTS, 1988 DRAFT
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                  1-37

                                                                         EXHIBIT 1-3 (continued)

                              SELECTED ACTION-SPECIFIC POTENTIAL APPLICABLE OR RELEVANT AND APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS a/
     Actions b/
                                             Requirements
                                            Prerequisites for Applicability c/ ,d/
                                                                                                                                                   Citation
Construction of a New Surface
Impoundment (see Closure with
Waste in Place and Closure with
no Post-Closure Care)
Minimum Technology Requirements:

Use two liners, a top liner that prevents
waste migration into the liner and a
bottom liner that prevents waste
migration through the liner (throughout
the post-closure period).

Design liners to prevent failure due to
pressure gradients, contact with the waste,
climatic conditions, and the stress of
installation and daily operations.

Provide a leachate collection system
between the two liners.

Use a leak detection system that will
detect leaks at the earliest possible time.

Ground-water Monitoring

Establish a detection monitoring program
(264.98). Establish a compliance
monitoring program (264.99) and
corrective  action monitoring program
(264.100) when required by 40 CFR
264.91. All monitoring program must
meet RCRA general ground-water
monitoring requirements (264.97)
RCRA hazardous waste (listed or characteristic) currently
being placed in a new surface impoundment, or use of
replacement or lateral extension of existing landfills or
surface impoundments.
40 CFR 264.220



40 CFR 264.221



40 CFR 264.221

40 CFR 264.221
                                                                                 Creation of a new landfill unit to treat, store, or dispose of
                                                                                 RCRA hazardous wastes as part of a remedial action.
                                                                                                                                           40 CFR 264.91-264.100
                                                                 ***  AUGUSTS, 1988 DRAFT
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                  1-38

                                                                         EXHIBIT 1-3 (continued)

                             SELECTED ACTION-SPECIFIC POTENTIAL APPLICABLE OR RELEVANT AND APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS a/
     Actions b/
                                          Requirements
Prerequisites for Applicability c/ ,d/
                                                                                                                                             Citation
Dike Stabilization
                                Design and operate facility to prevent
                                overtopping due to overfilling: wind and wave
                                action; rainfall; run-on; malfunction of level
                                controllers, alarms, and other equipment; and
                                human error.

                                Construct dikes with sufficient strength to prevent
                                massive failure.

                                Inspect liners and cover systems during and after
                                construction.

                                Inspect weekly for proper operation and integrity
                                of the containment devices.

                                Remove surface impoundment from operation if
                                the dike leaks or there is a sudden drop in liquid
                                level.

                                At closure, remove or decontaminate  all waste
                                residues and contaminated materials. Otherwise,
                                free liquids must be removed, the remaining
                                wastes stabilized,  and the facility closed in the
                                same manner as a landfill.

                                Manage ignitable or reactive wastes so that it is
                                protected from materials or conditions that may
                                cause it to ignite or react.
Existing surface impoundment containing
hazardous waste, or creation of a new surface
impoundment.
                                                                                                                                       40 CFR 264.221
                                                     40 CFR 264.221
                                                     40 CFR 264.226
                                                     40 CFR 264.226
                                                     40 CFR 264.227
                                                     40 CFR 264.228
                                                     40 CFR 264.227
                                                                ***  AUGUSTS, 1988  DRAFT
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                   1-39

                                                                          EXHIBIT 1-3 (continued)

                              SELECTED ACTION-SPECIFIC POTENTIAL APPLICABLE OR RELEVANT AND APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS a/
    Actions b/
                                             Requirements
                                               Prerequisites for Applicability c/ ,d/
                                                                                                                                                     Citation
Discharge of Treatment System
Effluent
Best Available Technology:

Use of best available technology (BAT)
economically achievable is required to
control toxic and nonconventional
pollutants. Use of best conventional
pollutant control technology (BCT) is
required to control conventional pollutants.
Technology-based limitations may be
determined on a case-by-case basis.
                                                                                     Point source discharge to waters of the United
                                                                                     States, i/j/
40 CFR 122.44(a)
                                      Water Quality Standards:

                                      Applicable Federally approved State water
                                      quality standards must be complied with.
                                      These standards may be in addition to or
                                      more stringent than other Federal standards
                                      under the CWA. k/

                                      Discharge limitations must be established at
                                      more stringent levels  than technology-based
                                      standards for toxic pollutants.

                                      Best Management Practices:

                                      Develop and implement a Best Management
                                      Practices program to  prevent the release of
                                      toxic constituents to surface waters.
                                                                                                          40 CFR 122.44 and State
                                                                                                          regulations approved
                                                                                                          under 40 CFR 131
                                                                                                          40 CFR 122.44 (e)
                                                                                                          40 CFR 125.100
  i/ "Waters of the U.S." is defined broadly in 40 CFR 122.2 and includes essentially any water body and wetland.

  j/ Section 121 of SARA exempts on-site CERCLA activities from obtaining permits. However, the substantive requirements of a law or regulation must be met. In particular, on-site
discharges to surface waters are exempt from procedural NPDES permit requirements. Off-site dischargers would be required to apply for and obtain an NPDES permit.

  k/ Federal Water Quality Criteria may be relevant and appropriate depending on the designated or potential use of the water, the media affected, the purposes of the criteria, and current
information. (CERCLA §121(d)(2)(B)(i)) Federal Water Quality Criteria for the protection of aquatic life will be relevant and appropriate when environmental factors (e.g., protection of
aquatic organisms) are being considered. (50 FR 30784 [July 29, 1985]).
                                                                 ***  AUGUSTS, 1988  DRAFT
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                 1-40

                                                                        EXHIBIT 1-3 (continued)

                             SELECTED ACTION-SPECIFIC POTENTIAL APPLICABLE OR RELEVANT AND APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS a/
      Actions b/
                                          Requirements
                                              Prerequisites for Applicability c/ ,d/
                                                                                                                                                Citation
Discharge of Treatment System
Effluent (continued)
The Best Management Practices program
must:

•• Establish specific procedures for the
  control of toxic and hazardous pollutant
  spills.

• • Include a prediction of direction, rate of
  flow, and total quantity of toxic pollutants
  where experience indicates a reasonable
  potential for equipment failure.

•• Assure proper management of solid and
  hazardous waste in accordance with
  regulations promulgated under RCRA.

Monitoring Requirements:

Discharge must be monitored to assure
compliance. Discharge will monitor:

•• The mass of each pollutant
• • The volume of effluent
•• Frequency  of discharge and other
  measurements as appropriate

Approved test methods for waste constituent
to be monitored must be followed. Detailed
requirements  for analytical procedures and
quality controls are provided.

Sample preservation procedures, container
materials, and maximum allowable holding
times are prescribed.
Discharge to waters of the U.S. j/
                                                                                                                                           40CFR 125.104
                                                                                                                                           40 CFR 122.41(i)
                                                                                                                                           40CFR 136.1-136.4
  ]/ Section 121 of SARA exempts on-site CERCLA activities from obtaining permits. However, the substantive requirements of a law or regulation must be met. In particular,
on-site discharges to surface waters are exempt from procedural NPDES permit requirements. Off-site dischargers would be required to apply for and obtain an NPDES permit.
                                                               ***  AUGUSTS, 1988  DRAFT
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                  1-41

                                                                         EXHIBIT 1-3 (continued)

                              SELECTED ACTION-SPECIFIC POTENTIAL APPLICABLE OR RELEVANT AND APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS a/
     Actions b/
                                              Requirements
                                                Prerequisites for Applicability c/ ,d/
                                                                                                                                                      Citation
Discharge of Treatment System
Effluent (continued)
Comply with additional substantive
conditions such as:
                                                        40 CFR 122.41(i)
Direct Discharge to Ocean
•• Duty to mitigate any adverse effects of any
  discharge; and

•• Proper operation and maintenance of
  treatment systems.

Discharges causing "unreasonable degradation
of the marine environment" are not permitted.
Discharge to the marine environment. I/
40 CFR 125.123(b)
                                        A determination of whether a discharge will
                                        cause reasonable degradation of the marine
                                        environment must be made, based on
                                        consideration of:

                                        •• Quantity, composition, or persistence of
                                          pollutants to be discharged;

                                        •• Potential transport of pollutants by
                                          biological, chemical, or physical
                                          processes;

                                        • • Composition and vulnerability of exposed
                                          communities;

                                        • • Importance of the  receiving water to
                                          spawning, migratory paths, and surrounding
                                          biological community;
                                        • • Existence of special aquatic sites;

                                        •• Impact on human health and commercial
                                          fishing;
                                                                                                                                                 40 CFR 125.122
  I/ CWA §403 requires that an NPDES permit be issued for discharges into marine waters, including territorial seas, the contiguous zone, and the oceans. (40 CFR 122.2.) A permit is
not required if point of discharge is on-site.
                                                                 ***  AUGUSTS, 1988 DRAFT
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                   1-42

                                                                          EXHIBIT 1-3 (continued)

                              SELECTED ACTION-SPECIFIC POTENTIAL APPLICABLE OR RELEVANT AND APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS a/
      Actionsb/
                                              Requirements
                                                       Prerequisites for Applicability c/ ,d/
                                                                                                                                                    Citation
Direct Discharge to Ocean
(continued)
Discharge to Publicly Owned
Treatment Works (POTW) (off-
site activity, see footnote ml)
•• Applicable requirements of the Coastal
  Zone Management Plan (see Vol. 3 of
  this manual); and

• • Marine Water Quality Criteria developed
  under CWA §304(a)(l).

Comply with the limiting permissible
concentrations (LPCs) at the mixing zone
boundary that are established in the permit.

Discharge of pollutants that pass-through
the POTW without treatment, interfere with
POTW operation, contaminate POTW
sludge, or endanger health/safety of POTW
workers, is prohibited.

Specific prohibitions preclude the
discharge of pollutants to POTWs that:

•• Create a fire or explosion hazard in the
  POTW;

•• Will cause corrosive structural change to
  POTW;

•• Obstruct flow resulting in interference;

•• Are discharged at a flow rate and/or
  concentration that will result in
  interference; and

• • Increase the temperature of waste-water
  entering the treatment plant that would
  result in interference, but in no case raise
  the POTW influent temperature above
  104-F(40'C).
Indirect discharge to a POTW.
                                                                                                                                              40CFR 125.123(d)(l)
                                                                                                                                              40CFR403.5
  m/ Discharge to POTWs is considered an off-site activity (see p. 3-21 for discussion of requirements); therefore, requirements related to discharge to a POTW are not ARARs, but
are included in this exhibit for reference. Off-site actions must comply with all legally applicable requirements, both substantive and administrative. The concept of "relevant and appropriate"
is not available for off-site actions.
                                                                 ***  AUGUSTS, 1988  DRAFT
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                   1-43

                                                                          EXHIBIT 1-3 (continued)

                              SELECTED ACTION-SPECIFIC POTENTIAL APPLICABLE OR RELEVANT AND APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS a/
     Actions b/
                                        Requirements
                                                           Prerequisites for Applicability c/ ,d/
                                                                                                                                                        Citation
Discharge to Publicly
Owned Treatment Works
(POTW) (continued)
 • Discharge must comply with local POTW pretreatment
  program, including POTW-specific pollutants, spill
  prevention program requirements, and reporting and
  monitoring requirements.
                                                      40CFR403.5 and local
                                                      POTW regulations
Discharge of Dredge and
Fill Material to Waters of
the U.S. or Ocean Waters
                                  • RCRA permit-by-rule requirements (including
                                   corrective action where the NPDES permit was issued
                                   after November  8, 1984) must be complied with for
                                   discharges of RCRA hazardous wastes to POTWs.
The four conditions that must be satisfied before dredge
and fill is an allowable alternative are:

•• There must be no practical alternative.


•• Discharge of dredged or fill material must not cause a
  violation of State water quality standards, violate any
  applicable toxic effluent standards, jeopardize an
  endangered species, or injure a marine sanctuary.

•• No discharge shall be permitted that will cause or
  contribute to significant degradation of the water.
• • Appropriate steps to minimize adverse effects must be
  taken.

Determine long- and short-term effects on physical,
chemical, and biological components of the aquatic
ecosystem.
Transport of RCRA hazardous wastes to POTWs by         40 CFR 270.60
truck, rail, or dedicated pipe (i.e., pipe solely
dedicated for hazardous waste [as defined in 40 CFR
264] which discharges from within the boundaries of
the CERCLA site to within the boundaries of the
POTW).

Capping, dike stabilization, construction of beams          40 CFR 230
and levees, and disposal of contaminated soil, waste         33 CFR 320-330
material or dredged material are  examples of
activities that may involve a discharge of dredged or
fill material.
                                                                 ***  AUGUSTS, 1988  DRAFT
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                    1-44

                                                                          EXHIBIT 1-3 (continued)

                              SELECTED ACTION-SPECIFIC POTENTIAL APPLICABLE OR RELEVANT AND APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS a/
     Actions b/
                                           Requirements
                                                       Prerequisites for Applicability c/ ,d/
                                                                                                                                                      Citation
Dredging
Excavation
Gas Collection

Ground-Water Diversion



Incineration
                                   Removal of all contaminated soil.
Dredging must comply with Section 10 of the Rivers
and Harbors Act and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
regulations.

Movement of excavated materials to new location
and placement in or on land will trigger land disposal
restrictions for the excavated waste or closure
requirements for the unit in which the waste is being
placed.

Area from which materials are excavated may require
cleanup to levels established by closure requirements.

[CAA requirements to be provided.]

Excavation of soil for construction of slurry wall
may trigger closure or land disposal restrictions.


Analyze the waste  feed.

Dispose of all hazardous waste and residues,
including ash, scrubber water, and scrubber sludge.

No further requirements apply to incinerators that
only burn wastes that are listed as hazardous solely
by virtue of combination with other wastes, and if
the waste analysis  demonstrates that no Appendix VII
constituent is present that might reasonably be
expected to be present.
RCRA hazardous waste placed at site after the
effective date of the requirements, or placed into
another unit.

Dredging in navigable waters of the United States.
                                                                                          Materials containing RCRA hazardous wastes subject
                                                                                          to land disposal restrictions are placed in another
                                                                                          unit.
                                                                                          RCRA hazardous waste placed at site after the
                                                                                          effective date of the requirements.
Materials containing RCRA hazardous waste subject
to land disposal restrictions are placed into another
unit.

RCRA hazardous waste.
See Closure in this
Exhibit.


33U.S.C. 403
33 CFR 320-330
                                                       40 CFR 268 (Subpart D)
                                                       See Closure in this
                                                       Exhibit.
See Consolidation in this
Exhibit.


40 CFR 264.341

40 CFR 264.351


40 CFR 264.340
                                                                  ***   AUGUSTS, 1988  DRAFT
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                 1-45

                                                                        EXHIBIT 1-3 (continued)

                             SELECTED ACTION-SPECIFIC POTENTIAL APPLICABLE OR RELEVANT AND APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS a/
     Actions b/
                                         Requirements
                                                      Prerequisites for Applicability c/ ,d/
                                                                                                                                                  Citation
Incineration (continued)
Performance standards for incinerators:

• • Achieve a destruction and removal efficiency of
  99.99 percent for each principal organic hazardous
  constituent in the waste feed and 99.9999 percent
  for dioxins:

• • Reduce hydrogen chloride emissions to 1.8 kg/hr
  or 1 percent of the  BC1 in the stack gases before
  entering any pollution control devices; and
• • Not release particulate in excess of 180 mg/dscm
  corrected for amount of oxygen in stack gas.

Monitoring of various parameters during operation
of the  incinerator is required.
These parameters include:

•• Combustion temperature;
• • Waste feed rate;
•• An indicator of combustion gas velocity; and
• • Carbon monoxide.

Control fugitive emissions either by:

•• Keeping combustion zone sealed or
•• Maintaining combustion-zone pressure lower than
  atmospheric pressure

Utilize automatic cutoff system to stop waste feed
when operating conditions deviate.
                                                                                        RCRA hazardous waste.
                                                                                                                                             40 CFR264.343
                                                                                                                                             40 CFR264.342
                                                                                                                                             40 CFR 264.343
                                                                                                                                             40 CFR 264.343
                                                                                                                                             40 CFR 264.345
                                                                ***   AUGUSTS, 1988  DRAFT
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                 1-46

                                                                        EXHIBIT 1-3 (continued)

                             SELECTED ACTION-SPECIFIC POTENTIAL APPLICABLE OR RELEVANT AND APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS a/
     Actions b/
                                        Requirements
                                                    Prerequisites for Applicability c/ ,d/
                                                                                                                                                  Citation
Incineration (continued)
Land Treatment
Special performance standard for incineration of
PCBs:

•• Achieve a destruction and removal efficiency of
  99.9999 percent;

•• Either 2 second dwell time at 1200 degrees
  O(±100) and 3 percent excess oxygen in stack
  gas; or 1.5 second dwell time at 1600 degrees C.
  and 2 percent excess  oxygen in stack gas; and

•• For non-liquid PCBs, mass air emissions from the
  incinerator shall be no greater than 0.001 g. KB
  per kg  of the PCBs entering the incinerator.

Prior to land treatment, the waste must be treated to
BDAT levels or meet a no migration standard.

Ensure that hazardous constituents are degraded,
transformed, or immobilized within the treatment
zone.

Maximum depth of treatment zone must be no more
than 1.5 meters (5 feet) from the initial soil surface
and more than 1 meter (3 feet) above the seasonal
high water table.

Demonstrate that hazardous constituents for each
waste can be completely degraded, transformed, or
immobilized in the treatment zone.

Minimize run-off of hazardous constituents.

Maintain run-on/run-off control and management
system.
Liquid and non-liquid PCBs at concentrations of 50
ppm or greater.
                                                                                                                                             40 CFR761.70
                                                                                      RCRA hazardous waste being treated or placed into
                                                                                      another unit.
                                                                                                                                             40 CFR264.271



                                                                                                                                             40 CFR264.271




                                                                                                                                             40 CFR264.271



                                                                                                                                             40 CFR 264.273

                                                                                                                                             40 CFR 264.273
                                                                ***   AUGUSTS, 1988  DRAFT
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                   1-47

                                                                          EXHIBIT 1-3 (continued)

                              SELECTED ACTION-SPECIFIC POTENTIAL APPLICABLE OR RELEVANT AND APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS a/
     Actions b/
                                            Requirements
                                                    Prerequisites for Applicability c/ ,d/
                                                                                                                                                     Citation
Land Treatment (continued)
Operation and Maintenance
(O&M)

Placement of Liquid Waste in
Landfill
Placement of Waste in Land
Disposal Unit
Special application conditions if food-chain crops
are grown in or on treatment zone.

Unsaturated zone monitoring.

Special requirements for ignitable or reactive
waste.

Special requirements for incompatible wastes.

Special testing and location requirements for
certain hazardous wastes.

30-year post-closure care to ensure that site is
maintained and monitored.

Liquids in Landfills Prohibition:
                                     No bulk or non-containerized liquid hazardous
                                     waste or hazardous waste containing free liquids
                                     may be disposed of in landfills.

                                     Containers holding free liquids may not be placed
                                     in a landfill unless the liquid is mixed with an
                                     absorbent or solidified.

                                     Land Disposal Restrictions:
                                     Attain land disposal "treatment standards" before
                                     putting waste into landfill in order to comply with
                                     land ban restrictions. A treatment standard can be
                                     either: (1) a concentration level to be achieved
                                     (performance-based) or (2) a specified technology
                                     that must be used (technology-based). If the
                                     standard is performance-based, any technology
                                     can be used to achieve the standard. (See
                                     Treatment when Waste will be Land Disposed.)
RCRA waste #s F020, F021, F022, F023, F026, F027
(dioxin-containing wastes).

Land disposal closure.
                                                    Placement of a bulk or non-containerized RCRA
                                                    hazardous waste in a landfill.
40 CFR 264.276


40 CFR 264.278

40 CFR 264.281


40 CFR 264.282

40 CFR 264.283


40 CFR 264.310
                                                                                                                                               40 CFR 264.314
                                                                                                          40 CFR 264.314
                                                    Placement of RCRA hazardous waste in a landfill,
                                                    surface impoundment, waste pile, injection well, land
                                                    treatment facility, salt dome formation,  salt bed
                                                    formation, or underground mine or cave.
                                                      40 CFR 268 (Subpart D)
                                                                 ***   AUGUSTS, 1988  DRAFT
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                    1-48

                                                                           EXHIBIT 1-3 (continued)

                              SELECTED ACTION-SPECIFIC POTENTIAL APPLICABLE OR RELEVANT AND APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS a/
      Actions b/
                                            Requirements
                                              Prerequisites for Applicability c/ ,d/
                                                                                                                                                  Citation
Slurry Wall
Surface Water Control
Tank Storage (On-Site)
Excavation of soil for construction of
slurry wall may trigger land disposal
restrictions.
Prevent run-on and control and collect
run-off from a 24-hour 25-year storm
(waste piles, land treatment facilities,
landfills).

Prevent over-topping of surface
impoundment.

Tanks must have sufficient structural
strength to ensure that they do not
collapse, rupture, or fail.

Waste must not be incompatible with the
tank material unless the tank is protected
by a liner or by other jeans.

Tanks must be provided with secondary
containment and controls to prevent
overfilling, and sufficient freeboard
maintained in open tanks to prevent
overtopping by wave action or
precipitation.


Inspect the following: overfilling control,
control equipment, monitoring data, waste
level (for uncovered tanks), tank
condition, above-ground portions of tanks
(to assess their structural integrity), and the
area surrounding the tank (to identify signs
of leakage).

Repair any corrosion, crack, or leak.
Materials containing RCRA hazardous waste subject
to land disposal restrictions are placed in another
unit. (See Treatment section for LDR schedule. Also
see Consolidation, Excavation sections in this
Exhibit.)

RCRA hazardous waste treated, stored, or disposed
after the effective date of the  requirements.
Storage of RCRA hazardous waste (listed or
characteristic) not meeting small quantity generator
criteria held for a temporary period greater than 90
days before treatment, disposal, or storage elsewhere
(40 CFR 264.10), in a tank(i.e., any portable device
in which a material is stored, transported, disposed
of, or handled). A generator who  accumulates or
stores hazardous waste on-site for 90 days or less in
compliance with 40 CFR 262.34(a)(l-4) is not
subject to full  RCRA storage requirements. Small
quantity generators are not subject to the 90 day limit
(40 CFR 262.34(c), (d), and (e)).
                                                                                                                                           40 CFR 264.25l(c).(d)
                                                                                                                                           40 CFR 264.273(c).(d)
                                                                                                                                           40CFR264.301(c).(d)
                                                                                                                                           40 CFR 264.221 (c)
                                                                                                                                           40 CFR 264.190
                                                                                                                                           40 CFR 264.191
                                                                                                                                           40 CFR 264.193-194
                                                                                                                                           40 CFR 264.195
                                                                                                                                           40 CFR 264.196
                                                                  ***  AUGUSTS, 1988  DRAFT
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                 1-49

                                                                        EXHIBIT 1-3 (continued)

                             SELECTED ACTION-SPECIFIC POTENTIAL APPLICABLE OR RELEVANT AND APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS a/
      Actions b/
                                          Requirements
                                           Prerequisites for Applicability c/ ,d/
                                                                                                                                           Citation
Tank Storage (On-Site)
(continued)
Treatment (in a unit)
At closure, remove all hazardous waste
and hazardous waste residues from tanks,
discharge control equipment, and
discharge confinement structures.

Store ignitable and reactive waste so as to
prevent the waste from igniting or
reacting. Ignitable or reactive wastes in
covered tanks must comply with buffer
some requirements in "Flammable and
Combustible Liquids Code." Tables 2-1
through 2-6 (National Fire Protection
Association, 1976 or 1981).

Storage Prohibitions:

Storage of banned waste must be in
accordance with 40 CFR 268. When such
storage occurs beyond one year, the
owner/operator bears the burden of
proving that such storage is solely for the
purpose of accumulating sufficient
quantities to allow for proper recovery,
treatment and disposal.

Design and operating standards for unit
in which hazardous waste is treated. (See
citations at right for design and operating
requirements for specific unit.)
                                                                                Treatment of hazardous waste in a unit.
                                                                                                                                     40 CFR 264.197
                                                                                                                                     40 CFR 264.198
                                                                                                                                     40 CFR 268.50
40 CFR 264.190-264.192
(Tanks)
40 CFR 264.221 (Surface
Impoundments)
40 CFR 264.251 (Waste Piles)
40 CFR 264.273 (Land Treatment
Unit)
40 CFR 264.343- .345
(Incinerators)
40 CFR 264.601 (Miscellaneous
Treatment Units)
40 CFR 265.373 (Thermal
Treatment Units)
                                                                ***   AUGUSTS, 1988  DRAFT
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                   1-50

                                                                          EXHIBIT 1-3 (continued)

                              SELECTED ACTION-SPECIFIC POTENTIAL APPLICABLE OR RELEVANT AND APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS a/
       Actions b/
                                           Requirements
                                                Prerequisites for Applicability c/ ,d/
                                                                                                                                              Citation
Treatment (when Waste will be
Land Disposed)
Treatment of waste subject to ban on land
disposal must attain levels achievable by best
demonstrated available treatment
technologies (BDAT) for each hazardous
constituent in each listed waste, if residual is
to be land disposed. If residual is to be
further treated, initial treatment and any
subsequent treatment that produces residual
to be treated need not be BDAT, if it does not
exceed value in CCWE (Constituent
Concentration in Waste Extract) Table, for
each applicable water. (See 51 FR 40642,
November 6, 1986.)
Disposal of contaminated soil and debris resulting
from CERCLA response actions or RCRA
corrective actions is not subject to land disposal
prohibitions and/or treatment standards for
solvents, dioxins, or California list wastes until
November 8, 1990 (and for certain first third
wastes until August 8, 1990).

All wastes listed as hazardous in 40 CFR Part 261
as of November 8, 1984, except for spent solvent
wastes and dioxin-containing wastes, have been
ranked with respect to volume and intrinsic
hazards, and are scheduled for land disposal
prohibition and/or treatment standard
determinations  as follows:

Solvents and dioxins             Nov. 8, 1986
California list wastes             July  8, 1987
One-third of all ranked and       Aug. 8, 1988
   hazardous wastes
Underground injection of         Aug. 8, 1988
   solvents and dioxins and
   California list wastes
CERCLA response action and     Nov. 8, 1988
   RCRA corrective action soil
   and debris
Two-thirds of all ranked and      July  8,1989
   listed hazardous wastes
All remaining ranked and         May 8,  1990
   listed hazardous wastes
   identified by characteris-
   tic under RCRA section
   3001
Any hazardous  waste listed        Within 6 mos.
   or identified under RCRA      of the date of
   section 3001 after            identification
   November 8, 1984            or listing.
40 CFR 268.10
40 CFR 268.11
40 CFR 268.12
40 CFR 268.41
40 CFR 268 (Subpart D)
                                                                                                                                        51 FR 40641
                                                                                                                                        52 FR 25760
                                                                 ***  AUGUSTS, 1988 DRAFT
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                    1-51

                                                                          EXHIBIT 1-3 (continued)

                              SELECTED ACTION-SPECIFIC POTENTIAL APPLICABLE OR RELEVANT AND APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS a/
       Actions b/
                                             Requirements
                                              Prerequisites for Applicability c/ ,d/
                                                                                                                                                Citation
Treatment (when Waste will be
Land Disposed) (continued)
Underground Injection of
Wastes and Treated Ground
Water
BDAT standards for spent solvent wastes
and dioxin-containing wastes are based on
one of four technologies or combinations:
for waste waters, (1) steam stripping, (2)
biological treatment, or (3) carbon
absorption [alone or in combination with
(1) or (2)]; and for all other wastes, (4)
incineration. Any technology may be used,
however, if it will achieve the
concentration levels specified.

UIC program prohibits:

• • Injection activities that allow movement
  of contaminants into underground
  sources of drinking water which may
  result in violations of MCLs or adversely
  affects health.

• • Construction of new Class IV wells, and
  operation and maintenance of existing
  wells.


Class IV wells are banned except for
reinjection of treated ground water  into  the
same formation from which it was
withdrawn, as part of a CERCLA cleanup
or RCRA corrective action.
                                                     40 CFR 268.30
                                                     RCRA Sections 3004(d)(3),
Approved UIC program is required in States listed
under SDWA section 1422. (All States have been
listed.) Class I wells and Class IV wells are the
relevant classifications for CERCLA sites. Class I
wells are used to inject hazardous waste, beneath
the lowermost formation containing, within  one
quarter mile, an underground source of drinking
water (USDW). n/ Class IV wells are used to inject
hazardous or radioactive waste into or above a
formation which contains, within one quarter mile
of the well,  an underground source of drinking
water.
                                                                                                                                        42U.S.C. 6924 (d)(3),
                                                                                                                                        40 CFR 144.12
                                                                                                                                        40 CFR 144.13
                                                                                                                                        40 CFR 144.13(c)
  n/ An underground source of drinking water (USDW) is a non-exempted aquifer or its portion which:  (1) supplies any public water system, or (2) which contains a sufficient quantity
of ground water to supply a public water system and currently supplies drinking water for human consumption or contains fewer than 10,000 mg/1 total dissolved solids. (40 CFR 144.3.)
                                                                  ***   AUGUSTS, 1988  DRAFT
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                   1-52

                                                                          EXHIBIT 1-3 (continued)

                              SELECTED ACTION-SPECIFIC POTENTIAL APPLICABLE OR RELEVANT AND APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS a/
      Actions b/
                                            Requirements
                                             Prerequisites for Applicability c/ ,dJ
                                                                                                                                                 Citation
Background Injection of
Wastes and Treated Ground
Water (continued)
The Director of the UIC program in a state
may lessen the stringency of 40 CFR
144.52 construction, operation, and
manifesting requirements for a well if
injection does not occur into, through, or
above a USDW or if the radius of
endangering influence (see 40 CFR
146.06(c)) is less than or equal to the
radius of the well.

• •Report non-compliance orally within 24
  hours.

• •Prepare, maintain, and comply with
  plugging and abandonment plan.

Monitor Class I wells by:

• •frequent analysis of injection fluid;


••continuous monitoring of injection
  pressure, flow rate, and volume; and

••installation and monitoring of ground-
  water monitoring wells.

Applicants for Class I permits must:

• •Identify all injection wells within the
  area of review.

••Task action as necessary to ensure that
  such well are properly sealed,
  completed, or abandoned to prevent
  contamination of USDW.

Criteria for determining whether an aquifer
may be determined to be an exempted
aquifer include current and future use,
yield, and water quality characteristics.
                                                                                                                                          40 CFR 144.16
                                                                                 Class I wells.
                                                                                 Class I wells are used to inject hazardous waste, beneath
                                                                                 the lowermost formation containing, within one quarter
                                                                                 mile, an underground source of drinking water
                                                                                 (USDW).
                                                                                                                                          40 CFR 144.28(b)
                                                                                                                                          40 CFR 144.51(b)
40 CFR 144.28(g)(l)
                                                                                                                                          40 CFR 144.55
                                                                                                                                          40 CFR 146.4
                                                                 ***   AUGUSTS, 1988  DRAFT
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                  1-53

                                                                         EXHIBIT 1-3 (continued)

                              SELECTED ACTION-SPECIFIC POTENTIAL APPLICABLE OR RELEVANT AND APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS a/
     Actions b/
                                           Requirements
                                             Prerequisites for Applicability c/ ,dJ
                                                                                                                                               Citation
Underground Injection of
Wastes and Treated Ground
Water (continued)
Case and cement all Class I wells to prevent
movement of fluids into USDW, taking
into consideration well depth, injection
pressure, hole size, composition of injected
waste, and other factors.

Conduct appropriate geologic drilling logs
and other tests during construction.

Injection pressure may not exceed a
maximum level designed to ensure that
injection does not initiate new fractures or
propagate existing ones and cause the
movement of fluids into a USDW.

Continuous monitoring of injection
pressure, flow rate, and volume, and
annual pressure, if required.

Demonstration of mechanical integrity is
required every 5 years.

Ground-water monitoring may also be
required

Comply with State underground injection
requirements.

Hazardous waste to be injected is subject to
land ban regulations. (See section 4.2.2.1
of this manual.) Treated ground water that
meets the definition of hazardous waste
and is to be injected also is subject to land
ban regulations.
(See above)
40CFR 144.28(e)(l)
                                                                                                                                         40CFR 146.12(d)
                                                                                                                                         40CFR 146.13
                                                                                                                                         40 CFR 147
                                                                                                                                         40 CFR 268.2
                                                                 ***  AUGUSTS, 1988 DRAFT
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                1-54

                                                                       EXHIBIT 1-3 (continued)

                             SELECTED ACTION-SPECIFIC POTENTIAL APPLICABLE OR RELEVANT AND APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS a/
     Actions b/
                                        Requirements
Prerequisites for Applicability c/ ,d/
                                                                                                                                         Citation
Waste Pile
                                 Use a single liner and leachate collection
                                 system.
                                 Waste put into waste pile subject to land
                                 ban regulations (see Appendix of this
                                 manual).
RCRA Hazardous waste, non-containerized
accumulation of solid, nonflammable hazardous waste
that is used for treatment or storage.
                                                                                                                                40CFR264.251
                                                                                                                                40CFR268.2
                                                               ***  AUGUSTS, 1988  DRAFT  ***

-------
                                        1-55
1.2.4 GENERAL PROCEDURE FOR IDENTIFICATION AND ANALYSIS OF ARARS

      ARARs should be identified at several points in the remedy selection process.
They must be identified on a site-specific basis, and therefore as additional
information is developed about the site, including the specific chemicals at the
site, special features of the site location, and the actions that are being
considered as remedies, more ARARS will progressively be identified and the list of
"potential" ARARs further refined. The lead and support agency  (Federal or State
Superfund program) are responsible for the identification of ARARs with assistance
from other EPA/State program offices and other Federal/State agencies a appropriate
(including information and technical assistance). Regions must work closely with
States,  who are responsible for indentifying State ARARs in a timely manner, to
ensure that State ARARs are identified at the critical points in the remedial
planning process. Regions must also work closely with States operating Federally
authorized programs under RCRA, the Clean Water Act  (CWA), the Clean Air Act, or
other statutes that are sources of potential ARARs.17

      Many statutes and the regulations promulgated under them contain requirements
that may be applicable or relevant and appropriate. Exhibit 1-9 at the end of this
chapter lists the statutes under which potential ARARs may have been promulgated.

      In order to provide guidance on ARARs identification, this manual describes in
detail the steps in the thought process involved in determining whether a
requirement is applicable or relevant and appropriate. However, as experience is
gained in identification, the determination may be streamlined to consideration of
key factors. For example, if the hazardous substance at the site is identical to a
RCRA listed hazardous waste, but its source is unknown, RCRA requirements will not
be applicable but may be relevant and appropriate if the action taken is regulated
by RCRA.

      The decision framework for ARARs determination, as described in this
manual,  has five steps:

      (1)   The first step in the process, using the procedures described in this
            guidance in Exhibit 1-4 and accompanying text is to identify potential
            ARARs. For chemical-specific requirements under RCRA, CWA, and SDWA,
            location-specific requirements under several statutes, and
            action-specific requirements under RCRA, CWA, and SDWA, potential
            requirements have already been identified and are listed in Exhibits
            1-1, 1-2, and 1-3, respectively. These exhibits will be expanded in
            subsequent drafts of this manual to include the requirements of
            additional environmental laws.

      (2)   Using the procedures described in the flowchart in Exhibit 1-5 and
            accompanying text, analyze the potential ARARs to determine whether
         Under the Clean Water Act,  States may be authorized to implement the permit
requirements of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System  (NPDES); under
the Clean Air Act, national ambient air quality standards are implemented,
maintained, and enforced through State Implementation Plans  (SIPs).


                         *  *  *   AUGUST  8,  1988 DRAFT   *  *  *
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        1-56
            they are actually applicable to the particular conditions at the site.

       (3)   If the requirements are not applicable, using the procedures outlined in
            the flowchart in Exhibit 1-7 and discussed in section 1.2.4.3, analyze
            them to determine whether they are relevant and appropriate to the
            particular conditions at the site.

       (4)   In developing the site risk assessment, which is used to determine
            protectiveness, criteria, guidances, advisories, and proposed standards
            may be used in addition to ARARs.  These to-be-considered criteria,
            guidances, advisories and proposed standards are not promulgated
            requirements  (and are not potential ARARs), but are an important
            component of the protectiveness determination required by the statutes.
            The Superfund Public Health Evaluation Manual provides guidance on
            conducting site-specific risk assessments and the use of TBCs.

       (5)   Determine whether circumstances are present that might justify a waiver
            of any otherwise applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements.

      Subsequent to the initiation of the remedial action new standards based on new
scientific information or awareness may be developed and these standards may differ
from the cleanup standards on which the remedy was based. These new ARARs or TBCs
should be considered as part of the review conducted at least every five years under
CERCLA §121(c) for sites where hazardous substances remain on-site. The review
requires EPA to assure that human health and the environment are being protected by
the remedial action. Therefore, the remedy should be examined in light of any new
standards that would be applicable or relevant and appropriate to the circumstances
at the site or pertinent new TBCs, in order to ensure that the remedy is still
protective. In certain situations, new standards or the information on which they
are based may indicate that the site presents a significant threat to health or
environment.  If such information comes to light at times other than at the five-year
reviews, the necessity of acting to modify the remedy should be considered at such
times.

      An overview of the general procedure for identifying ARARs at different points
in the remedial planning process is summarized in Exhibit 1-4. Identification of
ARARs should begin following the scoping and site characterization phase of the
Remedial Investigation, when sufficient information has been developed so that
initial Judgments can be made about the chemicals present at the site and any
special characteristics of the site location that must be taken into account. As
Exhibit 1-4 indicates, the first steps in the identification of ARARs, following the
determination of chemicals present and the determination of special location
characteristics, should be a review of the matrices in this manual for
chemical-specific and location-specific ARARs. Action-specific ARARs will first be
considered during the development of remedial alternatives. Each of these steps is
described in detail in the balance of this section and in sections 1.3 and 1.4.
                                AUGUST  8,  1988  DRAFT
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                 1-57
                                            EXHIBIT 1-4
                                  Procedure for Identifying ARARs
                                                               Remedial Investigation  (RI)—
                                                               Scoping and Site Characterization
                                         Consult Scoping and Site
                                           Characterization Data
                          List All
                         Chemicals
                          Present
                     Go To Exhibit 1-1
                         [P»je 1-16]
                      Chemical-Specific
                           Matrix
                        For Potential
                        Requirements*
                            I
                     Determine Actual
                    Chemical - Specific
                          ARARs
                       (Go to General
                    Procedures For Deter-
                     mining Applicability
                     and Relevance and
                      Appropriateness)
                       [P«(t 1-62 * 66]
      List All
      Location
    Characteristics
 Go To Exhibit 1-2
     [P«ge 1-27]
  Location-Specific
       Matrix
    For Potential
    Requirements
  Determine Actual
 Location - Specific
       ARARs
   (Go to General
Procedures For Deter-
 mining Applicability
  and Relevance and
   Appropriateness)
   [Page 1-62 & 66]
                                    AUGUST
                                                 1988  DRAFT
Word-searchable version -Not a true copy

-------
                                             1-58
                                     EXHIBIT 1-4 (cont'd)

                               Procedure for Identifying ARARs
                                                Feasibility Study (FS) Development of
                                                Alternatives - Initial Screening Stage
                     Develop Alternatives and Conduct Initial
                                  Screening.
                    Identify Probable Action - Specific ARARs
                    for Alternatives Passing Thru Initial Screen.
                              (Go To Exhibit 1-3
                                  (PMt 1- 31)
                            Action-Specific Matrix)
                        List Remedial Actions and Likely
                            Action-Specific ARARs
                         Go To General Procedures For
                          Determining Applicability and
                         Relevance and Appropriateness
                                    1-62 and 66]
                        Detailed Analysis of Alternatives:
                      List All Alternatives and All of Their
                      Identified ARARs (Action-Specific);
                          Document Alternatives and
                             Their ARARs in FS
                             Selection of Remedy:
                         Document Reason For Selecting
                        Remedial Alternative and How Its
                      ARARs Were Identified and Complied
                         With (or Waived) in the ROD.
         Note that chemical-specific ARARs will generally be  the  same for all alternatives,

         and need not be repeat  to  each alternative. A single list of chemical-specific ARARs

         should be developed during the site characterization phase of the Remedial

         Investigation and modified during the remedy selection process.
Word-searchable version — Not a true copy

-------
                                        1-59


      1.2.4.1  Procedure for Identifying ARARs

      Chemical-Specific ARARs

      Those chemicals identified at the site should be compared to the chemicals
listed in Exhibit 1-1, which lists chemical-specific standards under several
statutes. (Until Exhibit 1-1 is completed with chemical-specific standards from all
environmental statutes, it will be necessary to supplement the matrix in Exhibit 1-1
with a review of standards in other statutes, obtained by consulting Exhibit 1-9.)
If a chemical-specific standard is found in Exhibit 1-1, note the statute and its
jurisdictional prerequisites under which the standard was established. This
information will be necessary for determining if the chemical-specific standard is
applicable or relevant and appropriate. (Although in most cases a standard found
under the "potential ARAR" section of the matrix will be found to be an ARAR for
site-specific chemicals and exposure pathways, Remedial Project Managers  (RPMs)
should follow the procedure for determining whether these probable ARARs are
actually applicable or relevant and appropriate to a given site, as outlined in
Sections 1.2.4.2 and 1.2.4.3 of this manual.) If more than one standard is found for
a particular chemical, the most stringent should generally be identified as the
likely ARAR. Finally, the standards identified as probable ARARs should all be
analyzed according to the procedures outlined in the Superfund Public-Health
Evaluation Manual. When ARARs do not exist for a particular chemical or when the
existing ARARs are not protective of human health or the environment, advisories
found in the to-be-considered category should also be used.

      Location-Specific ARARs

      Similarly, following the completion of Phase I of the Remedial Investigation,
site characterization, any special characteristics of the site  (e.g., presence of
wetlands, habitat of endangered species, or historically significant features)
should be compared to the list of location-specific requirements in Exhibit 1-2. If
a location-specific requirement is found in Exhibit 1-2, the statute and its
jurisdictional requirements should be noted, so that the additional analysis
described in sections 1.2.4.2 and 1.2.4.3 of this manual can be completed. In noting
the statutory and regulatory requirements, determine whether the statute is
prohibitory (e.g. prohibits new activity)  or in retroactive (e.g. requires that
existing conditions be rectified).

      Action-Specific ARARs

      Action-specific requirements probably will not be identified for most sites
until the development of alternatives in the Feasibility Study. Additional
action-specific requirements should be identified and refined as appropriate during
remedial design, when specific information regarding size and operation of treatment
facilities will be available. Exhibit 1-4 indicates this difference by separating
the identification of action-specific ARARs from the identification of
chemical-specific and location-specific ARARs. Once possible action alternatives
have been developed and screened to
                               AUGUST  8,  1988  DRAFT
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        1-60

a workable number, they should be broken down into operable units and the type of
actions that are covered by potentially applicable or relevant and appropriate
statutes should be reviewed (e.g., disposal into a POTW of non-volatile substances
probably will not involve Clean Air Act (CAA)  considerations, therefore potential
CAA requirements need not be reviewed further for that specific action).

      Following the initial identification, the possible action alternatives should
be compared to Exhibit 1-3  (Action-Specific Requirements)  in this manual. Currently,
this matrix includes RCRA and CWA action-specific requirements.

      1.2.4.2. General Procedure for Determining if a Requirement is Applicable

      This manual describes the process for determining applicability. The procedure
is no different from that involved in determining the applicability of laws to any
activity,  but is provided here to promote a consistent approach to identifying
applicable requirements. The basic criterion for an applicable requirement is that
it directly and fully addresses or regulates the hazardous substance, pollutant,
contaminant, action being taken, or other circumstances at a site. Applicability is
established by the terms of the laws and regulations promulgating the requirements
being analyzed. To determine whether a particular requirement would be legally
applicable, it is necessary to refer to the specific terms or jurisdictional
prerequisites of the statute or regulation. All pertinent jurisdictional
prerequisites must be met for the requirement to be applicable. These jurisdictional
prerequisites include:

          Who,  as specified by the statute or  regulation,  is subject to its
          authority;18

     "     The types of substances or activities listed as  falling under the
          authority of the statute or regulation;

     "     The time period for  which the statute or regulation is in effect;  and

          The types of activities the statute  or regulation requires,  limits,  or
          prohibits.

     These  statutory  or  regulatory provisions must  then  be  compared to the pertinent
facts about the CERCLA site and the CERCLA response actions under consideration, an
outlined by Exhibit 1-5. To determine if a requirement is applicable, examine its
language and determine whether it would otherwise legally apply to the site or the
response action. This procedure may need to be undertaken for each potentially
applicable requirement and for each potential action alternative  (identification of
action-specific ARARs will be
      18Although the lead agency may be managing the CERCLA site,  and for the
purposes of the ARARs analysis would be the operator, it is not an owner/operator
for the purposes of CERCLA Sections 107 or 101(20) .

                         *  *  *   AUGUST  8,  1988  DRAFT   *  *  *
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        1-61

completed during the detailed analysis of alternatives), since different
requirements, even those within the same group of regulations, may have different
iurisdictional prerequisites. In addition, the analysis should be repeated for each
different operable unit, technology, or component of the remedial action.

     Exhibit  1-5  provides  an outline of the  general  procedure for determining
if a requirement is applicable. Based on the site scoping and characterization, or
for action-specific ARARs the initial screening phase of the Remedial
Investigation/Feasibility Study (and review during remedial design), the pertinent
facts concerning the site should be identified. Many of these facts, such as the
chemicals present, special characteristics of the location of the site, and the type
of action under consideration for the site,  will already have been determined in
connection with the identification of potential ARARs. Other facts, such as the
approximate date when substances were placed at the site, may also be necessary to
determine if the requirement applies. Different categories of information will be
necessary to determine the jurisdictional prerequisites of different requirements,
and not all categories listed in Exhibit 1-5 will be pertinent in all cases. Exhibit
1-6 indicates where subsequent chapters of this manual discuss the jurisdictional
prerequisites of particular requirements.

     In  summary,  once  the  pertinent  facts  have  been  determined,  they should be
compared with the jurisdictional prerequisites of the requirement. These
jurisdictional prerequisites can be found in Exhibits 1-1, 1-2, and 1-3 and are
explained further in subsequent chapters of this manual. They also appear in the
text of the relevant statute or regulation.  If the jurisdictional prerequisites are
met, the requirement is applicable.  If not,  the next step is to consider whether the
requirement is relevant and appropriate.
                                AUGUST  8,  1988  DRAFT
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                             1-62
                                          Exhibit 1-5

                              General Procedure for Determining

                                 If Requirement is Applicable
                          Identify Pertinent Facts Concerning
                           Situation at Site or Operable Unit:

                          • Type of Substances
                          • When Substances Placed at Location
                          • Type of Site or Special Location
                          • Persons Affected
                          • Identify Types of Response Action or
                            Technology Under Consideration for
                            Site or Operable Unit
                          • Other Characteristics
                               Review and List the Provisions
                         of Each Potential Applicable Requirement

                                 • Substances Covered
                                 • Time Period Covered
                                 • Types of Facilities Covered
                                 • Persons Covered
                                 • Actions Covered
                                . • Other Prerequisites
                Compare Pertinent Facts About the Chemicals Present, the Location of,
                  and the Types of Action/Technology under Consideration at the Site
                                  to Prerequisites for Requirements
                                        Are All
                                       Pertinent
                                       Provisions
                                    for Requirements
                                         Met?
                                      Requirement
                                      is Applicable
Go to Procedure
for Determining if
 Requirement is
  Relevant and
   Appropriate
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        1-63
                                    EXHIBIT 1-6
                         ARAR JURISDICTIONAL PREREQUISITES
  Chemical—Specific ARARs

  RCRA MCLs


  SDWA MCLs

  CWA WQCs
 List of Possible
  ARARs  (pages)

1-16


1-16

1-17 to 1-23
   Jurisdictional
 Prerequisites/Text
  Discussion (pages)
 2-4 thru 2-14
 2-23 thru 2-27

 4-3, 4-8

 3-10
Location-Specific ARARs

RCRA
* National Historic
     Preservation Act

* Endangered Species Act

Clean Water Act

* Wilderness Act

* Fish and Wildlife
     Coordination Act

* Wild and Scenic Rivers Act

* Coastal Zone Management Act

40 CFR Part 6 Appendix A
   List of Possible
    ARARs  (pages)

  Fault  Zone,  1-27
  Flood  Plain,  1-27
  Salt Dome
  Formation,  1-27
  1-27

  1-27

  1-28

  1-28


  1-28

  1-28

  1-28

  1-28
   Jurisdictional
 Prerecrui sites/Text
 Discussion (pages)

1-25
1-25

1-25
1-25

1-25

1-26

1-26


1-26

1-26

1-26

1-26
  These and other statutes will  be  addressed in a later addition of this manual.
                               AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT
 Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        1-64


                              EXHIBIT  1-6  (continued)

                         ARAR JURISDICTIONAL  PREREQUISITES
Action-Specific ARARs

RCRA Capping

     Closure

     Container  Storage

     New  Landfill

     New  Surface  Impoundment

     Dike Stabilization

     Excavation,  Ground-Water
           Diversion

     Incineration

     Land Treatment

     Land Disposal

     Slurry Wall

     Tank Storage

     Treatment

     Waste Pile

CWA Discharge to Water of  US

     Direct Discharge
           to  Ocean

     Discharge  to  POTW

     Dredge/Fill
SDWA Underground  Injection
             Control
List of Possible ARARs
ARARs  (pages)

1-31, 1-32

1-32, 1-33

1-34, 1-35

1-35, 1-36

1-37

1-38

1-44


1-44, 1-45, 1-46

1-46, 1-47

1-34, 1-47, 1-50,  1-51

1-48

1-48, 1-49

1-49, 1-50, 1-51

1-54

1-39, 1-40, 1-41

1-41, 1-42


1-42, 1-43

1-43, 1-44


1-51, 1-52, 1-53
    Jurisdictional
  Prerequisites/Text
  Discussion  (pages)

2-15

2-15,  2-19

2-12,  2-13

2-15,  2-18

2-15,  2-18

2-15

2-15,  2-21


2-14

2-14,  2-15, 2-18

2-15,  2-18

2-15,  2-21

2-12,  2-13

2-14

2-15,  2-18

3-2, 3-3, 3-4

3-2, 3-3, 3-4, 3-5


3-5, 3-6, 3-21, 3-22

3-2, 3-3, 3-6, 3-28,
3-29

4-9, 4-10, 4-11
                               AUGUST  8,  1988  DRAFT    *  *  *
 Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        1-65

     1.2.4.3  General Procedure for Determining if a Requirement is Relevant and
              Appropriate

     A particular requirement could be "relevant and appropriate" even if it is not
"applicable." The basic considerations are whether the requirement (1) regulates or
addresses problems or situations sufficiently similar to those encountered at the
CERCLA site (i.e., relevance), and (2) is appropriate to the circumstances of the
release or threatened release, such that its use is well suited to the particular
site. Determining whether a requirement is relevant and appropriate is site-specific
and must be based on best professional judgment. This judgment is based on a number
of factors, including the characteristics of the remedial action, the hazardous
substances present at the site,  and the physical circumstances of the site and of
the release,  as compared to the statutory or regulatory requirement.  All
requirements found to be applicable or relevant and appropriate must be complied
with.

     Exhibit 1-7 outlines the general procedure and factors to consider in
determining whether a requirement is relevant and appropriate. The factors listed in
the left-hand column-relate to the problem that the requirement is designed to
address or to the goal that the requirement is intended to attain; the factors in
the right-hand column relate to the problem present at the CERCLA site and the
objective of the remedial action.  The relative importance of these factors will vary
from site to site depending on the kind of ARARs under consideration  (chemical-,
action-,  or location-specific),  and on site-specific conditions.

     Both  sets of factors in Exhibit  1-7 should be defined narrowly.  For example,
the goal of both RCRA corrective action requirements and the CERCLA cleanup might be
defined as protection of human health and the environment. However,  in analyzing
whether the corrective action requirements are relevant and appropriate,  such a
definition of goals would be too broad. Instead, the goal of the RCRA corrective
action requirement might be characterized as the cleanup of a plume of ground-water
contamination from a distinct source. This would be compared to the goal of the
CERCLA action,  such as cleanup of area-wide ground-water contamination.

     Determining whether a requirement is both relevant and appropriate is
essentially a two step process.  First, the determination focuses on whether a
requirement is relevant based on a comparison between the action, location,  or
chemicals, covered by the requirement and related conditions of the site,  the
release,  or the potential remedy.  This step should be a screen which will determine
the relevance of the potentially relevant and appropriate requirement under
consideration.  The second step is to determine whether the requirement is
appropriate by further refining the comparison, focusing on the
nature/characteristics of the substances, the characteristics of the site,  the
circumstances of the release, and the proposed remedial action.
                               AUGUST  8,  1988  DRAFT
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                               1-66
                                            Exhibit 1-7


                               General Procedure for Determining
                           if Requirement is Relevant and Appropriate
                                    During the Identification Stage,
                                For Each Requirement Not Found to be
                                  Applicable, Review Factors Below to
                                Determine if CERCLA Problem Situation
                                  is Sufficiently Similar to the Problem
                                  that the  Requirement in Question is
                                   Designed to Remedy or Address
      Factors Relating to Origin and Objective
          of the Requirement in Question
   • Specific Goals and Objective of Requirement


   • Purpose of Requirement in Program of Origin


   • Media Regulated/Affected by Requirement

   • Substances Covered by Requirement
   • Entities Regulated/Affected

   • Action or Activity Regulated by Requirement


   • Variances, Waivers, or Exemptions of
     Requirement

   • Type of Physical Location Regulated or


   • Type of Structure or Facility Regulated or
     Affected

   • Requirement's Consideration of Use or
     Potential Use of Affected Resource
Factors Relating to Problem Present at CERCLA
Site or Operable Unit that Must be Addressed by
              Remedial Action
 • Specific Goals and Objectives of CERCLA
  Remedial Action at Site

 • Use of Requirement at Site Consistent with
  Purpose

 • Media Contaminated/Affected by Cleanup

 • Substances Involved at Site

 • Entities Affected

 • Remedial Action Contemplated at the Site
  and Duration of Activity

 • Circumstances at Site-Do they Fit
  Requirements for Variances
  Waivers, or Exceptions

 • Type  of Physical Location Involved


 • Type  of Structure or Facility Involved


 • Use or Potential Use of Resource
  Involved
                         Refine the Comparison Considering:  Nature/Character
                             of the Substances; Characteristics of the Site;
                       Circumstances of the Release; Proposed Response Action.
                                             Use Best
                                           Professional
                                     Judgment: Based on Con-
                                   sideration of Above Factors, Is
                                     Requirement Both Relevant
                                         tod Appropriate?
                                                  Yes
                           Try to Subdivide
                       Requirement into Smaller
                           Parts that may be
                          Sufficiently Similar
                      then Analyze and Compare
                         Requirement is Not
                       Relevant and Appropriate
                                           Requirement is
                                      Relevant and Appropriate
Word-searchable version — Not a true copy

-------
                                        1-67
     A requirement may be relevant but not appropriate  for the  specific  site.  Only
those requirements that are determined to be both relevant and appropriate must be
complied with. A requirement may be found relevant because it closely matches  the
site on some of the factors listed in Exhibit 1-7, but may not be appropriate
because the site circumstances differ significantly on other key factors. While some
requirements within a regulation will be relevant and appropriate, other
requirements in that same regulation may be relevant  (in that they address in  a
broad sense the same problem as is faced at the CERCLA site), but not appropriate
because the requirement is not well-suited to the circumstances at the CERCLA  site,
or to the threat to human health and the environment posed by the circumstances of
the release.

     In comparing the requirement and the site circumstances or the  circumstances
of the release, some of the following factors from Exhibit 1-7 and related
considerations might be particularly important in determining whether a requirement
is appropriate:

            the purpose of the requirement;

            the physical characteristics  (size/nature) of the site and
            contamination;

            the character and circumstances of the release at the  site compared to
            what the requirement was intended to address and  requires;

            the substances covered by the requirement  (e.g.,  the chemical
            characteristics, form or concentration of  the contamination or release
            for which the requirement was designed);

            the duration of the activity;

            the basis for a waiver or exemption;

In addition, one should consider:

            whether another requirement is available that more fully  matches  the
            circumstances at the site; and

            where EPA has explicitly decided that a requirement  is not appropriate
            to a situation, that requirement will not  be appropriate  for  such a
            situation at a CERCLA site.

     Portions of a requirement may be relevant and appropriate  even  if a
requirement in its entirety is not.  For example,  parts of the requirements for
design and operation of a waste pile found in 40 CFR §264.251,  such  as the
requirement to use a liner of sufficient strength and thickness to prevent failure
due to pressure gradients,  might be considered relevant and appropriate,  while that
portion of the design requirements calling for installation of a liner covering all
surrounding earth likely to be in contact
                               AUGUST  8,  1988  DRAFT
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        1-68

with the waste might not be appropriate if such earth is already contaminated and
the eventual remedy is to remove all of that earth.

     When the analysis results in a determination  that a requirement  is both
relevant and appropriate, such a requirement must be complied with to the same
degree as if it were applicable.

     Included below are  several examples of situations where requirements might be
relevant but not appropriate:

     1.   A requirement  may be relevant  to  the  particular  site  because  it  addresses
a similar type of facility or entity,  but not appropriate because of differences in
the duration of the activity. For example,  the RCRA requirements for secondary
containment of tanks and other storage units may not be appropriate for temporary,
short-term storage.

     2.   Many  RCRA requirements  are  designed to  apply  to  specific  types  of
discrete units.  These requirements may be relevant because they address the same
wastes and activities, such as closure of hazardous wastes in a landfill,  but may be
inappropriate because of the physical size of the contamination at the CERCLA site.
For example, although they may be appropriate for smaller areas, the requirements
for capping may not be appropriate in some circumstances for large dispersed areas
of low-level soil contamination such as may be found at many large municipal
facilities .

     3.   A requirement  may also  be  found  relevant but  not  appropriate  when another
requirement is available that has been designed to apply to that specific situation,
reflecting an explicit decision about the requirements appropriate to that
situation. For example,  the Agency has made a determination under RCRA that Subtitle
C is not an appropriate means of regulating on a national basis certain mining waste
from the extraction or beneficiation of ores and minerals (51 FR 24496,  July 3,
1986).  Therefore, since that explicit, formal determination has been made, Subtitle
C requirements will generally not be relevant and appropriate to these wastes from
extraction or beneficiation of ores and minerals.

     4.   RCRA  regulations  affecting  disposal or  landfill  closure  require  the  site
to be capped with a final cover designed and constructed to provide long-term
minimization of the migration of liquids through the capped area. However, such
requirements related to the need for an impermeable cover may not be appropriate in
some circumstances if the wastes are largely immobile, and there will be no direct
contact threat.

     5.   A location-specific  requirement may prohibit  prospectively  the  deposit  of
certain substances in a floodplain.  This prohibition may be appropriate with regard
to remedial options in considering whether to create new disposal units in the
floodplain.  However, it is not likely to be appropriate to remove large existing
landfills from the floodplain.

     6.   MCLs  (under RCRA  and under  SDWA)  are  relevant  and appropriate to
remediation of ground water that may be used for drinking.  However, MCLs are
                                AUGUST  8,  1988  DRAFT
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         1-69
generally not appropriate where ground water is not potentially drinkable due to
widespread naturally occurring contamination or due to location in a large industrial
area with substantial contamination where there is no actual, planned, or potential
use of ground water for drinking.19 In addition, MCLs are generally not appropriate
for site-specific circumstances where a well would never be placed and ground water
would thus never be consumed  (e.g., a twenty-foot strip of land between the toe of a
landfill and river, if there is no surface water contamination resulting from man-made
ground-water contamination at the site).

     Not all of the specific  factors listed in Exhibit 1-7 will need  to be considered  in
determining whether a requirement is relevant and appropriate. Only the pertinent
factors need be considered. For chemical-, location-, and action-specific
requirements, the following factors should generally be considered:

Chemical-Specific
Specific Goal and Objective of
     Requirement
Specific Goals and Objective of
      CERCLA Remedial Action at
      Site
Purpose of Requirement in Program
     of Origin

Substances Covered by Requirement

Media and Entities Regulated/
     Affected/Protected by Requirement
Variances, Waivers or Exemptions of
     Requirements
Use of Requirement at Site
      Related to Purpose

Substances Involved at Site

Media and Entities Potentially/
      Actually Contaminated/
      Affected by Cleanup

Circumstances at Site - - Do they
      Fit Requirements for
      Variance, Waiver, or
      Exemption or Otherwise
      Contradict some Implicit
      Assumption Underlying the
      Requirement
Requirement's Consideration of Use or
     Potential Use of Affected Resource
Use or Potential Use of Resource
      Involved
      19 ,
        Ground water in such industrial area (where there is no actual, planned,
or potential use of ground water for drinking)  would still be classified as Class
IIB aquifers, although MCLs may be determined to be relevant and appropriate.
                                AUGUST
                                          1988  DRAFT
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         1-70
Location-Specific
Specific Goal and Objective of
     Requirement
Specific Goals and Objective of
      CERCLA Remedial Action at
      Site
Purpose of Requirement in Program
     of Origin
Use of Requirement at Site
      Related to Purpose
Type of Physical Location Regulated or
     Affected
Location Involved
Action or Activity Prohibited/Required
     by Requirement
Activity
Remedial Action Contemplated at
      Site and Duration of
Variances, Waivers or Exemptions
Circumstances at Site -- Do they
      Fit Requirements for
      Variance, Waiver, or
      Exemption
Requirement's Consideration of Use or
     Potential Use of Affected Resource
Use or Potential Use of Resource
      Involved
Action-Specific
Specific Goal and Objective of
     Requirement
Specific Goals and Objective of
      CERCLA Remedial Action at
      Site
Purpose of Requirement in Program
     of Origin
Use of Requirement at Site
      Related to Purpose
Substances Covered by Requirement

Media and Entities Regulated/
     Affected/Protected by Requirement
Substances Involved at Site

Media and Entities Potentially/
      Actually Contaminated/
      Affected by Cleanup
Action or Activity Regulated by
     Requirement
Remedial Action Contemplated at
      Site and Duration of
      Activity
Variances, Waivers or Exemptions
Circumstances at Site — Do they
      Fit Requirements for
      Variance, Waiver, or
      Exemption
Type and Size of Facility, Unit, Release
      (e.g. Size of Release) Regulated or
     Affected
Type and Size of Facility Unit,
      Release Involved
                         *  *  *   AUGUST 8,  1988  DRAFT
                                                       *  *  *
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         1-71

Requirement's Consideration of Use or           Use or Potential Use of Resource
     Potential Use of Affected Resource               Involved

1 . 3  CERCLA WAIVER CRITERIA FOR ARARS

     CERCLA §121 provides that under certain circumstances  an otherwise applicable  or
relevant and appropriate requirement may be waived. These waivers apply only to
meeting ARARs with respect to remedial actions on-site; other statutory requirements,
such as that remedies be protective of human health and the environment, cannot be
waived. A waiver must be invoked for each ARAR that will not be attained or exceeded.
The waivers provided by CERCLA §121(d)(4), some circumstances under which each waiver
might be invoked, and criteria for invoking the waivers are discussed below.

1.    Interim Measures

     [T]he remedial action selected is only part of a total remedial action that will
     attain such level or standard of  control when completed.(CERCLA §121(d)(4)(A).)

     This waiver may be applicable to  interim measures that are expected to be
followed within a reasonable time by complete measures that will attain ARARs. The
interim measures waiver may apply to sites at which a final site remedy is divided
into several smaller actions.

     For example, the selected remedy  at a site may include excavation  and treatment
of the source.  However,  the treatment method may require treatability testing or time
for set-up or construction.  During this time,  an interim measure involving
stabilization,  such as a cap,  of the source may be appropriate.  In such a
circumstance,  the interim measure waiver would allow the present stabilization actions
at the site to constitute the initial components of a phased remedial response. These
actions would not be required to attain landfill closure ARARs under RCRA because the
response would not be complete.

     The factors that may be appropriate for invoking this  waiver include:

     "     Potential  for  exacerbation of  site problems. The  interim  measure  should  not
           directly  cause  additional migration  of  contaminants,  complicate  the site
           cleanup,  or present  an  immediate threat  to  public health  or  the
           environment; and

           Non-interference with  final  remedy.  The  interim measure selected  must  not
           interfere  with, preclude, or delay the  final remedy,  consistent with EPA's
           priorities  for  taking  further  action.
                                AUGUST  8,  1988  DRAFT
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         1-72

2 .    Greater Risk to Health and the Environment.

      [C]ompliance with such requirement at the  facility will  result  in  greater  risk  to
     human health and the environment than alternative options.  (CERCLA
     §121(d)(4)(B).)

     This waiver may be invoked for an ARAR  that can only be  met by  using  remedial
action that, because it meets that ARAR, poses greater risks  than a  similar remedial
alternative that does not meet that ARAR.  This waiver could be used  to  "salvage" a
remedial action option that would cause greater environmental damage or health  risks
solely because that option had to meet all ARARs, especially  where one ARAR causes the
problem. For example, attaining the ambient concentration level for  PCBs spread
throughout river sediment might require widespread dredging of the sediments, causing
an unacceptable release of the pollutant to the water body and damaging or disrupting
the ecosystem.  Waiving the ARAR for ambient PCB concentrations in the sediment would
eliminate the need to conduct such harmful dredging.

     Meeting an ARAR could also pose greater  risks  to workers or residents.  For
example, excavation of a particularly toxic,  volatile,  or explosive  waste to meet an
ARAR could pose high short-term risks.  If protective measures were not practicable,
then use of this waiver might be appropriate.

     Specific  factors that may be considered  in  invoking the  waiver  for preventing
greater risks include:

          Magnitude of adverse  impacts. The  risk posed  or  the likelihood  of  present
          or future risks posed by  the  remedy using the waiver  should  be
          significantly  less  than that  posed by the totally  compliant  remedy posing
          the  risk;

     "    Duration  of adverse impacts.  The more long lasting the  risks  from  the
          totally compliant  remedy,  the more this  waiver becomes  appropriate;  and

          Reversibility  of adverse  impacts.  This waiver is especially  appropriate if
          the  risks posed by  meeting the ARAR could cause  irreparable  damage.

     Remedies protective of human health and  the environment  but not meeting  all ARARs
should be compared to the remedy meeting ARARs that causes the minimum  adverse
impacts. The additional public health and environmental benefits of  not meeting all
ARARs must be weighed against the adverse impacts caused by not doing so.  Only  the
ARARs that cause the greater risk are eligible to be waived.

3 .    Technical Impracticability

      [C]ompliance with such requirement is technically impracticable from  an
     engineering perspective. (CERCLA §121(d)(4)(C).)
                                AUGUST 8,  1988  DRAFT
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         1-73

     The term "impracticable" implies an unfavorable balance of engineering
feasibility and reliability. The term "engineering perspective" used in the statute
implies that cost, although a factor, is not generally the major factor in the
determination of technical impracticability. A remedial alternative that is feasible
might be deemed technically impracticable if it could only be accomplished at an
inordinate cost. For instance, attainment of an ARAR might be possible, but constant
maintenance problems might require such an exorbitant amount of money that the
alternative would not be considered reliable, and thus would be infeasible from an
engineering perspective.

     Furthermore, the use of  the term "impracticable" implies that remedies
that are not demonstrated but that are thought to be feasible cannot be
eliminated because of this waiver.  Thus, this waiver may be used for cases
where:   (1)  neither existing nor innovative technologies can reliably attain
the ARAR in question, or (2) attainment of the ARAR in question would be
illogical or infeasible from an engineering perspective.

     The technical impracticability waiver may be invoked when either  of the  following
specific criteria are met:

     "     Engineering  feasibility.  The  current  engineering  methods necessary  to
           construct  and maintain an alternative  that will meet the ARAR cannot
           reasonably be implemented.

           Reliability.  The  potential  for  the alternative  to continue  to be protective
           into  the  future is  low,  either  because the continued reliability of
           technical  and institutional controls  is doubtful,  or because of inordinate
           maintenance  costs.

4.    Equivalent Standard of Performance

     [T]he remedial  action  selected will attain  a standard  of performance that is
     equivalent to that required under  the otherwise applicable standard, requirement,
     criteria, or limitation, through use of another method or approach.  (CERCLA
     §121(d)(4)(D).)

     This waiver may be used  in situations where an ARAR stipulates use of a
particular design or operating standard, but equivalent or better remedial
results (e.g., contaminant levels or reliability) could be achieved using an
alternative design or method of operation. For instance, an alternative may
involve reduction of either the mobility or toxicity of a hazardous substance
through specific form of treatment. The waiver may be invoked where a substitute form
of treatment from that specified or required in the ARAR (e.g.,  fixation instead of
incineration) achieves comparable reductions in either mobility or toxicity.

     The CERCLA Reauthorization Conference Committee's  Statement of Managers  makes the
following point with regard to this waiver:
                                AUGUST  8,  1988  DRAFT
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                          1-74
           Subsection [121]  (d)(4)(D) allows the selection of a remedial  action that
           does not comply with a particular Federal or State standard or requirement
           of environmental law, where an alternative provides the same level  of
           control as that standard or requirement through an alternative means  of
           control. This allows flexibility in  the  choice of technology  but does  not
           allow  any lesser standard or any other basis (such as a risk-based
           calculation)  for determining the required level of control. However, an
           alternative standard may be risk-based if the original standard was
           risk-based.

     The  following specific  factors may be considered in deciding whether to  invoke
this waiver:

           The time  required to achieve beneficial results using the  alternative
           remedy is  equal to or less  than the original ARAR. An alternative that
           achieved  similar results in significantly  less time should be considered  as
           advantageous;

     "     Degree of  protection of health, welfare, and the environment  (e.g.,
           environmental  concentration achieved)  is equal to or greater than that
           under  the  original ARAR;

           Level  of performance achieved compared to  that specified in the ARAR  (e.g.,
           concentration  of residuals); and

           Reliability  of the remedy.  The potential for the alternative ARAR to
           continue  to  be protective into the future  in equal to or greater than that
           afforded by  the ARAR to be  waived.

5.    Inconsistent Application  of State Requirements

     [W]ith  respect to a  State  standard,  requirement, criteria,  or limitation, the
     State has not consistently applied (or demonstrated the intention to consistently
     apply)  the  standard,  requirement,  criteria,  or  limitation in similar
     circumstances at  other  remedial  actions. (CERCLA §121(d)(4)(E).)

     This waiver is intended to prevent unjustified  or unreasonable  restrictions from
being imposed on cleanups. The  issues  raised  by this  waiver  are  closely tied to those
involved in the  definition of "promulgated."

     This waiver may be  used in two situations.  First,  State requirements may have
been developed and promulgated  but  never  applied  because  of  a  lack of applicability in
past situations.  Such  requirements  should not be  applied  in  CERCLA actions  where there
is evidence that the State does  not intend to apply  them.  Second,  State standards  that
have been variably applied or inconsistently  enforced may give  reason to invoke the
inconsistent application waiver. A standard is  presumed to have  been  consistently
applied unless there is evidence to the  contrary.

                         * *  *  AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT   * * *
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        1-75
      Consistency of application may be determined by:

         Similarity of sites or response circumstances  (nature of contaminants  or
         media affected,  characteristics of waste and facility, degree of danger or
         risk, other hazardous waste management programs, etc.);

         Proportion of non-compliance cases (including enforcement actions);

      "  Reason for non-compliance;

      "  Intention to consistently apply future requirements as demonstrated by
         policy statements, legislative history, site remedial planning documents,
         or State  responses to Federal-lead sites; newly promulgated requirements
         shall be presumed to embody this intention unless there is contrary
         evidence.

5.     Fund Balancing

      [I]n the case of a remedial action to be undertaken solely under section 104
      using the Fund, selection of a remedial action that attains such level or
      standard of control will not provide a balance between the need for protection
      of public health and welfare and the environment at the facility under
      consideration, and the availability of amounts from the Fund to respond to
      other sites which present or may present a threat to public health or welfare
      or the environment, taking into consideration the relative immediacy of such
      threats. (CERCLA §121(d)(4)(F).)

      The Fund-balancing waiver may be invoked when meeting an ARAR would entail
such cost in relation to the added degree of protection or reduction of risk
afforded by that standard that remedial action at other sites would be jeopardized.
(Even with this waiver, the remedy must still comply with the statutory requirement
to be protective of human health and the environment).

      The following criteria may be considered when invoking the Fund-balancing
waiver for ARARs:

         The cost of implementing a remedy that would attain the ARAR in question.

         The availability of amounts in the Fund to respond to other sites  (includes
         consideration of the number of sites and expected cost of remediation)  is
         not adequate because attainment of the ARAR would reduce the availability
         of Fund monies for other sites. Projections should show that significant
         threats from other sites may be addressed under the current Fund if the
         ARAR were not attained.
                         *  *  * AUGUST  8,  1988  DRAFT  *  *  *
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        1-76

1.4   OTHER CRITERIA OR GUIDELINES TO BE CONSIDERED  (TBCs)

      In addition to legally binding laws and regulations, many Federal and State
environmental and public health programs also develop criteria, advisories,
guidance, and proposed standards that are not legally binding, but that may provide
useful information or recommended procedures. These materials are not potential
ARARs but are evaluated along with ARARs, as part of the risk assessment conducted
for each CERCLA site, to set protective cleanup level targets. Chemical-specific TBC
values such as health advisories and reference doses will be used in the absence of
ARARs or where ARARs are not sufficiently protective to develop cleanup goals. In
addition, other TBC materials such as guidance or policy documents developed to
implement regulations may be considered and used as appropriate, where necessary to
ensure protectiveness.  The TBC values and guidelines may be used as appropriate.
After the risk assessment has been conducted, if no ARARs address a particular
situation, or if existing ARARs do not ensure protectiveness, to-be-considered
advisories, criteria, or guidelines should be used to set cleanup targets. Note that
it may be necessary in the risk assessment to express the TBC values in different
units (e.g., daily intake)  in order to apply then. For instance, TBC values
expressed as dosages may have to be converted to concentration levels before they
can be used.

      Exhibit 1-10 at the end of this chapter lists other Federal criteria,
advisories, guidance, and standards that should be considered. EPA is not aware of
any comprehensive listing of State TBCs, which should nevertheless be evaluated for
use in a particular site cleanup. Exhibit 1-8 outlines a procedure for determining
when such material should be used. The basic criterion in whether use of the
material to be considered is necessary to protect public health or the environment
at a CERCLA site. For example, although Health Effects Advisories (HEAs) are not
legally binding standards,  and may not be fully current, they may provide the best
available standard for a particular chemical for which no binding standard exists.
In that case, the HEA should be evaluated using the procedures in the Superfund
Public Health Evaluation Manual, and if the standard is necessary to achieve a
protective remedy it should be used.

      TBCs should only be used in setting protective cleanup levels after
ascertaining that they have not been superceded. For specific TBC values, and
related explanatory material and EPA contacts, consult the EPA Integrated Risk
Information System (IRIS).  IRIS is a computer-based catalogue of EPA risk assessment
and risk management information for chemical risk assessment and risk management
information for chemical substances, accessible through the Agency's electronic mail
system.21
      20 See the discussion of risk assessment in Section  1.2.3.1  above  and The
Superfund Public Evaluation Manual (October 1986; 9285.4-1)

      21 Training  is  available.  For general  questions,  contact the IRIS  coordinator
at FTS 382-7315.

                         *  *  * AUGUST 8,  1988  DRAFT  *  * *
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         1-77
                                     Exhibit 1-8

                       General Procedure for Determining

                  if Guidance or Criteria Should be Considered
                                 Conduct ARAR Identification
                               and Identify Guidance, Criteria, or
                               Advisory from To-Be-Considered
                                         List (TBC).
                                 (For TBCs See Exhibit 1-10).
                                 Analyze ARARs and TBCs as
                                 Pan of Risk Assessment (See
                                   Superfund Public Health
                                     Evaluation Manual).
Use Superfund
Public Health Evaluation
Manual to Analyze Use Of
Non-Enforceable Chemical-
Specific Standards


Use CERCLA
Guidance on
Feasibility Studies
to Analyze Use of
Other Standards


                                            I
                                   If Guidance, Criteria, or
                                   Advisory are Necessary to
                                     Achieve A Protective
                                       Remedy, Should
                                          Be Used
                                            I
                                       Document And
                                       Justify Use Of
                                           TBCs
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        1-78

1.5  DOCUMENTATION

      Guidance provided in this manual on ARAR and TBC documentation updates and
supersedes other sources such as the  Guidance on Feasibility Studies Under CERCLA
(April 1985), materials distributed at ROD workshops, and the Preamble to the NCP
(November 1985).  Detailed documentation of ARARs, as described below, should be
provided in an Appendix to the RI/FS Report, and a summary included in the ROD. When
revised,  the RI/FS guidance and the ROD guidance currently being developed will
discuss specific guidelines, and this manual will be revised where necessary.

      The following documentation should always be supplied in an Appendix to the
RI/FS Report in the discussion of the analysis of Federal and State ARARs:

         Documentation should provide a rationale for the decision that a
         chemical-, location-, or action-specific requirement is applicable,
         or is relevant and appropriate for that specific site, for each
         remedial action alternative that passed through the screening and
         into detailed analysis.   The rationale should include an
         explanation of the analysis loading to the determination of
         applicability, or relevance and appropriateness. If more than one
         requirement is determined to be ARAR in connection with the same
         substance, action, or site-specific condition, and if the standards
         are inconsistent or in conflict, the general rule is to comply with
         the most stringent requirement.

         When an alternative is chosen that does not attain an ARAR, the
         basis for waiving the requirement must be fully documented and
         explained.

      "  Documentation may also be appropriate in some cases when a potential
         ARAR is initially identified but ultimately is found not to be ARAR. For
         example, information may become available late in the RI/FS phase of the
         project that changes the status of a requirement from ARAR to not ARAR.
         When a requirement is expected to be ARAR, and the determination is
         difficult, the factors indicating why the standard was not ARAR should
         be stated and explained in sufficient detail so that the basis for the
         decision can be understood by a later reviewer.
      22 Note that chemical-specific ARARs will generally be the  same  for all
alternatives. A single list of chemical-specific ARARs should be developed and
modified during the remedy selection process. In most cases, documentation of the
identification of chemical-specific ARARs need not be repeated for each
alternative.
                         *  *  *  AUGUST  8,  1988  DRAFT  *  *  *
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                       1-79

      The following documentation should be provided in an Appendix to the RI/FS
Report for the analysis of other Federal and State criteria, advisories.
guidance, and proposed standards to be considered  (TBCs).

         If no potential ARARs are identified covering a particular
         situation, or if potential ARARs  are determined not to be
         protective, any pertinent criteria, advisories, guidance, or
         proposed standards should be used, and the reasons for their use
         should be fully documented.

      "  Documentation need not be provided for negative determinations
         related to TBCs. That is, reasons for determining that to-be-
         considered standards are not pertinent do not need to be
         documented.

      In addition to the circumstances specified above, documentation should be
provided for both ARARs and to-be-considered standards in every case in which, in
the decision-maker's judgment, the documentation would strengthen the RI/FS
Report and the ROD.
                         *  *  *  AUGUST 8,  1988 DRAFT * * *
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                             1-80

                                                                           EXHIBIT 1-9
                                                            UNIVERSE OF APPLICABLE OR RELEVANT AND
                                                                  APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS a/

1.      Office of Solid Waste
       Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (42 U.S.C. 6901) b/
       a.   40 CFR Part 264, applicable for permitted facilities c/, and 40 CFR Part 265, for interim status facilities.
            - -  Ground-water Protection (40 CFR 264.90-264.101)
            - -  Ground-water Monitoring, Subpart F (40 CFR 264.98-264.100) d/
            - -  Closure and Post-Closure (40 CFR 264.110-264.120, 265.110-265.120)
            - -  Containers (40 CFR 264.170-264.178, 265.190-265.177)
            - -  Tanks (40 CFR 264.190-264.200, 265.190-265.199)
            - -  Surface Impoundments (40 CFR 264.220-264.249, 265.220-265.230)
            - -  Waste Piles (40 CFR 264.250-264.269, 265.250-265.258)
            - -  Land Treatment (40 CFR 264.270-264.99, 265.270-265.282)
            - -  Incinerators (40 CFR 264.340-264.999, 265.340-265-369)
            - -  Land Disposal Restrictions (40 CFR 268.1-268.50)
            - -  Dioxin-containing Wastes (50 FR 1978). Includes the final rule for the listing of dioxin-containing waste.
       b.   Statutory requirements, including:
            - -  Liquids in Landfills (RCRA §3004(c))
            - -  Minimum  Technology Requirements (RCRA §3004(o), 3005(j))
            - -  Dust Suppression (RCRA §3004(e))
            - -  Hazardous Waste Used as Fuel (RCRA §3004(q))
       c.   Open Dump Criteria - pursuant to RCRA Subtitle D: criteria for classification of solid waste disposal facilities (40 CFR Part 257).
            Note: For nonhazardous wastes.
2.      Office of Water
       The Safe Drinking Water Act (42 U.S.C. 300(f))
       a.   Maximum Contaminant Levels (chemicals, turbidity, and microbiological contamination) (for drinking water or human consumption (40 CFR 141.11-141.16).
       b.   Maximum Contaminant Level Goals (40 CFR 141.50-141.51, 50 FR 46936)
       c.   Underground Injection  Control Regulations (40 CFR Parts 144, 145,  146, 147).
       Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251)
       Requirements established pursuant to sections 301 (effluent limitations), 302 (effluent limitations), 303 (water quality standards, including State water quality standards), 304
       (Federal water quality criteria), 306 (national performance standards), 307 (toxic and pretreatment standards, including Federal pretreatment standards for discharge into
       publicly owned treatment works, and numeric standards for toxics), 402 (national pollutant discharge elimination system), 403 (ocean discharge criteria), and 404 (dredged
       or fill material) of the Clean Water Act, (33 CFR Parts 320-330, 40 CFR Parts 122, 123, 125, 131, 230,231, 233, 400-469). Available ambient Water Quality

                                                        *  *  *  AUGUST  8,   1998  DRAFT *  * *
 Word-searchable version  — Not a true  copy

-------
                                                                            1-81

                                                                          EXHIBIT 1-9
                                                                          (Continued)

                                                           UNIVERSE OF APPLICABLE OR RELEVANT AND
                                                                  APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS

         Criteria Documents are listed at 45 FR 79318, November 28, 1980; 49 FR 5831, February 15, 1984;
         50 FR 30784, July 29, 1985; 51 FR 22978, June 28, 1986; 51  FR 43665, December 3, 1986; 51  FR 8012, March 7, 1986;
         52 FR 6213, March 2, 1987.

         Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act (33 U.S.C. 1401)
         Ocean Dumping Requirements (40 CFR Parts 220-223, Subchapter H)

         Discharge of dredged materials into ocean, (33 CFR Parts 320-329, 40 CFR Parts 122, 123, 125, 131, 230, 231, 233, 400-469). Incineration at sea requirements (40 CFR
         Parts 220-225, 227, 228). See also 40 CFR 125.120-125.124.

         Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act prohibits unauthorized obstruction or alteration of navigable waters
         (33 CFR Parts 320-329, 40 CFR Parts 122, 123, 125, 131, 230, 231, 233, 400-469).
     "    EPA's Statement of Procedures on Floodplains Management and Wetlands Protection. (40 CFR Part 6 Appendix A) f/

3.    Office of Pesticides and Toxic Substances

         Toxic Substances Control Act (15 U.S.C. 2601)

         a.   PCB Requirements Generally: 40 CFR Part 761; Manufacturing Processing, Distribution in Commerce, and Use of PCBs, and PCB items (40 CFR 761.20-761.30);
             Marking of PCBs and PCB items (40 CFR 761.40-761.45); Storage and Disposal (40 CFR  761.60-761.79);  Records and Reports (40 CFR 761.180-761.185). See
             also 40 CFR 129.105, 750.

         b.   Disposal of Wate Material  Containing TCDD (40 CFR 775.180-775.197).

4.    Office of Air and Remediation

         The Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978 (42 U.S.C. 2022)

         Uranium  mill tailing rules - Health and Environmental Protection Standards for Uranium and Thorium Mill
         Tailings,  (40 CFR Part 192).

     "    Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401)

         a.   National Ambient Air Quality Standards (40 CFR Part 50)

         b.   Standards for Protection Against Radiation - high and low level radioactive waster  rule, (10 CFR Part 20).

         c.   National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air  Pollutants for Asbestos and Wet Dust particulates, (40 CFR 61.140-61.156), for Beryllium (40 CFR 61.30-61.34), for
             Vinyl Chloride (40 CFR 61.60-61.71), for Benzene (40 CFR 61.110-61.112), and for other hazardous substances (40 CFR Part 61 generally). See also effluent
             limitations and pretreatment standards dor Wet Dust Collection (40 CFR 427.110-427.116) and 40 CFR Part 763.
         d.   National Emissions Radionuclides (40 CFR Part 61, 10 CFR 20.101-20.108)

         e.   State implementation plans for national primary and secondary ambient air quality control  standards (42 U.S.C. 7410)


                                                        * *  * AUGUST  8,  1998  DRAFT *  * *
 Word-searchable version — Not a true copy

-------
                                                                             1-82

                                                                           EXHIBIT 1-9
                                                                           (Continued)

                                                            UNIVERSE OF APPLICABLE OR RELEVANT AND
                                                                   APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS

     f.   Standards of performance for new stationary sources, including new incinerators (42 U.S.C. 7411), (40 CFR Part 60).

5.   Other Federal Requirements

    "    OSHA requirements r workers engaged in response or other hazardous waste operations (29 CFR 1910.120).

         Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 651).

         (a)  Occupational Safety and Health Standards (General Industry Standards) (29 CFR Part 1910).

         (b)  The Safety and Health Standards for Federal Service Contracts (29 CFR Part 1926).

         (c)  The Shipyard and Longshore Standards (29 CFR parts 1915, 1918).

         (d)  The Health and Safety Standards for Employees engaged in Hazardous Waste Operations. (50 FR45654)

         National Historic Preservation Act, 16 U.S.C. 470. Protection of Archaeological Resources: Uniform Regulations - Department of Defense (32 CFR Part 229, 229.4),
         Department of the Interior (43 CFR Part 7, 7.4).

    "    Federal Land Policy and  Management Act,  13 U.S.C. 1700. (Establishes requirements concerning utilization of public lands, particularly rights of way regulation (13 U.S.C.
         1761), land use planning and land acquisition and disposition (13 U.S.C. 1711), and appropriation of waters on public lands.

         Department of Transportation Rules for the Transportation of Hazardous Materials, 49 CFR Parts 107, 171.1-172.558.

         Endangered Species Act of 1973, 16 U.S.C. 1531. (Generally, 50 CFR Parts 81, 225, 402).

    "    Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, 16 U.S.C. 1271.

         Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, 16 U.S.C. 661 note.

         Fish and Wildlife Improvement Act of 1978, and Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956, 16 U.S.C.  742a note. el

         Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act of 1980, 16 U.S.C. 2901. (Generally, 50 CFR Part 83). e/

         Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, 16 U.S.C. 1451. (Generally, 15 CFR Part  930 and 15 CFR 923,45 for Air and Water Pollution Control Requirements).

         Farmland Protection Policy Act, 7 U.S.C. 4201.  (Generally, 7 CFR Part 658). e/

         Rivers and Harbors Act (33 U.S.C. 403)
      a/  This is the list of potentially applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements found in the October 2, 1985, Compliance Policy with additions. As additional
          requirements are promulgated, they must also be considered potentially applicable or relevant and appropriate and added to this list.

      b/  In authorized States, Federal regulations promulgated under RCRA are not applicable as a State requirement until the State adopts those regulations through its own
          legislative process, but probably would be relevant and appropriate as a Federal requirement. Federal



                                                         *  *  *  AUGUST   8,  1998  DRAFT  *  *  *
 Word-searchable version — Not a true copy

-------
                                                                          1-83

                                                                        EXHIBIT 1-9
                                                                        (Continued)

                                                         UNIVERSE OF APPLICABLE OR RELEVANT AND
                                                                APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS

        regulations promulgated pursuant to the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984, however, are effective immediately in all 50 States, and
        are potentially applicable as Federal Requirements.

     c/ 40 CFR Part 264 regulations apply to permitted facilities and may be relevant and appropriate to other facilities.

     d/ Only the Subpart F ground-water monitoring requirements under 40 CFR 264 are ARAR. The Subpart F ground-water monitoring requirements under
        40 CFR 265 are not ARAR.

     e/ May not be applicable or relevant for many sites.

     f/  40 CFR Part 6 Subpart A sets forth EPA policy for carrying out the provisions of Executive Orders 11988 (Floodplains Management) and 11990
        (Protection of Wetlands).
                                                      *  *  *  AUGUST  8,  1998 DRAFT  *  *  *
Word-searchable version — Not a true copy

-------
    Preceding  page blank                                            i-ss

                                                                         EXHIBIT 1-10

                                        OTHER FEDERAL AND STATE CRITERIA, ADVISORIES, AND GUIDANCE TO BE CONSIDERED a/

1.        Federal Criteria. Advisories, and Procedures

         Health Effects Assessments (HEAs) and Proposed HEAs, ("Health Effects Assessment for (Specific Chemicals), "ECAO, USEPA, 1985).

         References Doses (RFDs), ("Verified Reference Doses of USEPA," ECAO-CIN-475, January 1986). See also Drinking Water Equivalent Levels (DWELs), a set of
         medium-specific drinking water levels derived from RFDs. (See USEPA Health Advisories, Office of Drinking Water, March 31, 1987)

     "    Carcinogen Potency Factors (CPFs)  (e.g., Q1 Stars, Carcinogen Assessment Group [CAG] Values), (Table 11, "Health Assessment Document for Tatrachloroethylene
         (Porchloroethylene)," USEPA, OHEA/6008-82/005F, July 1985).

     "    Pesticide registrations and registration date.

         Pesticide and Food additive tolerances and action levels. Note: Some tolerances and action levels my pertain and should therefore be considered in certain situations.

     "    Waste load allocation procedures, EPA Office of Water (40 CFR Part 125, 130).

         Federal Sole Source Aquifer requirements See 52 FR 6873, March 5, 1987).

         Public health criteria on which the decision to list pollutants as hazardous under Section 112 of the Clean Air Act was based.

         Guidelines for Ground-Water Classification Under the EPA Ground-Water Protection Strategy.

     "    TSCA chemical advisories (4 issued to date: Nitrosamines (September, 1984), P/Tert/Buti/benzoic acid (March,1985) Burning used oil & space heaters (November,
         1985, 4-4 Methylinebis  [2/Chloroaline] (December, 1986), 2 Nitropropane (December 1986).

     "    Advisories Issued by FWS and  NWFS under the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act.

         TSCA Compliance Program Policy, ("TSCA Enforcement Guidance Manuel - Policy Compendium," USEPA, OECH, OPTS, March, 1985).

     "    OSHA health and safety standards that way be used to protect public health (non-workplace).
    a/  This list updates this list of other Federal criteria, advisories, and guidance to be considered in the October 5, 1985, Compliance Policy. As additional
        or revised criteria, advisories, or guidance are issued, they should be added to this list and also considered.


    b/  Proposed amendments to the federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act Introduced the concept of Ground Water Residue Guidance Levels (GRGLs).
        These amendments have not been passed by Congress and a List of GRGLs has not yet boan promulgated.
                                                       *  *  * AUGUST  8,  1998  DRAFT  *  *  *
 Word-searchable version — Not a true copy

-------
                                                                             1-86


                                                                          EXHIBIT 1-10
                                                                          (Continued)

                                          OTHER FEDERAL AND STATE CRITERIA, ADVISORIES, AND GUIDANCE TO BE CONSIDERED


         Health Advisories, EPA Office of Water

     "    EPA Water Quality Advisories, EPA Office of Water, Criteria and Standards Division.

2.        USEPA RCRA Guidance Documents

     "    Interim Final Alternate Concentration Limit Guidance Part I: ACL Policy and Information Requirements (July, 1987)

         a.   EPA's RCRA Design Guidelines

             (1)   Surface Impoundments, Liners Systems, Final Cover and Feedback Control.

             (2)   Waste Pile Design - Liner Systems.

             (3)   Land Treatment Units.

             (4)   Landfill Design - Liner Systems and Final Cover.

         b.   Permitting Guidance Manuals c/

             (1)   Permit Writer's Guidance Manual for Hazardous Waste Land Treatment, Storage and Disposal  Facilities, Phase I; (February 15, 1985) EPA/530-
                  SW-85-024.

             (2)   Permit Writer's Guidance Manual for Subpart F. (October, 1983)

             (3)   Permit Applicant's Guidance Manual for the General Facility Standards. (October 15, 1983) EPA # OSW 00-00-968

             (4)   Waste Analysis Plan Guidance Manual. (October 15, 1984) EPA/530-SW-84-012

             (5)   Permit Writer's Guidance Manual for Hazardous Waste Tanks. (July 1983)

             (6)   Model Permit Application for Existing Incinerators. (1985)

             (7)   Guidance Manual for Evaluating Permit Applications for the Operation of Hazardous Waste Incinerator Units. (July 1983)

             (8)   A Guide for Preparing RCRA Permit Applications for Existing Storage Facilities. (January 15, 1982)

             (9)   Guidance Manual on closure and post-closure Interim Status Standards.
         c/   RCRA permit manuals are listed to indicate the kind of information used, manner of interpreting information, and determining in setting standards; they are not
             used to indicate procedures.
                                                        *  *  *  AUGUST  8,  1998  DRAFT  *  *  *
 Word-searchable version — Not a true copy

-------
                                                                          1-87



                                                                       EXHIBIT 1-10
                                                                       (Continued)

                                        OTHER FEDERAL AND STATE CRITERIA. ADVISORIES. AND GUIDANCE TO BE CONSIDERED


        c.   Technical Resource Documents (TRDs)

            (1)   Evaluating Cover Systems for Solid and Hazardous Waste. (September 1982) EPS OSW-00-00-867

            (2)   Hydrologic Simulation of Solid Waste Disposal Sites. (November 1982) EPA OSW-00-00-868

            (3)   Landfill and Surface Impoundment Performance Evaluation. (April 1983) EPA OSW-00-00-869

            (4)   Draft Minimal Technology Guidelines on Double Liner System for  Landfills and Surface Impoundments. (May 1985) PB 87151072-AS

            (5)   Draft Minimal Technology Guidelines on Single Liner System for Landfills and Surface Impoundments. (May 1985) PB 871173159

            (6)   Management of Hazardous Waste Leachate. (September 1982) OSW-00-00-871

            (7)   Guide to the Disposal of Chemically Stabilized and Solidified Waste. (1982) EPA/530-SW-872

            (8)   Closure of Hazardous Waste Surface Impoundments. (September 1982) OSW-00-00-873

            (9)   Hazardous Waste Land Treatment. (April 1983) OSW-00-00-874

            (10)  Soil Properties, Classification, and Hydraulic Conductivity Testing. (March 1984) OSW-00-00-925, OSWER directive 9480.00-7D

        d.   Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste

            (1)   Solid Waste  Leaching Procedure Manual. (1984) OSW-00-00-924

            (2)   Methods for the Prediction of Leachate Plume Migration and Mixing

            (3)   Hydrologic Evaluation of Landfill Performance (HELP) Mode, Volumes I and II  (1984), EPA/530-SW-84-009 & EPA/530-SW-84-010

            (4)   Hydrologic Simulation on Solid Waste Disposal Sites. (November 1982) EPA OSW-00-00-868

            (5)   Procedures for Modeling Flow through Clay Liners to Determine Required Liner Thickness. (1984) EPA/530-SW-84-001 & OSWER directive
                 9480.00-9D

            (6)   Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Wastes,  third edition. (November 1986) SW-846

            (7)   A Method for Determining the Compatibility of Hazardous Wastes. EPA/600-02-80-076

            (8)   Guidance Manual on Hazardous Waste Compatibility
                                                      *  *  * AUGUST 8,   1998  DRAFT  *  *  *
Word-searchable version — Not a true copy

-------
                                                                          1-88


                                                                       EXHIBIT 1-10
                                                                        (Continued)

                                        OTHER FEDERAL AND STATE CRITERIA. ADVISORIES. AND GUIDANCE TO BE CONSIDERED

   3.        USEPA Office of Water Guidance Documents

        a.   Pretreatment Guidance Documents:

            (1)   304(g) Guidance Revised Pretreatment Guidelines (3 Volumes)

            (2)   Guidance for POTW Pretreatment Pogram Manual (October, 1983)

            (3)   Developing Requirements for Direct and Indirect Discharges of CERCLA Wastewater, Draft. (1987)
            (4)   Domestic Sewage Exemption Study

            (5)   Guidance for Implementing RCRA Permit by Rule Requirements at POTWs

            (6)   Application of Correction Action Requirements at Publicly Owned Treatment Works

            (7)   Draft Guidance Manual on the Development and Implementation of Local Discharge Limitations Under the Pretreatment Program (1987)

        b.   Water Quality Guidance  Documents

            (1)   Ecological Evaluation of Proposed Discharge of Dredged Material into Ocean Waters (1997)

            (2)   Technical Support Manual: Waterbody Surveys and Assessments for Conducting Use Attainability Analyses (1983)
            (3)   Water-Related Environmental Fate of 129 Priority Pollutants (1979)

            (4)   Water Quality Standards Handbook (December, 1983)

            (5)   Technical Support Document for Water Quality-based Toxics Control. (1983)

        c.   NPDES Guidance Documents

            (1)   NPDES Best Management Practices Guidance Manual (June 1981).

            (2)   Case studies on toxicity reduction evaluation (May 1983).
        d.   Ground Water/UIC Guidance Documents

            (1)   Designation of a USDW(No. 7.1, October 1979)

            (2)   Elements of aquifer identification (No. 7.2, October 1979)

            (3)   Interim Guidance Concerning Corrective Action for Primary and Continuous Release of Class I and IV Hazardous Waste wells (No. 45, April
                 1986) requirements
            (4)   Requirements applicable to wells injected into, through, or above an aquifer that has been exempted pursuant to Section 146.104(b) (4). (No.
                 27, July 1981)
                                                      *  *  * AUGUST  8,   1998  DRAFT *  *  *
Word-searchable version — Not a true copy

-------
                                                                          1-89
                                                                        EXHIBIT 1-10
                                                                        (Continued)

                                         OTHER FEDERAL AND STATE CRITERIA. ADVISORIES. AND GUIDANCE TO BE CONSIDERED


             (5) Guidance for UIC implementation on Indian Lands. (No. 33,  October 1983)

        e.   Ground-Water Protection Strategy (August 1984).

        f.    Clean Water Act Guidance Documents (See Exhibit 3-1).

4.       USEPA Manuals from the Office of Research and Development

        SW846 methods - Laboratory analytic methods (November 1986)

     "   Lab protocols developed pursuant to Clean Water Act Section 304(h).

5.       Nonpromulgated State Advisories

        State approval of water supply system additions or developments.

     "   State ground water withdrawl approvals.

    Note: Many other State advisories could be pertinent. Forthcoming guidance will include a more comprehensive list.
                                                      *  *  *  AUGUST  8,  1998  DRAFT *  *  *
 Word-searchable version — Not a true copy

-------
                                     CHAPTER  2

                 GUIDANCE  FOR CERCLA COMPLIANCE  WITH RCRA

2.0   INTRODUCTION

      This chapter addresses compliance of CERCLA remedial actions with applicable
or relevant and appropriate  requirements in RCRA  (42 U.S.C. 6901),as amended by
HSWA, and regulations promulgated under that statute.1 RCRA currently has nine
discrete sections  (Subtitles) that deal with specific waste management activities.
Three of these Subtitles are most likely to be  the basis for applicable or relevant
and appropriate requirements for CERCLA remedial actions: Subtitle C  (Hazardous
Waste Management), Subtitle  D (Solid Waste Management), and Subtitle I  (Underground
Storage Tank Regulation).  Of these, the provisions in Subtitle C, which mandate the
creation of a "cradle to grave" management system for hazardous waste by regulating
the generation, transportation,  treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous
waste,2  have  the  greatest  likelihood of being applicable or relevant and appropriate
to CERCLA actions, because they address situations similar to CERCLA site conditions
or activities. This chapter  therefore mainly addresses Subtitle C, but also
references Subtitles D and I where appropriate.

      Many of the potential ARARs have been listed in Exhibits 1-1
(Chemical-Specific Requirements), 1-2  (Location-Specific Requirements) and 1-3
(Action-Specific Requirements)  in Chapter 1, Section 1.2.3. Therefore, this chapter
concentrates on issues that  can arise in determining whether RCRA requirements are
applicable or relevant and appropriate in particular site-specific circumstances.

      This chapter is organized as follows:

      Section 2.1 highlights the importance of  coordination between CERCLA and RCRA
      offices.

      Section 2.2 provides a description of the basic structure and purposes of
      RCRA.

      Section 2.3 addresses  the jurisdictional  requirements for RCRA applicability.
      1  This manual currently addresses RCRA requirements for CERCLA actions only
where hazardous wastes will remain on site. Off-site remedial actions will be
addressed at a later date.

      2  Waste is  defined by the regulations to be hazardous (unless specifically
excluded) if it meets one of three criteria:  (1) it has a characteristic of
hazardous waste  (ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, or toxicity);  (2) it is
listed as a hazardous waste; or  (3) it is a mixture that contains  a hazardous waste.
                                AUGUST 8,2-13988 DRAFT
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         2-2

      Section 2.4 discusses which RCRA requirements  (i.e., requirements established
      by the Federal program, State programs, and requirements under the Hazardous
      and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984  (HSWA))  should be consulted in particular
      circumstances.

      Section 2.5 addresses issues involved in RCRA  storage requirements.

      Section 2.6 addresses issues involved in RCRA  treatment requirements.

      Section 2.7 addresses issues involved in RCRA  disposal requirements.

2.1   COORDINATION BETWEEN CERCLA (SUPERFUND) AND RCRA OFFICES

      This chapter is written to provide an overview of key RCRA requirements that
may be applicable or relevant and appropriate to CERCLA remedial actions. However,
since RCRA statutory and regulatory requirements are complex and many RCRA
regulations are still under development, it is important that the lead agency
consult with Regional and State RCRA experts3 for assistance in identifying RCRA
ARARs.  Each Region should develop procedures, protocols, or memoranda of
understanding that, while not recreating the administrative aspects of a permit,
ensure such early and continuous coordination. Such  procedures may also include a
mechanism for keeping the appropriate State or Federal RCRA program informed of how
RCRA ARARs are met during the remedial construction  phase.  (See also Chapter 1,
Section 1.2.1) .

      In addition, since Superfund program policy on RCRA ARARs will continue to be
developed as new RCRA regulations are promulgated, it may also be important to
consult with the appropriate Headquarters Superfund  office on questions regarding
potential RCRA ARARs.

2.2   OVERVIEW OF RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT  (RCRA)

      The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act  (RCRA) was passed in 19764 to meet
three goals: the protection of human health and the  environment, the reduction of
waste and the conservation of energy and natural resources, and the reduction or
elimination of the generation of hazardous waste as  expeditiously as possible. The
Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984  significantly expanded the scope
of RCRA by adding new corrective action requirements, land disposal restrictions,
and technical requirements.
      3  Consultation with State RCRA experts is particularly important where States
are authorized to administer and enforce RCRA  (see section 2.4).

      4  RCRA (Pub.  L.  No. 94-580,  90 Stat.  2795)  was  passed in 1976 as a series of
amendments to the Solid Waste Disposal Act of  1965 (Pub. L. No. 89-272) . The
amendments were so extensive that the statute  is commonly referred to as RCRA.
                            *** AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT  ***
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         2-3

      The RCRA regulations implementing Subtitle C establishing the hazardous
waste management system first became effective on November 19, 1980.  (The
regulations were published on May 19, 1980,  (45 FR 33066) and became  effective six
months later.) Additional standards pertaining to the management of hazardous waste
at permitted treatment, storage, and disposal facilities have been issued
periodically since. Included among these are the land disposal restrictions under
Subpart F  (see p. 2-21 for effective dates) and tank system regulations  (see p.
1-48, p. 2-12, and p. A-6), which became effective January 12, 1987.

      The regulations comprising the management system are of two types: general
standards that govern such topics as ground-water protection, closure, and
post-closure care requirements for facilities (40 CFR Part 264 Subparts B through
G),  and specific standards that regulate the installation, operation, inspection,
and closure of containers, tanks, surface impoundments, waste piles,  land treatment
units, landfills, incinerators, and the processes of thermal treatment, chemical or
biological treatment, and underground injection (40 CFR Part 264 Subparts I through
O and X, and 40 CFR 265 Subparts P, Q, and R).

      For CERCLA actions which involve treatment,  storage, or disposal of RCRA
hazardous waste after July 26, 1982, the 40 CFR Part 264 standards promulgated on
that date will generally be applicable.  (Note further discussion of Part 264 Subpart
F requirements in Section 2.7.4.1 below). If RCRA hazardous waste was treated,
stored, or disposed at the site before the effective date of these Part 264
standards, the Part 264 standards would not be applicable if the CERCLA action does
not involve current treatment, storage, or disposal, but may be relevant and
appropriate.

      While EPA has promulgated regulations in many areas since RCRA  was first
passed, the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984  (HSWA) will  result in
promulgation of additional requirements pertaining to several topics. Final
Promulgation of regulations to implement HSWA are expected in the future in the
following areas that may affect CERCLA cleanup actions:

      N  Standards for underground storage tanks containing Petroleum or hazardous
         chemicals (proposed 52 FR 12662, April 17. 1987);

      N  New procedures for determining if a waste is a hazardous waste
          (forthcoming);

      N  Technical standards for liners and leak detection systems in new landfills,
         surface impoundments, waste piles, underground tanks, and land treatment
         units (proposed 52 FR 20218, May 29, 1987);

      N  Regulations for the monitoring and control of air emissions  for volatile
         organics control at land disposal facilities  (proposed 52 FR 3748, February
         5, 1987);

      N  Requirements concerning land disposal restrictions on hazardous wastes
          (promulgated in part on November 7, 1986 and July 8, 1987 and


                            *** AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT ***
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         2-4

         forthcoming according to the schedule listed on p. 2-21). Land disposal of
         contaminated soil or debris resulting from a response action under CERCLA
         §104 or §106 is currently exempt from theses requirements. This statutory
         exemption period will end on November 8, 1988.

      N  Regulations under Subtitle D affecting solid waste disposal facilities
         (forthcoming).

      N  Regulations specifying procedures for carrying out corrective actions at
         RCRA facilities (forthcoming).

      N  Requirements concerning restrictions of hazardous wastes in underground
         injection wells (forthcoming).

      These regulations, when promulgated, are likely to be ARARs in certain
circumstances. As these and other regulations are promulgated, this manual will be
updated as necessary.

2.3   JURISDICTIONS, REQUIREMENTS FOR SUBTITLE C APPLICABILITY

      RCRA Subtitle C regulates the treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous
waste. In determining the jurisdictional requirements of regulations promulgated
under Subtitle C, the definitions of solid waste and hazardous waste, the types of
activities covered, and the time periods covered should be analyzed.

      In general, RCRA Subtitle C requirements for the treatment, storage, or
disposal of hazardous waste will be applicable if a combination of the following
conditions are met:

       (1)       the waste is a listed5  or characteristic6 waste under RCRA; and

       (2)(a)    the waste was treated,  stored, or disposed  (as defined in 40 CFR
               §260.10)  after the effective date of the RCRA requirements under
               consideration; or
      5  Listed hazardous wastes under RCRA are found in 40 CFR Part 261,  Subpart D.
The Subpart K lists identify waste streams from specified sources or industrial
processes and certain discarded commercial chemical products as hazardous. Some RCRA
requirements apply to hazardous wastes as defined in RCRA §1004(5) .

      6  Characteristic hazardous wastes under RCRA are described in 40 CFR Part 261,
Subpart C. Testing methods and protocols for characteristic determinations
(ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, and Extraction Procedure toxicity are
contained in Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, 3rd edition, Volume 1C,
Laboratory Manual  (SW-846).
                            *** AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT ***
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         2-5
         (b)   the activity at the CERCLA site constitutes treatment, storage, or
               disposal as defined by RCRA.

      Thus, there are two scenarios under which RCRA requirements may be applicable
to CERCLA sites. First, if the lead agency determines that RCRA listed or
characteristic hazardous waste is present and the wastes were treated, stored, or
disposed at the site after the effective date of the RCRA Subtitle C requirements
under consideration, then the pertinent RCRA Subtitle C requirements will be
applicable to the waste activity. Generally, traditional RCRA regulated facilities
that have been listed on the NPL may fall into this category, even if the proposed
CERCLA action would not involve treatment, storage, or disposal. For example, if a
RCRA Subtitle C landfill operated at the site after the effective date of the RCRA
closure requirements, then the lead agency would need to comply with the applicable
closure requirements for those units in completing the remedial action.

      Under the second scenario, the CERCLA activity involves treatment, storage, or
disposal of hazardous waste. If the lead agency determines that RCRA listed or
characteristic hazardous waste is present at the site (even if the waste was
disposed before the effective date of the requirement)  and the proposed CERCLA
action involves treatment, storage, or disposal as defined under RCRA Subtitle C,
then RCRA requirements related to those actions would be applicable.

      These two scenarios are contingent upon determinations that a RCRA Subtitle C
hazardous waste is present and on the identification of the period of waste
management. To determine whether a waste is a listed waste under RCRA, it is often
necessary to know the source. However,  at many Superfund sites no information exists
on the source of the wastes. The lead agency should use available site information,
manifests,  storage records,  and vouchers in an effort to ascertain the nature of
these contaminants. When this documentation is not available, the lead agency may
assume that the wastes are not listed RCRA hazardous wastes, unless further analysis
or information becomes available which allows the lead agency to determine that the
wastes are listed RCRA hazardous wastes. If the lead agency is unable to make an
affirmative determination that the wastes are RCRA hazardous wastes, RCRA
requirements would not be applicable to CERCLA actions,  but may be relevant and
appropriate if the CERCLA action involves treatment, storage or disposal and if the
wastes are similar or identical to RCRA hazardous waste.

      Under certain circumstances, although no historical information exists about
the waste,  it may be possible to identify the wastes as RCRA characteristic wastes.
This is important in the event that (1) remedial alternatives under consideration at
the site involve on-site treatment, storage, or disposal, in which case RCRA may be
triggered as discussed in this chapter; or  (2) a remedial alternative involves
off-site shipment. Since the generator  (in this case, the agency or responsible
party conducting the Superfund action)  is responsible for determining if the wastes
exhibit any of these characteristics (defined in 40 CFR §261.21-24), testing may be
required. The lead agency must use best professional judgment to determine, on a
site-specific basis, if testing for hazardous characteristics is necessary.
                            *** AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT ***
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         2-6

      In determining whether to test for the toxicity characteristic using the
Extraction Procedure (EP) Toxicity Test,7 it may be possible to assume that certain
low concentrations of waste are not toxic.  For example, if the total waste
concentration is 20 times or less the EP Toxicity concentration, the waste cannot be
characteristic hazardous waste. In such a case RCRA requirements would not be
applicable. In other instances, where it appears that the substances may be
characteristic hazardous waste  (ignitable,  corrosive, reactive, or EP toxic),
testing should be performed.

      If the wastes exhibit hazardous characteristics, RCRA requirements are
potentially applicable if the wastes also were either treated, stored, or disposed
after the effective date of the applicable  RCRA requirement or if the CERCLA actions
will involve treatment, storage, or disposal.

      If RCRA Subtitle C is not applicable, further analysis may be done to
determine whether it is both relevant and appropriate.8 This determination depends
first on whether the waste at the site is "sufficiently similar" to a RCRA hazardous
waste. The following paragraphs provide guidance on evaluating CERCLA waste with
regard to this "sufficiently similar" text.

      In addition to identifying hazardous  wastes through characteristic testing,
EPA analyzes wastes from specific industries or processes, and lists certain wastes
or waste streams if it determines they should be regulated as a hazardous waste
under RCRA. EPA's listing decision is based on an analysis of a number of factors
that affect the hazard of the waste, including the toxicity of the constituents in
the waste stream and their concentration, persistence, and bioaccumulation
characteristics, as well as volume generated and potential for mismanagement. Simply
the presence of a hazardous constituent in  a waste is not sufficient to
automatically consider a waste to be hazardous under RCRA.

      Similarly, when evaluating whether Subtitle C requirements are relevant and
appropriate, the mere presence of hazardous constituents in a CERCLA waste does not
mean the waste is sufficiently similar to a RCRA hazardous waste to trigger Subtitle
C as an ARAR.  Judguent should be used in assessing whether the waste closely
resembles a RCRA hazardous waste, considering the chemical composition, form,
concentration, and any other information pertinent to the nature of the waste. For
example, waste in barrels that is virtually identical to a listed waste might be
sufficiently similar. By contrast, low
      7  Currently,  14 contaminants are listed for the characteristic of EP toxicity.
A waste exhibits the characteristic of EP toxicity if an extract of a representative
sample of the waste, tested using the specified procedures, contains any of these 14
contaminants equal to or greater than the concentration level specified in 40 CFR
§261.24.

      8  See  Chapter 1,  section 1.2.2,  p.  1-10,  and section 1.2.4.3,  p.  1-65 to p.l-
70, for detailed guidance on making the determination that a requirement is both
relevant and appropriate.


                            *** AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT ***
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         2-7

concentrations of a hazardous constituent, dispersed in soil over a wide area, would
generally not trigger Subtitle C as relevant and appropriate.  (For determination of
relevance and appropriateness see general discussion on page 1-65.)

         2.3.1    DEFINITION OF HAZARDOUS WASTE

      Generally, most requirements under RCRA are triggered by the management of
waste defined specifically as solid or hazardous9 (See generally 40 CFR Part 261).
Solid waste is defined very broadly under the regulations to include garbage  (i.e.
from households), refuse  (metal scrap and other commercial wastes), sludges from
facilities such as wastewater treatment plants and pollution control facilities, and
other discarded materials in solid, semi-solid, liquid, or contaminated gaseous
forms resulting from industrial, commercial,  mining, agricultural, and community
activities. Hazardous waste considered a subset of solid waste, and is subject to
regulation under RCRA if:

      (1)   the wastes exhibit one of four characteristics  (ignitability,
            corrosivity, reactivity, or EP toxicity);

      (2)   are waste streams or discarded chemical products listed in the RCRA
            regulations as hazardous wastes  (40 CFR Part 264 Subpart D); or

      (3)   are mixtures of solid waste and waste listed as hazardous by RCRA
            regulations.

      Wastes that are specifically excluded from regulation as a hazardous waste
include household wastes, municipal resource recovery wastes, and some
wastes returned to the land as fertilizer.
      9  Most provisions in Subtitle C of RCRA apply to hazardous waste listed or
identified as characteristic pursuant to §3001, as described above in  (1) through
(3). However, RCRA §§3004(b),  (c), and  (u) apply to the broader definition of
hazardous waste found in RCRA §1004(5) :  "The term  ''hazardous waste' means a solid
waste, or combination of solid wastes, which because of its quantity, concentration,
or physical chemical, or infectious characteristic may cause, or significantly
contribute to an increase in mortality or an increase in serious irreversible, or
incapacitating reversible, illness; or pose a substantial present or potential
hazard to human health or the environment when improperly treated, stored,
transported, or disposed of, or otherwise managed." RCRA §3004  (b) prohibits
placement of noncontainerized or bulk liquid "hazardous waste"  (as defined in
§1004(5)) in certain salt domes and other geologic formations. Similarly,
noncontainerized or bulk liquid hazardous waste may not be placed in any landfill
(§3004(c)).  Section 3004(u) pertains to corrective action for solid waste management
units at RCRA facilities.
                            *** AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT ***
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         2-8

      2.3.2 TREATMENT, STORAGE, AND DISPOSAL OF HAZARDOUS WASTE

      Management of hazardous waste is divided by the statute and the regulations
into treatment, storage, and disposal. EPA has determined that the following
jurisdictional prerequisites will trigger the applicability of some portion of the
RCRA 40 CFR Part 264 requirements for a CERCLA remedial action:

       (1)    RCRA storage requirements apply to the storage of RCRA hazardous  waste
            after November 19, I960.10 Waste received by a facility before  November
            19, 1980, is still subject to RCRA requirements if the waste is stored
            after that date. Generators storing wastes for less than 90 days are not
            required to soak permits, but must satisfy the standards in 40 CPR Part
            265 Subpart I for containers or the standards in 40 CFR Part 265 Subpart
            J for tanks.11

       (2)    RCRA requirements for treatment or disposal12 of hazardous wastes apply
            if:
      10 "Storage" means the holding of hazardous waste  for  a  temporary  period,  at
the end of which the hazardous waste is treated, disposed of, or stored elsewhere.
(40 CFR §260.10(a))  Secondary containment system regulations  for tank systems were
enacted July 14, 1986, and must be met by January 12, 1989  for tanks containing
dioxins,  and for other tanks,  by January 12, 1991,  or when  the system has reached 15
years of age, whichever comes later.

      11 Generators of hazardous waste may accumulate hazardous waste on-site  for
less than 90 days without a permit or interim status, provided that: (1) the waste
is placed in containers or tanks that are in compliance with  Subparts I and J of 40
CFR Part 265 (excluding §265.197(c) and §265.200);  (2)  the  containers and tanks are
clearly dated and marked "hazardous waste;" and  (3)  the generator complies with
Subparts C and D of 40 CFR Part 265 and with §265.16 (see 40CFR §262.34(a)). In
addition,  generators of less than 100 kg/month of hazardous waste are not subject to
the 90-day limit (40 CFR §261.5);  and generators of less than 1000 kg/month of
hazardous waste may accumulate waste for up to 180 days without a permit  (40 CFR
262.34(d) ) .

      12 "Treatment" means any method, technique, or process,  including
neutralization, designed to change the physical, chemical,  or biological character
or composition of any hazardous waste so as to neutralize such waste, or so as to
recover energy or material resources from the waste,  or so  as to render such waste
non-hazardous or less hazardous; safer to transport,  store, or dispose of; or
amenable for recovery, amenable for storage, or reduced in  volume.  (40 CFR §260.10)

     "Land disposal"  is  defined by Section 3004(k)  of RCRA as follows:  "when used with
respect to a specified hazardous waste,  shall be deemed to  include, but not be
limited to,  any placement of such hazardous waste in a landfill, surface
impoundment, waste pile, injection well,  land treatment facility, salt dome
formation,  salt bed formation, or underground mine or cave."


                            *** AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT ***
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         2-9

            a)  the unit or area of contamination13 contains RCRA hazardous waste  that
            was treated or disposed of after the effective data of the pertinent
            requirements;14 or

            b)  the CERCLA activity at  the  unit  or area of contamination constitutes
            treatment or disposal  of RCRA  hazardous waste, as defined under RCRA. 15

       (3)   RCRA corrective action requirements16 apply  at  sites  that are
            subject to RCRA regulation under paragraphs  1 and  2 above, and  to
            all releases of hazardous waste or constituents  from  "solid  waste
            management units" existing at facilities containing such units.
            Solid waste management units  include "any unit from which
            hazardous constituents might migrate, irrespective of whether the
            units were intended for the management of solid  and/or
            hazardous wastes." Certain corrective action requirements
            specified under HSWA were in  50 FR 28712, July 15, 1985,  and 52
            FR 45788, December 1,  1987.
      13 Disposal of RCRA hazardous  waste  into  a  unit  or area of contamination (AOC)
will trigger applicability of certain RCRA requirements  to  the  unit  or AOC.  See
section 2.7 for more detailed discussion.

      14 For example, the requirements  for groundwater monitoring are applicable  to
surface impoundments,  landfills, land treatment  units,  and  waste  piles that  received
hazardous waste after July 26,1982.

      15 When current activity at the CERCLA  site constitutes treatment  or disposal,
the activity must also meet the conditions described  in  Sections  2.6 or  2.7  of this
chapter.

      16 "Hazardous waste" requiring corrective action under §3004(h) is  defined
more broadly than wastes listed or  identified  under §3001.  Corrective action applies
to hazardous waste as defined in §1004(5). See Footnote  9.
                            *** AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT  ***
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        2-10

      A portion of the RCRA requirements under 40 CFR Part 264 will likely be
applicable at most CERCLA sites that contain RCRA hazardous waste because remedial
actions at those sites will generally constitute treatment, storage, or disposal
after the effective date of RCRA. In those cases in which a RCRA facility has been
listed on the NPL, the applicability of RCRA standards to the facility has already
been determined. In addition to the jurisdictional prerequisites listed above,
however,  RCRA treatment, storage, and disposal standards each have their own
separate requirements. Therefore it will be necessary to utilize the procedures
outlined in Chapter 1 and take into account issues addressed in this chapter in
order to determine which RCRA requirements are applicable or relevant and
appropriate to particular CERCLA activities.

      2.3.3    ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS IN DETERMINING SUBTITLE C ARARs

      The following general principles may assist in determining potentially
applicable or relevant and appropriate RCRA requirements17:

      N  RCRA permits are not required for CERCLA actions taken entirely onsite.
         Facilities used for off-site disposal are required by CERCLA §121(d)(3) to
         be in compliance with all pertinent RCRA requirements (e.g., have a RCRA
         permit or interim status and have any releases from SWMUs being controlled
         by corrective action).

      N  Administrative RCRA requirements, such as reporting and recordkeeping
         requirements, are not applicable or relevant and appropriate for on-site
         activities.

      N  RCRA requirements that are not applicable may nonetheless be relevant and
         appropriate based on site-specific circumstances. In some cases, the source
         or prior use of a CERCLA waste may not be identifiable,  but the waste may
         be identical in composition to a listed RCRA waste derived from a known
         source or use, and therefore RCRA requirements would be relevant. In
         addition, a determination mist be made whether the requirement is
         appropriate given the circumstances of the release, the site
         characteristics, and the remedial activity. Only those requirements that
         are determined to be both relevant and appropriate must be complied with.
         (See Chapter 1, pp. 1-10 and 1-65 to 1-70 for a detailed discussion of the
         determination that a requirement is relevant and appropriate).
      17 RCRA guidance, although not ARAR, may also be  considered  and  includes:
Permit Writers' Guidance Manual for the Location of Hazardous Waste Land Storage and
Disposal Facilities: Phase 1, Criteria for Location Acceptability and Existing
Regulations for Evaluating Locations  (Final Draft), February 1985; Permit Applicants
Guidance Manual for the General Facility Standards of  40 CER 264, SW-968, October
1983; and Guidance for Ground-Water Classification Under the EPA Ground-Water
Protection Strategy, (Final Draft), December 1986.
                            *** AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT ***
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        2-11

      RCRA regulations are organized by particular waste management processes  (i.e.,
types of technology, such an incineration, tanks, or land treatment) as well as by
general standards (i.e., types of actions, such as disposal, closure, or corrective
action, that may pertain to several different processes).  Potential ARARs for CERCLA
sites may pertain to either the process or the action. Action-specific requirements
generally refer to an action or to a particular type of waste management process.

2.4   FEDERAL AND STATES RCRA REQUIREMENTS

      Federal regulations under RCRA establish minimum national standards defining
the acceptable management of hazardous waste. States can be authorized by EPA to
administer and enforce RCRA hazardous waste management programs in lieu of the
Federal program if the States have equivalent statutory and regulatory authority. In
these authorized States, the Federal regulations promulgated pursuant to RCRA are
not applicable until the State Adopts the Federal regulations through its own
legislative process. Federal regulations promulgated pursuant to HSWA, however, are
effective immediately. The regulations in these State programs may be more stringent
or have greater scope of coverage than the Federal program. If a State is not
authorized for a particular part of the RCRA program, the Federal government is
responsible for that portion of the program in the State,  and Federal regulations
are applicable.

      If the CERCLA site is located in a State with an authorized RCRA program, the
State's promulgated RCRA requirements will replace the equivalent Federal
requirements as potentially ARAR.  If the remedial action is taking place in a State
without full authorization, Federal requirements may be ARAR, unless the State's
promulgated regulations satisfy the requirement in CERCLA §121 that they are "more
stringent" than the Federal standard. Since-a State standards may need to be
evaluated. To retain final authorization State may be authorized for only a portion
of the RCRA program, both Federal and, the State must adopt HSWA-related
requirements as State law by specified dates. Thus, State authority and regulations
will eventually replace corresponding Federal requirements when the State receives
Federal authorization for HSWA. These requirements would then be analyzed as
potential ARAR.18

      Because the timetable for implementation of HSWA requirements extends into the
1990's, consideration of both Federal and State potential ARARs will be necessary
for some time to come. The forthcoming HSWA standards that may affect CERCLA cleanup
actions in the future are listed on page 2-3.
      18 Currently, the Agency is developing additional guidance on State ARARS,  to
be incorporate in this manual at a later date.
                            *** AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT ***
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        2-12

2.5   RCRA STORAGE REQUIREMENTS

      Remedial action at a CERCLA site may require short- or long-term storage of
hazardous substances found at the site.19 Whether RCRA  storage  requirements  will, be
applicable will depend on whether the waste is a RCRA hazardous waste and on
whether the waste has been or will be stored after November 19, 1980. If these
requirements are not applicable, whether they are relevant and appropriate  should be
determined based on the procedure for determining relevance and appropriateness
outlined in Chapter 1.

      The jurisdictional prerequisites for applicability of the RCRA storage
requirements are:

         (1)   The substance to be stored must be a RCRA hazardous waste.  (If the
               substance meets the definition of ignitable or reactive wastes,
               incompatible wastes,  or special categories of wastes, special
               requirements under the RCRA container storage, tank storage, surface
               impoundment storage,  and waste pile storage regulations pertaining to
               these wastes might also be applicable); and

         (2)   The hazardous waste must be stored after November 19, 1980.  Note that
               waste received by a facility before that date is still subject to
               RCRA requirements if stored in tanks or containers after that date.
               Thus, if the CERCLA site contains an existing storage area holding
               RCRA hazardous waste,  the requirements are applicable.20
               Alternatively, if the RCRA hazardous waste first becomes subject to
               regulation as a result of the actions taken at the cleanup site, RCRA
               storage requirements will be applicable. In these situations
               depending on the amounts and types of wastes being stored, different
               requirements may become applicable.21
      19 RCRA requirements for the use of  storage containers  are  given  in  40  CFR
Part 264 Subpart I, those regarding storage tanks are in 40  CFR  Part 264  Subpart J,
those regarding storage surface impoundments are in 40 CFR Part  264 Subpart  K, and
those regarding storage piles are in 40 CFR Part 264 Subpart L.  EPA has recently
issued a notice of proposed rulemaking that would require leak detection  systems for
tanks, surface impoundments, and storage piles. (May 29, 1987, 52 FR 20218).

      20 The land disposal restrictions rule also provides that any waste  that  is
prohibited from one or more methods of land disposal also is prohibited from storage
unless the storage is solely to accumulate sufficient quantities of the waste  to
allow for proper recovery, treatment, or disposal.

      21 There are  several types of small  quantity generators and different
provisions (40 CFR 1262.34)  apply depending on length of storage and amount  of
hazardous waste generated. For example,  a generator accumulating less  than 55
gallons of hazardous waste or one quart of an acutely hazardous  waste  listed in
§261.33(3) in containers at or near any point of generation  where wastes  initially
accumulate are not subject to the 90 day limit, as long as

                            *** AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT ***
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        2-13

      Finally, when it is determined that a waste is a RCRA hazardous waste, and
that the waste will be stored, a decision must be made as to whether the RCRA
requirements pertaining to storage are applicable. The particular storage
requirements applicable will depend upon the type of container used. Determining
which storage requirements under RCRA, are applicable will require analysis of the
prerequisites included in Subparts I, J, K, or L for the different types of storage.
Subpart I requires determining whether the receptacle satisfies the definition of
"container" in 40 CFR §260.10. Subpart J requires a determination if the receptacle
is a "tank," as tanks are defined by the regulations (40 CPR §260.10). Technical
requirements under HSWA for underground tanks are being developed, and in the future
they will also have to be considered in the ARAR analysis.22 Subpart L requires a
determination whether the waste is being stored in a "pile," as defined in the
regulations. However, certain covered waste piles are exempt from a part of the
waste pile requirements. A decision on the applicability of the waste pile
regulations will require an analysis of both basic definitions and exemotions.

      Even if they are not applicable, portions of RCRA requirements for tanks (40
CFR Part 264, Subpart J) may be relevant and appropriate for sites where temporary
storage in tanks is required. For example, the requirement that tanks have
sufficient minimum shell thickness and pressure controls to prevent collapse or
rupture may be relevant and appropriate, since the purpose of this requirement is to
ensure that the tank does not create additional environmental problems due to its
own failure. Subpart J further requires that tanks have an inner lining or coating,
or an alternative means of protection such as cathodic protection or corrosion
inhibitors, in order to ensure that the tank is safe throughout its effective life.
This requirement, while relevant, might not be appropriate unless the tanks were
expected to be in use for several years. For example, if hazardous substances will
be stored temporarily in the tanks and then drained, with the process repeated many
times, then such protection requirements would be both relevant and appropriate.
§§265.171, 265.172 and 265.173(a) are being complied with and containers are
marked clearly as hazardous waste. These sections require that the waste is
being stored in containers that are in good condition, are compatible with the waste
being stored, and are handled properly to prevent rupture or leaking.  (40 CFR
§262.34(c)(1)). Generators of between 100 kg. and 1000 kg. of hazardous waste per
month may accumulate it for up to 180 to 220 days (if they comply with tank and/or
container" regulations for storage)  without requiring a permit or interim status.

      22 Technical standards for underground  storage tanks containing petroleum or
hazardous substances were proposed on April 17, 1987,  52 FR 12662.
                            *** AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT ***
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        2-14

2.6   RCRA TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS23

      SARA §121 established a preference for remedial actions involving treatment
that permanently and significantly reduces the volume , toxicity, or mobility of the
hazardous substances, pollutants, and contaminants at the site. Whether RCRA
requirements pertaining to treatment will be applicable for a CERCLA activity will
depend on whether the prerequisites for RCRA applicability are satisfied.

      RCRA requirements for treatment of hazardous wastes apply at a CERCLA site
only if: (a) the waste is a RCRA listed or characteristic waste; and  (b) the CERCLA
activity constitutes treatment of RCRA hazardous waste, as defined under RCRA. The
general RCRA definition of treatment is:

      any method, technique, or process, including neutralization, designed to
      change the physical, chemical, or biological character or composition of any
      hazardous waste so as to neutralize such waste, or so as to recover energy or
      material resources from the waste, or so as to render such waste
      non-hazardous, or less hazardous; safer to transport, store, or dispose of; or
      amenable for recovery, amenable for storage, or reduced in volume.  (40 CPR
      §260.10)

      When it is determined that these conditions are met, it is necessary to
analyze the prerequisites included in the particular subpart that pertains to the
type of treatment being considered, in order to determine which treatment
requirements are applicable.24 Those prerequisites are described  in detail in
Exhibit 1-3  (Action-Specific Requirements)  in the preceding chapter.

      Finally, the RCRA treatment requirements also contain special standards
for ignitable or reactive waste, incompatible waste, and special categories of
wastes. If the requirements pertaining to treatment are otherwise applicable, and if
the wastes to be treated at the CERCLA site fall into any of the above special waste
categories, the special treatment standards for such wastes will be applicable.
      23 See Section 2.7.3, Special Restrictions Applicable  to  Land  Disposal,  for
discussion of beat demonstrated available treatment technologies  (BDAT).

      24 RCRA treatment requirements are  found  in  40 CFR  Part 264  Subpart  J  (Tanks),
Subpart K (Surface Impoundments), Subpart L  (Waste Piles),  Subpart M  (Land
Treatment),  Subpart O (Incinerators);  40 CPR Part 265 Subpart  P  (Thermal  Treatment)
and Subpart Q (Chemical,  Physical, and Biological Treatment);  in proposed standards
for 40 CFR Part 264 Subpart X  (Miscellaneous Treatment Units); and in  40  CFR  Part
268 (Land Disposal Restrictions). These requirements include design and operating
standards.
                            *** AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT ***
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        2-15

2.7  RCRA REQUIREMENTS TRIGGERED BY DISPOSAL

     Remedial actions at a CERCLA site can frequently involve grading, excavating,
dredging, or other measures that move contaminated materials from one place to
another or in other ways disturb them. Such actions may constitute disposal of
hazardous waste.

      Definition of Land Disposal

      EPA has concluded that moving RCRA hazardous waste  (including hazardous waste
that was originally disposed before the 1980 RCRA effective date) constitutes
disposal when RCRA hazardous waste is moved from one unit and placed in another
unit.  It should be noted that disposal and placement are synonymous for purposes of
the land disposal restrictions under RCRA. Therefore, land disposal is the same as
placement into a land disposal unit and will be treated as the same action
throughout the remainder of the chapter.

      In many cases, an area of contamination at a CERCLA site with differing
concentration levels of hazardous substances,  pollutants, or contaminants can be
viewed, as a single large "unit," e.g., a single landfill. In such cases, when RCRA
hazardous waste is moved from one part of the unit to another, disposal/placement
has not occurred. For example, an area of generally dispersed waste containing an
existing or new landfill unit could be viewed as a single large landfill.
Consolidation of waste from throughout the area into the smaller "landfill" would
not constitute disposal/placement under this scenario, because the waste can be
viewed as being part of the same overall
land-based unit.

      However, movement or hazardous waste into the area of contamination would make
RCRA requirements triggered by disposal/placement applicable to the waste being
managed and certain RCRA requirements  (such as for closure)  are applicable to the
entire area of contamination where the waste is received. In addition, placement in
a newly created or existing surface impoundment, or placement in a tank or
incinerator and replacement on land, even within the larger area of contamination,
would trigger applicability of RCRA requirements for disposal/placement,  because the
waste is being moved to different types of units.

      HSWA fines land disposal as the following

       [T]he term "land disposal", when used with respect to a specified hazardous
      waste, shall be deemed to include,  but not be limited to,  any placement of
      such hazardous waste in a landfill, surface impoundment, waste pile, injection
      well, land treatment facility, salt dome formation, salt bed formation, or
      underground mine or cave.  (RCRA §3004(k); HSWA §201(k))

      RCRA requirements for disposal/placement of hazardous wastes in a landfill,
waste pile, underground injection well, surface impoundment, or land
                            *** AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT ***
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        2-16

farm apply if  (a) RCRA hazardous waste25 was placed/disposed  into  a  land  disposal
unit after November 19, 1980  (or after the effective date of the  appropriate land
disposal regulations); or,  (b) if actions at the CERCLA site constitute  disposal as
defined above. Exhibit 2-1 presents an illustration of selected actions  that
constitute disposal. General types of actions that do or do not constitute
disposal/placement are summarized below. Actions which are not disposal/placement
will not trigger the applicability of RCRA disposal requirements, such as landfill
closure, minimum technology, or land disposal restrictions, but these requirements
may be relevant and appropriate.

      EPA has determined that placement/disposal occurs when:

      N  Wastes from different units are consolidated into one unit  (other than a
         land disposal unit within an area of contamination);

      N  Waste is removed and treated outside a unit and redeposited into the same
         or another unit  (other than a land disposal unit within  an area of
         contamination) ;

      N  Waste is picked up from the unit and treated within the  area of
         contamination in an incinerator,  surface impoundment, or tank and then
         redeposited into the unit. (Does not include in-situ treatment.)

      Placement/disposal does not occur under the following circumstances:

      N  Waste is consolidated within a unit (including an area of contamination
         that can be viewed as a single unit,  see p. 2-15);

      N  Waste is capped in place, including grading prior to capping;

      N  Waste is treated in situ;

      N  RCRA hazardous waste is processed within the unit in order to improve its
         structural stability for closure or for movement of equipment over the
         area. Under this scenario, the wastes are processed in order to stabilize
         the wastes prior to capping or for the purpose of moving machinery across
         the area. Wastes are not considered to be undergoing treatment  in these
         situations.
      25 Disposal for purposes of §3004 (b),  (c), and  (u)  is not  limited  to
characteristic waste -- it encompasses the statutory definition of hazardous waste
in §1004(5) of RCRA. See Footnote 9.
                            *** AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT ***
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                          2-17
                        EXHIBIT 2-1
        WHAT IS DISPOSAL/PLACEMENT
     CONSOLIDATE
   OUTSIDE OF AREA
   OF CONTAMINATION
        YES
 TREAT
  AND
REPLACE


  YES
CONSOLIDATE
  IN SAME
   AREA


I   NO   I
CAP
NO
Word-searchable version — Not a true copy

-------
                                        2-18
      If disposal of RCRA hazardous waste will occur as part of a CERCLA remedial
action or has already occurred, several RCRA requirements may be applicable to that
action.26 Depending on the precise  action to be   undertaken,  these requirements may
include the following:

      N  Design and operating requirements in 40 CFR Part 264 for RCRA-regulated
         processes that constitute disposal;

      N  Closure requirements in 40 CFR Part 264; and

      N  Special RCRA requirements in 40 CFR Part 268 pertaining to the land
         disposal of particular hazardous wastes.

      Each of these categories of  requirements and the actions that trigger then are
described in greater detail in this section.

      2.7.1   DESIGN AND OPERATING REQUIREMENTS TRIGGERED BY DISPOSAL

      The RCRA regulations recognize that disposal of hazardous waste may take place
in landfills, land treatment units, surface impoundments, waste piles, and by means
of underground injection. The potentially applicable RCRA regulations include design
requirements for landfills,  waste piles, surface impoundments, and land treatment
units.

      HSWA established new minimum technology requirements for such land disposal
units.  If new landfills or surface impoundments are constructed, or if replacements
or lateral expansions27 of existing landfills or  surface  impoundments  are used, they
must satisfy these minimum technical requirements28  (two  or more liners and a
leachate collection system between
      26 In addition to RCRA disposal  requirements, particular  RCRA storage  and
treatment requirements also may be ARARs, depending on the action  to be taken. See
the discussion of these requirements in sections 2.5 and 2.6.

      27 "Lateral expansion" is defined to be  an  expansion  of the boundaries of an
existing unit. "Replacement" occurs if a unit is emptied and reused. Reuse  occurs if
original waste in removed from a unit and different waste  (either  treated or
untreated from other units)  in put into the unit. If waste is  removed from  a unit,
treated, and put back into the same unit, replacement does not occur.

      28 RCRA  §3001 (o) (2) provides that if an  owner/operator demonstrates  to the
Administrator, and if the Administrator finds that alternative design and operating
practices and location characteristics will prevent the migration  of a hazardous
constituent into ground or surface water as effectively as minimum technology
requirements,  an exemption to the requirements shall be granted. 40 CFR Part
264.301(b)  specifies that the Administrator will consider  four factors in granting
the exemption: 1) the nature of the waste; 2) hydrogeology of  the  site; 3)  the
proposed alternative;

                            *** AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT ***
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        2-19

the liners; in addition, for landfills another leachate collection system must be
placed above the top liner)(RCRA 3004(o)). EPA proposed minimum technology
requirements for liners and leak detection systems for new land disposal units on
May 29, 1987 (52 FR 20218). As these and  other additional HSWA standards become
effective, new landfills, surface impoundments, waste piles, land treatment units,
and underground tanks also will be required to satisfy additional leak detection
requirements .29

      Surface impoundments in existence on November 8, 1984, must be retrofitted  to
meet minimum design standards by November 8, 1988  (RCRA 3005(j)), if they will be in
operation after that date, unless they meet certain statutory exceptions. Thus, use
after November 8, 1988, of existing surface impoundments at a CERCLA remedial action
site will trigger specific retrofitting requirements for surface impoundments, and
construction of new units must conform to specific minimum technological
requirements or obtain a waiver or exemption from them if RCRA hazardous waste will
be disposed in the units.

      2.7.2    CLOSURE REQUIREMENTS

      Application of Closure Requirements. Excavation, consolidation, and other
similar actions that move RCRA hazardous  waste across the unit boundary, thereby
constituting disposal under the interpretation described above in section 2.7.1,
will trigger the closure requirements for the units into which the waste is being
disposed. In particular, if soil cleanup  is part of the remedy, movement of the soil
containing RCRA hazardous waste across a  unit boundary will make the closure
requirements for either clean closure or  closure in place  (disposal or landfill
closure)  applicable to the unit into which the waste is placed.30

      If RCRA hazardous wastes deposited  at a site before November 19, 1980, are
not moved out,  the RCRA, requirements for disposal are not applicable, since the
jurisdictional prerequisites for their applicability are not satisfied. However,
because they are designed to address a problem similar to that being encountered at
the CERCLA site, these requirements may be relevant and appropriate, taking into
account site-specific circumstances. See  p. 1-65
and 4) all other factors affecting the leachate.

      29 A notice of proposed  rulemaking was  issued  on May  29,  1987  (52  FR  20218)
discussing leak detection regulations.

      30 EPA has proposed requirements  for  "hybrid"  or alternate  closure options
under RCRA (52 FR 8712, March 19, 1987). Such closures would combine elements of
clean closure and the closure in place alternatives. Because the rules  on  hybrid
closures are proposed regulations, and have not been promulgated as final  rules,
they are not applicable. However, the hybrid closure may be used where  closure is
not applicable, but is relevant and appropriate. Additional RCRA corrective action
technical requirements, discussed above, also may affect this  issue.
                            *** AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT  ***
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        2-20

for a detailed discussion of the determination that a requirement is both relevant
and appropriate.

      Types of Closure. RCRA regulations on clean closure  (removal and
decontamination) are found in 40 CFR §§264.111, 264.228, and 264.258. They require
all waste residues and contaminated containment system components (e.g., liners),
contaminated subsoils,  and structures and equipment contaminated with waste and
leachate to be removed and managed as hazardous waste or decontaminated before the
site management is completed. The level of cleanup required has been interpreted to
be "drinkable leachate" and "edible soils." The basic intent of this provision is to
allow the site to remain without care and supervision after the clean closure has
been completed.

      RCRA regulations affecting disposal or landfill closure, in contrast, require
the site to be capped with a final cover designed and constructed to provide
long-term minimization of the migration of liquids through the capped area, and to
maintain its integrity over time while functioning with minimum maintenance (40 CFR
§§264.111, 264.228,  264.258, and 264.310). This type of closure, however,
anticipates that post-closure care and maintenance will be carried out at the
facility for at least 30 years after closure (40 CFR §264.117  (a)(I)).31

      Even when the waste found at a CERCLA site in a RCRA hazardous waste, the
situation or waste management activity at the CERCLA site may not technically match
the situation addressed by the regulation, and the RCRA requirement would therefore
not be applicable. (Even if the hazardous waste is not identical to a hazardous
waste, but is very similar,  some hybrid closure requirements may be applicable.)
RCRA closure requirements may nevertheless be relevant and appropriate if other
factors are sufficiently similar.

      For example, if RCRA hazardous waste was disposed before 1980 in a unit like
those covered under RCRA and the remedial action is designed to leave waste in
place, a portion of one or more of the closure requirements may be relevant and
appropriate. Depending on site circumstances and the remedy selected either clean
closure, landfill closure, or hybrid closure, which combines elements of both, might
be used.

      Two scenarios in which a hybrid or alternate approach to closure may occur
(where RCRA closure is not applicable but may be relevant and appropriate) are the
following:

      Scenario 1: Although residual contamination is above health-based levels
(i.e., clean closure levels) contamination does not pose a direct contact threat or
impact ground water.  Residual leachate contaminant levels exceed health-based
levels. A type of alternate closure, which may be termed "alternate-clean" closure,
could be used. No covers or long-term management
      31 Minimal capping requirements  (e.g., permeability  test)  are  found  in
proposed regulations, but much of the information an capping is found in  guidance.
These are not ARAR, but can be used as TBC, as appropriate.

                            *** AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT ***
  Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        2-21

would be required. However, fate and transport modeling and model verification is
necessary to ensure that the ground water is usable. In this situation, a notice in
the property dead may be necessary indicating the presence of hazardous substances.

      Scenario 2:   Removal of waste material results in residuals that potentially
pose a direct contact threat but do not pose a threat to ground water. Residual
leachate contamination does not exceed health-based levels. This type of alternate
closure, which may be termed "alternate-landfill" closure, consists of a cover to
address the direct contact threat. The cover, however, may be permeable. Limited
long-term management would include site and cover maintenance and minimal
ground-water monitoring. For this scenario, institutional controls, including
land-use restrictions, would be necessary, based on site-specific considerations.

      If, however, the waste is widely dispersed and not contained in a RCRA-type
unit, use of RCRA closure may not be appropriate. For instance, RCRA covers are
generally not appropriate for large municipal landfills or large mining waste sites,
where the waste is generally of a low toxicity and the site encompasses an area that
bears little resemblance to the discrete units regulated under RCRA Subtitle C.

      2.7.3 SPECIAL RESTRICTIONS APPLICABLE TO LAND DISPOSAL

      Certain activities undertaken involving specific wastes of a remedial action
may be subject to the special restrictions on land disposal of hazardous wastes.
These Land Disposal Restrictions  (LDR), established by HSWA, may be required if
placement occurs  (placement into a unit is defined as identical to disposal; see p.
2-15 for the HSWA definition of land disposal).  These amendments to RCRA prohibit
the land disposal of certain untreated hazardous wastes or the residuals of treated
hazardous waste not meeting specified standards.

      The following schedule identifies the categories of waste and the date on
which the particular waste category will be banned from land disposal:
                    WASTE

          Spent solvent wastes
          (F001, F002, F003, F004, F005)
BAN EFFECTIVE DATE

November 8, 1986
          Dioxin-containing wastes
          F020, F021, F022, F023, F026,
          F027, F028)
November 8, 1986
          California list wastes
July 8, 1987
          First third of all ranked and
          listed RCRA hazardous wastes
August 8, 1988
                                AUGUST
                                          1988 DRAFT
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        2-22
          Second third of all ranked and
          listed RCRA hazardous wastes
      June 8, 1989
          All remaining ranked and listed
          RCRA hazardous waste and all RCRA
          characteristic hazardous wastes
      May 8, 1990
          Any RCRA hazardous waste listed or
          identified under RCRA 3001 after
          November 8, 1984
      Within six months of
      listing or
      identification
      RCRA wastes treated in accordance with treatment standards set by EPA under
RCRA §3004(m) are not subject to the prohibitions and may be land disposed.32  The
restrictions on land disposal of hazardous wastes apply to RCRA hazardous waste
placed after the effective prohibition date. Wastes land disposed before the
effective prohibition date (and not removed) are not subject to the restrictions.

      The treatment standards are to be achieved using the best demonstrated
available treatment technologies (BDAT).  The land disposal restrictions regulations
establish treatment standards that are based on BDAT for a given waste. A BDAT
treatment standard can take one of two forms:
      (1)  a  concentration  level  to  be  achieved
           standard),  or
(i.e.,  a  concentration-based
      (2)  a  specified technology that  must  be  used (i.e.,
           standard).
           a  "technology-based"
      If the standard is concentration-based, any treatment technology that can
achieve the standard may be used. If the standard is technology-based, that
technology must be used, unless an exemption exists or a variance is granted. Thus,
wastes must be treated according to the appropriate standard before wastes or the
treatment residuals of wastes can be disposed in or on the land.

      HSWA does provide certain CERCLA remedial actions with exemptions from
compliance with the land disposal restrictions. Until November 8, 1988, disposal of
soil and debris contaminated with solvents, dioxins, or California list wastes
resulting from a response action taken under §§104 or 106 of CERCLA is not subject
to the land disposal restrictions. EPA extended the exemption for these soil and
debris wastes until November 8, 1990 (and until August 8, 1990 for certain first
third wastes).  On November 7, 1986, when the Agency promulgated the first set of
land disposal restrictions, it also established additional temporary exemptions for
several waste categories and provided a schedule of ban effective dates by waste
types.
      32 Section 3004  (m) provides that EPA shall "...promulgate  regulations
specifying. ..levels or methods of treatment... which substantially diminish the
toxicity of the waste or substantially reduce the likelihood of migration of the
hazardous constituents from the waste."
                                AUGUST
                                          1988 DRAFT
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        2-23

      In addition, HSWA authorizes EPA to grant national variances from the
effective date of the land disposal restrictions based upon a lack of capacity to
treat the wastes. A capacity variance has been granted for Superfund wastes
containing spent solvents and dioxins that are not soil and debris waste until
November 8, 1988. A capacity variance also exists for a portion of the California
list wastes; for the wastes not granted a variance the testi restrictions are
currently effective. Rules are currently being developed to establish BDAT levels
for contaminated soil and debris. More exemptions and variances may be granted in
the future, as additional regulations are promulgated for remaining wastes. See the
following list of exemptions and variances.
          Waste
Exemption/Variance
   All solvent, dioxin, and
   California list soil and debris
   wastes from CERCLA  response and
   RCRA corrective actions

   All RCRA-listed dioxin wastes
Statutory two year exemption from
effective dates until 11/8/88;
exemption extended to 11/8/90
(exemption for certain first thirds
granted until 8/8/90)

Regulatory two-year national variance
until 11/8/88
   All RCRA-listed solvent wastes
   from CERCLA response and RCRA
   corrective actions  (non-soil and
   debris)
Regulatory two-year national variance
until 11/8/88
   Small quantity generator  (100
   kg-1000 kg per month) of RCRA
   solvent wastes
Regulatory two-year national variance
until 11/8/88
   Solvent-water mixtures, solvent
   containing sludges, or solvent-
   contaminated soil or solids  (non-
   CERCLA or RCRA corrective action)
   containing less than 1 percent
   total F001-F005 solvent
   constituents as initially
   generated

   Liquid and non-liquid hazardous
   wastes containing HOCs in total
   concentration greater than or
   equal to 1000 mg/1, or 1000
   mg/kg, respectively  (except  for
   dilute HOC wastewaters)
Regulatory two-year
variance until 11/8/88
Regulatory two-year national
variance until 7/8/89
                                AUGUST
                                          1988 DRAFT
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        2-24

      2.7.4   CORRECTIVE ACTION AND GROUND-WATER PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS

      RCRA contains several authorities under which corrective action requirements
will eventually be promulgated, and because of the similarity of corrective action
under RCRA to CERCLA cleanup, these requirements are likely to be potential ARARs in
many remedial action situations.

      40 CFR Part 264 Subpart F establishes requirements for ground-water protection
for RCRA-regulated land disposal units  (waste piles, surface impoundments, land
treatment areas, and landfills) that received hazardous waste after July 26, 1982.
In addition, releases of hazardous wastes or constituents from solid waste
management units (SWMUs) must be cleaned up in accordance with 40 CFR §264.101. The
existing corrective action requirements in 40 CFR §264.101 require the
owner/operator of a facility seeking a permit for the treatment, storage, or
disposal of hazardous waste to institute corrective action as necessary to protect
human health and the environment for all releases of hazardous waste or constituents
from any solid waste management unit at the facility, regardless of the time at
which waste was placed in such unit.

      In addition to the regulatory requirements specified by 40 CFR Part 264
Subpart F, HSWA added authority in RCRA §3004(u) for corrective action for all
releases from solid waste management units at RCRA treatment, storage, or disposal
facilities of hazardous waste or hazardous constituents to air, surface waters,
soil, or ground water. Detailed corrective action regulations are currently being
developed; in the interim, corrective actions are being implemented on a
case-by-case basis. The corrective action standards under §3004(u), when they are
promulgated, may be potentially applicable to CERCLA activities conducted at a
facility subject to RCRA Subtitle C regulation, or if the response action itself
involves treatment, storage, or disposal of a RCRA hazardous waste and potentially
relevant and appropriate for similar response actions and wastes. While corrective
actions requirements are specified in a RCRA permit  (40 CFR §264.101), CERCLA
on-site remedial actions are not required to obtain permits; however, substantive
corrective action requirements under §3004(u),  when promulgated, may be potential
ARARs. This manual will be updated to include further corrective action requirements
when they are promulgated.

      The two general types of ground-water corrective action requirements that
should be analyzed are ground-water monitoring under RCRA Subpart F and ground-water
protection  (contaminant concentration) standards.
                                AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        2-25

      2.7.4.1    Ground-Water Monitoring Requirements under Subpart F

      There are three general types of ground-water monitoring outlined in 40 CFR
Part 264 Subpart F:33

      N  Detection monitoring (40 CFR §264.98)

      N  Compliance monitoring  (40 CFR §264.99)

      N  Corrective action monitoring  (40 CFR §264.100)

If the CERCLA remedial actions involve creation of a new unit to dispose of RCRA
hazardous waste, the three types of monitoring contained in Subpart  F would be
applicable.34 In  all other cases, corrective  action monitoring  (40  CFR §264.100)
will be applicable to remedial actions undertaken at exiting RCRA  units or where the
disposal of RCRA hazardous waste (as defined) occurs at an exiting area of
contamination as part of the remedial action. Corrective action monitoring is
generally triggered by remedial action involving management of RCRA  wastes. Such
monitoring may be required for three years following completion of the remedy to
ensure that the clean-up level is not exceeded.35

      2.7.4.2 Ground-Water Protection Standards under Subpart F

      Evaluation of the RCRA ground-water protection standards under Subpart F as
ARARs should be done in the context of the Superfund approach for  establishing and
meeting ground-water protection goals. The Superfund approach derives its ground-
water restoration goals primarily from the vulnerability, use, and value of the
contaminated ground waters to their beneficial uses  (e.g., restore current or
potential sources of drinking water to drinking water quality ) within time frames
established as appropriate for
      33 These requirements are described  in  detail  in  RCRA Ground-Water  Monitoring
Technical Enforcement Guidance Document,  (OWPE/OSWER), September 1986.

      34 For CERCLA actions which  involve  treatment,  storage,  or disposal of  RCRA
hazardous waste after July 26, 1982, the  40  CFR Part 264 standards promulgated on
the date will generally be applicable. If RCRA hazardous waste was treated,  stored,
or disposed at the site before the effective date of these  Part 264 standards, the
Part 264 standards would not be applicable if the CERCLA action does not  involve
current treatment, storage, or disposal but may be  relevant and appropriate.

      35 Placement of upgradient  (background) monitoring wells and  RCRA procedures
for sampling and analysis are described in guidance  for implementing 40  CFR  Part 264
Subpart F. These procedures and guidance, however,  are not ARAR, but may  be
considered in the development of  ground-water monitoring plans at  CERCLA sites.
                                AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        2-26

the specific circumstances at a given  site. When  contaminated ground water is
identified, the program undertakes an  analysis  to determine  the  characteristics of
that ground water, using the framework laid out in EPA's  Ground-Water Protection
Strategy and EPA's Ground-Water Classification  Guidelines as a guide.  Remediation
levels are then established for the site based  on an  analysis of ARARs and other
requirements "to-be-considered" in determining  protective levels.  Alternative time
frames for cleanup and different technologies that might  be  employed to achieve the
selected remediation level should then be  considered  and  analyzed against a series
of criteria (the Superfund approach is discussed  in greater  detail in Chapter 5).

      The requirements of 40 CPR Part  264  come  into play  as  ARARS are analyzed an
part of determining the appropriate remediation level for a  site.  40 CFR §264.94
established three categories of ground water protection standards which are
considered by Superfund as potentially applicable or  relevant and appropriate
requirements:   background concentrations,  RCRA  Maximum Concentration Limits (MCLs),
and Alternate Concentration Limits  (ACLs). In general,  Superfund will find MCLs
under the Safe Drinking Water Act  (SDWA MCLs) the relevant and appropriate
requirements for most sites. In complying  with  SDWA MCLs,  cleanup will also be
consistent with RCRA MCLs. When no MCL has been established,  Superfund remedial
actions substantively meet RCRA Subpart F  requirements in one of two ways. In
general,  for ground waters with the characteristics of Class I and II aquifers
(i.e., those whose beneficial use will be  as drinking water  supply),  the Superfund
program establishes a remediation level that is the equivalent of a health-based
(i.e., assuming human exposure) ACL under  RCRA. For ground waters with the
characteristics of Class III  (i.e., cannot be used as drinking water because of high
salinity or naturally occurring widespread contamination)  and where MCLs would not
be relevant and appropriate, Superfund establishes levels consistent with
exposure-based (i.e., assuming low likelihood of  human exposure)  ACLs under RCRA.
Background levels will generally not be adopted by the Superfund program in
establishing remediation levels in Class III ground waters.

      The procedure for establishing site-specific ACLs under RCRA is specified in
40 CFR §264.94, and requires a finding that the hazardous constituent in the ground
water will not pose a substantial present  or potential hazard to human health or the
environment as long as the ACL is not  exceeded. Consideration of numerous factors is
required, affecting primarily:

      N  Potential adverse effects on  ground-water quality,  taking into
         consideration physical and chemical characteristics of  the waste,
         hydrogeological characteristics  of the setting, the quantity  and direction
         of ground-water flow, proximity  and withdrawal rate of ground-water users,
         current  and future uses of ground water,  the existing quality of the area
         ground water,  including other sources of contamination, the potential for
         health risks, the potential for other  damage,  the persistence and
         permanence of adverse effects; and

      N  Potential adverse effects on  hydraulically-connected surface water,  taking
         into consideration factors similar to  those  listed  above.
                                AUGUST  8,  1988  DRAFT
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        2-27

      In evaluating use of ACLs, Superfund considers these and other factors in
establishing site-specific remediation levels.

      CERCLA §121(d)(2)(B)(ii) provides a set of three additional conditions
limiting the use of ACLs at Superfund sites where MCLs would otherwise be applicable
or relevant and appropriate. The statute prohibits use of any process for
establishing ACLs for hazardous constituents in ground water (where there is not a
projected entry into surface water) for purposes of an on-site cleanup that assumes
a point of human exposure beyond the boundaries of the facility, except where three
specific conditions are met: "(1)  There are known and projected points of entry of
such groundwater into surface water; and  (2) on the basis of measurements or
projections, there is or will be no statistically significant increase of such
constituents from such groundwater in such surface water at the point of entry or at
any point where there is reason to believe accumulation of constituents may occur
downstream; and (3)  the remedial action includes enforceable measures that will
preclude human exposure to the contaminated groundwater at any point between the
facility boundary and all known and projected points of entry of such groundwater
into surface water." If the conditions are met, the assumed point of human exposure
may be at such known and projected points of entry.
                                AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         3-1

                                      CHAPTER 3

              GUIDANCE  FOR COMPLIANCE  WITH CLEAN WATER ACT REQUIREMENTS
3.0   INTRODUCTION

      This chapter addresses CERCLA compliance with Clean Water Act  (CWA) applicable
or relevant and appropriate requirements  (ARARs) in remedial actions.1 The CWA has
distinct regulatory features that include site-specific pollutant limitations and
performance standards which are applied primarily for protection of  surface water
quality (e.g., regulating point and non-point source discharges to surface water).2
Unlike the RCRA program described in Chapter 2, the CWA does not have specific
technology design and operating requirements that can be linked to specific remedial
technologies. It does, however, have effluent limitations guidelines and standards
supported by technological bases for specified industrial categories, that may be
relevant and appropriate to CERCLA actions.

      This chapter provides guidance for CERCLA site personnel based upon the type
of effluent discharge activity likely to occur at CERCLA sites.3 Several types of
discharges regulated under the CWA could occur at a CERCLA site: direct discharge to
surface water or to oceans, indirect discharge to a publicly owned treatment works
(POTW), and discharge of dredged or fill material into the waters of the U.S.
(including wetlands).  This chapter is organized into four sections:

      N  Section 3.1 provides a general overview of the
         provisions of the CWA and how they are implemented;

      N  Section 3.2 provides guidance for compliance with direct
         discharge requirements;

      N  Section 3.3 provides guidance for compliance with indirect  discharge
         requirements; and

      N  Section 3.4 provides guidance for compliance with dredge
         and fill requirements.
      1  The requirements of CERCLA §121 generally apply as a matter of law only to
remedial actions. However, as a matter of policy, EPA will attain ARARs to the
greatest extent practicable considering the exigencies of the situation at the site
when carrying out removal actions.

      2  Water quality criteria under the CWA may also be relevant and appropriate to
cleanup of surface and ground water per CERCLA §121(d)(2)(B)(i).

      3  Section 118 (a) (2)  of the CWA as amended by the Water Quality Act of 1987
specifically requires EPA to "...take the lead in the effort to meet..." the goals
embodied in the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement  (GLWQA) with particular emphasis
on goals related to toxic pollutants. The provisions of the GLWQA will be very
pertinent to sites having discharges to the Great Lakes drainage basin.

                         * * *  AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT  * * *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         3-2

      3.0.1   ON-SITE ACTIONS: COMPLIANCE WITH SUBSTANTIVE REQUIREMENTS

      CERCLA §121(e) states that no Federal, State or local permit  (e.g., a permit
for a direct discharge to surface waters) is required for the portion of any removal
or remedial action conducted entirely on-site. This permit exemption also applies to
any activities that occur on-site prior to the response action  (e.g., pump tests
during the RI/FS).4 For  purposes  of this guidance,  a direct discharge of Superfund
wastewaters would be "on-site" if the receiving water body is in the area of
contamination or is in very close proximity to the site and necessary for
implementation of the response action (even if the water body flows off-site).

      Superfund sites are not required to comply with administrative requirements
associated with the permitting process for on-site actions. However, remedies
selected must be protective of human health and the environment, and must meet
substantive requirements under any Federal environmental law or more stringent
promulgated State environmental or facility siting law that are identified as
applicable or relevant and appropriate.

      It is the responsibility of the lead agency to ensure that substantive
requirements for direct on-site discharges to surface waters and other on-site
actions are identified and complied with even though a permit incorporating that
standard of control is not required. In most cases, this responsibility can be
carried out effectively if the appropriate Regional and State Water personnel are
involved early and continuously in the Superfund process. Section 3.2.4 provides
more detailed guidance on such coordination.

      3.0.2   OFF-SITE ACTIONS: COMPLIANCE WITH SUBSTANTIVE AND ADMINISTRATIVE
              REQUIREMENTS

Off-site discharges  from CERCLA sites directly to  receiving waters  or
indirectly to POTWs must comply with applicable Federal, State and  local
substantive requirements and are not exempt from formal administrative
permitting requirements.5 The formal administrative permitting requirements
for off-site direct discharges are described further in section 3.2.5.
      4  EPA interprets "on-site" for permitting purposes to mean the areal extent of
contamination and all suitable areas in very close proximity to the contamination
necessary for implementation of the response action. Actions taken by EPA, other
Federal agencies, States or private parties undertaking removal or remedial actions
under CERCLA §§104, 106, or 122 are covered by the §121(e) permit exemption.

      5  The term "indirect  discharge" is used when a source discharges waste to a
POTW that treats the waste. Often, the POTW then discharges the treated wastewater
to receiving waters.
                                AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         3-3

3.1    OVERVIEW OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT

      The objective of the Clean Water Act  (CWA)  is  to  restore and maintain the
chemical, physical, and biological integrity  of  the  nation's waters.  This objective
is achieved through the control of discharges of pollutants to navigable waters.
This control is implemented through  the  application  of  Federal,  State and local
discharge standards. This section provides an overview  of the CWA including a
discussion of the regulated sources  and  pollutants,  limitations and standards,  and
how limitations and standards are applied to  regulated  sources.  A summary discussion
of specific CWA provisions is provided in the Appendix.

      3.1.1   REGULATED SOURCES AND  POLLUTANTS

      The CWA prohibits the unpermitted  discharge of any pollutant or combination of
pollutants to waters of the United States from any point source.6  A point source is
defined as:

         .  .  .  any discernible, confined, and discrete  conveyance, including but not
         limited to any pipe, ditch,  channel,  tunnel, conduit,  well,  discrete
         fissure, container,  . .  . from  which pollutants are or may be discharged.
         (40 CFR §122.2)

      A pollutant is defined  for regulatory purposes to include:

         .  .  .  dredged spoil, solid  waste, incinerator  residue,  filter
         backwash, sewage, garbage,  sewer sludge,  munitions,  chemical
         wastes,  . . . and industrial, municipal,  and agricultural
         waste discharged into water.  (40 CFR §122.2)

      All pollutants are regulated under the  CWA.  For the purpose of regulation, CWA
§301(b)(2)  divides the pollutants into the following three categories:

         N    Priority pollutants : the 126 individual toxic pollutants contained in
              65  toxic compounds  or  classes  of toxic compounds adopted by EPA
              pursuant to Section  307 (a) (1) of the  CWA, including,  for example.
              asbestos, benzene,  and chloroform;

         N    Conventional pollutants:   pollutants classified,  pursuant to CWA
              §304 (a) (4),  as biochemical oxygen demanding  (BOD), total suspended
              solids  (TSS),  fecal  coliform,  oil  and  grease, and pH; and
      6  "Waters of the U.S." is defined broadly in 40 CFR §122.2  and  includes
essentially any water body  (including  navigable waters)  and most wetlands.
                                AUGUST  8,  1988  DRAFT
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                          3-4

         N    Nonconventional Pollutants: any Pollutant not identified  as  either
              conventional  or priority,  i.e., ammonia nitrogen, chemical oxygen
              demand  (COD),  total organic carbon, total solids, and nonpriority
              toxic pollutants (40 CFR 122.21 (1)  (2) ) .

      3.1.2   LIMITATIONS AND STANDARDS

      The CWA requires the  establishment  of guidelines and standards to control the
direct or indirect discharge  of pollutants to waters  of the U.S. Effluent
limitations developed for the pollutants  regulated under the CWA are applied to
point source dischargers  on a case-by-case basis. The  standards required by the CWA,
and the regulations promulgated to implement these standards (discussed in greater
detail in sections 3.2, 3.3,  and  3.4),  include:

         N    Technology-Based Guidelines and Standards. The standards of control
              for  direct  discharges are derived  from Title  III  of the CWA. CWA
              §301 (b)  requires all direct dischargers to meet technology-based
              requirements.  These requirements include, for conventional
              pollutants, application of the best  conventional pollutant  control
              technology  (BCT), and for toxic  and  nonconventional  pollutants, the
              best available  technology economically achievable  (BAT).7 EPA has
              determined  the  technology-based requirements  through effluent
              limitations guidelines for specific  categories of industries, which
              are  transformed into specific discharge limits by permit  writers.
              Where effluent  guidelines for a specific industry or industrial
              category do not exist,  e.g., CERCLA sites,  BCT/BAT technology-based
              treatment requirements are determined on a case-by-case  basis using
              best professional judgment (BPJ). Once the BPJ determination  in made,
              the numerical effluent discharge limits are derived by applying the
              levels  of performance of a treatment technology to the wastewater
              discharge.

         N    Water Quality Criteria.  CWA §304 requires EPA to publish  water
              quality criteria for  specific "pollutants,  or their byproducts."  EPA
              develops two kinds of water  quality criteria:   one for protection  of
              human health  and another for protection of aquatic life.  Federal
      7  BAT is the major national method of controlling  the  direct discharge of
toxic and non-conventional pollutants  to waters of the U.S.  Effluent limitations
achieved through application  of  BAT  represent the best economically achievable
performance of plants within  an  industrial  category or subcategory. BCT is the level
of technology control developed  for  conventional pollutants.
                                AUGUST  8,  1988 DRAFT
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         3-5

                  water quality criteria are non-enforceable guidelines used by
                  States to set water quality standards for surface water. To date a
                  total of 82 water quality criteria documents have been made
                  available from the National Technical Information Service  (NTIS).
                  EPA has published notice of these documents as they have become
                  available (45 FR 79318, November 28, 1980; 49 FR 5831, February
                  15,  1984; 50 FR 30784, July 29, 1985; 51 FR 22978, June 28, 1986;
                  51 FR 43665, December 3, 1986; 51 FR 8012, March 7, 1986; 52 FR
                  6213, March 2,  1987).  Water quality criteria may be relevant and
                  appropriate to cleanup of surface and ground water at CERCLA sites
                  (CERCLA §121(d) (2) (B)  (i) ) .

                  Water Quality Standards. CWA §303 requires States to develop water
                  quality standards based on Federal water quality criteria to
                  protect existing and attainable use or uses (e.g., recreation,
                  public water supply)  of the receiving waters.  CWA §301(b)(1)(C)
                  requires that pollutants contained in direct discharges be
                  controlled beyond BCT/BAT equivalents when necessary to meet
                  applicable water quality standards. Where State standards contain
                  numerical criteria for toxic pollutants, appropriate numerical
                  discharge limitations may be derived for the discharge.  Where
                  State standards are narrative, e.g., "no toxic materials in toxic
                  amounts," either the whole-effluent or the chemical-specific
                  approach is generally used as the standard of control.

                  Ocean Discharge Regulations. CWA §403 prohibits discharges into
                  marine waters without an NPDES permit. A permit will not be issued
                  if the discharge will cause unreasonable degradation to the marine
                  environment. The permit, issued pursuant to 40 CFR Part 125,
                  Subpart M, may contain monitoring requirements and effluent
                  discharge limitations based upon limiting permissible
                  concentrations described in 40 CFR Part 227, Subpart G.
                  Substantive requirements of ocean discharge regulations are
                  potential ARARs for on-site CERCLA action.

                  Pretreatment Standards. CWA §307 (b) requires the establishment of
                  pretreatment standards for the control of pollutants discharged
                  into POTWs by industrial and other nondomestic sources,  i.e.,
                  indirect dischargers.  The purpose of the standards is to prevent
                  the discharge of pollutants that pass through (are not susceptible
                  to treatment by the POTW)  or interfere with the POTW  (inhibit or
                  destroy the operations, contaminate sludge, or endanger the health
                  of POTW workers).  For many
                                AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         3-6

              industries, EPA has promulgated national categorical pretreatment
              standards  for toxic pollutants. However, such  standards do not  cover
              all industrial categories or regulate all of the pollutants
              discharged to POTWs. Therefore, EPA's regulations  further impose
              general prohibitions  (pass through and interference) and specific
              prohibitions  (see section 3.3.1) on indirect discharges. These
              prohibitions apply directly to all nondomestic  sources and are
              implemented through the development and enforcement of local  limits,
              i.e., pretreatment requirements applied to wastewater discharges
              before they reach the POTW.

         N    Dredge and Fill Standards. CWA §404 regulates  the  discharge of
              dredged or fill material into waters of the U.S. This program is
              implemented through regulations set forth at 33 CFR Parts 320 through
              330 and 40 CFR Part 230. These regulatory requirements ensure that
              proposed discharges are evaluated with respect  to  impacts on  the
              aquatic ecosystem. The benefits that reasonably may be expected to
              accrue from the dredge and fill activity must  be balanced against its
              reasonably foreseeable detriments  (see section  3.4.3) . Section  103  of
              the Marine Protection Research and Sanctuaries Act regulates
              discharge  of dredged material into oceans.

3.2    GUIDANCE FOR COMPLIANCE WITH DIRECT DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS

      3.2.1   TYPES OF DIRECT DISCHARGES

      Several types of cleanup activities could be considered "direct discharges"
from a point source under the CWA. These activities,  which trigger action-specific
requirements for the discharge,  include:

         N    On-site waste treatment in which wastewater8 is discharged directly
              into a surface water body in the area of contamination or in  very
              close proximity to this area via a pipe, ditch, conduit, or other
              means of "discrete conveyance."

         N    Off-site treatment in which wastes from the site are piped or
              otherwise  discharged through a point source to  an  off-site surface
              water.
      8  Wastewater may include contaminated ground water pumped,  treated,  and
discharged to surface water.
                                AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         3-7

         N    Any remedial action in which site runoff would be channeled directly
              to a surface water body via a ditch, culvert, storm  sewer, or  other
              means.

It should be noted that contaminated ground water that naturally flows into
surface waters is not considered a point source discharge. However, such
contaminated ground water which enters a surface water may be subject to Federal
water quality criteria or State water quality standards.

      3.2.2   OVERVIEW OF NPDES PERMITS

      The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System  (NPDES)  program is the
national program for issuing, monitoring, and enforcing permits for direct
discharges. The CWA established the NPDES permit program under §402 of the Act to
implement the regulations,  limitations,  and standards promulgated pursuant to §§301,
304,  306, 307, 308,  and 403 of the CWA for point source direct discharges.  The NPDES
program is implemented under 40 CFR Parts 122-125. NPDES permits contain applicable
effluent standards (i.e., technology-based and/or water quality-based), monitoring
requirements, and standard and special conditions for discharge. The NPDES program
is administered by EPA and by State agencies authorized by EPA to administer a State
program equivalent to the Federal NPDES program. Regardless of whether States are
authorized to administer the NPDES program,  they may establish more stringent
requirements than those contained in the Federal program.

      3.2.3   GUIDELINES FOR DETERMINING SUBSTANTIVE REQUIREMENTS

      Both on-site and off-site discharges from CERCLA sites to surface waters are
required to meet the substantive CWA NPDES requirements,  including discharge
limitations, monitoring requirements, and best management practices. These
requirements will be contained in an NPDES permit for off-site CERCLA discharges
(see section 3.2.5).  For on-site discharges from a CERCLA site, these substantive
requirements must be identified and complied with even though an NPDES permit will
not be obtained. The following sections describe the substantive requirements of the
CWA as implemented through the NPDES program.

      3.2.3.1    Technology-Based  Standards

      The wastewater treatment technologies proposed in considering alternatives for
a CERCLA site are required to meet BCT/BAT requirements  (see section 3.1.2).  Due to
the lack of national effluent limitations guidelines for CERCLA site wastewater
discharges, technology-based effluent limitations have to be imposed on a
case-by-case basis.  Therefore,  best professional judgment  (BPJ) is used to identify
BCT/BAT equivalent discharge requirements.

      During an initial BPJ evaluation,  a proposed CERCLA response alternative
should be reviewed to ensure the use of treatment technologies that have been proven
effective to treat the pollutants or classes of pollutants present in the
                                AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
CERCA site wastewater (see p. 3-36, Exhibit 3-1 which is a list of the development
documents that provided the basis for the BAT categorical standards).  Then,
numerical effluent limitations or treatment efficiency requirements can be developed
for the specific situation (section 3.2.4 addresses how to coordinate with water
program offices in order to identify substantive requirements).  Factors that must be
evaluated to determine the appropriateness of the selected technology as BCT/BAT
include the process employed, the engineering aspects of the application of various
types of control techniques,  process changes, the cost of achieving such effluent
reduction, non-water quality environmental impact,  and other appropriate factors.9
(See CWA §304 and 40 CFR §§122 and 125.3(c)(3)). RPMs will follow a process similar
to a BPJ determination in developing numerical effluent limitations.  State or
Regional water quality staff may be consulted during the development of effluent
limitations.

      A direct method for initially establishing effluent discharge limits for
direct discharges an a case-by-case basis is to identify and use existing data on
the application of treatment technologies to the classes of wastes found at CERCLA
sites. The data needed to apply existing treatment technology performance to a
CERCLA site include the following:

         N    Description of wastes;

         N    Concentration of pollutants  in waste;

         N    Engineering information -  flow rates, volume, treatability
              information; and

         N    Expected treatment  (removal/destruction) efficiency.

      In general, the considerations involved in using technology-based information
to set case-by-case discharge limits include the following:

         N    Performance data should be based on the removal of identical or
              chemically similar pollutants to those found in the CERCLA discharge;

         N    Performance data should pertain to the treatability of wastewaters
              containing approximately the same pollutant concentration levels an
              those found in the CERCLA  discharge;
      9  In determining BAT for a specific source,  costs are considered but are
generally not balanced against pollutant removal benefits. In determining BCT, the
reasonableness of the relationship between the costs of obtaining a reduction in
effluents and the effluent reduction benefits is considered. Further, this
relationship is compared to the cost and level of reduction of such pollutants by a
POTW.
                                AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         3-9

         N    Compositional differences between  the  CERCLA  discharge  and  the
              discharge  for which treatability data  are  available  should  be
              noted;

         o    The variability in pollutant concentration levels  in the  CERCLA
              discharge  may affect treatability;  and

         N    Major differences between the  average  flow at the  discharge for
              which treatability data exist  and  the  average flow of the CERCLA
              discharge  should be noted.

      As mentioned above, in order to effectively assess wastewater treatability
using technology-based limitations,  available performance data should be  obtained
which document the efficiency of existing treatment  technologies in treating
wastewater of similar composition.  If such data  is not available,  pilot tests may
have to be conducted.  Treatment technologies are usually geared  toward  the removal
of general classes of pollutants (e.g.,  air  stripping units  remove volatile
organics). Removal efficiencies for specific pollutants within any  general category
may vary when using any particular treatment technology  and  may  necessitate close
control  (e.g., pH adjustment for precipitation of metals).

      Further guidance regarding the use of  BPJ  to develop  technology-based
discharge limitations can be found in the following Agency  guidance manuals:

         N    Training Manual for NPDES Permits  Writers, March 1986.

         N    Development of Case-Bv-Case Discharge  Permits Under
              the NPDES  and Pretreatment Programs   (Draft),
               U.S.  EPA,  Region 8,  October 1986.
         N    Developing Requirement  for Direct  and  Indirect
              Discharges of CERCLA Wastewater  (Draft), March  1987.

      3.2.3.2 Water Quality Criteria

      CERCLA §121 states that hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants
left on-site at the conclusion of the remedial action shall attain Federal water
quality criteria where they are relevant and appropriate under the circumstances
of the release or threatened release. CERCLA §121(d)(2)(B)(i) requires that this
determination is to be based on the designated or potential use of the water, the
media affected,  the purposes of the criteria, and current information.

      Whether a water quality criteria is relevant and appropriate depends on the
use(s) designated by the State, which is based on existing and attainable uses,
and whether the water quality criteria is intended to be protective of that use.
Water quality criteria for protection of human health identify protective levels
from two routes of exposures -- exposure from drinking the water and from
consuming aquatic organisms, primarily fish, and from fish consumption alone.
                                AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                       3-10

      Therefore, in waters designated as a public water supply, a water quality
criteria reflecting drinking the water would be relevant and appropriate; the
criteria that reflects fish consumption and drinking the water should be used if
fishing is also included in the State's designated use. If the State has
designated a water body for recreation, a water quality criteria reflecting fish
consumption alone may be relevant and appropriate if fishing is included in that
designation. Generally, water quality criteria are not relevant and appropriate
for other uses, such as industrial or agricultural use, since exposures reflected
in the water quality criteria are not likely to occur.

      Water quality criteria without modification are not relevant and
appropriate in selecting cleanup levels in ground water, since consumption of
contaminated fish is not a concern. However, a water quality criteria adjusted to
reflect only exposure from drinking the water may be useful in selecting a
cleanup level.

      MCLs represent the level of quality EPA has determined to be safe for
drinking and are generally relevant and appropriate for ground water that is or
may be used for drinking and for surface water designated as a current or
potential drinking water supply. Therefore, when a promulgated MCL exists, the
water quality criteria for that pollutant would not be relevant and appropriate.

      A water quality criteria for protection of aquatic life may be relevant and
appropriate for a remedy involving surface waters (or ground water discharges to
surface waters) when the designated use requires protection of aquatic life or
when environmental concerns exist at the site. The presence of organisms more
sensitive than those represented in the toxicological data based from which the
national criteria were derived, or exposure of organisms to multiple toxic
substances with additive or synergistic toxic effects may require application of
more stringent criteria.10 In addition,  if protection of human health and aquatic
life are both a concern, the more stringent standard or criterion should
generally be applied.

      If a State has promulgated a numerical water quality standard for a given
chemical and use, the State standard would generally be relevant and appropriate
rather than a water quality criteria, because it essentially represents a site-
specific adaptation of a water quality criteria.

      If a State has not designated uses for a surface water, whether a water
quality criteria is relevant and appropriate should be based on a site-specific
decision about the existing and attainable uses of the water body, considering
similar criteria used by States in designating uses and in consultation with the
State.
      10 For example, the water quality criteria  for  cadmium  for  the protection
of freshwater aquatic organisms may, in fact, not be stringent enough to protect
brown and brook trout,   (50 FR 30784, July 29, 1985.)
                                AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                       3-11

      In addition, CERCLA §121(d)(2) requires that, in determining whether a
water quality criteria is relevant and appropriate, the latest information
available be considered. Thus, a water quality criteria may be relevant but not
appropriate if its scientific basis is not current. To ensure that a water
quality criteria is current, consult with the Regional Water Program office and
the EPA IRIS (see Footnote 21, p. 1-76) .11

      3.2.3.3    Water Quality Standards

      In addition to technology-based limits, CWA §402 (a) (1), through reference
to CWA §301, requires that all NPDES permits include effluent limitations to
ensure that State ambient water quality standards are met in the receiving water
body at all times.12 Section  303  of  the CWA requires States  to promulgate  water
quality standards. Such ambient State standards will be applicable to CERCLA
discharges in combination with Federal BCT/BAT requirements which regulate the
discharge.

      State water quality standards are composed of:

         N    Use Classification

      Use classifications describe the existing and attainable uses for waters
within State boundaries. Although a State may develop its own classification
scheme, designated uses generally include:

              Recreation;
              Protection and propagation  of  fish and aquatic life;
              Agricultural and industrial uses;
              Public water supply;  and
              Navigation.

         N    Numerical and/or narrative  standards

      For each designated use, States are required to establish numerical or
narrative water quality standards necessary to protect the designated use; such
standards are subject to EPA review. (The standard may be a method for
determining numerical discharge limitations,  rather than the number itself.)
Discharges of CERCLA wastewater must comply with these promulgated standards.
      11 Exhibit  1-1 presents the  Federal water  quality  criteria  for  priority
pollutants. A summary of water quality criteria developed for protection of  fish
and other aquatic life  (fresh water, marine, and estuarine) and  for  protection of
human health may be found in Quality Criteria for Water 1986, EPA 440/5-86-001,
May 1, 1986  (51 FR 43665) - commonly referred to as the "Gold Book."

      12 CWA  §401 (a) (2)  requires that a discharge conform  to  applicable  water
quality requirements where the discharge affects a State other than  the State
issuing the NPDES permit.
                                AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                       3-12

      Numerical State water quality standards are usually based on Federal
ambient water quality criteria developed by EPA, which are also considered to be
potentially relevant and appropriate under CERCLA §121(d)(2)(A)(ii)  (see section
3.2.3.2).  States may use ambient water quality criteria in setting water quality
standards, or may set more or less stringent standards, as necessary to protect
designated uses.

      Many State water quality standards include narrative criteria to regulate
discharges of toxic pollutants. In general, these narrative criteria prohibit the
discharge of toxic pollutants in toxic amounts, or set a standard at a percentage
(often 10 percent) of the lowest concentration that will kill 50 percent of the
aquatic organisms (LC50) in a standard test. Under the CWA, "toxic" pollutants
are the priority pollutants (listed in Table 1 of the CWA). However, toxic
pollutants which are referred to in State water quality standards are not limited
to those listed in the CWA.

      EPA has issued a "Policy for the Development of Water Quality-Based Permit
Limitations for Toxic Pollutants"  (49 FR 9016, March 9, 1984).  Generally, this
policy states that toxic pollutants contained in direct discharges will be
controlled beyond BCT/BAT equivalents in order to meet applicable water quality
standards. The use of an integrated strategy consisting of both biological and
chemical methods is recommended to control toxic discharges from direct sources.

      Two general approaches are used to develop water quality-based toxics
controls:   the whole-effluent approach and the chemical-specific approach. The
whole effluent approach considers the effect on the receiving stream of all toxic
constituents in a complex wastewater. This is tested by determining the effects
of the effluent on standard test animals. One or a combination of the following
procedures should be used when implementing the whole effluent approach:

         N    Set discharge limitation for whole effluent  toxicity
              by using methods set forth in Federal guidance for
              water quality-based  toxics control.13

         N    Develop whole effluent toxicity monitoring
              requirements  (e.g.,  the requirement to submit
              appropriate bioassays to demonstrate that the
              in-stream concentration of the effluent will be  less
              than the no observable effect level, or NOEL).

         N    Evaluate monitoring  results and then determine whether
              to develop toxicity  limits where necessary  in  the
              absence of specific  State toxicity standards.  The
      13 See Technical Support Document  for Water Quality-Based
Toxics Control (September 1985); A Permit Writers Guide to Water
Quality-Based Permitting for Toxics Pollutants  (February 1987.)
                                AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        3-13

               wastewater that shows a problem must be treated in order to reduce
               the concentration of toxics in the wastewater to a level less than
               that which causes an instream effect.

      The chemical-specific approach to toxics control is used where the discharge
constituents are well-defined. Water quality criteria or State water quality
standards can be used to limit specific toxicants directly  (i.e., the effluent
discharge limitation will reflect numerical criteria for specific toxic pollutants).
Federal water quality advisories may also be helpful in setting limits for specific
chemicals.

      All CERLCA sites where technology-based controls are not adequate to achieve
water quality standards in the receiving water body should be considered for
water-quality based toxics controls, including numerical toxicity limits and whole
effluent limits. The impact of CERCLA discharges could be particularly critical on
(1)  a receiving water known to exhibit severe impacts on resident biota, (2) a
receiving water in which the designated use is not being achieved, or (3)  a
particularly valuable or sensitive receiving water  (e.g., a wildlife/recreation
area) or an area of biological importance  (e.g., a fishing ground).

      It is important to note that a combination of factors must be evaluated when
deciding if water quality-based toxics controls are necessary for a particular
CERCLA site discharge. The presence or absence of unacceptable effluent toxicity is
sometimes highly variable. The toxicity of an effluent (and the subsequent need for
toxics control)  is dependent on many factors including:

               Toxicity of materials;

            "  Treatment system use;

            "  Treatability of chemicals in the effluent;

            "  Soundness of best management practices;

               Variability of effluent composition and concentration;

               Capacity of treatment system; and

               Actual retention time of the treatment system.

      Coordination with Water Program offices is strongly recommended to ensure that
water quality-based controls, if applicable, are properly implemented to adequately
protect the receiving waters  (see section 3.2.4).  Guidance for implementing
narrative State water quality standards, including effluent
                                AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        3-14

toxicity testing monitoring requirements,  can be found in EPA guidance manuals.14

      3.2.3.4  Antidegradation Policy

      In addition to numerical and narrative State water quality standards, each
State is required to develop and adopt a statewide antidegradation policy and
identify the methods for implementing such a policy  (40 CFR §131.12).

      The objectives of the antidegradation policy are to:

            "  Protect existing uses of waters;

               Maintain the water quality level where it exceeds that which is
               necessary to support existing uses; and

               Protect high quality waters that constitute an outstanding national
               resource, such as waters of national significance and state parks and
               wildlife refugees.

      CERCLA discharges to high quality receiving waters could be prohibited or
limited if protective standards have been promulgated under the antidegradation
policy. These standards are commonly incorporated in the State's surface water
quality protection statutes.

      3.2.3.5  Requirements Regarding Water Quality Standards Imposed by the 1987
               Amendments to the CWA

      RPMs should be alert to possible changes in water quality standards. Pursuant
to Section 308 of the 1987 Amendments to the CWA, States must, within two years of
enactment of the 1987 Amendments, identify those water bodies within or adjacent to
the State that will not meet State water quality standards because of toxic
pollutants even after the implementation of BAT, new source performance standard,
and pretreatment standards. For each segment of water bodies identified, the State
is to determine the specific point sources discharging toxic pollutants (and the
amount of such discharge)  that are believed to be preventing or impairing the
desired water quality. Further, the State is required to develop an individual
control strategy, subject to EPA approval, that will produce a reduction in the
discharge of toxic pollutants from the identified point sources. The control
strategy will include the establishment of effluent limitations and water quality
standards containing numerical criteria.

      The proposed strategy, in combination with other controls on point and
nonpoint sources, must achieve the applicable water quality standard as soon as
      14 See Footnote 13.
                                AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        3-15

possible, but not later than 3 years after the establishment of the strategy. If the
State fails to submit an approvable strategy, EPA, with the cooperation of the
State, will develop a strategy meeting the requirements of the Act. The section
provides for judicial review of individual control strategies under CWA §509.

      Further, as the State reviews, revises, or adopts water quality standards, CWA
§304(1)  requires that the State adopt criteria for all toxic pollutants listed
pursuant to CWA §307(a)  for which criteria have been published under CWA §304(a),
the discharge or presence of which pollutant interferes with designated uses. The
State's standards are to be based on specific numerical criteria. Where numerical
criteria are not available, a process that results in a site-specific numerical unit
for specific chemicals may be included in permits.15  The  State  may also  adopt
criteria based on biological monitoring or assessment methods.

      3.2.3.6  Ocean Discharge Standards

CWA §403 requires that an NPDES permit for a discharge into marine waters located
seaward of the inner boundary of the territorial seas (i.e., State and Federal
offshore waters) be issued in accordance with guidelines for determining the
degradation of the marine environment.16 This section provides  guidance on the
substantive permit requirements which must be not for on-site CERCLA actions when
applicable or relevant and appropriate. The intent of CWA §403 and these guidelines,
referred to as the Ocean Discharge Criteria  (40 CFR Part 125, Subpart M), is to
"prevent unreasonable degradation of the marine environment and to authorize
imposition of effluent limitations, including a prohibition of discharge, if
necessary, to ensure this goal".17

      An NPDES permit will not be issued  (or an on-site discharge will not be
allowed) unless limits can be established that will prevent unreasonable degradation
or irreparable harm. The factors that must be evaluated in determining whether a
discharge will degrade marine waters include the following  (40 CER § 125.122):

         "     Quantities, composition, and potential for
               bioaccumulation or persistence of the pollutants;

               Potential transport of pollutants by biological,
               chemical, or physical processes;
      15  48 FR 51400,  November 8,  1983.

      16  Ocean discharge  criteria  are implemented through the CWA §402 NPDES program
as outlined in 40 CFR §§125.120-125.124.

      17  45 FR 65942,  October 3,  1980.
                                AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        3-16

         "  Composition and vulnerability of exposed communities;

            Importance of the receiving water to spawning, migratory paths, and the
            surrounding biological community;

            Existence of special  aquatic  sites;

         "  Potential effect on human  health;

            Existing or potential recreational commercial fishing;

            Applicable requirements of the Coastal Zone Management Plan;18  and

         "  Marine water quality criteria developed pursuant to CWA §304(a)(1).

      If a determination of unreasonable degradation cannot be made because of a
lack of sufficient information, EPA must then determine whether a discharge will
cause irreparable harm to the marine environment which will not be reversed after
cessation or modification of the discharge and whether there are reasonable
alternatives to ocean disposal. To assess the probability of irreparable harm,  EPA
is required to make a determination that the discharger, operating under appropriate
permit conditions, will not cause permanent and significant harm to the environment
during a monitoring period in which additional information is gathered. If data
gathered through monitoring indicate that continued discharge may cause unreasonable
degradation, the discharge shall be halted or additional permit limitations
established.

      One approach to conducting a CWA §403(c) evaluation for any discharger is to
identify the pollutants of concern in the effluent, determine their fate in the
environment, and assess their potential effects on marine communities, considering
the factors listed under 40 CFR §125.122  (see above).  Site-specific information is
essential in order to identify sensitive or critical marine resources and habitats.

      In addition to the monitoring requirements under 40 CFR §125.123 (d),
the NPDES permit for ocean discharges will also include a requirement that the
discharge must comply with the limiting permissible concentrations (LPCs) at the
mixing zone boundary. Under 40 CFR §227.22, LPCs are established for solid, liquid,
and suspended particulate phases of a discharge.19  Specific information
      1 8
         Volume  3  of  this  compliance  manual,  currently under development,  will
discuss the requirements of the Coastal Zone Management Plan.

      19  Liquid  phase LPCs  are  based  on applicable marine  quality criteria or upon
bioassay results and are set at levels that will not cause unreasonable acute or
chronic toxicity or other sublethal adverse effects and that will not
                                AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        3-17

may be required  (40 CFR §125.124) for evaluating proposed ocean discharge to an
ocean including:

                  Analyses of chemical constituents of the discharge and the
                  potential effect on the biological community;

                  Appropriate bioassays necessary to determine LPCs;

               "  Identification of critical habitats  (e.g., spawning
                  sites);

                  Computer modeling of the  dilution and
                  dispersion of  the discharge  plume;

               "  Facility and treatment process description; and

               "  Evaluations of alternative disposal options.

      3.2.3.7  Other Substantive Requirements

      In addition to the discharge limitations described above, the NPDES permit
establishes other substantive requirements for the direct discharge of pollutants to
surface waters that may be applicable or relevant and appropriate to circumstances
at a site. These NPDES permit requirements are contained in 40 CFR Parts 122-125 and
include:

               "  Monitoring. As required in 40 CFR §122.44 (i), continued compliance
                  with applicable NPDES discharge limitations is ensured through the
                  establishment of monitoring requirements for the discharger. The
                  regulation requires monitoring of the mass  (or other specified
                  measurement)  of each pollutant regulated and the volume of
                  effluent discharged from each point source. Other monitoring
                  requirements include designation of monitoring points, monitoring
                  frequency, sample types, and analytical methods. In addition to
                  monitoring for regulated pollutant parameters, monitoring may be
                  required for other pollutants of concern. These additional
                  monitoring requirements are developed on a case-by-case basis.
                  Consistent with the suggested CERCLA/Water coordination procedures
                  described in section 3.2.4 below, RPMs should provide of
                  monitoring reports in a form usable by the appropriate Water
                  Office for input to the Permit Compliance System  (PCS).  The PCS is
                  a computerized system that tracks NPDES discharges and assists the
                  Water Office in determining whether water quality standards are
                  being maintained.
result in accumulation of toxic materials in the human food chain.
                                AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        3-18

               "  Best Management Practices. In addition to standard discharge
                  limits, best management practices  (BMP) provisions can be required
                  on a case-by-case basis (40 CFR §125.103 (b) ) .  These requirements
                  can be incorporated into the NPDES permit and/or the CERCLA site
                  decision documents. BMPs are actions or procedures to prevent or
                  minimize the potential for the release or discharge of toxic
                  pollutants or hazardous substances in significant amounts. BMPs,
                  although normally qualitative, are most effective when used in
                  conjunction with numerical effluent limits.  Specific goals of BMP
                  provisions include ensuring that a discharger institutes good
                  housekeeping practices, ensuring proper chemical storage, and
                  controlling contaminated site runoff,  leachate and drainage from
                  material storage areas, sludge and waste disposal, and spills and
                  leaks.20

      3.2.4 COORDINATION BETWEEN CERCLA  (SUPERFUND) AND WATER OFFICES FOR ON-SITE
            ACTIONS

      RPMs will identify ARARs where a treatment technology is being considered
which involves on-site direct discharges to surface waters. In order to do so
correctly and in a timely manner, each EPA Region should establish procedures,
protocols or memoranda of understanding that, while not recreating the
administrative and procedural aspects of a permit, ensure early and continuous
cooperation and coordination between the Regional Superfund and Water offices.
Moreover, State Superfund and Water Program offices should be involved where there
in a State-lead action or where the State has been delegated NPDES authority.
Coordination among all appropriate offices should be established. However, the
Regional Superfund and Water offices should maintain their involvement in all
actions. The Water Program offices' experience in applying standards of control
under the CWA to industrial discharges is a valuable resource for Superfund.

      The process of identifying ARARs for remedial actions essentially begins after
the site characterization (during the remedial investigation)  and may continue
through the remedial design phase. ARARs are identified in increments of increasing
certainty as more information regarding the site is developed.  The appropriate scope
and extent of each Region's coordination procedures for identifying, ARARs should be
determined by the Region. It is recommended that the procedures describe the roles
and responsibilities of the respective offices in relation to the steps in the
Superfund selection of remedy process. The description of roles and responsibilities
should identify those steps where coordination will occur, the level of involvement
anticipated for each of these steps, e.g., written comments at certain stages,
routing procedures, and agreement as to what constitutes timely notification and
timely response between Superfund and Water offices  (Regional and State).
Coordination between the
        See NPDES Best Management Practices Guidance Document, EPA,  (June 1981)

                         *  * * AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT *  *  *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        3-19

Superfund and Water offices is recommended at the following steps in the remedial
process :

               Preliminary Assessment/Site Investigation. If,  as a result of the
               preliminary assessment or site investigation, it appears that a
               remedial action involving a discharge to surface waters may be
               considered, copies of pertinent documents should be sent to Water
               offices (Regional and State, if appropriate). Early notice of
               possible remedial actions involving discharges to surface waters will
               allow Water offices to plan their workloads accordingly.

            o  Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study. Water offices should be
               kept advised as more information regarding the site and the nature of
               the contamination is developed, e.g., types of wastes, affected
               media, expected concentrations, and potential treatment technologies.
               It may useful to obtain information from Water offices regarding
               surface water classifications, existing use designations,
               technology-based requirements, and water quality standards. In
               addition,  preliminary site summaries should be shared with the Water
               office.

               Further coordination with Water offices should occur when Superfund
               offices conduct an initial screening of potential remedial
               alternatives. Water offices may provide advice during the planning of
               the detailed analysis to be conducted regarding the effectiveness and
               implementability of treatment alternatives and the environmental,
               fate and effects of the discharge. These detailed analyses should
               identify Federal and State ARARs so that each alternative can be
               evaluated. The Water office comments should address, where
               appropriate, allocation analyses, treatability studies, monitoring
               strategies, and effluent limitations and conditions.

               Examples of documents that the Superfund office may want to provide
               to the Water office are the RI/FS Workplan (draft and final), the
               RI/FS report, and the proposed plan.

               Selection of Remedy/Record of Decision. Coordination with Water
               offices should continue through the selection of remedy stage. When
               the selected remedy involves a discharge to surface water, the Water
               offices may be able to provide information that will assist the
               Superfund office in documenting, in the Record of
                                AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        3-20

               Decision, that the selected remedy meets or exceeds ARARs  (or other
               health- or risk-based levels established through a risk assessment
               when ARARs do not exist or when they are waived).

               Remedial Design/Remedial Action.  Input from Water offices may assist
               the Superfund office in ensuring that the selected remedy is designed
               to attain and succeeds in attaining or exceeding all ARARs.

      General program coordination outside of specific Superfund projects can also
be enhanced by the exchange of effluent guidelines development documents, which are
the detailed technical bases for the categorical standards (see Exhibit 3-1, p.
3-36),  waste treatment literature, revised water quality standards and other
documents which are necessary to identify and comply with ARARs.

      3.2.5 ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NPDES PROGRAM

      The NPDES program establishes administrative requirements that must be
complied with prior to and after permit issuance. These requirements would not be
considered ARARs for on-site direct discharges to surface waters because they are
administrative in nature. However, they would be requirements to be complied with in
the NPDES permitting process for off-site direct discharges to surface waters.21
These NPDES administrative requirements include:

               Certification:  CWA §401 requires that any applicant for a Federal
               license or permit to conduct an operation that may result in any
               discharge to navigable waters, shall provide to the
               licensing/permitting agency a certification from the State that the
               discharge will comply with applicable provisions of CWA §§301, 302,
               303, 306, and 307.

            "  Permit Application Requirements: A discharge from a CERCLA site is
               considered a "new discharge" for regulatory purposes under the NPDES
               program. NPDES regulations  (40 CER §122.29) require that applications
               for permits for new-discharges must be made 180 days before
               discharges actually begin. The information required in a permit
               application will be collected during the RI/FS. States with NPDES
               authority may have slightly different permit application requirements
               for now discharges. The NPDES regulations require that pollution
               control equipment must be installed before the new discharge
      21 The lead agency  (or the PRP in the case of enforcement-lead  sites) will
obtain the NPDES permit from either the State or Federal agency, whichever is
authorized to implement the NPDES program.


                         *  *  * AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT *  *  *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        3-21

               begins, and compliance must be achieved within the shortest feasible
               time, not to exceed 90 days.

               Reporting Requirements.  The NPDES permit program requires
               dischargers to maintain records and to report periodically on the
               amount and nature of pollutants in the wastewaters discharged  (40 CFR
               §§122.44(i) and 122.48). Reports that are typically required include
               emergency reports (required in cases of noncompliance that are
               serious in nature) and discharge monitoring reports  (routine
               monitoring reports).

            "  Public Participation. CERCLA RPMs should also be aware that any NPDES
               discharge limitations and requirements developed for a CERCLA site
               are subject to public participation requirements in 40 CFR §124.10,
               including public notice and public comment.

3.3  GUIDANCE FOR COMPLIANCE WITH INDIRECT DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS

      In general, a discharge to a POTW is considered an off-site activity.22
Therefore, Superfund is required to comply with substantive and procedural
requirements of the national pretreatment program and all local pretreatment
regulations before discharging wastewater to a POTW.

      3.3.1  PRETREATMENT STANDARDS

      The national pretreatment program, authorized under CWA §307(b), controls the
indirect discharge of pollutants to POTWs.  The goal of the pretreatment program is to
protect municipal wastewater treatment plants and the environment from damage that
may occur when hazardous, toxic, or other nondomestic wastes are discharged into a
sewer system.23 This objective is achieved through pretreatment of wastewaters
discharged by industrial and other nondomestic users  (e.g., a CERCLA site) into
POTWs.

      The general pretreatment regulations, located in 40 CFR Part 403, are intended
to control the introduction of pollutants into POTWs so as to:
      22  Even  if  CERCLA wastewater is  discharged to a sewer located on-site,
treatment by a POTW located off-site is considered an off-site activity.

      23  The potential  problems to  a POTW  caused by inadequately  treated
discharges are diverse and include damages to the  POTW's physical  facilities,
threats to the health  and safety of POTW workers,  inhibition of  POTW treatment
processes, the discharge of toxic and other pollutants to the waters of the U.S.,
contamination of the POTW's sludge, and emission of volatile pollutants from the
POTW's sewer and treatment systems into the air.

                          *  *  * AUGUST 8, 1988  DRAFT  *  *  *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        3-22

            "  Prevent interference with the operation of a POTW;

               Prevent pass through of pollutants through the treatment works; and

            "  Improve opportunities to recycle and reclaim municipal and industrial
               wastewater and sludges.

      Interference is a discharge that, alone or in conjunction with discharges from
other sources, inhibits or disrupts a POTW, its treatment processes or operations,
or its sludge processes,  thereby causing either a violation of any requirement of
the POTW's NPDES permit or prevention of sewage sludge use or disposal.24

      Pass through is a discharge to a POTW that exits the POTW in quantities or
concentrations, which alone or in conjunction with a discharge(s) from other
sources,  causes a violation of any requirement of the POTW's NPDES permit.

      EPA's regulations at 40 CFR §403.5 include general and specific prohibitions
on discharges to POTWs.  The general prohibitions state that pollutants introduced
into POTWs by a non-domestic source shall not cause pass through or interference.
The specific prohibitions preclude the introduction of pollutants that:

               Create a fire or explosion hazard in the sewers or treatment works;

            "  Will cause corrosive structural damage to the POTW (pollutants with a
               pH lower than 5.0);

               Obstruct flow in the sewer system resulting in interference;

               Are discharged at a flow rate and/or concentration that will result
               in interference; and

            "  Increase the temperature of wastewater entering the treatment plant
               so as to inhibit biological activity resulting in interference  (in no
               case shall the temperature of the POTW increase to above 104"F
               (40"C)).

      Nondomestic users must comply with the general and specific prohibitions. In
addition,  pursuant to 40 CFR §403.5(c), some POTWs are required to develop and
enforce specific effluent limitations  (i.e., local limits) to implement the
      24 Most  POTWs  are  considered direct  dischargers  and are issued NPDES permits
controlling the discharge of their wastewater to receiving waters.
                                AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        3-23

general and specific prohibitions. In addition, the POTW may enforce local
prohibitions on wastes with objectionable color, noxious or malodorous liquids,
wastes that may volatilize in the POTW  (endangering the health and safety of POTW
workers), radioactive wastes, and other types of wastes that are incompatible with
POTW operations.

      The 1987 amendments to the CWA require States to review their water quality
standards and, if necessary, develop toxic discharge control programs  (see section
3.2.3.5). The amendments also require an increased EPA effort to develop regulations
for sludge use and disposal. Both of these efforts may affect discharge limitations
under NPDES permits, including POTWs' permits. Revisions to a POTW's NPDES permit
may affect existing pretreatment standards. In general, RPMs should maintain
awareness of the possibility of such changes.

      The national pretreatment standards also specify quantities or concentrations
of pollutants or pollutant properties that may be discharged to a POTW by existing
or new industrial users in specific industrial subcategories.  These categorical
standards are not applicable requirements because CERCLA cleanup actions do not
presently fit within any industrial category for which such standards exist. However
ever, they may be relevant and appropriate if the considerations underlying the
categorical standard (e.g., type and concentration of pollutant, type of industrial
process that produced the waste)  are sufficiently similar to the conditions of the
hazardous substance found at the site. See Exhibit 3-1, p. 3-36 for a listing of
development documents that provide the technical basis for the categorical
standards .

      3.3.2 GUIDANCE FOR DETERMINING WHETHER TO DISCHARGE CERCLA WASTEWATER TO A
            POTW

      A discharge to a POTW must not occur if it will cause pass through,
interference, violations of the specific prohibitions, or violations of the local
limits or ordinance. POTWs under consideration as potential receptors of CERCLA
wastewaters may include those POTWs either with or without an EPA-approved
pretreatment program. POTWs with an approved pretreatment program are required to
have the mechanisms necessary to ensure compliance by nondomestic users with
applicable pretreatment standards and requirements.   These  POTWs  are  also  required
to have the legal authority to deny or condition discharges that do not meet
pretreatment standards and requirements. POTWs
        POTWs with EPA-approved pretreatment programs must, among other things,
establish procedures to notify nondomestic users of applicable pretreatment
standards and requirements, receive and analyze self-monitoring reports from lUs,
sample and analyze industrial effluents, require compliance, conduct inspections,
investigate noncompliance, assess penalties, and comply with public participation
requirements. A NPDES State may apply for approval of a State, pretreatment program
pursuant to 40 CFR §403.10(f).  A State with an approved pretreatment program may
assume responsibility for implementing a POTW pretreatment program in lieu of
requiring the POTW to develop a pretreatment program.
                                AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        3-24

without an approved pretreatment program must be evaluated to determine whether
sufficient mechanisms  (i.e., enforceable local limits) exist to allow the POTW to
meet the requirements of the national pretreatment program in accepting CERCLA
wastewaters.  Pass through, interference and violations of the specific prohibitions
are always prohibited regardless of whether a POTW has an approved pretreatment program.

      The determination of a POTW's ability to accept CERCLA wastewater should be
made during the remedial alternatives analysis under the Remedial Investigation
Feasibility Study (RI/FS)  process.  Water Division officials and their State
counterparts and representatives of the POTW should participate in the evaluation of
any remedial alternatives recommending the use of a POTW. The following factors
should be evaluated during the remedial alternatives analysis:

            "  The quantity and quality of the CERCLA wastewater and its
               compatibility with the POTW. The constituents in the CERCLA
               wastewater must not violate the specific prohibitions, cause pass
               through or interference, including unacceptable sludge contamination,
               or cause a hazard to employees at the POTW. In some cases, control
               equipment at the CERCLA site may be necessary in order to pretreat
               the CERCLA discharge prior to discharge to the POTW.26

            "  If an indirect discharge to a POTW is being considered as an
               alternative, RPMs should provide information, such as a description
               of the contents and concentrations in the wastewater, in order for
               the POTW to evaluate the impacts of a discharge on its treatment
               system and on its continued compliance with its NPDES permit. The
               RPM,  working with the POTW, must perform the necessary analysis
               (e.g., pilot tests)  to determine whether the CERCLA discharge is
               likely to cause interference or pass through at the POTW or to
               violate the specific prohibitions.

               The POTW's record of compliance with its NPDES permit and
               pretreatment program requirements to determine if the POTW is a
               suitable disposal site for the CERCLA wastewater. Section 121(d)(3)
               of CERCLA prohibits the
         26 EPA's Office of Water is developing guidance manuals  to  assist  in
assessments regarding the compatibility of CERCLA wastewater with a POTW and the
requirements necessary for CERCLA wastewater to comply with pretreatment standards.
See also Guidance for POTW Pretreatment Program Development, October, 1983  (includes
discussion on developing local limits).
                                AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                    3-25

               discharge of CERCLA wastes to facilities that are not in
               compliance with applicable Federal law.27

               The potential for volatilization of the wastewater
               constituents at the CERCLA site, while moving through the
               sewer system, or at the POTW and its impact upon air quality.

               The potential for ground-water contamination from transport
               of CERCLA wastewater or impoundment at the POTW, and the need
               for ground-water monitoring.

               The potential effect of the CERCLA wastewaters upon the
               POTW s discharge as evaluated by maintenance of water quality
               standards in the POTW's receiving waters, including State
               narrative standard of "no toxic materials in toxic amounts."
               The POTW's knowledge of and compliance with any applicable
               requirements or requirements of other environmental statutes.
               RCRA permit-by-rule requirements may be triggered if the POTW
               receives CERCLA wastewaters that are classified as "hazardous
               wastes" without prior mixing with domestic sewage, i.e.,
               direct delivery to the POTW by truck, rail, or dedicated
               pipe.28  Not  all  CERCLA wastewaters  are  considered  hazardous
               wastes under RCRA  (listed or characteristic) ; determinations
               must be made on a case-by-case basis.

               —    if the POTW is operating under an NPDES permit issued
                     before November 8, 1984, the date of enactment of the
                     Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments  (HSWA), which
                     amended RCRA, the following permit-by-rule requirements
                     under 40 CFR §270.60(c) apply:(l)the POTW must have
                     an NPDES
      27  If a POTW is operating under an expired permit,  the conditions of the
permit normally continue in force until the effective date of a new permit. Most NPDES
permits provide for such extensions, unless this would violate State law. Thus, a
CERCLA site could discharge to a POTW that has an expired permit, if the POTW has
received an extension permissable under State law and is in compliance with the
extended permit.

      28  The  domestic sewage  exclusion  (DSE)  under  RCRA Subtitle  C provides that
nondomestic wastes are not considered hazardous wastes when they are discharged to
sewers containing domestic sewage that is treated at a POTW. The POTW that accepts
such wastes is not deemed to have received hazardous wastes and,  therefore, is not
subject to RCRA permit requirements.
                                AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                     3-26

               permit;  (2) the POTW must be in compliance with its NPDES
               permit;  (3) the POTW must comply with RCRA regulations
               regarding requesting an identification number, using a manifest
               system, identifying manifest discrepancies, and complying with
               reporting requirements; and  (4) the waste received meets all
               Federal, State, and local pretreatment requirements that would
               be applicable to the waste if it were discharged through a
               sewer, pipe, or similar conveyance  (i.e., the same pretreatment
               standards as if the domestic sewage exclusion applied).

               If the POTW is operating under an NPDES permit issued after
               November 8, 1984, including renewed permits, the POTW must
               comply with the same permit-by-rule requirements plus
               corrective action requirements under 40 CFR §264.101 before
                                                         2 9
               accepting a discharge of hazardous wastes.

            "  The various costs of managing CERCLA wastewater, including
               all risks, liabilities, permit fees, etc.   It may  be  appropriate
               to reflect these costs in the POTW's connection fees and user
               charge system.

      Based upon consideration of the above elements, the discharge of CERCLA
wastewater to a POTW should be deemed inappropriate if the evaluation indicates that:

               The constituents in the CERCLA discharge are not compatible
               with the POTW and will cause pass through, interference,
               violations of the specific prohibitions, toxic pollutants in
               toxic amounts in the POTW's receiving waters, violations of
               water quality standards, unacceptable sludge contamination, or
               a hazard to employees of the POTW.

               The impact associated with transporting the waste to and/or
               discharging of CERCLA wastewater into a POTW
      29 A RCRA rider permit  incorporating the permit-by-rule requirements,
including corrective action,  will be issued in conjunction with renewal of the
POTW's NPDES permit after November 8, 1984.

      30 SARA §119(c)(5)(D) specifically prohibits EPA  from indemnifying an owner  or
operator of a facility regulated under the Solid Waste Disposal Act, therefore,
POTWs subject to permit-by-rule provisions cannot be indemnified. EPA has
extended this prohibition of indemnification  to any POTW.  (For more information,
see OSWER Directive 9835.5.)
                                AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                     3-27

               would result in unacceptable impacts upon any environmental
               media.

               The POTW is determined to be an unacceptable receptor of CERCLA
               wastewaters based upon a review of the POTW's compliance
               history.

      If consideration of the various element indicates that the discharge
of CERCLA wastewater to a POTW is deemed appropriate:

         "  There should be early public involvement, including contact with
            POTW officials and users, in accordance with the CERCLA community
            relations plan and public participation requirements;

            Federal, State and local pretreatment requirements on the CERCLA
            discharge must be determined;

         "  All other requirements on the CECLA discharge must be identified,
            e.g., manifesting requirements under RCRA if CERCLA wastewaters
            that are classified as hazardous wastes under RCRA are discharged
            directly to the POTW without prior mixing with domestic sewage,
            i.e., by truck, rail, or dedicated pipe; and

            The POTW's NPDES permit and fact sheet may need to be modified to
            reflect the conditions of acceptance of CERCLA wastewaters. Permit
            modification may be necessitated by the need to pretreatment
            requirements, local limits, monitoring requirements, and/or
            limitations on additional pollutants of concern in the POTW's
            discharge.

3.3.3  POTW CONTROL MECHANISMS

      40 CFR §403.8(f)(iii) of the general pretreatment regulations require the use
of control mechanisms  (e.g., permit or order) to regulate indirect discharges to a
POTW. Those control mechanisms contain applicable pretreatment standards including
local discharge prohibitions and numerical discharge limits.

      The control mechanisms, in addition to incorporating pretreatment limitations
and requirements, may also include the following:

         "  Monitoring and reporting requirements to ensure continued
            compliance with applicable pretreatment standards. Monitoring and
            reporting frequencies vary among POTWs.  However, frequencies are
            typically based upon factors such as facility flow, types of
            pollutants, expected, and process variability.
                                AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                     3-28

         "  Spill prevention programs to prevent the accidental discharge of
            pollutants to POTWs.  The required components of a spill prevention
            program vary among POTWs. At a minimum, however, most POTWs
            require notification for spill events that could have an impact on
            their treatment system.

3.4  COMPLIANCE WITH DREDGE AND FILL REQUIREMENTS

      3.4.1 DREDGE AND FILL ACTIVITIES

      CERCLA activities that may be considered dredge and fill activities include,
but are not limited to the following:

         "  Dredging of contaminated lake, river, or marine sediments;

            Disposal of contaminated soil, waste material, well-drilling
            materials, or dredged material in surface water, including most
            wetlands;

            Capping of the site;

            Construction of berms and levees to contain wastes;

         "  Stream channelization;

         "  Excavation to contain effluent; and

            Dewatering of the site.

         3.4.2    AUTHORITIES FOR REGULATING DREDGE AND FILL ACTIVITIES

         Dredge and fill activities are regulated under the following
         authorities:

               "  Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act prohibits the
                  unauthorized obstruction or alteration of any navigable
                  water of the United States. Navigable waters of the U.S. are
                  defined an waters that are subject to the ebb and flow of
                  the tide shoreward to the mean high water mark and/or are
                  presently used, or have been used in the past or may be
                  susceptible to use to transport interstate or foreign
                  commerce. Structures or work in, above, or under navigable
                  waters are regulated under Section 10. Examples of
                  activities include dredging, filling, installation of
                  pilings, and construction of structures such as berms,
                  levees, coffer dams, and piers.
                                AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                     3-29

               "  Section 404 of the Clean Water regulates the discharge of
                  dredged or fill material to waters of the United States.
                  Federal jurisdiction under Section 404, the is, waters of
                  the U.S.,  is broader than that under Section 10 of the
                  Rivers and Harbors Act and includes all waters of U.S.
                  including wetlands, the use of which could affect interstate
                  commerce.  Examples of the discharge of dredged or fill
                  material regulated by Section 404 include  (a)  disposal of
                  dredged material in wetlands, (b) capping and  (c) construction
                  of berms and levees. It is important to note that while
                  the act of excavation and/or dredging is not regulated under
                  Section 404, the deposition of dredged or excavated
                  materials in waters of the U.S.  is a regulated activity
                  under Section 404.

                  Section 103 of the Marine Protection Research and
                  Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA) regulates ocean discharges of
                  materials dredged from waters of the U.S. Jurisdictional
                  limits under Section 103 extend seaward from the low tide
                  line  (baseline of the territorial sea)  where a shore
                  directly contacts the open sea.  Section 103 requires that
                  permits be issued for the transport of that dredged material
                  for the purposes of dumping it into ocean waters. MPRSA
                  §103(b) requires that ocean dumping of dredged material be
                  at sites designated by EPA under MPRSA §102(c).

               "  40 CFR Part 6, Appendix A contains EPA's regulations for
                  implementing Executive Order 11990, Protection of Wetlands,
                  and Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management, which
                  require Federal agencies, wherever possible,  to avoid or
                  minimize adverse impacts of Federal actions upon wetlands
                  and floodplains, and to preserve and enhance the natural
                  values of wetlands and floodplains. Federal actions include
                  dredge and fill activities.

      3,4.3 THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS/EPA PERMIT PROGRAM

      The Army Corps of Engineers (the Corps)  evaluates applications for permits for
activities regulated under Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act and Section 404
of the CWA.31  Protection of  wetlands  and  other  aquatic  habitats is  one  of  the
primary goals of the dredge and fill permit program. The Corps
      31 A State  agency  may  also  be  authorized to  issue  CWA §404  permits  in lieu of
the Corps or certain "State regulated waters." See 40 CFR Part 233.
                                AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        3-30

issues or denies permit applications on the basis of compliance with relevant
portions of the CWA §404(b)(1) guidelines and impact on the public interest  (see
next section).  EPA also reviews Section 404 permit applications for compliance with
the Guidelines as well as other CWA provisions.

      Under CERCLA §121(e), CWA §404 permits are not required for dredge and fill
activities conducted entirely on-site. However, the Corps expertise in assessing the
public interest factors for dredging and filling operations can contribute to the
overall quality of the CERCLA response action.

      MPRSA §103(c)  requires the Corps of Engineers to notify EPA of its intention
to issue Section 103 permits for ocean dumping of dredged materials. EPA reviews
Section 103 permits for compliance with environmental criteria promulgated by EPA
under Section 102(a) of MPRSA. The Corps cannot issue Section 103 permits that do
not comply with Section 102(a) criteria unless EPA grants a waiver to do so.

      3.4.4 SUBSTANTIVE REQUIREMENTS

      3.4.4.   Dredged and Fill Material Disposal under CWA Section 404 and
               Rivers and Harbors Act Section 1032

      Superfund's determination whether to discharge dredged or fill material in
waters of the United States should be based primarily on application of the CWA
§404(b)(1) guidelines, promulgated as regulations in 40 CFR §230.10. A guiding
principle of Part 230 is that degradation or destruction of wetlands and other
special aquatic sites should be avoided to the extent possible. Under the CWA
§404(b)(1) guidelines, no discharge of dredged or fill material shall be permitted
if there is a practicable alternative to the proposed discharge that would have less
adverse impact on the aquatic ecosystem, so long as the alternative does not have
other significant adverse environmental consequences (40 CFR §230.10(a)).

      Pursuant to 40 CFR §230. 10 (b), no discharge of dredged or fill material shall
be allowed if the discharge:

            Causes or contributes to violations of any additional State water
            quality standard;

         "  Violates any applicable toxic effluent standard or discharge prohibition
            under CWA §307;
      32 Among  the  factors  to-be-considered in determining disposal requirements for
dredged materials in the Great Lakes Basin under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
are EPA Guidelines for the Pollutional Classifications of Great Lakes Harbor
Sediments and International Joint Commission Average Concentrations.
                                AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        3-31

         "  Jeopardizes endangered or threatened species specified under the
            Endangered Species Act of 1973  (See Volume 3 of compliance manual); or

            Violates requirements to protect any marine protection sanctuary
            designated under Title III of the Marine Protection, Research, and
            Sanctuaries Act of 1972.

      The guidelines also provide that no discharge of dredged or fill material
shall be permitted which will cause or contribute to significant degradation of the
waters of the United States (40 CFR §230.10(c)). Where a discharge would
significantly degrade the waters of the United States, and there are no practicable
alternatives  to the discharge, such degradation can often be avoided or reduced and
compliance with the guidelines achieved through the use of appropriate and
practicable mitigation measures to minimize potential adverse impacts of the
discharge on the aquatic ecosystem  (40 CFR §230.10(d)). The term "practicable" is
defined in 40 CFR §230.3(q) to mean available and capable of being done after taking
into consideration cost, existing technology, and logistics in light of overall
project purpose."

      Determinations of Potential Effects of Discharge

      Prior to selecting a remedy which involves the discharge of dredged or fill
material, RPMs, working with the Regional 404/Wetlands Office, must consider the
availability of practicable alternatives to discharges in wetlands and other special
aquatic sites. If no practicable alternative exists, the potential short-term or
long-term effects of the proposed discharge of dredged or fill material on the
physical, chemical, and biological components of wetlands and the associated aquatic
environment should be determined. 40 CFR §230.11 describes the types of effects of a
proposed discharge that must be evaluated and considered in order to mitigate
impacts, including:

            Physical substrate determinations;

            Water circulation, fluctuation, an salinity
            determinations:

         "  Suspended particulate/turbidity determinations

         "  Contaminant determinations;

         "  Aquatic ecosystem and organism determinations;

            Proposed disposal site determinations;

            Determination of cumulative effects on the aquatic
            ecosystem; and
                                AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        3-32

         "  Determination of secondary effects on the aquatic
            ecosystem  (see 40 CFR §§230.11 through 230.54).

Minimizing Adverse Impacts

      Examples of specific steps that may be taken to comply with the requirement to
minimize adverse impacts  (40 CFR §230.10(d))  are set forth in considerable detail in
40 CFR Part 230, Subpart H, entitled "Actions to Minimize Adverse Effect." The most
preferred type of mitigation is to avoid impacts entirely. In some cases, avoidance
is not possible. In such cases, the goal of mitigation for unavoidable impacts is to
minimize adverse effects. This may include project modifications such as
modification of the choice of disposal site,  treatment of material to be disposed,
providing for control of the material after discharge, or, when necessary and
practicable, wetland enhancement, wetland restoration, and in certain instances,
wetland creation (40 CFR §230.75(d), where demonstrated effective techniques are
available. Small scale use of such techniques should be used where proposed
development and restoration techniques have not yet advanced to the pilot
demonstration stage. What, constitutes necessary mitigation at a particular site is
a case-specific determination depending on such factors as the type of activity, the
type of wetland, how well the wetland is presently functioning, etc., always keeping
in mind the goal of preserving wetland values at the site.

      ARAR Determination

      Section 404 applies to the discharger of dredged and fill materials and
addresses the impacts caused by such discharges. In some CERCLA response actions,
the wetland will already be severely degraded by virtue of prior discharges
of waste. While part of the CERCLA remedy may be to fill in the wetland,
the remedy would contemplate that the fill will serve an environmental benefit.
Where the functioning of the wetland has already been significantly and irreparably
degraded, mitigation would be oriented towards minimizing further adverse
environmental impacts, rather than attempting to recreate the wetland's original
value on-site or off-site. That is, there would be discretion, but no obligation
under CWA §404 for the lead agency to mitigate those impacts that preceded the
remedial fill operation. While CWA §404 is not an applicable requirement in such
cases, mitigation,  including wetland restoration and creation, may nonetheless be
appropriate in some circumstances to protect the environmental values of the site.
Moreover, other provisions, most notably 40 CFR Part 6, Appendix A, implementing
Executive Orders 11988 and 11990 (see section 3.4.4.3 below), may require such
mitigation. In addition, independent enforcement authorities under the Clean Water
Act (§§309 and 404)  may be used to require private parties responsible for the
original discharge  (e.g., the contamination)  to conduct appropriate mitigation
activities.

      In contrast,  there will be other situations where the response action itself
involves a discharge that may destroy an undegraded, functioning wetland. Examples
includes the diversion of surface or ground water through an existing
                                AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        3-33
wetland, and building access roads in wetlands. Such activities should be avoided to
the extent practicable. For impacts that cannot be avoided or minimized as described
above, enhancement, restoration, or creation of another wetland, as provided in the
CWA §404(b)(1) guidelines, may be applicable or relevant and appropriate to
Superfund actions.

      A discharge must comply with the CWA §404(b)(1) guidelines. If the discharge
complies with the guidelines, RPMs shall then consider whether the discharge would
be in the public interest. This includes evaluation of the probable impacts,
including cumulative impacts, of the proposed activity on the public interest. This
evaluation requires a careful weighing of all those factors that become relevant in
each particular case.33 The public interest review factors may not be used to offset
noncompliance with the guidelines. While a discharge that meets the guidelines may
not be permitted if it is concluded that permit issuance is not in the public
interest, the regulations do not allow a determination that it is in the public
interest to issue a permit that does not comply with the guidelines.

      In selecting remedies,  the RPMs should also consult with the State(s)  in which
the waters of the United States to be filled are  located. Under CWA §401 no permit
may be used until the State concurs or waives concurrence. Certification primarily
focuses on whether the State believes its water quality standards will be violated
if the discharge occurs;  the State,  for example, may condition its concurrence on
the inclusion of additional requirements necessary to satisfy State law. More
specific guidance appears in CWA §401(a) and (d)  and 40 CFR Part 121.

      Since no permit is required in the case of  on-site actions, State
certification is not legally required.  However, consultation with the State should
occur in general as part of State identification  of substantive State ARARS. If a
State determines the discharge would violate the  requirements of CWA §401(a)(1), a
discharge of dredged or fill material does not comply with the CWA §404(b)(1)
guidelines (40 CFR 230.10).  In such circumstances, the discharge will occur only in
accordance with CERCLA waiver criteria for ARARs.  In addition, the State will have
the opportunity to review and concur with the remedy selected in the Record of
Decision.
        33 CFR §325.3 (c) sets  forth the  following  factors  that  the  Corps  should
evaluate when conducting a public interest analysis: conservation,  economics,
aesthetics, general environmental concerns, wetlands, historic properties, fish and
wildlife values,  flood hazards, land use, navigation, shoreline erosion and
accretion, recreation, water supply and conservation, water quality, energy needs,
safety, food and fiber production, mineral needs, considerations of property
ownership and, in general,  the needs and welfare of the people.

                          * * * AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT * * *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        3-34

      3.4.4.2 Dredged Material Disposal under Section 103, MPRSA

      Consistent with EPA's regulations under 40 CFR §225.2, Superfund's decision to
ocean dispose (seaward of the territorial sea baseline)  of dredged material
(generally an off-site activity) needs to consider the following requirements:

               Disposal must be at a site designated by EPA for such
               use unless disposal at an available, designated site
               is not feasible;

           "    Requests for disposal at a nondesignated site must be
               accompanied by a statement of the basis for the
               determination that disposal at a designated site is
               not feasible.

Requests for ocean disposal of dredged materials under Section 103 of MPRSA must
include the following information:

           "    Historical uses of the proposed disposal site;

           "    Documented effects of other current or historical disposal
               activities, if any, in the area of the proposed dredged material
               site;

               Estimated length of time for the proposed dredged
               material disposal;

               Characteristics , quantities, and composition of the
               dredged material; and

           "    A description of the proposed disposal site characteristics  (if it is
               not a designated site) necessary for designation under 40 CFR Part
               228.

Requests for ocean disposal of dredged material will be reviewed by the Corps of
Engineers  (the permit issuing agency) for compliance with EPA's criteria under 40
CFR Part 227, including the following:

               Environmental impact criteria;

           "    Determination of the need for ocean disposal of
               dredged materials, including the evaluation of other
               available disposal alternatives;

               Impact on aesthetic, recreational,  and economic
               values;

               Impact on other uses of the ocean.

                          * * * AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT * * *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        3-35
      3.4.4.3  Dredged and Fill Material Disposal Under 40 CFR Part 6. Appendix A

      40 CFR Part 6, Appendix A, which describes EPA's policy on implementing
Executive Orders 11988 (Floodplain Management) and 11990  (Wetlands Protection),
may be applicable or relevant and appropriate for CERCLA activities.34  The
procedures substantively require that EPA conduct its activities to avoid, to the
extent possible, the long- and short-term adverse impacts associated with the
destruction or modification of wetlands and the occupation or modification of
floodplains.  The procedures also require EPA to avoid direct or indirect support of
new construction in wetlands or floodplain development wherever there  are
practicable alternatives and to minimize potential harm to floodplains or wetlands
when there are no practicable alternatives.

      3.4.5   COORDINATION BETWEEN  SUPERFUND AND  THE  404/WETLANDS  PROTECTION PROGRAM
              OFFICES  OR  OCEAN  DISPOSAL  PROGRAM

      RPMs should early and continuously involve the affected Regional 404/Wetlands
Protection office or Ocean Disposal Program where discharge of dredged or fill
material is being considered as a component of a remedy (see section 3.2.4 generally
describing coordination procedures), or if the CERCLA action has the potential to
affect wetlands.35 If additional expertise is  required and can be obtained within
time constraints of the response action, the 404 office or Ocean Disposal Program,
acting as a liaison and working closely with the lead agency Remedial  Project
Manager, should consult with other agencies with expertise in dredge and fill-type
determinations: the Corps of Engineers  (general expertise in conducting public
interest and Section 404(b)(1)  guidelines analyses and in identifying wetland
resources), the Fish and Wildlife Service (identifying endangered species,
evaluating impacts to the Fish and Wildlife community),  the National Marine
Fisheries Service (evaluating impacts to commercial and sport fisheries), the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,  and appropriate State agencies.

      Advice from the 404/Wetlands Office or Ocean Disposal Program and these other
agencies may assist the lead agency responsible for CERCLA site cleanup in
evaluating the possible impact of proposed actions on the aquatic environment, and
in selecting the best overall remedy through a careful weighing of all relevant
factors. These offices may also advise RPMs on how to minimize and mitigate adverse
environmental impacts.
      34 40 CFR Part 6,  Subpart A sets forth EPA policy for carrying out the
provisions of Executive Orders 11988  (floodplains Management) and 11990  (Protection
of Wetlands).

      35
        In Regions 3,  6 and 7, the 404/Wetlands Protection Program Offices are not
located in the Water Office.  In Regions 3 and 6, the wetlands program is located in
the Environmental Services Division and in Region 7 is located under the Assistant
Regional Administrator for Policy and Management.

                          * * * AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT * * *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                   3-36


                                                                                   EXHIBIT 3-1

                                                          CLEAN WATER ACT EFFLUENT GUIDELINES DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENTS I/
                                                                                                                    SOURCES OF AVAILABILITY
         INDUSTRIAL
         POINT  SOURCE
         CATEGORY

         ALCOHOL FOR
         FUEL  (SYNFUELS)
  40 CFR
PART NUMBER
                 SUBCATEGORY

                 S   Multimedia
                     Technical
                     Support
                     Document for
                     Ethenol and
                     Fuel  Industry
 EPA PUBLICATION
 DOCUMENT NUMBER
EPA 440/1-86-093
NTIS ACCESSION
    NUMBER
                                                 S   Low BTU
                                                    Gasifier
                                                    Wastewater
                                                     (1986)
                                                 S   Ethenol-for-
                                                    fuel (Guidance)
                                                 S   Low BTU Coal
                                                    Gasification
                                                     (Guidance)
         ALUMINUM FORMING
                                                 S   Aluminum
                                                    Forming
                                                    Volumes I &  II
                                                       (Final)
                                         EPA 440/1-84/073
                                         Vol.  I
                                         Vol.  II
         ASBESTOS
         MANUFACTURING
                 S   Building,
                     Construction
                     and Paper
                     (Final)
                                                                         EPA 4401/1-74/017-a
                                                 S   Textile,
                                                    Friction
                                                    Materials and
                                                    Sealing
                                                    (Final)
                                                                         EPA 440/1-74/035-a
                                                           *  *  *
                                                                     AUGUST  8,  1988  DRAFT  *   *  *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                   3-37

                                                                             EXHIBIT  3-1  (Continued)

                                                           CLEAN WATER ACT EFFLUENT GUIDELINES DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENTS I/
                                                                                                                   SOURCES OF AVAILABILITY
         INDUSTRIAL
         POINT SOURCE
         CATEGORY

         BATTERY
         MANUFACTURING
  40 CFR
PART NUMBER
                 SUBCATEGORY

                 S   Battery
                     Manufacturing
                     (Proposed)
EPA PUBLICATION
DOCUMENT NUMBER
NTIS ACCESSION
    NUMBER
                                                S   Errata Sheet
                                                S   Battery
                                                    Manufacturing
                                                    (Final)
                                          EPA 440/1-84-067
                                          Vol.  I
                                          Vol.  II
                       PB85-121507
                       PB85-121515
         BUILDERS PAPER
         AND  BOARD MILLS
                 S   Builders Paper
                     &  Roofing
                                                S   Board  &
                                                    Builders Paper
                                                    and Board Mills
                                                    (Proposed)
                                                S   Pulp, Paper and
                                                    Paperboard and
                                                    Builders' Paper
                                                    & Board Mills
                                                    (Final)
         CANNED &
         PRESERVED FRUITS
         &  VEGETABLES
                 S   Citrus, Apple &
                     Potatoes
                                                           *  *  *  AUGUST   8,   1988  DRAFT  *   *  *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                3-38

                                                                           EXHIBIT 3-1 (Continued)

                                                          CLEAN WATER ACT EFFLUENT GUIDELINES DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENTS I/
                                                                                                                SOURCES OF AVAILABILITY
         INDUSTRIAL
         POINT SOURCE
         CATEGORY

         CANNED AND
         PRESERVED
         SEAFOOD
         PROCESSING
  40 CFR
PART NUMBER
                 SUBCATEGORY

                 S   Catfish, Crab,
                    Shrimp
                                               S  Report to
                                                  Congress,
                                                  Section 74
                                                  Seafood
                                                  Processing
                                                  Executive
                                                  Summary -  (Vol.
                                                  I-III)

                                               S  Cement
                                                  Manufacturing
EPA PUBLICATION
DOCUMENT NUMBER
NTIS ACCESSION
    NUMBER
                                                                                               PB81-182354
                                                         *  *   * AUGUST  8,  1988  DRAFT  *   *  *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                 3-39

                                                                           EXHIBIT 3-1  (Continued)

                                                          CLEAN WATER ACT EFFLUENT GUIDELINES DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENTS  I/
                                                                                                                 SOURCES OF AVAILABILITY
INDUSTRIAL
POINT SOURCE
CATEGORY


40 CFR
PART NUMBER


SUBCATEGORY

Phase I (Final)
EPA PUBLICATION
DOCUMENT NUMBER


NTIS ACCESSION
NUMBER


GPO
STOCK
NUMBER


EPA


         COAL MINING
         COOLING WATER
         INTAKE
         STRUCTURES
S   Coil Coating
    Canmaking Phase
    II  (Final)

S   Coal Mining
    (Proposed)

S   Coal Mining
    (Final)

S   Best Technology
    Available for
    the Location
    Design
    Construction &
    Capacity of
    Cooling Water
    Intake
    Structures for
    Minimizing
    Adverse
    Environmental
    Impact
                                                                       EPA 440/1-81/057-b
                                                         *   *  *  AUGUST  8,   1988  DRAFT  *  *   *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                  3-40

                                                                            EXHIBIT 3-1  (Continued)
                                                           CLEAN WATER ACT EFFLUENT GUIDELINES DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENTS I/
                                                                                                                  SOURCES OF AVAILABILITY
         INDUSTRIAL
         POINT SOURCE
         CATEGORY

         COPPER FORMING
  40 CFR
PART NUMBER
                 SUBCATEGORY

                 S  Copper and
                    Copper Products
                     (Draft)
EPA PUBLICATION
DOCUMENT NUMBER
NTIS ACCESSION
    NUMBER
         DOMESTIC SEWAGE
         STUDY -
         HAZARDOUS WASTES
                 S  Dairy Products
                    Processing

                 S  Report to
                    Congress on  the
                    Discharge of
                    Hazardous
                    Wastes to
                    Publicly Owned
                    Treatment
                    works.
         ELECTRICAL AND
         ELECTRONIC
         COMPONENTS
                 S  Electrical  and
                    Electronic
                                                          *  *   * AUGUST   8,   1988  DRAFT  *  *   *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                       3-41






                                                                  EXHIBIT 3-1 (Continued)




                                                   CLEAN WATER ACT EFFLUENT GUIDELINES DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENTS I/
                                                                                                   SOURCES OF AVAILABILITY
INDUSTRIAL
POINT SOURCE
CATEGORY
ELECTROPLATING
& METAL
FINISHING
FEEDLOTS
FERROALLOY
GPO
40 CFR EPA PUBLICATION NTIS ACCESSION STOCK
PART NUMBER SUBCATEGORY DOCUMENT NUMBER NUMBER NUMBER EPA
413 & 433 S Copper, EPA 440/1-74/003-a PB238834/AS 5501-00816
Nickel,
Chrome, & Zinc
(Final)
- Pre treatment
(Final)
Finishing
(Proposed)
Finishing
(Proposed)
Manual for
Electroplating
and Metal
Finishing
Pre treatment
Standards
( February
1984)
412 S Feedlots EPA 440/1-74/004-a PB23851/AS 5501-00842
(Final)
424 S Smelting and EPA 440/1-74/008-a PB238650/AS 5501-00780
Slag
Processing
                                                  *  *  *  AUGUST  8,  1988 DRAFT  *  *  *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                       3-42






                                                                  EXHIBIT 3-1  (Continued)




                                                   CLEAN WATER ACT EFFLUENT GUIDELINES DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENTS I/
                                                                                                  SOURCES OF AVAILABILITY
INDUSTRIAL
POINT SOURCE
CATEGORY
FERTILIZER
MANUFACTURING




GLASS
MANUFACTURING





GRAIN MILLS




GPO
40 CFR EPA PUBLICATION NTIS ACCESSION STOCK
PART NUMBER SUBCATEGORY DOCUMENT NUMBER NUMBER NUMBER EPA
418 S Basic EPA 440/1-74/011-a PB238652/AS 5501-00868
Fertilizer
Chemicals
S Formulated EPA 440/1-75/042-a PB240863/AS 5501-01006
Fertilizer
(Final)
426 S Pressed S Blown EPA 440/1-75/034-a PB256854/1 5501-01036
Glass (Final)
S Insulation EPA 440/1-74/001-b PB238078/0 5501-00781
Fiberglass
(Final)
S Flat Glass EPA 440/1-74/001-c PB238-907/0 5501-00814
(Final)
406 S Grain EPA 440/1-74/028-a PB238316/4 5501-00844
Processing
S Animal Feed, EPA 440/1-74/039-a PB240861/5 5501-01007
Breakfast
Cereal & Wheat
                                                  *  *  * AUGUST  8,  1988  DRAFT  *  *  *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                 3-43

                                                                            EXHIBIT 3-1 (Continued)

                                                           CLEAN WATER ACT EFFLUENT GUIDELINES DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENTS I/
                                                                                                                 SOURCES OF AVAILABILITY
         INDUSTRIAL
         POINT SOURCE
         CATEGORY

         INORGANIC
         CHEMICAL
         MANUFACTURING
  40 CFR
PART NUMBER
                 SUBCATEGORY

                 S   Major Inorganic
                    Chemical
                    Products

                 S   Inorganic
                    Chemicals
                    Manufacturing
                    (Proposed Phase
                    II)

                 S   Inorganic
                    Chemicals
                    (Treatability
                    Study)

                 S   Inorganic
                    Chemicals
                    (Final Phase
                    II)

                 S   Inorganic
                    Chemicals
                    (Final Phase
                    II)
EPA PUBLICATION
DOCUMENT NUMBER
                                                                                                PB85-156446/XAB
                                                          *  *  *  AUGUST  8,  1988  DRAFT  *  *  *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                   3-44

                                                                             EXHIBIT 3-1  (Continued)

                                                           CLEAN WATER ACT  EFFLUENT GUIDELINES DEVELOPMENT  DOCUMENTS I/
                                                                                                                   SOURCES  OF AVAILABILITY
         INDUSTRIAL
         POINT SOURCE
         CATEGORY

         IRON & STEEL
         MANUFACTURING
  40 CFR
PART NUMBER
                     Steel Making
                                                    Iron  & Steel
                                                    (Proposed)
                                                    Volume I
                                                    Volume II
                                                    Volume III
                                                    Volume IV
                                                    Volume V
                                                    Volume VI

                                                    Iron  & Steel
                                                    (Final)
                                                    Volume I
                                                    Volume II
                                                    Volume III
                                                    Volume IV
                                                    Volume V
                                                    Volume VI
EPA PUBLICATION
DOCUMENT NUMBER
                                          EPA 440/1-74/024-a
                                                                         EPA 440/1-80/024-D
NTIS ACCESSION
    NUMBER
                                                                   PB81-184384

                                                                   PB81-184392
                                                                   PB81-184400
                                                                   PB81-184418
                                                                   PB81-184426
                                                                   PB81-184434
                                                                   PB81-184442
                                                                   Set of Vol's
                                                                   I thru VI
 GPO
STOCK
NUMBER
                                                    Guidance Manual
                                                    for
                                                    Pretreatment
                                                    Standards
                                                    (September
                                                    1985)
                                                                 *  AUGUST  8,  1988  DRAFT  *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                  3-45

                                                                             EXHIBIT 3-1 (Continued)

                                                           CLEAN WATER ACT EFFLUENT GUIDELINES DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENTS I/
                                                                                                                   SOURCES OF AVAILABILITY
         INDUSTRIAL
         POINT SOURCE
         CATEGORY

         LEATHER TANNING
  40 CFR
PART NUMBER
         MEAT PRODUCTS
         AND ENGINEERING
                 SUBCATEGORY
                                                S   Pretreatment
                                                    Public Hearing
                                                    Transcript for
                                                    Leather Tanning
                                                    and Finishing
                                                    (February 15,
                                                    1980)

                                                S   Leather Tanning
                                                    (Final)
EPA PUBLICATION
DOCUMENT NUMBER
                                                                         EPA 440/1-74/016-a
         METAL FINISHING
                                                S   Metal Finishing
                                                    (Proposed)
                                                S   Metal Finishing
                                                    (Final)

                                                S   Guidance Manual
                                                    for Electro-
                                                    plating and
                                                    Metal Finishing
                                                    Pretreatement
                                                    Standards
                                                    (February 1984)
                                                          *   *  *  AUGUST  8,  1988  DRAFT  *  *   *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                   3-46

                                                                             EXHIBIT 3-1 (Continued)

                                                            CLEAN WATER ACT EFFLUENT GUIDELINES DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENTS  I/
         INDUSTRIAL
         POINT SOURCE
         CATEGORY
  40 CFR
PART NUMBER
                                                SUBCATEGORY
 EPA PUBLICATION
 DOCUMENT NUMBER
                                                                                                                    SOURCES OF AVAILABILITY
         METAL MOLDING
         AND CASTING
         (FOUNDRIES)
                 S   Metal Molding
                     and Casting
                     (Vol. I & II)
                     (Proposed)
                                                S   Metal Molding
                                                    Casting
                                                    (Foundries)
                                                    (Final)
         MINERAL MINING
         PROCESSING
                 S   Minerals for
                     the
                     Construction
                     Industry
         NONFERROUS
         METALS FORMING
                 S   Nonferrous
                     Metals Forming
                     (Final)
EPA 440/1-84/019-b
Vol.  I
Vol.  II
Vol.  Ill
         NONFERROUS
         METALS
         MANUFACTURING
                 S   Bauxite
                     Refining
                     Aluminum
                     Segment
                                                                         EPA 440/1-74/091-c
                                                S   Secondary
                                                    Aluminum
                                                    Smelting-
                                                    Aluminum
                                                    Segment
                                                           *  *   *  AUGUST  8,  1988  DRAFT  *  *   *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                  3-47

                                                                             EXHIBIT 3-1 (Continued)

                                                           CLEAN WATER ACT EFFLUENT GUIDELINES DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENTS I/
                                                                                                                   SOURCES OF AVAILABILITY
         INDUSTRIAL
         POINT SOURCE
         CATEGORY

         OIL  & GAS
         EXTRACTION
  40 CFR
PART NUMBER
                 SUBCATEGORY

                 S   Onshore
                     (Interim Final
                     (Includes
                     Offshore)
EPA PUBLICATION
DOCUMENT NUMBER
                                                S  Oil & Gas
                                                   Extraction
                                                    (Proposed)
                                                                                                 PB86-114949/XAB
                                                   Assessment of
                                                   Environmental
                                                   Fate & Effects
                                                   of Discharge
                                                   from Offshore
                                                   Oil and Gas
                                                   Operations
         ORE MINING AND
         DRESSING
                 S   Ore Mining and
                     Dressing Volume
                     I
                                                S  Ore Mining and
                                                   Dressing Volume
                                                   II
                                                S  Ore Mining &
                                                   Dressing
                                                    (Proposed)
                                                S  Ore Mining &
                                                   Dressing
                                                    (Final)
                                                          *   *  *  AUGUST  8,  1988  DRAFT  *  *  *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                   3-48

                                                                             EXHIBIT 3-1  (Continued)

                                                           CLEAN WATER ACT  EFFLUENT GUIDELINES DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENTS I/
                                                                                                                   SOURCES OF AVAILABILITY
         INDUSTRIAL
         POINT SOURCE
         CATEGORY

         ORGANIC
         CHEMICALS
         MANUFACTURING &
         PLASTICS AND
         SYNTHETIC FIBERS
  40 CFR
PART NUMBER
 414 and
 416
SUBCATEGORY

S   Major Organic
    Products
                                                    Organic
                                                    Chemicals &
                                                    Plastics &
                                                    Synthetic
                                                    Fibers
                                                    (Proposed)
                                                    Selected
                                                    Summary of
                                                    Information in
                                                    Support of
                                                    Organic
                                                    Chemicals,
                                                    Plastic &
                                                    Synthetic
                                                    Fibers  (July
                                                    1985)
                          EPA PUBLICATION
                          DOCUMENT NUMBER
                                          EPA 440/1-83/009-b
                                          Vol.  I
                                          Vol.  II
                                          Vol.  Ill
                                                    Guidance Manual
                                                    for
                                                    Implementing
                                                    Total Toxic
                                                    Organic
                                                    (TTO)Pretreat-
                                                    ment Standards
                                                    (September
                                                    1985)
                                                           *  *  *
                                                                    AUGUST  8,   1988  DRAFT  *   *  *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                   3-49

                                                                             EXHIBIT 3-1  (Continued)

                                                            CLEAN WATER ACT EFFLUENT GUIDELINES  DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENTS I/
                                                                                                                    SOURCES OF AVAILABILITY
         INDUSTRIAL
         POINT SOURCE
         CATEGORY

         PESTICIDES
  40 CFR
PART NUMBER
                 SUBCATEGORY

                 S   Pesticides
                 S   Pesticides
                     (Proposed)

                 S   Test Methods
                     for Non-
                     conventional
                     Pesticides
                     Chemical
                     Analysis of
                     Industrial &
                     Municipal
                     wastewater
EPA PUBLICATION
DOCUMENT NUMBER
                                                S   Pesticides
                                                    (Final)
                                                                                                  PB86-150042/XAB
         PETROLEUM
         REFINING
                 S   Petroleum
                     Refining

                 S   Petroleum
                     Refining
                     (Proposed)

                 S   Petroleum
                     Refining
                     (Final)

                 S   Transcript for
                     Public Hearing
                     for Petroleum
                     Refining  (April
                     9, 1980)
                                                                         EPA 440/1-74/014-a
                                                                                                  PB238612/6
                                                                                                  PB81-118413
                                                           *  *   *  AUGUST  8,   1988  DRAFT   *  *  *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                               3-50

                                                                          EXHIBIT 3-1  (Continued)
                                                         CLEAN WATER ACT EFFLUENT GUIDELINES DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENTS I/
                                                                                                              SOURCES OF AVAILABILITY
        INDUSTRIAL
        POINT SOURCE
        CATEGORY

        PHARMACEUTICALS
  40 CFR
PART NUMBER
        PHOSPHATE
        MANUFACTURING
                SUBCATEGORY
                    Phosphorus
                    Derived
                    Chemicals

                    Other Non-
                    Fertilizer
                    Chemicals
EPA PUBLICATION
DOCUMENT NUMBER
                                                                                              PB241018/1
                                                        *  *   * AUGUST  8,   1988  DRAFT  *  *  *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                   3-51

                                                                              EXHIBIT 3-1 (Continued)

                                                            CLEAN WATER ACT EFFLUENT GUIDELINES DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENTS I/
                                                                                                                    SOURCES  OF AVAILABILITY
         INDUSTRIAL
         POINT  SOURCE
         CATEGORY

         PLASTIC &
         SYNTHETIC
         FIBERS
         (MATERIALS) &
         ORGANIC
         CHEMICALS
         MANUFACTURING
  40 CFR
PART NUMBER
 416
 & 414
S   Synthetic
    Resins
                 S   Synthetic
                     Polymers
                                                     (Proposed)
                          EPA PUBLICATION
                          DOCUMENT NUMBER
NTIS ACCESSION
    NUMBER
                                                                          EPA 440/1-83/009-b
                                                                          Vol. I
                                                                          Vol. II
                                                                          Vol. Ill
                                                                   PB83-205625
                                                                   PB83-205633
                                                                   PB83-205641
                                                                   PB83-205658
                                                                   Set of Vol's  I
                                                                   thru III
                                                    Selected
                                                    Summary or
                                                    Information  in
                                                    Support of
                                                    Organic
                                                    Chemicals,
                                                    Plastic &
                                                    Synthetic
                                                    Fibers (July
                                                    1985)
                                                    Guidance Manual
                                                    for
                                                    Implementing
         PORCELAIN
         ENAMELING
                     Porcelain
                     Enameling
                     (Proposed)
                     Porcelain
                     Enameling
                     (Final)
                                                           *  *   *  AUGUST  8,  1988  DRAFT  *  *  *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                3-52

                                                                          EXHIBIT 3-1  (Continued)

                                                         CLEAN WATER ACT EFFLUENT GUIDELINES DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENTS I/
                                                                                                               SOURCES OF AVAILABILITY
         INDUSTRIAL
         POINT SOURCE            40 CFR                                 EPA PUBLICATION
         CATEGORY              PART NUMBER       SUBCATEGORY              DOCUMENT NUMBER
         POTWs/                	        S  Fate of              EPA 440/1-82/303
         POLLUTANTS:—                              Priority             Vol.  I
         Priority                                  Pollutants in         Vol.  II
         Pollutants in                              Publicly Owned
         Publicly Owned                             Treatment
         Treatment Works                            Works (vol. I
                                                  & II)
                                                         *  *  *  AUGUST  8,   1988  DRAFT  *  *  *

Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                                  3-53

                                                                             EXHIBIT 3-1 (Continued)

                                                           CLEAN WATER ACT EFFLUENT GUIDELINES DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENTS I/
                                                                                                                  SOURCES OF AVAILABILITY
         INDUSTRIAL
         POINT SOURCE
         CATEGORY

         PULP, PAPER AND
         PAPERBOARD
  40 CFR
PART NUMBER
                 SUBCATEGORY

                 S   Unbleached
                     Kraft  and
                     Semi-chemical
                     Pulp
EPA PUBLICATION
DOCUMENT NUMBER
                                                S   Pulp  & Paper
                                                    and Paperboard
                                                    and Builders'
                                                    Paper and
                                                    Board Mills
                                                    (Proposed)

                                                S   Pulp, Paper &
                                                    Paperboard and
                                                    Builders'
                                                    Paper & Board
                                                    Mills (Final)
                                                    Control of
                                                    Polychlori-
                                                    nated
                                                    Biphenyls in
                                                    the Deink
                                                    Subcategory of
                                                    Pulp, Paper &
                                                    Paperboard
                                                    (Oct. 1982)
         RUBBER
         PROCESSING
                 S   Tire  &
                     Synthetic
                                                                         EPA 440/1-74/030-a
                                                          *   *  *  AUGUST  8,  1988  DRAFT   *  *  *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                                          3-54

                                                                     EXHIBIT 3-1 (Continued)

                                                      CLEAN WATER ACT EFFLUENT GUIDELINES DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENTS I/
                                                                                                        SOURCES OF AVAILABILITY
INDUSTRIAL
POINT SOURCE
CATEGORY
SOAPS &
DETERGENTS
STEAM ELECTRIC
POWERPLANTS
SUGAR PROCESSING
TEXTILE MILLS
MANUFACTURING

PROCESSING
GPO
40 CFR EPA PUBLICATION NTIS ACCESSION STOCK
PART NUMBER SUBCATEGORY DOCUMENT NUMBER NUMBER NUMBER EPA
417 S Soaps & EPA 440/1-74/018-a PB238613/4 5501-00867
Detergents
421 S Steam Electric EPA 440/1-74/029-a PB240853/2 5501-01001
Power
Generating
(Proposed)
409 S Beet Sugar EPA 440/1-74/002-D PB238462/6 5501-0011/
(Final)
S Cane Sugar EPA 440/1-74/002-c PB23814/3 5501/00826
Refining
(Interim Final)
410 S Textile Mills EPA 440/1-74/022-a PB238832/AS 5501-00903
(Final)
and Fixtures
                                               Processing
                                               (Proposed)

                                           S   Timber Products
                                               Processing
                                               (Final)
                                                     *  *  *  AUGUST  8,  1988  DRAFT  *  *  *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                     CHAPTER  4

                 GUIDANCE FOR COMPLIANCE WITH REQUIREMENT
                       OF THE SAFE DRINKING  WATER ACT

4.0 INTRODUCTION

      This chapter addresses CERCLA compliance with Safe Drinking Water Act  (SDWA)
applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements (ARARs) in remedial actions.1 It
is organized into two sections:

               Section 4.1 provides a general overview of the provisions of the SDWA
               and how they are implemented; and

            "  Section 4.2 presents a summary of SDWA ARARs for CERCLA actions
               including drinking water standards, underground injection control,
               sole source aquifer, and wellhead protection program requirements.

4.1   OVERVIEW OF THE SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT

      The Safe Drinking Water Act  (SDWA),2 initially enacted in 1974 and most
recently amended in 1986, mandates EPA to establish regulations to protect human
health from contaminants in drinking water. The legislation authorizes national
drinking water standards and a joint Federal-State system for assuring compliance
with those standards. Maximum contaminant levels and treatment techniques ensure the
quality of public drinking water supplies. This section provides an overview of the
treatment and pollution prevention requirements imposed by the SDWA that may
potentially affect the selection, design, and implementation of CERCLA response
activities.

      The establishment of national drinking water standards is authorized under
Title XIV, Part B of the SDWA. EPA has developed two sets of drinking water
standards, referred to as primary and secondary standards, to protect human health
and ensure the aesthetic quality of drinking water respectively. Primary standards
consist of contaminant-specific standards, known as Maxim Contaminant Levels  (MCLs).
MCLs are set as close as feasible to Maximum Contaminant Level Goals  (MCLGs), which
are purely health-based goals. Secondary
      1  The requirements of CERCLA §121 generally apply as a matter of law only to
remedial actions. However, as a matter of policy, EPA will attain ARARs to the
greatest extent practicable considering the exigencies of the situation at the site
when carrying out removal actions.

      2  42  USC §300f,  et sea.,  as amended (in 1976,  1977,  1979,  1980,  1984,  and
1986) .
                                  AUGUST  8,  1988 DRAFT
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         4-2

drinking water standards consist primarily of limits used by States to regulate the
aesthetic quality of water supplies, and are not enforceable at the Federal level.

      Part C of Title XIV of the SDWA authorizes the establishment of a permit
program and two resource planning programs designed to prevent contamination of
underground sources of drinking water. Those three programs are: the Underground
Injection Control (UIC) permit program, the Sole Source Aquifer program, and the
Wellhead Protection program.

      Owners and operators of certain classes of underground injection wells must,
obtain permits or be authorized by rule under the UIC program in order to operate
the wells. The permit applicant must prove to the State or Federal permitting
authority that the underground injection will not endanger drinking water sources.

      An aquifer that is identified as the solo or principal source of drinking
water source for an area may be designated as a "sole source aquifer" under Section
1424(e)  of the SDWA. No commitment of Federal financial assistance may be made for
any project that may contaminate a sole source aquifer so as to create a significant
public health hazard.

      The 1986 amendments to the SDWA established a Wellhead Protection program
(WHP)  that the States may use to protect public drinking wells and springs,
"...within their jurisdiction from contaminants which may have any adverse effects
on the health of persons."  EPA issued guidance on the procedures for determining
WHP areas in June 1987. States have the option of using this guidance. Guidance was
issued an June 19, 1987 and notice was published in the Federal Register.

4.2   SUMMARY OF SDWA ARARs FOR CERCLA ACTIONS

      Under the SDWA, EPA has developed the following programs:

         "  Drinking water standards;

            Underground Injection Control program; and

            Sole-source Aquifer and Wellhead Protection programs.

      In each of these areas, EPA has promulgated regulations that could be
potential ARARs or developed guidance that could be considered for CERCLA actions.
The following subsections discuss these potential ARARs in greater detail.  (Chapter
1,  Exhibit 1-1 of this guidance presents a summary of potential SDWA ARARs in each
of these areas and the appropriate CFR citations.)
                                  AUGUST  8,  1988 DRAFT
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         4-3
4.2.1 DRINKING WATER STANDARDS

      EPA has promulgated drinking water regulations designed to protect human
health from the potential adverse effects of drinking water contaminants. These
drinking water regulations generally apply to community water systems, which are
public water systems having at least 15 service connections or serving an average of
at least 25 year-round residents.3 The  drinking water standards  and regulations
promulgated in July 1987 for eight synthetic organic chemicals  (52 FR
25690, July 8, 1987) also apply to a new category of suppliers referred to as
non-transient, non-community systems.4  These systems are those that regularly serve
at least 25 of the same persons over 6 months per year  (e.g., rural schools).

Use of MCLs/MCLGs/SMCLs

      Primary drinking water regulations include MCLs for specific contaminants.
MCLs are enforceable standards which apply to specified contaminants which EPA has
determined have an adverse effect on human health. MCLs are set at levels that are
protective of human health, and are set as close to MCLGs5 as is feasible taking
into account available treatment technologies and the costs to large public water
systems. MCLGs, in contrast, are strictly health-based and do not take cost or
feasibility into account. As health goals, MCLGs are established at levels at which
no known or anticipated adverse effects on the health of persons occur and which
allow an adequate margin of safety. To date, MCLs have been promulgated for 30
specific chemicals  (10 inorganics, 14 organic chemicals including pesticides, and
total trihalomethanes, certain radio-nuclides, coliform bacteria, and turbidity).
The SDWA amendments of 1986 require EPA to promulgate MCLs for 83 specific
contaminants  (including reproposal of the earlier-promulgated 30 contaminants with
the exception of silver and total trihalomethanes) by June 1989. A list of these 83
contaminants and their promulgation schedule is provided in Exhibit 4-2. MCLGs have
been published for 8 organic contaminants and for fluoride. A list of current MCLs
and MCLGs is presented in Exhibit 1-1.  MCLGs have been proposed for 40 additional
organic and inorganic contaminants. A list of currently proposed MCLGs is presented
in Exhibit 4-1.
      3  Certain drinking water standards also apply to non-community water systems.
These include standards for nitrate, turbidity, and microbiological concentrations
(40 CFR §141.11, 40 CFR §141.13, and 40 CFR §141.14 respectively).

      4  EPA plans to continue to extend its drinking water regulations to non-
transient, non-community systems.

      5  Recommended maximum contaminant levels (RMCLs)  were renamed maximum
contaminant level goals  (MCLGs) by the  1986 Amendments to the Safe Drinking Water
Act.


                              * * * AUGUST 8,  1988 DRAFT * * *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         4-4
                                     EXHIBIT 4-1

                  Proposed Maximum Contaminant  Level Goals  (MCLGs)
                        Under the Safe Drinking Water Act a./
                                       (1985)
    CHEMICAL
   PROPOSED
MCLGs  (mg/l)b/
    Acrylamide
    Alachlor
    Aldicarb
    Aldicarb sulfoxide
    Aldicarb sulfone
    Arsenic
    Asbestos
    Barium
    Cadmium
    Carbofuran
    Chlordane
    Chromium
    Copper
    Dibromochloropropane
    o-Dichlorobenzene
    1,2-cis-Dichloroethylene
    1, 2-trans-Dichloroethylene
    1,2-Dichloropropane
    2,4-D
    Epichlorohydrin
    Ethylbenzene
    Ethylene dibromide  (EDB)
    Heptachlor
    Heptachlor epoxide
    Lead
    Lindane
    Mercury
    Methoxychlor
    Monochlorobenzene
    Nitrate
    Nitrite
    Polychlorinated biphenyls
    Pentachlorophenol
    Selenium
    Styrene
    Tetrachloroethylene
       0
       0
       0.009
       0.009
       0.009
       0.05
       7.1 c/
       1.5
       0.005
       0.036
       0
       0.12
       1.3
       0
       0
       0.07
       0.07
       0.006
       0.07
       0
       0.68
       0
       0
       0
       0.02
       0.0002
       0.003
       0.34
       0.06
     1 0
       1
       0
       0.22
       0.045
       0.14
       0
                             * * * AUGUST 8,1988 DRAFT * * *
Word-searchable version — Not a true copy

-------
                                         4-5

                                     EXHIBIT 4-1
                                     (Continued)

                  Proposed Maximum Contaminant  Level  Goals (MCLGs)
                          Under the Safe Drinking Water Act
                                        (1985)
                                                     PROPOSED
             CHEMICAL
            	MCLGS (mg/1)  a/
             Toluene                                    2
             Toxapheno                                  0
             2,4,5-TP                                   0.052
             Xylene                                     0.44
      a./ A list of final MCLs and MCLGs  is presented in Exhibit 1-1.  There are
currently no proposed MCLs.

      b/ MCLG - Maximum contaminant level goal;  proposed values taken from 50 FR
46936 (November 13, 1985). EPA will repropose  those  MCLGs with the proposal of MCLs
for these chemicals. This proposal is expected in  May/June 1988.

      c/ Million fibers per liter >10q in length.
                              * * * AUGUST 8,1988 DRAFT * * *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                             4-6
                                         EXHIBIT  4-2

                     List  of 83 Contaminants  for Which MCLs  Must Be
                                 Promulgated by June  1989
 9 MCLs  Currently  Final

 Benzene
 Carbon  Tetrachloride
 p- Dichlorobenzene
1,2-Dichloroethane
1,1-Dichloroethylene
Flouride
 40 Contaminants Mandated for MCL Promulgation by June 19886
 Acrylamide
 Aldicarb
 Alachlor
 *Arsenic
 Asbestos
 *Barium
 *Cadmium
 Carbofuran
 Chlordane
 Chloroenzene
 *Chromium
 *Coliform Bacteria
 Copper
 Dibromochloropropane
  (DBCP)
o-Dichlorobenzene
cis-1,2,  Dichloro-
 ethylene
trans- 1,2,  Dichloro
 ethylene
* 2,4- Di chlorophenoxy
 acetic Acid (2,4-D)
1-2, Dichloropropane
Epichlorohydrin
Ethyl Benzene
Ethylene  Dibromide
Giardia Lamblia
Heptachlor
Heptachlor Epoxide
*Lead
 34 Contaminants Mandated for MCL Promulgation by June 1989
 Adipates
 Aldicarb  Sulfone
 Aldicarb  Sulfoxide
 Antimony
 Atrazine
 Beryllium
 *Beta Particle  -  Photon
  Radioactivity
 Cyanide
 Dalapon
 Dinoseb
 Diquat
 *      19 MCLs  to be reproposed
*Endrin
Endothall
Glyphosate
*Gross alpha particle
 activity
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Legionella
Methylene Chloride
Nickel
PAHs
Phthalates
Pichloram
1,1,1-Trichloromethane
Trichloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
*Lindane
*Mercury
*Methoxychlor
*Nitrate
PCBs
Pentachlorophenol
*Selenium
*2,4,5- TP Silvex
Styrene
Toluene
*Toxaphene
*Turbidity
Viruses
Xylene
*Radium 226 and 228
Radon
Simazine
Standard Plate Count
Sulfate
2,3,7,8 - TCDD (Dioxin)
Tetrahlorobenzine
Thallium
Trichlorobenzine
1,1,2 - Trichloromethane
Uranium
Vydate
 6 At  the time  of this  manual's  publication, no  MCLs for  these contaminants had
 been proposed  or promulgated under the  SDWA amendments  of 1986.
                                 * * * AUGUST 8,1988 DRAFT * * *
Word-searchable version — Not a true copy

-------
                                         4-7
                                     EXHIBIT 4-3

                    Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels  (SMCLs)
                          Under the Safe Drinking Water Act
                                        (1985)
         CONTAMINANT
                                                                 LEVEL
 Chloride
 Color
 Copper
 Corrosivity
 Fluoride
 Foaming agents
 Iron
 Manganese
 Odor
 PH
 Sulfate
 Total dissolved solids  (TDS)
 Zinc
                                       250  mg/1
                                       15 color  units
                                       1 mg/1
                                       Noncorrosive
                                       2.0  mg/1
                                        .5  mg/1
                                        .3  mg/1
                                        .05 mg/1
                                       3  threshold odor number
                                       6.5-8.5
                                       250  mg/1
                                       500  mg/1
                                       5  mg/1
 Source:
40 CFR §143.3.
                             * * * AUGUST 8,1988 DRAFT * * *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         4-8
      For water that is to be used for drinking, the MCLs set under the Safe
Drinking Water Act are generally the applicable or relevant and appropriate
standard. MCLs are applicable where the water will be provided directly to 25 or
more people or will be supplied to 15 or more service connections. If MCLs are
applicable, they are applied at the tap. In addition, MCLs are relevant and
appropriate as in situ cleanup standards where either surface water or ground water
is or may be used for drinking water. When no promulgated standard exists for a
given contaminant, proposed MCLs are to be given greater consideration among the
to-be-considered advisories.

      A standard for drinking water more stringent than an MCL may be needed in
special circumstances, such as where multiple contaminants in groundwater or
multiple pathways of exposure present extraordinary risks (i.e.,  above an individual
lifetime cancer risk of 10~4). In setting a level more stringent than the MCL in
such cases, a site-specific determination should be made by considering MCLGs,  the
Agency's policy on the use of appropriate risk ranges for carcinogens,  levels of
quantification, and other pertinent guidelines. Prior consultation with Headquarters
contacts in the Office of Emergency and Remedial Response or the Office of Waste
Programs Enforcement, as appropriate, is encouraged in such cases.

      The responsibility for enforcing primary drinking water regulations resides
with the appropriate State government agency in those States where EPA has granted
the State primary enforcement authority or with EPA in the two States that do not
have primary enforcement (Indiana and Wyoming). Suppliers of water may be assessed
criminal or civil penalties for violations of primary drinking water regulations.1
In addition, suppliers are required to notify the public regarding violations of
primary drinking water standards.

      Secondary drinking water regulations consist primarily of Secondary Maximum
Contaminant Levels (SMCLs)  for specific contaminants or water characteristics that
may affect the aesthetic qualities of drinking water (i.e.,  color, odor,  and taste).
SMCLs are nonenforceable limits intended as guidelines for use by States in
regulating water supplies.  SMCLs apply to public water systems and are measured at
the tap of the user of the system.  A list of existing SMCLs is presented in Exhibit
4-3. For States that have adopted SMCLs as additional drinking water standards,
SMCLs are potential State ARARs, depending on site conditions.

      Variances and Exemptions2

      Public water suppliers may also obtain variances or exemptions from complying
with primary MCLs if certain criteria are met. Detailed procedures for applying for
a variance or exemption are described in the regulations.7  Granting of  an exemption
or variance is contingent upon demonstrating that noncompliance will not result in
an unreasonable risk to human health.
        40 CFR §142.40  and 40  CFR §142.50 respectively.
                                  AUGUST  8, 1988 DRAFT *  *  *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         4-9
In general, variances are granted only to water supply systems  in which  the
characteristic of the existing raw water sources precludes attainment  of MCLs,  even
with the application of best available technology. Variances must include  compliance
schedules, which are determined by State water offices. Exemptions  are typically
granted in situations where, due to compelling factors  (which may include  economic
factors), a public water system is unable to comply with the primary MGLs. As with
variances, exemptions must include a schedule for eventual compliance  with the
primary drinking water regulations. The distinction between the two is that
exemptions may only be given to a public water system that was  in operation  on  the
effective date of any MCL or treatment technique requirement. Variances  may  only  be
granted to public water systems that have installed best available  technology,
treatment techniques, or other means that EPA finds are available.  The final date
for compliance provided in any schedule in  the case of any exemption may be  extended
to a maximum period of three years from the date of the exemption  (except  for
systems serving fewer than 500 service connections).

      In addition, at CERCLA sites that are causing the public  water supplies in  the
area to violate SDWA standards, the RPM should work closely with the water suppliers
in developing remedial options and, if necessary, in assisting  the  water suppliers
in obtaining temporary variances or exemptions if appropriate.  However,  the  RPM
should first coordinate this activity with  the Regional drinking water program.

      4.2.2 UNDERGROUND INJECTION CONTROL (UIC) PROGRAM

      Overview

      Underground injection wells are divided into five general classes  of wells  for
permitting and regulatory purposes.8 The applicable UIC  technical and procedural
standards and criteria vary according to the class of well. The five classes of
wells are:

         Class I wells are those used to inject industrial, hazardous  and
         municipal wastes beneath the lower most formation containing,
         within one-quarter (1/4) mile of the well bore, an underground
         drinking water source.9
      8  According  to  40 CFR §144.3, a well is defined as a bored,  drilled  or
driven,  shaftor a  dug hole, whose  depth is greater than the largest surface
dimension.

      9  According  to  40 CFR §146.3, an underground source of drinking  water
is defined as any  aquifer  or  its portion that  (1) supplies any public  water
supply or contains a  sufficient quantity of water to supply a public
water, and currently  supplies drinking water for human consumption
or contains fewer  than 10,000 mg/1 total dissolved solids, and
(2)  is not an exempted aquifer according to 40 CFR §146.4.
                                  AUGUST 8,  1988 DRAFT * * *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                   4-10

               Class II wells are used to dispose  of  fluids which  are
               brought to the surface in connection with  oil  and gas
               production, to inject fluids  for the enhanced  recovery  of
               oil or gas, or to store liquid hydrocarbons.

               Class III wells are those used to inject fluids  for the
               extraction of minerals.

               Class IV wells are used to inject hazardous waste or
               radioactive waste into or above a formation that, within
               one-quarter  (1/4) mile of the well, contains an
               underground drinking water source.  Operation or
               construction of Class IV wells is prohibited and allowed
               only for the reinjection of treated wastes as  part  of a
               CERCLA or RCRA cleanup action.

            "  Class V wells include all wells not incorporated in
               Classes I-IV. Typical examples of such wells are recharge
               wells, septic system wells, and shallow industrial
               (non-hazardous) disposal wells,

      Of the five classes of wells, Class I, Class IV, and Class V wells  are  the
classes most likely to be associated with CERCLA actions  For  Class I and  Class  IV
wells, the injection of hazardous wastes is  involved.10 An abandoned or failed
Class I or Class IV injection well facility  could  be  the  site of CERCLA action.
In addition, UIC requirements may be ARARs for CERCLA remedial  actions involving
the reinjection of treated ground water. Class II  and Class III wells  are
unlikely to be associated with CERCLA actions and  are not discussed further in
this section. The Agency is in the process of developing  standards applicable to
Class V wells. However, a CERCLA site cleanup could involve reinjection of
wastewater that is not defined as hazardous  (i.e., the wastewater  does not meet
the definition of hazardous waste) to a Class V well.

      Two important distinctions between Class I and  Class IV wells are the
location and existing quality of the aquifer above, into, or  below which  wastes
will or are being injected. Class I wells are used for disposing hazardous waste
beneath the lowermost formation containing within  one-quarter mile of  the well,
an underground source of drinking water. Class IV  wells are used for disposing
hazardous waste into or above a formation containing  within one-quarter mile  of
the well, an underground source of drinking  water. However,
      10 Hazardous waste in the UIC program means  a  hazardous waste as defined in 40
CPR §261.3.  In summary,  a  hazardous waste is a solid waste that either exhibits
any hazardous characteristics  (ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity,  EP toxicity),
or that has  been named hazardous  and listed, and has not been excluded by
regulation (e.g.,  household wastes, domestic sewage, irrigation return flows,
mining overburden returned to  site, and agricultural wastes).
                                  AUGUST 8,  1988 DRAFT * * *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                       4-11

the operation or construction of Class IV wells is prohibited, and allowed only
where the wells are used to reinject treated ground water into the same formation
from which it was withdrawn as part of a CERCLA cleanup or a RCRA corrective
action (40 CFR §144.13). There are two clarifications regarding Class IV wells
contained in 40 CFR §144.13(d) that should also be noted:

      "  The injection of hazardous wastes into aquifers that have been
         exempted pursuant to 40 CFR §146.4  (and are otherwise below the
         lowermost underground source of drinking water) are considered
         to be Class I wells, rather than Class IV wells, and subject to
         Class I UIC regulations;11 and

      "  The injection of hazardous wastes where no underground source of
         drinking water exists within one-quarter mile of the well,
         provided that EPA or the authorized State determines that such
         injection is isolated to ensure injected wastes do not migrate
         from the injection zone, considered to be Class I wells rather
         than Class IV wells, and subject to Class I UIC regulations.

      The UIC program regulates underground injections into the five classes of
wells described above. Operation of these injection wells must be authorized by
permit or rule if the injection results in the movement of fluid containing any
contaminant into an underground source of drinking water, and if contaminants
present in injected fluids cause a violation of any primary drinking water
standard (see section 4.2.1) or adversely affect the health of persons.

      Underground injection wells that are constructed off-site are subject to
all provisions of the SDWA relating to underground injection of fluids and must
be permitted by an authorized State agency or EPA and comply with the UIC permit
requirements. Superfund sites that construct underground injection wells on site
are not required to comply with the administrative requirements of the UIC
program,  however they must meet the substantive requirements of this program
where the requirement is determined to be applicable or relevant and appropriate
to the CERCLA remedial action.
      11  In general, an  aquifer  that  is  not  currently  used  for  drinking  purposes,
and cannot be used for drinking water in the future due to insufficient yield or
excessive contamination, may be officially designated as an "exempted aquifer" by
EPA or an authorized State agency  (subject to EPA approval). (40 CFR §146.4)
                             * * * AUGUST 8,1988 DRAFT * * *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        4-12

4.2.2.1 Guidelines for Determining Substantive Requirements

      The injection of hazardous wastes from CERCLA sites into wells constructed
both on-site and off-site must meet the substantive requirements of the UIC program
including general program requirements that apply to Class I, Class IV, and Class V
wells, and specific criteria and standards applicable only to Class I wells.

      In general, no owner or operator may construct, operate, or maintain an
injection well in a manner that results in the contamination of an underground
source of drinking water at levels that violate MCLs or otherwise adversely affect
the health of persons  (40 CFR §144.12). This requirement applies to all classes of
wells, including Class I, Class IV, and Class V wells.

      There currently are no requirements for the injection into Class V wells.
However, if injection into a Class V well could cause the water in the receiving
underground source of drinking water to violate primary drinking water regulations,
then EPA or the authorized State agency could require the issuance of a permit that
could include the substantive requirements of the UIC program  (40 CER §144.12(c)).
Such substantive requirements may be ARAR for on-site actions.

      The Hazardous and Solid Wastes Amendments of 1984 include a provision banning
RCRA restricted wastes from land disposal unless the Agency promulgates specific
treatment levels for each waste based on the Best Demonstrated Available Technology
(BDAT) and in accordance with the statutory schedule.12 Thus  far, the Agency has
promulgated treatment levels for certain solvent- and dioxin-containing wastes  (40
CFR §268.40)  and the "California list" prohibitions  (40 CFR §268.32) were effective
in July 1987.

      Until August 1988, solvents, dioxins, chlorophenols, and the "California list"
are exempt from these treatment standards only when they are disposed of via deep
well injection.13 This method of land disposal, however, will be banned after August
1988, if the Agency determines that this practice for these specified wastes is not
protective of human health and the environment, or the Agency fails to make such a
determination by August 1988.

      Thus, CERCLA sites that involve the discharge of hazardous wastes into UIC
wells currently do not have to comply with BDAT treatment levels. However, beginning
August 1988,  before RCRA restricted wastes can be disposed in a Class I well  (as
part of an on-site or off-site activity), or contaminated ground water can be
reinjected into a Class IV well (as part of an on-site activity), the wastes or the
ground water must attain any treatment levels that may have been promulgated for
each constituent disposed in the injection well,  or be
      12 RCRA §§3004(d),  (e),  (g),  (m),  and  (h).

      13 RCRA  §3004 (f) .
                              * * * AUGUST 8,1988 DRAFT * * *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        4-13

subject to one of several variances provided for in 40 CFR Part 268 for each RCRA
listed waste present at the injection well.14

      Class I wells are also required to obtain a RCRA permit-by-rule as a
condition for injecting hazardous waste. For any UIC permit issued to a Class  I well
after November 8, 1984, RCRA permit-by-rule provisions require the owner/operator of
the well to comply with RCRA corrective action for releases from solid waste
management units  (40 CPR §264.101). Therefore, a RCRA permit-by-rule issued after
November 8, 1984 must address any necessary corrective action not only for the
injection well, but for all solid waste management units at the facility. For  any
UIC permit for Class I wells issued prior to November 8, 1984, RCRA corrective
action requirements for releases from solid waste management units will be addressed
upon permit reissuance.15

      All owners and operators of underground injection wells are subject to UIC
closure requirements. These closure requirements include the preparation and
submission of a plugging and abandonment plan. For Class I wells, this plan has to
be submitted in accordance with the requirements provided in 40 CFR §144.28(c). For
Class IV wells, closure plan requirements are provided in 40 CFR §144.23(b).

      Finally, owners and operators of Class I wells are subject to additional UIC
operating requirements including:

      "  Construction Requirements. Various requirements are specified
         for the construction of Class I wells including the type of
         casing and cementing for the well, appropriate geophysical well
         logging and other test requirements, ect.  (40 CFR §146.12) .

      "  Operating Requirements. The operation of Class I wells are
         subject to specific operating requirements, including use of
         approved fluids surrounding the outermost casing and
         maintenance of injection pressure
      14 The Agency is required to promulgate  regulations  for  RCRA restricted
wastes in accordance with a statutory schedule. If the Agency fails to meet  this
schedule,  then certain wastes present at a CERCLA site may be banned  from land
disposal.

      15 The UIC program corrective action requirements (40 CFR §144.55) are
limited to repairing well defects to prevent  releases from the well.  The term
RCRA corrective action,  as used in this context, is broader and requires control
to not only prevent releases from the well, but to also clean-up  past  releases
from the well. RCRA regulatory amendments have been proposed  (51  FR 10706; March
28,1986) to clarify the corrective action requirements for hazardous  waste
injection wells.
                             * * * AUGUST 8,1988 DRAFT * * *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                   4-14
      (40 CFR §§144.28(f) and 146.13).

      "  Monitoring Requirements. At a minimum, monitoring requirements
         for Class I wells include analysis of the injected fluids;
         installation and use of continuous recording devices to monitor
         injection pressure, flow rate and volume, and pressure on the
         annulus; demonstration of mechanical integrity  (in accordance
         with 40 CFR §146.8) at least every 5 years; and use of
         monitoring wells in the area of review16 to monitor migration of
         fluids into, and pressure in, underground sources of drinking
         water  (40 CFR §146.13 (b)). As part of the suggested
         coordination between CERCLA RPMs and UIC program  (EPA Regional
         and/or State)  personnel, monitoring results should be provided
         to the appropriate UIC program office.

      4.2.2.2  Administrative Requirements of the UIC Program

      The UIC program establishes administrative requirements that must be complied
with prior to and after UIC permit issuance or authorization by rule. The
requirements would not be considered ARARs for on-site injection of wastes because
they are procedural or administrative in nature. However, they would be requirements
to be complied with for off-site injection of wastes into wells. These
administrative requirements include:

      "  Application Requirements. All existing and now underground injection wells
         must apply for a permit unless an existing wall is authorized by rule for
         the life of the well (40 CFR §144.31). For new wells, this application must
         be submitted to EPA or an approved State within a reasonable time prior to
         construction of the well. For existing Class I and Class IV wells, this
         application must be submitted within six months after the approval or
         promulgation of a State UIC program, or to EPA as expeditiously as
         practicable (but no later than 1 year and 4 years after the effective date
         of the UIC program for Class I wells and Class IV wells, respectively) .17
      16 According  to  40  CFR  §146.6,  the  area  of  review for  an  injection well  can be
defined as either the zone of endangering influence or a fixed radius around  the
well.

      17 Specific UIC application requirements are contained in 40 §144.31 (e) .
                             * * * AUGUST 8,1988 DRAFT * * *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                   4-15
      "  Inventory and Other Information Requirements. Existing
         underground injection wells that are authorized by rule are
         required to submit inventory information to EPA or are approved
         State (40 CFR §144.26). This inventory must be submitted no
         later than 1 year after the approval or promulgation of a State
         UIC program, or to EPA no later than 60 days after the
         effective date of the UIC program Class IV wells only).  Owners
         and operators of class I wells do not need to submit inventory
         information to EPA if a permit application (as described above)
         is submitted within one year of the effective he program.
         Further, for EPA administered program only, other additional
         information may be submitted that is necessary to determine
         whether a well is endangering an underground source of drinking
         water(40 CFR §144.27).

         Consistent with the suggested CERCLA/UIC Office Coordination
         described in a section 4.2.2.3 below, RPMs should provide
         inventory information  (for both on-site and off-site injection
         wells) for input to the Federal Underground Reporting System
         (FURS).  The FURS is a computerized data base that tracks
         inventory information for the UIC Program.

      "  Reporting Requirements. The UIC program requires owners and
         operators of Class I wells to maintain records and report
         quarterly on the characteristics of injection fluids and,
         ground-water monitoring wells (if required) and various
         operating parameters  (e.g., injection pressure flow rate, etc.)
         (40 CFR §146.13(c)). In addition, Class I well authorized by
         rule are required to report orally with 24 hour any
         noncompliance that may endanger health or the environment (40
         CFR §144.28(b)).  There are no reporting requirements for Class
         IV wells under the UIC program.

      4.2.2.3 Coordination Between CERCLA Program and UIC Office

      Before developing or considering remedial options that involve the use of
underground injection wells, CERCLA RPMs should contact the appropriate State or EPA
Regional office responsible for administering the UIC program to ensure compliance
with substantive requirements  (on-site and off-site) and all administrative,
requirements (off-site). RPMs should also contact appropriate State or EPA, Regional
office personnel responsible for issuing permits under RCRA, to ensure that any UIC
well that requires a RCRA permit-by-rule is in compliance with RCRA corrective
action requirements.
                             * * * AUGUST 8,1988 DRAFT * * *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        4-16
      4.2.3 SOLE SOURCE AQUIFER  (SSA) PROGRAM

Designation of SSAs and Review of Federally Financed Projects

      The SDWA permits EPA to designate aquifers that are the sole or principal
drinking water source for an area and which, if contaminated, would present a
significant hazard to human health, as "sole source aquifers." Under the Sole Source
Aquifer program, Federal financial assistance may not be committed for any project
that may contaminate a sole source aquifer so as to create a significant public
health hazard. Federal financial assistant to design the project to avoid
contamination of the aquifer.18

      In general, projects that could be subject to review under the Sole Source
Aquifer  (SSA)  program include highway or building construction projects, either of
which could have potentially detrimental effects on public health and the
surrounding environment. As a general matter CERCLA activities would not in and of
themselves increase preexisting contamination of sole source aquifers. Therefore, it
is unlikely that CERCLA activities would be subject to restrictions on Federal
financial assistance. Nonetheless, a review of any potential problems associated
with sole source aquifers should be part of the RI/FS process.

Demonstration Program

      The 1986 amendments to the SDWA also established procedures for the
development, implementation, and assessment of demonstration programs designed to
protect critical aquifer protection areas in sole source aquifers. The primary
component of a SSA Demonstration Program is the development of a comprehensive
management plan to maintain the quality of ground water in critical protection
areas. The specific components of a protection plan must include several elements,
including designation of the specific actions and management practices to be
implemented to prevent adverse impacts on ground water quality. Any State, municipal
or local government, or political subdivision, or planning entity, that identifies a
critical aquifer protection area over which it has authority may apply to EPA for,
selection of such area for a demonstration program.
      18 Following SDWA §1424 (e), EPA  issued  guidance,  in  February  1987,  on  the  sole
source aquifer process entitled "sole Source Aquifer Designation Petitioner
Guidance." For purposes of the Edward Underground Aquifer, the sole source aquifer
in San Antonio, Federal financial assistance is defined in 40 CFR  §149.2 in part "as
any financial benefits provided directly as aid to a project by a  department,
agency, or instrumentality of the Federal government in any form including
contracts, grants, and loan guarantees."
                             * * * AUGUST 8,1988 DRAFT * * *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        4-17
4.2.4 WELLHEAD PROTECTION PROGRAM

      One provision in the SDWA amendments of 1986 directs States to develop and
implement programs to protect wells and recharge areas that supply public drinking
water systems from contaminants that flow into the well from the surface and
sub-surface. The Agency is responsible for publishing guidance to assist the States
in preparing their wellhead protection programs. The Office of Ground-Water
Protection issued this guidance in June, 1987.19 The  statute require's  States to
adopt and submit program plans within 3 years of enactment  of the SDWA amendments.
EPA is charged with reviewing these programs and ensuring that they comply with the
requirements outlined under SDWA, including identifying all potential  anthropogenic
sources of contaminants, outlining programs for protecting wells from  such
contaminants, and describing contingency plans for replacing wells affected by
contaminants. Finally, EPA is authorized to make grants to assist in the development
and implementation of the State programs.

      Because the Wellhead Protection program is designed to be run by the States,
the program will involve no Federal ARAR provisions. Nonetheless, State wellhead
protection programs may impose requirements with which a Federal agency must comply,
unless specifically exempted by the President.20 Thus, there may be ARARs under the
State wellhead protection programs with which CERCLA response actions  must comply.
For example, a State program may contain requirements for protecting a municipal
water source or replacing it if contaminated. RPMs should be alert to  State programs
an they develop over the next several years. It is suggested that RPMs coordinate
with Regional drinking water program personnel assigned to the Wellhead Protection
program. Regional personnel will be familiar with the progress of State programs,
and can assist in the beginning of a CERCLA response action to determine ARARs.
      19 See Guidance  For Application  For  State Wellhead  Protection  Program
Assistance Funds Under The Safe Drinking Water Act, EPA,  (June 1987).

      20 Section  1428(h) of SDWA requires  that Federal  agencies comply  with both
substantive and procedural State program requirements. However, according  to CERCLA
§121, on-site CERCLA actions need only comply with substantive program requirements.
                             * * * AUGUST 8,1988 DRAFT * * *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                      CHAPTER 5

                           GROUND-WATER PROTECTION POLICIES


5.0 OVERVIEW OF THE GROUND-WATER PROTECTION STRATEGY

      The Environmental Protection Agency  (EPA) is charged with the responsibility
to adopt and enforce policies and regulations  to protect the nation's ground water
under several different statutes, including CERCLA, the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act, the safe Drinking Water Act, the Clean Water Act, the Toxic Substances
Control Act, and the Federal Insecticide,  Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. In
response to the need to organize and coordinate the various programs that protect
ground water EPA issued its "Ground-Water  Protection Strategy" in  1984. Although the
Strategy is not a promulgated requirement  and  therefore would not  be a potential
ARAR for a Superfund site, it does list several policy statements  to be considered
when developing a protective remedy. The Strategy outlined a number of specific
activities, including:

           strengthening EPA's organization for ground-water
           management and cooperation between  Federal and State
           Agencies;

        "   issuing guidelines on classifying ground water for EPA
           decisions affecting ground-water protection and corrective
           action; and

        "   assessing the problems thee may exist from unaddressed
           sources of contamination.

   The need to strengthen EPA's ground-water management led to the creation of the
Office of Ground-Water Protection (OGWP).  In addition to coordinating the Agency's
Ground-Water Protection Strategy, OGWP is  also administering programs mandated under
SDWA that are geared specifically toward ground-water protection,  including the Sole
Source Aquifer (see section 4.2.3) and Wellhead Protection programs  (see section
4.2.4) .

5 . 1  OGWP GROUND-WATER CLASSIFICATION  GUIDELINE

   To help achieve consistency among programs  through appropriate  guidance,
ground-water classification guidelines, based  on the policy that different ground
waters merit different levels of protection, were developed under  the Strategy.
Again,  since the ground-water classification guidelines are not promulgated
regulations, they are not potential ARARs  for  a superfund site. Under the OGWP
Classification Guidelines,1 ground waters are classified in one of three
classification categories  (I, II, or III), based upon ecological importance,
replaceability, and vulnerability considerations. Irreplaceable
   1  In December 1986,  EPA published the "Guidelines for Ground-Water Classification
   under the EPA Ground-Water Protection Strategy"  (final draft).
                              * * * AUGUST 8,1988 DRAFT * * *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         5-2

ground water that is currently used by a substantial population or ground water that
supports an ecologically vital habitat is considered Class I. Class II ground water
consists of water that is currently being used or water that might be used as a
drinking water source in the future. Ground water that cannot be used for drinking
water due to insufficient quality  (e.g., high salinity or widespread naturally
occurring contamination)  or quantity is considered Class III.

5.2 SUPERFUND APPROACH TO GROUND-WATER RESTORATION

   The Ground-Water Protection Strategy and the draft Classification Guidelines
emphasize the protection of ground-water resources, while the CERCLA policies
outlined in the "Draft Guidance on Remedial Actions for Contaminated Ground Water at
Superfund Sites," focus on the restoration of contaminated ground waters. Under
Superfund,  ground waters are restored based in large part on their characteristics,
primarily:  vulnerability, use, and value. The goal of the Superfund program's
approach is to return ground waters to their beneficial uses, e.g., restore current
or potential sources of drinking water to drinking water quality. The restoration
should be accomplished within a time frame that is reasonable given the particular
circumstances at a site.  As necessary, current ground-water users may be provided
with an alternate source of drinking water or well-head treatment. In formulating a
ground-water cleanup approach, the following factors are analyzed.

        "   Determining the Characteristics of the Ground Water. Using
           the Ground-Water Protection Strategy and the EPA Guidelines
           for Ground-Water Classification as guides, a determination
           is made as to whether the contaminated ground water falls
           within Class I, II, or III. The classification methodology
           assists,  in the characterization of the ground-water's
           vulnerability, use, and, value.2  In applying the
           classification methodology to Superfund sites, additional
           judgment should be exercised. For example:
   2  Ground-water classifications performed at superfund sites are site-specific and
limited in scope to the Superfund remedial action that well be undertaken.
Classifications performed by EPA's Superfund program do not apply to that
geographical area in general nor to any other actions that may be undertaken under
any other State or Federal program, or private actions. The classification scheme
described above may be superseded by other classification scheme that may have been
promulgated by a State and are applicable or relevant and appropriate to the
superfund cleanup. This approach may also be modified by State ARARs that derive
from wellhead protection programs which may require protection of a municipal water
source, or replacement if that source is contaminated.
                             * * * AUGUST 8,1988 DRAFT * * *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         5-3
               The Superfund program may define a Classification Review Area that is
               larger or smaller than the 2-mile radius specified in the proposed
               guidelines based on a site-specific determination;

         —    The Superfund program may use methods other than the DRASTIC3 model
               for predicting aquifer vulnerability to contamination;

               In establishing the aquifer characteristics, the Superfund program
               would always consider factors other than yield in determining that an
               aquifer is unusable; and

               The Superfund program may initiate investigations of other sources
               when background levels of contamination exist rather than treating
               the aquifer as Class III.

      Additional modifications of the specific criteria established in the
      classification guidelines may be warranted when site specific investigations
      reveal factors that the guidelines do not address.

      N  Identifying ARARs and Establishing Cleanup Goals. MCLs are the probable
         relevant and appropriate Federal standards for aquifers with Class I and
         Class II characteristics, i.e., irreplaceable, current or potential
         drinking water sources.4  For aquifers  with Class  III  characteristics,  i.e.,
         which cannot be used for drinking water because of high salinity or
         widespread naturally occurring contamination, MCLs are neither applicable
         nor relevant and appropriate. Further, consistent with Superfund site
         compliance with RCRA ground-water protection standards, the use of
         background levels will generally not be adopted by the Superfund program in
         establishing remediation levels for
      3 National Well Water Association "DRASTIC: A Standardized System  for
Evaluating Ground Water Pollution Potential Using Hydrogeologic Settings",
EPA/600/2-85/018,  May 1985.

      4  EPA Class  I  ground waters include both those  serving substantial populations
and those that are ecologically vital. Where ground waters are Class I due to being
ecologically vital,  MCLs may not be stringent enough to protect the ecosystem. If
this is the case,  then site-specific standards should be developed to address
protection of the ecosystem.
                            *** AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT ***
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         5-4
         Class III aquifers (see discussion presented in Chapter 2,  section
         2.7.4.2). While cleanup of aquifers with Class III characteristics is not
         likely,  in some cases source control or other measures (such as
         point-of-use treatment)  may be undertaken in order to prevent further
         contamination or to mitigate risk from exposure.  Also, the need for
         environmental protection may determine the necessity and extent of
         ground-water remediation for such aquifers.

         Cleanup  levels should be selected based on an evaluation of the information
         developed during the risk assessment for the site.

         If MCLs  or more stringent State standards are not available or are not
         sufficiently protective, Federal and State environmental and public health
         criteria, advisories, guidance and proposed standards should be considered,
         along with MCLGs for special circumstances (discussed on p. 4-6).  The
         to-be-considered (TBC)  materials include: proposed MCLs,  health advisories,
         drinking water equivalent levels, or risk specific doses,  and State health
         advisories.

      N  Evaluation of Cleanup Alternatives. Alternatives  should be developed that
         meet the concentration goals,  and also on the basis of the effectiveness,
         implementability,  and cost of each alternative.

         Superfund's approach to ground-water cleanup calls for development of a
         limited  number of ground-water cleanup alternatives expressed in terms of a
         remediation level (i.e., cleanup concentration in the ground water), a time
         period for restoration to the preliminary remediation level for all
         locations in the area of attainment, and the technology or approach that
         will be  used to achieve those goals.

         In evaluating remedial technologies and other methodologies for
         ground-water cleanup, technical and cost factors  are of special importance.
         The technical practicability of each alternative  must be evaluated in light
         of the contaminant characteristics and hydrogeological conditions  which may
         not allow effective implementation of the alternative to clean up  the
         ground water.

         Complex  fate and transport mechanisms of contaminated ground waters often
         make it  difficult to accurately
                            *** AUGUST 8,  1988 DRAFT ***
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         5-5

         predict the performance of the ground-water remedial action. Therefore, the
         remedial process must be flexible and allow changes in the remedy based on
         the performance of several years of operation. If the chosen remedial
         action does not meet performance expectations after a period of operation,
         the Superfund program has to decide the extent to which further or
         different action is necessary and appropriate to protect human health and
         the environment.

      N  State Ground-Water Protection Programs. In addition to the EPA policy for
         ground-water classification and protection as outlined in the "Ground-Water
         Protection Strategy", many States have also begun adopting protection
         strategies and classification systems. In fact,  the Strategy recognizes
         that States have the principal role in ground-water protection. The May
         1985 OGWP document, "Selected State and Territory Ground-Water
         Classification Systems," outlines several State classification systems,
         some of which are more strict (i.e., more protective of certain
         ground-water resources) than the Federal system. For example, Wyoming has
         promulgated a regulation that recognizes seven classes of ground water.
         Consequently, a ground water that would be considered Class III under the
         EPA program might be placed under a more protected classification under the
         Wyoming program (e.g., "ground water suitable for industry"). If the State
         has promulgated a particular cleanup level associated with the class
         specifications that is more stringent than the Federal standards, then this
         cleanup level would be ARAR.

         In developing response options for Superfund sites that include
         contaminated ground water, the CERCLA RPM should contact the appropriate
         State or EPA Regional Ground-Water Office to ensure identification and
         compliance with State ARARs and consideration of State ground-water
         programs.

19.  Criminal and civil penalties can be assessed only by States. EPA may only
commence civil actions for violations of primary drinking water regulations.

20.  Obtaining a variance or exemption requires a finding that an unreasonable risk
to human health will not result. The Office of Drinking Water is developing guidance
to define "unreasonable risk to human health."
                            *** AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT ***
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         H-l
                  HYPOTHETICAL SCENARIO ILLUSTRATING HOW APPLICABLE
          OR RELEVANT AND APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS ARE IDENTIFIED AND USED
      The following hypothetical scenario illustrates the process of determining
whether particular requirements are applicable or relevant and appropriate the
actions to be taken at this hypothetical site. The purpose of this hypothetical
scenario is to provide an example of how certain site-specific conditions would be
analyzed, not to analyze fully all aspects of all ARARs for the site. Thus, only
some of the potential chemical-specific, location-specific, and action-specific
alternatives for the site are analyzed. The scenario has been designed to illustrate
ARARs from several different statutes, and currently provides examples of RCRA,
SDWA, and CWA requirements.

SITE CONDITIONS

      The Flintstone site is a 9-acre abandoned hazardous waste disposal area. The
site was used as a sand and gravel pit until the early 1970s. The pit was then used
for the indiscriminate illegal dumping of household refuse, chemical sludges,
construction debris, and hazardous liquids. Diagram 1 provides details of the site
surroundings.

      Disposal methods for the liquid material and sludges included:

      N  Discharge of the sludge-like material directly into pits at the
         site;

      N  Abandonment of over 2,000 drums of various types of chemical waste on the
         surface of the site;

      N  Dumping/burial of drummed materials in shallow trenches in the area;
         and

      N  Pouring of the contents of the drums directly onto the surface.

      Solid wastes  (refuse, tires, trash, empty drums, and construction debris)
cover approximately 6 acres of 9-acre-site to an average depth of 10 feet. The depth
of the fill materials ranges from 4 to 13 feet, in some areas extending below the
water table, and includes an estimated 19,000 cubic yards of contaminated material.
Areas of contaminated soil or "hot spots" outside of the waste pits resulted from
flooding and overtopping of the pits during heavy rainfall and seasonal fluctuations
in the ground-water level. One of the "hot spots" contains a number of discarded
drums. Approximately 4,000 cubic yards of contaminated materials similar to those
disposed of at the site were also dumped in a 1-acre wetlands area southwest of the
gravel pit. This unauthorized fill may be subject to enforcement under the Clean
Water Act, and mitigation could be required (under CWA §404 and related regulations
as

                            *** AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT ***
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                                 H-2
                                              Diagram 1

                              Flintstones's Site Surroundings
                                                                            LEGEND

                                                                            D PttvMe Welts

                                                                           — Proposed Expansion
CONTAMINATED
                                          GROUND-WATER
                                             now
                                       COMMUNITY
                                               TOM'S TRAILER
                                                  PARK
                                1.0 ACRE
                             CONTAMINATED
                               WETLAND
                                      PICNIC
                                       AREA
             • NOT TO SCALE
Word-searchable version — Not a true copy
                                           AUGUST  8, 1988 DRAFT

-------
                                         H-3

relevant and appropriate to the CERCLA action -- see p. 3-30) -1 Finally,  PCB-
contaminated oils were sprayed along Route 2 and the dirt access road leading to the
site.

      Ground water passing under the site flows southeast toward the Lamb
River. The contaminant plume leaves the site and spreads diffusely due to the
fractured bedrock underlying the site. Contamination of the  aquifer is increased by
pumping of wells in the local area, causing elevated levels  of contaminants to be
drawn into the aquifer. Ground-water flow in the aquifer is  50 ft/yr.
Contaminants entering the ground water from the main site will reach the
Lamb River after 10 to 12 years, with the contaminant plume  reaching a steady
state condition in approximately 16 years. The levels of observed on-site
soil contamination are sufficient to act as a source of continuing ground-water
contamination for several years if remedial actions are not  initiated. Ground water,
sampled at test wells 1,000 feet downgradient of the site, is contaminated with
methylene chloride, trichloroethylene (TCE),  benzene, cadmium, chromium, and lead.

      The area surrounding the Flintstone site is primarily  residential. The closest
residence are within 600 feet of the southern perimeter of the site. Drinking water
wells at several private residences located near the site are contaminated.
Residents of these homes are currently being supplied bottled water.

      IDENTIFICATION AND ANALYSIS OF CHEMICAL-SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS

      During the scoping of the RI/FS, chemical-specific requirements for the site
are initially identified.2  For chemicals,  this  is  done by comparing the chemicals
identified at the site with the list of chemical-specific ARARs in Exhibit 1-1 of
Chapter 1 of this manual. The following table summarizes the data on chemicals found
on the site:
      1  The 1-acre area represents the extent of the wetland as verified by Regional
dredge and fill program personnel. The areas outside of the waste pits which have
been subject to flooding and high ground-water tables have been determined not to be
wetlands.

      2  Identification of chemical-specific ARARs should be modified and revised as
necessary throughout the RI/FS. Note too that design changes or respecifications may
result in further refinement of all types of ARARs.
                            *** AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT ***
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         H-4

                     Summary of Data on Chemicals Found on  Site

         Waste                            Concentration     Media Affected

      Volatile Organic Solvents

       trichloroethylene  (TCE)            22ppb-43ppb       Ground  water

       methylene chloride                 60 ppm            Ground  water

       benzene                            200 ppb           Ground  water

      Metals

       cadmium, chromium, lead            >.05ppm           Ground  water

      In identifying potential ARARs for these chemicals, the  following procedure
would be used  (Note that this example works through the procedure for  only  one  of
the chemicals listed above.)

Identification of Chemical-specific ARARs

      First, consult Exhibit 1-1 in Chapter 1 to determine  if  a  chemical-specific
standard or standards have been established for the chemicals. The  chemical-specific
standards for one of the chemicals in this example, trichloroethylene, are  listed
below, as taken from Exhibit 1-1.

                  Chemical-Specific Standards  for Trichloroethvlene

      SDWA MCL                                  5.0 x  10-03  mg/1

      CWA Ambient Water Quality Criteria
          Aquatic Life (Freshwater Acute)        4.5 x  10+01  mg/1
          Aquatic Life (Freshwater Chronic)      2.1 x  10+01  mg/1
          Aquatic Life (Marine Acute)            2.0 mg/1
          Human Health (Water and Fish
              Ingestion)                         2.7 x  10~03  mg/1
          Human Health (Fish Ingestion
              only)                              8.1 x  lQ-°2  mg/1

Exhibit 1-1 also contains a Maximum Contaminant Level  Goal  (MCLG) of 0 mg/1,  which
should be considered in special circumstances, such an where multiple  contaminants
are found in the ground water or where multiple pathways  of exposure present
extraordinary risks (i.e., individual lifetime cancer  risk  above 10~4).
                            *** AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT  ***
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         H-5

Analysis of Chemical-specific ARARs

Determination of Applicability

      Second, following the procedures in Exhibit 1-5 of Chapter 1, determine if any
of the listed chemical-specific standards fully address the particular site-specific
conditions and is applicable. In this case, the individual wells in the local
community are not public sources of drinking water. Therefore, the SDWA standards
would not be applicable.

Determination of Relevance and Appropriateness

      Third, determine which of the standards, if any, address situations
sufficiently similar to the CERCLA site conditions that they should be treated as
probable relevant and appropriate requirements. As the Superfund program gains
further experience in identification of site-specific ARARs, the step by-step
analysis described here may be supplemented by policy decisions on the
relevance and appropriateness of some ARARs.  For example, EPA has determined as a
matter of policy that MCLs will be relevant and appropriate for ground water or
surface water that currently is or may in the future be used directly
for drinking. (In these cases, the MCLs should be met in the surface water or
ground water itself.) The following analysis of the MCL for trichloroethylene
is included to explain the logic of this policy in terms of ARARs.

      In this hypothetical situation, the ground-water flow is toward private wells.
Although the water under the site is not a current source of public drinking water,
and the wells do not belong to a public water system and thus do not meet the
jurisdictional prerequisites for the SDWA requirements, the water may be a potential
future source of drinking water. Because the contaminated ground water may be used
directly for drinking water in the future, the MCL for trichloroethylene should be
identified as a probable relevant and appropriate standard. Generally, use the
factors listed in Exhibit 1-7 to determine if the requirement is potentially
relevant at the site. If the requirement is relevant, focus on the purpose of the
requirement, the characteristics of the site and contamination, the character of the
release, the duration of the activity, and the basis for any waiver or exception to
determine if the requirement is appropriate.  With respect to the SDWA MCL for
trichloroethylene, for example, the following factors would be considered:

              SDWA Requirement            Problem at CERCLA Site

Objective:    Provide safe  drinking        Contamination of drinking water
              water                       source

Purpose:      Avert TCE  contamination     Avert TCE contamination

Media:        Ground water                 Ground water

Substance:    Trichloroethylene           Trichloroethylene
                            *** AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT ***
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         H-6

Parties:      Public  drinking water       Private drinking water wells
              system

Activity:     Provision of water          Cleanup of contamination

Variances:    None                         Not relevant

Place:        Drinking water tap          Aquifer

Facility:     Public  drinking water       Uncontrolled waste site
              source

Use of
Resource:     Human consumption           Human consumption/
                                          other uses not specified

      Based on this comparison, the CERCLA  situation appears to be sufficiently
similar to the problem addressed by the SDWA requirement that the SDWA MCL for
trichloroethylene would be considered relevant. Considering  (1) the purpose of the
requirement and the purpose of the CERCLA action  (both are directed toward
protection of current and potential drinking water), (2) the substance covered by
the requirement (trichloroethylene) and  (3)  the fact that EPA has decided that MCLs
are appropriate for future drinking water,  it can be judged that MCLs are both
relevant and appropriate.

      Water Quality Criteria  (WQC) more stringent than a SDWA MCL may be found
relevant and appropriate when there are environmental factors that are being
considered at a site, such as protection of aquatic organisms. In this hypothetical
situation, cleanup of the ground water under the waste pits will not be carried out
in order to protect aquatic wildlife in Flint Stream since the plume of contaminated
ground water will never reach the stream. Contaminated ground water is not currently
reaching the Lamb River, and is not expected to do so at a level that would
substantially harm aquatic life in the future. The WQCs for protection of aquatic
life therefore are not relevant and appropriate for the site. Water quality criteria
for protection of human health may be relevant and appropriate depending on the
likely route of exposure. However, if the potential for human exposure to
contaminants in the Lamb River existed, then WQC for protection of human health  (for
fish consumption)  should be considered, or  if the wetlands area were contaminated
with TCE, and the cleanup goal was to make  the water in the wetlands suitable for
aquatic life, it would be necessary to consider ambient water quality criteria and
State water quality standards. If such a State water quality standard were
established for protection of aquatic life,  the standard would be applicable.

ARARs and Risk Assessment

      Standards identified as potential ARARs, as well an TBCs, should be analyzed
according to the procedures outlined in the Superfund Public Health Evaluation
Manual.  Guidelines or criteria found in the to-be-considered
                            *** AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT ***
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         H-7

category should be used when ARARs do not exist for a particular chemical or when
the risk assessment indicates that existing ARARs are not sufficient to protect
human health or the environment.

      A similar analysis should be conducted for each of the other potentially ARAR
chemical-specific standards.

      IDENTIFICATION AND ANALYSIS OF LOCATION-SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS

      Identification and analysis of location-specific requirements should follow
the same general procedure as outlined above for chemical-specific requirements. The
locational characteristic of the site should be compared to the location-specific
requirements listed in Exhibit 1-2 in Chapter 1. In this case, a review of the
Flintstone site location reveals several characteristics that should be analyzed
further. They include:

      N   Flint Stream or Lamb River may be wild,  scenic,  or recreational rivers;

      N   Site may be within 100-year floodplain;  and

      N   Remedial actions may affect wetland.

      For purposes of this hypothetical example, it is assumed that neither the
stream nor the river has been designated a wild, scenic, or recreational river, and
that the site is not within a floodplain. Therefore, the requirements listed in
Exhibit 1-2 will not be ARARs based on those characteristics. For actions affecting
the 1.0 acre contaminated wetlands area, however,  Exhibit 1-2 lists CWA §404, 40 CFR
Part 230,  Army Corps of Engineers regulations (33 CFR Parts 320-330), and 40 CFR
Part 6, Appendix A, as potential ARARs. An assessment of the potential effects of
the remedial action on the wetland should be made during the RI/FS. Consultation
with the State and contacts with the §404 Wetlands Protection Office in the Region
should be made to determine if special steps are required to avoid adverse effects.
In this hypothetical situation, because dredged or fill material will not be
discharged into the wetland as part of the remedial action, CWA §404, 40 CFR Part
230, and Army Corps of Engineers regulations (33 CFR Parts 320-330) are not
applicable. However, 40  CFR Part 6, Appendix A, which is EPA's statement of
procedures on wetlands protection, requires,  to the extent possible, that remedial
activities avoid long- and short-term adverse impacts associated with the
destruction or modification of wetlands. When there are no practicable alternatives
to conducting such activities in wetlands, the potential harm should be minimized.

      IDENTIFICATION AND ANALYSIS OF ACTION-SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS

      Cleanup at the hypothetical Flintstone Site will probably involve a large
number of different remedial activities. It is assumed that several actions would be
considered, including:
                            *** AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT ***
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         H-8

      N   The consolidation of waste from the contaminated wetland area by picking
          it up and removing it to one of the waste pits on the main site;

      N   Extraction of contaminated ground water,  treating it, and discharging it
          to a publicly owned treatment works (POTW);

      N   Extraction of contaminated ground water,  treating it, and discharging it
          directly to Flint Stream;  and

      N   Extraction of contaminated ground water,  treating it, and injecting it
          back into the aquifer.

      Not all of these potential actions at the site are analyzed in this
hypothetical scenario. The procedure used, however, would be followed for each of
the potential actions.

Identification of Action-specific ARARs

      First, the potential action-specific ARARs for each of the actions under
consideration would be identified by consulting Exhibit 1-3 in Chapter 1, which
lists action-specific requirements under RCRA (including the Hazardous and Solid
Waste Amendments of 1984) and the CWA. In this hypothetical situation, for example,
Exhibit 1-3 indicates that the potential requirements involved in consolidation will
differ depending on whether the consolidation occurs within units or between units.
Among the requirements are land disposal restrictions, closure requirements, and
post-closure care requirements.

Analysis of Action-specific ARARs

      Exhibit 1-3 also lists the prerequisites for applicability of the requirements
associated with each of the actions listed. After potential ARARs have been
identified, the next stop is to determine whether the prerequisites for RCRA
applicability are satisfied by the site-specific conditions for the actions under
consideration. In this case, Exhibit 1-3 indicates that the prerequisites for
applicability of the consolidation requirements are placement of hazardous wastes
into another unit. In analyzing these prerequisites, therefore, first determine
whether RCRA hazardous wastes or constituents are involved in the action.
Trichloroethylene is listed RCRA waste #U228 and cadmium, chromium, and lead are
hazardous waste constituents. However, it should not be assumed that these materials
are RCRA hazardous wastes. Testing or attempts to identify the origin of the
constituents should be undertaken, when necessary,  to determine whether the first
prerequisite, that the wastes are RCRA hazardous wastes, is satisfied. Second,
analyze the prerequisite concerning placement of the wastes. In this situation,
movement of contaminated materials from the wetland area across the boundary of the
1.0 acre unit and placement of the waste in the second unit would satisfy the
prerequisite, because the site consists of two separate areas of contamination, and
the materials are being
                            *** AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT ***
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         H-9

removed from the first and placed in the second.

      Because the prerequisites associated with consolidation are satisfied,
next it is necessary to consider the requirements listed under Exhibit 1-3 for
land-disposal requirements and restrictions,  for closure requirements, and for
post-closure care and monitoring, since they are triggered if consolidation
between two units occurs. If the wastes are being consolidated in a new
landfill,  the entry in Exhibit 1-3 for construction of a new landfill on site
should next be consulted to determine the requirements for that action. If,
on the other hand,  the wastes are being consolidated in an existing landfill
(which would not be the case in this hypothetical scenario) the entry in
Exhibit 1-3 for closure with waste in place may be relevant and appropriate.
In either situation, additional prerequisites are listed in Exhibit 1-3 and
regulatory citations are provided so that additional details about the requirements
may be obtained if necessary. The identification of which requirements would be
ARARs would depend, in part, on the further actions to be taken and the wastes
involved.  If, for example, the wastes are subject to the land disposal bans under
RCRA, then treatment to Best Demonstrated Available Technology (BDAT)  levels would
be required before the wastes could be land disposed.

      Action-specific requirements for other potential actions at the site would be
analyzed in the same way as the consolidation action described above.  For example,
direct discharge to Flint Stream or indirect discharge to a POTW are actions that
Exhibit 1-3 indicates are subject to discharge requirements established pursuant to
the Clean Water Act. Specifically, the direct discharge of treated ground water to
Flint Stream is subject to National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System  (NPDES)
Program discharge standards and requirements. According to the draft NCP, "on-site"
is defined for permitting purposes to include the "areal extent of contamination and
all suitable areas in very close proximity to the contamination necessary for
implementation of the response action." For this hypothetical example, the area of
contamination resulting from the abandoned hazardous waste area is directly adjacent
to Flint Stream. Therefore the extraction and treatment of contaminated ground
water, and subsequent discharge to Flint Stream is considered an on-site  action due
to the proximity of the site to Flint Stream. As such, the discharge need not have a
NPDES permit, but must meet substantive ARARs. As discussed in Chapter 3, these
substantive requirements for the Flintstone site include discharge limits. These
limits would be based on the more stringent standards between the following:

      N   Technology-based standards.  Because the Flintstone site was  used for
          indiscriminate illegal dumping,  and not for the sole use of  an industrial
          generator of hazardous waste,  there are no applicable EPA guidelines.
          Therefore,  technology-based standards have to be set using best
          professional judgment.  The proposed response alternative for the
          Flintstone site must be reviewed to ensure the use of treatment
          technologies that have been proven  effective to treat the pollutants
          present in the contaminated ground  water.  Numerical effluent limits or
          treatment efficiency requirements can be
                            *** AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT ***
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        H-10

          developed.

      N   Water-quality criteria/State standards.  The identification of which water
          quality criteria/State standards would be applicable or relevant and
          appropriate depends primarily on the designated use of Flint Stream. If,
          for example,  the State designation of Flint Stream required protection and
          propagation of fish and aquatic life, EPA water quality criteria for the
          protection  of aquatic life (or applicable or relevant and appropriate
          State water quality standards, if available)  would need to be met for each
          pollutant of concern prior to discharge.

      Other substantive NPDES requirements such as effluent toxicity monitoring or
best management practices would also have to be evaluated based on the Flintstone
conditions. The appropriate EPA/State Water Program Office should be consulted
regarding all substantive NPDES requirements that may be applicable or relevant and
appropriate for the Flintstone site.

      Prior to the determination to discharge treated ground water from the
Flintstone site to a POTW, it first must be determined if the POTW is in compliance
with applicable Federal laws  (i.e., the POTWs NPDES permit and pretreatment program
requirements). Therefore, the Flintstone site manager needs to evaluate the POTWs
record of compliance. To do this, the Flintstone site manager would need to contact
the POTW oversight authority  (i.e., appropriate EPA Region or delegated State Water
Office) to collect data pertaining to the POTWs compliance status. If the POTW is
out of compliance with applicable laws, then according to CERCLA §121(d)(3), the
discharge to the POTW should be prohibited.

      A determination of the POTW s ability to accept the treated ground water
should also be made during the remedial alternatives analysis under the RI/FS
process. Factors that should be considered for this determination are discussed in
Section 3.3.2. and include, for example, evaluating waste compatibility with the
POTW. The Flintstone site manager should coordinate with the appropriate Water
Division officials and their State counterparts and POTW representatives in
evaluating the potential use of the POTW for the discharge of Flintstone site
wastewater.

      If the remedial alternative under consideration involves discharge to a POTW,
the pollutants to be discharged must be identified carefully. Certain pollutants  are
specifically precluded from discharge into a POTW  (those that will create a fire  or
an explosion hazard in the POTW, for example). Other discharges must specifically
comply with local POTW pretreatment programs. These local pretreatment programs
typically have specific requirements regarding discharge to their POTW. For example,
any local limits for the pollutants of concern at the Flintstone site would have  to
be complied with prior to discharge to the POTW. Any other specific discharge
requirements of a POTW  (e.g., prohibitions such as temperature, color, etc.) are
considered applicable and must be complied with.
                            *** AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT ***
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        H-ll

      Other substantive requirements for discharge to POTWs include RCRA
permit-by-rule requirements, which must be complied with for discharges of RCRA
wastes to POTWs by truck, rail, or dedicated pipe. If the treated ground water is
transported by a dedicated pipe from the site directly to the POTW, the POTW would
be subject to the RCRA permit-by-rule provisions, and will have to also be in
compliance with RCRA requirements in NPDES permits. The Flintstone site would also
need to meet applicable RCRA requirements, including manifesting requirements, etc.
Specific Clean Water Act ARARs are discussed in greater detail in Chapter 3.

      For the underground injection of treated ground water, Underground Injection
Control  (UIC)  program requirements established under the Safe Drinking Water Act are
potential ARARs (see 40 CFR Part 144).  The identification of which specific
requirements would apply depends on the type of injection well constructed at the
site. Class I, Class IV and Class V wells are the three classes most likely to be
associated with CERCLA actions. For the Flintstone site, contaminated ground water
is to be extracted, treated, and reinjected back into the ground. The proposed well
bore is located within one-quarter mile of an underground drinking water source.
Therefore, the well is classified as a Class IV well. Such wells may be used for
cleanup at CERCLA sites  (40 CFR §144.13(c)). Further, the proposed well bore will be
located within the Flintstone site. Therefore, this is considered an on-site
discharge. No UIC permit is required, but substantive UIC program requirements must
be met.

      Substantive requirements for Class IV injection wells include:

      N   The  general requirement that  no owner or operator may construct,  operate,
          or maintain an injection well in a manner that results in the
          contamination of an underground source of drinking water;

      N   Applicable RCRA provisions; and

      N   Construction,  operating,  and  closure requirements.

A more detailed discussion of these requirements is provided in Section 4.1.2.
                            *** AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT ***
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         A-l

                                      APPENDIX

              OVERVIEW OF MAJOR ENVIRONMENTAL STATUTES AND REGULATIONS


1.     OVERVIEW OF RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT

      1.1 OFFICE OF SOLID WASTE

      This section describes the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act  (RCRA) of
1976, the additions to the Act made in the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments
(HSWA) of 1984, and accompanying regulations finalized or proposed by October  1,
1987. As the major federal statute creating standards for the treatment, storage,
and disposal of hazardous waste. RCRA is the most important source of applicable or
relevant and appropriate standards for actions taken pursuant to CERCLA  §§104  and
106.  The first part of this section provides an overview of the statutes, noting
their purpose and structure; the second provides a summary of the important
regulatory requirements under RCRA and HSWA.

      1.2 OVERVIEW OF RCRA

      RCRA was enacted in 1976 to regulate the management of hazardous waste,  to
ensure the safe disposal of wastes, and to provide for resource recovery from  the
environment by controlling hazardous wastes "from cradle to grave." The  statute
attempts to address all aspects of hazardous waste management by establishing
essentially a three-step process:  (1) identification and listing of wastes to  be
regulated as hazards;  (2) tracking of wastes from the point of generation, through
transportation, to the site of final treatment, storage, or disposal; and  (3)
controlling the management practice used during the treatment, storage,  and ultimate
disposition of these wastes through technical standards, performance standards, and
permitting requirements.

      Although certain statutory and regulatory requirements under RCRA  apply
specifically to generators and transporters, the majority of substantive RCRA
requirements affect the management of hazardous waste treatment, storage, and
disposal facilities.

      RCRA operating standards for treatment, storage, and disposal facilities will
be the primary area of interaction between RCRA requirements and CERCLA  responses.
The authority for these requirements is found in RCRA Subtitle C, §3004, Standards
Applicable to Owners and Operators of Hazardous Waste Treatment, Storage, and
Disposal Facilities. Subtitle C also addresses the other aspects of the  three-step
process mentioned above, including identification and listing of hazardous waste
(§3001);  standards applicable to generators and transporters of hazardous waste
(§§3002 and 3003); and standards applicable to owners or operators of facilities for
treatment,
                            *** AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT ***
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         A-2

storage, and disposal of hazardous waste  (§3305).

      RCRA Subtitle D provides criteria for the disposal of nonhazardous wastes in
open dumps and sanitary landfills. These may be applicable or relevant and
appropriate for CERCLA actions in a limited number of situations. RCRA §4004(a)
requires EPA to issue regulations establishing criteria for determining whether a
facility should be classified as a sanitary landfill or as an open dump. It also
allows states to develop solid waste management planning programs that set forth a
plan for closing open dumps. §4005(a)  prohibits open dumping of hazardous or solid
waste.

      The enactment in November, 1984 of the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of
1984 (HSWA) added significant new provisions to §3004. Among them are new
requirements that:

      N   Prohibit land disposal of  certain  wastes,  including some liquid
          hazardous wastes and dioxins (this prohibition does not apply
          legally to disposal from a CERCLA  response action for a four-year period
          after enactment of the amendment;  however,  it could be determined to be
          relevant and appropriate before the date of its legal applicability);1

      N   Require a review of each RCRA hazardous waste to determine whether
          land disposal of the waste should  be prohibited.2 The  ban  would not
          apply if an EPA-developed  treatment standard for a  waste had been
          met;

      N   Require (1)  the installation of a  double liner and  a leachate
          collection system and (2)  ground-water monitoring for landfills and
          surface impoundments,  and  the use  of leak detection systems for
          certain types of hazardous waste management units;3

      N   Require corrective action  for all  releases from a solid waste
          management unit at permitted hazardous waste treatment,  storage,  or
          disposal facilities.  (Although this requirement applies only to
      1  Initial  land ban regulations were issued in 1986 and are found in 40 CFR
Part 268. A correction to those regulations was issued in June, 1987  (52 FR 21010)
and additional regulations for "California List" wastes were issued in July, 1987
(52 FR 25760) .

      2  The schedule of hazardous  wastes to be reviewed by EPA is  set out in 40 CFR
Part 268.

      3  A Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)  was  issued on May 29,  1987 discussing
possible regulations for leak detection requirements. Rules covering the installation
of liners and leachate collection systems have also been issued and are  found in
Subparts I - N of Part 264.
                            *** AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT ***
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         A-3

          permitted facilities,  standards for corrective action developed under RCRA
          may be applicable or relevant and appropriate to similar CERCLA actions.)4
          In addition,  corrective action requirements as necessary or appropriate
          are authorized under §3004(u); and

      N   Authorize administrative orders requiring corrective action or other
          response measure for releases of hazardous waste from interim status
          facilities.

      1.3 RCRA REGULATIONS PERTAINING TO HAZARDOUS WASTE

      The RCRA program is largely defined by regulations, which, along with guidance
and decisions made in the permitting process, are the source of a great majority of
the RCRA program's specific requirements. RCRA requirements that may be applicable
or relevant and appropriate to CERCLA response actions are found primarily in the
RCRA regulations  (40 CFR Parts 260-271).

      The RCRA regulations that are of primary importance for CERCLA responses
are the Standards for Owners and Operators of Hazardous Waste Treatment, provided in
RCRA §3004. The RCRA regulations differ depending on whether a hazardous waste
facility has a RCRA permit (40 CFR Part 264)  or is operating under interim status
(40 CFR Part 265).  CERCLA remedies will generally be consistent with the more
stringent Part 264 standards,  even though a permitted facility is not involved.
Therefore, only the Part 264 standards are described here.

      Nine of the subparts in 40 CFR Part 264 are potentially applicable or relevant
and appropriate to CERCLA. Seven of these subparts establish process-specific
standards for particular types of hazardous waste management units:

      N   Containers (Subpart  I)
      N   Tanks (Subpart J);
      N   Surface impoundments (Subpart K) ;
      N   Waste piles  (Subpart L);
      N   Land treatment (Subpart M);
      N   Landfills (Subpart  N) ;  and
      N   Incinerators  (Subpart O).

The other subparts that are potentially applicable or relevant and appropriate are
ground-water protection (Subpart F)  and closure and post-closure  (Subpart G). These
nine subparts are briefly described below.
      4  Procedures  for corrective action are found throughout subparts of the
RCRA regulations. A proposed rule covering administrative procedures  for corrective
action hearings was issued on August 6, 1987  (52 FR 29222).
                            *** AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT ***
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         A-4

      Subpart F — Ground-Water Protection  (40 CFR §§264,90-264,101)

      Subpart F creates broad ground-water protection requirements under RCRA. These
requirements include both concentration standards and monitoring requirements and
corrective action requirements for regulated units.

      The EPA Regional Administrator is required by 40 CFR §264.92 and §264.94 to
set ground-water protection standards and concentration limits for Appendix VIII and
Appendix IX5  hazardous constituents once they are detected in the ground water at a
hazardous waste land disposal facility. According to 264.94(a), the concentration
limits will be based on:  (1) the background level of each constituent in the ground
water at the time the limit is specified in the permit;  (2) maximum concentration
limits  (MCLs) for 14 specified hazardous constituents if background levels are below
these standards; or  (3) an "alternate concentration limit'  (ACL) that can be set by
the Regional Administrator if he determines that a less stringent standard will
protect public health and the environment. The factors that should be used to grant
an ACL are outlined in 40 CFR §264.94(b).6

      Subpart F also establishes a three-phase ground-water monitoring program for
permitted land disposal facilities. 40 CFR 1264.98 outlines the requirements of a
"detection monitoring program," to detect the existence of designated hazardous
constituents in the ground waters. The detection monitoring program' is a
semi-annual monitoring protocol. If hazardous constituents are detected, the
ground-water protection strategy  (GWPS) must be established.7

      40 CFR §264.99 outlines the compliance monitoring program that must be
established whenever hazardous constituents are detected. During this phase, the
owner or operator must conduct compliance monitoring to determine if the levels of
constituents exceed the ground-water protection standards  (background levels, MCLs,
or ACLs) specified in the permit. If GWPS limits are exceeded, the owner or operator
must institute a corrective action program to bring the facility back into
compliance (40 CFR §264.100).  In conjunction with the corrective action program, the
owner or operator must also establish effectiveness of the corrective action
program. The owner or operator must continue the compliance monitoring program until
the GWPS is achieved for
      5  Rules adding Appendix IX list were finalized on September 9,  1987 (52 FR
25842).

      6  The factors used to grant an ACL are presented in Chapter 2.

      7  A proposed rule issued August 24,  1987 (52 FR 31948)  would establish new
standards for determining when hazardous wastes are "detected" in ground water, and
thus when corrective action and compliance monitoring provisions would be triggered.
This rule would change the definition of "detection", for example, to be
"statistically significant evidence of contamination."
                            *** AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT ***
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         A-5


three consecutive years before returning to the detection monitoring program.

      Subpart G — Closure and Post Closure (40 CFR §§264.110-264.120)

      Subpart G creates technical and procedural standards for closure and
post-closure care of hazardous waste management facilities.

      40 CFR §264.111 requires that the owner or operator close the facility in a
manner that "minimizes the need for further maintenance" and "controls, minimizes,
or eliminates ...  post-closure escape of hazardous waste, leachate, contaminated
rainfall, or waste decomposition products" to the environment."8

      Process-specific closure requirements for surface impoundments  (40 CFR
§264.228) specify that if some wastes or contaminated materials are left in place at
final closure, the facility must be closed in accordance with the post-closure
requirements contained in 40 CFR §§264.117-.120.  Process-specific closure
requirements for landfills  (40 CFR §264.310)  specify that the owner or operator must
cover the landfill with a specially designed and constructed final cover. After
final closure, the owner or operator must comply with the post-closure requirements
contained in 40 CFR §§264.117-264.120. Finally, process-specific closure
requirements for waste piles (40 CFR §264.258)  specify that if, after removing or
decontaminating all residues and making all reasonable efforts to effect removal or
decontamination of contaminated components, subsoils, structures, and equipment, the
owner or operator finds that not all contaminated subsoils can be practicably
removed or decontaminated, he must close the facility and perform post-closure care
in accordance with the closure and post-closure care requirements for landfills.9

      40 CFR §264.12 requires the owner or operator to prepare a written plan as
part of the permit conditions that describes how and when the facility will be
closed and partially closed, describes procedures for decontamination activities,
and includes a schedule for conducting closure. In addition,  the owner or operator
must notify the Regional Administrator at least 180 days prior to the date he
intends to begin closure activities.  The closure plans must be reviewed by the
Regional Administrator and are subject to the public participation provision in 40
CFR Part 124 as part of the permit review
         8 The notice of proposed rulemaking issued on May 29,  1987 would add
   requirements for leak detection systems in most disposal facilities.

         9A rule issued on March 19,  1987 allows interim status facility owners
   or operators to remove all contaminants from treatment, storage or disposal
   facilities and avoid post-closure requirements. The rule provides interim
   status facilities the same opportunity that already exists for permitted
   facilities.

                        *  *  *  AUGUST  8, 1988  DRAFT  *  * *

Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         A-6
process .lu

      40 CFR §264.117  states  that  monitoring,  maintenance, and reporting
requirements established  for  surface impoundments,  waste piles, land treatment
facilities, and landfills must  continue for 30 years following closure. The Regional
Administrator may extend  or reduce the length of the period based on cause. 40 CFR
§264.118 requires the  preparation  of a written post-closure plan describing planned
monitoring and maintenance activities.11

      Subpart I — Use and Management of Containers (40 CFR §§264.170-264.178)

      Requirements for facilities  that store containers of hazardous wastes are
provided in 40 CFR Part 264 Subpart I.  The major requirements are that the owner or
operator must:  (1) maintain containers in good condition;  (2) inspect container
storage areas at least weekly;  (3)  provide a sloped, crack-free base for all  areas
storing containers that contain free liquids;  (4)  refrain from placing incompatible
wastes in the same container, and  place walls or dikes between containers holding
wastes incompatible with  other  nearby materials; (5) remove all wastes and residues
from containment systems  upon closure;  and (6)  locate only containers holding
ignitable or reactive  waste at  least fifty feet from the property line.

      Subpart J — Tanks  (40  CFR §§264.190-264.200)

      40 CFR Part 264  Subpart J outlines design and management standards for  tanks
containing hazardous wastes.

      On July 14, 1986, EPA promulgated regulations amending the Subpart J
requirements.12  The regulations  address tank design, installation, and operating
standards and can be summarized as follows:

      "    The owner  or operator must obtain a written  assessment  the structural
           integrity  and acceptability  of  existing  tanks  systems  and designs  for  now
           tank systems,  reviewed by an  independent, qualified,  registered
           professional engineer.

           All new tank systems would be required to be enclosed  in  a full secondary
           containment system that would encompass  the  body of  the
    10
      A recent proposed rule  (52 FR 35838)  establishes procedures under which owners
and operators may amend their  written closure  and post-closure plans.


      Post-closure procedure requirements for certain  facilities that  received
wastesbetween 7/26/82 and 1/26/83 were issued (51  FR 16421) on May 2,  1986).  The
NPRM of  May 29, 1987 would amend  these requirements to make them consistent with the
double-liner and leak detection systems.

         12 51 FR_  25470, July 14, 1986.

                         *  * *  AUGUST  8,  1988  DRAFT  *  * *

Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        A-7
           tank  and  all  ancillary  equipment  and be  able  to  prevent  any migration  of
           wastes  into the  soil. This  secondary containment system  would  be  required
           to be equipped with  a leak  detection system capable  of detecting  releases
           within  24  hours  of release.

      "    Facilities with  existing  tank  systems will be required to  install
           secondary  containment systems  within specified times based on  age  and
           waste type.

           Owners  or  operators  may seek from the Regional Administrator both
           technology-based and risk-based variances from secondary containment
           requirements, based  on  either:  (1)  a demonstration of no migration of
           hazardous  waste  constituents beyond the  zone  of  engineering control; or
           (2) a demonstration  of  no substantial present or potential hazard  to
           human health  and the environment.

           Annual  leak tests must  be conducted on non-enterable underground  tanks
           until such time  as an adequate secondary containment system could  be
           installed. Either an annual leak  test or other type  of adequate
           inspection must  also be conducted on enterable types of  tanks  which do
           not have  secondary containment.

           Inspection requirements have been upgraded to include regular  inspection
           of cathodic protection  systems and daily inspection  of entire  tank
           systems for leaks, cracks,  corrosion, and erosion that may lead to
           releases.

           The owner  or  operator must  remove a tank from which  there  has  been a
           leak, spill or which is judged unfit to  use.  He  then must  determine the
           cause of  the  problem, remove all  waste from the  tank, contain  visible
           releases,  notify appropriate parties as  required by  other  laws (i.e.
           CERCLA  Reportable Quantity  requirements), and certify the  integrity of
           the tank before  further use.

           Closure requirements include removing waste,  residues and  contaminated
           liners, disposing of them as hazardous waste,  and conforming with
           Subparts  G and H (including post-closure of tank if  necessary).

           The owner  or  operator must  also comply with general  operating
           requirements  and with special  requirements for ignitable,  reactive or
           incompatible  wastes.

      EPA recently proposed a comprehensive rule  (52  FR 12662,  April  17,  1987) to
regulate all underground storage  tanks (USTs). It proposes  standards  for "design,
construction,  installation, release  detection and compatibility" and applies them
specifically to tanks storing either petroleum products or  hazardous  substances
other than those regulated under  Subtitle C of RCRA.  These  may, however,  be relevant
and appropriate to Subtitle C hazardous
                        * *  *  AUGUST  8,  1988  DRAFT *  * *

Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         A-E
wastes.

      Subpart K — Surface Impoundments (40 CFR §§264.220-264.249)

      40 CFR Part 264 Subpart K establishes design and operating requirements for
surface impoundments. The standards require that each new surface impoundment, each
new surface impoundment at an existing facility, each replacement of an existing
surface impoundment unit, and each lateral expansion of an existing surface
impoundment unit must satisfy certain minimum technological requirements, including
two or more liners and a leachate collection system between the liners.  An
alternative liner design may be approved if the Regional Administrator finds that
operating practices and locational characteristics together prevent the migration of
hazardous constituents into the ground water or surface water at least as
effectively as the liners and leachate collection systems. Owners or operators must
comply with ground-water monitoring requirements under 40 CFR Part 264 Subpart F,
including corrective action,  if needed. Impoundments must be removed from service if
the liquid level suddenly drops or the dike leaks.

      RCRA §3005(j), as amended, requires the owner or operator of any surface
impoundment that was in existence and operating under interim status on November 8,
1984,  to install two or more liners,  a leachate collection system between the
liners,  and ground-water monitoring by November 8, 1988,  (unless the impoundment
qualifies for one of four exemptions set out in §3005(j)) or to cease placement,
storage, or treatment of hazardous waste in the surface impoundment.

      RCRA also required EPA to issue standards mandating that new surface
impoundment facilities use an approved leak detection system. EPA issued a notice of
proposed rulemaking  (NPRM) on May 29, 1987 that would allow a modified version of a
leachate collection and removal system (LCRS) between double liners as an adequate
leak detector. The NPRM also proposed changes in regulations for replacements and
lateral extensions of existing surface impoundment facilities, response activities
by owners and operators of facilities, and quality assurance requirements.

      At closure,  an impoundment operated under Part 264 may be closed by removing
and decontaminating all hazardous wastes,  residues, liners and subsoils. If all
hazardous wastes cannot be removed or decontaminated, then the facility must be
capped and post-closure care provided. An owner or operator of an impoundment may
also choose to close the impoundment as a disposal facility — solidify all
remaining wastes,  cap the facility, and comply with Part 264 post-closure
requirements.

      Subpart L — Waste Piles  (40 CFR §§264.250-264.269)

      Subpart L requires that an owner or operator of a waste pile facility:  (1)
install a liner under each pile that prevents any migration of waste out of the pile
into the adjacent subsurface soil or ground or surface water at
                        * *  *  AUGUST  8,  1988  DRAFT  *  * *

Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                         A-9
any time during the active  life;  (2)  provide a leachate collection and removal
system;  (3) provide a run-on  control  system and a run-off management system;  (4)
comply with the Subpart  F requirements;  (5)  inspect liners during construction and
inspect the wastes at least weekly  thereafter;  and (6)  close  the facility by
removing or decontaminating all wastes,  residues,  and contaminated subsoils  (or
comply with the closure  and post-closure requirements applicable to landfills if
removal or decontamination  of all contaminated subsoils proves impossible).  Existing
piles are exempt from the liner and leachate collection system requirements but may
be affected by the regulations proposed  in the NPRM (May 29, 1987) 13.

      Subpart M — Land  Treatment  (40 CFR §§264.270-264.299)

      Subpart M requires that owners  or  operators of facilities that dispose of
hazardous waste by land  application:  (1)  establish a treatment program that
demonstrates to the Regional  Administrator's satisfaction that all hazardous
constituents placed in the  treatment  zone will be degraded,  transformed,  or
immobilized within that  zone;  (2) conduct a monitoring program to detect
contaminants moving in the  unsaturated zone (the subsurface above the water table);
and (3) continue all operations during closure and post-closure to maximize the
degradation, transformation,  or immobilization of hazardous constituents.14
      Subpart N — Landfills  (40  CFR §§264.300-264.339)

      Subpart N requires  owners or  operators  of new landfills,  new landfills at an
existing facility, replacements of  existing landfill units,  and lateral expansions
of existing landfill units  to  satisfy the  minimum technological requirements for two
or more liners and a leachate  collection system above and between the liners. In
addition, the landfill must have  run-on/run-off control  systems and control wind
dispersal of particulates as necessary;  comply with the  Subpart F ground-water
protection requirements,  close each cell of the landfill with a final cover, and
institute specified post-closure  monitoring and maintenance programs. In addition,
40 CFR §264.314 and §265.314 ban  the landfill disposal of bulk or non-containerized
liquid hazardous waste. After  November 8,  1985,  non-hazardous liquids also are
generally banned  (for more  information,  see section "Hazardous Solid Waste
Amendments - Land Ban") .15
      13 A NPRM (May 29,  1987, 52 FR 20218) would require double liners and a
leachate collection and removal system for the unused portions of existing piles and
for any lateral extensions  of waste piles and leak detection.

         The NPRM would require  owners and operators to establish  a written response
plan to handle any leaks detected at the  facility.

         The NPRM would require  leak detection  systems and the development of a
written response plan to any leaks that were detected.

                        * *  * AUGUST   8,  1988 DRAFT *  *  *

Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        A-10
      Subpart O — Incinerators (40 CFR §§264.340-264.999)

      Subpart O of Part 264 specifies design and operating requirements for any
incinerator burning hazardous wastes. For incinerators that only burn wastes listed
as hazardous solely by virtue of their ignitability, corrosivity, or reactivity, or
some combination thereof, only the closure requirements and waste analyzes required
prior to incineration are applicable. 40 CFR §264.343 specifies that all
incinerators must be constructed and maintained so as to detoxify (by destruction or
physical removal in air pollution control systems) at east 99.99 percent  (or 99.9999
percent for dioxin wastes) of each "principal organic hazardous constituent" in the
input steam, and so as not to emit more than 180 milligrams of particulate matter
per cubic meter of stack gas. HCL emissions are limited to 1.8 kg/hr or 1 percent of
the HCL in stack gas before controls. 40 CFR §264.347 outlines the parameters the
owner/operator must monitor during incinerator operation; 40 CFR §264.351 requires
that all wastes, residues, ash, and effluents be removed from the incinerator site
at closure and treated as hazardous wastes, if applicable.

      Ha.za.irdo'us Solid Waste Amendments — Lcind Ba.n

      On July 15, 1985, EPA codified into the existing RCRA Subtitle C regulations a
set of provisions from the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 (See 50 FR
28742)(the "Codification Rule"). Although the provisions of the Codification Rule
have been integrated into the previously discussed RCRA regulations, they are
addressed separately here to highlight the new requiremients that the statute
imposed. Those provisions likely to have a significant impact an the RCRA regulatory
requirements that may be applicable or relevant and appropriate to CERCLA responses
are discussed below.
      Ban of Liquids in Landfills.  HSWA imposed a ban on the placement of bulk or
non-containerized liquid hazardous waste or hazardous waste containing free liquids
(whether or not absorbents have been added) in any landfill after May 8, 1985,
unless it can be demonstrated that:

      (1)  The only reasonably available alternative  for these non-hazardous
           liquids is a landfill or unlined surface impoundment which already
           contains, or any reasonably be  anticipated to contain, hazardous waste;
           and

      (2)  The disposal of the non-hazardous liquids  in the landfill will not
           present a risk of contamination to any underground source of drinking
           water.

      Other Land Ban Rules.  EPA issued a rule in May,  1986 (effective June 28, 1986)
and an amended rule in November,  1986 that is now codified in 40 CFR Part 268. The
rule sets forth the first list of banned wastes that  have not undergone the Best
Demonstrated Available Technology  (BDAT)  and the schedule for EPA's review of other
wastes that may be affected by the land ban.  A
                        * *  *  AUGUST  8,  1988  DRAFT  *  * *

Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        A-11
correction to Part 268 was finalized in June,  1987  (52  FR  21010),  and a  rule
finalizing the restrictions on "California List" wastes  (liquid  hazardous  wastes
containing PCBs)  and hazardous wastes containing HOCs was  issued on  July 7,  1987.

      Delisting Procedures. Prior to HSWA, delisting petitioners were required under
40 CFR §260.22(a) to demonstrate to the satisfaction of  the Administator at  that the
waste in question did not meet any of the criteria  under which it was originally
listed. Section 260.22 provided that a waste  so excluded could still qualify as a
hazardous waste if it failed any of the RCRA  Subpart C  characteristics
(ignitability, reactivity, corrosivity, EP toxicity). The  codification rule  added to
40 CFR §260.22(a) the requirements that, before excluding  a waste:

       (1)  The petitioner  must demonstrate to the  satisfaction  of the Administrator
           that  the waste  produced by  a particular generating facility does  not
           meet  any of the criteria under which the waste  was listed as a hazardous
           or an acutely hazardous waste; and

       (2)  Based on a complete application,  the Administrator must determine, where
           he has a reasonable basis to believe that factors  (including additional
           constituents) other than those for which the waste was listed could
           cause the waste to be a hazardous  waste,  that such factors do not
           warrant retaining the waste  as a  hazardous waste.  A  waste which is so
           excluded, however, still may be a  hazardous  waste  by  operation of
           Subpart C of Part 261.

      Minimum Technology Requirements. HSWA imposed minimum technological
requirements that must be met by owners or operators of  certain  landfills  and
surface impoundments.  Specifically, amended §3004  of RCRA  stipulates that  a  permit
for a new landfill or surface impoundment, a  new landfill  or  surface impoundment at
an existing facility,  or a replacement or lateral  expansions  of  an existing  landfill
or surface impoundment unit,  must require the installation of two or more  liners,  a
leachate collection system above (in the case of a  landfill)  and between the liners,
and ground-water monitoring.  The section provides  an exemption from  liner  and
leachate collection system standards if alternative  design and operating practices,
together with locational characteristics, will prevent  the migration of  hazardous
constituents into the ground water or surface water  at  least  as  effectively  as
the liners and leachate collection system. Amended  §3015 of RCRA establishes
the applicabili of §3004 standards to interim status surface  impoundments,
landfills, and waste piles receiving wastes after May 8, 1985.16
        Regulations concerning minimum technology requirements were proposed on
March 28,  1986  (51 FR 10706). Information  about the effectiveness of double-liner
and leachate collection systems,  the subject of the minimum requirements, was
published  on April 17,  1987  (52 FR  12566).
                        *  *  * AUGUST 8,  1988 DRAFT * *  *

Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        A-12
      Corrective Action and Cleanup Beyond Facility Boundary. RCRA  §3004 was  amended
by HSWA to require corrective action for all releases of hazardous  waste or
constituents from any solid waste management unit at a  facility  seeking a  RCRA
permit, regardless of when waste was placed at the unit. RCRA §3004 also directs  the
Agency to promulgate regulations obligating owners and  operators  of treatment,
storage, and disposal facilities to undertake corrective action  beyond the facility
boundary where necessary to protect human health and the environment, unless  the
owner or operator demonstrates to EPA that, despite his best efforts, he or she is
unable to obtain the necessary permission to undertake  such action.  Until  EPA
promulgates the regulations which are currently being developed,  implementation of
this statutory provision shall proceed on a case-by-case basis through
administrative orders.17

      Underground Injection. The HSWA added new §7010 to RCRA, banning the injection
of hazardous wastes into or above any underground formation which contains, within
one-quarter mile of the injection well, an underground  source of  drinking  water.  The
ban applies to any state not having identical or more stringent  prohibitions  in
effect under an applicable underground injection control program that has  been
approved or prescribed by EPA under the Safe Drinking Water Act.

      1.4 OTHER RCRA REGULATIONS

      The following additional RCRA regulations may be  applicable or relevant and
appropriate to CERCLA responses:

      Open Dump Criteria (40 CFR Part 257)

      In addition to the subparts of 40 CFR Part 264 described above, the  open dump
criteria of 40 CFR Part 257 are potentially applicable  or  relevant  and appropriate
to CERCLA responses. 40 CFR Part 257 establishes criteria  for classifying  solid
waste disposal facilities to determine which pose a reasonable probability of
adverse effects on human health and the environment. Facilities  that fail  to  satisfy
the criteria of the Part are classified as open dumps,  which must be addressed by
State solid waste management plans.

      Special Rules Concerning Dioxin

      40 CFR Part 261 provides that certain wastes containing tetra, penta, and
hexaclorinated dioxins (CDDs) are acute hazardous wastes.  Special requirements are
set by §§264.175, 264.200,  264.231, 264.259, 264.283, 264.317, and  264.343 for the
management standards concerning such wastes. These standards include special
requirements for the management of the wastes in a storage, tank, surface
impoundment, pile, land treatment unit, landfill,
        A rule on corrective action and cleanup beyond the facility boundary was
proposed an March 28,  1986  (51 FR_ 10706).
                        *  *  * AUGUST 8, 1988 DRAFT  * * *

Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        A-13
or incinerator. EPA has also proposed a rule for the management of the residues
resulting from the incineration or thermal treatment of such wastes.18

2.     OVERVIEW OF CLEAN WATER ACT AND THE WATER QUALITY ACT

      This section describes the Clean Water Act (CWA)  of 1977, and the amendments
to the act made by the Water Quality Act  (WQA)  of 1987. The section provides an
overview of the CWA,  noting its purpose, structure,  and implementing regulations.
The purpose is to provide an overview of the legislative requirements and the
implementing regulations of each law that establish potentially applicable or
relevant and appropriate requirements for CERCLA activities.

      2.1.   OVERVIEW OF THE CWA

      The objective of the CWA is to restore and maintain the chemical, physical,
and biological integrity of the nation's waters. The national goals established to
achieve this objective of the CWA are 1) that the discharge of pollutants into
waters of the U.S. be eliminated, and 2) that water quality that provides for the
protection and propagation of fish, shellfish,  and wildlife and provides for
recreation in and on the water, be attained. The objective and goals of the CWA are
to be achieved through the control of discharges of pollutants to surface waters.
The CWA also involves the States (through the implementation of approved programs)
in the objective to prevent, reduce, and eliminate the discharge of pollutants to
surface waters.

      The CWA is organized into five major sections:

           "    Title I - Research And Related Programs: Establishes grants and
               contracts for research, development,  and training programs for water
               pollution control.

           "    Title II - Grants for Construction of Treatment Works: Requires the
               development and implementation of waste treatment management plans
               and practices that will achieve the goals of the Act. Provides for
               the award of grants for the construction of wastewater treatment
               works.

               Title III - Standards and Enforcement: Requires the establishment of
               criteria and standards for discharges to surface waters to protect
               water quality and achieve national performance standards. The
               authority to enforce these standards is also established.
         18 See 50 FR 37338,  September 12,  1985.

                        * *  *  AUGUST  8,  1988 DRAFT  *  * *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        A-14
           "    Title IV - Permits and Licenses: Requires the establishment of
               regulatory permitting programs to apply and enforce standards
               established under Title III of the Act.

               Title V - General Provisions: Establishes provisions associated with
               the implementation of the requirements of the Act, including
               emergency powers, citizen suits, judicial review, employee
               protection, administrative procedures, Federal procurement, and State
               authority.

      The primary areas of interaction between CWA requirements and CERCLA responses
occurs under Titles III and IV, where effluent standards and permits are required to
be established and applied to discharges to the Nation's waterways. The implementing
regulations resulting from the requirements established under Titles III and IV of
the CWA are contained throughout Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations. Due to
the numerous parts of Title 40 published pursuant to the CWA, the following sections
will summarize CWA requirements by major Sections contained in Titles III and IV.
The major implementing regulations for these sections are also referenced.

      2 . 2  CWA REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO CERCLA DISCHARGES

      Section 301 - Effluent Limitations

      Section 301 of the CWA requires technology-based discharge limitations be
established for categories and classes of point sources of pollutants. For
conventional pollutants, Section 301 requires that effluent limitations be based
upon the application of the best conventional pollutant control technology (BCT).
For toxic and nonconventional pollutants, Section 301 requires that effluent
limitations be based upon the application of the best available technology
economically achievable  (BAT).  Pretreatment standards are applied to indirect
discharges to publicly owned treatment works (POTWs).

      Section 302 - Water Quality Related Effluent Limitations

      Section 302 authorizes the establishment of more stringent effluent
limitations (including alternative BAT effluent control strategies) to protect water
quality if technology-based controls established under Section 301 would not assure
protection of the intended uses of the receiving waters (e.g., public water supply,
agricultural and industrial uses, and recreational uses).

      Section 303 - Water Quality Standards and Implementation Plans

      Section 303 of the CWA requires States to develop water quality standards that
consist of a designated use or uses for the waters and water quality criteria for
such waters to protect the use or uses.

      The 1987 amendments revise Section 303 of the CWA and requires States to adopt
the Federal water quality criteria established for all toxic pollutants
                        * *  *  AUGUST  8,  1988  DRAFT  *  * *

Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        A-15
pursuant to Section 304 if the discharge or presence of toxic pollutants could
reasonably be expected to interfere with the designated uses adopted by the State.
In the absence of numerical criteria, States are required to adopt criteria based
upon biological monitoring or assessment methods consistent with those provided in
Section 304 of the CWA as amended by the WQA.

      Section 304 - Information and Guidelines

      Under Section 304 of the CWA, EPA is required to develop and publish criteria,
based upon latest scientific knowledge, to be utilized by States in developing water
quality standards. Under Section 304, EPA is also required to develop and publish
regulations establishing guidelines for the technology-based effluent limitations
required in Section 301 of the CWA for categories and classes of point sources of
pollutants .19

      Section 304 of the CWA, as amended in 1987, requires States to develop
individual strategies to control toxic pollutant discharge into those waters where
application of effluent limitations for point sources, required under Section 301,
cannot reasonably attain or maintain applicable water quality standards or the
designated use of the waters. In addition, EPA is required to develop and publish
guidance on methods for establishing and measuring water quality criteria for toxic
pollutants on other bases than pollutant-specific criteria, including biological
monitoring and assessment.

      Section 306 - National Standards of Performance

      Section 306 requires EPA to propose and publish regulations establishing
standards of performance for new source discharges. A new source is defined as a
building, structure, facility, or installation from which there is a discharge, and
the construction of which is started after the publication of proposed national
standards of performance  (developed pursuant to Section 306) applicable to the
source.

      Section 307 - Toxic and Pretreatment Effluent Standards

      Section 307(a) establishes the list of toxic pollutants (commonly referred to
as "priority pollutants") subject to regulation pursuant to the CWA.
Technology-based effluent limitations are developed for the priority pollutants for
categories or classes of point sources. Section 307(b) requires EPA to develop and
promulgate pretreatment standards for the discharge of pollutants into POTWs.

      Section 401 - Certification

      Any applicant for a Federal license or permit to conduct an operation which
may result in any discharge to navigable waters is required to provide
         19 These effluent guidelines are provided in 40 CFR Parts  405-471.

                        *  *  * AUGUST 8,  1988  DRAFT  *  * *

Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                        A-16
the Federal permitting agency  (e.g., the Army  Corps  of  Engineers)  a  certification
from the State in which the discharge originates  (or EPA on  a  State's  behalf in
certain circumstances). This certification must state that the discharge  will comply
with applicable provisions of  Sections  301,  302,  303, 306, and 307 of  the CWA.  If
the certifying authority does  not act on a request for  certification within the
specified time, concurrence is deemed waived.

      Section 402 - National Pollutant  Discharge  Elimination System

      Section 402 of the CWA establishes the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System  (NPDES) program. All dischargers  into navigable waters are
required to obtain a NPDES permit, which incorporates the requirements of sections
301, 302, 306, 307 and 403 of  the CWA.20 Section  402  also establishes procedures for
implementing the NPDES program, including requirements  for authorizing
State-operated permit programs.

      Section 403 - Ocean Discharge Criteria

      Section 403 requires EPA to develop and  promulgate guidelines  for determining
the effects of discharges on the degradation of ocean waters.  All  discharges to
oceans must comply with these  guidelines prior to issuance of  a permit under Section
402 of the CWA.

      Section 404 - Permits for Dredged or Fill Material

      Section 404 establishes  the requirements to obtain a permit  for  the discharge
of dredged or fill material to navigable waters.21 All discharges of  dredge and fill
materials must undergo a public interest analysis to determine whether the benefits
reasonably expected to result  from the  activity outweigh the reasonably foreseeable
detriments. Section 404 also establishes the Secretary  of the  Army (through the Army
Corps of Engineers) or delegated State  the permitting authority,  for 1987 CWA
Amendments dredge and fill activities.

      1987 CWA Amendments

      The enactment of the WQA of 1987  provides amendments and additions  to various
sections of the CWA. Other significant  amendments with  potential application to
CERCLA activities include:

           "    Establishment of the National Estuary Program,
           40 CFR  Parts 122-125 provide the implementing regulations for the
   NPDES program.

         21 40 CFR  Part 230 and 33  CFR Parts 320  through 330 provide the
   implementing regulations  for the Dredge and Fill Program.


                         *  *  * AUGUST 8,  1988 DRAFT  * *  *

Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                 A-17
               the purposes and policies of which are to maintain and
               enhance the water quality in estuaries, considered to
               be of great national significance for fish and
               wildlife resources.

               Clarification of the CWA's prohibition of backsliding
               on effluent limitations.

           "    Authorization for grants to States to implement
               nonpoint source management programs, including ground
               water quality protection activities.

3. THE SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT

      This section describes the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)  of 1974, the most
recent amendments to the SDWA made in 1986, and accompanying regulations. The
first part of this section provides an overview of the SDWA, noting its purpose
and structure. The second part of this section provides a summary of the
regulatory requirements under the SDWA that are applicable to CERCLA activities.
The purpose is to provide an overview of the legislative requirements and the
implementing regulations of each law that establish potentially applicable or
relevant and appropriate requirements for CERCLA activities.

      3 . 1  OVERVIEW OF THE SDWA

The SDWA was enacted in 1974 in order to assure that all people served by
public water systems would be provided with a supply of high quality water.
The SDWA established a program to require compliance with national drinking
water standards for contaminants that may have an adverse effect on public
health. The SDWA also focused on the removal of contaminants found in water
supplies as a preventive health measure and established programs intended to
protect underground sources of drinking water from contamination.

      The SDWA amendments of 1986 established new procedures and deadlines for
setting national primary drinking water standards,  established a national
monitoring program for unregulated contaminants, augmented the underground waste
injection control requirements, and established a sole source aquifer
demonstration program and a wellhead area protection program.

      The SDWA is structured in five parts:

      Part A - Definitions: Provides definitions of key terms used in the SDWA.

      Part A - Public Water Systems:  Requires EPA to establish maximum
contaminant level goals and promulgate national primary and secondary drinking
water regulations. Part B also provides conditions for giving States the
                        * *  *  AUGUST  8,  1988  DRAFT  *  * *

Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                       A-18
primary responsibility for enforcement of standards, establishes prohibitions for
use of lead in water supply systems, and provides terms for variances and
exemptions from national primary drinking water regulations.

      Part C - Protection of Underground Sources of Drinking Water: Requires EPA
to publish regulations for State underground injection control programs, for
State programs to establish wellhead protection areas, and for development,
implementation, and assessment of demonstration programs designed to protect
critical areas located within areas designated an sole source aquifers.

      Part D - Emergency Powers: Empowers EPA to enforce SDWA regulations to
protect human health upon failure of State and local authorities to do so.

      Part E - General Provisions: Establishes general provisions for the
implementation of the SDWA including: assurance of adequate treatment chemicals,
grants for State programs; records and inspection requirements; establishment of
an advisory council; regulation of Federal agencies; judicial review; and
citizens civil actions.

      3.2  SDWA REGULATIONS PERTAINING TO CERCLA ACTIVITIES

      The following summarizes the SDWA regulation's that may be applicable or
relevant and appropriate to CERCLA response actions.

      40 CFR Part 141 - National Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations

      40 CFR Part 141 establishes primary drinking water regulations which are
designed to protect human health from the potential adverse effects of drinking
water contaminants. Both maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) and maximum
contaminant level goals (MCLGs)  for specific contaminants are provided. Whereas
MCLs are enforceable standards,  MCLGs are secondary standards, and as such are
non-enforceable.

      As of July 1987, MCLs have been promulgated for 24 specific chemical  (10
inorganics and 14 organic pesticides), total trihalomethanes, certain
radionuclides, and coliform bacteria. MCLGs have been promulgated for eight
organic contaminants and for fluoride. The 1986 SDWA amendments require EPA to
promulgate MCLs for 83 specific contaminants by June 1989.

      40 CFR Part 141 also establishes monitoring, reporting, and analytical
requirements for public water systems.

      40 CFR Part 142 - National Primary Drinking Water Regulations
      Implementation

      40 CFR Part 142 sets forth the regulations for the implementation and
enforcement of national primary drinking water standards. In particular,
procedures are provided for variances and exemptions from compliance with
                        *  *  * AUGUST  8,  1988  DRAFT  *  * *

Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                       A-19
MCLs.  These variances and exemptions apply to public water suppliers. The
requirements for determining the primary enforcement responsibilities of a State
are also provided.

      40 CFR Part 143 - National Secondary Drinking Water Regulations

      This part establishes National Secondary Drinking Water Regulations which
consist of secondary maximum contaminant levels  (SMCLs).  SMCLs are set to
regulate contaminants that may affect the aesthetic qualities of drinking water
(e.g., color, odor); however, SMCLs are nonenforceable. There are 12 SMCLs
promulgated.

      40 CFR Part 144 - Underground Injection Control  Program

      40 CFR Part 144 provide requirements for Underground Injection Control
(UIC)  Programs and establishes the following classification of wells:

           Class  I,  wells  that  inject  RCRA hazardous  or other  industrial  or
           municipal waste beneath  the lower  most formation  containing, within
           one-quatter  (1/4)  mile of the  well bore,  an  underground  drinking  water
           source. An underground source  of drinking  water is  defined as  any
           aquifer or its  portion that supplies  a public  water system or  contains
           fever  than 10,000  mg/1 total dissolved solids.

           Class  II,  injection  wells associated  with  oil  and natural  gas
           production,  recovery, and storage.

           Class  III, wells that inject fluids for use  in extraction  of minerals.

           Class  IV,  wells used to  inject RCRA hazardous  waste into  or above a
           formation that  within one-quarter  (1/4)  mile of the well,  contains an
           underground  drinking water  source.  The operation  or construction  of
           Class  IV  wells  is  prohibited,  and  allowed  only where the  wells are
           used to reinject treated ground water as part  of  a  CERCLA cleanup or a
           RCRA corrective action.

           Class  V,  wells  not considered  to be Class  I, II,  III,  or  IV.

      Various subparts  within Part 144 describe the general requirements for the
operation of underground injection wells. These subparts are briefly described
below:

      "    Subpart B -  General  Program Requirements

           Subpart B provides the general requirements  for underground injection
wells including prohibitions of unauthorized injection, prohibition of movement
of fluid into underground sources of drinking water,  and requirements for the
discharge of hazardous  wastes.  Injection into Class IV
                        * *  *  AUGUST  8,  1988  DRAFT  *  * *

Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                       A-20
wells is also prohibited except for the reinjection of contaminated groundwater
that has been reinjected into the same formation from which it was drawn pursuant
to CERCLA activities.

           Subpart  C  - Authorization  of Underground Injection  by Rule

           Subpart  C  authorizes  by rule the  injection  into existing wells  for
specified periods of time depending upon the class of well involved. Specific
requirements for authorization by rule are also specified.

      "    Subpart  D  - Authorization  by Permit

           Subpart  D  establishes the  authorizations necessary  to permit
underground injection activities.

           Subpart  E  - Permit  Conditions

           Subpart  E  provides  the  conditions  which  are applicable to all
underground injection activities that require a permit, including corrective
action requirements for the injection into Class I wells.

      40 CFR Part 146 - Underglound Injection Control Program: Criteria and
      Standards

      40 CFR Part 146 sets forth the technical criteria and standards  for the UIC
program. In particular Subpart B provides the criteria and standards applicable
to Class I wells including construction,  operating, monitoring and reporting
requirements. No criteria and standards currently exist for Class IV wells, which
are banned except in cleanups approved under CERCLA or RCRA.
                        * *  *  AUGUST  8,  1988  DRAFT  *  * *

Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                       A-22
                      DICTIONARY OF ACRONYMS USED IN MANUAL

ACL      -  Alternate concentration Limits
AOC      -  Area of Contamination
ARAR     -  Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirement
BAT      -  Best Available Technology Economically Achievable
BCT      -  Best Conventional Pollutant Technology
BDAT     -  Best Demonstrated Available Treatment Technologies
BMP      -  Best Management Practices
BOD      -  Biochemical Oxygen Demand
BPJ      -  Best Professional Judgment
CAA      -  Clean Air Act
CAG      -  Carcinogen Assessment Group
CCWE     -  Constituent Concentration in Waste Extract
CERCLA   -  Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and
            Liability Act of 1980 (aka Superfund)
COD      -  Chemical Oxygen Demand
CPF      -  Carcinogen Potency Factors
CFR      -  Code of Federal Regulations
CWA      -  Clean Water Act
DSE      -  Domestic Sewage Exclusion
EDB      -  Ethylene Dibromide
EP       -  Extraction Procedure
EPA      -  Environmental Protection Agency
FR       -  Federal Register
FS       -  Feasibility Study
FWQC     -  Federal Water Quality Criteria
GLWQA    -  Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement
GWPS     -  Ground Water Protection Standard
HEA      -  Health Affects Advisories
HSWA     -  Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984
IRIS     -  Integrated Risk Information System
IU       -  Industrial User
LC50     -  Lowest Concentration that Will Kill 50 Percent of Test Organisms
LCRS     -  Leachate Collection and Removal System
LDR      -  Land Disposal Restrictions
LPC      -  Limiting Permissible Concentrations
MCLs     -  Maximum Contaminant Levels (SDWA)
MCLGs    -  Maximum Contaminant Level Goals
MPRSA    -  Marine Protection Research and Sanctuaries Act
NCP      -  National Contingency Plan
NHPA     -  National Historic Preservation Act
NOEL     -  No'd6serVable Effecf'Level
NPDES    -  National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NPL      -  National Priorities List
NPRM     -  Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
NTIS     -  National Technical Information Service
OGWP     -  Office of Ground-Water Protection
OSC      -  On-Scene Coordinator
OSW      -  Office of Solid Waste
OSWER    -  Office  of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
                        *  *  * AUGUST  8, 1988  DRAFT  *  * *
Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
                                       A-23

OWPE     -  Office of Waste Programs Enforcement
PCB      -  Polychlorinated Biphenyls
PCS      -  Permit Compliance System
POTW     -  Publicly-Owned Treatment Works
PRP      -  Potentially Responsible Party
RCRA     -  Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
RFD      -  Reference Dose
RI/FS    -  Remedial Investigation / Feasibility Study
RMCL     -  Recommended Maximum Contaminant Level  (renamed MCLG)
ROD      -  Record of Decisions
RPM      -  Remedial Project Manager
SARA     -  Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act
SDWA     -  Safe Drinking Water Act
SI       -  Site Investigation
SIP      -  State Implementation Plan  (CAA)
SITE     -  Superfund Innovative Technologies Evaluation
SMCLs    -  Secondary Maximum Containment Levels
SMOA     -  Superfund Memorandum of Agreement
SPHEM    -  Superfund Public Health Evaluation Manual
SSA      -  Sole Source Aquifer
SWMU     -  Solid Waste Management Unit
TBC      -  To Be Considered
TCE      -  Trichloroethylene
TDS      -  Total Dissolved Solids
TSS      -  Total Suspended Solids
UCR      -  Unit Carcinogenic Risk
UIC      -  Underground Injection Control
USDW     -  Underground Source of Drinking Water
WHP      -  Wellhead Protection Program
WQA      -  Water Quality Act
WQC      -  Water Quality Criteria
                        * *  *  AUGUST  8,  1988  DRAFT  *  * *

Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------
 0   2  "3
 p   fl   £
 ^5  —^   ^
 *•  ~  >-
 S  •£  —
+*   P
 o
 c
          o   o
.ts   s   b   a
     g   o.2
     S^^j
 .    a

elf  §
 ^5   C^ ^"^   * *
 fl   8  S
     ^•^   »»
     a   s
H  «
     2  .2  .5
                      Reproduced by NTIS
                      National Technical Information Service
                      U. S. Department of Commerce
                      Springfield,  VA 22161
                      This report was printed specifically for your
                       order from our collection of more than 2 million
                       technical reports.
For economy and efficiency, NTIS does not maintain stock of its vast
collection of technical reports. Rather, most documents are printed for
each order. Your copy is the best possible reproduction available from our
master archive. If you have any questions  concerning this document or
any order you placed with NTIS, please call our Customer Services
Department at (703)487-4660.

Always think of NTIS when you want:
!   Access to the technical, scientific, and engineering results
generated by the ongoing multibillion dollar R&D program of the U.S.
Government.
!   R&D results from Japan, West Germany, Great Britain, and some
20 other countries, most of it reported in English.

NTIS also operates two centers that can provide you with valuable
information:
!   The Federal Computer Products Center - offers software and
datafiles produced by Federal agencies.
!   The Center for the Utilization of Federal Technology - gives you
access to the best of Federal technologies and laboratory resources.

For more information about NTIS, send for our free NTIS Products and
Services Catalog which describes how you can access this U.S. and
foreign Government technology. Call (703)487-4650 or send this sheet to
NTIS, U.S. Department of Commerce,  Springfield, VA22161.
Ask for catalog, PR-827.

Name	
Address
                       Telephone,
                                             - Your Source to U. S. and Foreign Government
                                                Research and Technology.
   Word-searchable version - Not a true copy

-------