EPA/530-SW-85-012
Guidance on Implementation of the Minimum Technological
Requirements of HSWA of 1984, Respecting Liners and
Leachate Collection Systems
Reauthorization Statutory Interpretation # 5D
On November 8, 1984, the President signed into law the
Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA). Among the
provisions of this new law are minimum technological requirements
for hazardous waste landfills, surface impoundments, and waste
piles. These provisions are found in Sections 3004(o) and 3015
of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), as amended
by HSWA. With respect to liners and leachate collection systems,
these sections provide that:
0 New units and lateral expansions and replacements of
existing units at hazardous waste landfills and surface
impoundments must be double lined and have leachate
collection systems above (in the case of landfills) and
between the liners;
0 New units and lateral expansions and replacements of
existing units at interim status waste piles must meet
the requirements for single liners and leachate collection
systems provided in the Agency's current permitting
regulations for new waste piles.
0 All hazardous waste facility permits issued after
November 8, 1984, must ensure that these requirements are
imposed on the appropriate units;
° Affected interim status units must meet these requirements
by May 8, 1985;
U-.S. •
Region
-------
Owners or operators of interim status units subject to
the double liner requirements must notify EPA or the
State of their intent to receive waste into one of the
affected units sixty days before the waste is received; and
Double liner systems installed in good faith compliance
with Agency regulations and guidance during interim status
will not have to be replaced at the time of permitting
unless they are leaking.
Scope of this Guidance
The purpose of this document, and the associated technical
guidance documents, is to provide further interpretation of the
minimum technological requirements found in Sections 3004(o) and
3015 of the new statute as they relate to liners and leachate
collection systems. As comments are received on this guidance
document, they will be used to revise the guidance as appropriate
and to establish a sound basis for future rulemaking.
This RCRA statutory interpretation describes the following
provisions of HSWA:
0 Applicability of the minimum technological requirements;
0 Notification requirements for interim status facilities;
0 Acceptable liner systems (detailed descriptions are contained
in the two attached technical guidance documents);
0 A description of the requirements for demonstrating good
faith compliance with the double liner system requirements;
and
0 Variances from the double liner system requirements.
-------
(Note: The minimum technological requirements are also
imposed on existing interim status surface impoundments
under Section 3005(j) of HSWA. Section 3005(j) provides
that existing interim status surface impoundments shall
not receive, store, or treat hazardous waste after
November 8, 1988, unless such impoundments comply with
the double liner and leachate collection system requirements
of §3004(o)(1)(A). A number of variances to the minimum
technological requirements are also contained in Section
3005(j) for existing interim status surface impoundments.
The Section 3005(j) requirements, including the multiple
variances, will be addressed in upcoming guidance to be
issued by EPA. However, the attachment to this current
guidance, entitled "Minimum Technology Guidance on Double
Liner Systems for Landfills and Surface Impoundments—
Design, Construction, and Operation" should be used for
the installation of double liner systems at existing
interim status surface impoundments that do not qualify
for one of the Section 3005(j) variances. Although this
current guidance makes no further mention of the Section
3005(j) requirements, it is important to note that existing
interim status surface impoundment units, although referred
to herein as exempt from the double liner system requirements
of Sections 3004(o) and 3015, may or may not be exempt from
the double liner requirements imposed by Section 3005(j).)
Applicability of the Minimum Technological Requirements
A. Interim Status Units
Section 3015 of RCRA, as amended by HSWA, imposes minimum
technological requirements on certain interim status waste piles
(single liner system), and on certain interim status landfills
and surface impoundments (double liner system). EPA believes
that the applicability of the minimum technological requirements
should be determined with reference to the date of enactment of
HSWA, November 8, 1984. The requirements apply during interim
status to any new unit, replacement of an existing unit, or
lateral expansion of an existing unit that first receives waste
after November 8, 1984. Such a unit or expansion must comply
with the minimum technological requirements with respect to waste
received after May 8, 1985.
-------
In order for a unit or portion of a unit to be exempted
from the minimum technological requirements, i.e., to be considered
an "existing unit" rather than a new unit, replacement, or lateral
expansion, the unit must already have received waste as of
November 8, 1984. In addition, the area must have been
"operational" as of November 8, 1984. That is, the area must
have been constructed by that date in accordance with Federal,
State, and local requirements, including licenses and permits.
If for some reason an entire unit was not operational on that
date (for example, a required liner, leachate collection system,
or berm had not yet been completely installed or constructed),
only the portion of the unit that was constructed in compliance
with Federal, State, and local requirements as of November 8,
1984, will be exempt from the new requirements. In order to
determine whether an area is within the boundaries of the unit,
available physical evidence (e.g., berms, excavation, or other
construction) may indicate where the boundaries are located.
Other objective information (e.g., operating records or the Part
A), if available, may also be used to identify the boundaries of
the unit.
Any new unit or replacement or lateral expansion of an existing
unit that first receives waste after November 8, 1985, is subject
to the new requirements. If such a unit still receives hazardous
waste after May &, 1985, the minimum technological requirements
must be in place on that date.
For interim status facilities, several options are available
for a new unit or replacement or lateral expansion of an existing
unit:
-------
(1) If the owner or operator wishes to continue using a
unit after May 8, 1985, the entire unit could be lined in accordance
with the new requirements; if waste were placed in the unit between
November 8, 1984, and May 8, 1985, this option would require the
retrofitting of the areas that received the waste so that these
areas would meet the minimum technological requirements; or
(2) The owner or operator may be able to restructure a unit
that has received waste between November 8, 1984, and May 8,
1985, by creating a barrier between the area that contains waste
and any empty area (e.g., construction of a berm within a landfill
trench). The area that contains waste could not receive additional
waste after May 8, 1985 (unless it were retrofitted to meet the
minimum technological requirements). The empty area would constitute
a new unit that can receive waste after May 8, 1985, if it complies
with the minimum technological requirements; or
(3) If the owner or operator stops receiving hazardous waste
in the unit on or before May 8, 1985, the unit need not comply
with the minimum technological requirements. In other words,
Section 3015 does not impose any new requirements on a new interim
status unit or replacement or lateral expansion that first receives
waste after November 8, 1984, but ceases to receive waste by
May 8, 1985.
B. Permitted Units
Section 3004(o) of RCRA, as amended by HSWA, requires landfills
and surface impoundments to comply with the minimum technological
requirements at the time of permit issuance. This provision
mandates a double liner system for any new unit or replacement
or lateral expansion of an existing unit that first receives
-------
waste after the date of permit issuance. The requirements must
be included in any permit issued after November 8, 1984.
Although both permitted and interim status landfills and
surface impoundments must comply with the same double liner
requirements, there are distinctions between the permitting and
interim status requirements. Compliance with the minimum
technological requirements through the permitting process is
subject to more stringent EPA supervision than compliance during
interim status. In addition, unlike the interim status provision,
which gives facilities until May 8, 1985, to comply, the permitting
requirements are effective as of the date of enactment of HSWA.
All permits issued after November 8, 1984, must contain the new
requirements.
C. Issues in Common to Both Interim Status and Permitted Units
Existing units, as noted above, are not affected by the
requirements of Sections 3004(o) and 3015. Any portion of a
landfill or surface impoundment that was operational on
November 8, 1984, and already contained at least some waste as
of that date, qualifies as an existing unit under the new law:
it is an existing unit under Section 3015 (interim status) because
it received waste and was operational before the date of enactment,
and it is also an existing unit under Section 3004(o)(l)
(permitting) because it received waste before permit issuance.
Therefore, the entire unit is exempt from the minimum technological
requirements. EPA's current regulations do require the lining
of partial units at permit issuance: §264.221(a) (for surface
impoundments), §264.251(a) (for waste piles), and §264.301(a)
-------
(for landfills) require the portions of units not covered with
waste at permit issuance to install a single liner (with a leachate
collection system above the liner, in the case of a landfill or
waste pile). This means that even if a landfill or surface
impounduent unit is exempt from the new double liner standards,
any portion of the unit not covered with waste at permit issuance
is still subject to EPA's current single liner standards. Hence,
in this instance, EPA's current standards have not been superseded-
by HSWA. (For technical guidance on EPA's current single liner
standards, see the attached technical guidance entitled: "Minimum
Technology Guidance on Single Liner Systems for Waste Piles,
Landfills, and Surface Impoundments—Design, Construction, and
Operation.")
In summary, the combined effect of Sections 3004(o)(1)(A)
and 3015 is to require any landfill, surface impoundment, or
waste pile unit, replacement, or lateral expansion that first
receives waste after November 8, 1984, to comply with the minimum
technological requirements after May 8, 1985 (if such unit or
replacement or lateral expansion is still receiving hazardous
waste after that date), or at permit issuance, whichever occurs
first. Landfills and surface impoundment units that install
double liners and leachate collection systems in good faith
during interim status cannot be required to retrofit at the time
of first permitting unless there is reason to believe that the
liner is leaking. Any landfill or surface impoundment unit that
received waste before November 8, 1984, is exempt from the double
-------
8
liner system requirements but must comply with Agency's current
single liner regulations with respect to portions not covered
with waste at the time of permit issuance.
Since enactment of the HSWA, the Agency has received numerous
inquiries regarding the applicability of the minimum technological
requirements for liners and leachate collection systems at
hazardous waste landfills, surface impoundments, and waste piles.
The following definitions, questions, and answers address some
of the more critical issues that have been raised.
(1) Existing unit
0 Issues:
(a) If berms are constructed after November 8, 1984, to
allow wastes to be placed higher on an existing
unit, are the minimum technological requirements
applicable?
- Response: The new requirements do not apply if
the additional waste will be placed within the
boundaries of the existing unit (See note below)
and if Federal, State, or local requirements,
including State and local permits, applicable to
the unit on November 8, 1984, would not require
the new construction in order to receive wastes.
(b) Can a unit that has already been partially or
finally capped receive additional waste without
complying with the minimum technological requirements?
- Response: If the cap effectively isolates
the new waste from the waste within the capped
-------
unit, then the area on which the new waste
is placed will be a new unit. (Also, see
note below.)
NOTE (applicable to (a) and (b) above):
If the plan, permit, etc., specifies any final elevation
or maximum capacity of the unit, the elevation or capacity
limitation will restrict the maximum allowable height of the
existing unit. If no final elevation or maximum capacity of the
unit is specified in operating records, closure plans, State
permits, etc., additional waste can be placed on the area if the
area is operational. However, the additional placement of waste
on a unit must also consider the slope of the final cover at
closure.
(c) If a unit qualifies as an "existing unit" and had
a very thin layer of hazardous waste placed through-
out the unit prior to November 8, 1984, is the
entire unit exempt from the minimum technological
requirements?
- Response: One of the criteria for a unit to
qualify as an existing unit is that waste
must have been placed in some part of the unit
prior to November 8, 1984. Therefore, the unit
meets the criterion of having received waste
prior to November 8, 1984. (Because the entire
unit is covered with waste, the unit will be
exempt from the single liner requirements at
permitting.)
-------
10
(2) Permitted unit
0 Issue:
Does a unit that received a RCRA permit prior to
November 8, 1984, have to meet the minimum technological
requirements?
- Response: As long as the unit was permitted
prior to November 8, 1984, even if it has not
been constructed, it is not subject to the
minimum technological requirements.
(3) Replacement unit
0 Definition:
Consistent with the legislative history of HSWA,
replacement of a unit occurs when (a) the unit is
taken out of service (i.e., the unit has stopped
receiving waste or the "normal" rate of waste receipt
is significantly decreased), (b) all or substantially
all of the waste is removed, and (c) the unit is reused.
0 Issues:
a) Is the removal of all or substantially all waste
from a surface impoundment or waste pile for the
purpose of inspecting the liner or base a replacement?
- Response: This will be a replacement unit if
wastes are again placed in the unit.
b) If wastes are removed from a portion of a waste
pile, either in the normal operation of the pile,
to facilitate inspection of the base under that
portion, or as part of a closure activity, while
-------
11
the remainder of the waste pile continues to receive
waste at the normal rate, is this a replacement?
- Response: The key criterion in this case is
whether the unit has been taken out of service.
Since the normal flow of waste to the unit has
not ceased, this is not a replacement.
c) Is the removal of all or substantially all the waste
from a landfill, waste pile, or surface impoundment
for the purpose of recovering materials, with the
residue returned to the unit, a replacement?
- Response: If the normal flow of waste to the
unit has ceased and all or substantially all
the waste is gradually removed from the unit
while processed waste is being returned to the
unit, this is a replacement. However, if new
waste is continually placed in the unit (i.e.,
normal waste-receiving operations are continuing)
while unprocessed waste is being removed for
recovery and then return to the unit, this is
not a replacement.
d) At the time of replacement are there any closure
requirements?
- Response: There are no closure requirements
such as public comment or removal of contaminated
soil at the time of replacement. Any contamination
of soils at the site, including contamination from
activities prior to the replacement unit, will
-------
12
be addressed at final closure of the replacement
unit. However, all applicable criteria for
constructing the replacement unit must be adhered
to, including the need for a stable base that
does not contain contaminants that would be
incompatible with the replacement unit liner.
(4) Solid Waste
0 Issue:
Can a new unit or a replacement or lateral expansion
of an existing unit operating under interim status
that receives hazardous waste between November 8,
1984, and May 8, 1985, continue to receive non-hazardous
waste after May 8, 1985, without complying with the
minimum technological requirements?
- Response: Since this is a new unit, replacement, or
a lateral expansion, it can only receive hazardous
waste until May 8. After that date it can continue
to receive non-hazardous waste without complying
with the new requirements. The owner or operator of
all interim status units that stop receiving hazardous
waste must comply with the closure requirements of
Subpart G of Part 265. EPA has issued a proposed
rule providing that if a unit is unlikely to receive
additional hazardous waste, the expected date of
closure is 30 days after the date of receipt of the
known final volume of hazardous waste. See
50 FR 11090 (March 19, 1985). EPA policy is that
-------
13
closure activities for interim status units should
begin within 30 days of the last receipt of hazardous
waste.
(5) Conversion of a surface impoundment to a landfill
0 Issue:
Can the owner/operator of an interim status surface
impoundment change the facility process to become a
landfill? If the process can be changed, is the landfill
an existing unit, replacement unit, or a new unit?
- Response: For an interim status, existing unit,
surface impoundment to qualify for a change in process
to a landfill it will need to meet the requirements
in §270.72(c). Under this provision, an owner/
operator can submit a revised Part A application
(along with a justification) for consideration
of a process change. Only two circumstances can be
used to request a change of process:
(1) It is necessary to prevent a threat to human
health or the environment because of an
emergency situation, or
(2) It is necessary to comply with Federal
regulations or State or local laws.
However, for circumstances that do allow a process
change under this very restrictive requirement, the
landfill unit would be an existing unit. However,
the size of the landfill would be restricted by the
existing unit requirements.
-------
14
(6) Liners and Leachate Collection Systems
0 Issue:
In a double liner system, must both liners and the
leachate collection sytems extend up the sidewalls of
a landfill or surface impoundment (impoundments have
only one leachate collection system, which is between
the liners)?
- Response
The Agency interprets Section 3004(o)(1)(A)(i) to
require that both liners of the double liner
system and the leachate collection system between
the liners extend to any area of the unit that is
in contact with the waste. This interpretation
of the statutory requirement is consistent with
the Agency's current regulatory practice regarding
the design of double lined units. Congress intended
that the Agency's existing design standards provide
the basis for interpreting the new minimum techno-
logical requirements. In addition, the legislative
history of HSWA suggests that the leachate collection
system between the liners should act both as
leachate collection and removal system and a leak
detection system. These purposes can be achieved
only if the liners and the leachate collection
system between the liners cover all surfaces of
the unit that are in contact with the wastes.
-------
15
The HSWA does not specifically require that
the primary leachate collection system of a landfill
(the leachate collection system above the top liner)
extend up the sidewalls. The legislative history
of HSWA also does not address this issue. EPA's
past policy, as stated in guidance, has been to
allow the installation of a primary leachate
collection system on the base and only partially
up the sides of a landfill in some cases, depending
on site-specific circumstances. Although the
Agency believes that the statute has done nothing
to alter this policy, we believe that, in general,
it is more protective to install primary leachate
collection systems on both the base and sidewalls,
and we encourage such designs. Such a design
allows leachate to drain to the surnp faster and
minimizes ponding of leachate within the waste on
the sidewalls of the top liner.
(7) Interim Status Waste Piles
0 Issue:
What are the liner and ground-water monitoring require-
ments at interim status waste piles?
- Response:
A. Existing units:
0 Subject to current regulations promulgated
under Part 265.
0 Ground-water monitoring not required.
-------
16
0 If leachate or run-off from the pile
is a hazardous waste, then either:
a) The pile must have a single
impermeable liner with leachate
collection; or
b) The pile must be protected from
precipitation and run-on and no free
liquids may be placed in the pile.
B. New units, replacements, and lateral expansions:
0 Subject to requirements for a single liner
with leachate collection and removal under
§264.251(a).
0 Variances from single-liner requirements
are available if:
a) The waste pile is in a structure so
that neither run-off nor leachate
is generated (§264.250(c)); or
b) The owner or operator shows that
alternate design and operating practices,
together with location characteristics,
will prevent the migration of hazardous
constituents into the ground water or
surface water at any future time
(§264.251(b)).
0 Ground-water monitoring is not required.
-------
17
(8) Monofills
Issue:
What requirements must a landfill or surface impoundment
meet to qualify as a monofill and be eligible for a
waiver from the minimum technological requirements?
- Response:
The unit must meet the requirements of (A),(B),
and (C):
(A) Contain only hazardous wastes from
foundry furnace emission controls or
metal casting molding sand;
(B) The wastes must not contain constituents
that would render the wastes hazardous
for reasons other than Extraction
Procedure (EP) toxicity; and
(C) Meet the requirements of (1) or (2):
(1) the unit must (a) have at least one
liner, for which there is no
evidence that such liner is leaking,
(b) be located more than one-quarter
mile (a one-quarter mile radius
hemisphere drawn under and around
the unit) from an underground source
of drinking water, and (c) be in
compliance with generally applicable
ground water monitoring requirements
for permitted units; or
-------
18
(2) The owner/operator demonstrates
that the unit is located, designed,
and operated such that hazardous
constituents will not migrate into
ground water or surface water at
any future time.
Notification Requirements for Interim Status Facilities
A. Overview
Section 3015(b)(2) of HSWA requires the owner or operator
of an interim status landfill or surface impoundment to notify
the Administrator at least 60 days prior to receiving waste at a
new unit, replacement of an existing unit, or lateral expansion
of an existing unit. However, the statute does not specify the
content of the notice. The Agency believes that a brief
notification will be sufficient because the Regions and States
already have good information about most of the facilities that
will be making changes during interim status. Further, we do
not foresee problems in obtaining additional information, if
necessary, through field inspections, Part B reviews, or through
the provisions of §270.72 (changes during interim status) that
require a revised Part A permit application prior to an increase
in the design capacity of processes used at a facility.
B. Requirements
The Agency will, therefore, consider that the owner or
operator has complied with the notification requirement of
HSWA if he submits to the Agency: (1) the EPA Identification
Number for the facility; (2) an indication of whether the proposed
-------
19
change is for a new unit or replacement or lateral expansion of
an existing unit; (3) the initial date waste will be received at
the unit(s) or lateral expansion(s); and (4) a statement signed
and dated by a company officer that the information provided
under (1),(2), and (3) is accurate.
C. Authorized State
All requirements of HSWA, including notification requirements
associated with the minimum technological provisions, are effective
immediately in authorized States as well as unauthorized States.
No States are currently authorized for implementation of the
minimum technological requirements. Until such time as States
are authorized (for interim or final authorization for minimum
technological requirements), all notification should be sent to
the appropriate EPA Regional Office. Applicants who are uncertain
as to the status of their State should contact the EPA Regional
Office.
Acceptable Liner Systems
A. Surface Impoundments and Landfills
Section 3004(o)(5)(B) allows the use of a particular type of
liner design until EPA issues regulations implementing the double
liner requirements in §3004(o). The Agency has identified two
additional designs, or more accurately performance requirements
for two designs, that it believes meet the liner and leachate
collection system requirements for certain landfills and surface
impoundments under §§3004(o) and 3015. The Agency will accept
'permit applications and issue draft permits for facility designs
that meet the performance-based designs described in this guidance.
-------
20
Whether these designs appear in the final permit will depend
upon the Agency's response to comments on the draft permit.
The two designs are fully described in the attached draft technical
guidance entitled "Minimum Technology Guidance on Double Liner
Systems for Landfills and Surface Impoundments—Design, Construction,
and Operation." The Agency will accept convincing demonstrations
of equivalency of performance to the specifications in this
guidance as adequate demonstration of compliance with RCRA Section
3004(o)(l)(A)(i).
In addition to the designs in the attached technical guidance,
EPA will accept the design set out in §3004(o)(5)(B). However,
the Agency has reservations about whether the interim statutory
bottom liner design, i.e., three feet of compacted clay with a
hydraulic conductivity of not greater than 1X10~7 centimeters
per second, will meet the bottom liner performance criteria of
that section in most cases. The specified performance standard
requires that the bottom liner prevent migration of any constituent
through it during the operating period, including any post-closure
monitoring period. To meet this standard, a bottom liner of
compacted clay or other natural soil material must be thick
enough and low enough in permeability to prevent the migration
of any constituent through the liner during the stated period.
The breakthrough time for constituents, in most cases, will be
governed by unsaturated liquid flow through the liner. EPA is
studying the breakthrough of constituents through compacted soil
liners. There is currently, however, no field-verified method
for determining either breakthrough or the associated liner
-------
21
thickness requirements. EPA believes that the interim design
(i.e., a three-foot thick compacted liner with a saturated hydraulic
conductivity of 1X10~^ cm/sec) will result in a breakthrough
time substantially shorter than the operating period in most
cases, as explained more fully in the attached technical guidance.
EPA does not discourage rigorous demonstrations of liner designs.
The Agency has, however, strong reservations concerning the
likelihood that such a design is either economically or technically
feasible in most cases. However, because §3004(o)(5)(B) authorizes
the use of a lower liner constructed of a 3-foot thick compacted
soil liner with a saturated hydraulic conductivity of 1X10"^
cm/sec, owners and operators may use this design until such time
as the effective date of regulations or until this guidance is
finalized.
B. Waste Piles
Section 3015(a) of HSWA requires the owner or operator
of new units, replacements, and lateral expansions of interim
status waste piles to meet the existing Agency requirements for
single liners and leachate collection systems for new waste
piles under Part 264. These single liner system requirements
are contained in §264.251.
The attached technical guidance entitled "Minimum Technology
Guidance on Single Liner Systems for Waste Piles, Landfills, and
Surface Impoundments--Design, Construction, and Operation"
updates the Agency's previously issued single liner system guidance.
It contains single liner system design, construction, and operation
specifications that the Agency believes are acceptable for meeting
-------
22
the requirements of §264.251. (In addition to waste piles, the
attached single liner system guidance also addresses landfills
and surface impoundments because certain portions of existing
landfills and surface impoundments, although exempt from the
double liner requirements of HSWA, are required by Agency regulations
to be single lined at permitting.)
C. Construction Quality Assurance for Liner Systems
To assure, to a reasonable degree of certainty, that a
completed liner system meets or exceeds all required design
criteria, plans, and specifications, a construction quality
assurance (CQA) program is necessary. CQA is included as part
of the attached technical guidance to detect deviations from the
design, caused by error or negligence on the part of the construction
contractor, and to provide the suitable corrective measures
before wastes are placed in the unit. A CQA guidance document
is currently being developed.
Good Faith Compliance with Guidance and Regulations
HSWA requires that an owner or operator of an interim
status landfill or surface impoundment facility, who builds a
new unit, lateral expansion of an existing unit, or replacement
of an existing unit, comply with the minimum technological
requirements of §3004(o) with respect to waste received
after May 8, 1985. Before a permit is issued, the owner or
operator of the facility is required to show that the liner and
leachate collection systems installed during interim status have
been installed in "good faith compliance" with EPA's regulations
and guidance documents. If the system has been installed in
-------
23
good faith compliance, then the Administrator can not require liner
retrofitting at the time of permit issuance unless he has
reason to believe that the liner is leaking.
The owner and operator will meet his burden of demonstrating
good faith compliance if he complies with the notification
requirements discussed earlier in this guidance and makes the
following two demonstrations. The owner and operator should:
0 present evidence to the Agency that all the appropriate
units were lined; and
0 present evidence that the liner and leachate collection
systems were designed and installed in accordance with
the Agency's regulations and with the double liner guidance
described in the attachment to this document or any
additional guidance provided on Section 3004(o)(5)(B).
The information for these demonstrations should be kept at the
facility. The required records for making a good faith demonstration
are described below.
A. Demonstrating that all appropriate units have been double lined
According to §265.73(b)(1) and (2) (and §265.309 for
landfills), the owner or operator must keep written operating
records at his facility that contain:
1) a description and the quantity of each hazardous waste
received, and the method(s) and date(s) of its treatment,
storage, or disposal at the facility ....
2) the location of each hazardous waste within the facility
and the quantity at each location. For disposal facilities
(emphasis added) the location and quantity of each hazardous
waste must be recorded on a map or diagram of each cell or
disposal area. . . .
-------
24
The Agency will request the submission of the facility's
operating records when the permit application is submitted.
Compliance with these two recordkeeping requirements discussed
above may provide sufficient information for the owner or operator
to demonstrate where waste was placed on the facility as of
November 8, 1984, and May 8, 1985. The owner or operator should
clearly distinguish between "existing units" and new units,
lateral expansions of existing units, or replacement units.
In addition to the information found in the operating
records, the Agency will look to the information submitted in
the facility's Part B application to be assured that the proper
units were double lined. EPA will receive all the facilities'
Part B applications by November 8, 1985.
Furthermore, the Agency will look to the information gathered
by our field inspectors. EPA may elect to conduct an inspection
after the owner or operator notifies the Agency 60 days prior to
receipt of waste at a new unit, replacement of an existing unit,
or lateral expansion of an existing unit. The inspector will
review the operating records and visually inspect the site to
determine if the operating records accurately detail the boundaries
of the existing units and the units that are being double lined.
The owner or operator should bear in mind the importance of
keeping accurate and complete operating records to demonstrate that
the proper units were double lined during interim status. The
permit writer will look to the owner or operator to make this
demonstration at the time of permit review, which may be some
time after the units have been lined and in use. The permit
-------
25
writer will depend on the operating records, Part B application,
and inspection records to decide whether an owner or operator
double lined the proper units.
B. Demonstrating that the liner and leachate collection system(s)
were designed and installed in accordance with the Agency's
regulations and guidance
The Agency has interpreted HSWA to mean that an owner or
operator who demonstrates that he followed the guidance in this
document and its attachments, or the terms of §3004(o)(5)(B),
will be considered to have acted in good faith. The owner or
operator can demonstrate that the liners and leachate collection
systems were designed and installed in good faith by showing
that the design conforms to the guidance, or §3004(o)(5)(3),
and an adequate construction quality assurance (CQA) plan was
prepared and followed. This CQA plan should be kept at the
facility. The procedure for developing a CQA plan is specified
in the attached technical guidance. Additional guidance will be
provided in Construction Quality Assurance for Land Based Hazardous
Waste Facilities, which will be issued in draft form in June
1985. The CQA plan will be reviewed during the site inspection
and will be the chief means for the permit writer to determine
whether the owner or operator followed the liner guidance in
designing and installing the double liner system.
Owners and operators of facilities that have already
installed double lined units before the issuance of this guidance
must show that their liners meet the requirements of HSWA §3004(o).
To meet this requirement, owners and operators may use the
statutory interim design in §3004(o)(5)(B), or may show that
-------
26
the design complies with §3004(o)(1)(A)(i), which EPA believes
requires a design that protects human health and the environment.
Some owners or operators who plan to install a double liner
system may choose to deviate from the design in §3004(o)(5)(B)
or the designs in this liner guidance. Alternate designs may be
installed if they meet the performance standards embodied in the
double liner system design in this guidance. Owners or operators
should confer with the Agency during the design and construction
of the alternate system in order for EPA to ascertain whether
the system will meet the double liner performance standards. As
a result, these facilities will be able to more easily demonstrate
to the Agency during the Part B review that their alternate
design meets the performance standards in this guidance.
Variances from the Double Liner System Requirements
RCRA §3004(o)(2) and (3) provides authority to the Administrator
to waive the double liner requirements in two situations. In
one case, a waiver may be allowed if the owner or operator demon-
strates that alternative design and operating practices, together
with location characteristics, will prevent the migration of any
hazardous constituents into the ground water or surface water at
least as effectively as double liner and leachate collection
systems specified in this guidance. The second waiver applies
to monofills receiving only wastes from foundry furnace emission
controls or metal casting molding sand that are riot hazardous
wastes for reasons other than Extraction Procedure toxicity.
Owners or operators applying for a waiver for a permitted
unit should submit appropriate information in their Part B
-------
27
permit application. Until EPA develops specific procedures
for interim status purposes, owners and operators seeking a
variance for an interim status unit should seek approval on a
case-by-case basis from the EPA Regional Administrator before
designing the unit.
This guidance should be used in preparing and evaluating
waiver requests regarding alternate design and operating practices
In addition, the Agency is developing more detailed guidance on
alternate design and operating practices. We expect to make
this additional guidance available in 1986. No specific guidance
is planned for the monofill waiver.
In order to evaluate any waiver request, the objectives of
the liner and leachate collection systems must be established.
These objectives are: (1) to maximize the removal of leachate
containing hazardous constituents during the active life and
through any post-closure monitoring period and (2) in combination
*>
with the final cover system, to minimize the escape of hazardous
constituents from the unit in the long-term future.
Until regulations are developed, the design specified in
§3004(o)(5)(B) provides the standard against which alternate
designs should be compared. Three factors—design, operation,
and location—determine whether an alternate design can meet the
waiver criteria. These factors must be used recognizing the
characteristics of the land disposal process and how migration
can be expected to occur. Hazardous constituents that escape
the unit can be expected to migrate if they are liquids or if
they are dissolved or suspended in liquids. Therefore, surface
-------
28
impoundments, because they are storage or disposal units for
liquids, are more difficult to qualify for the waiver. Landfills,
on the other hand, may be more likely to qualify for the waiver
if the owner or operator can demonstrate that the facility
adequately manages liquids.
Adequate liquids management can be demonstrated by showing
that liquids are minimized at the facility. First, the landfill
should be kept as dry as possible. This includes not accepting
bulk liquid wastes for disposal, controlling surface run-on so
that rainfall does not add excessive moisture, and keeping
the disposal site above the ground-water table. There are other
design and operating features that can be used to minimize moisture,
including building the landfill under roof and rapid removal of
any incident precipitation. The goal of these liquids management
activities is to minimize the formation of leachate during the
life of the facility. With little or no leachate, which is the
driving force to cause migration of hazardous constituents, the
waiver may be granted. This waiver would not relieve the owner
or operator from any responsibility to construct and maintain a
proper final cover.
The demonstration that there is no likelihood of significant
amounts of leachate may also be made based on climate. Certain
areas of the country receive very small amounts of rainfall
annually. By using calculations or experience gained at other
units constructed in the same climate, it may be possible to
demonstrate that little or no leachate is formed. The waiver
could be granted when such a demonstration is made. As before,
-------
29
this would not affect the design of a final cover.
Another way to qualify for the waiver is to prove that the
leachate does not contain hazardous constituents. This demon-
stration requires specific testing because leachate is presumed
to contain hazardous constituents. Some hazardous constituents
may not leach and may be eligible for a waiver. It may also be
possible to qualify for a waiver by showing that the wastes are
treated prior to disposal so that they do not leach. This
demonstration can be made based on the non-leaching characteristics
of the waste alone or in combination with the facility location
(e.g., the facility is located in a very low rainfall area).
A facility located in an area that is capable of attenuating
all the hazardous constituents before they reach ground water
or surface water may also qualify for a waiver. This demonstration
may be possible, under some circumstances, for inorganic hazardous
constituents, especially heavy metals. It is less likely that a
successful demonstration could be made for most organic hazardous
constituents.
In general, EPA expects that waiver demonstrations will be
difficult to make. The owner or operator will be expected to
make a comprehensive demonstration that his alternative design
and operating practices, together with location characteristics,
are as effective as the double liner and leachate collection
systems specified in this guidance.
------- |