vvEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response DIRECTIVE NUMBER: 9486.01(85) TITLE: Criterion for the Application of Hazardous Waste Treatment Technologies *** 4 APPROVAL DATE: 3-27-851 EFFECTIVE DATE: 3-27r85 ORIGINATING OFFICE: rdfTice of^biid waeste -I * ^ •* s s 1 * • - - /-* 0 FINAL D DRAFT STATUS: REFERENCE (other documents): [ ] ,A- Pending * OMBI [ ] B- Pending'AA-OSWER Approval [ ] C- Fpr^revievr&/pr'comment ' [ ]. ,D-- Ih^developnent or circulating headquarters OS WER OS WER OS WER /£ DIRECTIVE DIRECTIVE Di ------- PARTS 264-265 SUBPART M - LAND TREATMENT DOC: 9486.01(85) Key Words: Regulations: Subject: Addressee: Originator: Source Doc : Date: Summary: Treatment, Risk 40 CFR 264 Criterion for the Application of Hazardous Waste Treatment Technologies Richard C. Fortuna, Executive Director, Hazardous Waste Treatment Council John H. Skinner, Director, Office of Solid Waste 9486.01(85) 3-27-85 The land disposal restrictions model is designed to determine for which hazardous wastes land disposal is protective. These findings will be expressed as "health-based thresholds.*" If available treatment technologies can achieve. these thresholds, the treatment standard will be set at the thresholds. When technology cannot achieve the thresholds, treatment standards will be based on the best demonstrated available technology that substantially reduces toxicity of the waste or migration of the hazardous waste constituents. OSW will define the best technology as that which minimizes threats to human health and the environment from the land disposal of a waste. Treatment technologies that increase overall risks to health and the environment will not be considered in the evaluation of best technologies. Health-based thresholds are based on the toxic effects of constituents. For some constituents, such as solvents, OSW is also concerned with their effects on liners, and thus is establishing "Liner Protection Thresholds" for them. These thresholds will be used in lieu of the health-based threshold to the extent that they are more stringent. ------- 9486.01 (85) MAR 2 7 1S85 Kr. Fichard C. For tuna £ Executive Director _ ^ Hasardous Waste Treatment Council £ 1919 Pennsylvania Avenue « • •*• en Suite 300 \ Washington, C.C. -2800C . § ' '4-". £ Dear Rich i £ T PJ Thank you for your latter of February 15, 1985. We welcome c this opportunity to clarify aeveral aspect* of OSW's land disposal i restrictions program for you. . ^ ..-..- \ TO There seeois to be some confusion concerning the difference o between (1) the use of the generic land disposal restrictions | attdel , and (2) the determination of treatment standards. This w particular model is designed to detercine for which hazardous oe wastes land disposal Is protective* These findings will be £ expressed as 'health-based thresholds.* We aaree with you that ^ the relative risk of alternative treatment technologies should ? net be a factor In deten*ininn these thresholds. ° "~~" 9 If available tre a t7»ent technologies can achieve these thresholds, the treatment standard will be set at the thresholds. x When technology cannot achieve the thresholds , treatp»*»nt standards ^ will be based on the best available tr^atrent technology that ' -J substantially reduce? toxicitv of the wsste or finration o^ If hazardous waste constituent?. CSV7 will define th* best tech- ^ as that which »rlnir>ife* threats to hur»an health anH the -3 environment from the land disposal of a waste. In both your February letter and your letter of March 5, 1985 to Pick fcorcenstern , you stated that you did not feel that there was a place ift the land disposal restrictions program to consider any increased risks of alternative treatment technologies . lk>wever , OSW feels that the Agency cannot justify a proararr that allows the use of alternatives that actually worsen the health and environmental risks resulting from the management of haiardous waste. Therefore, CSV is currently planning to evaluate the overall risks of each alternative treatment aa a step in setting the treatrent standards. Vhen the results of our analysis reveal that an alternative technology significantly increases the overall ------- risk to huaan health and the environment» that technology will not be considered 'available* for the purpoaea of setting treat- went standards. In no way will thie determination affect our health-baaed threshold rtetervlnations. inhere appropriate , w« will then develop standards to reduce unacceptable risks posad by sny such technology so that •ven that technology could ultimately be used. ft. r-i-i..--1-- '- X hope that thia explanation sdaouate^ly addreaaea your concerns about th« uae of relative riak assessment in OSW's land diapoaal restrictions pro^raa. As always , I welcome any coenenta or ouestions that you have concernina OPV proorams , snd I would be happy to »eet with you at any tine to discuss these and other iasues. Pleas/ feel free to contact *>e in thia regard. i — •- • • <• . Sincerely, John H. Skinner Director -- •- - ^Office of Solid Waste (WB-5C2) ------- |