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)
------- |