oEPA
               united St
               Environmental Protection
               Agency
            Off ice of
            Solid Waste and
            Emergency Response
DIRECTIVE NUMBER:  9481.03(84)

TITLE: Deficiencies in Part B Permit Applications with
     ACL Demonstrations
                APPROVAL DATE: 3-15-84

                EFFECTIVE DATE: 3-15-84

                ORIGINATING OFFICE: office of solid waste

                3 FINAL

                D DRAFT

                 STATUS:
            [ ]  A- Pending OMB approval
            [ ]  B- Pending AA-OSWER approval
            f ]  C- For review &/or comment
            [ ]  D- In development or circulating

REFERENCE (other documents):      headquarters
  OSWER      OSWER      OSWER
VE   DIRECTIVE   DIRECTIVE   Dl

-------
PARTS 264 AND 265  SUBPART F - GROUND-WATER PROTECTION      '"* DOC:  9481.03(84)


Key Words:    Alternate Concentration Limit (ACL)

Regulations:  40 CFR 270.14(c)(2)/(4), 264.94(b)(ii)/(iv)/(v)

Subject:      Deficiencies in Part B  Permit Applications with ACL
              Demonstrations

Addressee:    Jack Lehman, Fred Lindsey, Ken Shuster, Burnell Vincent, George
              Dixon, Art Day, Peter Guerrero, Terry Grogan, Amy Mills, Dave
              Fagan, Nancy Hutsel, Elizabeth Cotsworth, and Libby Scopino

Originator:   Randall BW. Breeden, Hydrologist OSW, Land Disposal Branch

Source Doc:   #9481.03(84)

Date:         3-15-84

Summary:

     Deficiencies in ACL demonstrations include  the following:

     1)   Lack of sufficient hydrogeological data  to substantiate what is occur-
          ring beneath a facility.

     2)   An incomplete Appendix VIII  analysis to  describe  the concentration
          of each Appendix VIII constituent in the  plume of contamination
          [§270.14(c)(4)] and an incomplete ACL demonstration to describe the
          existing quality of groundwater  [§264.94(b)(vi)]

     3)   Inconclusive  information  to  assure there  will be  no harm to human
          health and.  the environment at the concentration levels they are asking
          the ACLs for.' Applicants need to submit  an  in-depth evaluation of the
          effects each hazardous constituent will  have on human health and the
          environment.

     4)   Failure to  place Point of compliance (POC) wells  at the hazardous
          waste  management boundary (HWMB).

     5)   Inadequate .hydrogeological data  pertaining to the surrounding  area.

-------
  MAR 15 B8-4


 Issues  Concerning Alternate Concentration Limits
 Demonstrations

 Randall W.  Breeden,  Hydrologist OSW
 Land Diaposal Branch (*H-3(5E)

 Addressees


      To data, Headquarters has received three part  B  permit
 applications with Alternate Concentration Limit demonstra-
 tions.   I have reviewed the applications in conjunction with
 the Permit  Assistance Team.  The KPA has denied all RCRA ACL
 demonstrations to date.  There are several reasons  why all
 requests have been denied.  I will briefly discuss  the major
 deficiencies that I  have encountered in the permit  applications,

   *  One major dlficiency in all ACL demonstrations has been
 the lack of sufficient hydrogeologieal data to substantiate
 what the applicants believes is occurring beneath their facility.
 The quantity and quality of subsurface information  that is
 needed  to adequatley assess what is occurring beneath a facilty
 is substantial.  So far we have not received an application
 that has had the amount and detail of information necessary to
 juatify the ACL demonstration.             .

      To date, no facility submitting an ACL demonstration has
 completed an Appendix VIII analysis.  Pursuant to 270.14(c)(4),
 all facilities that exhibit a plume of contamination  must
 submit  on Appendix VIII analysis describing the concentration
 of each Appendix VIII constituent in the plume.   Pursuant to
 2(4.94  (b)(ri) an ACL demonstration must describe the 'existing
 quality of  ground water*... in order to accomplish  this an
 Appendix VIII analysis must be performed.  Not only Is the
 analysis required by ruls, but in the case where  a  aasardous
 constituent is deteained to be in the ground water,.and does
 not have an ACL or KCL established for that constituent, cor-
 rective action may be required to return the concentration  of
 that constituent back to background or the 2(4.94 (b) Table 1
 KCL concentration.   Me have uaed the 270.l4(c)(2)  and (c')(4)
 as a elnb to require facilities to do the Appendix  VIII analysis
 before  we will even consider the ACL demonstration.

      Two facilities that have submitted an ACL demonstration
 (International Pap«r, Region VII and Sodyeco, Region  IV) are
 currently analysing the ground water for Appendix VIII compounds
 after receiving WODa for the ACL demonstration.   Roth facilities
, are aware that resubmittal of their ACL demonstration must

-------
Include more detailed Information-describing  the subsurface "•_
environment* and fate and  transport for each  hasarooua con-""',
stituent found in the ground water*

     There has been a lack of conclusive  informaitbn submitted .'
with the ACL demonstrations that there will be no harm to  •.
human health and the environment at the   concentration levels
that they are asking ACLs  for.  In order  to help remedy this   :
situation we have requested the applicants to provide an in-depth
evaluation of the effects  that each hasardous constituent will
have on human health and the environment. '.',"••

  •••'  In all applications the point of compliance (POC) wells
have not been placed at the hazardous waste management boundary
(HVMB).  This poses problems when reviewing contaminant concen-
tration data, (e.g.  the contaminant concentration  data may
not be representative of the concentration at the POC due  to
the wells being  incorrectly placed).  In  some cases the wells
have been screened at the  wrong depth to  adequately intercept
the plume.  EPA  coanents have.requested that  the POC be moved
closer to the HWXB.  EPA consents and the HOD have  mentioned
that the POC must be moved closer to H*MB.  ...  _• ... .,—.   •--,

     A significant amount  of off-site information  is needed in
order to adequately assess an ACL demonstration.  The applica-
tions received so far contain sparse  information concerning
pffsite hydrogeology, water quality,  and  general information
about the surrounding area.  Paragraphs 2<4.94(b)(11) and
2C4.94(b)(v) gives EPA  the authority  to request the hydrogeological
information pertaining  to  the surrounding land.  We have requested
the applicants to submit more detailed offsite  information.

  •   We have yet to see a  resubmittal -for an  ACL demonstration,
however,;International  Paper and Sodyeco  are  currently  in  the
process of compiling one.

Addresseest  ..
  *»..•'   .  .•'.
  Jack Lehman
  fred Lindsey
  Ken shuster
  Emrnell Vincent
  Qeorge Dixon  ,
  Art Day     *'•':
  Peter Guerrero
  Terry Orogan
  Amy Mills ,; i
       Fagaa  '!•:•
        flatsel '
  Elisabeth Cot«wortJi
                               : Jtm2102:3/15/84
                              : 2    '  •" '•"'•  J

-------