BACKGROUND DOCUMENT NO. 5
HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT SffiTEM: GENERAL;
STANDARDS APPLICABLE TO OWNERS AND OPERATORS
OF HAZARDOUS WASTE TREATMENT, STORAGE, AND DISPOSAL
FACILITIES; AND HAZARDOUS WASTE PEEMIT PROGRAM
(40 CFR 260, 264, and 122)
Permitting of Land Disposal Facilities;
Underground Injection and Underground Seepage
This document (ms. 1941.38) provides background
information on EPA's proposed regulations for
land disposal of hazardous waste
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
July 1981
-------
(2)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION Page 3
I. NEED FOR REGULATION Page 5
II. ANALYSIS OF STANDARDS Page 5
1. Purpose, scope and applicability - §264.1 Page 5
2. Permits by rule - §122.26 Page 8
3. Applicability (Underground Injection) - §264.430 Page 11
4. General design and
installation requirements - §264.431 Page 12
5. General operating requirments - §264.432 Page 13
6. Monitoring and response - §264.433 Page 14
7. Closure and post-closure - §264.434 Page 17
8. Applicability (Underground Seepage) - §264.460 Page 18
9. General design requirements - §264.461 Page 20
10. General operating requirements - §264.462 Page 21
11. Containment system - §264.463 Page 21
12. Diversion Structures - §264.464 Page 22
13. Inspections and testing - §264.465 Page 23
14. Contingency plans - §264.467 Page 23
15. Closure and post closure - §264.468 Page 24
16. Special requirements for
ignitable or reactive waste - §264.469 Page 25
17. Special requirements for
incompatible wastes - §264.470 Page 26
III REFERENCES Page 26
-------
(3)
INTRODUCTION
Underground injection and underground seepage are two types
of land disposal facilities for which specific general standards
have not previously been proposed under §3004 of the RCRA. It had
been intended, as is apparent from §122.26 which these regulations
propose to amend, that hazardous waste injection be administered
under the Underground Injection Control (UIC) program established
under the authority of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). Comment
was received questioning this intention and the equivalence of the
standards of compliance of the SDWA and the RCRA. Furthur related
issues arose when the UIC proposal to ban all shallow injections
of hazardous waste, except those which would only effect an "exempted
aquifer", was administratively rejected; and it was recognized that
no provision existed within the UIC Program or the SDWA for interim
status for existing hazardous waste underground injection facilities.
This resulted in requirements for interim status being proposed
for injection wells as Subpart R of Part 265 at 45 FR 33280 on 19
May 1980. The issues were discussed in the preamble to that
promulgation of proposed regulations and in the preamble to the
final regulations for Part 122 at 45 FR 42472.
The term "injection well", as used in the UIC Program, is a
term of art. It includes any facility used for the emplacement of
fluids into the land if the depth of the facility is greater than
the largest surface dimension. This term is interpreted to include
facility types described as seepage facilities in §264.19 if the
dimensional condition of the term is met. It is specifically
intended to include covered seepage facilities with an inlet pipe
-------
(4)
since the diameter of the pipe is interpreted to represent the
largest surface dimension of the facility. Such seepage facilities
are generally considered to be among those "wells" which are Class
IV wells (not a literally correct generalization based on the
definition in §122.32). Standards for Class IV wells were reserved
at 45 FR 42511 when the UIC regulations under Part 146 were
promulgated on 24 June 1980.
Seepage facilities which do not meet the dimensional criteria
of an "injection well" are often referred to as "pits, ponds, and
lagoons" and are within definition of "surface impoundments"
applicable to Part 265 of the the RCRA. Certain of these terms and
definitions are not consistant with the general use of the language,
and are confusing. In order to achieve a more logical distinction
amoung the various types of facilities (which would be generally
understood) , the term "seepage facilities" has been used in these
regulations to describe facilities designed with the objective of
emplacing liquids into or above the surficial (uppermost) aquifer.
The term "underground injection facilities" has been limited in
these regulations to those facilities which are designed with the
objective of injecting (under pressure) liquids beneath the surficial
aquifer. Therefore, a seepage facility may be an "injection well"
or a "surface impoundment" as those terms are defined or used in
Parts 122, 146, 260, and 265; whereas an "underground injection
facility" may only be an "injection well" which is cased to prevent
discharge into the surficial (uppermost) aquifer. The use of
these and other terms is furthur described in preamble discussion
of "Types of facilities - §264.19(a)" at 46 FR 11136-38.
-------
(5)
I. NEED FOR REGULATION
Based on the above discussion, it should be clear that the
need for regulation of "underground injection facilities" and
"seepage facilities" has been addressed in other documents and
need only be referenced here. Reference can be made to the
Underground Injection Control Regulation Docket for specific
demonstration of the need for regulation of those facilities which,
due to dimensional definition, were addressed as "injection wells".
The Statement of Basis and Purpose dated May, 1980 sets forth the
reasoning of the Agency and includes the citation of pertinent
references. Reference can be made to "Background Document No. 1 -
Surface Impoundments" of this series for specific demonstration of
the need for regulation of surface impoundments which are designed
with the objective of emplacing liquids into the land.
II. ANALYSIS OF STANDARDS
!• Purpose, scope and applicability - §264.1
A. Proposed Regulations and Rationale
See the final regulation - §264.l(g) at 45 FR 33221
B. Summary of Comments
One commenter on the Agency's proposal to administer the
well injection of hazardous waste under the UIC program objected
strongly arguing that; (1) The language of Section 3005(a) of RCRA
does not allow the disposal of hazardous waste in any facility that
in not permitted under RCRA; and (2) the disposal of hazardous waste
should be regulated under RCRA because that Act provides a greater
level of protection to the environment.
-------
(6)
C . Discussion
The Ajency discussed that comment in the Preamble to the
final regulations for Part 146 at 45 FR 42278. It rejected the
substance of the second part of the arguement asserting that the
major concern from the injection of fluids is the potential danger
to underground sources of drinking water. It should be noted that
the term "underground sources of drinking water" is also a term of
art as used in conjunction with the SDWA. It is defined in a manner
which would include within the meaning of the term essenially all
surficial aquifers whether or not they are or could potentially be
used to supply water for drinking use.
The Agency has reconsidered its own position that the concern
over the injection of fluids is limited to drinking water source
protection recognizing that the position it had taken is more
valid for deep well injection than for shallow well "injection"
(i.e., seepage into the surficial or uppermost aquifer). It has
therefore proposed to amend the permit by rule for injection wells
in §122. 26(b) to limit the exclusive jurisdiction to administer
hazardous waste "well injection" under the UIC program.
The amendment to §264.1(d) is the simple insertion of the phrase
"and a permit by rule under §122.26(b) of this Chapter" which
limits the exclusive jurisdiction of the UIC program to the scope
of the amended permit by rule.
Therefore, the proposed amendment conforms the applicability
of the regulations to exclude only those "injection wells" which,
by definition, can fully comply with the criteria and standards
for hazardous waste land disposal facilities. Because of the
-------
(7)
Agency's decision to propose the Non-numerical health and
environmental standard, it can not continue the complete delegation
of the authority to permit land disposal by well injection to the
jurisdiction of the Underground Injection Control Program of the
Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) as it had previously intended. The
Non-numerical human health and environmental standard being proposed,
the "Ground Water Protection Standard", is based on the premise that
decisions on the use of groundwater as a source of present or future
drinking water will be made on a much narrower basis than the broad,
numerically based, definition of an "underground source of drinking
water".
The basic decision of the Agency to resolve the problems of
which criteria and standards apply when a facility, subject to both
the RCRA and the SDWA, is to be permitted is that both apply. The
Authority section of the preamble therefore cites both Acts with
respect to "well injection", and the Part 264 standards and criteria
apply to all hazardous waste "well injection". This should be
understood to be an administrative resolution of the problem which
reduces the issues to those of exclusive jurisdiction.
At both the federal and the state levels of government, the
management and protection of ground water is not exclusively
associated with either broad health and environmental effects or
with the use of ground water for drinking water. As EPA has been,
state agencies are often also charged by their own legislative
bodies to consolidate resources in the management of any resource.
Part of the intent of the decision referenced above is to allow
management flexibility in charging individuals to be responsible
-------
(8)
for either the RCRA or the SDWA programs, or both. The scope of
the exclusive jurisdiction is discussed below with reference to
the RCRA permit by rule in §122.26.
D. Regulatory Language
In §264.1, paragraph (d) is revised to read as follows:
§264.1 Purpose, scope and applicability.
*****
(d) The requirements of this Part apply to a person disposing
of hazardous waste by means of underground injection subject to a
permit issued under an Underground Injection Control (UIC) program
approved or promulgated under the Safe Drinking Water Act and a
permit by rule under §122.26(b) of this chapter only to the extent
they are required by §122.45 of this Chapter. These Part 264
regulations do apply to the aboveground treatment or storage of
hazardous waste before it is injected underground.
*****
2. Permits by rule - §122.26
A. Proposed Regulations and Rationale
See the final regulation - §122.26(b) at 45 PR 33435
B. Summary of Comments
See the Summary of Comments under Section 1.
C . Discussion
As mentioned in Section 1., the scope of the permit by rule
to allow RCRA jurisdiction over certain types of facilities to be
exclusively administered under the UIC program has been proposed
for amendment. A basic problem became evident upon analysis by
the Agency of the decision not to implement the total UIC ban
-------
(9)
of Class IV wells. Class IV wells are those which "inject" hazardous
waste above an "underground source of drinking water" (USDW).
Included among Class IV wells are a number types of facilities
that are "wells" because of the UIC definition (i.e., deeper than
wide) rather than because they would commonly be referred to as wells,
Many of those types of facilities are among those subject to "Subpart
S - Seepage Facilities" of the proposed rule. It should be noted
that the Class IV ban of wells that inject directly into a USDW is
being continued, and must be considered a limitation on RCRA
jurisdiciton to permit such facilities. The justification for
continuing this "interim ban", discussed at 45 FR 42485 in the
preamble to the final UIC regulations, is covered in the UIC
Statement of Basis and Purpose dated May, 1980.
The basic problem that resulted in the proposed amendment to
§122.26(b) is that the scope of authority to permit or deny
applications for permits under the RCRA and the SOWA are not
equivalent. In the proposed rule that problem is being resolved
by promulgating criteria and standards for "injection wells" under
both the RCRA and the SEWA. In this way the RCRA standard will
apply equally to either program and, at least within the Agency,
exclusive jurisdiciton will not be a primary issue. The allocation
of staff resources with appropriate talents to review permit
applications for hazardous waste land disposal facilities can be
managed as appropriate to the Agency's goals.
The permit by rule allows UIC exclusive jurisdiction in those
circumstances when it is clear that the RCRA standard will be
complied with. Those circumstances exist only when no waste will
-------
(10)
enter a surficial aquifer and no water will be withdrawn for use
from the zone of containment within the injection zone. In all
other circumstances, the RCRA criteria and standards will apply
directly since the UIC criteria and standards are either not
equivalent or have been reserved.
The term "zone of containment" is a RCRA term of art defined
in the proposed amendments to Part 260 at 46 FR 11171. The use of
that defined term in §122.26(b) will require that a permit applicant
define the zone of containment of the injection in accordance with
the requirements of §122.25(d) in order to qualify for the RCRA
permit by rule. In the UIC program, the requirement for review is
limited to the "area of review" which is defined in §146.07 as a
fixed radius around the well or the calculated area where "pressures
in the injection zone may cause the migration of the injection
and/or formation fluid into an underground source of drinking
water". This UIC requirement ignores the potential for migration
of the injected waste in the absence of injection pressure and,
although it may approximate the expected physical response of the
natural systems to deepwell injection under pressure, it cannot be
relied upon to describe the area of concern when the injection will
occur into a formation (aquifer) in which the groundwater is moving.
In a similar manner, the language of the permit by rule requires
a permit applicant to show that the confining zone beneath which he
proposes to inject hazardous waste will not allow movement of fluid
into a surficial aquifer where the human health and environmental
effects of concern are not limited to those which would accrue from
the withdrawal and use of affected groundwater.
-------
(11)
D. Regulatory Language
In §122.26, paragraph (b) is revised to read as follows:
§122.26 Permits by rule.
*****
(b) Injection wells. The owner or operator of an injection
well disposing of hazardous waste beneath a surficial aquifer and
beneath a confining zone that does not allow movement of fluid
into a surficial aquifer if the owner or operator:
(1) Has a permit for underground injection issued under
Part 122, Subpart C or Part 123, Subpart C; and
(2) Complies with the conditions of that permit and the
requirements of §122.45 (requirements for wells managing hazardous
waste); and
(3) Providing that no ground water is being or will in the
future be withdrawn from the zone of containment.
3. Applicability (Underground Injection) - §264.430
A. Proposed Regulations and Rationale
See the Discussion in Section 1.
B. Summary of Comments
See the Discussion in Section 1.
C. Discussion
As expressed in the preamble to the regulation at 46 PR 11149,
the requirements of Subpart R are applicable to all "deepwell"
injections (through the uppermost aquifer) of hazardous wastes.
"Wells" which discharge into or above a surficial aquifer are subject
to the requirements of Subpart S (See Section 8. and the Discussion
in Section 1.)
-------
(12)
D. Regulatory Language
The regulations of this Subpart apply to owners and operators
of facilities which dispose of hazardous waste by means of an
injection well which discharges below the surficial aquifer, except
as §264.1 provides otherwise.
4. General design and installation requirements - §264.431
A. Proposed Regulations and Rationale
See the Preamble to the Part 146 regulations at 45 PR 42481.
B. Summary of Comments
See the Preamble to the Part 146 regulations at 45 FR 42481.
C . Discussion
There are six "pathways of contamination" references in the
Statement of Basis and Purpose dated may 1980 for the Underground
Injection Control program as follows:
0 migration of fluids through a faulty injection well casing;
0 migration of fluids through the annulus located between the
casing and well bore;
0 migration of fluids from an injection zone through the confining
strata;
0 vertical migration of fluids through improperly abandoned and
improperly completed wells;
0 lateral migration of fluids from within an injection zone
into a protected portion of that stratum; and
0 direct injection of fluids into or above an underground source
of drinking water.
If a well casing is defective, injected fluids may leak through
it. Such migration can contaminate the adjacent groundwater.
-------
(13)
Similarly, resistance by the receiving stratum to the entry of
injected fluids may be greater than annular resistance and the
fluids may travel alongside the casing in the drilling cavity and
contaminate a "protected" stratum. For further discussion see
Chapter 7 of the Report to Congress (1).
Casing and cementing requirements established in Part 146 are
effective in preventing the first two pathways from transmitting
contaminants. Review of geologic considerations in the injection
zone is necessary in preventing transmission through confining
strata or improperly abandoned or completed wells.
These regulations adopt the technical requirements and
specifications promulgated in Part 146 for Class I wells as the
applicable requirements for satisfying the requirements of §264.431.
Reference should be made to the Statement of Basis and Purpose
for Part 146 for more specific discussion of the requirements.
D. Regulatory Language
An underground injection well which discharges hazardous
waste below the surficial aquifer must be designed and installed
to prevent the migration of hazardous waste and decomposition or
reaction byproducts from the well casing and from the zone of
containment. An injection well designed and installed in accordance
with the technical requirements and specifications included in
§146.12(b),(c),(d) and (e) of this chapter will be considered as
satisfying the requirements of §264.431.
5. General operating requirments - §264.432
A. Proposed Regulations and Rationale
See the Preamble to the Part 146 regulations at 45 FR 42481.
-------
(14)
B. Summary of Comments
See the Preamble to the Part 146 regulations at 45 FR 42481.
C . Discussion
The requirements of §264.432 can also be met by complying with
appropiate requirements in Part 146. The operational requirements
of Part 146 also serve to minimize migration of fluids through a
casing. Foremost among these are the requirements to demonstrate
mechanical integrity. A mechanical integrity test is used to
verify, as its name indicates, the "integrity" of a well, i.e.,
whether there is an absence of significant leaks. The reader
should refer to "Mechanical Integrity Testing of Injection Wells",
Geraghty and Miller, Inc., April 30, 1980 for discussion of the
specific methodology (2).
Control of injection pressure below the known limits of
capability of confining strata is also necessary to comply with
the operating performance requirement.
D. Regulatory Language
The owner or operator of an underground injection well which
discharges hazardous waste below the surficial aquifer must prevent
the migration of hazardous waste and decomposition or reaction
byproducts from the well casing and from the zone of containment.
An injection well operated in accordance with the technical
requirements and specifications included in §146.13(a) of this
chapter will be considered as satisfying the requirements of §264.432.
6. Monitoring and response - §264.433
A. Proposed Regulations and Rationale
See the proposed Part 265 regulations at 45 FR 33284
-------
(15)
B. Summary of Comments
No significant comments were received on the proposed Part 265
requirements.
C. Discussion
Since these requirements are virtually unchanged from those
which were proposed for Part 265 on 19 May 1980, the rationale
need not be repeated here. See the Preamble to the proposed
regulations at 45 PR 33282.
D. Regulatory Language
The owner or operator of an underground injection well which
discharges hazardous waste below the surficial aquifer must:
(a) Develop a plan for a monitoring program capable of
determining compliance with §264.432 and the facility permit by:
(1) Demonstrating the mechanical integrity of the injection
well; and
(2) Demonstrating that the pressure of the injected fluids
remains within allowable limits.
(b) Specify in the plan required under paragraph (a) of this
section:
(1) For demonstrating mechanical integrity:
(i) The annular pressure range to be maintained and basis for
determining it for the specific well tubing, packer and casing
characteristics and for the anticipated injection fluid temperature;
(ii) The devices and procedures for continuous monitoring and
recording of the annular pressure, and evaluation of that information;
and
-------
(16)
(iii) Procedures for immediate response to changes in the
annular pressure outside the allowable range, and for restoration
of mechanical integrity;
(2) For demonstrating that injection fluid pressure remains
within allowable limits:
( i) The calculated fracture pressure and the basis for
determining it for the specific formation and zone of containment.
( ii) The calculated allowable injection pressure to be measured
at the well head and the basis for determining it for specific
injection fluid characteristics (i.e., specific gravity, viscosity
and temperature);
( iii) The techniques and procedures for continuous monitoring
and recording of the injection pressure at the well head, and for
evaluation of that information; and
(iv) Procedures for immediate response to an increase in the
well head pressure above the allowable limit, to restore pressure
to within allowable limits.
(c) Implement the monitoring plan which satisfies paragraph
( b) of this section and determine the mechanical integrity of the
well and the injection zone pressure.
(d) Keep records of the monitoring data and evaluations
specified in paragraph (b) (1) and (2) of this section throughout
the active life of the facility.
(e) Submit an annual report to the Regional Mministrator in
which compliance with §264.432 is assured; and separately identify
in the annual report those corrective actions, specified in
paragraphs (b)(l)(iii) and (b)(2)(iv) of this section which were
-------
(17)
implemented during the reporting period; and provide an explanation
of circumstances which required corrective action.
7. Closure and post-closure - §264.434
A. Proposed Regulations and Rationale
See the Preamble to §122.45 at 45 FR 33335
B. Summary of Comments
See the Preamble to §122.45 at 45 FR 33335
C . Discussion
In the Preamble to §122.45 at 45 FR 33335, the Agency set forth
it reasoning for reduced post-closure requirements for well used to
inject hazardous waste fluids into deep aquifers. That reasoning
is applicable to injection wells subject to Subpart R. Therefore,
the requirements for closure and post-closure are minimal. The
physical precautions of Part 146 for plugging will suffice for
this requirements of §264.434. The Statement of Basis and Purpose
for Part 146 should be consulted for background purposes.
D. Regulatory Language
(a) The owner or operator of an underground injection well
which discharges hazardous waste below the surficial aquifers
must close his facility in a manner that prevents future use of
the well and minimizes threats to public safety.
(b) The owner or operator of an underground injection well
which discharges hazardous waste below the surficial aquifer must
close by plugging the well with cement. Plugging in accordance
with the technical requirements included in §146.10(b) of this
chapter will be considered as satisfying this requirement.
-------
(18)
(c) The owner or operator of an underground injection well
which discharges hazardous waste below the surficial aquifer is
excluded from the requirements of §§264.117 - 264.118 and
§§264.144 - 264.145 of this Part.
8. Applicability (Underground Seepage) - §264.460
A. Proposed Regulations and Rationale
See the discussion in the Introduction and the Need for
Regulation sections of this document; and the discussions in Section
1. - Purpose, scope, and applicability and in Section 2. - Permits
by rule.
B. Summary of Comments
See the Summary of Comments under Section 1. of this document,
Background Document No. 1 - Surface Impoundments (of this series),
and the background document "Subpart K - General Standards for
Surface Impoundments Used for Treatment and Storage" dated 29
December 1980.
C. Discussion
These standards apply to seepage facilities which are defined
in the proposed amendments to Part 260 as "any land disposal facility
which is used to emplace liquids into the land or the ground water
which is not a cased injection well, a landfill, a surface
impoundment, or a land treatment facility".
As discussed in the introduction and reflected in the definition
quoted above, the fundamental difference between surface impoundments
and certain types of seepage facilities is the objective of the
design of the facility. Seepage facilities are designed with the
objective of emplacing liquids into the land, whereas surface
-------
(19)
are designed to contain liquids. Surface impoundments may leak
liquids, but the normal design objective is contol or limit leakage
at least to the extent that the facility does impound (i.e., contain)
free liquids creating a relatively stable free liquid surface.
Four types of seepage facilities are described in the preamble
discussion of "Types of facilities - §264.19(b)" at 46 FR 11136-38.
The four types described are seepage lagoons, drying beds, seepage
pits, and seepage beds. As noted in the preamble to Subpart S at
46 FR 11149, "any injection well that is not cased to prevent
discharge into the surficial aquifer is also a seepage facility".
Of the four types described, seepage lagoons and drying beds are
similar in construction and design (except with respect to the design
objectives discussed above) to surface impoundments.
The technical requirements of Subpart S which have been proposed
effectively establish that the technical requirements of Subpart K
which are appropiate for application to those types of seepage
facilities that are similar in construction and design to surface
impoundments (i.e., seepage lagoons and drying beds) do apply. The
Agency was not prepared to propose parallel technical requirement
for seepage pits, seepage beds, (both of these types of facilities
are commonly constructed below the elevation of the adjacent ground
surface and covered) and injection wells which are not cased to
prevent discharge into the surficial aquifer at the time the proposed
requlations were promulgated. The Agency is considering what
technical requirements should be promulgated for those types of
facilities under both Part 264 and Part 265 (See the preamble to
the proposed Part 265 requirements for Subpart R at 45 FR 33281) .
-------
(20)
D. Regulatory Language
The regulations in this Subpart apply to owners and operators
of seepage facilities used to treat, store, or dispose of hazardous
waste, except as §264.1 provides otherwise.
9. General design requirements - §264.461
A. Proposed Regulations and Rationale
See the 29 December 1980 Background Document; General design
requirements - §264.221.
B. Summary of Comments
See the 29 December 1980 Background Document; General design
requirements - §264.221.
C. Discussion
The design of a seepage lagoon or drying bed is essentially
the same as a surface impoundment in the 5 February 1981 reproposed
regulations. Although ground water concerns may differ, design of
the facility with regard to dikes, freeboard, overtopping and
surface water protection in general remains the same. The rationale
regarding these requirements may be found in the background documents
for the regulations referred to. (See Background Document No . 1 -
Surface Impoundments of this series; General Design Requirements -
§264.221; the background docment "Subpart K - General Standard
for Surface Impoundments Used for Treatment and Storage" dated 29
December 1980; and the background document "Subpart K - Final
Interim Status Standards for Surface Impoundments" dated 28 April
1980.) of Solid Waste, April 28, 1980. In the following sections,
abreviated reference will be made to these as appropiate rather
than creating redundant discussion in this document.)
-------
(21)
D. Regulatory Language
(a) Seepage lagoons and drying beds must be designed to comply
with the requirements of §264.221, Subpart K.
10. General operating requirements - §264.462
A. Proposed Regulations and Rationale
See the 29 December 1980 Background [Document; General Operating
Requirements - §264.222.
B. Summary of Comments
See the 29 December 1980 Background Document; General Operating
Requirements - §264.222.
C. Discussion
See the 29 December 1980 Background Document; General Operating
Requirements - §264.222.
D. Regulatory Language
Seepage lagoons and drying beds must be operated and maintained
to comply with the requirements of §264.222, Subpart K.
11. Containment system - §264.463
A. Proposed Regulations and Rationale
See the 29 December 1980 Background Document; Containment
systems - 264.223; ISSUE; Earthen dikes.
B. Summary of Comments
See the 29 December 1980 Background Document; Containment
systems - 264.223; ISSUE; Earthen dikes.
C. Discussion
Seepage facilities are specifically designed to allow seepage
of liquids, therefore, liner requirements are not specified in
this regulation. Waste must, however, be contained within any
-------
(22)
dikes which are utilized to prevent spills, surface water
contamination and uncontrolled (i.e., not permited) discharges to
groundwater. The containment system regulation is, therefore,
effectively limited to insuring that dikes are adequately constructed
and maintained. See the 29 December 1980 Background Document -
ISSUE; Earthen dikes
D. Regulatory Language
(a) All earthen dikes must have a protective cover, such as
grass, shale, or rock, or be constructed of materials which are
sufficiently resistant to wind and water erosion to preserve the
structural integrity of the dike.
12. Diversion Structures - §264.464
A. Proposed Regulations and Rationale
See the 29 December 1980 Background Document; General Operating
Requirements - §264.222; ISSUE; Dike maintenance and diverson of
run-on.
B. Summary of Comments
See the 29 December 1980 Background Document; General Operating
Requirements - §264.222; ISSUE; Dike maintenance and diverson of
run-on.
C. Discussion
Seepage lagoons and drying beds are designed to contain waste
for seepage within a defined area generally enclosed by dikes.
Where run-on is allowed to occur, overflow of seepage facility
dikes is likely to occur with subsequent surface water, and possibly
ground water degradation. The regulation, therefore, specifically
calls for run-on diversion for seepage lagoons and drying beds.
-------
(23)
D. Regulatory Language
(a) Run-on must be diverted away from a seepage lagoon or a
drying bed.
13. Inspections and testing - §264.465
A. Proposed Regulations and Rationale
See the 29 December 1980 Background Document; Inspection and
Testing - §264.226.
B. Summary of Comments
See the 29 December 1980 Background Document; Inspection and
Testing - §264.226.
C. Discussion
See the 29 December 1980 Background Document; Inspection and
Testing - §264.226.
D. Regulatory Language
(a) The owner or operator of a seepage lagoon or a drying bed
must comply with the inspection requirements of §264.226, Subpart K,
14. Contingency plans - §264.467
A. Proposed Regulations and Rationale
See the 29 December 1980 Background Document; Containment
system repairs; Contingency plans - §264.227.
B. Summary of Comments
See the 29 December 1980 Background Document; Containment
system repairs; Contingency plans - §264.227.
C. Discussion
The failure of a seepage facility dike may result in identical
damage to health and the environment as a surface impoundment dike
failure; therefore, the contingency plan requirments which are
-------
(24)
applicable to surface impoundment dikes apply to seepage facilities
with dikes. See the 29 December 1980 Background Document;
Containment system repairs; Contingency plans - §264.227.
D. Regulatory Language
Seepage facilities with dikes must comply with the requirements
of §264.227, Subpart K, applicable to dikes.
15. Closure and post closure - §264.468
A. Proposed Regulations and Rationale
See the 29 December 1980 Background Document; Closure - §264.228.
B. Summary of Comments
See Background Document No. 1 - Surface Impoundments of this
series; Closure and post-closure - §264.228.
C. Discussion
See Background Document No. 1 - Surface Impoundments of this
series; Closure and post-closure - §264.228.
D. Regulatory Language
Unless otherwise authorized in the permit for the facility, at
closure, all hazardous waste and hazardous waste residues must be
removed from a seepage facility and managed as a hazardous waste
in accordance with all applicable requirements of Parts 262 - 266
of this Chapter. Any component of the containment system or any
appurtenant structures or equipment (e.g., discharge platforms and
pipes, and baffles, skimmers, aerators, or other equipment)
containing or contaminated with hazardous waste or hazardous waste
residues must be decontaminated; or removed and also managed as
a hazardous waste.
-------
(25)
16. Special requirements for ignitable or reactive waste - §264.469
A. Proposed Regulations and Rationale
See the 29 December 1980 Background Document; Special
Requirements for ignitable or reactive wastes - §264.229.
B . Summary of Comments
See the 29 December 1980 Background Document; Special
Requirements for ignitable or reactive wastes - §264.229.
C. Discussion
The requirements of this section are equivalent to those
promulgated for surface impoundments. See the 29 December 1980
Background Document; Special Requirements for ignitable or reactive
wastes - §264.229. The requirements apply to all seepage facilities
rather than just seepage lagoons and drying beds. The comment to
the existing language of the requirement for surface impoundments
has not been included at the request of the Federal Register staff.
D. Regulatory Language
Ignitable or reactive waste must not be placed in a seepage
facility, unless:
(a) The waste is treated, rendered, or mixed before or
immediately after placement in the facility so that:
(1) The resulting waste, mixture, or dissolution of material
no longer meets the definiton of ignitable or reactive waste under
§§261.21 or 261.23 of this Chapter; and
(2) §264.17(b) is complied with; or
(b) The waste is managed in such a way that it is protected
from any material or conditions which may cause it to ignite or
react; or
-------
(26)
(c) The seepage facility is used solely for emergencies.
'17. Special requirements for incompatible wastes - §264.470
A. Proposed Regulations and Rationale
See the 29 December 1980 Background Document; Special
requirements for incompatible wastes - §264.230.
B. Summary of Comments
See the 29 December 1980 Background Document; Special
requirements for incompatible wastes - §264.230.
C. Discussion
The requirements of this section are also equivalent to those
promulgated for surface impoundments. See the 29 December 1980
Background Document; Special requirements for incompatible wastes
- §264.230. These requirements also apply to all seepage facilities
rather than just seepage lagoons and drying beds. The comment to
the existing language of the requirement for surface impoundments
has not been included at the request of the Federal Register staff.
D. Regulatory Language
Incompatible wastes, or incompatible wastes and materials (see
Appendix V for examples) must not be placed in the same seepage
facility, unless §264.17 (b) is complied with.
Ill REFERENCES
1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, The Report to Congress;
Waste Disposal Practices and their Effects on Ground Water;
January 1977. "—
2. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Mechnical Integrity
Testing of Injection Wells; by Geraghty and Miller, Inc.,
April 30, 1980.
------- |