The Proposed Plan and the ROD should summarize how the components of an alternative will comply with major ARARs, and should describe why the requirement is applicable or relevant and appropriate. When an alternative is chosen that does not attain an ARAR, the basis for waiving the requirement must be fully documented and explained. TBCs referred to in the ROD should be listed and described briefly, as well as the reasons for their use.
See Guidance on Preparing Superfund Documents. Policy om Newly Promulgated Requirements "Freezing" ARARs at the ROD If a requirement that would be applicable or relevant and appropriate to the remedial action is promulgated after the Record of Decision ROD is signed and the ARARs for the selected remedy have already been established, the remedy will be evaluated in light of the new requirement to ensure that the remedy is still protective.
To the extent that the remedy remains protective in light of any new information reflected in the requirement, the original ARARs remain "frozen" at the ROD and nothing more needs to be done. However, if it is determined that the new requirement must be met in order for the remedy to be protective, the remedy must be modified to attain the requirement through an Explanation of Significant Differences ESD or ROD amendment.
For example, a new requirement for a chemical at a site may indicate, through new scientific information on which it was based, that the cleanup level selected for the chemical corresponds to a cancer risk of 10"2 rather than 10"5, as originally thought. The original remedy would have to be reevaluated in terms of the new requirement because it may no longer be protective. The six statutory waivers are provided in Highlight Box 4 and are discussed more fully below. These waivers may not be used for off-site actions.
Interim Measures Waiver, 2. Equivalent Standard of Performance Waiver, 3. Greater Risk to Health and the Eiwiroazneat Waiver, 4. Fund-Balancing Waiver. The interim measure should not cause additional migration of contaminants, complicate the site response, or present an immediate threat to public health or the environment, and must not interfere with or delay the J; EXAMPLE OF INTERIM At a raiciag site, interim measures were used to address drainage of contaminated water from a mine.
The acJioa involved passive treatment of mine tunnel discharges through construction of an artificial wetland, which would reduce contamination from the mine tunnel to the level of contamination present upstream. It should be noted, however, that if a requirement relates to some portion of the long-range site cleanup that is outside the scope of the immediate remedial action, it is not an ARAR for this action and a waiver is unnecessary.
The Equivalent Standard of Performance waiver may be used in situations where an ARAR stipulates use of a particular design or operating standard, but equivalent or better remedial results could be achieved using an alternative design or method of operation.
In invoking this waiver, the alternative should be equal to or greater than the ARAR in terms of: 1 the degree of protection afforded; 2 the level of performance achieved; and 3 the potential to be protective in the future. The time required to achieve beneficial results using the alternative should be considered; however, the duration of the alternative should be balanced against other beneficial factors that may ensue from using the alternative.
Provides answers to questions that arose in developing applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements ARARs policies, training sessions, and in identifying and complying with ARARs at specific sites.
The LDR program ensures that toxic constituents present in hazardous waste are properly treated before hazardous waste is disposed of in the ground. Summarizes the major components of RCRA LDRs, outlines the types of restrictions imposed, and presents compliance options specified in the regulation.
Defines the California list of wastes, summarizes their restrictions, and discusses their potential to overlap with other LDR treatment standards. Summarizes the types and effective dates of treatment standards, and outlines procedures for compliance with the treatment standards and minimum technology requirements set during national capacity extensions.
Outlines the process for utilizing a Treatability Variance for the remediation of soil and debris contaminated with RCRA hazardous wastes. Until the the Agency promulgates treatment standards for them, the treatment levels outlined will serve as alternative 'treatment standards' to obtain compliance with LDRs.
Outlines the process for utilizing a Treatability Variance for the removal of soil and debris contaminated with RCRA hazardous wastes. Until the the Agency promulgates treatment standards for them, the treatment levels outlined will serve as alternative "treatment standards" to obtain compliance with LDRs. Provides questions and answers which summarize the considerations involved with obtaining a treatability variance from LDRs.
This directive includes suggested language to be incorporated into the feasibility study report. Explains: 1 how to determine when LDRs are 'applicable' to a Superfund removal or remedial action, and 2 the Superfund approach for complying with those LDRs which are applicable.
Discusses the circumstances under which delisting wastes may be appropriate, and the procedures for delisting a RCRA hazardous waste as part of a Superfund remedial response. Occasionally, more than one CWA direct discharge requirement may potentially apply to a surface-water cleanup see Section III for resolution of this issue. Substantive Requirements a. EPA regulation requires States to establish antidegradation requirements.
As a resu discharges that result from CERCLA response actions high-quality receiving waters could be prohibited limited, unless an ARAR waiver such as inconsistent application by the State is available. State anti- degradation requirements may be applicable to both point and nonpoint source discharges.
A point source is a discernible conveyance such as a pipe, ditch, channel, tunnel or well from which pollutants may be discharged. Effluent Standards Technology-Based Limitations - CWA section b requires that, at a minimum, all direct discharges meet technology-based limits. Technology-based requirements for conventional pollutant discharges include application of the best conventional pollutant control technology BCT. For toxic and nonconventional pollutants, technology-based requirements include the best available technology economically achievable BAT.
Technology-based limits for water discharges are often expressed as con- centration levels. State WQS may be numeric or narrative.
Where State WQS are narrative, either the whole-effluent or the chemical-specific approach is generally used as the standard of control. State WQS may be applicable to both point and nonpoint source discharges.
The purpose of pretreatment standards is to avoid the introduction of pollutants into municipal wastewater treatment plants that pass through, interfere with, or are otherwise incompatible with, such treatment works.
The pretreatment standards are found in the national pretreatment program and in all State and local pretreatment regulations. There are three types of pretreatment standards see Highlight 3. It is, therefore, subject to both the substantive and administrative requirements of the national pretreatment program, and to all applicable State and local pretreatment regulations.
A POTW with an approved pretreatment program already has the mechanisms necessary to ensure that discharges, including those from a CERCLA site, comply with applicable pretreatment standards and requirements. POTWs have the authority to limit or reject wastewater discharges and to require dischargers to comply with control mechanisms such as permits or orders.
0コメント