NCD980602163_19950808_Warren County PCB Landfill_SERB C_US-EPA clarification on specific PCB regulatory issues-OCR

SENT 8Y : 4 -APT PTSBj 8-8-95 4:51PM; 404 347 1681 => 919 715 3605j
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION-4
AUG O 8 1995
4APT-PTSB
Mr. William L. Meyer
Director
l◄S COURTLAND STREET, N .E.
ATLANTA. GEOII.GIA 30J65
Division of Solid waste Management
State of North Carolina Department of
Health and Natural Resources
P.O. Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Dear Mr. Myer:
This is in response to your letter dated July 14, 1995,
regarding written clarification on some specific Polychlorinated
Biphenyl (PCB) regulatory/policy issues that pertain to the
detoxification of the Warren County PCB Landfill. our response
#1 /3
is as follows: r
1. Issue: Process for modification of existing TSCA chemic~l
waste landfill permit to allow excavation, removal, back fill and
closure of the landfill.
As I mentioned at the July 7, 1995, meeting, it is very
unusual to think about removal of soil from a closed landfill.
Assuming that post-closure maintenance of the landfill is
provided, the PCB regulations stipulate that the material in the
landfill is properly disposed.
In this case, you will be removing regulated soil to conduct
PCB research and development (R&D) pursuant to an EFA approval
which will authorize the work. In the R&D approval, if issued by
Region 4, we will include language authorizing the State of North
Carolina to open the landfill to obtain the soil. If the R&D
approval is issued by Headquarter's, we can issue a letter to the
State of North Carolina authorizing the excavation work at the
landfill. We will also stipulate providing some interim cover
over the section of the landfill that was disturbed so as to
prevent additional rainwater from being introduced into the
landfill during the R&D work, and finally some language to
require reclosure (assuming the R&D work was not successful) of
the landfill within a certain period of time after the completion
of the R&D work.
If the R&D work is successful, and some company pursues a
PCB alternative disposal approval for the R&D process to enable
it to be used to detoxify the entire Warren County landfill, some
language will. be stipulated that provides for continued interim
cover over the disturbed area of the landfill until full scale
SENT BY: 4 APT PTSB; . 8-8-95 4:51PM; 404 347 1681 => 919 715 3605;
2
detoxification operations can begin on-site. If another process
is chosen to detoxify the landfill which has already been
approved by the EPA PCB program, we will also need to stipulate
language that provides for continued interim cover over the
disturbed area of the landfill until full scale detoxification
operations can begin on-site.
We are interested in reviewing and discussing the test
sample excavation plans for the site. There may be some options
for removal of the contaminated soil that could minimize the area
of cover disturbed such as the use of a drill rig to extract the
soil for testing._ Let's discuss your plans.
2. Issue: Limitations, restrietions on the amount of materials
that can be removed fo~ utilization on a pilot scale RMD
detoxification project. Are waivers available for the 500 lb.
limitations for R&:D projects? ?f no waiver& to the 500 lb. R~
limits are available, what is the process !or approval to exceed
this amount.
Typically, with respect to restrictions on the quantity of
materials that can be used, EPA evaluates each R&D demonstration
project request on a case-by-case basis to determine if the
quantities are warranted based upon the size/rating of the pilot
scale process equipment. So there are no actual restrictions on
the quantity, but EPA reserves the right to restrict that
quantity based on the perceived need for the project.
As stipulated in 40 C.F.R. §761.65(i) (2), R&D into PCB
disposal methods using a total of less than 500 pounds of PCB
material (regardless of PCB concentration} will be reviewed and
approved by the appropriate EPA Regional Administrator and R&D
using 500 pounds or more of PCB material (regardless of PCB
concentration} will be reviewed by the approval authorities set
out in §§761.60(e} and 761.?0(a) and (b) (Director, Chemical
Management Division -EPA headquarters). In order for EPA Region
4 to approve any R&D project involving more than 500 pounds of
PCB material, we have to request in writing a waiver from the
Chemical Management Division at EPA headquarters. EPA
headquarters is not likely to grant a waiver to allow Region 4 to
process the approval in this case since they consider that the
base-catalyzed dechlorination (BCD} process as not being a proven
technology from the PCB program's perspective. If it turns out
that any or all of the proposed pilot scale projects using BCD
involve less than 500 pounds, Region 4 could issue separate
approvals for each of the projects, thus avoiding having to
receive a waiver.
3. Issue: What approval is applicable to a pilot scale R&D
project utilizing BCD technology for PCB (<500 ppm) contaminated
soils?
#2 /3
SENT BY: 4 APT PTSBj 8-8-95 4:52PMj 404 347 16~1 =>
3
As discussed above, subject to the limitations provided for
at §761.60(i) (2), the approval for a pilot scale R&D treatability
study is addressed by the above provisions.
4. Issue: If PCB (<500 ppm) contaminated soils are stored prior
to and during the implementation of a R&D pilot scale project,
what standards are applicable?
The answer to your question will depend on the location of
the testing. Our preferred approach would be to store the test
material in containers in a roofed/diked enclosure per §761.65.
We are available to discuss various options for storage that you
may consider.
s. Issue: The State intends to proceed with up to 3 simultaneous
pilot Beale projects involving 3 different methodologies for SCD.
At what point should the state submit infor.mation to TSCA for
approval? Will approval ~e required for each project?
I mentioned one to two months for approval at the
July 7, 1995, meeting. However, after further thought on the
subject, I believe a more realistic timeframe would be at least
90 days prior to the projected start date for the project. That
allows us some time to work the project in with the other
approvals that we may have already in the process. I don't think
there will be any problem for Region 4 to process an approval in
that timeframe. If the application involves more than 500 pounds
of material, ·it will necessitate EPA headquarters approval. I
can't control the timeframe for their approval of the project,
but I can assure you that we will stress in writing the
importance of the project to Region 4 which hopefully will ensure
expeditious processing. Separate approvals are not required for
each project. However, if one or more of the projects involves
less than 500 pounds, we can issue separate approvals for each
project so that the over 500 pound criteria would not be
triggered.
6. Issue: What is the difference in applicability of PCB
regulations on :R&D projects and proposals for final approval for
an alternative methods ~or destroying PCBs? Por U8Jnp1e if a11 3
R.&.D projects fail to meet the 2 ppm PCB standard for exclusion,
then no proposal for alternative technology will be submitted for
consideration. It is not clear to the Division how these two
processes are addressed in the 40 C.P.R.761 Reg,.ilations.
As mentioned above, R&D approvals are addressed by 40 C.F.R.
§76i.60(i} (2). An alternative disposal approval is addressed by
40 C.F.R. §761.60(e). This Section states that any one who is
required to incinerate FCBs and PCB Items who can demonstrate
that an alternative method of destroying PCBs and PCB Items
exists, and that this alternative method can achieve a level of
performance equivalent to §761.70 incinerators or high efficiency
4
boilers, can request an exemption from the incineration
requirements (i.e., EPA will issue an alternative disposal
approval for a process that is successfully demonstrated to treat
soils down below 2 ppm PCBs}.
If you have any questions about this response or would like
to discuss some of the details of the projects, please do not
hesitate to call me or Craig Brown of my staff at [phone] .
Sincerely yours,
ffeMial_~
Stuart D. Perry
Chief
Toxics Unit
~ ~U)t~ SENT ~Y : 4'APT PTS B; 8-8-95 4:50PM; 404 347 1681 => 919 715 3605; #1/1
FACIMILE COVER SHEET
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION 4
FROM:
TELEPHONE NO.
FAX NO.
TO:
FAX NO.
TELEPHONE NO.
345 COURTLAND STREET, H.B.
ATLANTA,~GEORGIA 30365
COMMENTS