UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION III 1650 Arch Street Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 1 9103 - 2029 February 12, 2004

David C. Ward, Manager Environ mental Safety

Health & Safeguards Department BWX Technologies, Inc. Nuclear Products Division P.O. Box 785 Lyn chburg, VA 2 4505
- 0785
Dear Mr. Ward: We have reviewed the petition submitted by BWX Technologies, Inc. (BWXT) dated February 21, 2003, for de listing of certain wastes. T he wastes which are the subject of this petition are sludges located in two on
- site waste management units and wastewater (to the extent that it is classified as F006). S pecifically , the two waste management units which contai n the subject sludge are Final Effluent Ponds (FEPs) Nos. 1 and 2, and the wastewater in question is the wastewater being treated in FEP No. 2 (to the extent the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality

or EPA classifies these wastewaters as F006). The listing description for F006 is, “ Wastewater treatment sludges from electroplating operations, except from the following processes... ” Itis, and alway s has been, Agency policy that the mixture rule does not apply to the liquid in a wastewater treatme nt unit that manages unlisted liquid waste, even if that liquid generates a hazardous sludge that settles to the bottom of the unit. T his policy , however, does not apply if the sludge is dredged up or scoured from the bottom of the unit as a result of ope ration of the unit, and phy sically mixes with the liquid. Since the F006 listing describes a “ wastewater treatment sludge ” and not a “ wastewater ” as the listed waste, and in light of the above mentioned policy , EPA does not understand how the wastewater in FEP No. 2 would be considered a F006 listed waste. W e note that the petition does not describe how or whether samples of this wastewater will be collected and analy zed, and, therefore, the petition would be considered to be seriously deficient with re gard to this waste stream. I f y ou intend to pursue delisting of the wastewater, we need additional information explaining why

y ou feel the F006 listing applies to the wastewater, and how you intend to collect environmental data to show that this waste sho uld be delisted. Inaddition, please address the following questions or comments:

Wast e Description2

1. In order to complete the profile of wastes entering the FEPs, please describe any unanticipated discharges to the FEPs which have occurred over the operating life of these units. 2. P lease explain the method used to estimate the volume of sludge currently residing in the FEPs. Waste Sampling 3. T he Sludge Sampling Plan indicates that after freezing, the sample core will be spray ed with deionized water to remove the outer surface lay er of ice that forms from contact with the tube. T h is step appears to be unnecessary
. T he FEP sludge is expected to contain water. 4. T he Sludge Sampling Plan indicates that any water from the aluminum pan (in which the frozen cores are allowed to thaw) will be decanted. A gain, this step appears to be unnecessary

since the sludge is expected to contain liquid. 5. T he Sludge Sampling Plan does not describe the collection of samples to support the analy sis of volatile organic compounds (VOCs). G rab samples are ty pically collected for this ty pe of analy sis. H omogenization of samples during the sample preparation phase of the plan would not be compatible with VOC analy sis. Sample Container and Equipment Preparation 6. T he Sludge Sampling Plan does not identify the ty pe of sample containers that will b e used. 7. T he Sludge Sampling Plan does not indicate which/how sample preservatives will be used, or the amount of sample preservative that will be used. 8. T he Sludge Sampling Plan does not specify maximum sample holding times. 9. P rior to the sampling event, BWXT (or its contractor) must determine the number of sample containers that will be needed and the sample volumes to be collected. B WXT needs to make sure that adequate waste is available for waste sample analy sis, and fi eld and laboratory

control samples.

Sample Labeling3

10. T he Sludge Sampling Plan did not provide information on how sample container labels, sample log sheets, chain
- of
- custody records, and field log books will be used to document sampling activities
. T he Sludge Sampling Plan indicates only that samples will be transported after chain
- of
- custody forms have been completed. T he Sludge Sampling Plan needs to describe how field activities will be recorded, and what forms will be used to record informati on. Sample Shipment 11. I t is recommended that a chain
- of
- custody seal be placed over each sample container top after the sample is collected. A t the very least, it is recommended that a chain
- of
custody seal be placed over the shipping cooler lid to verify the absence of sample tampering during shipment. 12. I t is recommended that the cooler be delivered to the laboratory on the day

samples are prepared (i.e., the day frozen samples are thawed and homogenized). T he Sludge Sampling Plan did not iden tify when coolers will be delivered to the laboratory
. Sample Analyses 13. T he petition and Sludge Sampling Plan indicate that TCL P analy ses will be performed for metals and organic compounds. I t is unclear whether the TCL P extract will be analy

zed f or the full suite of Appendix VI II constituents (as appropriate) or only those constituents listed in 40 CFR Section 261.24. 14. D uring the Phase 1 sampling event, at least one sample from FEP Nos. 1 and 2 must be analy zed using a multiple leachate testi ng protocol. T his protocol requires the testing of all constituents using the TCL P procedure but substituting the specified extraction fluid with, (a) distilled deionized water, and (b)an alkaline solution of sodium hydroxide with a pH between 10 and 12. 15. T he petition and Sludge Sampling Plan must be revised to include analy sis of the FEP sludge samples for total sulfide. 16. T he petition and Sludge Sampling Plan must be revised to include analy sis of the FEP sludge samples for total oil and grease content.

Analytical Methods4

17. T he petition and the Sludge Sampling Plan must be revised to include the specific preparative, cleanup and determinative methods that will be used for all analy tes. O ne pos sible format for presenting this information is shown in the example below: Preparation Cleanup Analy tical Method Method Method Total Appendix IX volatiles 5035 NA 8260B Total Appendix IX herbicides 8151A 3620B 8151A TCL P Appendix I X semivolatile s 1311/3510 3640A 8270C Detection Limits 18. T he Sludge Sampling Plan did not provide detailed information regarding analy tical detection limits and is, therefore, incomplete. D etection limits are laboratory and instrument
- specific. In order to properly evaluate the analy

tical methods that will be used, the laboratory

needs to generate its own detection limits to assure that it meets the project DQOs with respect to sensitivity and detection. F or example, Method 6010 is probably appropriate for most of the target metals and can ty pically detect concentrations significantly

below the delisting maximum allowable concentrations. H owever, this method may

not be suitable for selenium or lead if the laboratory is requ ired to reach the delisting health
- based levels. T he Sludge Sampling Plan must provide the laboratory
- generated detection limits, using the methods and instruments that will be used during the actual analy sis. Data Validation 19. T he petition must in clude provisions specifying third party data validation for all analy tical data. D ata validation should be performed in accordance with the Region I II Modifications to the National Functional Guidelines for Data Review. Please refer to the list of referen ces in the attached “ Region I II QAPP Preparation Checklist ” for the specific data validation documents. Quality Assurance Project Plan 20. T he petition does not include a Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). In all cases involving the collection of e nvironmental data, both a Sampling and Analy sis Plan (S/A Plan) and a QAPP must be prepared. T hese two plans can be prepared either as separate plans or as one combined document.
Quality Control Samples5

21. T he Sludge Sampling Plan states that one f ield duplicate will be collected during the field event. T his frequency must be revised so that one field duplicate is collected f or every twenty (20) samples or each sample batch, whichever is greater. 22. T he Sludge Sampling Plan must include provisi ons for ensuring that samples are maintained at 4 o C until they are received by

the laboratory
. T emperature blanks are one way to evaluate the potential effects of sample transportation on data quality
. O ne temperature blank is included in each sample c ooler. Upon receipt by the laboratory , the temperature of the water in the temperature blank vial must be 4 o C, plus or minus 2 degrees. Laboratory Quality Assurance 23. T he Sludge Sampling Plan does not specify the analy tical laboratory

(or laborato ries) to be used for analy sis of the sludge samples, nor does it contain the analy tical laboratory ’ s QA procedures. T his requirement can be addressed by , (a) including the laboratory ’ s QA manual and, (b) the results of the laboratory ’ s most recent profici ency

testing for each ty

pe of analy sis that it will be performing. H owever, in lieu of proficiency

testing results, we will accept a current certificate of accreditation for the specified ty

pes of analy ses from an organization such as NELAP (the National Environmental L aboratory Accreditation Program). Hazardous Waste Characteristics 24. S ection XI(Conclusions), Subsection D states that, “ The data to be generated will demonstrate that the FEP Sludge does not exhibit any hazardous waste characteristi c. ” The sampling and analy sis proposed in the petition does not address all of the hazardous waste characteristics. C haracteristics can be addressed by testing, or in some cases, by presenting other information which is sufficient to show that the subjec t waste could not exhibit that particular characteristic based on process knowledge. F or example, the characteristic of reactivity can be addressed in part by testing for cy anide and sulfide; however, other categories of reactivity are usually

addressed through process knowledge. If testing is not done for a particular hazardous waste characteristic, the final submission must still specifically

address that characteristic, and provide information to support the conclusion that the waste does not possess the property described by

the characteristic. Inorder to assist y ou in addressing the QAPP requirements, Iam enclosing a copy of the Region I II QAPP Preparation Checklist. T his document is also available electronically
. I f the electronic version woul d be useful to y ou, please let me know.6

If y ou have any

questions regarding the review comments contained in this letter, please feel free to contact me at the address above, by phone at 215
- 814
- 3395, or by e - mail at friedman.davidm@epa.gov. Sincerely ,

David M. Friedman Delisting Coordinator Waste and Chemicals Management Division EPA Region I II
ATTACHMENT CC: John Storton (BWXT) Mike Jacobi Cy nthia Nadolski Hassan Vakili (VADEQ)