(a) A facility or practice shall not contaminate an underground drinking water source beyond the solid waste boundary or beyond an alternative boundary specified in accordance with paragraph (b) of this section.
(b)(1) For purposes of section 1008(a)(3) of the Act or section 405(d) of the CWA, a party charged with open dumping or a violation of section 405(e) with respect to sewage sludge that is not used or disposed through a practice regulated in 40 CFR part 503 may demonstrate that compliance should be determined at an alternative boundary in lieu of the solid waste boundary. The court shall establish an alternative boundary only if it finds that such a change would not result in contamination of ground water which may be needed or used for human consumption. This finding shall be based on analysis and consideration of all of the following factors that are relevant:
(i) The hydrogeological characteristics of the facility and surrounding land, including any natural attenuation and dilution characteristics of the aquifer;
(ii) The volume and physical and chemical characteristics of the leachate;
(iii) The quantity, quality, and direction of flow of ground water underlying the facility;
(iv) The proximity and withdrawal rates of ground-water users;
(v) The availability of alternative drinking water supplies;
(vi) The existing quality of the ground water, including other sources of contamination and their cumulative impacts on the ground water;
(vii) Public health, safety, and welfare effects.
(2) For purposes of sections 4004(a) and 1008(a)(3), the State may establish an alternative boundary for a facility to be used in lieu of the solid waste boundary only if it finds that such a change would not result in the contamination of ground water which may be needed or used for human consumption. Such a finding shall be based on an analysis and consideration of all of the factors identified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section that are relevant.
(c) As used in this section:
(1) Aquifer means a geologic formation, group of formations, or portion of a formation capable of yielding usable quantities of ground water to wells or springs.
(2) Contaminate means introduce a substance that would cause:
(i) The concentration of that substance in the ground water to exceed the maximum contaminant level specified in appendix I, or
(ii) An increase in the concentration of that substance in the ground water where the existing concentration of that substance exceeds the maximum contaminant level specified in appendix I.
(3) Ground water means water below the land surface in the zone of saturation.
(4) Underground drinking water source means:
(i) An aquifer supplying drinking water for human consumption, or
(ii) An aquifer in which the ground water contains less than 10,000 mg/1 total dissolved solids.
(5) Solid waste boundary means the outermost perimeter of the solid waste (projected in the horizontal plane) as it would exist at completion of the disposal activity.
[44 FR 53460, Sept. 13, 1979, as amended at 46 FR 47052, Sept. 23, 1981; 58 FR 9386, Feb. 19, 1993]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
13
cases (
3 in the last 5 years), 1989–2026 · leading case:
Brod v. Omya, Inc., 653 F.3d 156 (2d Cir. 2011).
Brod v. Omya, Inc., 653 F.3d 156 (2d Cir. 2011).
· cites it 2× “RCO argued that the sampling results showed that Omya had violated 40 C.F.R. § 257.3-4 , which prohibits waste disposal practices that contaminate underground drinking water sources with specific substances in excess of specific thresholds.”
South Road Assocs. v. Int'l Bus. MacHines Corp., 216 F.3d 251 (2d Cir. 2000).
· cites it 10× “SRA alleges that this remediation program: (1) failed to discover (or remedy) all of the contamination, so that contamination levels continued at the time of the suit to exceed the maximum contaminant levels (“MCLs”) allowable under 40 C.F.R. § 257.3-4 (a), (c)(2)(i)-(ii); and…”
Dague v. City of Burlington, 732 F. Supp. 458 (D. Vt. 1989).
· cites it 6× “3-3 (a); and (c) the contamination of an underground drinking water source beyond the Landfill boundary in violation of 40 C.F.R. § 257.3-4 (a). a. Generation of methane gas Plaintiffs allege that in the past the Landfill generated methane gas in concentrations exceeding the…”
South MacOmb Disposal Auth. v. Am. Ins., 572 N.W.2d 686 (Mich. Ct. App. 1998).
· cites it 2× “, and its license under 40 CFR 257.3-4(a-c). The letter requested that plaintiff submit a work plan detailing a hydrogeological investigation of the site to define the extent of the groundwater contamination and provide an explanation of the direct and immediate measures that…”
Cmty. Ass'n for Restoration of the Env't, Inc. v. Cow Palace, LLC, 80 F. Supp. 3d 1180 (E.D. Wash. 2015).
· cites it 2× “§§ 6903 (3), 6972(a)(1)(B); see also 40 C.F.R. § 257.3-4 (a) (defining contaminating to mean causing that groundwater to exceed the MCL or cause a further increase in groundwater that already exceeds the MCL).”
Lewis v. FMC Corp., 786 F. Supp. 2d 690 (W.D.N.Y. 2011).
“The prohibition contained in the preceding sentence shall be enforceable under section 6972 of this title [the citizen suit provision] against persons engaged in the act of open dumping.”
Orange Env't, Inc. v. Cnty. of Orange, 860 F. Supp. 1003 (S.D.N.Y. 1994).
“40 C.F.R. § 257.3-4 (c)(2). Since 1987, monitoring wells outside the perimeter of the landfill have exhibited forty instances where the concentration of certain substances exceeded the maximum containment level (“MCL”) parameters for those substances as specified in Appendix I…”
Covington v. Jefferson Cnty., 358 F.3d 626 (9th Cir. 2004).
“Under the applicable regulation, 40 C.F.R. § 257.3-4 , “[a] facility or practice shall not contaminate an underground drinking water source beyond the solid waste boundary.”
Cnty. Comm'n of Fayette Cnty., West Virginia v. Nat'l Grid NE Holdings 2 LLC (S.D.W. Va 2022).
· cites it 3× “In this case, the County alleges that, since Quercus’s acquisition of the surface rights of the subject real estate on July 27, 2013, Quercus “has failed, and continues to fail,” to “satisfy the criteria set forth in 40 C.F.R. § 257.3-4 (a).” (ECF No. 499 at 114-15, ¶ 221.”
Jones (D. Maryland 2026).
· cites it 3× “3-3 (c) and 40 C.F.R. § 257.3-4 (a). Defendants argue that the notice had to cite to those specific implementing regulations, while Plaintiffs counter that their reference to § 6945 sufficed.”
— 40 C.F.R. § 257.3-4(a) — 1 case
South MacOmb Disposal Auth. v. Am. Ins., 572 N.W.2d 686 (Mich. Ct. App. 1998).
“, and its license under 40 CFR 257.3-4(a-c). The letter requested that plaintiff submit a work plan detailing a hydrogeological investigation of the site to define the extent of the groundwater contamination and provide an explanation of the direct and immediate measures that…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.