be denied. The agency of record was the Bureau of Waste Control, Arizona Department of Health Services, which was safefguarding the public’s interests on behalf of the EPA.(21) 

       The University’s waiver request was denied by the EPA. The waiver had characterized the site as having no chance of contaminants migrating to groundwater. The University’s public position was characterized in a 1983 letter from Henry Koffler, then University of Arizona President: “The landfill is located in an ideal location with approximately 500 feet of clay between the surface and the groundwater. The evaporation rate at the site is significantly greater than the precipitation rate. Studies of the site are ongoing to evaluate the rate of chemical migration, if any.”(22) 

       The EPA’s December 7, 1983 response to the UA’s waiver request (73) reads: 

“The waiver request documentation is deficient and therefore the waiver should not be granted due to the following general deficiencies: 

• The report lacks site specific data and/or justifications for the use of data from the surrounding area. 
• Documentation of the data/information and techniques employed is scant. 
• The travel time estimates made in the report with regard to waste migration appear to be minimized by the data and techniques employed; however, time is only one aspect to consider when evaluating the potential for waste migration and the travel times reported do not demonstrate a low potential for waste migration. Details of the physical and chemical attenuative capacities of the saturated and unsaturated zones must be considered in evaluating the potential for waste migration. 
• The water balance employed is deficient due to the time frame considered (month vs. day) and infiltration and subsequent leachate generation cannot be ruled out. The past practice of disposal of drummed and bulk liquid wastes into unlined trenches was not