[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 129 (Wednesday, July 3, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35042-35054]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-17030]
[[Page 35041]]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part VI
Environmental Protection Agency
_______________________________________________________________________
Effluent Guideline Plan; Notice
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 129 / Wednesday, July 3, 1996 /
Notices
[[Page 35042]]
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[FRL 5527-5]
RIN 2040-AC86
Effluent Guidelines Plan
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of Proposed Effluent Guidelines Plan.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Today's notice announces the Agency's proposed plans for
developing new and revised effluent guidelines, which regulate
industrial discharges to surface waters and to publicly owned treatment
works. Section 304(m) of the Clean Water Act requires EPA to publish a
biennial Effluent Guidelines Plan. The Agency requests comment on the
proposal and will publish a final plan following the close of the
comment period.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 2, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments in writing to: Water Docket Clerk (4101),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC
20460. The public record for this notice is available for review in the
EPA Water Docket, Room 2616 Mall, 401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC.
For access to Docket materials, call (202) 260-3027 between 9 a.m. and
3 p.m. for an appointment. The EPA public information regulation (40
CFR Part 2) provides that a reasonable fee may be charged for copying.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eric Strassler, EPA Engineering and
Analysis Division, telephone 202-260-7150.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Regulated Entities
II. Legal Authority
III. Introduction
A. Purpose of Today's Notice
B. Overview of Today's Notice
IV. Effluent Guidelines Program Background
A. Statutory Framework
B. Components of an Effluent Guideline Regulation
C. Development of Effluent Guideline Regulations
D. NRDC Litigation and Consent Decree
V. Today's Proposed Effluent Guidelines Plan
A. Effluent Guidelines Currently Under Development
1. Schedule for Ongoing Rulemaking
2. Changes in Rulemaking Scope, Schedules and/or Organization
a. Metal Products and Machinery
b. Pulp, Paper and Paperboard
c. Pharmaceutical Manufacturing
d. Transportation Equipment Cleaning
B. Process for Selection of New Effluent Guideline Regulations
1. Selection Criteria and Data Sources
a. Selection Criteria
b. Data Sources
2. New Rulemaking Activities
a. Iron and Steel Manufacturing
b. Other Rules
C. Preliminary Studies
1. Recently Completed Studies
a. Petroleum Refining
b. Metal Finishing
c. Textile Mills
d. Inorganic Chemicals
e. Steam Electric Power Generating
f. Iron and Steel Manufacturing
2. Ongoing Studies
a. Photographic Processing
b. Chemical Formulators and Packagers
3. Future Studies
a. Coal Mining
b. Feedlots
c. Stormwater Discharges
d. Hospitals
e. Ore Mining and Dressing
f. Glass Manufacturing
g. Canmaking
h. Organic Chemicals, Plastics and Synthetic Fibers
i. Pulp, Paper and Paperboard
j. Generic Effluent Guideline Issues
D. Other Rulemaking Actions
1. Leather Tanning and Finishing
2. Ore Mining and Dressing
3. Marine Discharges from Vessels of the Armed Forces
VI. Recommendations of the Effluent Guidelines Task Force
A. Data Sources
B. Criteria for Selecting Industries for Preliminary Studies
C. Design of Preliminary Studies
VII. Request for Comments
VIII. Economic Impact Assessment; Executive Order 12866
Appendix A--Promulgated Effluent Guidelines
Appendix B--Current and Future Rulemaking Projects
Appendix C--Preliminary Studies
I. Regulated Entities
Today's proposed plan does not contain regulatory requirements and
does not provide specific definitions for each industrial category.
Entities potentially affected by decisions regarding the final plan are
listed below.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category of entity Examples of potentially affected entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry..................... Pulp, Paper and Paperboard; Pesticide
Formulating, Packaging and Repackaging;
Coastal Oil and Gas Extraction;
Centralized Waste Treatment;
Pharmaceutical Manufacturing; Metal
Products and Machinery; Landfills and
Incinerators; Industrial Laundries;
Transportation Equipment Cleaning; Iron
and Steel Manufacturing; Coal Mining;
Feedlots; Hospitals; Ore Mining and
Dressing; Glass Manufacturing; Canmaking
------------------------------------------------------------------------
To determine whether your facility would be regulated, you should
carefully examine the applicability criteria in the appropriate
proposed rule (previously published or forthcoming). Citations for
previously published proposed rules and schedules for forthcoming
proposed rules are provided in Appendix B of today's notice.
II. Legal Authority
Today's notice is published under the authority of section 304(m)
of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1314(m), which requires EPA to
publish a biennial Effluent Guidelines Plan, schedule review and
revision of existing regulations and identify categories of dischargers
to be covered by new regulations.
III. Introduction
A. Purpose of Today's Notice
Today's notice announces the Agency's proposed biennial plan
pursuant to sec. 304(m). EPA invites the public to comment on the
proposed plan, and following the close of the comment period the Agency
will publish a final plan.
B. Overview of Today's Notice
The Agency proposes to develop effluent limitation guidelines and
standards (``effluent guidelines'') as follows:
1. Continue development of 10 rules listed in the 1994 Effluent
Guidelines Plan (59 FR 44234, August 26, 1994). The categories are:
Pulp, Paper and Paperboard; Pesticide Chemicals (Formulating, Packaging
and Repackaging); Coastal Oil and Gas Extraction; Centralized Waste
Treatment; Pharmaceutical Manufacturing; Metal Products and Machinery,
Phases 1 and 2; Landfills and Incinerators; Industrial Laundries; and
Transportation Equipment Cleaning.
2. Begin development of revised effluent guidelines for the Iron
and Steel Manufacturing category.
3. Initiate three preliminary studies to assist in determining
whether new or revised rules should be developed for particular
categories. Each preliminary
[[Page 35043]]
study will generally take approximately two years to complete.
4. Complete preliminary studies on the Photographic Processing and
Chemical Formulating and Packaging industries.
5. Plan for development of seven additional effluent guidelines,
either new or revised. The point source categories to be covered by
these guidelines will be identified in future biennial Effluent
Guidelines Plans. EPA's current plan is to begin development of one
additional rule in 1996 and two rules each year from 1997 to 1999, with
proposed rules published between 1998 and 2001, and final action taken
between 2000 and 2003 respectively.
IV. Effluent Guidelines Program Background
A. Statutory Framework
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA) of 1972 (Pub. L.
92-500, Oct. 18, 1972) (the ``Act'') established a program to restore
and maintain the integrity of the nation's waters. To implement the
Act, Congress directed EPA to issue effluent limitation guidelines,
pretreatment standards, and new source performance standards for
industrial dischargers. These regulations were to be based principally
on the degree of effluent reduction attainable through the application
of control technologies.
The 1977 amendments to the FWPCA, known as the Clean Water Act
Amendments (Pub. L. 95-217, Dec. 27, 1977) (CWA), added an additional
level of control for conventional pollutants such as biochemical oxygen
demand (BOD) and total suspended solids (TSS), and stressed additional
control of 65 toxic compounds or classes of compounds (from which EPA
later developed a list of 126 specific ``priority pollutants''). To
further strengthen the toxics control program, sec. 304(e), added by
the 1977 amendments, authorized the Administrator to establish
management practices to control toxic and hazardous pollutants in plant
site runoff, spillage or leaks, sludge or waste disposal, and drainage
from raw material storage.
The effluent guidelines promulgated by EPA reflect the several
levels of regulatory stringency specified in the Act, and they also
focus on different types of pollutants. Section 301(b)(1)(A) directs
the achievement of effluent limitations requiring application of best
practicable control technology currently available (BPT). In general,
effluent limitations based on BPT represent the average of the best
treatment technology performance for an industrial category. For
conventional pollutants listed under sec. 304(a)(4), sec. 301(b)(2)(E)
directs the achievement of effluent limitations based on the
performance of best conventional pollutant control technology (BCT).
The Act requires that BCT limitations be established in light of a two-
part ``cost-reasonableness'' test. The test, which assesses the
relative costs of conventional pollutant removals, is described in
detail in the Federal Register notice promulgating the final BCT rule
on July 9, 1986 (51 FR 24974).
Both BPT and BCT regulations apply only to direct dischargers,
i.e., those facilities that discharge directly into waters of the
United States. In general, regulations are not developed to control
conventional pollutants discharged by indirect dischargers because the
POTWs receiving those wastes normally provide adequate treatment of
these types of pollutants or they can be adequately controlled through
local pretreatment limits.
For the toxic pollutants listed in sec. 307(a), and for
nonconventional pollutants, secs. 301(b)(2)(A), (C), (D) and (F) direct
the achievement of effluent limitations requiring application of best
available technology economically achievable (BAT). Effluent
limitations based on BAT are to represent at a minimum the best control
technology performance in the industrial category that is
technologically and economically achievable.
In addition to limitations for existing direct dischargers, EPA
also establishes new source performance standards (NSPS) under sec. 306
of the Act, based on the best available demonstrated control
technology, processes operating methods, or other alternatives. NSPS
apply to new direct dischargers. Generally the NSPS limitations are to
be as stringent, or more stringent than BAT limitations for existing
sources within the industry category or subcategory.
Although the limitations are based on the performance capability of
particular control technologies, including in some cases in-process
controls, dischargers may meet their requirements using whatever
combination of control methods they choose, such as manufacturing
process or equipment changes, product substitution, and water re-use
and recycling. The limitations and standards are implemented in permits
issued through the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) pursuant to sec. 402 of the Act for point sources discharging
directly to the waters of the United States.
Section 402 of the CWA provides for the issuance of permits to
direct dischargers under NPDES. These permits, which are required by
sec. 301, are issued either by EPA or by a State agency approved to
administer the NPDES program. Individual NPDES permits must incorporate
applicable technology-based limitations contained in guidelines and
standards for the industrial category in question. Where EPA has not
promulgated applicable technology-based effluent guidelines for an
industry, sec. 402(a)(1)(B) provides that the permit must incorporate
such conditions as the Administrator determines are necessary to carry
out the provisions of the Act. In other words, the permit writer uses
best professional judgment (BPJ) to establish technology-based
limitations for the dischargers.
Indirect dischargers are regulated by the general pretreatment
regulations (40 CFR Part 403), local discharge limits developed
pursuant to Part 403, and categorical pretreatment standards for new
and existing sources (PSNS and PSES) covering specific industrial
categories. These categorical standards under sections 307(b) and (c)
apply to the discharge of pollutants from non-domestic sources which
interfere with or pass through publicly owned treatment works (POTWs),
and are enforced by POTWs or by State or Federal authorities. The
categorical pretreatment standards for existing sources covering
specific industries are generally analogous to the BAT limitations
imposed on direct dischargers. The standards for new sources are
generally analogous to NSPS.
To ensure that effluent guidelines remain current with the state of
the industry and with available control technologies, section 304(b) of
the Act provides that EPA shall revise the effluent guidelines at least
annually if appropriate. In addition, section 301(d) provides that EPA
shall review and if appropriate, revise any effluent limitation
required by section 301(b)(2).
B. Components of an Effluent Guideline Regulation
The principal components of effluent guideline regulations are
numerical wastewater discharge limitations controlling specified
pollutants for a given industry. These are typically concentration-
based limits (specified in units such as milligrams of pollutant per
liter of water) or production-based mass limits (specified in units
such as milligrams of pollutant per unit of production). Numerical
limits also cover parameters such as pH and temperature.
[[Page 35044]]
A guideline often subcategorizes an industry based on differences
in raw materials, manufacturing processes, characteristics of the
wastewaters, or type of product manufactured; in some cases, non-water
quality environmental impacts or other appropriate factors that justify
the imposition of specialized requirements on the subcategorized
facilities are used as a basis. EPA develops a set of effluent
limitations for each category or subcategory at each level of control
(BPT, BAT, etc.) that is addressed in the guideline.
A guideline also may prescribe Best Management Practices (``BMPs'')
in addition to or in lieu of numerical limits. BMPs may include, for
example, requirements addressing the minimization or prevention of
storm water runoff, plant maintenance schedules and requirements
addressing the training of plant personnel.
C. Development of Effluent Guideline Regulations
EPA has accumulated substantial experience and expertise in the
course of preparing 51 effluent guidelines. This section of the notice
summarizes the various tasks which the Agency typically undertakes in
an effluent guideline rulemaking.
EPA begins work on an effluent guideline rulemaking project by
tentatively defining the scope and dimensions of the industry category.
The Agency determines the size of the category as it has been defined,
using all available sources of information. Given the diversity of
regulatory categories, no single source suffices to establish size. At
various times, EPA has used one or more of the following sources:
standard published sources, information available through trade
associations, data purchased from the Dun and Bradstreet, Inc. data
base, other publicly available data bases, U.S. Census Bureau data,
other U.S. Government information, and any available EPA data base. If
a category is very large and/or diverse, the Agency will determine
whether it can be broken down into appropriate categories or
subcategories. If more than one subcategory can be identified, the
Agency may need to establish priorities for regulation.
EPA works with interested stakeholders early in the regulation
development process. State and local regulatory officials familiar with
the industry are consulted, and business associations and citizen
groups are also invited to share information.
Regulatory information about industry categories is obtained by EPA
largely through its survey questionnaires, site visits and wastewater
sampling. Survey questionnaires solicit detailed information necessary
to assess the statutory rulemaking factors (particularly technological
and economic achievability of available controls), water use,
production processes, and wastewater treatment and disposal practices.
A significant portion of the Agency's questionnaires typically seek
information necessary to assess the economic achievability of a
prospective regulation.
Generally, the Agency defines its site visits and wastewater
sampling effort based on information received in response to the
questionnaires. While the questionnaire provides information about
production processes, water uses and, in general terms, what is found
in the industry's wastewater, on-site sampling and detailed monitoring
data are used to characterize the pollutants found in discharges. Site
visits are also used to assess manufacturing processes, wastewater
generation, pollutant control technologies, pollution prevention
opportunities (e.g., process changes), and potential non-water quality
impacts of effluent guidelines (i.e., air emissions, sludge generation,
energy usage).
In developing a list of pollutants of concern for an industry, EPA
initially will study wastewater samples for all pollutants that can be
measured by recognized analytical methods.
Currently over 457 pollutants or analytes can be measured by these
methods. This includes the subset of 126 pollutants known as
``priority'' pollutants developed pursuant to CWA sec. 307(a). EPA will
develop new analytical methods to cover additional pollutants as
necessary. For example, the Agency has developed new methods for use in
the Pesticides, Pulp and Paper, Pharmaceuticals, and Offshore Oil and
Gas effluent guidelines. (EPA generally proposes any new methods for
public comment concurrently with the proposed rule.)
Most of the effluent sampling and analysis that has been conducted
specifically to support effluent guideline regulations promulgated to
date has been conducted by EPA. On occasion, however, these activities
have been pursued on a cooperative basis with industry parties. For
example, EPA and numerous pulp and paper manufacturers participated in
cooperative efforts to sample and analyze effluent, wastewater
treatment sludge, and pulp from domestic mills that bleach chemical
pulp in their production processes.
EPA conducts engineering and statistical analyses of the technical
data to develop control and treatment options for the pollutants of
concern, and the projected costs for these options. The Agency
considers the costing information and economic data gathered from the
survey and other sources in its economic impact analysis, and then
selects one or more of the options as the basis for a rulemaking
proposal. It also develops assessments of the environmental impact of
the industry discharges, and may conduct a regulatory impact analysis
as well.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA) (Title
III of Pub.L. 104-121, March 29, 1996), requires that EPA conduct
regulatory flexibility analyses for rules which have a significant
impact on a substantial number of small entities. These analyses are to
assess the impact of the rule on small entities and consider
alternative ways of reducing those impacts. Section 344 of SBREFA also
requires EPA to organize a ``small business advocacy review panel'' for
each rule where a regulatory flexibility analysis is required.
Prior to publishing a proposed rule, EPA usually conducts a public
meeting to discuss the Agency's findings and describe the general
outlines of the rule. Following publication, a hearing is conducted
during the public comment period, and supplemental notices of new data
may be published, if appropriate.
The Agency's outreach efforts to improve the regulatory development
process have involved some industries subject to effluent guidelines.
One such special effort is the Common Sense Initiative (CSI), a
committee established under the Federal Advisory Committee Act
(FACA)(Pub.L. 92-463). Through CSI, EPA has brought together federal,
state, and local government representatives, environmental interest and
environmental justice leaders, labor representatives, and industry
executives to examine the full range of environmental requirements
affecting six pilot industries. These six teams are exploring
comprehensive strategies for environmental protection which include
regulatory and voluntary approaches on which all can agree. Two of the
six teams, Metal Finishing and Iron and Steel, are discussing effluent
guidelines issues as well as other regulations. EPA looks forward to
receiving recommendations from these CSI teams.
D. NRDC Litigation and Consent Decree
EPA has developed today's proposed Effluent Guidelines Plan
pursuant to a consent decree in NRDC et al v. Browner (D.D.C. Civ. No.
89-2980, January 31, 1992, as modified). The Decree commits EPA to
schedules for proposing and
[[Page 35045]]
taking final action on effluent guidelines, and also for conducting
preliminary studies. Some of the industry categories to be regulated
are specified in the Decree. For the remaining required rulemakings,
EPA retains the discretion to select guidelines for development
based on Agency priorities.
EPA will use the results of the preliminary studies and other
information (such as public comments and recommendations from state and
local governments) to select industries for future regulation. The
Decree requires the Agency to study eleven industries.
The Decree also required EPA to establish the Effluent Guidelines
Task Force, an advisory committee, to formulate recommendations for
improvements to the effluent guidelines program. The Agency created the
Task Force in 1992. The Task Force has held several public meetings and
has begun to present recommendations to the EPA Administrator. The work
of the Task Force is discussed further in Section V of today's notice.
Since 1992, EPA and NRDC have agreed to several modifications of
the Decree consisting of deadline extensions for certain rules.
V. Today's Proposed Effluent Guidelines Plan
A. Effluent Guidelines Currently Under Development
1. Schedule for Ongoing Rulemaking
The Agency is currently in the process of developing new or revised
effluent guidelines for 10 categories. (These categories were listed in
the Agency's 1994 Effluent Guidelines Plan.) The categories and actual
or Consent Decree dates for proposal and final action are set forth in
Table 1.
Table 1.--Effluent Guidelines Currently Under Development
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposal Final action
-------------------------------
Category Consent decree
or actual Consent decree
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pulp, Paper and Paperboard.............. 12/17/93 (\1\)
Pesticide Formulating, Packaging, and
Repackaging............................ 4/14/94 9/96
Centralized Waste Treatment............. 1/27/95 \2\ 9/96
Coastal Oil and Gas Extraction.......... 2/17/95 10/96
Pharmaceutical Manufacturing............ 5/2/95 \2\ 8/96
Metal Products and Machinery, Phase..... 15/30/95 2,3 9/96
Industrial Laundries.................... \2\ 12/96 \2\ 12/98
Transportation Equipment Cleaning....... \2\ 12/96 \2\ 12/98
Landfills and Incinerators.............. \2\ 3/97 \2\ 3/99
Metal Products and Machinery, Phase 2... \3\ 12/97 2,3 12/99
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Pulp, Paper and Paperboard rulemaking is not covered by the
January 31, 1992 consent decree.
\2\ EPA is discussing extensions to Consent Decree dates with NRDC.
\3\ EPA is considering merging Phases 1 and 2 of the Metal Products and
Machinery rule. See discussion below.
The Agency has only recently received funding for Fiscal Year 1996,
and funding restrictions may affect rulemaking schedules. EPA is
discussing extensions to all the Consent Decree dates with NRDC, for
both budgetary reasons and specific policy, technical and
administrative issues in some regulations.
2. Changes in Rulemaking Scope, Schedules and/or Organization
a. Metal Products and Machinery. EPA is considering merging Phases
1 and 2 of the Metal Products and Machinery rule. The Phase 1 proposed
rule, covering seven industry sectors, was published on May 30, 1995
(60 FR 28209). Such a merger would mean that EPA would not proceed with
a final rule for Phase 1, but would issue a new proposal covering both
phases (15 sectors total) and promulgate a final rule covering both
phases.
There are several reasons why a single final rule for this category
would be desirable:
The same basis and applied metals as well as the same
manufacturing and wastewater treatment unit operations typically are
used throughout both phases of the MP&M category. The classification of
a facility as MP&M Phase 1 or Phase 2 should not affect its ability to
treat its wastewater to a given level.
The complexities of having different effluent limits
across the two phases (for the same pollutant and level of control)
would be avoided. Having one set of effluent limits for the MP&M
category greatly simplifies implementation for POTWs and compliance for
facilities.
Merging these rules would allow EPA to use POTW survey
data being collected for Phase 2 to develop more precise estimates of
the administrative burden for all sectors, and to consider aggregated
environmental impacts and compliance costs.
Opportunities to explore alternative permitting
requirements such as BMPs would be enhanced.
The additional time needed for a combined rule would allow
more extensive stakeholder involvement. For example, members of the
Metal Finishing CSI team have expressed interest in working with EPA on
obtaining additional data, and POTWs and NPDES permit authorities will
be able to provide more substantive data on implementation issues.
EPA invites comment on the merits of combining the two phases into
one rule.
b. Pulp, Paper and Paperboard. EPA issued the proposed Pulp, Paper
and Paperboard ``Cluster Rules'', covering both effluent guidelines and
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP), on
December 17, 1993 (40 CFR part 430, 58 FR 66078). The proposed effluent
guidelines were organized into 12 subcategories.
EPA plans to promulgate final effluent guidelines for two
subcategories later this year: Bleached Papergrade Kraft and Soda
(proposed Subpart B), and Papergrade Sulfite (proposed Subpart E). At
least eight of the remaining subcategories will be addressed in a final
rule expected in 1997: Unbleached Kraft; Semi-Chemical; Mechanical
Pulp; Non-Wood Chemical Pulp; Secondary Fiber Deink; Secondary Fiber
Non-Deink; Fine and Lightweight Papers from Purchased Pulp; Tissue,
Filter, Non-Woven, and Paperboard from Purchased Pulp (proposed
Subparts C, F, G, H, I, J, K and L, respectively). Two remaining
subcategories, Dissolving Kraft (proposed Subpart A) and
[[Page 35046]]
Dissolving Sulfite (proposed Subpart D), will be addressed in a
subsequent rule.
c. Pharmaceutical Manufacturing. EPA published a proposed rule for
the Pharmaceutical Manufacturing Category on May 2, 1995 (60 FR 21592).
In that notice, the Agency stated that it is required by the Clean Air
Act Amendments of 1990 (CAAA) to promulgate NESHAP regulations by 1997;
no NESHAP regulations were proposed along with the water regulations.
In developing the proposed effluent guidelines and standards, EPA
coordinated its efforts to make sure that the rule would be consistent,
within the constraints of the governing statutes, with the forthcoming
air emissions standards. The Agency's analysis of industry wastewater
showed a substantial portion consists of volatile organic compounds
which pose a risk to human health through increased exposure to
carcinogens and increased exposure to systemic toxicants from
atmospheric exposure.
The Agency intends to propose the NESHAP in November 1996, and
promulgate the standards in November 1997. The current Consent Decree
for effluent guidelines requires promulgation for the pharmaceutical
industry by August 1996. While EPA's original intent was to issue
separate air and water rules utilizing a common technology basis, the
Agency is considering the merits of jointly promulgating the air and
water regulations by the 1997 CAAA deadline. The Agency believes that a
single promulgation of industry standards will be beneficial in terms
of consistency and clarity, and will result in more integrated multi
media regulatory controls. EPA also believes that these benefits would
outweigh benefits that might be obtained from a slightly earlier
promulgation of the effluent guidelines alone.
EPA invites public comment on the merits of simultaneous
promulgation of air and water standards for this industry.
d. Transportation Equipment Cleaning. EPA began development of
effluent guidelines for the Transportation Equipment Cleaning industry
assuming that the scope would include effluent generated from the
interior cleaning of tank trucks, rail tank cars, and tank barges, and
the exterior cleaning and de-icing of aircraft. However, as a result of
data collection and analysis, the Agency has decided to limit the scope
of the rule to effluent generated from tank and container interior
cleaning.
Last year EPA decided to exclude aircraft exterior cleaning and de-
icing from the current effluent guidelines development effort because
of other Agency requirements recently promulgated under the stormwater
program (60 FR 51215, September 29, 1995). New stormwater permits
applicable to airports require implementation of pollution prevention
plans to control stormwater discharges. EPA anticipates that the
stormwater permit program will reduce, and may eliminate the need for a
specific effluent guideline covering these discharges.
The Agency will track the effectiveness of stormwater pollution
prevention efforts to control deicing discharges and other airport
stormwater runoff and decide later if an effluent guideline is
necessary for aircraft exterior cleaning and de-icing.
B. Process for Selection of New Effluent Guideline Regulations
Section 304(m) does not specify criteria that the Agency should use
to select categories for regulation by effluent guidelines. For the
first Effluent Guidelines Plan, published January 2, 1990 (55 FR 80),
EPA listed criteria it had used to select categories. The 1992 consent
decree, while specifying some of the categories to be regulated, allows
the Agency flexibility in selecting future categories for regulation,
and does not specify selection criteria. Therefore EPA intends to
continue to use selection criteria such as those listed in the 1990
plan.
1. Selection Criteria and Data Sources
a. Selection Criteria. EPA considers three kinds of criteria for
selection of categories: environmental factors, utility to states and
POTWs, and economic impacts. The environmental factors allow the Agency
to compare the discharges of various categories to approximate risk to
human health and the environment. The specific factors used have
included:
Total priority pollutants discharged (lbs/day).
Total pollutants discharged (lbs/day).
Total priority toxic pounds-equivalent discharged (lbs/
day).
Number of carcinogens present in discharges.
Number of facilities discharging to water quality-impaired
receiving waters.
Number of documented cases of sediment contamination.
Data for all of the above factors may not be available for all of
the categories under consideration. EPA has found that an estimate of
the total priority pollutants discharged is usually available for each
category, and can be used to calculate the total priority toxic pounds-
equivalent discharged. These have been among the most useful indicators
for selecting categories for effluent guidelines. The toxic pounds-
equivalent (developed for most of the 126 priority pollutants and
hundreds of nonconventional pollutants) are calculated using the mass
loading of a pollutant (measured in pounds), multiplied by a weighting
factor for each pollutant based on toxicity and potential for
bioaccumulation. The individual values are then summed to provide the
category value.
The second broad criterion EPA uses in selecting industries for
development of effluent guidelines is the ``utility'' or ``usefulness''
of the regulation. This factor reflects the fact that, even in the
absence of a national effluent guideline, a discharger of pollutants
into waters of the United States must obtain an NPDES permit
incorporating technology-based effluent limits. Permit writers at
facilities not covered by national guidelines are directed to use Best
Professional Judgment in determining what technology-based limits are
appropriate. (A roughly analogous situation exists with respect to the
development of ``local limits'' for those facilities discharging into
POTWs). At some facilities, however, development of BPJ permits by
individual permit writers may be especially difficult due to the
complexity of wastestreams, presence of pollutants with poorly
understood treatability characteristics, or other factors. National
effluent guidelines may be especially appropriate for such facilities
and the categories of which they are a part. Promulgation of new and
revised categorical pretreatment standards was the first recommendation
in ``National Pretreatment Program: Report to Congress'' (EPA 21W-4004,
July 1991).
In assessing the utility or usefulness of a national effluent
guideline, EPA typically looks at a variety of factors. Among these
are:
Average priority pollutants discharged per facility;
Average priority toxic pounds-equivalent discharged per
facility;
Number of discharging facilities.
The number of priority pollutants discharged per facility and the
toxic pounds-equivalent levels are considered as relative indicators of
plant complexity. The number of discharging facilities signifies the
greater impact of a guideline on a large-population category, in
reducing permit writing workload and implementing permit limitations on
a timely basis.
[[Page 35047]]
The economic impact factors consist of cost and economic
achievabilty of additional controls, and investment cycle. The cost and
economic achievability factor is an estimate based on the Agency's
projection of what the ``best available technology'' would be in a new
or revised regulation, and the impacts of such costs on the industry.
The investment cycle factor is a consideration of the timing of an
industry's capital investments in equipment. This is based on an
assumption that if there is a periodic equipment replacement cycle for
an industry, the economic impact of a new or revised regulation may be
less if the compliance period coincides with the replacement cycle.
These economic factors are difficult to estimate in the absence of
detailed questionnaire data and other information that are gathered
during a regulation development project, but EPA attempts to assemble
some economic projections during its preliminary studies.
These criteria are groups of factors that the Agency considers and
weighs in setting rulemaking priorities. The criteria can not be
applied mechanically. In applying the criteria and selecting categories
of dischargers for the preparation of new or revised guidelines, the
Agency uses considerable judgment grounded in its expertise in the
regulation of the discharge of pollutants and the administration of the
Clean Water Act and other authorities that address pollution of the
nation's waters.
The Effluent Guidelines Task Force has developed recommendations on
criteria for selecting industries for preliminary studies. The
recommendations are discussed in section V below.
b. Data Sources. The Agency evaluates which categories should be
subject to new or revised effluent guidelines using the following
sources of information:
Recommendations from NPDES permit writers in its own
regional offices and State agencies.
Recommendations from POTWs and the Association of
Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies (AMSA).
Preliminary studies of industries, which are discussed
further in section IV.C of today's notice.
Rulemaking records from existing effluent guidelines,
which document unresolved issues from past rulemaking activity for some
categories.
Other EPA reports, such as the annual Toxic Release
Inventory (TRI), ``An Overview of Sediment Quality in the United
States'' (EPA 905/9-88-002, June 1987), and ``National Sediment
Contaminant Point Source Inventory: Analysis of Facility Release Data''
(Draft, May 1996).
Reviews of variance requests and petitions.
Public comments.
EPA continues to rely on these data sources for effluent guidelines
planning. The Effluent Guidelines Task Force has developed
recommendations on use of data sources for selecting industries. These
recommendations are discussed below.
2. New Rulemaking Activities
The 1992 consent decree requires that EPA begin rulemaking on two
categories in 1996, and start work on two more in 1997.
a. Iron and Steel Manufacturing. EPA has decided to develop
revisions for the Iron and Steel Manufacturing category (40 CFR part
420). This decision is based on consideration of a preliminary data
summary on the category recently prepared by the Agency. Initial
development of a proposed rule will begin later this year, with
proposal scheduled for December 2000 and promulgation scheduled for
December 2002. The preliminary data summary is discussed below in
section IV.C.1.
b. Other Rules. EPA has not yet selected additional rulemaking
projects. EPA is not proposing specific industrial categories for
selection in today's notice. However, based on the above discussion of
data sources, the Agency may choose the next categories from the
following list:
Petroleum Refining.
Textile Mills.
Inorganic Chemicals.
Steam Electric Power Generating.
Photographic Processing.
Chemical Formulators and Packagers.
Other categories being considered for preliminary studies.
Recent, ongoing and future preliminary studies are discussed briefly in
Section IV.C of today's notice. The public is invited to comment on
these categories, as well as recommending other categories for
development of new or revised effluent guidelines.
C. Preliminary Studies
The purpose of a Preliminary Study is to indicate whether and to
what extent an industry discharges toxic and nonconventional
pollutants, and to provide a basis for comparison with other industries
for purposes of assigning priorities for regulation. The results of a
Preliminary Study for an industry are published in a ``Preliminary Data
Summary.'' The Preliminary Data Summary presents a synopsis of recent
technical and economic information on a category of dischargers. The
Preliminary Data Summaries are not used directly as a basis for
rulemaking, but are used in the Agency's determination of which
categories most require preparation of new or revised effluent
guidelines. (They also may be expanded to become guidance documents for
NPDES permit writers and POTWs.)
A Preliminary Study typically collects data on the following:
The products manufactured and/or services provided by an
industry;
Number, types and geographic location of facilities;
Destination of discharges (directly to surface waters,
indirectly to POTWs, or both);
Characterization of the wastewater discharges and
identification of pollutants present in the wastestreams (e.g., mean
concentrations of pollutants, wastewater volumes, mass loadings);
Sampling and analytical methods employed to ascertain the
presence and concentration of pollutants in the wastewater;
Source reduction, recycling and pollution control
technologies in use and potentially applicable to the industry;
Non-water quality environmental impacts associated with
wastewater treatment in the industry (e.g., air emissions, wastewater
treatment sludges, and other wastes including hazardous wastes);
Cost of control technologies in place and cost estimates
for additional controls;
Cost-effectiveness of reduction of toxic and
nonconventional pollutants;
Estimates of water quality impacts of discharges within
the subject industry;
Economic assessment (current financial condition of firms
in the industry, industry expansion or reduction trends, size
characterization of firms, impact of estimated treatment costs on
representative facilities).
The type and level of detail of information varies among the
Preliminary Data Summaries, depending on the data available to the
Agency when each document is prepared and whether the industry is
covered by an existing effluent guideline. For example, some of the
Summaries have comprehensive, primary data on the number and location
of the discharging facilities while others contain estimates drawn from
secondary data sources. However, the Summaries represent the Agency's
best characterization of industries at the time the summaries are
compiled. As additional data are
[[Page 35048]]
acquired, they are factored into the evaluation process. Consequently,
the Preliminary Data Summaries are also subject to revision. The Agency
has made the Summaries available to the public and intends to continue
to do so.
1. Recently Completed Studies
a. Petroleum Refining. The BAT regulations for the Petroleum
Refining category were promulgated in 1982 at 40 CFR part 419. The
preliminary data summary, completed in 1994, compared data collected by
EPA in 1992 and 1993 with data collected for the 1982 rule in the late
1970s.
Historically, U.S. petroleum refineries have been large water
users. The industry has changed significantly since the previous
rulemaking with regard to patterns of water usage and product
formulations. Many of the refineries studied use well below 50 percent
of the flows predicted by the Agency's 1982 BPT and BAT flow models,
with some refineries as low as 15 percent of their water use rates
predicted by the BPT flow model. (The BAT regulations did not require
any further flow reductions; however, as a result of litigation, the
1986 amendment to BAT and NSPS incorporated additional flow reduction
as part of the basis for limitations for phenol and total chromium.)
Refineries have modified product formulations such as gasoline to
comply with Clean Air Act requirements covering volatile organic
compounds and lead. Such manufacturing process changes have led to
modifications of wastewater collection systems, which may still be
underway at some facilities.
A summary of the treatment technologies that are identified as
currently in place is presented in the report. Of the 27 refineries
studied, 20 are direct dischargers and 7 are indirect dischargers. All
of the 20 direct discharging refineries have some form of biological
treatment. Three have sand filtration and one facility has an in-plant
activated carbon system in addition to biological treatment.
A summary of the effluent data collected from six refineries
visited as part of this study compares the pollutants covered by BPT
with the concentrations used as a basis to develop the BPT limitations
in 1974. Effluent concentration data are also summarized for a number
of other pollutants, including pollutants covered by the current
effluent guidelines. These data were obtained from the following
sources:
Average concentration data (over a one year period)
collected during Environment Canada's ``Seven Refineries Study''
conducted in 1989;
Long term average data collected from seven U.S.
refineries during the Canadian study;
EPA's Permit Compliance System (PCS) covering 138 direct
discharging refineries for 1992.
A preliminary assessment of the pollutant loadings and potential
water quality impacts of discharges from petroleum refining facilities
to surface waters and POTWs, using readily available data and
information sources on refinery wastewater volume and constituents,
annual loadings and average concentration, are estimated in the
summary. In addition, potential aquatic life and human health impacts
are summarized based on a review of documented environmental impacts
and a review of the physical-chemical properties and toxicity of
pollutants associated with wastewater discharges from the petroleum
refining industry.
EPA's categorization of the 98 pollutants of interest, based on
their fate and impact, indicated that approximately one quarter of the
pollutants exhibit high or moderate acute toxicity to aquatic life. EPA
classifies 23 of the pollutants as potential carcinogens, while 52 are
recognized as human systemic toxicants. Of the pollutants of concern,
41 have EPA-assigned concentration limits for drinking water
protection. Approximately half of the pollutants are expected to
biodegrade fast or moderately fast in oxygenated water. However,
several highly to moderately toxic pollutants are resistant to
biodegradation or only slowly biodegrade. Whole effluent toxicity (WET)
tests done at 47 petroleum refining facilities in Texas, Louisiana, and
Oklahoma showed approximately 40 percent failed at least one WET test
for acute, chronic, or sublethal effects. Tests conducted at five
refineries in the San Francisco Bay region were in compliance with
chronic WET test requirements. Twenty petroleum refining facilities are
identified by States as point sources impairing (or contributing to
impairment of) water quality and are included on their CWA Section
304(l) ``Short List'', which identifies facilities discharging to
impaired water bodies. Three cases of sediment contamination are
identified with petroleum refineries based on a 1987 report.
b. Metal Finishing. The Metal Finishing regulations were
promulgated in 1983 at 40 CFR part 433. The preliminary data summary,
completed in 1994, briefly summarized the Metal Finishing regulations
and a related category, Electroplating, promulgated in 1981 at 40 CFR
part 413. The summary also discussed then-current efforts in the
development of the Metal Products and Machinery (MP&M) rule. Because
the MP&M rule was expected to significantly overlap in coverage with
the Metal Finishing rule, the preliminary data summary deferred
additional technical, economic and environmental assessment of the
industry.
c. Textile Mills. The Textile Mills regulations were promulgated in
1982 at 40 CFR part 410. EPA completed its study of the industry in
1995. The numbers of establishments engaged in the manufacture of
textile products were estimated at nearly 6,000. Approximately 35 to 50
percent are engaged in wet processing (dyeing, finishing, printing and
coating), and at least 90 percent of these sources discharge their
process wastewater to POTWs. Water conservation programs developed by
textile facilities have reduced the total volume of wastewater
discharged through more efficient use of process water. Compared with
1980, the industry in 1993 averaged 22 percent less water per pound of
fiber processed. A survey of POTWs afforded a review of the
pretreatment technologies and innovative pollution prevention
techniques that are currently being employed by textile users of POTWs.
Pollutant parameters in textile process wastewater were
characterized before and after treatment. Available data indicated: (1)
Few organic priority pollutants were identified consistently and, when
detected, were quantified at very low concentrations (less than 100
ppb); and (2) metal parameters consistently detected at low levels
include: copper, chromium, and zinc. At textile operations using
metallized dyes, copper, chromium or nickel are often chelated by
organic ligands to form water-soluble metal complexes. While their
solubility limits the removal of such metal complexes during biological
treatment, complexation also suppresses the immediate and subsequent
bioavailability (toxicity) of metal species in the treated wastewater.
Although most textile facilities engaged in wet processing
discharge their wastewater to POTWs, a survey of POTWs with textile
users did not identify any general operational problems that could be
related to the lack of categorical pretreatment standards for this
industry. In the absence of categorical pretreatment standards, each
POTW surveyed has developed local limits for those parameters it has
determined must be controlled to assure compliance with its own NPDES
permit.
[[Page 35049]]
d. Inorganic Chemicals. The Inorganic Chemicals regulations were
promulgated in 1982 (Phase 1) and 1984 (Phase 2) at 40 CFR part 415.
EPA completed its study of the industry in 1994. EPA identified
approximately 51 chlor-alkali facilities, 47 inorganic pigment
facilities, 140 industrial gas facilities, and 422 other inorganic
chemical manufacturing facilities. These are believed to represent
nearly complete coverage of this category in the United States.
Inorganic chemicals are mostly used by major manufacturing industries
to produce automobiles, steel, paper, petroleum products, and housing
materials.
EPA identified 30 inorganic pollutants and their compounds (13
priority and 17 nonconventional) as pollutants of interest in the
wastewater discharges from inorganic chemical manufacturing facilities.
These include 15 metals, one metal oxide, two non-metallic elements,
five inorganic acids, and seven other inorganic compounds. An analysis
of 1992 data from PCS indicates that permit limits for copper and zinc
are exceeded most frequently of the 12 metals examined. A chemical load
analysis of the data shows that zinc represents the vast majority of
total discharge quantity (about 70 percent) followed by chromium and
nickel. A one-year chemical load analysis of surface water releases and
transfers to POTWs of inorganic chemicals using 1992 TRI data shows
that 5.4 million pounds are being released to surface waters and 27.1
million pounds are being transferred to POTWs. Ammonia, ammonium
nitrate and ammonium sulfate represent the vast majority of total
releases, with ammonia being reported most frequently. Mercury was the
most frequently reported metal in discharges from the 1992 TRI
facilities. The total discharge of priority pollutants from the
Inorganic Chemicals Manufacturing Category is estimated at 0.51 million
pounds per year.
EPA's categorization of the 30 pollutants of interest, based on
their potential environmental fate and impact, indicates that one-third
of the pollutants (10 of 30), primarily metals in their elemental form,
are highly toxic to aquatic life. The Agency has set drinking water
maximum contaminant level standards for approximately one-third of the
pollutants (11 of 30), and about half (16 of 30) have been identified
as human systemic toxicants. EPA classifies arsenic, cadmium, and lead
as Class A, B1, and B2 carcinogens, respectively. Calculated toxic
weighted loads, based on toxicity and bioaccumulation potential,
indicate that approximately 40 percent of the weighted surface water
releases are from priority pollutants and approximately 30 percent of
POTW transfers are from priority pollutants. States, in developing
lists of point sources impairing water quality under sec. 304(l),
identified 27 inorganic chemical manufacturing facilities. Inorganic
chemical manufacturing ranks first among 40 industrial categories as a
source of potential sediment contaminants in a 1995 draft EPA report
(``National Sediment Contaminant Point Source Inventory: Analysis of
Release Data for 1992'', EPA Office of Science and Technology, May 1995
draft). EPA also reports 12 cases of possible sediment contamination
associated with inorganic chemical manufacturing.
e. Steam Electric Power Generating. The Steam Electric Power
Generating regulations were promulgated in 1982 at 40 CFR part 423. The
Preliminary Data Summary for the Steam Electric Point Source Category
was completed in 1995. The 1982 Guidelines and Standards are currently
being applied to about 900 utility steam electric facilities, and
potentially to over one thousand non-utility steam electric generators.
Steam electric generation is by far the Nation's largest industrial
water user, estimated at over 110 trillion (110 x 1012) gallons
per year.
Pollutants of concern for this industry include chlorine, mercury,
arsenic, copper, zinc and lead. EPA estimates a total annual pollutant
load of 22 million pounds, of which 727 thousand pounds are priority
pollutants, based on 1992 PCS data. Chlorine and iron represent the
vast majority of total loads, being 34 and 40 percent respectively.
Zinc and copper represent the majority of priority pollutant loads,
respectively comprising 37 and 28 percent of the total. When arranged
by toxic weighted pounds chlorine is found to be the most significant
pollutant, comprising 70 percent of total toxic pounds-equivalent.
Mercury and arsenic contribute the greatest number of toxic pounds-
equivalent among the priority pollutants. These estimated pollutant
loading represent only 361 of the 910 U.S. steam electric utility
plants operating in 1992, due to insufficient data for the excluded
facilities.
The Steam Electric Industry ranks third among 44 industrial
categories as a source of potential sediment impact. Categorization of
the 53 pollutants of interest based on their environmental fate and
impact indicate that 22 of the 53 are highly or moderately toxic to
aquatic life. A review of documented environmental impacts shows that
States identify 39 steam electric facilities as point sources impairing
water quality based on their CWA Section 304(l) ``short list.''
Due to many changes that have occurred in this industry since the
1982 rule, the current guidelines and standards do not address issues
such as:
``Non-utilities'', mainly comprised of cogenerators and
renewable fuel burners,
Combined cycle generators, with gas turbine exhaust heat
driving a steam turbine,
Use of bromine and other biocides in place of chlorine,
Zebra mussel control strategies, and
Wastewaters from a growing population of non-steam
electric generators.
f. Iron and Steel Manufacturing. The Iron and Steel Manufacturing
regulations were promulgated in 1982 at 40 CFR part 420 and amended in
1984. EPA completed its study of the industry in 1995. The industry has
consolidated and modernized in the past fifteen years. Integrated mills
continue to ``down-size'' to reflect changes in the demand of different
steels and to remain competitive. ``Mini-mills'' continue to grow due
to their ability to make higher quality steels. Coking operations are
declining due to changes in iron-making processes. Continuous casting
is now the norm for the industry due to the higher energy efficiency of
the process over the traditional piecemeal casting operations. These
changes are believed to be fostered by domestic and world competition.
The 300 industry facilities are becoming more efficient. This has
led to substantial changes in how the industry operates. Pollutant
loadings are down due to improved recycle rates on many unit
operations, more efficient processing of conventional operations,
elimination of obsolete processes, improved computerization of
manufacturing, changes in market demands, and improved treatment
processes. Many better-performing mills are discharging wastewater
loadings far below EPA's current standards.
However, not all of the industry has kept pace with the improved
operations or pollution prevention opportunities. Forty mills are
included on the sec. 304(l) ``short list'', and a number of mills
continue to discharge in excess of current effluent guidelines.
Facilities in 10 of the 12 subcategories discharge some toxic and
nonconventional pollutants that are not covered in the current
regulation. Changes made by the industry in its cold forming operations
have rendered some current standards inapplicable, and some elements of
the current regulation are obsolete. Many better-performing mills are
discharging
[[Page 35050]]
wastewater loadings far below EPA's current standards (e.g.,
Sec. 420.01(b), involving centralized waste treatment).
Revised effluent guidelines for the Iron and Steel industry could
result in a substantial reduction in pollutants discharged: as much as
29 million pounds per year of total suspended solids, 6.9 million
pounds of oil and grease, and 710,000 pounds of ammonia-N.
2. Ongoing Studies
a. Photographic Processing. The Photographic regulations were
promulgated in 1976 for BPT (direct dischargers) only, at 40 CFR part
459. Subsequent to promulgation of the BPT rule, EPA collected some
additional information to support development of BAT, NSPS and
pretreatment standards, but no additional rules were promulgated. As of
1980, the Agency estimated that 99 percent of 11,000 photographic
processing facilities were indirect dischargers. Several POTWs have
recommended that EPA develop categorical standards for indirect
dischargers. While processing facilities are believed to be widely
dispersed across the United States, POTW efforts vary considerably.
Some POTWs have implemented local limits for silver and perhaps other
pollutants, while others have no specific mechanisms for this industry.
EPA is reviewing the pollutants of concern (such as silver,
cyanide, and chromium), what technologies are available for controlling
discharges and POTWs' efforts to address the discharges by means of
local limits or other mechanisms. In addition to working with states
and POTWs, the Agency is consulting with business associations in the
review of industry-recommended silver management practices.
b. Chemical Formulators and Packagers. Chemical formulators and
packagers (CFP) purchase concentrated chemical products from chemical
manufacturers, and mix or otherwise formulate and/or package them into
end-use products for sale to consumers, businesses and institutions.
CFP facilities are similar to pesticide formulating, packaging and
repackaging (PFPR) facilities in that some discharge wastewater, while
others have no discharge. However, some CFP facilities are not covered
by either the impending PFPR final rule, the Organic Chemicals,
Plastics and Synthetic Fibers (OCPSF) category (40 CFR part 414), nor
the Inorganic Chemicals category (40 CFR part 415).
In the course of developing the PFPR rule, EPA acquired some data
on CFP facilities. EPA will continue to review these data and develop a
profile of the industry's discharges.
3. Future Studies
EPA intends to begin three preliminary studies in 1996. Studies are
being considered on the following subjects:
a. Coal Mining. Regulations for the Coal Mining category were
promulgated in 1982 at 40 CFR part 434. The Agency is aware of several
issues that have emerged subsequent to the rulemaking or that were not
resolved in the promulgated rule. These include the question of whether
there should be separate subcategories for remining operations and
western coal mines; whether limitations on manganese discharges should
be revised; whether the criteria for ``bond release'' as defined at 40
CFR 434.11(d) should be revised; and whether discharges related to
methane gas production should be regulated in Part 434.
b. Feedlots. Regulations for the Feedlots category were promulgated
in 1974 at 40 CFR part 412. The effluent guidelines, which apply to
feedlots of 1,000 or more animal units (AUs), contain limitations
requiring no discharge of process wastewater pollutants, based on
treatment of wastes in lagoons or holding ponds. The Agency is aware of
several issues which could be explored in a preliminary study. These
include:
Changes in industry (e.g., there has been an increase in
recent years in the number of large corporate hog farms)
The ability of facilities to comply using technology that
was the basis for the 1974 effluent guidelines during chronic rainfall
and snowmelt runoff events
Regulatory coverage of livestock markets
Proper runoff control structure dewatering to maintain
free-board and land disposal of contained runoff by techniques
consistent with non-point source controls.
c. Stormwater Discharges. Stormwater discharges are explicitly
addressed in several effluent guidelines, such as Fertilizer
Manufacturing (40 CFR Part 418) and Coal Mining (40 CFR part 434). In
addition, discharges associated with industrial activity and from
municipal separate stormwater sewer systems serving a population of
100,000 or more are subject to NPDES stormwater permitting requirements
at 40 CFR 122.21 and 122.26. The stormwater permit program is being
implemented by EPA and States utilizing the NPDES regulations and
permits, including individual, general and sector permits. The Agency
is considering whether development of additional technical information
and guidance on characterizing stormwater discharges and evaluating the
efficacy of controls would be useful to discharging facilities in
complying with permit requirements. EPA may conduct a study to explore
what kinds of documentation would be helpful. For example, the Agency
could develop a compilation of municipal stormwater control techniques
appropriate for specific situations, along with cost models and cost-
effectiveness analyses.
d. Hospitals. BPT regulations for the Hospitals category were
promulgated in 1976 at 40 CFR part 460. EPA published a Preliminary
Data Summary on the Hospitals category in 1989. The 1989 summary
reported that there were 6,870 registered hospitals in the United
States as of 1985, and approximately 97 percent of these were indirect
dischargers. A principal pollutant of concern from hospital discharges
has been silver, emanating from processing of x-ray images. While some
hospitals employ silver recovery systems, a national PSES limitation
for silver may be useful to some POTWs in promoting fuller control of
silver discharges. Recommended silver management practices developed by
the photographic industry may be reviewed for relevancy to addressing
hospital discharges. Additionally, the Agency may explore discharges
associated with procedures for deactivation of infectious waste,
including discharges from scrubber water of on-site incinerators.
e. Ore Mining and Dressing. Most portions of the Ore Mining and
Dressing category were promulgated in 1982 at 40 CFR part 440. (Subpart
M, Gold Placer Mining Subcategory, was promulgated in 1988). EPA may
study issues stemming from a pending action affecting some gold mines
under Subpart J (see section IV.D.2 of today's notice), and may also
examine the need for revised analytical methods for cyanide, which
affects multiple subcategories in part 440.
f. Glass Manufacturing. BPT regulations for the Glass Manufacturing
category were promulgated in 1974 at 40 CFR part 426. The Agency is
aware of changes in industry manufacturing practices since 1974 that
may affect wastewater discharge characteristics, and revisions to the
effluent guidelines may be appropriate. For example, there are new
processes for manufacturing light bulbs and fiber optics, and there has
been a substantial increase in production of float glass, while plate
glass manufacturing has declined.
[[Page 35051]]
g. Canmaking. Regulations for the Canmaking subcategory of the Coil
Coating category were promulgated in 1983 at 40 CFR part 465, Subpart
D. One of the pollutant parameters included in this subcategory is
Total Toxic Organics (TTO). EPA's inclusion of the TTO limit was based
on the industry's use of can sealant compounds. The Agency has received
reports from some POTWs that industry may no longer be using these
compounds, but POTWs continue to require TTO monitoring because the
limitation remains in the regulation. EPA may investigate the TTO issue
to determine whether a revision to the limitation is appropriate.
h. Organic Chemicals, Plastics and Synthetic Fibers. Regulations
for the OCPSF category were promulgated in 1987 at 40 CFR part 414. EPA
may conduct a retrospective study of the industry's actual compliance
strategies and incurred costs for complying with the final regulation
in comparison to the Agency's projected technology bases and estimated
costs of compliance used for developing the regulation. The Agency
establishes end-of-pipe numerical standards based on the performance of
specific waste management and wastewater treatment unit operations.
Individual plants may select appropriate wastewater management
practices and treatment alternatives to comply with the numerical
standards. This study would identify the selected in-plant and end-of-
pipe wastewater treatment unit operations and determine the extent to
which process modifications, source reduction, water conservation, and
pollution prevention were used to meet the numerical standards. The
study would identify the actual costs incurred to comply with the
regulation and compare them to the Agency's estimated engineering costs
of compliance. This information may assist the Agency in improving the
accuracy of its general approach to estimating the engineering costs of
compliance.
i. Pulp, Paper and Paperboard. The proposed rule for the Pulp,
Paper and Paperboard Category included BPT, BCT and NSPS for
conventional pollutants for six of the proposed subcategories (Subparts
G, H, I, J, K, and L), but did not address toxic and nonconventional
pollutant discharges. EPA is aware of increased activity in the
secondary fiber and deinking segments of the industry, and may conduct
a study focusing on toxic and nonconventional pollutant discharges from
these and other mills in these subcategories.
j. Generic Effluent Guideline Issues. A number of suggestions which
could affect numerous existing or planned effluent guidelines have been
raised in the context of recently proposed regulations. Several of
these suggestions involve implementation of effluent guidelines, while
others directly impact the content of effluent guideline regulations.
These suggestions include such things as allowing certification in lieu
of monitoring for specified pollutants under defined circumstances,
defining Best Management Practices in concert with concentration-based
limitations as an alternative to mass-based limitations, considering
exemptions for indirect dischargers below a cut-off point defined in
terms of either flow or pollutant loadings, and allowing a reduced
sampling frequency (e.g., once a year) for indirect dischargers under
defined circumstances. EPA is aware of a great interest in some of
these suggestions by the regulated community and local governments and
may conduct a study to evaluate the potential effects of implementing
these suggestions.
D. Other Rulemaking Actions
1. Leather Tanning and Finishing
EPA is promulgating minor revisions to pretreatment standards for
existing and new sources applicable to certain facilities in the
Leather Tanning and Finishing point source category (40 CFR part 425).
The facilities involved discharge process wastewaters to POTWs. EPA is
eliminating the upper (alkaline) pH limits for facilities in these
subcategories. Affected POTWs may still elect to set an alternative
upper (alkaline) pH limit based on local circumstances. EPA is
promulgating these changes as a ``direct'' final rule in order to
provide prompt implementation, which will allow facilities to minimize
any potential hazards to worker safety and health that may occur in the
absence of this rule.
This regulation is being promulgated in response to a petition
submitted by a trade association for the leather tanning industry, the
Leather Industries of America. The petition requests the Agency to
consider relaxing the upper pH limit for certain indirect dischargers.
The Agency is making a minor amendment to these regulations, provided
that such an amendment would not adversely affect POTW operations or
receiving water quality. This minor amendment would not affect the
other rulemakings described in today's notice. EPA is not planning
other revisions to the Leather Tanning regulations.
2. Ore Mining and Dressing
EPA is proposing to exempt a waste stream from existing effluent
guidelines for the Copper, Lead, Zinc, Gold, Silver and Molybdenum Ores
Subcategory of the Ore Mining and Dressing Category (40 CFR part 440,
Subpart J). The Agency published a proposed rule on February 12, 1996
(61 FR 5364).
Dewatered tailings generated by the Alaska-Juneau (A-J) gold mine
project near Juneau, Alaska would be affected by this proposal. The use
of impoundments or ``tailings ponds'' was an important component of the
technology basis of the existing regulations, which were promulgated in
1982. EPA is proposing this exemption based on the results of a
preliminary review of the technology basis for the existing regulations
that appear to show that, because of the severe topographic and
climatic conditions that exist at the A-J site, the use of a tailings
impoundment is impractical. If constructed, an extraordinary amount of
wet weather runoff would flow into the impoundment which would make it
impracticable to treat the mill tailings. In addition, construction of
a massive tailings impoundment may result in long-term environmental
degradation and there are safety concerns with a pond of this size.
This proposal opens the way for the detailed evaluation of
alternatives for treatment of the tailings. The discharge of tailings
from the A-J project to marine waters, which otherwise would be
prohibited by Subpart J, could appropriately be evaluated. The proposal
does not in itself authorize or endorse any method of tailings
treatment or disposal. The discharge of tailings to marine waters would
require final revision of Subpart J under the proposal. EPA will
evaluate all comments and information received prior to making a final
determination, which the Agency currently expects to do by the end of
1996.
3. Marine Discharges from Vessels of the Armed Forces
Section 325 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 1996 (Pub. L. 104-106, February 10, 1996) amended the Clean Water
Act by adding sec. 312(n), which requires EPA and the Department of
Defense (DOD) to:
Determine discharges from vessels of the armed forces
requiring control
Promulgate performance standards for marine pollution
control
Promulgate regulations governing design, construction,
installation and use of marine pollution controls.
EPA is currently developing a plan with DOD to comply with sec.
312(n).
[[Page 35052]]
The amendment requires the discharge determination within two years of
enactment, promulgation of performance standards within two years of
discharge determination, and promulgation of other regulations within
one year after promulgation of standards.
VI. Recommendations of the Effluent Guidelines Task Force
The Effluent Guidelines Task Force was established by EPA to
recommend improvements to the effluent guidelines program. The Task
Force consists of members appointed by the Agency from industry,
citizen groups, state and local government, the academic and scientific
communities, and EPA's Office of Research and Development. The Task
Force was created to offer advice to the EPA Administrator on the long-
term strategy for the effluent guidelines program, and particularly to
provide recommendations on a process for expediting the promulgation of
effluent guidelines. It is chartered as a subcommittee of the National
Advisory Council for Environmental Policy and Technology (NACEPT), the
external policy advisory board to the Administrator, pursuant to the
Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA).
The Task Force has developed recommendations on three topics
pertinent to EPA's effluent guidelines planning process: data sources,
criteria for selecting industries for preliminary studies, and the
design of studies.
A. Data Sources
The Task Force generally agreed with EPA on the sources of data
that are appropriate for comparing categories. It encouraged EPA to
consider information supplied by POTWs, AMSA, States, and trade
associations. Reviews of technical literature and the Toxic Release
Inventory (for basic identification of industry sources and locations)
were also recommended.
B. Criteria for Selecting Industries for Preliminary Studies
The Task Force supported EPA's use of total toxic pounds-equivalent
discharged as one of the principal selection criteria. Other criteria
that EPA has used in previous Effluent Guidelines Plans were supported
with varying degrees of emphasis, and several new factors were
recommended. The recommendations included using number of facilities
and flow (including establishing a cutoff below which alternatives to
establishing effluent guidelines will be developed); giving priority to
industries not covered by existing guidelines; giving priority to
industries targeted for regulations by other EPA programs (e.g. air,
solid waste); giving priority to service industries; and priority to
industries which are at or near the beginning of their investment
cycles.
C. Design of Preliminary Studies
The Task Force recommended that in cases where an industry and its
issues are documented, EPA should proceed directly to rulemaking rather
than conducting an intermediate preliminary study. This should only be
done where there is a preponderance of already assimilated information
indicating full rulemaking is appropriate, or in cases where
stakeholders have clearly indicated that effluent guidelines are
needed. Where there is uncertainty about the extent of industrial
discharges and comparability to other categories, a study should be
conducted.
VII. Request for Comments
EPA invites public comment on its plans for development of effluent
guidelines and preliminary studies. Comments will be accepted until
August 2, 1996. In particular, the Agency is interested in data that
would facilitate category-wide comparisons of industries with regard to
discharge characteristics, treatment practices and effects on water
quality. In addition to the industries discussed or listed in today's
notice, EPA will consider information on other industries in developing
Effluent Guidelines Plans.
VIII. Economic Impact Assessment; Executive Order 12866
Today's notice proposes a plan for the review and revision of
existing effluent guidelines and for the selection of priority
industries for new regulations. This notice is not a ``rule'' and does
not establish any requirements; therefore, no economic impact
assessment has been prepared. EPA will provide economic impact analyses
or regulatory impact analyses, as appropriate, for all of the future
effluent guideline rulemakings developed by the Agency.
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the
Agency must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant''
and therefore subject to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review
and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Order defines
``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in a
rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or
communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
It has been determined that this plan is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under the terms of Executive Order 12866 and is
therefore not subject to OMB review.
Dated: June 27, 1996.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
Appendix A--Promulgated Effluent Guidelines
[``Promulgation'' refers to the date of promulgation of BAT controls unless otherwise noted. Minor amendments or
corrections are not shown.]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Revised Rule (P: Proposal F:
Category 40 CFR Part Promulgation Final Action) or Study
Completion (S)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aluminum Forming.................. 467 10/83
Asbestos Manufacturing............ 427 2/74
Battery Manufacturing............. 461 3/84
Builder's Paper and Board Mills 431 12/86 (BCT)
\1\.
Carbon Black Manufacturing........ 458 1/78
Cement Manufacturing.............. 411 8/79 (BCT)
[[Page 35053]]
Coal Mining....................... 434 10/82
Coil Coating...................... 465 12/82
Canmaking Subcategory......... .............. 11/83
Copper Forming.................... 468 8/83
Dairy Products Processing......... 405 6/86 (BCT)
Electroplating.................... 413 1/81 (PSES)
Electrical and Electronic 469 4/83
Components.
Explosives Manufacturing.......... 457 3/76
Feedlots.......................... 412 2/74
Ferroalloy Manufacturing.......... 424 7/86 (BCT)
Fertilizer Manufacturing.......... 418 8/79 (BCT)
Fruits and Vegetables Processing.. 407 7/86 (BCT)
Glass Manufacturing............... 426 7/86 (BCT)
Grain Mills....................... 406 7/86 (BCT)
Gum and Wood Chemicals............ 454 5/76 (BPT)
Hospitals......................... 460 5/76 (BPT) S 1989
Ink Formulating................... 447 7/75
Inorganic Chemicals............... 415 6/82 S 1994
Iron and Steel Manufacturing...... 420 5/82 S 1995
Leather Tanning and Finishing..... 425 11/82
Meat Products..................... 432 7/76 (BCT)
Metal Finishing................... 433 7/83 S 1994
Metal Molding and Casting 464 10/85
(Foundries).
Mineral Mining and Processing..... 436 7/77 (BPT)
Nonferrous Metals Forming......... 471 8/85
Nonferrous Metals Manufacturing... 421 6/84
Oil and Gas Extraction............ 435
Offshore Subcategory.......... .............. 3/4/93
Coastal Subcategory........... .............. 11/79 (BPT) P 2/17/95; F 10/96
Other Subcategories........... .............. 11/79 (BPT)
Ore Mining and Dressing........... 440 12/82
Gold Placer Mining Subcategory .............. 5/88
Organic Chemicals, Plastics and 414 11/87
Synthetic Fibers.
Paint Formulating................. 446 7/75 S 1989
Paving and Roofing Materials...... 443 7/75
Pesticide Chemicals............... 455
Manufacturing................. .............. 9/28/93
Formulating, Packaging, .............. 4/78 (BPT) P 4/14/94; F 9/96
Repackaging.
Petroleum Refining................ 419 10/82 S 1993
Pharmaceutical Manufacturing...... 439 10/83 P 5/2/95; F 11/97 \2\
Phosphate Manufacturing........... 422 6/76
Photographic Processing........... 459 7/76 (BPT) S 1996
Plastics Molding and Forming...... 463 12/84
Porcelain Enameling............... 466 11/82
Pulp, Paper and Paperboard........ 430 12/86 (BCT) P 12/17/93; F \1\
Rubber Manufacturing.............. 428 2/74
Seafood Processing................ 408 7/86 (BCT)
Soap and Detergent Manufacturing.. 417 4/74
Steam Electric Power Generating... 423 11/82 S 1995
Sugar Processing.................. 409 7/86 (BCT)
Textile Mills..................... 410 9/82 S 1994
Timber Products Processing........ 429 1/81
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
\1\ EPA proposed merging part 431 with part 430 in the proposed Pulp, Paper and Paperboard rule on 12/17/93. The
Pulp, Paper and Paperboard rulemaking is not covered by the January 31, 1992 consent decree.
\2\ EPA is discussing extensions to Consent Decree dates with NRDC.
Appendix B--Current and Future Rulemaking Projects
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category Proposed Final
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pulp, Paper and Paperboard........ 12/17/93 (\1\)
(58 FR 66078)
Pesticide Formulating, Packaging 4/14/94 9/96
and Repackaging.
(59 FR 17850)
Centralized Waste Treatment....... 1/27/95 \2\ 9/96
(60 FR 5464)
[[Page 35054]]
Coastal Oil and Gas Extraction.... 2/17/95 10/96
(60 FR 9428)
Pharmaceutical Manufacturing...... 5/2/95 \2\ 8/96
(60 FR 21592)
Metal Products and Machinery, 5/30/95 \2\,\3\ 9/
Phase 1. 96
(60 FR 28209)
Industrial Laundries.............. \2\ 12/96 \2\ 12/98
Transportation Equipment Cleaning. \2\ 12/96 \2\ 12/98
Landfills and Incinerators........ \2\ 5/97 \2\ 5/99
Metal Products and Machinery, \2\ 12/97 \2\,\3\ 12/
Phase 2. 99
Iron and Steel Manufacturing...... \2\ 12/98 \2\ 12/00
1 category........................ \2\ 12/98 \2\ 12/00
2 categories...................... \2\ 12/99 \2\ 12/01
2 categories...................... \2\ 12/00 \2\ 12/02
2 categories...................... \2\ 8/01 \2\ 12/03
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
\1\ The Pulp, Paper and Paperboard rulemaking is not covered by the
January 31, 1992 consent decree.
\2\ EPA is discussing extensions to Consent Decree dates with NRDC.
\3\ EPA is considering merging Phases 1 and 2 of the Metal Products and
Machinery rule.
See discussion above.
Appendix C--Preliminary Studies
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category Complete
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Petroleum Refining......................................... 1993
Metal Finishing............................................ 1993
Textile Mills.............................................. 1994
Inorganic Chemicals........................................ 1994
Steam Electric Power Generating............................ 1995
Iron and Steel Manufacturing............................... 1995
Photographic Processing.................................... 1996
Chemical Formulators and Packagers......................... 1996
Three studies.............................................. 1997
(see discussion in Section IV.C.3)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 96-17030 Filed 7-2-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P