[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 149 (Wednesday, August 4, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42552-42573]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-18604]
[[Page 42551]]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part IV
Environmental Protection Agency
_______________________________________________________________________
40 CFR Parts 403 and 503
Standards for the Use or Disposal of Sewage Sludge; Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 149 / Wednesday, August 4, 1999 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 42552]]
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 403 and 503
[FRL-6401-3]
RIN 2040-AC25
Standards for the Use or Disposal of Sewage Sludge
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Today's action amends the existing regulation regarding the
land application, surface disposal, and incineration of sewage sludge.
The amendments clarify existing regulatory requirements regarding
operational standards for pathogen and vector attraction reduction and
provide flexibility to the permitting authority and the regulated
community in complying with the minimum frequency of monitoring
requirements. The amendments also make the incineration subpart of the
regulation totally self-implementing by providing information on air
dispersion modelling, incinerator testing methods, and continuous
emission monitors to the sewage sludge incinerator owner-operator. It
also amends the existing General Pretreatment Regulation for Existing
and New Sources of Pollution by adding a concentration for total
chromium in land-applied sewage sludge to the list of pollutants that
are eligible for a removal credit issued by a wastewater treatment
works treating domestic sewage.
EFFECTIVE DATE: The final rule is effective September 3, 1999. For
purposes of judicial review, this final rule is promulgated as of 1 pm
eastern time on August 18, 1999 as provided in 40 CFR 23.7.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alan B. Rubin, Ph.D., Senior
Scientist, Health and Ecological Criteria Division (4304), Office of
Science and Technology, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M
Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460, telephone (202) 260-7589.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Regulated Entities
II. Authority
III. Background
IV. Final Amendments to the Part 503 Land Application, Surface
Disposal, Pathogen, and Vector Attraction Reduction Requirements
A. Ceiling Concentration Limits--Land Application
B. Frequency of Monitoring
C. Certification Language
D. Time of Application
E. Definition of pH
F. Class B, Alternative 1--at the Time of Use or Disposal
G. Site Restriction for Grazing of Animals
H. Vector Attraction Reduction Equivalency
I. Vector Attraction Reduction at the Time of Use or Disposal
J. Time Period for Vector Attraction Reduction Option 10
K. Technical Corrections
1. Sections 503.16(a)(1) and 503.26(a)(1)--Frequency of
Monitoring
2. Section 503.17(b)(7)--Recordkeeping for Land Application of
Domestic Septage
3. Section 503.18--Reporting
4. Section 503.21(c)--Contaminate An Aquifer
5. Section 503.22(b)--General Requirements
6. Section 503.32(a)(3)--Pathogens
7. Appendix B to Part 503--Pathogen Treatment Processes
V. Final Amendments to the Part 503 Incineration Requirements
A. Compliance period
B. Site-Specific Exemption from Frequency of Monitoring,
Recordkeeping, and Reporting Requirements
C. Pollutant Limits for Arsenic, Cadmium, Chromium, Lead and
Nickel
D. Management Practices
E. Frequency of Monitoring
F. Recordkeeping
VI. Final Amendment to Part 403
VII. Regulatory Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
C. Congressional Review Act
D. Paperwork Reduction Act
E. Unfunded Mandate Reform Act
F. Executive Order 12875, Enhancing Intergovernmental
Partnerships
G. Executive Order 13084, Consultation and Coordintion With
Indian Tribal Governments
H. Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
I. Regulated Entities
Entities potentially regulated by today's action are those that
prepare sewage sludge and use or dispose of the sewage sludge through
application to the land, placement on a surface disposal site,
placement in a municipal solid waste landfill unit, or firing in a
sewage sludge incinerator. Regulated categories and entities include:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category Examples of regulated entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
State/Local/Tribal Gov............ Publicly-owned treatment works that
treat domestic sewage.
Federal Government................ Federally-owned treatment works that
treat domestic sewage.
Industry.......................... Privately-owned treatment works that
treat domestic sewage, and persons
who receive sewage sludge and
change the quality of the sewage
sludge before it is used or
disposed.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The above list of regulated categories and entities is not intended
to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for readers regarding
entities likely to be regulated by this action. The list includes the
type of entities that EPA is now aware could potentially be regulated
by this action. Other types of entities not listed above also could be
regulated. To determine whether your facility is regulated by this
action, you should carefully examine the applicability section in
Sec. 503.1 (Purpose and Applicability) of part 503 of Title 40 of the
Code of Federal Regulations. If you have questions regarding the
applicability of this action to a particular entity, contact the
individual whose name is in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section.
II. Authority
The amendments to part 503 are promulgated pursuant to the
authority of section 405 of the Clean Water Act (CWA), which requires
EPA to establish numerical limits and management practices that protect
public health and the environment from the reasonably anticipated
adverse effects of toxic pollutants in sewage sludge. Section 405(e)
prohibits any person from disposing of sewage sludge from a publicly
owned treatment works (POTWs) or any other treatment works treating
domestic sewage for any use or disposal for which regulations have been
established pursuant to subsection (d) of section 405 except in
compliance with such regulations.
The amendment to part 403 is promulgated under the authority of
sections 307 and 405 of the CWA. In section 307(b) of the CWA, Congress
directed EPA to establish categorical pretreatment standards for
industrial discharges of toxic pollutants to POTWs. Congress authorized
POTWs in defined circumstances to provide relief from categorical
pretreatment standards in the form of a removal credit to
[[Page 42553]]
indirect dischargers. Section 307(b) authorizes a removal credit where,
among other things, grant of the removal credit does not prevent the
POTW from using or disposing of its sewage sludge in compliance with
section 405 of the CWA.
III. Background
A. Part 503 Amendments
On February 19, 1993, EPA promulgated, pursuant to section 405(d)
of the CWA, Standards for the Use or Disposal of Sewage Sludge (58 FR
9248). This regulation establishes the requirements that protect public
health and the environment when sewage sludge is: (1) Applied to the
land to either condition the soil or fertilize crops grown in the soil;
(2) placed on a surface disposal site; (3) placed in a municipal solid
waste landfill unit; or (4) fired in a sewage sludge incinerator. EPA
amended the part 503 sewage sludge regulation on February 25, 1994 (59
FR 9095) and again on October 25, 1995 (60 FR 54764) to address various
issues.
On October 25, 1995, EPA published a document in the Federal
Register proposing several technical changes to part 503 (60 FR 54771).
These changes were intended to address a number of issues identified
since promulgation of the regulation. The proposed changes clarify
certain requirements, provide additional flexibility to the regulated
community in complying with the part 503 requirements, and modify the
requirements for sewage sludge incinerators to make the requirements
self-implementing. Comments on the October 1995 proposal were
considered in developing the changes in today's final rule.
B. Part 403 Amendment
Industrial facilities that discharge specific pollutants to POTWs
for treatment must pretreat their effluent to meet categorical
pretreatment standards promulgated under section 307(b) of the CWA.
Section 307(b) also provides that where POTWs provide some or all of
the treatment of an industrial user's wastewater required to meet a
categorical pretreatment standard, POTWs may grant ``a removal credit''
to such an indirect discharger. The credit, in the form of a less
stringent categorical pretreatment standard, allows an increased
concentration of a pollutant in the discharge from the indirect
discharger to the POTW.
Section 307(b) of the CWA establishes three criteria that a POTW
has to meet to obtain authority to grant a removal credit to a
discharger of a toxic pollutant to the POTW: (1) The POTW removes all
or any part of the toxic pollutant, (2) the POTW's ultimate discharge
does not violate the effluent limitation or standard that would be
applicable to the toxic pollutant if it were discharged directly rather
than through a POTW, and (3) the discharge to the POTW does not prevent
sewage sludge use or disposal by the POTW in accordance with section
405 of the CWA. EPA promulgated removal credit regulations that are
codified at 40 CFR 403.7.
On February 19, 1993, EPA amended the part 403 General Pretreatment
Regulations to add a new Appendix G that includes two lists of
pollutants eligible for a removal credit with respect to the use or
disposal of sewage sludge if the other procedural and substantive
requirements of 40 CFR 403.7 are met. The first list (Appendix G--
Section I) includes, by sewage sludge use or disposal practice, the
pollutants regulated in EPA's Standards for the Use or Disposal of
Sewage Sludge (40 CFR part 503). The second list (Appendix G--Section
II) includes, by sewage sludge use or disposal practice, additional
pollutants eligible for a removal credit if the concentration of the
pollutant in sewage sludge does not exceed the prescribed
concentration. The pollutants in Appendix G--Section II are the
pollutants EPA evaluated and decided not to regulate during the
development of the part 503 regulation. See 58 FR 9381-9385, February
19, 1993.
The October 1995 proposal addressed the concentration for total
chromium for land-applied sewage sludge on the list of pollutants in
Appendix G--Section II of the part 403 regulations. EPA concluded after
reviewing comments on the proposed concentration to establish the
concentration at the value in today's final rule.
IV. Final Amendments to the Part 503 Land Application, Surface
Disposal, Pathogen, and Vector Attraction Reduction Requirements
A. Ceiling Concentration Limits--Land Application
In the October 25, 1995, document, EPA proposed to amend the
applicability section of the land application requirements to clarify
that the ceiling concentration limits (Table 1 of Sec. 503.13) apply to
all sewage sludge that is land-applied. Specifically, EPA proposed to
amend Sec. 503.10(b)(1), (c)(1), (d), (e), (f), and (g) to expressly
provide that the ceiling concentration limits have to be met in all
cases. All commenters on this proposed change concurred with the
change. Thus, today's action amends Sec. 503.10(b)(1), (c)(1), (d),
(e), (f), and (g) to require that the ceiling concentration limits in
Table 1 of Sec. 503.13 be met.
B. Frequency of Monitoring
Sections 503.16, 503.26, and 503.46 require periodic monitoring of
sewage sludge for pollutants as well as periodic demonstration of
compliance with certain pathogen density and vector attraction
reduction requirements. The frequency of monitoring varies with the
amount of sewage sludge used or disposed. The current regulation allows
the permitting authority, after two years of monitoring, to reduce the
frequency, but in no case may the permitting authority authorize
monitoring less frequently than once a year. EPA proposed to amend the
regulation to authorize the permitting authority to reduce the
frequency of monitoring for pollutants and certain pathogen density
requirements 1 to less than once a year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For example, EPA proposed to authorize the permitting
authority to reduce the frequency of monitoring for the pathogen
densities in Sec. 503.32(a)(5)(ii) and Sec. 503.32(a)(5)(iii). The
frequency of monitoring for all other pathogen densities (e.g., the
1000 MPN per gram of total solids fecal coliform requirement for all
Class A pathogen alternatives), and for the vector attraction
reduction options (e.g., 38 percent volatile solids reduction)
cannot be reduced by the permitting authority.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Several commenters opposed the proposed change because they
believed it would undermine public confidence in the quality of sewage
sludge that is used or disposed. They stated that consistent monitoring
of sewage sludge is essential to retaining public support for the part
503 regulation.
The Agency does not agree that the proposed change to the frequency
of monitoring requirements means that consistent monitoring of sewage
sludge will not continue. The reduction in the frequency only applies
to pollutant concentrations and certain pathogen density requirements,
and only can be made by the permitting authority.
EPA has decided to modify Sec. 503.16, Sec. 503.26, and Sec. 503.46
to delete the requirement to monitor at least once per year. This
change provides flexibility to permitting authority to tailor
monitoring requirements to specific circumstances without jeopardizing
public health and the environment.
Today's change allows, but does not require, the permitting
authority to reduce the frequency of monitoring. Moreover, the
permitting authority's ability to reduce the monitoring frequency is
limited to monitoring for pollutants and the enteric virus and viable
helminth ova density requirements in pathogen Class A,
[[Page 42554]]
Alternative 3 (see Sec. 503.32(a)(5)(ii) and (5)(iii)). This change
does not apply to any other pathogen density requirement or to the
vector attraction reduction requirements. Further, this change does not
preclude the permitting authority from increasing the frequency of
monitoring even if they reduce the frequency after two years of
monitoring at the part 503 frequency.
Thus, EPA is today amending Sec. 503.16(a)(2), Sec. 503.26(a)(2),
and Sec. 503.46(a)(3) by deleting the phrase ``* * * but in no case
shall the frequency of monitoring be less than once per year when * *
*'' Note that the part 503 frequency of monitoring requirements do not
apply if sewage sludge is not land-applied, surface-disposed, or fired
in a sewage sludge incinerator during the year.
C. Certification Language
Sections 503.17 and 503.27 of the current sewage sludge regulation
require sewage sludge preparers and land appliers, and the owner/
operator of a surface disposal site, respectively, to keep certain
records, and in the case of a Class I sludge management facility, to
report this information to the permitting authority. The regulation
also requires the recordkeepers to certify to compliance with
applicable requirements. Failure to certify may result in significant
penalties.
The October 1995 notice proposed to change the certification
language in the part 503 recordkeeping sections because the effect of
requiring the appropriate person to certify compliance may be to
discourage self-reporting of violations. If a requirement is not being
met, the applicable person obviously cannot certify to compliance with
the requirement without perjury. EPA proposed only to require that the
applicable person certify to the accuracy of the information that was
collected to show compliance. Compliance with the requirement then
would be determined by the permitting authority.
Commenters supported the proposed change. One commenter expressed
concern, however, that the language change may be construed to relieve
preparers of land-applied sewage sludge from meeting certain
requirements. This is not the case. As indicated in Sec. 503.7, the
preparer of land-applied sewage sludge is responsible to ensure that
the applicable land application requirements are met. The change in the
certification language does not relieve a preparer from this duty.
Under the regulation, as amended, the appropriate person must certify
that information collected to show compliance with a requirement was
prepared under his/her direction and supervision in accordance with the
system designed to ensure that qualified personnel gather and evaluate
information properly.
Another commenter suggested that the certifications in the land
application recordkeeping section (Sec. 503.17) for the preparer be
combined into one certification. The commenter also suggested this be
done for the certifications for the applier. EPA has decided to retain
the current certifications in the land application recordkeeping
section without change because they contain the applicable
certification for each requirement (i.e., pollutants, pathogens, and
vector attraction reduction), and ensure there is no confusion about
who is to certify to what.
Today's action amends Sec. 503.17 by revising the certification
language as described above in paragraphs (a)(1)(ii), (a)(2)(ii),
(a)(3)(i)(B), (a)(3)(ii(A), (a)(4)(i)(B), (a)(4)(ii)(A), (a)(5)(i)(B),
(a)(5)(ii)(F), (a)(5)(ii)(H), (a)(5)(ii)(J), (a)(5)(ii)(L),
(a)(6)(iii), and (b)(6). EPA is also amending Sec. 503.27 by revising
the certification language in paragraphs (a)(1)(ii), (a)(2)(ii),
(b)(1)(i), and (b)(2)(i).
D. Time of Application
In the October 25, 1995 Notice, EPA proposed to change certain of
the recordkeeping requirements for land-applied sewage sludge and for
domestic septage applied to agricultural land, forest, or a reclamation
site. EPA proposed to delete the requirement in
Sec. 503.17(a)(5)(ii)(C) and Sec. 503.17(b)(3) to record the time of
application of bulk sewage sludge and domestic sewage, respectively, to
a site. At the same time, EPA proposed to add a new requirement in
Sec. 503.17(a)(4)(ii)(E) for Class B sewage sludge. This change would
require appliers of Class B sewage sludge to record the date bulk
sewage sludge is applied to each site. EPA concluded that, because the
regulation restricts the use of sites to which Class B sewage sludge is
applied,2 it is important to record the date Class B sewage
sludge is land-applied. For the reasons discussed at proposal, EPA is
today adopting these changes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ For example, Sec. 503.32(b)(5) prohibits the harvesting of
food crops with harvested parts below the land surface up to 38
months after land application of a Class B sewage sludge.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
E. Definition of pH
EPA also proposed a change to the definition of pH to clarify that
pH should be measured at 25 degrees Centigrade (C) or be converted to
an equivalent value at 25 degrees C. Twenty-five degrees C is the
reference temperature for reporting pH values in the scientific
literature.
Commenters favored the proposed change, which EPA is today adopting
as proposed. Today's notice amends the definition of pH in
Sec. 503.31(g) to read as follows: pH means the logarithm of the
reciprocal of the hydrogen ion concentration measured at 25 deg.
Centigrade or measured at another temperature and then converted to an
equivalent value at 25 deg. Centigrade.
The following equation from Smith and Farrell can be used to adjust
pH values taken at temperatures other than 25 degrees C to equivalent
values at 25 degrees C:
pH correction = [0.03 pH units/1.0 deg. C] x [Temp deg.
Cmeas -25 deg. C]
This equation indicates that for each degree difference between the
measured temperature in degrees C and 25 degrees C, there is a change
in pH of 0.03 units. Thus, if a pH of 12 is measured at 20 degrees C,
the pH at 25 degrees C is 11.85 [12 + (0.03 x -5)]. There is an
inverse relationship between temperature and pH.
F. Class B, Alternative 1--at the Time of Use or Disposal
EPA also proposed to amend Sec. 503.32(b)(2) to change the pathogen
reduction requirements in pathogen Class B, Alternative 1 to allow
those requirements to be met any time before the sewage sludge is used
or disposed. Under the current regulation, these requirements must be
met ``at the time the sewage sludge is used or disposed.''
There were two reasons for EPA's decision to propose this change.
First, the requirement in Sec. 503.32(b)(2) is inconsistent with the
requirements in the two other Class B pathogen
alternatives.3 Part 503 does not require that the
requirements in either Class B, Alternative 2 or Class B, Alternative 3
be met at the time the sewage sludge is used or disposed. For example,
when the requirements in Class B, Alternative 2 are met, the sewage
sludge can be stored and then land-applied. Part 503 does not require
additional treatment after the storage period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ These alternatives are Class B, Alternative 2 (treat sewage
sludge in a Process to Significantly Reduce Pathogens (PSRP)) and
Class B, Alternative 3 (treat sewage sludge in a process that is
equivalent to a PSRP). See Sec. 503.32(b)(3) and Sec. 503.32(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Second, EPA concluded that protection of public health and the
environment does not require that the Class B pathogen requirements be
met at the time sewage sludge is used or disposed. The part 503 rule
imposes site restrictions for Class B sewage sludge that is land-
applied and management
[[Page 42555]]
practices for surface-disposed Class B sewage sludge irrespective of
which Class B pathogen alternative is selected. The site restrictions
and management practices allow time for the environment to further
reduce remaining pathogens in the sewage sludge to below detectable
levels.
To make the Class B pathogen alternatives consistent, the Agency
proposed to delete the requirement that the fecal coliform density in
Class B, Alternative 1 be met at the time of use or disposal. This
means that the fecal coliform density requirement can be met any time
(e.g., before storage) before the sewage sludge is used or disposed. As
mentioned above, the site restrictions for land-applied Class B sewage
sludge and the surface disposal management practices provide time for
the environment to further reduce the remaining pathogens in Class B
sewage sludge to below detectable levels.
One commenter opposed the proposed change believing that it would
increase the public health risk, particularly when the sewage sludge is
stored before it is used or disposed. The Agency disagrees and is
adopting the change as proposed.
There is no evidence of increased incidences of disease from
exposure to Class B sewage sludge that is either stored, or used or
disposed. There is evidence, however, that over time the densities of
Salmonella sp. bacteria, enteric viruses, and viable helminth ova in
sewage sludge are reduced to below detectable levels by environmental
conditions. Thus, in EPA's judgement, public health and the environment
are protected when the Class B pathogen requirements and the land
application site restrictions for a Class B sewage sludge are met. With
respect to the concern about stored sewage sludge, the U.S. Department
of Agriculture and EPA are preparing guidance on storage of sewage
sludge. This guidance will address, among other things, good practices
for storing sewage sludge. Today's action amends Sec. 503.32(b)(2)(i)
to indicate that seven representative samples of the sewage sludge that
is used or disposed shall be collected.
G. Site Restriction for Grazing of Animals
EPA also proposed to change the site restriction in
Sec. 503.32(b)(5)(v). The current regulation indicates that animals
shall not be allowed to graze for 30 days after land application of a
Class B sewage sludge. The language in the proposed change indicates
that animals shall not be grazed for 30 days after land application of
a Class B sewage sludge. This restriction applies to the intentional,
not inadvertent, grazing of animals. Commenters supported this change,
and EPA is adopting it today.
H. Vector Attraction Reduction Equivalency
Sewage sludge has a number of qualities that may attract disease-
spreading agents--``vectors''--like birds, flies and rats. The part 503
regulation includes requirements for reducing what is called ``vector
attraction'' potential. The regulation allows use of any of 10 vector
attraction reduction options when sewage sludge is applied to the land
(or 11 options in the case of sewage sludge that is placed on a surface
disposal site). See 40 CFR 503.33.
In the October 25, 1995, notice, EPA proposed to allow the use of
other vector attraction reduction options for any of the eight
treatment options if the permitting authority determined that such an
option was ``equivalent,'' (i.e, equally effective in reducing vector
attraction). This flexible approach is similar to that provided
currently in the part 503 regulation for Class A and Class B pathogen
reduction processes. Processes other than those prescribed in the
regulation may be used to reduce pathogens if the permitting authority
determines they are equivalent.
All of the commenters supported the proposed change. However, none
of the commenters provided information necessary to develop appropriate
measures that could be used to determine whether an option is
equivalent to one of the first eight vector attraction reduction
options. Without such measures, equivalency cannot be determined.
Because no measures exist currently that can be used to determine
whether a vector attraction reduction option is equivalent to one of
the first eight vector attraction reduction options, EPA concluded that
the part 503 regulation should not be amended at this time to allow for
vector attraction reduction equivalency. For this reason, today's
action does not amend Sec. 503.15(c), Sec. 503.25(b), and
Sec. 503.33(a).
The Agency encourages anyone with information that can be used to
develop appropriate measures for vector attraction reduction
equivalency to submit the information to EPA. If measures can be
developed, EPA will consider reproposing the changes to Sec. 503.15(c),
Sec. 503.25(b), and Sec. 503.33(a) to allow an option that is
equivalent to one of the first eight vector attraction reduction
options, if the equivalent option is approved by the permitting
authority.
I. Vector Attraction Reduction at the Time of Use or Disposal
Another proposed change in the October 25th notice was the time
when certain vector attraction reduction options have to be met. Under
the current regulation, vector attraction reduction Options 1 through 8
can be met any time before the sewage sludge is used or disposed. In
the case of Options 9, 10, and 11, however, they must be met at the
time the sewage sludge is used or disposed.
The October 25th notice proposed to change the time when vector
attraction reduction Options 6, 7, and 8 have to be met. The proposed
change required that those options be met at the time the sewage sludge
is used or disposed rather than any time before the sewage sludge is
used or disposed.
As explained in the proposal (60 FR 54775, October 25, 1995),
vector attraction reduction achieved by pH adjustment (Option 6) may
not always be permanent. The target pH conditions in Option 6 allow
sewage sludge to be stored for some period before use or disposal
without the pH dropping. If the sewage sludge is stored for some longer
period of time, however, the pH may drop. At that point, biological
activity in the sewage sludge may resume, and the sewage sludge may
putrefy and attract vectors.
Similarly, in the case of vector attraction reduction Options 7 and
8, the moisture content of the sewage sludge may increase during
storage after the percent solids requirements are met, and biological
activity could increase. This also could cause vectors to be attracted
to the sewage sludge.
EPA received a significant number of comments opposing the proposed
change for Option 6--pH adjustment. Several commenters stated that the
proposed change to Option 6 would require them to adjust the pH of the
sewage sludge twice--once before storage and then again after storage
before use or disposal. This would increase the cost of Option 6.
The commenters assumed incorrectly that part 503 requires the pH of
the sewage sludge to be adjusted prior to storage. EPA only proposed to
require that the pH be adjusted at the time of use or disposal. Thus,
the only cost attributable to part 503 would be the cost of one pH
adjustment at the time of use or disposal.
The commenters presented several other reasons for retaining Option
6 in its current form. These include the following. First, nutrient
problems could result when high pH sewage sludge is land-applied (micro
nutrients
[[Page 42556]]
are less available for plant uptake in high pH soils, particularly in
coastal plains). Second, the high calcium content of the sewage sludge
will lower the agronomic rate for the application site. Third, the
effectiveness of herbicides applied to a site will be reduced because
herbicides are less available in high pH soils. Finally, sewage sludge
with a high pH may induce manganese deficiency because manganese is
more water soluble at high pH and, thus, may be removed from a site
through leaching to ground water. Some commenters also indicated that
if Option 6 is changed, ``unstabilized'' sewage sludge could be
stockpiled or stored and could cause harm to public health. Other
commenters indicated there have been no vector attraction problems in
cases where the pH of the sewage sludge is adjusted prior to storage,
but not at the time of use or disposal.
The only comment on the proposed change to Options 7 and 8 (i.e.,
percent solids) suggest that these options are often relied on by small
POTWs. Thus, the change may have an economic impact on those POTWs.
After further review, EPA concluded that the time when vector
attraction reduction Options 6, 7, and 8 have to be met should not be
changed. In cases where Option 6 is met prior to storage of the sewage
sludge, the pH of the sewage sludge could drop during storage. The
Agency agrees, however, that there have been no documented cases of
vector attraction problems when this occurs, and that it is desirable
to reduce the attractiveness of stored sewage sludge to vectors. In
addition, there are measures that can be taken to keep the pH of the
sewage sludge from dropping during storage. Thus, the time when Option
6 can be met (i.e., any time before the sewage sludge is used or
disposed) remains unchanged.
In the case of Options 7 and 8, the Agency is not aware of any
documented cases concerning protection of public health and the
environment when those options are met prior to use or disposal. Thus,
the time when Options 7 and 8 can be met (i.e., any time before the
sewage sludge is used or disposed) also remains unchanged.
J. Time Period for Vector Attraction Reduction Option 10
In the October 25, 1995, notice, EPA proposed to modify the part
503 regulation to allow the permitting authority to change the time
period sewage sludge has to be incorporated into the soil in vector
attraction reduction Option 10. Vector attraction reduction Option 10
requires incorporation of sewage sludge into the soil within six hours
after it is land-applied or surface-disposed. This reduces the
attraction of vectors to the sewage sludge by placing a barrier between
the sewage sludge and the vectors. EPA proposed this change to allow
the permitting authority to consider site-specific conditions (e.g.,
the remoteness of the land application site) that may affect the time
period during which sewage sludge can be incorporated into the soil.
Commenters supported the proposed change. However, one commenter
asked EPA to modify the language so as to make it clear that, while the
permitting authority may relax the time requirements in Option 10, the
permitting authority could not tighten them. EPA is rejecting this
suggestion because there may be circumstances in which more rapid soil
incorporation is necessary to protect public health and the
environment.
The current regulation authorizes the permitting authority to
modify the existing part 503 requirements where warranted by
circumstances. Section 503.5(a) indicates that a permitting authority
may impose additional or more stringent requirements than the
requirements in part 503 if necessary to protect public health and the
environment. Section 503.5(b) indicates that a State or political
subdivision thereof can establish additional or more stringent
requirements than those in part 503 for any reason.
EPA is today amending Sec. 503.33(b)(10)(i) to allow the permitting
authority to increase the time period during which sewage sludge has to
be incorporated into the soil. Only the permitting authority can
authorize a time period that is different from the time period in part
503.
K. Technical Corrections
In the October 25, 1995 Notice, EPA proposed several technical
corrections to part 503 that were minor in nature and that clarified
some of the technical requirements of the part 503 regulation.
Commenters supported the clarifications. Today's final amendment makes
the following technical corrections to the part 503 regulation with the
one exception discussed below.
1. Sections 503.16(a)(1) and 503.26(a)(1)--Frequency of Monitoring
Sections 503.16(a)(1) and 503.26(a)(1) contain the requirements for
monitoring for pollutants, pathogen densities, and vector attraction
reduction. Those sections indicate there are pathogen density
requirements in Sec. 503.32(b)(3) and (b)(4). This is incorrect.
Today's final amendment deletes the reference to Sec. 503.32(b)(3) and
(b)(4) from Sec. 503.16(a)(1) and Sec. 503.26(a)(1).
Sections 503.16(a)(1) and 503.26(a)(1) also indicate that the
frequency of monitoring requirements apply to vector attraction
reduction Option 5 in Sec. 503.33(b)(5) and Option 6 in
Sec. 503.33(b)(6). This also is incorrect. Today's final amendment
deletes the reference to vector attraction reduction Options 5 and 6
from Sec. 503.16(a)(1) and Sec. 503.26(a)(1).
2. Section 503.17(b)(7)--Recordkeeping for Land Application of Domestic
Septage
Today's final amendment changes Sec. 503.17(b)(7) by changing an
incorrect reference.
3. Section 503.18--Reporting
Today's final amendment corrects the omission of a reporting date
in the part 503 regulation by inserting February 19th in
Sec. 503.18(a)(2).
4. Section 503.21(c)--Contaminate An Aquifer
Today's final amendment corrects the reference to the maximum
contaminant level for nitrate in Sec. 503.21(c). On January 30, 1991,
EPA published a regulation (56 FR 3526) that changed the reference for
the maximum contaminant level for nitrate from 40 CFR 141.11 to 40 CFR
141.62(b). That change was effective July 30, 1992. For this reason,
the reference to the maximum contaminant level for nitrate in the
definition of contaminate an aquifer is being changed to 40 CFR
141.62(b) in today's final rule.
5. Section 503.22(b)--General Requirements
Today's final amendment changes Sec. 503.22(b) by correcting the
statutory reference and by inserting the appropriate date.
6. Section 503.32(a)(3)--Pathogens
In the October 1995 notice, EPA indicated that pathogen Class A,
Alternative 1 only applies to thermal processes such as anaerobic
digestion, and does not apply to composting. Upon further review, EPA
concluded that the time/temperature conditions in Class A, Alternative
1 can be achieved through composting. If the temperature of every
particle of the composted sewage sludge is raised to the appropriate
value for the appropriate time period, Salmonella sp. bacteria, enteric
viruses, and viable helminth ova in the sewage sludge are reduced to
below detectable levels. For this reason, the proposed change to
[[Page 42557]]
Sec. 503.32(a)(3) to exclude composting is not being made.
7. Appendix B to Part 503--Pathogen Treatment Processes
The description of Process to Further Reduce Pathogens (PFRP) No. 6
(Gamma ray irradiation) is corrected to insert the phrase ``at dosages
of at least 1.0 megarad at room temperature (ca. 20 deg. C)'' that was
omitted inadvertently.
V. Final Amendments to the Part 503 Incineration Requirements
A. Compliance Period
In the October 25, 1995, proposal, EPA proposed to amend Sec. 503.2
to require compliance with the revised incineration requirements in
subpart E of part 503 as expeditiously as practicable, but in no case
later than 90 days after publication of the final amendment. If
compliance with the revised subpart E requirements required
construction of new pollution control facilities compliance had to be
achieved as expeditiously as practicable but no later than 12 months
after publication of today's final amendment.
Commenters indicated that 90 days are not enough to comply with the
revised incineration requirements, particularly the requirement to
install continuous emission monitors for total hydrocarbons (THC). EPA
agrees, and has increased the time to comply with the revised
requirements in subpart E.
Today's final rule amends Sec. 503.2 by adding a new paragraph (d)
that, unless otherwise specified in subpart E, requires compliance with
the revised subpart E requirements in the final rule as expeditiously
as practicable, but in no case later than 12 months after the effective
date for the final rule. If new pollution control facilities have to be
constructed to comply with the revised requirements, compliance with
the revised subpart E requirements shall be achieved as expeditiously
as practicable, but no later than 24 months after the effective date
for the final rule.
B. Site-Specific Exemption From Frequency of Monitoring, Recordkeeping,
and Reporting Requirements
The October 25, 1996, notice proposed to amend the applicability
section in Sec. 503.40 to exempt sewage sludge incinerators on a site-
specific basis from the frequency of monitoring, recordkeeping, and
reporting requirements for a specific pollutant in defined
circumstances. Under the proposed approach, if the limit for arsenic,
cadmium, chromium, lead or nickel, determined pursuant to Sec. 503.43,
is significantly higher than the measured concentration for the
pollutant, the permitting authority could exempt the pollutant from the
above requirements so long as the incinerator continued to operate
within the values for the incinerator operating parameters established
during the performance test required by the regulation. The notice
requested comments on whether this approach is appropriate, and how to
determine whether the calculated limit for a pollutant is significantly
higher than the measured concentration of the pollutant in sewage
sludge.
All commenters favored allowing such an exemption. With respect to
how to determine whether a calculated pollutant limit is significantly
higher than the measured concentration, commenters suggested two
different approaches. The first limits the availability of the
exemption for a pollutant to circumstances in which the monthly average
pollutant concentration did not exceed 50 percent of the calculated
limit. The second approach varies the frequency of monitoring, based on
the percentage the measured concentration bore to the calculated limit.
For example, the frequency of monitoring could be reduced to once per
year if the measured concentration is 80 percent of the calculated
limit. If the measured concentration is 60 percent of the calculated
limit or less, there would be no monitoring requirement for that
pollutant.
After considering this proposed change further, EPA has decided not
to amend the regulation for the following reasons. Although several
commenters offered suggestions on how to determine whether a calculated
limit is significantly higher than the measured concentration for a
pollutant, no commenter provided any test the permit writer could apply
for ensuring that, in fact, the actual concentration for the pollutant
falls substantially below the calculated limit. Moreover, there are
questions about how much data are needed to support an exemption and
the period of the exemption (e.g., one year, five years, or forever).
In addition, there are many factors that could affect the actual
concentration of a pollutant in sewage sludge (e.g., variability of the
pollutant in the influent to the treatment works).
Another concern EPA has about the proposed change is the assumption
that the incinerator will be operated as it was during the performance
test. There are many factors that affect the performance test results
(e.g., feed rate and excess oxygen). If these factors change, the
calculated limits for a pollutant could change.
Given the concerns about changes in both the calculated limit and
the measured concentration of a pollutant in sewage sludge, EPA
concluded that the part 503 regulation should not provide for a site-
specific exemption from the frequency of monitoring, recordkeeping, and
reporting requirements in subpart E. Thus, today's notice does not
amend Sec. 503.40 to add a new paragraph (d).
C. Pollutant Limits for Arsenic, Cadmium, Chromium, Lead and Nickel
In the October 25, 1995 notice, EPA proposed several changes to the
requirements in Sec. 503.43 for sewage sludge that is incinerated. As
explained in greater detail in the preamble to the proposal (60 FR
54777-54779, October 25, 1995), 40 CFR 503.43 establishes limits on the
allowable ``daily concentration'' of arsenic, cadmium, chromium, lead
and nickel in sewage sludge. The allowable limits are calculated using
equations set forth in the regulation, and are dependent on a number of
factors that vary with specific conditions at an incinerator site. To
calculate the limit for each of the five pollutants, the regulation
requires determination of two factors that are dependent on site-
specific conditions. They are: (1) A dispersion factor (DF)--how
pollutants are dispersed when they exit the incinerator stack, and (2)
the incinerator's control efficiency (CE)--how efficiently the
incinerator removes a pollutant in the sewage sludge that is
incinerated. The regulation requires use of an air dispersion model to
determine the DF and a performance test to establish the CE, both of
which must be specified by the permitting authority. In addition, in
the case of chromium, the regulation requires the permitting authority
to determine whether the risk specific concentration (RSC) for
chromium, which is used to establish the allowable chromium sewage
sludge pollutant concentration, should be based on default values
provided in the regulation (Table 2 of Sec. 503.43) or determined by a
site-specific calculation.
The requirement for site-specific action by the permitting
authority has significant implications for compliance and enforcement
of the regulation. Site-by-site tailoring of a particular incinerator's
requirements effectively defers the determination of an individual
incinerator's limits until action by the permitting authority. Given
the resource-intensive nature of these site-by-site determinations and
constraints on available resources, EPA
[[Page 42558]]
proposed to adopt a different approach. The Agency proposed to delete
the requirement for the permitting authority to approve the air
dispersion modeling and performance tests used to determine DF and CE,
respectively, as well as modify the requirement for the permitting
authority to determine the appropriate chromium RSC. EPA also proposed
to clarify the definition of the allowable concentration of a pollutant
in sewage sludge.
1. Average Daily Concentration
EPA proposed to revise 40 CFR 503.43(c)(1) and (d)(1) to clarify
that the calculated sewage sludge concentration is an average daily
concentration based on the number of days in a month that the
incinerator operates. This change made the calculated concentration
consistent with the risk specific concentration (i.e., the allowable
ambient air concentration for a pollutant developed through risk
assessment) for a pollutant.
Comments on this proposed changed were generally favorable, but the
commenters asked for a clarification with respect to the number of days
in the month the incinerator operates. Commenters questioned whether
the calculated limit was a monthly average. Upon further review, EPA
concluded that it is not appropriate to calculate the allowable
concentration of a pollutant in sewage sludge fed to a sewage sludge
incinerator using the number of days in the month the incinerator
operates. Instead, the average daily concentration should be the
arithmetic mean of the concentration of a pollutant in the samples
collected and analyzed during a month. Thus, if one sample is collected
and analyzed during the month, the average daily concentration is the
concentration of a pollutant in that sample. If two samples are
collected and analyzed during the month, the average daily
concentration is the arithmetic mean of the concentration of a
pollutant in those two samples. Likewise, if only one sample is
collected and analyzed during the year, the average daily concentration
is the concentration for a pollutant in that one sample.
After considering the comments on the proposed change to the
allowable concentration of a pollutant in sewage sludge, EPA concluded
that the allowable concentration should be an average daily
concentration. Thus, today's notice amends Sec. 503.43(c)(1) and (d)(1)
by changing the definition of ``C'' in equations (4) and (5),
respectively, to average daily concentration. Today's notice also
amends Sec. 503.41--Special Definition--by adding the following
definition for average daily concentration: ``Average daily
concentration is the arithmetic mean of the concentration of a
pollutant in milligrams per kilogram of sewage sludge (dry weight
basis) in the samples collected and analyzed in a month.''
2. Approval of Air Dispersion Model and Performance Test
As noted above, the October 1995 notice proposed to amend the
regulation to delete the requirement in Sec. 503.43(c)(2), (c)(3),
(d)(4), and (d)(5) for the permitting authority to specify the air
dispersion model and performance test used to calculate the sewage
sludge pollutant limits. EPA received no comments on these proposed
changes. Therefore, today's notice amends Sec. 503.43 (c)(2), (c)(3),
(d)(4), and (d)(5) by deleting the requirement for the permitting
authority to specify how to meet these requirements.
EPA also proposed amending Sec. 503.43(d)(3) to delete the
requirement for the permitting authority to specify one of the two
means of calculating the risk specific concentration for chromium. EPA
received only one comment, and it favored the proposed change. Thus,
today's final rule amends Sec. 503.43(d)(3) by deleting the requirement
for the permitting authority to specify how to meet this requirement.
The October 1995 notice also proposed to add a new paragraph (e) to
Sec. 503.43. This paragraph contains requirements for air dispersion
modeling and performance tests to serve the purpose of the deleted
requirements in Sec. 503.43(c)(2), (c)(3), (d)(4), and (d)(5) that the
permitting authority specify the air dispersion model and performance
test.
The proposed Sec. 503.43(e)(1) required that any air dispersion
model and performance test be ``consistent with good air pollution
control practices for minimizing air pollution.'' One commenter
objected to this provision asserting that such a requirement was
inappropriate. In the commenter's view, an air dispersion model and a
performance test are used to measure something, not to minimize air
emissions. EPA concurs with the comment on Sec. 503.43(e)(1). Thus,
today's final amendment only requires that the air dispersion model be
appropriate for the geographical, physical, and population
characteristics at the incinerator site, and that the performance test
be appropriate for the type of sewage sludge incinerator.
Proposed Sec. 503.43(e)(2) required that an air dispersion modeling
protocol be submitted to the permitting authority within 30 days of the
publication date of this final amendment. The permitting authority
would then have 30 days to review the protocol, including the selected
air dispersion model, and provide comments on the protocol. If the
permitting authority did not object within 30 days, the protocol could
be used to determine the dispersion factor for the incinerator site. No
comments were received on this proposed requirement.
Upon further review, EPA concluded that the air dispersion model
protocol should not be submitted to the permitting authority 30 days
from the date of publication of this final amendment because the Agency
lacks the resources to review and comment on the protocol within 30
days after it is received. Instead, today's action amends
Sec. 503.43(e)(2) to require that results of air dispersion modeling
initiated after September 3, 1999, be submitted to the permitting
authority no later than 30 days after completion of the modeling. This
requirement does not apply to air dispersion modeling completed prior
to September 3, 1999.
EPA encourages the person who conducts the air dispersion modeling
to coordinate with the permitting authority prior to conducting the
modeling. This could prevent future problems if the permitting
authority has concerns about the air dispersion modeling.
As indicated in the October 1995 notice, EPA has published several
guidance documents that contain recommendations on how to select
appropriate air dispersion models. These models consider such site-
specific factors as stack height, stack diameter, stack gas
temperature, exit velocity and topography of surrounding terrain. See
Guidelines on Air Quality Models in Appendix W to 40 CFR part 51 and in
the U.S. EPA, ``Technical Support Document for Sewage Sludge
Incineration'' at Section 5.6.1 (EPA 822/R-93-003, November 1992).
Information on air quality models also can be obtained from the Support
Center for Regulatory Air Models (SCRAM) on the Technology Transfer
Network, (http://ttnwww.rtpnc.epa.gov/).
Proposed Sec. 503.43(e)(3) contained the minimum procedures for
conducting a performance test. A performance test measures the degree
to which a sewage sludge incinerator and associated air pollution
control devices remove a pollutant. As previously explained, the
pollutant control efficiency from a performance test is used to
calculate the allowable concentration of a pollutant in sewage sludge
fired in the incinerator.
[[Page 42559]]
The procedures in the proposed Sec. 503.43(e)(3) parallel the
procedures in 40 CFR 60.8, a regulation that describes the general
procedures for conducting performance testing under the Clean Air Act.
EPA concluded that it is necessary to specify minimum procedures for
conducting performance tests now that the part 503 incineration
requirements are self-implementing.
The procedures in proposed Sec. 503.43(e)(3)(i) require that the
performance test be conducted under representative incinerator
conditions at the highest expected sewage sludge feed rate within
design specifications. A commenter suggested that EPA should recognize
the variability in the feed rate during the operation of the sewage
sludge incinerator.
EPA agrees that the feed rate used in performance tests may well
differ from the sewage sludge feed rate during day-to-day operation of
the incinerator. Part 503 takes this into account by requiring that the
``highest expected'' feed rate be used in the performance test. Because
the actual feed rate is expected to be equal to or less than the
highest expected feed rate, the actual feed rate should not cause the
control efficiency for a pollutant to decrease during the day-to-day
operation of the incinerator.
The above comment is more applicable to the feed rate used to
calculate the limit for a pollutant than to the feed rate during a
performance test. As provided in the current rule, the sewage sludge
feed rate used in the equations in Sec. 503.43(c)(1) and (d)(1) to
calculate the limit for a pollutant takes the feed rate during
operation into account. The feed rate used in these equations is either
the average daily amount of sewage sludge fired in all sewage sludge
incinerators within the property line of the site where the sewage
sludge incinerators are located for the number of days in a 365 day
period that each sewage sludge incinerator operates, or the average
daily design capacity for all sewage sludge incinerators within the
property line of the site where the sewage sludge incinerators are
located (see Sec. 503.41(j)). This definition recognizes potential
variability in the actual feed rate, and accounts for the variability
by providing for averaging over a 365 day period.
The October 25, 1995, proposal required in Sec. 503.43(e)(3)(ii)
that the permitting authority be notified at least 30 days prior to a
performance test so that the permitting authority may have the
opportunity to comment on the test protocol and test methods, and to
observe the test. This requirement does not apply in cases where
performance tests were conducted prior to September 3, 1999. This
change is included in today's final rule as proposed.
EPA has decided not to adopt a provision it proposed as
Sec. 503.43(e)(3)(iii) that would have required that performance
testing facilities contain safe sampling platforms and safe access to
them because that provision is not related directly to the use or
disposal of sewage sludge. In addition, for sewage sludge incinerators
subject to 40 CFR part 60, subpart O, the proposed provision reflects a
similar provision in 40 CFR 60.8 concerning performance tests. There
also may be other federal or state safety requirements that govern the
way performance tests are conducted. Therefore, the Agency concluded
that this provision does not need to be in today's final rule.
Today's final Sec. 503.43(e)(3)(iii), proposed as subparagraph
(e)(3)(iv), concerns the number of runs for a performance test. Each
performance test shall consist of three runs. The arithmetic mean of
the results of the three runs is the control efficiency for a
pollutant. All commenters on this proposal agreed with the requirement.
Thus, this requirement in today's final rule is the same as it was in
the proposal.
Today's action also promulgates Sec. 503.43(e)(4) as proposed on
October 25, 1995. This provision requires that the calculated pollutant
limits be submitted to the permitting authority within 30 days of
completion of air dispersion modeling and performance tests.
As proposed, Sec. 503.43(e)(5) requires new air dispersion modeling
and performance testing when there are ``significant changes'' in
specific aspects of the site or in incinerator operating conditions.
One commenter asked how high above the feed rate in the performance
tests or the feed rate used to calculate pollutant limits can the
actual feed rate be before a new performance test or a new limit for a
pollutant is required. One possibility is to allow the actual feed rate
to increase by a certain percentage (e.g., 10 percent) of the feed rate
in the performance test or the feed rate used to calculate a limit
before a new performance test has to be conducted or a new limit for a
pollutant calculated.
Another possibility is to decide how much the actual feed rate can
increase on a case-by-case basis. Under this approach, all the factors
that affect the decision on whether to conduct a new performance test
or calculate a new limit can be considered. For example, if the
measured concentration of a pollutant in sewage sludge is significantly
lower than the calculated limit for the pollutant, public health may
still be protected if the feed rate increases by more than 10 percent,
while in another case, an increase of 10 percent in the feed rate may
result in a pollutant limit being exceeded.
Today's final rule does not specify when new performance tests have
to be conducted or when new pollutant limits have to be calculated.
Section 503.43(e)(5) indicates that significant changes in incinerator
operating conditions will require that new performance tests be
conducted. The decision on whether a change in operating conditions,
including feed rate, is significant will be determined on a case-by-
case basis by the permitting authority. Protection of public health
should be the major factor in deciding whether to conduct new
performance tests or calculate new pollutant limits.
3. Technical Corrections
The October 1995 notice also proposed three technical corrections
to Sec. 503.43(d)(1) and (d)(2). Two of the changes corrected
typographical errors in the definition of terms in (d)(1) and the other
change corrected a reference in (d)(2). These changes are included in
today's final rule.
4. Air Emissions Analytical Methods
The preamble in the October 1995 notice requested comments on
whether to specify methods to analyze emissions from sewage sludge
incinerator stacks in part 503. Commenters on the proposal recommended
that EPA not include specific test methods for air emissions in part
503 because EPA approved methods already are required in other
regulations. EPA agrees with the commenters.
EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards has approved
Method 29 in 40 CFR part 60, Appendix A as a method for determining
compliance with the particulate emissions standards in subpart O of 40
CFR part 60 (Standards of Performance for Sewage Treatment Plants), and
the beryllium and mercury emissions standards in subparts C and E,
respectively, of 40 CFR part 61 (National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants). This method only requires that one sampling
train be used. The methods in 40 CFR part 266 (Boilers and Industrial
Furnaces), Appendix IX, section 3.1 also can be used to measure
emission rates. When those methods are used, more than one sampling
train is needed. Because both methods are available, today's final rule
does not specify a method to measure emission rates. EPA recommends,
however, that Method 29
[[Page 42560]]
be used during the performance test required by part 503 because that
method only requires one sampling train.
D. Management Practices
Sections 503.45(a)(1) and Sec. 503.45(b)-(d) of the sewage sludge
regulation require the installation of instruments that continuously
monitor total hydrocarbons (THC) concentration, oxygen concentration,
information to determine moisture content in the sewage sludge
incinerator stack emissions, and combustion temperature, respectively.
These instruments must be installed, calibrated, operated, and
maintained ``as specified by the permitting authority.''
As explained in the October 1995 proposal (60 FR 54779), the part
503 regulation required the permitting authority to specify the manner
in which the above instruments are installed calibrated, operated, and
maintained because, at the time the regulation was published, there was
only limited EPA guidance in this area. Because there is now EPA
guidance on how to install, calibrate, operate, and maintain the above
instruments, EPA proposed to amend Sec. 503.45(a)(1) and
Sec. 503.45(b)-(d) to delete the requirement that the permitting
authority specify how the instruments required by those sections are
installed, calibrated, operated, and maintained. With one exception,
all comments received on the proposed changes concurred with the
changes.
EPA received one comment suggesting alternative means of
demonstrating compliance with the total hydrocarbons or carbon monoxide
operational standards. The commenter suggested that EPA consider
providing for the site-specific establishment and continuous monitoring
of a minimum incinerator exhaust temperature, in lieu of continuous
monitoring of total hydrocarbons or carbon monoxide. The commenter also
suggested that the incinerator owner/operator be allowed to demonstrate
a site-specific correlation between total hydrocarbons and carbon
monoxide emissions as an alternative method of demonstrating compliance
with either emissions limit. The Agency did not propose either of these
alternatives in the October 25, 1995 proposal. However, in the preamble
to the proposal, the Agency stated that it would study monitoring for
other parameters, including temperature, to measure compliance with
either the total hydrocarbon limit or the carbon monoxide limit and
would decide whether further amendments to part 503 were needed as a
result of the study. (60 FR 54779). EPA undertook this study and
produced a report on the feasibility of alternatives to continuous
monitoring of total hydrocarbons or carbon monoxide. A copy of the
report, entitled ``An Investigation of Alternative Means for
Demonstrating Compliance with the part 503 Total Hydrocarbon
Operational Standards,'' EPA 822-R-98-001 is in the rulemaking docket.
The study indicated that, while technically feasible on a site-specific
basis , either of these options would be extremely resource intensive
and would involve the permitting authority in complex procedures to
determine and approve site-specific temperature limits or site-specific
total hydrocarbons/carbon monoxide correlations. As a result of these
findings, the Agency, has decided not to pursue either the option of
establishing and continuously monitoring for site-specific temperature
limits or the option of establishing site-specific correlations between
total hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide emissions in lieu of complying
independently with either the 100 ppm total hydrocarbons or carbon
monoxide emissions limits. However, the Agency invites the public to
comment on whether these options for demonstrating compliance should be
pursued further and to provide any additional information to supplement
the report that EPA relied on in deciding not to allow for these
alternatives at this time. Thus, the above changes are included in
today's final rule.
In the October 1995 notice, EPA also proposed to delete the
requirements in Sec. 503.45 (e) and (f) for the permitting authority to
specify the maximum combustion temperature for a sewage sludge
incinerator and the values for the operating parameters for the air
pollution control devices, respectively. These proposed changes help
make the part 503 incineration requirements self-implementing.
Commenters supported the proposed modifications, and they are included
in today's final rule.
EPA also proposed to amend Sec. 503.45 (e) to require that the
maximum combustion temperature for the incinerator, which is based on
information obtained during the performance test, not be exceeded
significantly. EPA recognized that the combustion temperature of a
sewage sludge incinerator could vary. Consequently, the Agency asked
for comment on: (1) What averaging period should be used to determine
the maximum allowable combustion temperature (daily average, hourly?)
and (2) how much the maximum combustion temperature could vary from the
performance test maximum combustion temperature.
Commenters' suggestions ranged from measuring maximum operating
combustion temperature as a hourly average to a daily average, with
temperature monitored hourly. EPA concluded that the operating
combustion temperature for a sewage sludge incinerator should be the
arithmetic mean of the hourly average temperature in the hottest zone
of the furnace for the hours during the day the incinerator operates,
and that the maximum allowable operating combustion temperature be
based on the average combustion temperature during the performance test
(see discussion below). Any variation in the operating combustion
temperature over a day is not expected to significantly impact either
the concentration of a pollutant in the emissions from the sewage
sludge incinerator or the ambient air concentration for the pollutant
and, therefore, is not expected to significantly impact public health.
Thus, EPA is amending the part 503 regulation to add a new definition
to Sec. 503.41--Special Definitions--for incinerator operating
combustion temperature as follows: ``Incinerator operating combustion
temperature is the arithmetic mean of the temperature readings in the
hottest zone of the furnace recorded in a day (24 hours) when the
temperature is averaged and recorded at least hourly during the hours
the incinerator operates in a day.''
As indicated above, EPA proposed that the maximum allowable
operating combustion temperature be based on information obtained
during the incinerator performance test required by Sec. 503.43 (c)(3)
and (d)(5). The proposed regulation required three separate runs for
each performance test. Commenters argued that the maximum combustion
temperature from each of the runs should be averaged to determine the
maximum combustion temperature for the performance test and that
temperature should then be increased by a certain percentage (e.g., 20
percent) to determine the maximum operating combustion temperature.
EPA agrees that an average should be used to describe the
combustion temperature in a performance test. The Agency does not
agree, however, that the maximum temperature from each run should be
averaged and that average increased by a certain percentage to obtain
the maximum operating combustion temperature. EPA concluded that the
performance test combustion temperature should be the arithmetic mean
of the average combustion temperature in the hottest
[[Page 42561]]
zone of the furnace from each of the runs in a performance test. This
accounts for variability in the combustion temperature because all of
the continuously measured temperature readings are used to calculate
the arithmetic mean. Thus, today's final rule amends Sec. 503.41--
Special Definitions--by adding the following definition for performance
test combustion temperature: ``Performance test combustion temperature
is the arithmetic mean of the average combustion temperature in the
hottest zone of the furnace for each of the runs in a performance
test.''
EPA also agrees that the performance test combustion temperature
should be increased by a certain percentage to determine the maximum
operating combustion temperature for an incinerator. After further
review, EPA concluded that a 20 percent increase in the performance
test combustion temperature is reasonable. The change in control
efficiency resulting from a 20 percent increase in performance test
combustion temperature is not expected to be significant because that
change is not expected to result in a significant change in the
concentration of a pollutant in the incinerator stack emissions and is
not expected to result in a significant change in the allowable limit
for a pollutant (control efficiency is one of the variables used to
calculate the limit for a pollutant). Because neither the stack
emissions concentration nor the allowable limit for a pollutant are
expected to change significantly, public health is not expected to be
impacted significantly with a 20 percent increase in performance test
combustion temperature on an average daily basis. This is particularly
true with respect to the pollutant limits because the limits are
designed to protect public health from a lifetime of exposure (i.e., 70
years). In addition, most of the calculated pollutant limits for sewage
sludge incinerators are higher (sometimes several orders of magnitude
higher) than the measured sewage sludge concentration for a pollutant.
Also, as indicated in the report titled ``Human Health Risk Assessment
for Use & Disposal of Sewage Sludge: Benefits of the Regulation'' (EPA
822-R-93-005, November 1992), the estimated aggregate risk (i.e., risk
to the entire exposed population) from exposure to emissions from
sewage sludge incinerators prior to the establishment of the part 503
incineration requirements (i.e., baseline risk) is low. Because the
baseline aggregate risk is low, a 20 percent increase in the
performance test combustion temperature on an average daily basis is
not expected to impact the risk to the exposed population from
incineration of sewage sludge.
A 20 percent increase also provides flexibility needed to operate a
sewage sludge incinerator, particularly multiple hearth incinerators.
In addition, one of the commenters on the proposal recommended a 20
percent increase even though their recommended increase was in the
maximum performance test combustion temperature. As mentioned above,
EPA concluded that it is reasonable to apply the increase to the
average temperature from the performance test. Thus, Sec. 503.45(e) in
today's final rule indicates that the arithmetic mean of the
temperature readings in the hottest zone of the furnace recorded in a
day when the temperature is average and recorded at least daily (i.e.,
the operating combustion temperature) shall not exceed the arithmetic
mean of the average combustion temperature in the hottest zone of the
furnace for each of the runs in the performance test (i.e., the
performance test combustion temperature) by more than 20 percent.
Today's final rule amends Sec. 503.45(f) to delete the requirement
that the permitting authority specify the air pollution control device
operating parameters. Instead, Sec. 503.45(f) requires that the air
pollution control device be appropriate for the sewage sludge
incinerator and that the operating parameters for the air pollution
control device indicate adequate performance of the device. As
explained in the preamble to the proposal (60 FR 54780, October 25,
1995), EPA intended that the values for the air pollution control
device operating parameters be expressed as a range, and requested
comment on what the allowable range of values should be relative to the
values determined during the performance test. EPA also requested
comments on whether to standardize operating parameters for different
air pollution control devices in today's final rule. Operating
parameters for different types of air pollution control devices are
presented in the ``Technical Support Document for Sewage Sludge
Incineration'' in section 7.5 and Appendix M (EPA 822/R-93-003,
November 1992).
All commenters opposed EPA establishing standardized operating
parameters in part 503 for the different types of air pollution control
devices. The operating parameters and the value for the operating
parameter should be established on a case-by-case basis. However, if
EPA decides to standardize operating parameters, commenters recommended
that EPA establish average daily values, and allow flexibility in
selecting the values for the operating parameters (e.g., allow values
for the operating parameters that are as low as 70 percent of the
average daily value in the performance test).
Because the operating parameters vary depending on the type of air
pollution control device used and the values for the operating
parameters depend on site-specific conditions, EPA agrees that those
parameters and values should be determined on a case-by-case basis.
Thus, today's Sec. 503.45(f) does not standardize the operating
parameters for the different types of air pollution control devices.
Section 503.45(f) in the proposal indicated that operation of the
sewage sludge incinerator shall not cause a significant exceedence of
the values for the air pollution control device operating parameters.
One commenter requested that EPA define ``significant exceedence'' as
the phrase was used in proposed Sec. 503.45(f). The commenter suggested
that EPA employ a concept that uses 20 percent and 40 percent ranges to
define ``significant exceedence.''
Subpart O of 40 CFR part 60 (Standards for Performance for Sewage
Sludge Plants) applies to sewage sludge incinerators when the material
charged is at least 10 percent sewage sludge or when more than 2205
pounds of sewage sludge are charged per day, and when construction or
modification of the incinerator commences after June 11, 1973. That
subpart contains the requirements for the operation of the incinerator
air pollution control device. For this reason, Sec. 503.45 (f) in
today's final rule requires that for sewage sludge incinerators subject
to subpart O of 40 CFR part 60, operation of the air pollution control
device shall not violate the requirements for the air pollution control
device in subpart O.
For all other sewage sludge incinerators, Sec. 503.45 (f) in
today's final rule indicates that operation of the sewage sludge
incinerator shall not cause a significant exceedence of the average
value for the air pollution control device operating parameters from
the performance tests required by Sec. 503.43 (c)(3) and (d)(5). EPA
decided not to define ``significant exceedance'' in this case at this
time. The Agency is considering whether to request comments on the
allowable ranges for the values for the air pollution control device
parameters in a subsequent proposal to amend the part 503 regulation.
[[Page 42562]]
EPA also proposed to add a new section Sec. 503.45(h). As proposed,
this provision would require that the instruments required in
Sec. 503.45(a)-(d) be appropriate for the type of sewage sludge
incinerator, and shall be installed, calibrated, operated, and
maintained ``consistent with good air pollution control practice for
minimizing air emissions.'' EPA received only one comment on this
provision. The commenter argued that the phrase ``consistent with good
air pollution control practice for minimizing air emissions'' is not
pertinent. EPA agrees that the requirement to install certain
instruments for measuring emissions, temperature, etc. is not directly
related to emissions capture, and has deleted this phrase from the
final rule.
E. Frequency of Monitoring
EPA proposed several changes to the frequency of monitoring
requirements in Sec. 503.46 for sewage sludge incinerators. 60 FR
54780-82, October 25, 1995.
1. Mercury and beryllium. In the case of mercury and beryllium
4, EPA proposed to delete the requirement that the
permitting authority specify the monitoring frequency, and that the
frequency be the frequency in the National Emission Standard for
Hazardous Air Pollutant (NESHAP) for beryllium in subpart C of 40 CFR
part 61 and in the NESHAP for mercury in subpart E of 40 CFR part 61.
EPA also requested comment on whether to establish a periodic
monitoring frequency for beryllium and mercury for sewage sludge
incinerators that is different from the monitoring frequencies in the
NESHAP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The preamble to the proposal explains the current standards
and monitoring requirements for incineration of sewage sludge
containing mercury and beryllium. 60 FR 54780, October 25, 1995.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The October 1995 notice stated that the Agency was considering
three options for the frequency of monitoring for mercury. The options
were: (1) Periodic (quarterly or annual) stack or sewage sludge
sampling, (2) periodic (monthly, quarterly, or annual) sewage sludge
sampling, and (3) sewage sludge sampling based on the amount of sewage
sludge fired in a sewage sludge incinerator. For beryllium, EPA
indicated that periodic stack sampling only for sewage sludge
incinerators that must comply with the beryllium emission standard in
40 CFR 61.32(a) was being considered.
Most of commenters opposed additional beryllium and mercury
monitoring beyond that required by the current NESHAP for beryllium and
mercury. One commenter recommended a semi-annual frequency for mercury
monitoring if mercury in the stack emissions exceeds 1600 grams per day
(the NESHAP requires annual monitoring if mercury in the stack
emissions exceeds 1600 grams per day). Another commenter recommended
sewage sludge sampling for mercury according to the part 503 frequency
of monitoring for arsenic, cadmium, chromium, lead, and nickel rather
than stack emission sampling. Another commenter recommended no stack
sampling and that the monitoring frequency for mercury be based on the
amount of sewage sludge fired in a sewage sludge incinerator.
5
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ One commenter also requested clarification of the
applicability of the beryllium NESHAP to sewage sludge incinerators.
The beryllium NESHAP applies to incinerators that process beryllium-
containing waste, as defined in 40 CFR 61.31(g). Thus, if sewage
sludge contains beryllium-containing waste and the sewage sludge is
fired in a sewage sludge incinerator, the sewage sludge incinerator
is subject to the beryllium NESHAP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA has decided not to establish additional monitoring requirements
for beryllium and mercury. The Agency concluded that monitoring
frequencies in the beryllium and mercury NESHAPs are reasonable. Thus,
today's final regulation amends Sec. 503.46(a)(1) to delete the
requirement for the permitting authority to designate the frequency of
monitoring for beryllium and mercury in emissions. The regulation, as
amended, now provides that the monitoring frequency for beryllium and
mercury is the frequency in the beryllium and mercury NESHAP,
respectively.
Even though the mercury NESHAP only requires annual monitoring if
mercury in the stack emissions exceeds 1600 grams per day, the
frequency can be increased on a case-by-case basis by the permitting
authority when necessary to protect public health and the environment
(see Sec. 503.5). Thus, in areas like the Great Lakes where mercury
emissions are a major concern, the monitoring frequency for mercury may
be increased by the permitting authority, or the person who fires
sewage sludge in a sewage sludge incinerator could elect to increase
the mercury monitoring frequency.
2. Reduction in frequency of sewage sludge monitoring. The October
1995 notice also proposed to amend Sec. 503.46(a)(3). This section
currently allows the permitting authority to reduce the frequency of
monitoring for pollutants after the sewage sludge has been monitored
for two years at the frequency in Table 1 of Sec. 503.46. In no event,
however, may monitoring be less frequent than once per year. EPA
proposed to delete the requirement for monitoring at least once per
year.
Commenters supported the proposed change. Thus, for the reasons
explained above in the previous discussions for the frequency of
monitoring for land application and surface disposal, today's final
rule amends Sec. 503.46(a)(3) by deleting the at-least-once-per-year
monitoring frequency requirement.
3. Continuous monitoring of THC, oxygen concentration, information
to determine moisture content, and combustion temperature. As
previously explained, the current regulation requires continuous
monitoring of THC, oxygen concentration, information to determine
moisture content, and combustion temperature. EPA proposed in the
October 1995 notice to amend this requirement so as to permit
monitoring at less frequent intervals. The Agency requested comment on
how to determine when less frequent monitoring should be authorized
(e.g., should the frequency of monitoring be based on the amount of
sewage sludge fired annually or on the number of days in a year an
incinerator operates?).
All commenters supported the proposed change to delete the
requirement for continuous monitoring for the four parameters. They
also offered several recommendations on when to allow less than
continuous monitoring of the exit gas. Some commenters recommended
exempting fluidized bed incinerators from the continuous monitoring
requirement entirely or any incinerator after two years of continuous
monitoring if the monitoring results indicate minimal THC
concentrations in the emissions. Others recommended exempting an
incinerator when the amount of sewage sludge fired is below a specified
amount or exempting an incinerator if a demonstration can be made that
temperature can be measured continuously in lieu of measuring THC
continuously. After reviewing the comments, EPA has decided not to
adopt any of the recommendations. EPA concluded that the commenters had
failed to provide adequate technical or scientific support for
relieving an incinerator from the continuous monitoring requirements.
The commenters failed to show how compliance with the applicable
requirements could be demonstrated in the absence of continuous
monitoring.
4. Operating parameters for air pollution control devices. As
explained in the preamble to the proposal (60 FR 54779, October 25,
1995), and as discussed above, Sec. 503.45 currently requires the
operation of a sewage
[[Page 42563]]
sludge incinerator's air pollution control device be specified by the
permitting authority. Section 503.46(c) requires the permitting
authority to specify the frequency of monitoring for the air pollution
control device operating parameters. EPA proposed to change
Sec. 503.46(c) to delete the requirement for the permitting authority
to specify the monitoring frequency for air pollution control device
operating parameters and to require that those parameters be monitored
at least daily. Commenters supported these proposed changes.
Currently, incinerators that charge more than 10 percent sewage
sludge (dry weight) or that charge more than 2205 pounds of sewage
sludge per day; that commence construction or modification after June
11, 1973; and that have a wet scrubbing device are required to measure
and record the pressure drop of the gas flow through the wet scrubber
continuously (see 40 CFR 60.153). Incinerators that meet the first two
of the above requirements and that have another type of air pollution
control device also may have to monitor air pollution control device
operating parameters continuously, if required by the EPA
Administrator. The Agency decided not to establish additional frequency
of monitoring requirements in today's final rule for sewage sludge
incinerators subject to 40 CFR part 60. Thus, the final rule indicates
for sewage sludge incinerators subject to part 60, the frequency of
monitoring for the air pollution control device operating parameters
shall be the frequency of monitoring in subpart O of part 60.
For all other sewage sludge incinerators, the frequency of
monitoring for the air pollution control device operating parameters in
today's rule is at least daily, as proposed. EPA is considering whether
to establish a continuous monitoring requirement for the air pollution
control device operating parameters in a subsequent proposal to amend
the part 503 regulation. Continuous monitoring is consistent with the
monitoring requirements for air pollution control device operating
parameters now being considered by other EPA programs. Until a
different frequency of monitoring requirement is established, however,
the frequency of monitoring for the air pollution control device
operating parameters for sewage sludge incinerators not subject to the
requirements in subpart O of part 60 is at least daily.
F. Recordkeeping
Today's action amends Sec. 503.47(f) by changing the requirement to
record the maximum combustion temperature for the sewage sludge
incinerator to a requirement to record the operating combustion
temperatures for the sewage sludge incinerator. This change makes
Sec. 503.47(f) consistent with the new definition of operating
combustion temperature in Sec. 503.41(i).
VI. Final Amendment to Part 403
Part 503, as published on February 19, 1993, restricted the total
chromium concentration of land-applied sewage sludge to prevent
possible plant injury (i.e., phytotoxicity). On November 15, 1994, the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit remanded the total chromium
land application pollutant limits for modification or additional
justification, concluding that EPA lacked an adequate evidentiary basis
for the risk-based total chromium limits. Leather Industries of America
v. Environmental Protection Agency, 40 F.3d 392 (DC Cir. 1994). On
October 25, 1995, EPA promulgated a final rule that deleted total
chromium from the pollutants regulated when sewage sludge is applied to
the land (60 FR 54764, October 25, 1995). EPA concluded that there is
no current basis for establishing total chromium limits for land-
applied sewage sludge.
At the same time EPA deleted the total chromium limits from the
part 503 land application requirements, the Agency took two other
actions. First, EPA removed total chromium from the list of pollutants
in Appendix G--Section I (40 CFR part 403) for which a removal credit
is available when sewage sludge is land-applied. EPA removed total
chromium because the Appendix G--Section I list is limited to those
pollutants specifically regulated in part 503. Second, to ensure the
continued eligibility of chromium for a removal credit when sewage
sludge is land-applied, EPA added a footnote to the table in Appendix
G--Section II. This table lists pollutants not regulated in part 503
that are eligible for a removal credit so long as the concentration of
the pollutant in sewage sludge does not exceed the concentration for
the pollutant in the table. The footnote stated that determination of a
concentration limit for total chromium in sewage sludge that is land-
applied would be made on a case-by-case basis. Case-by-case
determinations would continue until EPA published a concentration for
total chromium in Appendix G--Section II for land-applied sewage
sludge.
EPA reviewed the part 503 land application risk assessment for
total chromium, and on October 25, 1995, proposed to establish the
concentration for total chromium for removal credit purposes in
Appendix G--Section II at 12,000 mg/kg (60 FR 54771). This is the value
determined to be protective of ground water in the part 503 land
application risk assessment. The ground-water pathway was the pathway
that resulted in the most stringent limit for total chromium after the
phytotoxicity and animal grazing pathways were found to be
inappropriate (see EPA's reanalysis of the exposure pathways for total
chromium in land-applied sewage sludge in the docket for the October
25, 1995, proposal). Several comments were received on the proposal.
One commenter stated that a numerical value for total chromium in
Appendix G--Section II for land-applied sewage sludge is not necessary
as a condition for granting a removal credit for total chromium. The
commenter believes that the Clean Water Act, as amended, provides EPA
the authority to grant a removal credit without having a numerical
value for the pollutant in Appendix G--Sections I or II. EPA disagrees
with this comment. EPA's position is that a numerical value for the
pollutant must be established in Appendix G--Sections I or II for the
POTW to be able to grant a removal credit to the indirect discharger
for that pollutant. As articulated in the preamble to EPA's recent
pretreatment streamlining rule, a POTW or industrial user can currently
petition the Agency to establish a Part 503 standard or an amendment to
Part 403, Appendix G--Section II for a pollutant along with an analysis
of the impact of the pollutant on the use or disposal of its sewage
sludge. Upon promulgation of the Part 503 standard or listing of the
pollutant in Part 403, Appendix G--Section II, the pollutant would be
eligible for inclusion in an application for a removal credit.
With respect to the numerical limit for total chromium, several
commenters took issue with some of the assumptions underlying the
proposed numeric limit in Appendix G--Section II. Specifically, the
commenters indicated that there are problems with the Agency's land
application ground-water pathway exposure assessment, which was the
basis for the proposed numerical value for total chromium in land-
applied sewage sludge in Appendix G--Section II. In the commenters'
views, the values for the land application site parameters and the
pollutant-specific parameters used in the ground-water pathway analysis
are too conservative. Moreover, the commenters believe that EPA's
assessment erroneously relied on parameters associated with chromium
[[Page 42564]]
in its hexavalent form rather than in the trivalent form.
EPA disagrees that the values for the land application site
parameters (i.e., soil type, depth to groundwater, and thickness of
aquifer) used in the ground-water pathway exposure analysis are too
conservative. Because food crops are grown in sandy soils and because
sewage sludge is applied to sandy soils, the Agency assumed sand, which
has a high pollutant transmission potential, as the soil type when
evaluating the ground-water pathway. Likewise, it is not unreasonable
to assume that there will be circumstances in which crops will be grown
on land that has a depth to groundwater of one meter. Similarly, it is
likely that in dryer climates the thickness of the aquifer below the
application site could be as small as one meter. Given the potential
for land application in such conditions, the values EPA used for the
site parameters in the ground-water pathway analysis are reasonable.
EPA agrees, however, that the numerical values for pollutant-
specific parameters used in the ground-water pathway analysis are
inappropriate for modeling either trivalent chromium or total chromium.
This is because the numerical value for the human health endpoint
(i.e., maximum contaminant level) used in the ground-water pathway
analysis is based on exposure to hexavalent chromium (see 56 FR 3537,
January 30, 1991), and because the numerical value for the partition
coefficient (KD value) used in the ground-water pathway analysis is
what would be expected for hexavalent chromium. EPA concluded,
therefore, that the 12,000 mg-chromium/kg-sewage sludge value proposed
for total chromium in Appendix G--Section II on October 25, 1995, is
for the hexavalent form of chromium in sewage sludge that is land-
applied.
Given that the 12,000 mg/kg concentration is for hexavalent
chromium only, EPA could either establish the concentration limit in
Appendix G--Section II for hexavalent chromium, or determine an
appropriate concentration for total chromium. EPA rejected the option
of setting a concentration limit for hexavalent chromium only. It is
extremely difficult to determine the concentration of hexavalent
chromium in sewage sludge for two reasons. First, it is present in
sewage sludge at very low levels relative to trivalent chromium levels.
Second, hexavalent chromium's high chemical reactivity characteristics
make it extremely difficult to quantify in analytical procedures.
Therefore, EPA concluded that the chromium limit for land-applied
sewage sludge on the list in Appendix G--Section II should be for total
chromium.
To determine a limit for total chromium, which represents a mixture
of both hexavalent and trivalent chromium, EPA had to determine
concentrations for both hexavalent chromium and trivalent chromium that
do not cause a reasonably anticipated adverse effect. As noted above,
EPA already determined that if the hexavalent chromium concentration
does not exceed 12,000 mg/kg, hexavalent chromium in sewage sludge that
is land-applied will not have an adverse effect on public health and
the environment. For trivalent chromium, formal ground-water modeling
has not been performed. Therefore, EPA derived the concentration value
for trivalent chromium for the ground-water pathway based on some
assumptions.
EPA made two assumptions in using a simple model to determine the
trivalent chromium concentration. First, the Agency assumed that all of
the values for the land application site parameters in the ground-water
model for hexavalent chromium are the same for trivalent chromium. That
is, the soil type is sand, the depth to groundwater is one meter, and
the thickness of the aquifer is one meter.
Second, EPA assumed that, with the exception of the oral reference
dose (RfD), the pollutant-specific parameters for hexavalent chromium
are the same for trivalent chromium, including the KD value of 59 l/kg.
The RfD for hexavalent chromium used to derive the human health
endpoint in the ground-water pathway is 5 x 10-3 mg/kg-day.
The RfD for trivalent chromium is 1 mg/kg-day--some 200 times greater.
Because the ratio of the numerical values for the RfDs of trivalent to
hexavalent chromium is 200, with all other land application site
parameters and pollutant-specific parameters being equal for the two
chromium valence species, the estimated allowable concentration value
for trivalent chromium in sewage sludge is 200 times the allowable
concentration for hexavalent chromium or 2,400,000 mg/kg. This is only
a theoretical value because the actual concentration can never exceed
one million milligrams per kilogram.
The above theoretical concentration for trivalent chromium is an
extremely conservative estimate based on many comments that stated that
the KD values for trivalent chromium are reported as high as several
thousand l/kg. If KD values like these are used in the analysis, the
estimated theoretical concentration for trivalent chromium would be
higher.
As indicated in the Technical Support Document for Land Application
of Sewage Sludge (EPA 822/R-93-001a, November 1992) on page 5-107,
sewage sludge contains little, if any, hexavalent chromium because
hexavalent chromium is reduced to trivalent chromium during sewage
sludge treatment. Thus, EPA believes the concentration of hexavalent
chromium in sewage sludge compared to the concentration of trivalent
chromium is negligible. At most, hexavalent chromium should not exceed
one percent (i.e., 10,000 mg/kg) of the total chromium in sewage
sludge.
EPA is today establishing the total chromium concentration in
Appendix G--Section II for land-applied sewage sludge at 100,000 mg/kg.
The Agency concluded that, although trivalent chromium is the prevalent
form of chromium in sewage sludge, it is the hexavalent form of
chromium that the total chromium concentration for land-applied sewage
sludge must limit. Two commenters recommended a concentration of
100,000 mg/kg as appropriate to protect ground water from total
chromium in land-applied sewage sludge. This concentration is
consistent with the total chromium concentration limit established for
granting a removal credit for sewage sludge placed in a lined active
sewage sludge unit. Because the percentage of hexavalent chromium in
total chromium is expected to be less than one percent, there is
virtually no potential that the hexavalent chromium concentration in
land-applied sewage sludge will exceed the allowable concentration for
hexavalent chromium (i.e, 12,000 mg/kg) in the 100,000 mg/kg total
chromium concentration limit.
A total chromium concentration of 100,000 mg/kg in land-applied
total chromium also ensures that the total chromium limit from other
pathways in the part 503 land application risk assessment is not
exceeded. For example, the total chromium limit for the animal grazing
pathway is 190,000 mg/kg, which is almost twice the total chromium
concentration in Appendix G--Section II in today's rulemaking.
Finally, it is important to note that the value for total chromium
the Agency is adopting today in Appendix G--Section II for land-applied
sewage sludge is 1-2 orders of magnitude greater than the highest
concentration of total chromium ever measured in sewage sludge based on
the results of the 1989 National Sewage Sludge Survey. This too should
ensure that the granting of a removal credit for total chromium will
not
[[Page 42565]]
adversely affect public health and environmental when sewage sludge is
applied to the land.
VII. Regulatory Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the
Agency must determine whether a regulatory action is ``significant''
and therefore subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) 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 government 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 final rule is not a
``significant'' regulatory action under the terms of Executive Order
12866 and is not subject, therefore, to OMB review. Further, because
the effect of today's rule is to modify current requirements and
provide additional flexibility to the regulated community in complying
with the part 503 requirements, and to allow a removal credit for
chromium in land applied sewage sludge under part 403, costs to the
regulated community should be reduced or at least remain unchanged.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.,
as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act,
EPA generally is required to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis
describing the impact of the regulatory action on small entities as
part of rulemaking. However, under section 605(b) of the RFA, if EPA
certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities, EPA is not required to prepare
a regulatory flexibility analysis. Pursuant to section 605(b) of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 605(b), the Administrator
certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
This action to amend the part 503 regulation provides added
flexibility in complying with the part 503 requirements and technical
clarification for some of the requirements. For example, the permitting
authority has been given the discretion to reduce the frequency of
monitoring for some of the pollutants subject to the rule. Today's
action also makes the incineration requirements self-implementing by
specifying how an incinerator owner/operator is to determine pollutant
limits applicable to sewage sludge to be combusted. The incineration
amendments include requirements to provide notice to the permitting
authority prior to performance testing and to report information that
was previously obtained by the permitting authority during the
permitting process. These requirements involve minimal additional cost,
because the requirements to develop the information needed to calculate
the pollutant limits are not new. Only the need to provide prior notice
of testing and to report the results are new, and these requirements
involve little expense.
In addition, this action amends the part 403 regulation to
establish a total chromium in sewage sludge concentration to allow a
wastewater treatment works to issue a removal credit for chromium in
land applied sewage sludge. This relieves the wastewater treatment
works from having to perform a site-specific evaluation and calculation
to establish a total chromium concentration in sewage sludge in order
to issue a pre-treatment removal credit for chromium to an industrial
discharger. As such, the amendments impose no significant new
requirements on the regulated community, including small entities.
Accordingly, I certify that this regulation will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Therefore, this final regulation does not require a regulatory
flexibility analysis.
C. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 30 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
Sec. 804(2). This rule will be effective September 3, 1999.
D. Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection requirements for existing 40 CFR part
503 were approved by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq. OMB approved the information collection requirements for
the existing regulation (part 503) and assigned OMB Control Nos. 2040-
0004 and 2040-0086. Today's action amending part 503 reduces
information collection requirements in part 503 by allowing the
permitting authority to reduce the frequency of monitoring for certain
part 503 pollutants.
However, today's action also adds a new notice requirement in
Sec. 503.43(e). The information collection request for this new
provision is currently under development. EPA expects to publish a
proposed Information Collection Request (ICR) for these requirements in
the Federal Register for comment within the next 60 days. The ICR will
be submitted for approval to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. after public
comment. The information requirements will be published in the Federal
Register again for public comment when EPA submits them to OMB for
review and approval. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person
is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers
for EPA's regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter
15.
E. Unfunded Mandate Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandate Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that
may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
one year. Before
[[Page 42566]]
promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement is needed,
section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify and consider
a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the least
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative that
achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 do
not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover,
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that
alternative was not adopted.
Before EPA establishes any regulatory requirements that may
significantly or uniquely affect small governments, including tribal
governments, it must have developed under section 203 of the UMRA a
small government agency plan. The plan must provide for notifying
potentially affected small governments, enabling officials of affected
small governments to have meaningful and timely input in the
development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant Federal
intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and advising
small governments on compliance with the regulatory requirements.
EPA has determined that today's amendments do not contain a Federal
mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more for
State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private
sector in any one year. The final amendments either clarify existing
regulatory requirements or provide additional flexibility to the
regulated community in complying with current part 503 requirements and
allow for the issuance of removal credits under part 403.
For example, EPA is making a number of changes to reduce the
reporting and recordkeeping burden of the current requirements. These
include an amendment to authorize the permitting authority to reduce
the frequency of monitoring of sewage sludge for pollutants and certain
pathogen density requirements. In addition, the amendments modify the
provision to certify that compliance with certain requirements was
achieved. Under today's amendment, a person certifies to the accuracy
of the submitted information and not, as is the case at present, to
compliance with regulatory requirements.
Today's amendments also delete the language from the current
regulation that requires the permitting authority to specify certain
factors used to calculate site-specific pollutant limits for sewage
sludge incinerators and to specify how to install, calibrate, operate,
and maintain incinerator continuous emission monitors. Instead, the
rule contains the information needed by the incinerator owner/operator
to make the site-specific calculations and properly monitor emissions
of total hydrocarbons. These self-implementing provisions contain a
one-time requirement for the owner/operator to provide notice and
report calculations which were previously obtained from the permitting
authority. In addition, today's amendments contain technical changes
that correct inaccurate cross-references and add omitted reporting
dates and inadvertently omitted phrases. Therefore, to the extent that
today's final regulation reduces the costs of complying with the
current part 503 requirements and allow for the issuance of removal
credits under part 403, the final regulation will lessen the regulatory
burden on State, local, and tribal governments and the private sector.
As noted above, there are minimal costs or reduced costs associated
with the other changes in today's final amendments. Thus, today's
amendments are not subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205
of the UMRA.
EPA has determined that today's amendments contain no regulatory
requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. The final amendments do not significantly affect small
governments because, as explained above, the amendments provide
additional flexibility in complying with existing regulatory
requirements, provide for self-implementation, or clarify those
requirements. The final amendments also do not uniquely affect small
governments because the changes are applicable to facilities operated
by small governments to the same extent they are to other sewage sludge
preparers and users or disposers. Thus this rule is not subject to the
requirements of section 203 of UMRA.
F. Executive Order 12875, Enhancing Intergovernmental Partnerships
Under Executive Order 12875, EPA may not issue a regulation that is
not required by statute and that creates a mandate on a State, local,
or tribal government, unless the Federal government provides the funds
necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by those
governments, or EPA consults with those governments. If EPA complies by
consulting, Executive Order 12875 requires EPA to provide to the Office
of Management and Budget a description of the extent of EPA's prior
consultation with representatives of affected State, local, and tribal
governments, the nature of their concerns, any written communications
from the governments, and a statement supporting the need to issue the
regulation. In addition, Executive Order 12875 requires EPA to develop
an effective process permitting elected officials and other
representatives of State, local, and tribal governments ``to provide
meaningful and timely input in the development of regulatory proposals
containing significant unfunded mandates.''
EPA has concluded that this rule will create a mandate on State,
local, and tribal governments and that the Federal government will not
provide the funds necessary to pay the direct costs incurred by the
State, local and/or tribal governments in complying with the mandate.
However, the mandate created by these amendments to parts 503 and 403
will have only a minimal impact on these governments as described in
sections VII A and E of this preamble.
In developing this rule, EPA consulted with State, local, and
tribal governments to enable them to provide meaningful and timely
input in the development of this rule. Over the past three years in the
development of this rule, EPA on numerous occasions has had
communication with State, local, and tribal governments on this rule.
EPA has solicited and received suggestions for improving its
implementation. This outreach effort culminated in the formation of a
National Biosolids (Sewage Sludge) Partnership which serves as an
accessible forum for these exchanges to take place. The representatives
of these governments have expressed their approval of this
communications process.
The concerns of these governments as this rule was developed
centered around their need to have greater flexibility in complying
with certain provisions of the original part 503 rule. EPA recognized
these governments' concerns by providing an option for the permitting
authority to allow for a reduction in the frequency of monitoring of
certain part 503 pollutants and allowing for increased flexibility in
complying with certain pathogen and vector attraction reduction
requirements in the part 503 rule. EPA's conclusion is that the
incorporation of these provisions of increased flexibility into the
part 503 rule still results in adequate protection of public health and
the environment from pollutants in land applied sewage sludge.
[[Page 42567]]
G. Executive Order 13084, Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
Under Executive Order 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is
not required by statute, that significantly or uniquely affects the
communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial
direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the Federal
government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance
costs incurred by the tribal governments, or EPA consults with those
governments. If EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order 13084
requires EPA to provide to the Office of Management and Budget, in a
separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a
description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with
representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the nature
of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the
regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to develop
an effective process permitting elected officials and other
representatives of Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful
and timely input in the development of regulatory policies on matters
that significantly or uniquely affect their communities.''
Today's rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the
communities of Indian tribal governments and it does not impose
substantial direct compliance costs on them. The amendments clarify
existing part 503 requirements and provide the regulated community
additional flexibility in complying with the regulatory requirements
and make other requirements self-implementing. In addition, the
amendment to part 403 allows for the issuance of a removal credit for
chromium when sewage sludge is land applied, thereby reducing a
regulatory burden to the private sector. As explained in sections VII A
and E in this preamble, today's changes do not impose substantial
direct costs. Accordingly, the requirements of section 3(b) of
Executive Order 13084 do not apply to this rule.
H. Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any
rule initiated after April 21, 1997, or proposed after April 21, 1998,
that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant'' as defined
under EO 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental health or safety risk
that EPA has reason to believe may have a disproportionate effect on
children. If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the agency must
evaluate the environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule
on children, and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to
other potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives
considered by the Agency.
Because this rule was proposed on October 25, 1995, it is not
subject to EO 13045. Also as explained in the section on EO 12866,
today's final rule is not an economically significant rule. In
addition, EPA does not have reason to believe that today's amendments
pose any environmental health or safety risks presenting a
disproportionate risk to children. However, EPA reviewed the impact of
this rule on children's health in light of the Agency's Policy on
Evaluating Health Risks to Children.
Today's amendments to part 503 do not alter any of the existing
part 503 pollutant limits, which are based on the results of the risk
assessments undertaken for the part 503 rule as published on February
19, 1993 (58 FR 9248). Today's amendment to part 403 establishes a
limit for total chromium in land-applied sewage sludge for the purpose
of granting a removal credit. That limit is based on the results of the
ground-water pathway analysis. A child is protected in this case
because the limit based on the ground-water pathway results is more
stringent than the limit based on the results of the child ingestion
pathway.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Under section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act (``NTTAA''), the Agency is required to use voluntary
consensus standards in its regulatory activities unless to do so would
be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary
consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., materials
specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, business practices,
etc.) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards
bodies. Where available and potentially applicable voluntary concensus
standards are not used by EPA, the Act requires the Agency to provide
Congress, through OMB, an explanation of the reasons for not using such
standards.
Today's final rule does not involve technical standards. Therefore,
EPA did not consider the use of any voluntary consensus standards.
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 403
Environmental protection, Incineration, Land application,
Pollutants, Removal credits, Sewage sludge, Surface disposal.
40 CFR Part 503
Environmental protection, Frequency of monitoring, Incineration,
Land application, Management practices, Pathogens, Pollutants,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Surface disposal, Vector
attraction reduction.
Dated: July 15, 1999.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40 of the Code of
Federal Regulations is amended as set forth below:
PART 403--GENERAL PRETREATMENT REGULATIONS FOR EXISTING AND NEW
SOURCES OF POLLUTION
1. The authority citation for part 403 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.
2. Appendix G to part 403 is amended by revising section II to read
as follows:
Appendix G to Part 403--Pollutants Eligible for a Removal Credit
* * * * *
II. Additional Pollutants Eligible for a Removal Credit
[Milligrams per kilogram--dry weight basis]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Use or disposal practice
-------------------------------------------------------
Pollutant Surface disposal
LA -------------------------------- I
Unlined \1\ Lined \2\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arsenic................................................. ............ .............. \3\ 100 ........
[[Page 42568]]
Aldrin/Dieldrin (Total)................................. 2.7 .............. .............. ........
Benzene................................................. \3\ 16 140 3400 ........
Benzo(a)pyrene.......................................... 15 \3\ 100 \3\ 100 ........
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate.............................. ............ \3\ 100 \3\ 100 ........
Cadmium................................................. ............ \3\ 100 \3\ 100 ........
Chlordane............................................... 86 \3\ 100 \3\ 100 ........
Chromium (total)........................................ \3\ 100 .............. \3\ 100 ........
Copper.................................................. ............ \3\ 46 100 1400
DDD, DDE, DDT (Total)................................... 1.2 2000 2000 ........
2,4 Dichlorophenoxy-acetic acid......................... ............ 7 7 ........
Fluoride................................................ 730 .............. .............. ........
Heptachlor.............................................. 7.4 .............. .............. ........
Hexachlorobenzene....................................... 29 .............. .............. ........
Hexachlorobutadiene..................................... 600 .............. .............. ........
Iron.................................................... \3\ 78 .............. .............. ........
Lead.................................................... ............ \3\ 100 \3\ 100 ........
Lindane................................................. 84 \3\ 28 \3\ 28 ........
Malathion............................................... ............ 0.63 0.63 ........
Mercury................................................. ............ \3\ 100 \3\ 100 ........
Molybdenum.............................................. ............ 40 40 ........
Nickel.................................................. ............ .............. \3\ 100 ........
N-Nitrosodimethylamine.................................. 2.1 0.088 0.088 ........
Pentachlorophenol....................................... 30 .............. .............. ........
Phenol.................................................. ............ 82 82 ........
Polychlorinated biphenyls............................... 4.6 <50 <50 ........
Selenium................................................ ............ 4.8 4.8 4.8
Toxaphene............................................... 10 \3\ 26 \3\ 26 ........
Trichloroethylene....................................... \3\ 10 9500 \3\ 10 ........
Zinc.................................................... ............ 4500 4500 4500
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Active sewage sludge unit without a liner and leachate collection system.
\2\ Active sewage sludge unit with a liner and leachate collection system.
\3\ Value expressed in grams per kilogram--dry weight basis.
Key: LA--land application.
I--incineration.
PART 503--STANDARDS FOR THE USE OR DISPOSAL OF SEWAGE SLUDGE
1. The authority citation for part 503 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Sections 405(d) and (e) of the Clean Water Act, as
amended by Pub. L. 95-217, Sec. 54(d), 91 Stat. 1591 (33 U.S.C. 1345
(d) and (e)); and Pub. L. 100-4, Title IV, Sec. 406(a), (b), 101
Stat., 71, 72 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.)
2. Section 503.2 is amended by adding a new paragraph (d) to read
as follows:
Sec. 503.2 Compliance period.
* * * * *
(d) Unless otherwise specified in subpart E, compliance with the
requirements in Secs. 503.41(c) through (r), 503.43(c), (d) and (e),
503.45(a)(1), (b) through (f), 503.46(a)(1), (a)(3), and (c), and
503.47(f) that were revised on September 3, 1999 shall be achieved as
expeditiously as practicable, but in no case later than September 5,
2000. When new pollution control facilities must be constructed to
comply with the revised requirements in subpart E, compliance with the
revised requirements shall be achieved as expeditiously as practicable
but no later than September 4, 2001.
3. Section 503.10 is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(1), (c)(1),
(d), (e), (f), and (g) to read as follows:
Sec. 503.10 Applicability.
* * * * *
(b)(1) Bulk sewage sludge. The general requirements in Sec. 503.12
and the management practices in Sec. 503.14 do not apply when bulk
sewage sludge is applied to the land if the bulk sewage sludge meets
the ceiling concentrations in Table 1 of Sec. 503.13 and the pollutant
concentrations in Table 3 of Sec. 503.13; the Class A pathogen
requirements in Sec. 503.32(a); and one of the vector attraction
reduction requirements in Sec. 503.33(b)(1) through (b)(8).
* * * * *
(c)(1) The general requirements in Sec. 503.12 and the management
practices in Sec. 503.14 do not apply when a bulk material derived from
sewage sludge is applied to the land if the derived bulk material meets
the ceiling concentrations in Table 1 of Sec. 503.13 and the pollutant
concentrations in Table 3 of Sec. 503.13; the Class A pathogen
requirements in Sec. 503.32(a); and one of the vector attraction
reduction requirements in Sec. 503.33(b)(1) through (b)(8).
* * * * *
(d) The requirements in this subpart do not apply when a bulk
material derived from sewage sludge is applied to the land if the
sewage sludge from which the bulk material is derived meets the ceiling
concentrations in Table 1 of Sec. 503.13 and the pollutant
concentrations in Table 3 of Sec. 503.13; the Class A pathogen
requirements in Sec. 503.32(a); and one of the vector attraction
reduction requirements in Sec. 503.33(b)(1) through (b)(8).
(e) Sewage sludge sold or given away in a bag or other container
for
[[Page 42569]]
application to the land. The general requirements in Sec. 503.12 and
the management practices in Sec. 503.14 do not apply when sewage sludge
is sold or given away in a bag or other container for application to
the land if the sewage sludge sold or given away in a bag or other
container for application to the land meets the ceiling concentrations
in Table 1 of Sec. 503.13 and the pollutant concentrations in Table 3
of Sec. 503.13; the Class A pathogen requirements in Sec. 503.32(a);
and one of the vector attraction reduction requirements in
Sec. 503.33(b)(1) through (b)(8).
(f) The general requirements in Sec. 503.12 and the management
practices in Sec. 503.14 do not apply when a material derived from
sewage sludge is sold or given away in a bag or other container for
application to the land if the derived material meets the ceiling
concentrations in Table 1 of Sec. 503.13 and the pollutant
concentrations in Table 3 of Sec. 503.13; the Class A pathogen
requirements in Sec. 503.32(a); and one of the vector attraction
reduction requirements in Sec. 503.33(b)(1) through (b)(8).
(g) The requirements in this subpart do not apply when a material
derived from sewage sludge is sold or given away in a bag or other
container for application to the land if the sewage sludge from which
the material is derived meets the ceiling concentrations in Table 1 of
Sec. 503.13 and the pollutant concentrations in Table 3 of Sec. 503.13;
the Class A pathogen requirements in Sec. 503.32(a); and one of the
vector attraction reduction requirements in Sec. 503.33 (b)(1) through
(b)(8).
4. Section 503.16 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1) and
(a)(2) to read as follows:
Sec. 503.16 Frequency of monitoring.
(a) Sewage sludge. (1) The frequency of monitoring for the
pollutants listed in Table 1, Table 2, Table 3 and Table 4 of
Sec. 503.13; the pathogen density requirements in Sec. 503.32(a) and
Sec. 503.32(b)(2); and the vector attraction reduction requirements in
Sec. 503.33 (b)(1) through (b)(4) and Sec. 503.33 (b)(7) through (b)(8)
shall be the frequency in Table 1 of Sec. 503.16.
Table 1 of Sec. 503.16--Frequency of Monitoring--Land Application
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount of sewage sludge \1\ (metric tons
per 365 day period) Frequency
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Greater than zero but less than 290........ Once per year.
Equal to or greater than 290 but less than Once per quarter (four times per year).
1,500.
Equal to or greater than 1,500 but less Once per 60 days (six times per year).
than 15,000.
Equal to or greater than 15,000............ Once per month (12 times per year).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Either the amount of bulk sewage sludge applied to the land or the amount of sewage sludge prepared for sale
or give-away in a bag or other container for application to the land (dry weight basis).
(2) After the sewage sludge has been monitored for two years at the
frequency in Table 1 of Sec. 503.16, the permitting authority may
reduce the frequency of monitoring for pollutant concentrations and for
the pathogen density requirements in Sec. 503.32(a)(5)(ii) and
(a)(5)(iii).
* * * * *
5. Section 503.17 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1)(ii),
(a)(2)(ii), (a)(3)(i)(B), (a)(3)(ii)(A), (a)(4)(i)(B), (a)(4)(ii)(A),
(a)(5)(i)(B), (a)(5)(ii)(C), (a)(5)(ii)(F), (a)(5)(ii)(H),
(a)(5)(ii)(J), (a)(5)(ii)(L), (a)(6)(iii), (b)(3), (b)(6), and (b)(7),
and by adding a new paragraph (a)(4)(ii)(E) to read as follows:
Sec. 503.17 Recordkeeping.
(a) Sewage sludge. (1) * * *
(ii) The following certification statement:
I certify, under penalty of law, that the information that will
be used to determine compliance with the Class A pathogen
requirements in Sec. 503.32(a) and the vector attraction reduction
requirement in [insert one of the vector attraction reduction
requirements in Sec. 503.33(b)(1) through Sec. 503.33(b)(8)] was
prepared under my direction and supervision in accordance with the
system designed to ensure that qualified personnel properly gather
and evaluate this information. I am aware that there are significant
penalties for false certification including the possibility of fine
and imprisonment.
* * * * *
(2) * * *
(ii) The following certification statement:
I certify, under penalty of law, that the information that will
be used to determine compliance with the Class A pathogen
requirements in Sec. 503.32(a) and the vector attraction reduction
requirement in (insert one of the vector attraction reduction
requirements in Sec. 503.33(b)(1) through (b)(8)) was prepared under
my direction and supervision in accordance with the system designed
to ensure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate this
information. I am aware that there are significant penalties for
false certification including the possibility of fine and
imprisonment.
* * * * *
(3) * * *
(i) * * *
(B) The following certification statement:
I certify, under penalty of law, that the information that will
be used to determine compliance with the Class A pathogen
requirements in Sec. 503.32(a) was prepared under my direction and
supervision in accordance with the system designed to ensure that
qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate this information. I
am aware that there are significant penalties for false
certification including the possibility of fine and imprisonment.
* * * * *
(ii) * * *
(A) The following certification statement:
I certify, under penalty of law, that the information that will
be used to determine compliance with the management practices in
Sec. 503.14 and the vector attraction reduction requirement in
(insert either Sec. 503.33(b)(9) or (b)(10)) was prepared under my
direction and supervision in accordance with the system designed to
ensure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate this
information. I am aware that there are significant penalties for
false certification including the possibility of fine and
imprisonment.
* * * * *
(4) * * *
(i) * * *
(B) The following certification statement:
I certify, under penalty of law, that the information that will
be used to determine compliance with the Class B pathogen
requirements in Sec. 503.32(b) and the vector attraction reduction
requirement in (insert one of the vector attraction reduction
requirements in Sec. 503.33(b)(1) through (b)(8)if one of those
requirements is met) was prepared under my direction and supervision
in accordance with the system designed to ensure that qualified
personnel properly gather and evaluate this information. I am aware
that there are significant penalties for false certification
including the possibility of fine and imprisonment.
* * * * *
(ii) * * *
(A) The following certification statement:
I certify, under penalty of law, that the information that will
be used to determine
[[Page 42570]]
compliance with the management practices in Sec. 503.14, the site
restrictions in Sec. 503.32(b)(5), and the vector attraction
reduction requirement in (insert either Sec. 503.33(b)(9) or (b)(10)
if one of those requirements is met) was prepared for each site on
which bulk sewage sludge is applied under my direction and
supervision in accordance with the system designed to ensure that
qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate this information. I
am aware that there are significant penalties for false
certification including the possibility of fine and imprisonment.
* * * * *
(E) The date bulk sewage sludge is applied to each site.
(5) * * *
(i) * * *
(B) The following certification statement:
I certify, under penalty of law, that the information that will
be used to determine compliance with the pathogen requirements in
(insert either Sec. 503.32(a) or Sec. 503.32(b)) and the vector
attraction reduction requirement in (insert one of the vector
attraction reduction requirements in Sec. 503.33(b)(1) through
(b)(8) if one of those requirements is met) was prepared under my
direction and supervision in accordance with the system designed to
ensure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate this
information. I am aware that there are significant penalties for
false certification including the possibility of fine and
imprisonment.
* * * * *
(ii) * * *
(C) The date bulk sewage sludge is applied to each site.
* * * * *
(F) The following certification statement:
I certify, under penalty of law, that the information that will
be used to determine compliance with the requirement to obtain
information in Sec. 503.12(e)(2) was prepared for each site on which
bulk sewage sludge was applied under my direction and supervision in
accordance with the system designed to ensure that qualified
personnel properly gather and evaluate this information. I am aware
that there are significant penalties for false certification
including the possibility of fine and imprisonment.
* * * * *
(H) The following certification statement:
I certify, under penalty of law, that the information that will
be used to determine compliance with the management practices in
Sec. 503.14 was prepared for each site on which bulk sewage sludge
was applied under my direction and supervision in accordance with
the system designed to ensure that qualified personnel properly
gather and evaluate this information. I am aware that there are
significant penalties for false certification including the
possibility of fine and imprisonment.
* * * * *
(J) The following certification statement when the bulk sewage
sludge meets the Class B pathogen requirements in Sec. 503.32(b):
I certify, under penalty of law, that the information that will
be used to determine compliance with the site restrictions in
Sec. 503.32(b)(5) for each site on which Class B sewage sludge was
applied was prepared under my direction and supervision in
accordance with the system designed to ensure that qualified
personnel properly gather and evaluate this information. I am aware
that there are significant penalties for false certification
including the possibility of fine and imprisonment.
* * * * *
(L) The following certification statement when the vector
attraction reduction requirement in either Sec. 503.33(b)(9) or (b)(10)
is met:
I certify, under penalty of law, that the information that will
be used to determine compliance with the vector attraction reduction
requirement in (insert either Sec. 503.33(b)(9) or
Sec. 503.33(b)(10)) was prepared under my direction and supervision
in accordance with the system designed to ensure that qualified
personnel properly gather and evaluate this information. I am aware
that there are significant penalties for false certification
including the possibility of fine and imprisonment.
* * * * *
(6) * * *
(iii) The following certification statement:
I certify, under penalty of law, that the information that will be
used to determine compliance with the management practice in
Sec. 503.14(e), the Class A pathogen requirement in Sec. 503.32(a), and
the vector attraction reduction requirement in (insert one of the
vector attraction reduction requirements in Sec. 503.33(b)(1) through
Sec. 503.33(b)(8)) was prepared under my direction and supervision in
accordance with the system designed to ensure that qualified personnel
properly gather and evaluate this information. I am aware that there
are significant penalties for false certification including the
possibility of fine and imprisonment.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(3) The date domestic septage is applied to each site.
* * * * *
(6) The following certification statement:
I certify, under penalty of law, that the information that will be
used to determine compliance with the pathogen requirements (insert
either Sec. 503.32(c)(1) or Sec. 503.32(c)(2)) and the vector
attraction reduction requirement in [insert Sec. 503.33(b)(9),
503.33(b)(10), or Sec. 503.33(b)(12)] was prepared under my direction
and supervision in accordance with the system designed to ensure that
qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate this information. I am
aware that there are significant penalties for false certification
including the possibility of fine and imprisonment.
(7) A description of how the pathogen requirements in either
Sec. 503.32(c)(1) or (c)(2) are met.
* * * * *
6. Section 503.18 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(2) to read
as follows:
Sec. 503.18 Reporting.
(a) * * *
(2) The information in Sec. 503.17(a)(5)(ii)(A) through
(a)(5)(ii)(G) on February 19th of each year when 90 percent or more of
any of the cumulative pollutant loading rates in Table 2 of Sec. 503.13
is reached at a land application site.
* * * * *
7. Section 503.21 is amended by revising paragraph (c) to read as
follows:
Sec. 503.21 Special definitions.
* * * * *
(c) Contaminate an aquifer means to introduce a substance that
causes the maximum contaminant level for nitrate in 40 CFR 141.62(b) to
be exceeded in the ground water or that causes the existing
concentration of nitrate in ground water to increase when the existing
concentration of nitrate in the ground water exceeds the maximum
contaminant level for nitrate in 40 CFR 141.62(b).
* * * * *
8. Section 503.22 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as
follows:
Sec. 503.22 General requirements.
* * * * *
(b) An active sewage sludge unit located within 60 meters of a
fault that has displacement in Holocene time; located in an unstable
area; or located in a wetland, except as provided in a permit issued
pursuant to either section 402 or 404 of the CWA, shall close by March
22, 1994, unless, in the case of an active sewage sludge unit located
within 60 meters of a fault that has displacement in Holocene time,
otherwise specified by the permitting authority.
* * * * *
9. Section 503.26 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1) and
(a)(2) to read as follows:
Sec. 503.26 Frequency of monitoring.
(a) Sewage sludge (other than domestic septage). (1) The frequency
of
[[Page 42571]]
monitoring for the pollutants in Tables 1 and 2 of Sec. 503.23; the
pathogen density requirements in Sec. 503.32(a) and in
Sec. 503.32(b)(2); and the vector attraction reduction requirements in
Sec. 503.33(b)(1) through (b)(4) and Sec. 503.33(b)(7) through (b)(8)
for sewage sludge placed on an active sewage sludge unit shall be the
frequency in Table 1 of Sec. 503.26.
Table 1 of Sec. 503.26.--Frequency of Monitoring--Surface Disposal
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount of sewage sludge \1\ (metric tons
per 365 day period) Frequency
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Greater than zero but less than 290........ Once per year.
Equal to or greater than 290 but less than Once per quarter (four times per year).
1,500.
Equal to or greater than 1,500 but less Once per 60 days (six times per year).
than 15,000.
Equal to or greater than 15,000............ Once per month (12 times per year).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Amount of sewage sludge placed on an active sewage sludge unit (dry weight basis).
(2) After the sewage sludge has been monitored for two years at the
frequency in Table 1 of this section, the permitting authority may
reduce the frequency of monitoring for pollutant concentrations and for
the pathogen density requirements in Sec. 503.32(a)(5)(ii) and
(a)(5)(iii).
* * * * *
10. Section 503.27 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1)(ii),
(a)(2)(ii), (b)(1)(i), and (b)(2)(i) to read as follows:
Sec. 503.27 Recordkeeping.
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
(ii) The following certification statement:
I certify, under penalty of law, that the information that will
be used to determine compliance with the pathogen requirements in
(insert Sec. 503.32(a), Sec. 503.32(b)(2), Sec. 503.32(b)(3), or
Sec. 503.32(b)(4) when one of those requirements is met) and the
vector attraction reduction requirement in (insert one of the vector
attraction reduction requirements in Sec. 503.33 (b)(1) through
(b)(8) if one of those requirements is met) was prepared under my
direction and supervision in accordance with the system designed to
ensure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate this
information. I am aware that there are significant penalties for
false certification including the possibility of fine and
imprisonment.
* * * * *
(2) * * *
(ii) The following certification statement:
I certify, under penalty of law, that the information that will
be used to determine compliance with the management practices in
Sec. 503.24 and the vector attraction reduction requirement in
(insert one of the requirements in Sec. 503.33(b)(9) through
Sec. 503.33(b)(11) if one of those requirements is met) was prepared
under my direction and supervision in accordance with the system
designed to ensure that qualified personnel properly gather and
evaluate this information. I am aware that there are significant
penalties for false certification including the possibility of fine
and imprisonment.''
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) The following certification statement:
I certify, under penalty of law, that the information that will
be used to determine compliance with the vector attraction reduction
requirements in Sec. 503.33(b)(12) was prepared under my direction
and supervision in accordance with the system designed to ensure
that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate this
information. I am aware that there are significant penalties for
false certification including the possibility of fine and
imprisonment.
* * * * *
(2) * * *
(i) The following certification statement:
I certify, under penalty of law, that the information that will
be used to determine compliance with the management practices in
Sec. 503.24 and the vector attraction reduction requirements in
(insert Sec. 503.33(b)(9) through Sec. 503.33(b)(11) if one of those
requirements is met) was prepared under my direction and supervision
in accordance with the system designed to ensure that qualified
personnel properly gather and evaluate this information. I am aware
that there are significant penalties for false certification
including the possibility of fine or imprisonment.
* * * * *
11. Section 503.31 is amended by revising paragraph (g) to read as
follows:
Sec. 503.31 Special definitions.
* * * * *
(g) pH means the logarithm of the reciprocal of the hydrogen ion
concentration measured at 25 deg. Centigrade or measured at another
temperature and then converted to an equivalent value at 25 deg.
Centigrade.
* * * * *
12. Section 503.32 is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(2)(i) and
(b)(5)(v) to read as follows:
Sec. 503.32 Pathogens.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(2) * * *
(i) Seven representative samples of the sewage sludge that is used
or disposed shall be collected.
* * * * *
(5) * * *
(v) Animals shall not be grazed on the land for 30 days after
application of sewage sludge.
* * * * *
13. Section 503.33 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(10)(i) to
read as follows:
Sec. 503.33 Vector attraction reduction.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(10)(i) Sewage sludge applied to the land surface or placed on an
active sewage sludge unit shall be incorporated into the soil within
six hours after application to or placement on the land, unless
otherwise specified by the permitting authority.
* * * * *
14. Section 503.41 is amended by redesignating paragraphs (c), (d),
(e) (f), (g), (h), (i),(j), (k), (l), (m), (n), and (o) as paragraphs
(d), (e), (f), (g), (h), (j), (l), (m), (n), (o), (p), (q), and (r),
respectively, and by adding new paragraphs (c), (i), and (k) to read as
follows:
Sec. 503.41 Special definitions.
* * * * *
(c) Average daily concentration is the arithmetic mean of the
concentration of a pollutant in milligrams per kilogram of sewage
sludge (dry weight basis) in the samples collected and analyzed in a
month.
(i) Incinerator operating combustion temperature is the arithmetic
mean of the temperature readings in the hottest zone of the furnace
recorded in a day (24 hours) when the temperature is averaged and
recorded at least hourly during the hours the incinerator operates in a
day.
(k) Performance test combustion temperature is the arithmetic mean
of
[[Page 42572]]
the average combustion temperature in the hottest zone of the furnace
for each of the runs in a performance test.
15. Section 503.43 is amended by revising paragraphs (c) and (d),
and by adding a new paragraph (e) to read as follows:
Sec. 503.43 Pollutant limits.
* * * * *
(c) Pollutant limit--lead. (1) The average daily concentration for
lead in sewage sludge fed to a sewage sludge incinerator shall not
exceed the concentration calculated using Equation (4).
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.048
Where:
C = Average daily concentration of lead in sewage sludge.
NAAQS = National Ambient Air Quality Standard for lead in micrograms
per cubic meter.
DF = Dispersion factor in micrograms per cubic meter per gram per
second.
CE = Sewage sludge incinerator control efficiency for lead in
hundredths.
SF = Sewage sludge feed rate in metric tons per day (dry weight basis).
(2) The dispersion factor (DF) in equation (4) shall be determined
from an air dispersion model in accordance with Sec. 503.43(e).
(i) When the sewage sludge stack height is 65 meters or less, the
actual sewage sludge incinerator stack height shall be used in the air
dispersion model to determine the dispersion factor (DF) for equation
(4).
(ii) When the sewage sludge incinerator stack height exceeds 65
meters, the creditable stack height shall be determined in accordance
with 40 CFR 51.100(ii) and the creditable stack height shall be used in
the air dispersion model to determine the dispersion factor (DF) for
equation (4).
(3) The control efficiency (CE) for equation (4) shall be
determined from a performance test of the sewage sludge incinerator in
accordance with Sec. 503.43(e).
(d) Pollutant limit--arsenic, cadmium, chromium, and nickel. (1)
The average daily concentration for arsenic, cadmium, chromium, and
nickel in sewage sludge fed to a sewage sludge incinerator each shall
not exceed the concentration calculated using equation (5).
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.049
Where:
C = Average daily concentration of arsenic, cadmium, chromium, or
nickel in sewage sludge.
CE = Sewage sludge incinerator control efficiency for arsenic, cadmium,
chromium, or nickel in hundredths.
DF = Dispersion factor in micrograms per cubic meter per gram per
second.
RSC = Risk specific concentration for arsenic, cadmium, chromium, or
nickel in micrograms per cubic meter.
SF = Sewage sludge feed rate in metric tons per day (dry weight basis).
(2) The risk specific concentrations for arsenic, cadmium, and
nickel used in equation (5) shall be obtained from Table 1 of
Sec. 503.43.
Table 1 of Sec. 503.43.--Risk Specific Concentration for Arsenic,
Cadmium, and Nickel
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Risk specific
concentration
Pollutant (micrograms
per cubic
meter)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arsenic.................................................. 0.023
Cadmium.................................................. 0.057
Nickel................................................... 2.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(3) The risk specific concentration for chromium used in equation
(5) shall be obtained from Table 2 of Sec. 503.43 or shall be
calculated using equation (6).
Table 2 of Sec. 503.43.--Risk Specific Concentration For Chromium
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Risk specific
concentration
Type of Incinerator (micrograms
per cubic
meter)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fluidized bed with wet scrubber.......................... 0.65
Fluidized bed with wet scrubber and wet electrostatic 0.23
precipitator............................................
Other types with wet scrubber............................ 0.064
Other types with wet scrubber and wet electrostatic 0.016
precipitator............................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04AU99.050
Where:
RSC=risk specific concentration for chromium in micrograms per cubic
meter used in equation (5).
r=decimal fraction of the hexavalent chromium concentration in the
total chromium concentration measured in the exit gas from the sewage
sludge incinerator stack in hundredths.
(4) The dispersion factor (DF) in equation (5) shall be determined
from an air dispersion model in accordance with Sec. 503.43(e).
(i) When the sewage sludge incinerator stack height is equal to or
less than 65 meters, the actual sewage sludge incinerator stack height
shall be used in the air dispersion model to determine the dispersion
factor (DF) for equation (5).
(ii) When the sewage sludge incinerator stack height is greater
than 65 meters, the creditable stack height shall be determined in
accordance with 40 CFR 51.100(ii) and the creditable stack height shall
be used in the air dispersion model to determine the dispersion factor
(DF) for equation (5).
(5) The control efficiency (CE) for equation (5) shall be
determined from a performance test of the sewage sludge incinerator in
accordance with Sec. 503.43(e).
(e) Air dispersion modeling and performance testing. (1) The air
dispersion model used to determine the dispersion factor in Sec. 503.43
(c)(2) and (d)(4) shall be appropriate for the geographical, physical,
and population characteristics at the sewage sludge incinerator site.
The performance test used to determine the control efficiencies in
Sec. 503.43 (c)(3) and (d)(5) shall be appropriate for the type of
sewage sludge incinerator.
(2) For air dispersion modeling initiated after September 3, 1999,
the modeling results shall be submitted to the permitting authority 30
days after completion of the modeling. In addition to the modeling
results, the submission shall include a description of the air
dispersion model and the values used for the model parameters.
(3) The following procedures, at a minimum, shall apply in
conducting performance tests to determine the control efficiencies in
Sec. 503.43(c)(3) and (d)(5) after September 3, 1999:
(i) The performance test shall be conducted under representative
sewage sludge incinerator conditions at the highest expected sewage
sludge feed rate within the design capacity of the sewage sludge
incinerator.
(ii) The permitting authority shall be notified at least 30 days
prior to any performance test so the permitting authority may have the
opportunity to observe the test. The notice shall include a test
protocol with incinerator operating conditions and a list of test
methods to be used.
(iii) Each performance test shall consist of three separate runs
using the applicable test method. The control efficiency for a
pollutant shall be the arithmetic mean of the control
[[Page 42573]]
efficiencies for the pollutant from the three runs.
(4) The pollutant limits in Sec. 503.43 (c) and (d) of this section
shall be submitted to the permitting authority no later than 30 days
after completion of the air dispersion modeling and performance test.
(5) Significant changes in geographic or physical characteristics
at the incinerator site or in incinerator operating conditions require
new air dispersion modeling or performance testing to determine a new
dispersion factor or a new control efficiency that will be used to
calculate revised pollutant limits.
16. Section 503.45 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1), (b),
(c), (d), (e), and (f), and by adding a new paragraph (h) to read as
follows:
Sec. 503.45 Management practices.
(a)(1) An instrument that continuously measures and records the
total hydrocarbons concentration in the sewage sludge incinerator stack
exit gas shall be installed, calibrated, operated, and maintained for a
sewage sludge incinerator.
* * * * *
(b) An instrument that continuously measures and records the oxygen
concentration in the sewage sludge incinerator stack exit gas shall be
installed, calibrated, operated, and maintained for a sewage sludge
incinerator.
(c) An instrument that continuously measures and records
information used to determine the moisture content in the sewage sludge
incinerator stack exit gas shall be installed, calibrated, operated,
and maintained for a sewage sludge incinerator.
(d) An instrument that continuously measures and records combustion
temperatures shall be installed, calibrated, operated, and maintained
for a sewage sludge incinerator.
(e) Operation of a sewage sludge incinerator shall not cause the
operating combustion temperature for the sewage sludge incinerator to
exceed the performance test combustion temperature by more than 20
percent.
(f) An air pollution control device shall be appropriate for the
type of sewage sludge incinerator and the operating parameters for the
air pollution control device shall be adequate to indicate proper
performance of the air pollution control device. For sewage sludge
incinerators subject to the requirements in subpart O of 40 CFR part
60, operation of the air pollution control device shall not violate the
requirements for the air pollution control device in subpart O of 40
CFR part 60. For all other sewage sludge incinerators, operation of the
air pollution control device shall not cause a significant exceedance
of the average value for the air pollution control device operating
parameters from the performance test required by Sec. 503.43 (c)(3) and
(d)(5).
* * * * *
(h) The instruments required in Sec. 503.45(a)-(d) shall be
appropriate for the type of sewage sludge incinerator.
17. Section 503.46 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1),
(a)(3), and (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 503.46 Frequency of monitoring.
(a) Sewage sludge.
(1) The frequency of monitoring for beryllium shall be as required
in subpart C of 40 CFR part 61, and for mercury as required in subpart
E of 40 CFR part 61.
* * * * *
(3) After the sewage sludge has been monitored for two years at the
frequency in Table 1 of Sec. 503.46, the permitting authority may
reduce the frequency of monitoring for arsenic, cadmium, chromium,
lead, and nickel.
* * * * *
(c) Air pollution control device operating parameters.
For sewage sludge incinerators subject to the requirements in
subpart O of 40 CFR part 60, the frequency of monitoring for the
appropriate air pollution control device operating parameters shall be
the frequency of monitoring in subpart O of 40 CFR part 60. For all
other sewage sludge incinerators, the appropriate air pollution control
device operating parameters shall be at least daily.
18. Section 503.47 is amended by revising paragraph (f) to read as
follows:
Sec. 503.47 Recordkeeping.
* * * * *
(f) The operating combustion temperatures for the sewage sludge
incinerator.
* * * * *
19. Appendix B to 40 CFR part 503 is amended by revising the
description No. 6 under B. Processes to Further Reduce Pathogens (PFRP)
to read as follows:
Appendix B to Part 503--Pathogen Treatment Processes
* * * * *
B. * * *
(6) Gamma ray irradiation--Sewage sludge is irradiated with
gamma rays from certain isotopes, such as \60\ Cobalt and \137\
Cesium, at dosages of at least 1.0 megarad at room temperature (ca.
20 deg. Celsius).
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 99-18604 Filed 8-3-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P