United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Water (4503)
Office of Air and Radiation
Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards (RTF)
EPA-821-R-97-02G
October 1997
Amendments to the Effluent
Limitations Guidelines, Pretreatment
Standards, and New Source
Performance Standards for the
Bleached Papergrade Kraft and Soda
Subcategory of the Pulp, Paper, and
Paperboard Point Source Category
Part 430; Proposed Rule
-------
-------
This copy of the Pulp and Paper industry "Cluster Rules" is being
provided as a service to the public before Federal Register
Publication. It is subject to editing and reformatting to conform to
Federal Register requirements. The only official version of the
document mil be that published in the Federal Register.
i
| ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
i 40 CPR Part 430
' [FRL ]
Amendments to the Effluent Limitations Guidelines,
Pretreatment Standards, and New Source Performance Standards
for the Bleached Papergrade Kraft and Soda Subcategory of
the Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Point Source Category
AGENCYi: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
" f
!
ACTION: Proposed rule
SUMMARY: Today EPA is proposing two amendments to 40 CFR
I
Part 430, the Pulp, Paper and Paperboard Point Source
Category. The first affects only existing direct
discharging mills in Subpart B (Bleached Papergrade Kraft
i ; ' -
and Soda Subcategory) that choose to enroll in the Voluntary
Advanced Technology Incentive's Program being promulgated in
the final Pulp and Paper "Cluster Rules," found elsewhere in
i
i
today's Federal Register. Today's proposal would require
\
such mills to submit a plan (referred to as the "Milestones
t
Plan")! specifying research, construction, and other
'activities leading to achievement of the Voluntary Advanced
-------
Technology BAT effluent limitations in §430.24(b) of the
final "Cluster Rules", with accompanying dates for achieving
these milestones. The .purpose of the plan would be to
provide the permitting authority with mill-specific
information upon which to base permit requirements
reflecting reasonable interim milestones as required by
§430.24(b)(2).
The second amendment proposed today would authorize
mills in Subpart B to demonstrate compliance with applicable
chloroform limitations and standards, (also being
promulgated today in the "Cluster Rules") in lieu of
monitoring at a fiber line, by certifying that the fiber
line is not using elemental chlorine or hypochlorite as
bleaching agents and that they also maintain certain
operational conditions specified in the proposed regulation.
This second amendment would reduce the reporting burden for
those mills that choose to certify.
In addition, although EPA is not proposing totally
chlorine-free (TCF) technologies and associated process
wastewater flow reduction technologies as the basis for new
source performance standards or pretreatment standards for
new sources for mills in Subpart B at this time, EPA today
-------
is requesting comments and data on the feasibility of TCP
processes for this subcategory, especially the range of
i
products made and their specifications. EPA is also
requesting comments and data regarding effluent reduction
performance of'TCF processes for this subcategory.
i
DATES:I Comments on the proposed rule, as well as
information and data regarding the feasibility of TCF
bleaching processes for new sources in the Bleached
Papergrade Kraft and Soda Subcategory, must be received by
i
[insert date 60 days from date of publication] at the
following address.
i
ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal, as well as
information and data regarding TCF processes, in-triplicate
I
to Mr.!J. Troy Swackhammer, Office of Water, Engineering and
F
Analysis Division (4303), U.S. Environmental Protection
f
Agencyi, 401 M Street, SW, Washington DC 20460. In addition
i . .
to submitting hard copies of the comments, the public may
also send comments via e-mail to:swackhammer.j-
troy@epamail.epa.gov. The public record (excluding
. i
confidential business information) for this rulemaking is
available for review at the EPA's Water Docket, 401 M
Street; SW, Washington DC. For access to docket materials,
-------
call (202) 260-3027 between 9:00 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. for an
appointment. The EPA public information regulation (40 CFR
Part 2) provides that a reasonable fee may be charged for
Mr. J. Troy Swackhammer
copying.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
at (202) 260-7128.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulated entities. Entities potentially regulated by this
action are those operations that chemically pulp wood fiber
using kraft or soda methods to produce bleached papergrade
pulp and/or bleached paper/paperboard. Regulated categories
and entities include:
Category
Applicable
Proposed
Amendment
Examples of Regulated Entities
Industry --
Bleached
Papergrade Kraft
and Soda
Subcategory
Submittal of
Milestones Plan
Certification in
place of
chloroform
monitoring
Pulp and paper mills that
choose to enroll in the
Voluntary Advanced Technology
Incentives Program
Pulp and Paper Mills that
choose to certify to the use
of Elemental Chlorine-Free
processes and certain other
processes and operational
controls in lieu of monitoring
for chloroform
This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather
provides a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be
4
-------
regulated by this actidn. This table lists the types of
entities that EPA is now aware could potentially be
regulated by this action. Other types of entities not
i
listed in the table could also be regulated. To determine
whether your facility is regulated by this action, you
i
should carefully examine the applicability criteria in §
430.20' of the final Pulp and Paper "Cluster Rules" found '
elsewhere in today's Federal Register. If you have
i
questions regarding the applicability of this action to a
particular entity, consult the person .listed in the
preceding "FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT" section.
i .
Overview
i . .
This preamble describes the legal authority of this
proposed rule, background information to the development of
the proposed amendments, and the rationale for the proposed
Milestones Plan and the proposed chloroform certification
provisions. This preamble also solicits-comments and data
regarding the proposed amendments, as well as information
and data regarding the feasibility of Totally Chlorine-Free
bleaching processes as a basis for new source performance
standards (NSPS) or pretreatment standards for new sources
-------
(PSNS) for mills in Subpart B (Bleached Papergrade Kraft and
Soda Subcategory).
Organization of this Preamble
I. Legal Authority
II. Background
A. Voluntary Advanced Technology Incentives Program
B. Demonstrating Compliance with Chloroform
Limitations
C. Availability of Totally Chlorine Free Technologies
III. The Milestones Plan
A. Rationale for Submittal of the Plan
B. Scope of the Milestones Plan
C. Permit Writers' Responsibilities
D. Estimates of Burden for Milestones Plan
IV. Certification in Lieu of Monitoring for Chloroform
V. Solicitation of Data and Comments
VI. Administrative Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
E. Executive Order 12875
-------
FL Executive Order 12898
1
G. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
I. Legal Authority
i ;
This proposed regulation would establish requirements
i
for submitting a "Milestones Plan" by mills that choose to
enrollf in the Voluntary Advanced Technology Incentives
Program and would reduce the monitoring burden on mills that
i
certify that they use elemental chlorine-free processes and
other operational controls. These amendments to 40 CFR Part
430 are proposed under the authorities of Sections 301, 304,
306, 3Q7, 308, 402, and 501 of the Clean Water Act, 33
U.S.C. 1311, 1314, 1316, 1317, 1318, 1342, and 1361, as
amended.
II. Background
i
A. Voluntary Advanced Technology Incentives Program
EPA is establishing a Voluntary Advanced Technology
[
Incentives Program for Subpart B to encourage direct
discharging mills to move beyond today's baseline BAT and
NSPS technologies toward the "mill of the future," which EPA
believes will have a minimum impact on the environment. See
40 CFR:430.24(b) and 430.25(c). Mills that enroll in the
incentives program (hereafter AT mills) can choose between
-------
two or three different levels of ultimate performance
requirements (i.e., existing mills can choose Tier I, Tier
II, or Tier III; new source mills can choose Tier II or Tier
III). In any tier, existing AT mills must meet "stage 1"
limitations, interim milestones, and "stage 2" limitations
(i.e., the ultimate performance requirements for the
particular tier). New source AT mills must meet the
ultimate Tier performance requirements upon commencement of
discharge. For further details on this voluntary program,
see Section IX of the preamble for the promulgated "Cluster
Rules" for the pulp and paper industry published elsewhere
in today's Federal Register.
, In order to facilitate achievement of the ultimate BAT
limitations required by this program, EPA is proposing today
to require all existing mills enrolled in the voluntary
incentives program to submit plans (referred to as
"Milestones Plans") detailing the strategy the mill will
follow to develop and implement the technologies or
processes it intends to use to achieve the Voluntary
Advanced Technology BAT limitations associated with the
chosen incentive tier.
-------
B:. Demonstrating Compliance with Chloroform
: Limitations
i
In response to comments, EPA considered in connection
i
with the final Cluster Rules whether certification of
i
Elemental Chlorine-Free (ECF) bleaching processes can be
used in lieu of monitoring as a basis for compliance with
i
i
the regulations published elsewhere in the Federal Register
i
today. EPA determined that the information available at
l .
this time does not demonstrate that ECF certification alone
[
is sufficient to ensure compliance with the regulations
i '
promulgated today. Therefore, the effluent limitations
i
guidelines promulgated today do not allow certification of
i
ECF bleaching to replace monitoring for any regulated
pollutant. However, EPA is proposing here to allow mills in
i
Subpart B that demonstrate compliance with the applicable
chloroform limitations -or standards through required
I
i
monitoring over a two-year period to demonstrate continuing
compliance with chloroform limitations and standards by
certifying that they use ECF bleaching processes and also
maintain process and operation conditions in use during the
i '
initial two-year monitoring period. See Section IV. EPA is
-------
requesting data to further inform its final decision in this
matter. See Section V.
C. Availability of Totally Chlorine-Free Technologies
With respect to Totally Chlorine-Free (TCP) bleaching
processes, several non-U.S. mills have reported the
production of TCP softwood kraft pulp at full market
brightness. However, EPA's data are not sufficient to
confirm that TCP bleaching processes are technically
demonstrated for the full range of market products currently
served by the bleached kraft process. EPA is also unable,
based on the information available today, to define a
segment of the Bleached Papergrade Kraft and Soda
subcategory for which TCP bleaching processes and, if
appropriate, flow reduction technologies similar to those
incorporated in the Voluntary Advanced Technology Incentives
program, are known to be technically feasible and thus could
be the basis for NSPS or PSNS. EPA believes that progress
being made in developing TCP bleaching processes and process
wastewater flow reduction technologies is substantial, and
that additional data may demonstrate that TCP processes and
flow reduction technologies are indeed available for the
full range, or a substantial portion, of market products.
10
-------
To this end, EPA is soliciting additional data and comment
on the full range of market specifications currently being
achieved for TCP kraft pulp (e.g., brightness, strength, and
cleanliness). EPA also will further evaluate whether the
performance of TCP and associated process wastewater flow
reduction technologies would be superior environmentally to
l
the performance of the technology basis of the new NSPS/PSNS
standards for Subpart B mills published/elsewhere in today's
Federal Register. Depending on these findings, EPA will
j
determine whether to propose revisions to NSPS/PSNS based
1 ; .
upon TCP for Subpart B mills.
i
III. The Milestones Plan
I
A'. Rationale for Submittal of the Plan
EPA has determined that the Milestones Plan described
in today's proposed amendment to 40 CFR 430.24 will provide
i
information necessary for the development of interim
limitations or permit conditions under 40 CFR 430.24(b) (2)
that lead to achievement of the Voluntary Advanced
Technology BAT .limitations codified at 40 CFR 430.24(b) (3)
and (4). See CWA section 308(a). Once incorporated-into
NPDES permits, these milestones will be enforceable and will
provide valuable benchmarks for reasonable inquiries into
[
11
-------
progress being made by participating mills toward
achievement of the interim and ultimate Tier limits. EPA
believes that requiring each mill enrolled in the Voluntary
Advanced Technology Incentives Program to submit an
individualized Milestones Plan to its permitting authority
will provide the necessary flexibility to the mill and the
permit writer so that the milestones selected to be
incorporated into the mill's NPDES permit reflect the unique
situation at that mill. These interim milestones will
represent reasonable further progress toward the achievement
of the six-year milestone limits for Tiers II and III and
the ultimate Advanced Technology BAT limitations for all
Tiers. As developed by each individual mill, these
milestones should reflect the planning process under which
the mill determined the ultimate Tier limits to be
economically achievable.
B. Scope of the Milestones Plan
As proposed today, the Milestones Plan would describe
each envisioned new technology component or process
modification the mill intends to implement in order to
achieve the Voluntary Advanced Technology BAT limits. In
addition, the mill would be required to include a master
12
-------
schedule in the plan showing the sequence of implementing
the new technologies and process modifications and
identifying critical-path relationships within the sequence.
For ea|ch individual technology or process modification, the
i
Milestones Plan would need to include: (1) a schedule that
lists the anticipated dates that associated construction,
installation, and/or process changes will be initiated; (2)
the anticipated date that those steps will be completed; (3)
i .
the anticipated date that the Advanced Technology process or
individual component will be fully operational; (4) and the
i
anticipated reductions in effluent quantity and improvements
i
in effluent quality as measured at the bleach plant (for
bleach plant, pulping area and evaporator condensates flow
and BAT parameters other than Adsorbable Organic Halides
I
(AOX) )! and at the end of the 'pipe (for AOX) . For those
technologies or process modifications that are not
commercially available or demonstrated on a full-scale basis
at the; time the plan is developed, the plan would be
required to include a schedule for research (if necessary),
i
process development, and mill trials. The schedule for
i
research, process development, and mill trials would need to
i
show major milestone dates and the anticipated date the
!
i
: 13
-------
technology or process change will be available for mill
implementation. The plan also would need to include
contingency plans in the event that any of the technologies
or processes 'specified in the Milestones Plan need to be
adjusted or alternative approaches developed to ensure that
the ultimate tier limits are achieved by the dates outlined
in the master schedule. EPA is proposing new regulatory
language describing the Milestones Plan in §430.24(c) .
C. Permit Writers' Responsibilities
EPA expects the permitting authority to use the
information contained in those plans, as well as its own
best professional judgment, to establish enforceable interim
milestones applying all statutory factors. EPA also expects
permit writers to include reopener clauses in the permits to
adjust these interim milestones as necessary to reflect the
results of research, process development, mill trials, and
contingencies as appropriate.
D. Estimates of Burden
EPA has estimated the reporting burden associated with
the required Milestones Plan, and is developing a draft
Information Collection Request (ICR) under the Paperwork
Reduction Act, described in Section VI.C. These estimates
14
-------
reflect the burden of preparing1 the Milestones Plan, and are
r
based on the assumption that plans will follow the outline
given !as an example in .the "Voluntary Advanced Technology
t
Incentives Program Technical Support Document" (DCN 14488).
I
The labor hour and cost estimates are based on the
i
F
anticipated level of complexity of the Tier plans, and
i
reflect greater complexity at higher Tiers. It should be
noted that the burden estimates include preparation and
submittal of the milestones plan and for Tiers II and III
!
plan development, a budget to perform scoping studies to
[
determine implementability at the mills.
EPA estimated 56 hours for the preparation and
i -
submittal of the Milestones Plan for mills enrolling in Tier
. [
I of the Voluntary Advanced Technology Incentives Program.
This assumes the mill will implement readily-available
technology and will not perform research and development
activities. EPA estimates that 14 mills will enroll at the
Tier L level.;
EPA estimates 154 hours for the preparation and
submittal of the Milestones Plan for mills enrolling in Tier
II of the Voluntary Advanced Technology Incentives Program
in addition to an estimate of approximately $14,000 for each
i
!
15
-------
scoping study, which may be performed by a consultant. This
assumes the mill, upon implementing the milestones plan,
will conduct one research and development project related to
condensate reuse, but otherwise will implement readily-
available technology. The cost of the research and
development project, which is estimated as part of EPA's
estimates for compliance with the Voluntary Advanced
Technology Incentives Program, is not included in this
burden estimate. EPA estimates that 13 mills will enroll at
the Tier II level.
EPA estimates 328 hours for the preparation and
submittal of the Milestones Plan for mills enrolling in Tier
III of the Voluntary Advanced Technology Incentives Program
in addition to an estimate of approximately $26,000 for each
scoping study, which may be performed by a consultant. This
assumes the mill upon implementing the milestone plan, will
conduct six research and development projects designed to
upgrade condensate quality from evaporators, to improve
treatment of condensates, to provide advanced process
control, to optimize water balance strategies to nearly
closed loop processing, and to remove minerals and/or
chloride. The cost of the research and development
16
-------
projects, which are estimated as part of EPA's estimates for
i
compliance with the Voluntary Advanced Technology Incentives
Program, are not included in this burden estimate. EPA
estimates that 2 mills will enroll at the Tier III level.
The following chart reflects the underlying basis for
. i
-the hour estimates:
r
i
Overview of
Technical
Strategy
Description of
Technology
Elements
Master
Schedule
Research and
Development
Schedule
Appendix of
Supporting
Documentation1
Total Hours
Tier I
Engineer
Hours
12
10
20
0
4
Manage-
ment
Hours
4
2
4
0
0
56
Tier II
Engineer
Hours
20
20
46
24
16
Manage-
ment
Hours
8 ,
4
8
8
0 '
154
Tier III
Engineer
Hours
24
32
64
112
24
Manage-
ment
Hours
8
8
16
40
0
328
i
1 Includes vendor documentation or preliminary studies at all Tier levels,
feasibility studies, research proposals and reports, and literature on minimum
effluent technology at Tier II and III levels, and literature on closed cycle
i technology for Tier III.
Assuming a salary rate (inclusive of benefits) of $65
i
per hour for process engineering time and $100 per hour for
senior! management time, the costs for preparing milestone
plans p.re estimated at $246,400 as a one-time cost for mills
anticipated to enroll in the program. The total cost of the
17
-------
milestones plan preparation inclusive of estimates for
scoping studies is approximately $481,000.
IV. Certification in Lieu of Monitoring for Chloroform
Commenters to EPA's July 15, 1996 Notice of
Availability on the pulp and paper effluent limitations
guidelines and standards, 61 FR 36835, suggested that EPA
consider allowing certification of process changes
(specifically elimination of elemental chlorine and
hypochlorite, but no other process factors) in lieu of
monitoring to demonstrate compliance with the chloroform
limitations and standards EPA had proposed. EPA did not
include a certification option in the final Gluster Rules
because the information available at this time does not
demonstrate that ECF certification alone is sufficient to
ensure compliance with the regulations published elsewhere
in today's Federal Register. EPA based this conclusion on
its finding that pulping and bleaching processes and related
factors also have an effect on the rates of generation of
chlorinated pollutants as measured in mill wastewaters. See
DCN 14497, Vol 1.
Nevertheless, EPA believes that it may be appropriate
to allow mills to demonstrate compliance with chloroform
18
-------
limitations and standards promulgated today through a
certification that accounts for those process and operating
I
conditions. EPA has reason to believe that these conditions
are relevant to compliance with the promulgated chloroform
limitations and standards. Among the process and related
<
factors that EPA believes may influence compliance are:
i
residual lignin content of unbleached pulp (kappa number);
i '
the bleaching chemicals used (e.g., chlorine dioxide, or
chlorihe monoxide assuming elemental chlorine and
I
hypchlprite have been eliminated); and, their application
rates,; kappa factor, and other physical factors (e.g.,
L
mixing: with other wastewaters with differing properties
prior ,to monitoring point, etc.) plus the types of bleach
plant washers used (e.g., high air flow drum washers, low
air flow, washers,- etc.) .
Therefore, EPA is proposing new regulatory language in
40-CFR; 430.02 (f) that would allow Subpart B mills to certify
in lie'u of the requirement to monitor for chloroform at a
-fiber
line to which the limitations or standards apply, if:
(1) the discharger demonstrates, based on two years of
monitoring conducted in accordance with the minimum
monitoring requirements of the final regulation, that it is
19
-------
achieving the applicable limitations or standards for
chloroform; (2) the discharger certifies at that time and
annually thereafter to the permitting or pretreatment
control authority that the fiber line does not use elemental
chlorine or hypochlorite as bleaching agents and that it is
maintaining certain other process and operating conditions
in use at the fiber line during the initial compliance
demonstration period; and, (3) the discharger maintains
records of the process and operating conditions for the
fiber line. These process and operating conditions include,
for example, maintaining a kappa factor and/or chemical
application rate that does not exceed that for which
compliance has been demonstrated at that fiber line,
achieving a pre-bleaching kappa number that does not exceed
that for which compliance has been demonstrated, and using
precursor-free raw material. Examples of additional
operational factors that may be required as part of the
certification are the mixing (or separation) of acid and
alkaline filtrates prior to the monitoring point and other
physical factors such as types of bleach plant washers
(e.g., high air flow drum washers, low air flow washers,
etc.) .
20
-------
EPA is proposing that the certification be made
i '
annually, rather than once every permit cycle, because the
certification includes operational factors in addition to
t
chemical use or substitution. These factors require greater
oversight and control on the part of the mill than can be
achieved by monitoring mill chemical purchases.
EPA believes that additional data will allow it to
further document and'confirm the specific process and
operating conditions that are necessary to provide an
adequate basis for establishing compliance with the
promulgated chloroform limitations and standards. EPA
i
believes that if additional data becomes available that
t
i
further document and confirm pertinent process and operating
conditions, then it would be appropriate to provide
flexibility to allow ECF mills to certify that they
consistently maintain these process changes and operating
conditions subsequent to the two year period of monitoring
for compliance demonstration. Thus, additional data will be
critical to EPA's final decision on the certification being
i
proposed today for Subpart B mills.
The certification alternative for chloroform being
proposed today is not limited to the timeframes during which
21
-------
monitoring is required at the minimum monitoring frequencies
specified in 40 CFR 430.02(b) and (c), but may apply as an
alternative to monitoring that would be otherwise be
required by a permit writer or pretreatment control
authority in accordance with 40 CFR 122.44(i) or 40 CFR Part
403, as applicable.
EPA anticipates that the cost of certifying, when
compared to the cost of monitoring, would be negative. EPA
also recognizes that certification is voluntary and is not
being required of mills that prefer to monitor. EPA has
therefore not included costs of certification in the overall
cost estimates of this proposal.
V. Solicitation of Data and Comments
EPA is seeking comment on today's proposed amendments
to Part 430, which would require submission of a plan for
achieving the Voluntary Advanced Technology BAT limits
codified in Subpart B. Specifically, EPA solicits comment
on the overall scope of the plan and the suggested content,
including the effectiveness of the milestones, required,
critical-path schedule, contingency alternatives, and
identification of major milestones, in the form of numeric
or narrative limitations and/or conditions, that could or
22
-------
should' be incorporated in an NPDES permit. EPA also
solicits comment on the reasonableness of the response
f
burdeni that such a plan would impose. (See Sections III.D
and VI'. C of today's proposal for discussions of the burden
estimated to be associated with the Milestones Plan).
EPA is also seeking additional bleach plant chloroform
data from Subpart B ECF mills, along with corresponding
process and operating information and data, to determine
f
whether an ECF certification process for chloroform should
also require certification that relevant process and
i -
operating factors are consistently maintained. Currently
available data and any new data that are received will be
i " '
I
used by EPA as a basis for its final decision on whether to
promulgate the certification being proposed today and the
extent; to which process and related factors are
i .
i
incorporated.
EPA also'is .soliciting comment and data on TCP
[
!
processes and associated process wastewater flow reduction
f
technologies that may serve as the technology basis for
NSPS/P$NS for Subpart B mills. EPA specifically solicits
data on the range of market pulp and paper products that are
i
commercially manufactured by TCP processes in the U.S.,
! ' 23 '
-------
Canada, Europe, and elsewhere. EPA also solicits and will
seek to gather additional performance data for full scale
TCP mills that could serve as the basis for NSPS/PSNS that
may be proposed at a later date.
Interested parties wishing to gather and submit data at
ECF mills for chloroform generation and related process
variables, and for the performance and products of TCP
processes and flow reduction technologies, are strongly
encouraged to contact EPA to ensure that the data gathering
to be undertaken will be of adequate scope, will utilize
appropriate analytical methods where necessary, and will
include sufficient documentation to be useful. (Consult the
person listed in the "FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT"
section of this proposal.)
Finally, EPA is soliciting comment on the estimated
burden associated with preparing the Milestones Plan (see
Sections III.D and VI.C of today's notice for detailed
discussions of the estimated burden).
VI. Administrative Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866
Under Executive Order 12866, 58 FR 51735 (Oct. 4,
1993), the Agency must determine whether the regulatory
24
-------
action;is "significant" and therefore subject to OMB review
and.the requirements of the Executive Order. The Order
defines "significant regulatory action" as one that is
likely;to result in a rule that may:
(1) have an annual effect on the economy of $100
million or more or adversely affect in a material
way the economy, a sector of the economy,
; productivity, competition, jobs, the environment,
I
public health or safety, or State, local, or
' tribal governments or communities;
(2) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise
; interfere with an action taken or planned by
another agency;
(3) materially alter the budgetary impact of
i
entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs
or the rights and obligations of recipients
[
I thereof; or
(4) raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of
.1
; legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the
principles set forth in the Executive Order.
i
Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, it has
been determined that this rule is a "significant regulatory
i 25
-------
action." As such, this action was submitted to OMB for
review. Changes made in response to OMB suggestions or
recommendations will be documented in the public record.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act and the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 USC 601
et seq.), whenever a federal agency is required by section
553 of the Administrative Procedure Act (or any other law)
to publish a general notice of proposed rulemaking for any
proposed rule, the Agency generally must prepare an initial
regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA) describing the
economic impact of the regulatory action on small entities.
The Agency must prepare an IRFA for a proposed rule unless
the head of the agency certifies that it will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. EPA is today certifying, pursuant to section
605(b) of the RFA, that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. Therefore, the Agency did not prepare an IRFA.
The proposal, if promulgated, will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities for the following reasons. The RFA defines "small
26
-------
entity" to mean a small;business, small organization or
small governmental jurisdiction. The proposal to allow
i
certification in lieu of monitoring for chloroform would
reduce:the economic cost of compliance for any direct
discharging mill that chooses to certify, including any mill
-i - -
that is a small business. Therefore, the proposal to allow
i
certification, if adopted, would not have a significant
i
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
With respect to the Milestones Plan proposal, EPA has
determined that there are only three mills in Subpart B that
i
are small businesses. These mills would be subject to the
proposed Milestones Plan requirement only if they choose to
f
enroll!in the Voluntary Advanced Technology Incentives
Program (VATIP). EPA does not believe three to be a
substantial number. Furthermore, EPA has concluded that the
i
cost of the Milstones Plan requirement to any mill choosing
I
to enroll in VATIP that is a small business is not
significant. EPA has calculated the cost of the Milestones
Plan requirement to be between $4,000 and $50,000 per mill,
depending on whether the mill chose Tier I, II or III. This
amount! is a small fraction of the total cost of the new
effluent guideline requirements for Subpart B, which EPA has
27
-------
already certified as not having a significant impact
elsewhere in today's FR. Furthermore, the requirement to
submit a Milestones Plan would only affect those mills that
voluntarily choose to enroll in the program. In these
circumstances, the Milestones Plan requirement would not, if
promulgated, have a significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection requirements in this
proposed rule 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., following the 60 day comment
period of this notice and incorporation/consideration of
those comments received on the burden of the information
collection requirements. An Information Collection Request
(ICR) document will be prepared by EPA for submission to
OMB. However, EPA is using today's notice to solicit public
comments on the estimates associated with the burden of the
Milestones Plan for Tier I, Tier II, and Tier III Advanced
Technology mills prior to submitting the ICR document to OMB
(See Section III.D of today's notice for a discussion of the
burden estimates). EPA will publish a notice in the Federal
28
-------
Register when the ICR is submitted to OMB for approval,
i
allowing for additional public comments to be submitted to
OMB oni the burden estimates. The information requirements
\
are not effective until OMB approves them and today's
proposed amendments are promulgated.
i
As discussed in Section III.A of today's notice, EPA
believes the Milestones Plan is necessary to provide NPDES
permit writers with the information necessary to design a
i
i
permit1 that contains mill specific "interim milestones"
required by the Voluntary Advanced Technologies Incentives
Program. See §430.24 (b). (2) of the final Pulp and Paper
"Cluster Rules," found elsewhere in today's Fe_deral
E
Register. The Milestones Plan will allow permit writers to
set milestones on a schedule that the mill believes is
realistic for its facility.
EPA does not believe the second proposed amendment in
today's notice -- certification in lieu of monitoring for
chloroform -- will cause any additional burden on those
mills choosing to certify. In fact, EPA believes that for
mills jthat choose to make the certification, the burden
f ... . . .
associated with monitoring will be reduced because they will
i
no longer, need to monitor for chloroform.
, ! 29
-------
As discussed in more detail in Section III.D of today's
notice, the total burden for the Milestones Plan is listed
by Tier in the following table:
Milestones Plan -- Estimated Industry Burden
Tier
Tier I
Tier II
Tier III
Total for
all Tiers
Hours/Mill
56
154
328
Estimated Number
of Enrolled Mills
14
13
2
29
Total Hours
784
2,002
656
3,442
Scoping study
Estimate ($)
0
182,130
52,320
234,450
Total
Cost ( $ )
55,900
325,000
100,000
480,900
Burden means the total time,effort, or financial
resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain,
or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal
agency. This includes the time needed to review
instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting,
validating, and verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing
information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any
previously applicable instructions and requirements; train
personnel to be able to respond to a collection of
information; search data sources; complete and review the
collection of information; and transmit or otherwise
disclose the information.
30
-------
An Agency may not Conduct ar sponsor a collection of
E
information, 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.
i "
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(UMRA), P.L. 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal
agencies to assess the effects of their regulatory actions
i
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
promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement is
t
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
i
i
or least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives
: 31 -x
-------
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 this rule does 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. This
rule would impose a reporting burden on the private sector
32
-------
of les's than 3,500 burden hour§ (costed at less than
i
$250,0'00) as a one-time expense. This rule does not affect
I
tribal^ governments at all, will ease the burden on State
governments responsible for implementing final regulations
i
published elsewhere in this Federal Register today, and may
i
ease the compliance monitoring burden of local governments
i .
responsible for implementing final regulations published
elsewhere in this Federal Register today. Thus, today's
rule i!s not subject to the requirements of sections 202 and
205 ofi the UMRA.
i
EPA has determined that this rule contains no
regulatory requirements that might significantly or uniquely
i
affect; small governments for the same reasons cited above.
E. Executive Order 12875
To reduce the burden of federal regulations on States
and small governments, the President issued Executive Order
i -
12875 on October 28, 1993, entitled Enhancing the
Intergovernmental Partnership (58 FR 58093). In particular,
i
this executive order requires EPA to consult with
I '
representatives of affected State, local, or tribal
governments on Federal matters that significantly or
uniquely affect their communities. This rule does not
! 33
-------
affect tribal governments at all, will ease the burden on
State governments responsible for implementing final
regulations published elsewhere in this Federal Register
today, and may ease the compliance monitoring burden of
local governments responsible for implementing final
regulations published elsewhere in this Federal Register
today.
F. Executive Order 12898
Executive Order 12898 directs federal agencies to
"determine whether their programs, policies, and activities
have disproportionally high adverse human health or
environmental effects on minority populations and low-income
populations." (Sec.3-301 and Sec. 3-302). This proposed
rule will not have adverse health or environmental effects.
G. 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
34
-------
are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards
bodies. Where available and potentially applicable
voluntary consensus standards are not used by EPA, the Act
requires the Agency to provide Congress, through the Office
of Management and Budget, an explanation of the reasons for
not using such standards.
The Agency does not believe that this proposed rule
addresses any technical standards subject to the NTTAA. A
i
commen^er who disagrees with this conclusion should indicate
I
how the notice is subject to the Act and identify any
i
potentially applicable voluntary consensus standards.
35
-------
Amendments to the Effluent Limitations Guidelines, Pretreatment Standards, and New Source
Performance Standards for the Bleached Papergrade Kraft and Soda Subcategory of the Pulp,
Paper, and Paperboard Point Source Category Page 36 of 36
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 430
Chloroform, Effluent guidelines, Elemental chlorine-free,
Environmental protection, Incentives, Milestones Plan, Pulp
and paper industry, Totally chlorine-free, and Water
pollution control.
Dated:
Carol M. Browner
Admini s tra. tor
36
-------
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, Title 40 of
the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 430, is proposed to be
amendeji as follows:
PART 430 - THE PULP, PAPER, AND PAPERBOARD POINT SOURCE
i
CATEGORY
1;. The authority citation for Part 430 continues to
read as follows:
I "
Sections 301, 304, 306, 307, 308, 402, and 501 of the
Clean Water Act, (33 U.S.C. 1311, 1314, 1316, 1317,
I
1318, 1342, and 1361), and Section 112 of Clean Air Act
i
(42 U.S.C. 7412).
r
2;. Section 430.02 is amended by adding paragraph (f)
to read as follows:
§430.02 Monitoring Requirements
*****
(f) Certification in Lieu of Monitoring-. A discharger
subject to limitations and standards for chloroform under
Subpar|t B of this part is not required to monitor for
chloroform at a fiber line to which the limitations or
standards apply if:
37
-------
(1) the discharger demonstrates, based on two years of
monitoring conducted in accordance with paragraph (a) of
this section, that it is achieving the applicable
limitations or standards for chloroform;
(2) the discharger certifies at that time and annually
thereafter to the permitting or pretreatment control
authority that the fiber line does not use either elemental
chlorine or hypochlorite as bleaching agents, and that the
mill consistently maintains process operation conditions
representative of those employed during the two year
compliance monitoring period required in paragraph (f) (1),
including pre-bleaching kappa numbers, use of precursor-free
raw materials, kappa factor and bleaching chemical
application rates, and other factors pertinent to the
initial compliance demonstration; and
(3) the discharger maintains records of the process and
operating conditions referenced in paragraph (f)(2) of this
section for the fiber line on site.
3. Section 430.24 is amended by revising paragraph
(b)(2) and adding paragraph (c) to read as follows:
38
-------
§430.24 Effluent limitations reflecting the degree of
effluent reduction attainable by application of the best
available technology economically achievable (BAT)
*****
***
*** t Best Professional Judgment Milestones:
Narrative or numeric limitations and/or special permit
conditions, as appropriate, established by the permitting
!
authority on the basis of his or her best professional
judgment that reflects a reasonable interim milestones
t -
toward! achievement of the effluent limitations specified in
[
paragraphs (b) (3) and (b) (4) of this section, as applicable,
i
after consideration of the milestones plan submitted by the
discharger in accordance with paragraph (c) of this section.
*****
(C) All dischargers enrolled or intending to enroll in
the Voluntary Advanced Technology Incentives Program must
submit, to the NPDES permitting authority a Milestones Plan
covering all fiber lines enrolled or intending to be
enrolled in that program at their mill by [insert 14 months
l
from date of publication of the final rule] or the date the
discharger applies for NPDES permit limitations consistent
-------
with paragraph (b) of this section, whichever is later. The
Milestones Plan must include the following information:
(1) a description of each anticipated new technology
component or process modification that is needed to achieve
the limitations in paragraphs (b)(3) and (b)(4) of this
section;
(2) a master schedule showing the sequence of implementing
the new technology components or process modifications and
identifying critical path relationships;
(3) a schedule for each individual new technology component
or process modification that includes:
(I) the anticipated initiation and completion dates of
construction, installation and operational "shakedown"
period associated with the technology components or process
modifications and, when applicable, the anticipated dates of
initiation and completion of associate.d research, process
development, and mill trials;
(ii) the anticipated date that the discharger expects the
technologies and process modifications selected to achieve
the limitations specified in paragraphs (b)(3) and (b)(4) of
this section are operational on a full-scale basis,-
40
-------
(iii) ;contingency plans should any technology or process
specified in the Milestones Plan need to be adjusted or
alternative approaches developed to ensure that the
limitations specified in paragraphs (b)(3) and (b)(4) of
.
this section are met; and
(4) a'signature by the responsible corporate officer as
defined in 40 CFR 122.22.
*****
41
-------
-------
-------
------- |