833B83100
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of
Water Enforcement
and Permits
833B83100
vvEPA
Guidance Manual
for POTW Pretreatment
Program Development
BVIRQNMENTAk
PROTECTION
AGENCY
DALLAS,
LIBRARY
-------
\ UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
" WASHINGTON. D.C. 20460
°
QCT 5 1983 _ OFF.CEOF
'ALUS, T
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT :^")Pretreatment Program Guidance
"K
FROM: Rebecca W. Hanmer
Acting Assistant Administrator for Water (WH-556)
TO: Users of the Guidance Manual for POTW
Pretreatment Program Development
This manual provides information needed by a local POTW to
develop an approvable pretreatment program. It also delineates
what data and information the POTW must include in its submittal
package so that the appropriate Approval Authority (either an
approved State or an EPA Regional Office) can review and approve
the program. The information is based on the requirements
specified in the General Pretreatment Regulations (40 CFR Part
403) for an approvable pretreatment program. If changes to these
requirements are needed, EPA will issue timely supplemental
guidance.
The manual does not discuss in detail certain provisions of
the national pretreatment program including the Combined Waste-
stream Formula and Removal Credits. The Agency will provide
separate guidance on these aspects of the pretreatment program
in the future.
EPA developed this manual for two reasons. First, POTWs
need guidance on developing pretreatment programs which satisfy
the regulatory requirements of the General Pretreatment Regula-
tions. This manual includes instructions and guidance for
conducting an industrial waste survey, developing a compliance
sampling program, producing resource and funding estimates, and
developing local effluent limitations for industrial users of
the POTW's treatment facility. The manual's appendices contain
very useful information, not only for program development, but
also for program implementation. It contains worksheets for
assisting the POTW in developing each element of the program.
-------
- 2 -
Second, EPA recognized that there are differences in POTWs
and that POTW pretreatment programs should consider such local
conditions as the size of the POTWs service area, the number of
industrial users, and the specific pollutants and the amounts of
these pollutants which the industrial users are discharging to
the POTW's treatment facilities.
The regulatory requirements which must be met are set forth
in the General Pretreatment Regulations, 40 CFR Part 403. This
guidance manual does not establish any new requirements. Where
the term "must" is used, refer to a regulatory requirement. The
term "should" denotes recommended good practice, but you do not
have to abide by this practice in order to meet regulatory
requirements if you have an acceptable alternate.
I believe that you, the POTW personnel responsible for
developing a pretreatment program, will find this manual useful.
As this guidance may be revised periodically to reflect program
experience or changes in program regulations, please feel free
to write to the Office of Water Enforcement and Permits (EN-336)
if you have suggestions on how the guidance may be improved or
areas which should be addressed. Thank you.
-------
GUIDANCE MANUAL
FOR
POTW PRETREATMENT PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT
Rebecca Hanmer
Acting Assistant Administrator, Office of Water
Bruce R. Barrett, Jr.
Director, Office of Water Enforcement and Permits
Martha G. Prothro
Director, Permits Division
Dr. James D. Gallup
National Pretreatment Coordinator
October 1983
Office of Water Enforcement and Permits
Office of Water
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, DC 20460
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This document was prepared with guidance from EPA
Headquarters, Office of Water Enforcement and Permits
and EPA Regional Offices. The North Carolina Department
of Natural Resources and Community Development and Tennessee
Department of Health and Environment participated as peer
reviewers and provided valuable comments which have been
incorporated into this document. This Guidance Manual
was prepared by JRB Associates under EPA Contract No.
68-01-6514.
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
1. INTRODUCTION 1-1
1.1 THE NATIONAL PRETREATMENT PROGRAM 1-1
1.2 ELEMENTS OF A PRETREATMENT PROGRAM 1-4
1.3 ORGANIZATION OF THIS MANUAL 1-6
2. INDUSTRIAL WASTE SURVEY 2-1
2.1 COMPILE A MASTER LIST OF INDUSTRIAL USERS 2-1
2.2 SURVEY INDUSTRIAL USERS 2-2
2.3 CONDUCT FOLLOW-UP ACTIVITIES 2-5
2.4 SUMMARIZE SURVEY RESULTS 2-5
2.4.1 Industrial Classification Scheme 2-9
2.4.2 Industrial Waste Survey Data Management 2-10
2.5 IWS INFORMATION FOR THE PROGRAM SUBMISSION 2-11
3. LEGAL AUTHORITY 3-1
3 .1 REQUIRED LEGAL AUTHORITIES 3-1
3.1.1 Deny or Condition 3-2
3.1.2 Compliance with Pretreatment Standards 3-2
3.1.3 Control Mechanism 3-4
3.1.4 Compliance Schedules/Reporting Requirements.... 3-5
3.1.5 Inspection, Sampling, and Monitoring 3-6
3.1.6 Legal Remedies 3-7
3.1.7 Emergency Relief 3-8
3.1.8 Confidentiality 3-8
3.1.9 Multijurisdictional Issues 3-9
3.2 ATTORNEY'S STATEMENT 3-10
3.3 LEGAL AUTHORITY INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR THE PROGRAM
SUBMISSION 3-12
4. TECHNICAL INFORMATION 4-1
4.1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION 4-1
4.2 PLANT PERFORMANCE AND INDUSTRIAL DATA 4-2
4.3 SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS TO DETERMINE FATE AND EFFECT.... 4-3
4.4 LIMITATIONS ON POTW EFFLUENT AND SLUDGE 4-5
4.4.1 Water Quality Limitations 4-5
4.4.2 Sludge Limitation 4-6
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
PAGE
4.5 METHODOLOGY FOR DETERMINING LOCAL DISCHARGE
LIMITATIONS 4-7
4.5.1 Types of Standards 4-9
4.5.2 General Procedure for Setting Local Limits 4-10
4.6 TECHNICAL INFORMATION FOR THE PROGRAM
SUBMISSION 4-12
5. DESIGN OF MONITORING PROGRAM 5-1
5.1 TYPES OF MONITORING 5-1
5.1.1 Scheduled Monitoring 5-1
5.1.2 Unscheduled Monitoring 5-2
5.1.3 Demand Monitoring or Investigative
Monitoring 5-2
5.1.4 Industrial Self-Monitoring 5-3
5.2 DETERMINATION OF MONITORING FREQUENCY 5-3
5.3 FIELD MONITORING STRATEGY 5-5
5.3.1 Industrial Inspections 5-5
5.3.2 Sample Collection and Handling 5-7
5.4 LABORATORY CONSIDERATIONS IN MONITORING 5-9
5.5 CHAIN-OF-CUSTODY PROCEDURES 5-10
5.6 ADMINISTRATION 5-11
5.7 COMPLIANCE MONITORING INFORMATION FOR THE
PROGRAM SUBMISSION 5-14
6. PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURES 6-1
6.1 UPDATE INDUSTRIAL WASTE SURVEY 6-1
6.2 NOTIFY INDUSTRIAL USERS OF APPLICABLE STANDARDS AND
REQUIREMENTS 6-2
6.3 REVIEW SELF-MONITORING REPORTS 6-3
6.4 INVESTIGATE NONCOMPLIANCE INCIDENTS 6-6
6.5 CONDUCT PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ACTIVITIES 6-8
6.6 IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURES FOR THE PROGRAM
SUBMISSION 6-9
ii
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
PAGE
7. PROGRAM ORGANIZATION, COSTS, AND REVENUE SOURCES 7-1
7.1 ORGANIZATION AND STAFFING 7-1
7.1.1 Organization Chart 7-2
7.1.2 Considerations in Staffing and Organizing the
Pretreatment Program 7-2
7 .2 PROGRAM COSTS AND FUNDING MECHANISMS 7-6
7.2.1 Estimating Program Costs 7-6
7.2.2 Financing Sources and Cost Recovery Systems.... 7-15
7.3 INFORMATION ON RESOURCES REQUIRED FOR THE PROGRAM
SUBMISSION 7-29
8. APPROVAL AND IMPLEMENTATION 8-1
8.1 APPROVAL 8-1
8.1.1 Approval Procedures for a Final Pretreatment
Program 8-2
8.1.2 Special Cases 8-3
8.2 IMPLEMENTATION 8-4
8.2.1 Ongoing Activities 8-5
8.2.2 Program Effectiveness 8-5
8.2.3 Oversight 8-7
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A Pretreatment Information Contacts
APPENDIX B Bibliography of Pretreatment References
APPENDIX C General Pretreatment Regulations for Existing and New Sources
and Amendments
APPENDIX D Priority Pollutants and Categorical Industry Information
APPENDIX E Sample Pretreatment Compliance Schedule
APPENDIX F Blank Worksheets
iii
-------
APPENDIX G % Checklist for Pretreatment Program Submission
APPENDIX H Sample Industrial Waste Survey Questionnaire
APPENDIX I EPA Model Ordinance
APPENDIX J Sample Sewer Use Permit
APPENDIX K Sample Attorney's Statement
APPENDIX L Development of Discharge Limits to Control Incompatible
Pollutants
APPENDIX M Sample Collection and Preservation Procedures
iv
-------
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES
Table Page
1.1 Industries Subject to Categorical Pretreatment
Standards 1-5
2.1 Industrial Waste Survey Results.. 2-6
2.2 Industries Eliminated from Further Survey Efforts 2-7
2.3 Industrial Users Discharging Nondomestic Waste 2-8
4.1 Determining Need for Local Limitations 4-8
5.1 Sampling Record 5-12
5.2 Monitoring Results Report Form 5-13
7.1 Factors Affecting POTW Levels of Effort for Pretreatment
Program Operating Tasks 7-7
7.2 POTW Pretreatment Program Personnel Requirement Ranges.... 7-8
7.3 Estimated POTW Personnel Requirements for a POTW
Pretreatment Program by Program Activity 7-9
7.4 Typical Equipment for a Two-Person Field Sampling Crew.... 7-12
7.5 Typical Commercial Laboratory Costs 7-13
7.6 Worksheet for Calculating Annual Operating Costs 7-16
7.7 Pretreatment Program Financing Options 7-17
7.8 Cost Recovery Options 7-23
7.9 Rate Calculation Worksheet for Service Model 7-25
7.10 Rate Calculation Worksheet for Industry Surcharge
Model 7-27
7.11 Rate Calculation Worksheet for Pollutant Strength Model... 7-30
Figure
6.1 Review Process for Industrial Self-Monitoring Reports 6-5
7.1 Worksheet for Developing an Organization Plan 7-3
-------
1. INTRODUCTION
This manual provides guidance to the municipal personnel responsible for
the development and implementation of a local pretreatment program. It also
provides relevant information to the official who will supervise the local
program. This development manual has two purposes:
To help you in developing your pretreatment program and implementing
the program on an ongoing basis
To assist you in preparing your program submission to obtain approval.
The intent of the manual is to provide sufficient guidance so that you
can independently develop a local pretreatment program. However, some ques-
tions may require additional assistance beyond this manual's scope. Special
questions or problems that are not completely addressed here should be
referred to your State pretreatment office or the appropriate EPA Regional
Office (a list of these offices appears in Appendix A). In addition, Appendix
B lists other documents that you may find useful when developing a pretreat-
ment program.
It is important for you to understand the goals of the National Pretreat-
ment Program and the integral role of your local program in achieving these
goals. The first section of this chapter briefly describes the National
Pretreatment Program. The remainder of the chapter outlines typical pretreat-
ment program elements and discusses this manual's organization.
1.1 THE NATIONAL PRETREATMENT PROGRAM
The goal of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) National
Pretreatment Program is to protect municipal treatment plants (commonly called
"POTWs" for "publicly-owned treatment works") and the environment from the
adverse impact that may occur when hazardous or toxic wastes are discharged
into a sewage system. This protection is achieved mainly by regulating
1-1
-------
nondomestic users of POTWs that discharge toxic wastes or unusually strong
conventional wastes. There are four major problems that can be prevented
through implementation of a local pretreatment program:
(1) Interference with POTW operations. Since municipal treatment sys-
tems are designed primarily to treat domestic wastes, the introduc-
tion of nondomestic wastes may affect these systems. For example,
the bacteria in activated sludge systems or digesters can be inhib-
ited by toxic pollutants. The result is interference with the
treatment process, which means that domestic and industrial wastes
are discharged essentially untreated into the receiving stream.
(2) Pass-through of pollutants. Even if pollutants do not interfere
with the treatment systems, they often pass through POTWs without
being removed because the systems are not designed to remove them.
In many cases, industries may not be allowed to directly discharge
these pollutants into a lake or stream because of potential envi-
ronmental damage.
(3) Municipal sludge contamination. The removal of certain pollutants
by the POTW's treatment system is likely to result in contamination
of its sludge. If the sludge is buried in an unsecured landfill,
these pollutants may leach and contaminate adjacent surface waters
and aquifers. If the sludge is incinerated, these pollutants may be
released to the air. If the sludge is applied to agricultural land,
crops or pasture grasses may no longer be safe for human or animal
consumption. In general, industrial pollutants (especially metals),
can limit the POTW1s sludge management alternatives and increase the
cost of appropriate sludge disposal methods.
(4) Exposure of workers to chemical hazards. When combined with domes-
tic wastes, industrial wastes can produce poisonous gases, such as
hydrogen sulfide, which may be hazardous to POTW personnel.
EPA first issued regulations for the National Pretreatment Program on
June 26, 1978. The revised regulations (see Appendix C) became final on
January 28, 1981, with an effective date of March 30, 1981. The General Pre-
treatment Regulations for Existing and New Sources of Pollution (40 CFR 403)
require that any POTW (or combination of POTWs operated by the same authority)
with a design flow greater than 5 million gallons per day (mgd) must establish
a pretreatment program as a condition of its National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit. POTWs with design flows less than 5 mgd
may also be required to establish a pretreatment program if nondomestic waste
causes upsets, sludge contamination, or violations of NPDES permit conditions,
1-2
-------
or if their industrial users are subject to national pretreatment standards
(described below). EPA estimates that about 1,700 of the nation's 14,000
POTWs must develop programs. The remaining municipal treatment plants are not
believed to be receiving industrial wastes of concern at this time and will
probably not be required to develop pretreatment programs unless local
circumstances regarding industrial users of their system change.
The General Pretreatment Regulations establish prohibited discharge stan-
dards and categorical pretreatment standards to control pollutant discharges
into treatment plants. Prohibited discharge standards apply to all industrial
and commercial establishments connected to POTWs. Categorical pretreatment
standards apply to industrial and commercial discharges in 25 specific indus-
trial categories determined to be the most significant sources of toxic pol-
lutants.*
Prohibited discharge standards protect the POTW1s plant and operations by
prohibiting the discharge of pollutants that:
Create a fire or explosion hazard in the sewers or treatment works
Are corrosive (with a pH lower than 5.0)
Obstruct flow in the sewer system or interfere with operation
Upset the treatment processes or cause a violation of the POTW's
permit
Increase the temperature of wastewater entering the treatment plant to
above 104°F (40°C).
*0riginally, there were 34 categorical industries; however, to date nine cate-
gories have been exempted. Two industrial categoriesorganic chemicals, and
plastics and synthetic fiberswere combined to form a single industrial
class. In addition, the mechanical products category was incorporated into
the metal-finishing industry group. A new industrial category, nonferrous
metals forming, was recently added to the list of categories pending regula-
tion under categorical standards.
1-3
-------
Each categorical pretreatment standard is published by EPA as a separate
regulation. The standard contains limits for pollutants commonly discharged
by the specific industrial category. All firms regulated by a particular cat-
egory are required to comply with these standards, no matter where they are
located in the country. Table 1.1 lists the 25 industries and the status of
the standard regulating that industry. One hundred and twenty-six toxic pol-
lutants are being considered for regulation in the 25 categorical standards.
Appendix D lists these pollutants, the generally accepted detection limits for
each pollutant, and the regulated and exempted industrial categories.
Municipalities will use these national standards, as well as locally
developed regulations, to control nondomestic users discharging to their
wastewater collection and treatment systems. A local pretreatment program is
the legal, technical, and administrative framework for achieving effective
control of such dischargers. States participate in the National Pretreatment
Program because the Federal pretreatment regulations require all States that
administer NPDES programs to develop and administer State pretreatment pro-
grams. States with approved programs have the responsibility of overseeing
and coordinating the development of local pretreatment programs, and approving
or disapproving local pretreatment program submissions. If a State does not
administer a pretreatment or NPDES program, then EPA is the Approval Authority
for local pretreatment programs. However, many States participate in some
pretreatment activities even before their State program is approved. By
contacting your State pretreatment office, you can determine whether the State
or EPA will review and approve your program.
1.2 ELEMENTS OF A PRETREATMENT PROGRAM
The development and implementation of a pretreatment program usually
becomes a condition of your treatment plant's existing NPDES permit when the
permit is reissued or revised. A compliance schedule is attached to the per-
mit requiring the submission of certain elements of the pretreatment program
by prescribed dates. A typical compliance schedule is shown in Appendix E.
Each EPA Region has specific interim submission deadlines which all POTWs in
1-4
-------
(Revised 12-1-83)
TABLE 1.1
INDUSTRIES SUBJECT TO CATEGORICAL PRETREATMENT STANDARDS
FINAL REGULATIONS
Industry Category
Timber Products
Electroplating
Iron & Steel
Inorganic Chemicals (Phase I)
Textile Mills
Coal Mining2
Petroleum Refining
Pulp & Paper Mills
Steam Electric Power Plants
Leather Tanning 4 Finishing
Porcelain Enameling
Coil Coating
2
Ore Mining
Electrical & Electronic
Components (Phase I)
Metal Finishing
Copper Forming
Aluminum Forming
Pharmaceuticals
Coil Coating (Canmaking)
Date Issued
In Federal
Register
1-26-81
1-28-81
5-27-82
6-29-82
9-02-82
10-13-82
10-18-82
11-18-82
11-19-82
11-23-82
11-24-82
12-01-82
12-03-82
4-08-83
7-15-83
8-15-83
10-24-83
10-27-83
11-17-83
PROPOSED REGULATIONS
Page Number
8260
9462
23258
28260
38810
45382
46434
52006
52290
52848
53172
54232
54598
15382
32462
36942
49126
49808
52380
Effective
Date
3-30-81
3-30-81
7-10-82
8--12-82
10-18-82
11-26-82
12-01-82
1-03-83
1-02-83
1-06-83
1-07-83
1-17-83
1-17-83
5-19-83
8-29-83
9-26-83
12-07-83
12-12-83
1-02-84
Battery Manufacturing
Metal Molding & Casting
(Foundries)
Pesticides
Nonferrous Metals (Phase I)
Electrical & Electronic
Components (Phase II)
Organic Chemicals and Plastics
and Synthetic Fibers
Inorganic Chemicals (Phase II)
Nonferrous Metals (Phase II)
Plastics Processing
Nonferrous Metals Forming
11-10-82 51052
11-15-82 51512
11-30-82 53994
2-17-83 7032
3-09-83 10012
3-21-83 11828
10-25-83 49408
PENDING REGULATIONS
1
Existing job shop electroplaters and independent printed circuit board manu-
facturers must comply with only the electroplating regulations. All other
electroplating subcategories are now covered by both the electroplating and
metal finishing standards.
2
These two industries, to EPA's knowledge, contain only direct dischargers
(i.e., they do not discharge to POTWs) and thus no pretreatment standards
have been developed.
1-5
-------
that Region must meet. This procedures manual will assist you in developing
any interim program elements or your final program submission.
A local program includes the following six general elements. These
elements parallel the pretreatment compliance schedule activities specified in
most POTWs' NPDES permits.
(1) Industrial Waste Survey - The POTW must identify and evaluate the
nondomestic discharges to its treatment system.
(2) Legal Authority - The POTW must operate under a legal authority that
will enable it to apply and enforce the requirements of the General
Pretreatment Regulations and any other State or local rules needed
to control nondomestic discharges.
(3) Technical Elements/Local Limits - The POTW must characterize dis-
charges to its treatment system and establish local effluent limits
to protect the operation of its treatment plant, the quality of its
receiving water, and the quality of its sludge.
(4) Compliance Monitoring - The POTW must develop procedures for moni-
toring its industrial users to determine compliance and noncom-
pliance.
(5) Procedures - The POTW must develop administrative procedures to
implement its pretreatment program.
(6) Resources - The POTW must have sufficient resources (funds, equip-
ment, and personnel) to operate an effective and ongoing program.
1.3 ORGANIZATION OF THIS MANUAL
This manual is designed as a set of procedures to be followed in the de-
velopment of your pretreatment program. Chapter 2 outlines the steps involved
in an industrial waste survey. The survey is usually the first activity re-
quired in most POTW compliance schedules, and is the technical basis for the
rest of the program. Chapter 3 presents the necessary legal authorities for a
pretreatment program. Establishing these authorities is the next major step
in developing a pretreatment program. Chapter 4 discusses the technical in-
formation required for pretreatment program development. Chapter 5 details
compliance monitoring procedures, and Chapter 6 covers administrative proce-
dures. Chapter 7 provides information concerning the resources necessary to
1-6
-------
implement a pretreatment program, including organization, staffing, equipment,
and funding. Chapter 8 describes the approval process and indicates your re-
sponsibilities after the pretreatment program is approved.
Each chapter of this manual summarizes the relevant regulations, dis-
cusses how to develop and present the required information, and outlines what
to include in the request for approval submission. In addition, several
worksheets have been provided to aid in program development. Within the text
of the chapters, these worksheets have been filled in with examples to demon-
strate their use. Appendix F contains blank worksheets for your use.
Every element in your program submission should be thoroughly documented,
and this documentation should be included in the program submission to the
Approval Authority (either the State or EPA). Without thorough documentation,
the Approval Authority reviewing your program cannot determine the adequacy
and effectiveness of the proposed local program. Your submission should
describe a viable and effective pollution control program that serves to
protect your treatment system, receiving water, and sludge, and therefore, to
protect public health and the environment.
To assist you in preparing your submission and to ensure that all of the
necessary program elements are included, Appendix G contains a checklist that
addresses required and recommended program components. This checklist, or one
similar to this, is frequently used by EPA Regional Offices and delegated
States in conducting their review of a POTW program.
1-7
-------
2. INDUSTRIAL WASTE SURVEY
Section 403.8(f)(2) of the General Pretreatment Regulations requires a
POTW to identify and locate all possible industrial users subject to the
pretreatment program, and to identify the volume and character of pollutants
discharged by these users. The Industrial Waste Survey (IWS) is commonly used
to obtain this information. The information gathered during the IWS is essen-
tial in developing your pretreatment program because it provides the basis for
most other activities. By identifying these industries and what they dis-
charge, you can logically identify sources of known (or suspected) treatment
plant problems, develop local limits for problem dischargers, determine
sampling and analysis needs (both at the industries and in the treatment plant
itself), and estimate manpower and equipment needs. Four major activities
comprise the IWS:
(1) Compiling a master list of potential industrial users located in the
POTW service area
(2) Surveying each of these industries to collect the necessary
information
(3) Conducting follow-up activities, where needed, to obtain complete
and accurate information
(4) Summarizing the data for use in developing the pretreatment program.
Each of these activities is discussed in detail below.
2.1 COMPILE A MASTER LIST OF INDUSTRIAL USERS
The first step in conducting an IWS is to develop a master list of all
industries (commonly called industrial users or lUs) in your POTW's service
area that discharge to the treatment system. To identify these potential
industrial users (including those in neighboring jurisdictions where appro-
priate) and to obtain their mailing addresses, you may want to consult the
following sources:
Existing sewer authority files
2-1
-------
Water use and billing records
Utility company records
Sewer connection permits
Business license records
Chamber of Commerce rosters
Local telephone directory
Property tax records
City and State industrial directories
Other standard listings of industrial firms.
Lists of industrial users from the first four sources are usually very com-
plete and may be the best places to start in compiling a master list. If
these listings are not available, the other sources indicated above may be
consulted to develop the master list.
2.2 SURVEY INDUSTRIAL USERS
Once the master list has been compiled, the next step is to gather data
from each IU. This information may be gathered by using questionnaires or
telephone calls, or by visiting lUs. Some information may already be on file
at the POTW. If your POTW is small (typically 7 or 8 mgd or less) and has
very few industries (typically less than 10), you may visit or call to survey
these industries. A POTW may also sponsor a workshop to distribute and ex-
plain survey questionnaires to its lUs. Questions about the survey or the
local pretreatment program can be answered at this time.
POTWs with current industrial information may find it feasible to elim-
inate particular industries or groups of industries from survey efforts if the
industry is:
A manufacturing operation which does not generate wastewater (dry
manufacturing process)
A direct discharger
A discharger of sanitary wastewater only.
2-2
-------
If your master list of potential industrial users includes theaters, beauty
shops, barber shops, or retail sales firms, such businesses can usually be
eliminated prior to contacting the firms. These businesses can be eliminated
because their discharges typically do not contain the volume or type of sig-
nificant pollutants that concern the POTW.
Other listings may be classified as industries but are actually offices
or warehouses, with no nondomestic wastewaters discharged. Thus, they also
may be eliminated from the master list. Hotels, motels, restaurants, and gas
stations may be removed as well if they do not contribute to problems in the
collection system or the treatment plant involving oil and grease or other
discharged substances. You should have reliable or verifiable information in
order to eliminate any industry from the list. In addition, criteria for
eliminating the industry from this list should be valid, and should be docu-
mented in your pretreatment program submission.
Regardless of how you decide to conduct the survey, the following
information, at a minimum, should be requested from those industries that are
contacted:
Name of industry
Address of facility
Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code(s) or expected
classification
Wastewater flow (if unknown, may use water consumption rate)
Types and concentrations (or mass) of pollutants contained in discharge
Major products manufactured or services supplied if pollutant
constituents in discharge are not known
Description of existing on-site pretreatment facilities and practices.
Although these data are sufficient for developing the pretreatment program,
you may consider requesting the following information to better evaluate your
industrial dischargers:
Locations of discharge points
2-3
-------
Raw materials used or stored at the site
Flow diagram or sewer map for the industry
Number of employees
Operation and production schedules
Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasures (SPCC) plan description.
If the POTW already has portions of the necessary survey information in its
files, then the survey need only request the outstanding portions of infor-
mation. Generally, if the information was collected within the last three
years, you may consider it up-to-date. However, this guideline should be
followed only if POTW personnel can be relatively sure that the IUs in ques-
tion have not significantly changed their operations during the period.
Most POTWs use questionnaires to gather the required information. You
should develop questionnaires that are easy to read and understand. The ques-
tionnaire should require the signature of an official authorized to sign for
the company, as well as the name of a company representative who can be con-
tacted to arrange site visits for inspection and monitoring. A sample ques-
tionnaire is provided in Appendix H. This questionnaire uses a two-stage
approach. If the company does not generate certain wastes (specified in Ques-
tion A.8 of the questionnaire), then it need not complete the entire question-
naire. Also note that the questionnaire can serve as a wastewater discharge
permit for the IU if the POTW chooses to use permits as a control mechanism.
A letter should accompany the questionnaire explaining the purposes of a
local pretreatment program and describing how survey data will be used. It
should also state the deadline for completing the form and returning it.
Approximately two to three weeks should be sufficient time. The name and
telephone number of a municipal official who can be contacted if the indus-
tries have questions about the survey should be included in the letter. To
increase the initial response rate, you might include a stamped, self-
addressed envelope for returning the completed questionnaire.
2-4
-------
2.3 CONDUCT FOLLOW-UP ACTIVITIES
As industrial waste survey responses are gathered, they should be
reviewed for completeness and accuracy. To determine which firms have not
responded to the survey, you should develop a method to track firms that
return a properly completed questionnaire and firms that do not respond. For
firms that do not respond by the deadline, the POTW should undertake follow-up
activities, such as letters of reminder, telephone calls, or site visits. A
maximum of approximately six to eight weeks from the initial survey mailout
date should be sufficient time to conduct follow-up activities. The amount of
time you will need for follow-up activities will vary according to the number
of firms which you are surveying. Your program submission should describe the
follow-up measures used and list any lUs that ultimately did not submit a com-
pleted form.
2.4 SUMMARIZE SURVEY RESULTS
Your next step will be to summarize the type and number of local IUs and
the types and quantities of specific pollutants, particularly toxic pollu-
tants, entering the treatment plant system. This summary is the best way to
interpret industrial data and begin to determine IU sampling and monitoring
schedules, as well as specific local effluent limits.
Tables 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3 are presented here as sample worksheets for
summarizing data. Table 2.1 provides a format to list industries surveyed by
the POTW. Check marks can be used to complete the form where appropriate.
Where further explanation is necessary for clarification, you can simply
attach additional pages. Table 2.2 can be used to list those industries
eliminated from survey efforts and the reason for their elimination. The
combined lists of industries in Tables 2.1 and 2.2 should represent your
master list of industrial users; thus, a separate master list would not be
required in your submission.
Table 2.3 can be used to summarize information specifically related to
the quantity and quality of waste discharged by the IUs. It can also be
valuable if you operate more than one treatment plant and/or service other
jurisdictions with your plant. The list should include only those firms that
2-5
-------
cs
H
.J
S3
cn
w
en
w
H
cfl
Od
H
d
rH
CO
4-J
c
CO
4J
3
rH
rH
0
PH
>-.
0)
4-1
CO
s
o>
.u
CO
ca
S
u
i-i
4J
CO
0)
6
0
T>
O
Z
r-l
(U
W
CO
3
01
AJ
CO
CO
*
o
H
U
CO
01
e
o
Q
4->
O
Z
o
iH
Q
T3
0>
4J
H
ja
rl
rd
o
M
PH
:*>
4J
rl
M
O
H
M
P-i
vO
CM
i i
bO
C
r-l
rH
O
3
w
o
CO
4J
C
o
o
d
o
Z
^^
>-v
rH
d
o
CD
bO
M
CO
rd
O
CO
H
o
o
Z
U
M
Cfl
o
d
o
a
CO
01
c*
CO
4J
d
Cfl
W
3
rH
rH
O
PH
X
s~\
T3
0)
r-l
T3
H
CO
U
d
to
4J
3
rH
rH
O
P-I
s~\
O
1
O
rH
m
rl
§
o
H
^s^
IJ
01
rH
rl
O
PQ
B
o
PH
O
^ t
0)
a
o
u
CO
iH
>
(X
3
O
rH
rH
O
FK
Ni^-'
X
rH rH
Pv. |~.
-3- -3-
ro CO
CO
CO
o>
i ,
W
TJ
-a
i
d
cfl
P<
B
8
01
>
< rH
PH
T3
d >!
CM CO
iH
rH fH
rH
rH CM
01
3
CO
Z
>>
d
tfl
a
e
o
o
H
CO O
AJ CJ
O) CO
S TJ d
O 0)
U M rH
PP PH rH
3 5
XI
1 1
in
CO
CO
4J
CD
,d
4J
C^
Cfl
m
rH
U
d
M
A
d
o
CO
I-l
01
T3
d
3
X
rH
r*^
-------
M
CO
CU
O
a
0)
r-l
0)
H
CM
Ed
J
C/5
&
O
!H
W
to
pi
td
33
I
Cx
1
Q
Cd
Ed
co
Ed
M
ai
H
C/3
P
M
CJ
CO
4J
e
o
CO
CO
cu
l-l
o
c
«
(X
§
CJ
CO
(X
o
o
^
,_f
|
CNI
CM
CM
p
CU
00
cfl
d
s
*,
c
cu
p
o
CO
o
*
CJ
>
TJ
CM
i i
^
,_<
CO
4-1
CJ
3
o
0
p
ex.
rH
cfl
4J
cu
33
CJ
PQ
5
CO
00
CO
In
T)
CO
4J
CJ
CO
CX
CO
c
H
*
p
CU
J5
CU
CO
o
4-1
't-1
cu
00
p
cfl
^£J
CJ
CO
l-l
*d
p
CO
4J
cfl
^
CO
CO
cu
o
0
p
a
o
c
*>
^-»
l-l
c
o
cu
00
p
cfl
4=
CJ
CO
r-l
v
CJ
4-1
CO
cu
0
o
a
.
""CJ
CO
4J
CO
C
H
e
H
i»]
Ed
e
0
co
CO
CO
CO
CM
t (
1
CM
CM
CM
CO
cu
P
P-,
A
C
o
CO
p
cu
T3
q
c
r£*
0
*
4-*
cn
rf
4J
i
CO
LO
1 1
e
CJ
C
M
M
C
o
CO
P
cu
£*
<3
CO
00
CTN
^*^
^-
o
CO
4J
CJ
CO
CX
CO
c
H
*>
u^
O
CM
CM
CM
C/}
Ed
O
p.4
jgj
A
P
CU
00
cfl
jr
o
CO
lfj
J-l
CJ
cu
H
Q
..
*rj
CU
4J
CO
C
H
e
rl
r-l
Ed
e
o
CO
cO
0)
pi
CM
CM
1
CM
CM
CM
p
CU
8P
c
,§
*
c
o
CO
c
j^
o
T)
i-H
^1
9
4J
CO
d
H
Cfl
j^
rH
CM
CO
cu
co
^
CX
p
cu
JJ
c
Ed
1^
0
o
CJ
CO
oo
-H
CM
^^
sr
o
cu
4-1
o
CO
CX
CO
a
H
A
^
rH
C
O
CO
w>
CO
jj
CU
CO
CJ
H
4J
CO
CO
e
o
d
^
CO
CJ
tH
U-l
M-l
O
CO
cu
i-i
CO
>£-
o
ff
cfl
M
PQ
..
o
cu
4-1
cfl
c
r-l
e
H
r-l
Ed
e
o
CO
CO
d)
06
o
cu
4J
CO
r-l
Ed
o
CO
CO
o
cu
4J
CO
c
Cd
e
o
CO
CO
cfl
c
Ed
c
o
CO
cfl
CO i--
^C3 pJ
4J CO |
3 CD 4-1
e * co
O 4-1
P CO CO
U-l P T-l
CU r-l
CO CO
P 3 CU
cu -c
CO r-l
3 (0 d
H CO
r-l p CJ
CO 4J
rJ CO CO
P 3 co
4J "O CU
co d 4-1
3 -H 4-1
TJ
513 s .
CU CO O T3
co cx co cu
CO 3 CO -o
42 O CO -H
4J p P >
60 O
U-i p p
O <4-l CO cx
CJ
CO
cu
rJ C
e o
T-1 !-)
SCO 4-1
CO
C
O CO
l-l
CO CX
e x
CO CU
CO
H tO
4-1
CO CO
d 4=
4J
H CO
i-( 3
cu e
P co P co
O 4-1 O
<4-i p U-l CO
C U-i T3 -O
O U-l CU
CO CU
C
CO
CO CO
CU >, C P
P CU T4
e
CO
CO P !-( 4-1
43 3
CU
CO
H CO CU 00
cu
4J
o
2-7
------- An error occurred while trying to OCR this image.
-------
discharge nondomestic industrial wastewater to the POTW. Data from the table
can be organized in several formats:
By SIC categories
By specific pollutants entering the POTW system
By POTW system.
The example in Table 2.3 illustrates grouping by SIC code. Depending on the
format selected, the table can be used to identify industries subject to cate-
gorical standards, pollutants subject to local discharge limitations, or the
treatment plant to which an industrial user discharges. To assist you in
compiling these data, Appendix D presents the priority pollutants commonly
found in the discharges of categorical industries, the SIC codes for indus-
tries affected by categorical standards, and a listing of generally accepted
detection limits for the analysis of the priority pollutants.
2.4.1 Industrial Classification Scheme
At this stage of your pretreatment program development, it may be helpful
to group lUs according to a classification scheme. A classification scheme is
not required for the submission, but can be very useful for establishing moni-
toring, permitting, and administrative procedures. lUs can be classified by
factors such as type of industry, flow rate, and the character of their waste.
One suggested classification scheme involves a permit system and divides
industries into the following three groups:
Group 1: Major or significant industries, defined as any industry
that:
- Is subject to categorical standards
- Discharges a nondomestic wastestream of 25,000 gallons per day
(0.025 mgd) or more
- Contributes a nondomestic wastestream which makes up 5 percent or
more of the average dry weather hydraulic or organic (BOD, TSS,
etc.) capacity of the treatment plant
- Has a reasonable potential, in the opinion of the POTW Supervisor,
to adversely affect the POTW treatment plant (inhibition, pass-
through of pollutants, sludge contamination, or endangerment of
POTW workers).
2-9
-------
These industries would be regulated individually and have specific
effluent limitations (including conventional pollutants, where neces-
sary) placed on their discharges. They should also be monitored and
inspected periodically to ensure compliance with their limitations.
Group 2: Minor IDs , defined as small industries and some commercial
users (restaurants, auto repair shops, etc.) whose individual dis-
charges do not significantly impact the treatment system, degrade
receiving water quality, or contaminate sludge. Industries that have
the potential to discharge a nondomestic or process wastestream, but
at the present time discharge only sanitary waste, may also be
included in this group. However, this group does not contain any
categorical industries. Industries in this classification may be
included in a general permit system and occasionally monitored and
inspected to determine if their status has changed. If wastestreams
from any of these users or a group of these IDs becomes a problem, the
POTW may require a general permit for all Ills in that group or may
wish to change their classification to a significant or major IU.
Group 3: Insignificant IDs, defined as those that have been elimi-
nated from further consideration. These include industries that do
not discharge to the POTW, or do not have any reasonable chance of
discharging a nondomestic wastestreara to the POTW.
2.4.2 Industrial Waste Survey Data Management
In conducting the IWS, a POTW (especially a large one with many indus-
trial users) may generate a great quantity of data that must be summarized and
readily accessible. To manage this information, you will need to establish a
data management system, either by developing a new filing system, expanding
your current filing system, or using a computerized management information
system. For large POTWs, a computer may be the most accurate means to main-
tain and update IU information because of the varied capabilities it offers,
such as:
Accepting IWS data
Printing labels for mailing out questionnaires, notices, etc.
Tracking the status of each mailed questionnaire
Storing survey responses in an accessible manner
Providing aggregate data statistics
Incorporating data from future monitoring programs.
Chapter 6 of this manual also discusses data management needs
you might encounter as you develop the pretreatment program.
2-10
-------
2.5 IWS INFORMATION FOR THE PROGRAM SUBMISSION
To adequately document the IWS and assist the Approval Authority in
reviewing your program, the submission should include the following:
Sources used to compile a comprehensive (master) list of IDs
Methods used for the survey (questionnaire, site visit, telephone,
etc.)
A copy of the questionnaire and the letter sent to the industries
including dates the forms were sent (if questionnaire was used)
A description of follow-up actions taken by the POTW to obtain
properly completed survey forms from lUs, and the response rate for
the entire survey (including industries that did not return completed
survey forms despite follow-up actions)
A master list of all industries discharging to the treatment plant
that:
- Indicates which industries were eliminated from the survey and the
criteria used to eliminate them
- Summarizes IWS results including a list of IDs affected by the
program, a classification of these users (either by SIC code,
industrial category, or other appropriate scheme), and a list of
pollutants known or suspected to be discharged from each IU. Where
available, information on the concentrations of these pollutants
should also be presented.
These two items can appear either separately or together (as a master
list).
2-11
-------
3. LEGAL AUTHORITY
The ability to develop and implement a successful local pretreatment
program depends on adequate legal authority at the local level. The legal
authorities that your local government must have to implement the pretreatment
program are listed in Section 403.8(f)(l) of the General Pretreatment Regu-
lations. To summarize, the POTW must be able to:
Deny or condition new or increased contributions of pollutants, or
changes in the nature of the pollutants discharged to the POTW
Require compliance with applicable pretreatment standards and require-
ments by IDs
Control, through permit, contract, or other means, the contribution to
the POTW by each IU
Require the development of a compliance schedule by each IU, and the
submission of all notices and self-monitoring reports as necessary to
assure compliance
Carry out all inspection, surveillance, and monitoring procedures to
determine compliance independent of information supplied by the IU
Obtain remedies for noncompliance, including the ability to seek
injunctive relief, civil or criminal penalties, and/or collect
liquidated damages
Obtain effective summary relief from industrial waste discharges that
endanger public health, the environment, or POTW operations
Comply with the confidentiality requirements and limitations on data
restrictions specified in 40 CFR 403.14.
3.1 REQUIRED LEGAL AUTHORITIES
Section 403.8(f)(l)(i-vii) of the General Pretreatment Regulations states
the specific legal authorities required in your ordinance to implement and
enforce a pretreatment program. After reviewing these legal authorities
(summarized below), you may find that the community needs a new sewer use
ordinance or that you must make significant modifications to your present
ordinance. For these reasons, EPA's model ordinance is included in Appendix
I. The model ordinance is intended only as a guide, indicating the legal
3-1
-------
authorities that should be included in an ordinance. Your local ordinance
should be specifically tailored to the procedures that will be used to
administer and enforce your local pretreatment program. The following
sections briefly outline the required legal authorities.
3.1.1 Deny or Condition
The POTW must have the authority, according to 40 CFR 403.8(f)(l)(i) , to
deny or condition new or increased contributions of pollutants to the POTW by
ILJs where such contributions do not meet applicable pretreatment standards and
requirements, or could cause the POTW to violate its NPDES permit. This means
the POTW must have the power to regulate the discharge of pollutants that
cause pass-through, interference, or sludge contamination problems, or that
exceed Federal categorical standards. The ordinance or other written docu-
mentation that provides the authority to effectively control such discharges
by Ills satisfies this requirement.
The ordinance should also include a general prohibition of unauthorized
(or unpermitted) discharges and the authority to deny or place conditions on
discharges that change in character or volume (i.e., a permit that can be
modified on notice of changed industrial discharges). You may also find it
useful to include a specific provision requiring lUs to provide timely notice
of any substantial change in the quantity or quality of their industrial waste
discharge to the POTW.
3.1.2 Compliance with Pretreatment Standards
The authority to require compliance by lUs with applicable pretreatment
standards and requirements must be stated in your ordinance, according to
40 CFR 403.8(f)(l)(ii). The POTW must be able to prohibit the introduction of
pollutants that pass through or interfere with the operation or performance of
the treatment works, and must be able to enforce national categorical pre-
treatment standards (as they are promulgated), prohibited discharge standards,
and any local limits.
3-2
-------
A POTW must be able to require compliance with the categorical pretreat-
raent standards as they are promulgated. The ordinance should explicitly
reference categorical pretreatment regulations and standards as an indication
that they have been fully incorporated and made enforceable by the ordinance.
Since not all categorical standards have been promulgated, they are not likely
to appear fully in an ordinance. Still, the ordinance should state that these
standards, once promulgated, shall apply to Ills. A possible mechanism for
applying such standards is as a permit or contract condition.
Prohibited discharge standards must be enumerated in your ordinance. In
exceptional instances where this is not possible, standards can be imposed as
permit or contract conditions. Each of the prohibitions must be specified.
General language is usually sufficient in establishing prohibited discharge
standards. However, there are a few special cases which may require explana-
tion in the submission. For example, if an IU end-of-pipe heat limitation is
set at a temperature higher than 104°F (as is often the case) , your submission
should include a technical justification showing that the higher end-of-pipe
heat limitation will not cause the temperature at the treatment plant influent
to exceed the prohibited discharge standard of 104°F. In addition, it is
beneficial to the POTW if the ordinance explicitly prohibits dilution as a
means of meeting pollutant concentration limits set in categorical pretreat-
ment standards and provides the accompanying authority to impose mass effluent
limits. This authority should be extended to noncategorical industrial users.
You must also have the legal authority to establish local effluent limits
for industries that discharge to your treatment plant. Typically, local dis-
charge limits apply to noncategorical significant industries and those indus-
tries for which categorical standards have not yet been promulgated. Any
generic authority to establish local limits must be included in the ordinance.
You may set local limits by industrial category, by pollutant, or by individu-
al industrial facility. Although the ordinance can include specific numerical
limits, the POTW is often allowed more flexibility if the limits are specified
in the permit. This allows the POTW the flexibility to modify the limits, if
necessary, to protect its treatment plant operation, or sludge or water
3-3
-------
quality. If categorical standards do not afford adequate protection for the
POTW, you should establish local limits more stringent than categorical
standards.
If your ordinance allows the POTW to form special agreements with lUs to
accept industrial waste discharges that otherwise do not conform to effluent
limits contained in the ordinance, this special agreements provision must not
allow the waiver of national categorical standards and prohibited discharge
standards. Local standards may be waived, but national standards may not,
unless this waiver is granted by mechanisms established under the General
Pretreatment Regulations (such as removal credits, fundamentally different
factors variances, or net/gross calculations).
3.1.3 Control Mechanism
Under 40 CFR 403.8(f)(!)(iii) , the POTW must have the authority to con-
trol, through permit, contract, order, or similar means, the contribution to
the POTW from each IU to ensure compliance with applicable pretreatment stan-
dards and requirements. A POTW must be able to control the discharge of each
industry even when that industry is located in an outlying jurisdiction. It
is strongly recommended that a control mechanism, such as a permit system, be
established for the program and then described in your submission. A contrac-
tual mechanism, whereby the POTW provides its services subject to mutually
agreeable terms, is also acceptable. Another acceptable control technique is
an administrative order. Each of these mechanisms establishes a legal frame-
work for controlling the volume and constituents discharged by an industry.
For larger systems, a permit system to administer and enforce pretreat-
ment standards and requirements may be very efficient. This permit system
would employ discharge permits, rather than connection permits. The distinc-
tion is that a connection permit merely allows individuals to hook up to the
sewer system, similar to a building license or construction permit, while a
discharge or sewer use permit regulates continuing use of the sewer system and
places conditions on discharges. You will find a permit system most effective
if it contains the following components:
3-4
-------
Permit application - used to collect pertinent data; often appended to
final industrial discharge permit
Limited duration - preferably no more than five years; allows periodic
review of discharge conditions
Non-transferability - any transfer of a discharge permit, at a
minimum, should be subject to POTW approval
Modification - allows incorporation of categorical standards and any
local effluent limits necessary to correct operational problems at the
POTW; useful in dealing with noncompliance
Conditions - conditions for discharge should be clearly stated in the
discharge permit
Revocation - excellent enforcement tool; a permit system can be used
effectively to enforce against detrimental activities besides illegal
waste discharges (e.g., falsification of self-monitoring reports,
tampering with monitoring equipment, or refusal to allow timely access
to industrial premises).
A discharge permit system should be flexible to allow modification of
discharge conditions to correct any operational problems at the POTW, to
accommodate changes in environmental regulations, and to reflect changes in an
industrial process. However, an industrial discharge permit should never give
excessive legal right to discharge, as may occur, for example, if permits are
issued for indefinite duration or made freely transferable without the need
for POTW approval. A sample permit can be found in Appendix J.
3.1.4 Compliance Schedules/Reporting Requirements
Under 40 CFR 403.8(f)(1)(iv) , the POTW must have the authority to require
(1) the development of a compliance schedule by each IU for the installation
of technology required to meet applicable pretreatment standards and require-
ments, and (2) the submission of all notices and self-monitoring reports from
Ills as are necessary to assess and assure compliance by industries with pre-
treatment standards and requirements, including, but not limited to, the
reports required in 40 CFR 403.12. The specific requirements of 403.12 can be
found in Appendix C, which contains a copy of the General Pretreatment
Regulations.
3-5
-------
3.1.4.1 Compliance Schedules
Your POTW must have the authority to establish and enforce deadlines for
the installation by an IU of any pretreatment facilities or technology needed
to meet applicable pretreatment standards. These conditions should include
time limits to ensure that progress is made over time. A permit system allows
this requirement to be easily implemented.
3.1.4.2 Reporting Requirements
Your POTW must have the authority to require its lUs to submit self-
monitoring reports. This authority must encompass any reporting required of
categorical industries, including baseline monitoring reports, compliance
schedule progress reports, compliance reports on categorical standards dead-
lines, periodic self-monitoring reports, and any other applicable reporting
requirement. A POTW must also have the authority to require lUs to notify it
promptly upon the discharge of any slug load that may contribute to an inter-
ference at the treatment facility. It is also helpful if you establish penal-
ties for any industrial actions that affect the integrity of monitoring
procedures, including falsification of self-monitoring reports or tampering
with monitoring equipment and methods.
3.1.5 Inspection, Sampling, and Monitoring
The POTW must have the authority, as required by 40 CFR 403.8(f)(l)(v),
to carry out all inspection, surveillance, and monitoring procedures necessary
to determine compliance or noncompliance with applicable standards and
requirements independent of information supplied by lUs. Your POTW must have
the authority to enter industrial premises for the purposes of inspecting,
sampling, and monitoring industrial waste discharges, and reviewing and copy-
ing any necessary records. The POTW also must be able to set up and maintain
its monitoring equipment at the industrial facility for a sufficient length of
time to complete such monitoring.
POTW officials should be allowed to enter the premises at any reasonable
time, not only during normal working hours. This additional flexibility may
be necessary for handling emergency situations, suspected illegal non-work
3-6
-------
hour discharges, and cases of suspected tampering with monitoring equipment.
No language in your ordinance should require the POTW to afford prior notice
of inspection, sampling, and monitoring activities. Random inspection, sam-
pling, and monitoring should be done with the least possible prior notifica-
tion. Although prior notice may be given to ensure cooperation, it is not
always a good idea and should not be required in the ordinance. In accordance
with Section 308 of the Clean Water Act, a POTW should be able to require
installation of monitoring facilities and equipment, and prescribe monitoring
methods.
3.1.6 Legal Remedies
According to 40 CFR 403.8(f)(l)(vi)(A), two remedies for noncompliance
must be available to the POTW: (1) injunctive relief, and (2) civil or crimi-
nal penalties. The POTW must have the right to seek injunctive relief against
Ills violating pretreatment standards and requirements. This authority may be
demonstrated either by including specific language in your ordinance or by
discussing in the attorney's letter (described below in Section 3.2) the
existing case law or statutory authority that can be used to support a suit
for injunctive relief against pretreatment violations.
If your POTW has police powers, it must establish the authority to
enforce civil or criminal penalties against lUs that violate pretreatraent
standards or requirements. Your ordinance should contain provisions granting
the POTW authority to impose fines or penalties. EPA recommends a fine of at
least $300 per violation per day to act as a sufficient deterrent. If State
law limits the amount of the fines or penalties you can impose, you may want
to consider alternative courses of action, such as pursuing amendments to
State statutory law to allow for greater fines and penalties. If State law
does not permit your municipality to impose civil or criminal penalties, EPA
regulations specify that the municipality must enter into contracts which
provide for liquidated damages for violations of pretreatment standards and
requirements. However, this contractual mechanism may prove ineffective for
two reasons. First, courts generally do not enforce penalty clauses in con-
tracts. The recommended liquidated damages clause would actually be a penalty
3-7
-------
substitute and therefore unenforceable. Second, even if a clause is enforce-
able, most POTWs will not want to limit the amount recoverable from an indus-
try if substantial damages occur at the treatment plant.
You may also find that establishing an administrative/adjudicative
mechanism (such as a show-cause hearing) to resolve conflicts between IDs and
the POTW will be helpful in maintaining a good relationship with the indus-
tries in the area. Effective and equitable administrative proceedings should
help expedite the enforcement of pretreatment standards and requirements.
3.1.7 Emergency Relief
Under 40 CFR 403.8(f)(l)(vi)(B), the POTW must have the authority, upon
notification to the 1U of a violation, to halt immediately any actual or
threatened discharge to the POTW that may present an imminent endangerment to
public health, the environment, or the POTW. Where the health or welfare of
persons is threatened, notification should be immediate, such as by telephone
call. Where the environment or POTW operations are threatened, the violating
user must be notified and afforded the opportunity to terminate the discharge
and mitigate any damage.
Your ordinance can provide this authority by allowing the POTW to suspend
wastewater treatment service and/or discharge permits in emergency situations,
and by requiring the discharger to immediately stop or eliminate the contribu-
tion upon notification of the suspension. The ordinance must further provide
that, if the discharger fails to comply voluntarily with a suspension order,
the POTW may take any steps necessary, including severance of the sewer con-
nection, to prevent further discharge. If your ordinance does not provide
this authority, the authority may still be available to the POTW as a valid
exercise of its police powers. In this case, the POTW attorney's statement
should explain how the authority is a part of the POTW's police powers.
3.1.8 Confidentiality
Under 40 CFR 403.8(f)(l)(vii) , the POTW must comply with the confiden-
tiality requirements of 40 CFR 403.14 which states that effluent data provided
3-8
-------
to the POTW be available to the public without restriction. While most confi-
dential data can be protected, the POTW must be able to release effluent data,
such as:
Information necessary to determine the identity, amount, frequency,
concentration, temperature, or other characteristics of any pollutant
discharged
A description of the manner or rate of operation of any source to the
extent necessary to determine what was discharged under an applicable
standard or limitation
A general description of the location and nature of the source to the
extent necessary to distinguish it from others.
Data or information on research, products, processes, and methods need
only be released if necessary to disclose that a source is in or out of com-
pliance, or to allow a determination of feasibility/attainability of a stan-
dard or limitation. Information that is proprietary, a trade secret, or
otherwise confidential can be withheld provided it is not "effluent data" as
defined above. A good approach for your POTW to take in providing this con-
fidentiality requirement is to state in your ordinance that effluent data are
considered nonconfidential.
3.1.9 Multijurisdictional Issues
Very often, POTWs serve more than one political jurisdiction. In these
multijurisdictional situations, the agency or entity holding the NPDES permit
for the discharge of municipal wastewater has the primary responsibility to
enforce pretreatment standards throughout the service area. This may or may
not present a problem, depending on how your POTW is structured. If a special
sewer district encompassing your entire service area has been created and the
sewer district has rulemaking authority sufficient to implement a centralized
pretreatment program, there is no problem. However, when the sewer district's
powers are limited, your POTW must supplement its existing legal authorities
by negotiating and signing an interjurisdictional pretreatment agreement with
each contributing jurisdiction containing a categorical or significant IU.
3-9
-------
On the other hand, if your POTW does not involve a special sewer district
and it services industries that lie beyond the municipal boundaries and thus
beyond the reach of your municipal ordinances, a mechanism to control the
discharges of these industries must be created. In order to control the dis-
charges of these industries in outlying jurisdictions, there must be either:
(1) a contract between each industry and the POTW that conditions the indus-
try's receipt of sewer service upon meeting the POTW1s requirements; or (2) an
agreement between the POTW and the outlying jurisdiction where the industry is
located. The agreement with the outlying jurisdiction should specify that the
jurisdiction will enforce the POTW's requirements or permit the POTW itself to
do so. This agreement should address the following:
Ordinance or regulation
Local discharge limit mechanism
Pretreatment program administration
Records transference
Inspection and sampling authority
Enforcement.
In a multijurisdictional situation, your program submission must include the
pretreatment agreement(s) and the ordinance(s) from any outlying jurisdic-
tions.
3.2 ATTORNEY'S STATEMENT
40 CFR 403.9(b)(l) requires a statement in the final submission from the
POTW attorney, city solicitor, or another city official acting in a comparable
capacity. The individual who signs this letter should be the person who is
responsible for bringing an enforcement action in court. The statement must:
1. Identify the provision of the legal authority under section
403.8(f)(l) that provides a basis for each procedure under section
403.8(f)(2)
2. Identify the manner in which the POTW will implement the program re-
quirements set forth in section 403.8, including the means by which
pretreatment standards will be applied to individual IUs (e.g., by
order, permit, ordinance, contract, etc.)
3-10
-------
3. Identify how the POTW intends to ensure compliance with pretreatment
standards and requirements and to enforce them in the event of
noncompliance by IDs.
The attorney's letter must specifically refer to the basic statutory authority
for the entire program, which is often a provision in State law authorizing
your municipality to enact certain local ordinances or to enter into con-
tracts. It must also cite the particular ordinance provision for each author-
ity listed in 403.8(f)(l).
The attorney must specify the control mechanism to be employed in apply-
ing pretreatment standards to lUs. Items such as permits, contracts, and
orders should be mentioned. A general description of the 403.8(f)(2) pro-
cedures and relevant control mechanisms should also be included. A detailed
description is not necessary in the letter as long as such detail is contained
elsewhere in the submission. The attorney's statement should refer to the
portions of the submission describing the procedures and control mechanisms.
The letter must also identify how the POTW intends to ensure compliance.
Again, it is not necessary for the attorney to include a detailed explanation
of compliance procedures, but the enforcement procedures that will be followed
should be generally described and reference made to the portion of the submis-
sion detailing the compliance procedures. An example attorney's statement is
provided in Appendix K.
When enforcement is the responsibility of more than one jurisdiction, the
statement must explain how the other jurisdictions fit into the program and
how your POTW will ensure that other jurisdictions carry out their responsi-
bilities (see Section 3.1.9, Multijurisdictional Issues). Typically, multi-
jurisdictional arrangements are enforced through a joint powers agreement. In
this case, the attorney's statement should specify remedies available to your
POTW if the agreement is breached. Attorneys' letters are required for each
jurisdiction if several jurisdictions are involved.
3-11
-------
3.3 LEGAL AUTHORITY INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR THE PROGRAM SUBMISSION
The legal authority section of your final pretreatment program submission
must include the following:
A statement from the city solicitor, a city official acting in a com-
parable capacity, or the city's independent legal counsel, that the
POTW has the authority to carry out the program [403.9(b)(l)].
A copy of any statute, ordinance, regulation, contract, agreement, or
other authority that will be relied on by the POTW to administer the
program [403.9(b)(2)].
A statement reflecting the endorsement of or approval by the local
boards or bodies responsible for supervising and/or funding the
program [403.9(b)(2>].
Any additional documents required in multijurisdictional situations
for administration of the program [403.9(b)(2)].
3-12
-------
4. TECHNICAL INFORMATION
Technical information provides the basis for a significant portion of
your pretreatment program. It enables you to quantify industrial pollutants
within the treatment system, establish local effluent limits for IDs, and
develop an effective compliance monitoring system. This chapter focuses on
the technical information you will need to operate your program, to develop
local effluent limits, and to include in the program submission. In addition,
this chapter, along with Appendix L, provides you with a detailed methodology
to establish local discharge limitations for your IUs as part of the pre-
treatment program.
In order to develop this technical information, your POTW will want to
compile the following information:
Descriptive background information about the POTW and its service area
Existing POTW performance data for conventional, nonconventional, and
priority pollutants (including historic data on plant problems)
Data on the sampling and analysis performed at the treatment plant and
at the industries
Limitations placed on the POTW's effluent and sludge
Methodology for determining local effluent limitations.
4.1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION
The purpose of including background information with your submission is
to provide the reviewer with an understanding of your specific treatment
plant, its service area, and the problems it may have encountered with indus-
trial pollutants. This information should present an overall view of your
POTW, including:
The number of treatment plants, their locations, and service area.
map would be very useful, particularly if the system is large.
The receiving streams for your POTW's discharge.
4-1
-------
A description of your treatment facilities and processes. It may be
helpful to also include a schematic flow diagram of each plant.
Design flow and average daily flow.
Sludge production rate.
Sludge disposal method.
Percent industrial flow.
Indication of whether storm drains contribute to your POTW1s influent.
A discussion of planned facility modifications or additions.
If there is more than one treatment plant, information should be gathered and
submitted for each plant. This information can be brief, but it is important
that it be thorough enough to enable the reviewer to become familiar with your
POTW.
4.2 PLANT PERFORMANCE AND INDUSTRIAL DATA
It is also important for you to identify operating problems known or
suspected to have been caused by industrial discharges at the treatment plant.
This information will enable you to determine the pollutants for which efflu-
ent limits are needed. If your treatment plant has never experienced opera-
ting problems, it may still be helpful for you to look at the susceptibility
of your plant to pollutants found in industrial discharges to the system (as
described in Section 4.3).
A logical procedure to identify present or potential operating problems
is to first review past and present operation and maintenance data for:
Reductions in removal efficiency
Degradation of the collection system facilities
Emergencies such as sewer plugging, excessive corrosion, unusual
odors, explosion hazards, explosions, or fires
Violation of NPDES permit conditions
Water quality degradation or fish kills at the POTW's effluent
discharge location
Sludge contamination.
4-2
-------
Careful examination of the operating design and history of your POTW may
provide evidence for the cause of these problems, whether from equipment
failures, improper operation and maintenance, or industrial discharges. Your
POTW's pretreatment program submission should indicate the number and fre-
quency of any upsets, problems, or violations during a recent period (usually
18 months), their probable cause, and remedial actions taken.
Specific data, if available, that should be provided in your pretreatraent
program submission are:
Summary of 12 to 18 months of influent and effluent conventional
pollutant data (BOD, TSS, pH, temperature). If priority or noncon-
ventional pollutant data are available, this should also be provided.
Sludge pollutant analyses. Any sludge data that are available should
be included. If the data are presented in liquid form (units in mg/1
or ug/1), the percent solids content of the sludge at the time of
analysis should also be included to enable calculation of the pol-
lutant content of the dry sludge (in mg/kg). The results of any
Extraction Procedure (EP) toxicity tests or other sludge analyses
should also be provided.
Priority pollutant analyses of any other locations sampled within the
POTW collection system, treatment plant, or at industries.
Any other data pertinent to the pretreatment program, such as
operating data that demonstrate plant upsets or inhibition due to
industrial contributions.
4.3 SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS TO DETERMINE FATE AND EFFECT
Sampling and analysis of the POTW treatment plant influent, effluent and
sludge will be necessary to quantify the extent of pollutant pass-through,
interference, inhibition, and sludge contamination, and to provide a basis for
establishing local industrial discharge limitations. This sampling program
should be designed to obtain quantitative information regarding the concen-
tration, loads, and fluctuations of specific pollutants (particularly priority
pollutants) identified from the IWS.
One method to determine the presence of toxic pollutants in the treatment
system is to conduct an initial test of the influent, effluent, and sludge for
the 126 priority pollutants, using 24-hour composite samples. Although these
4-3
-------
analyses can be expensive (approximately $800-$1200 per sample according to
estimates obtained in March 1983 from commercial laboratories), they provide
important information to help confirm or deny the presence of significant
amounts of toxics entering the POTW system. There are several methods which
can be used to reduce the financial burden of such analyses. A common method
is to limit the number of pollutants analyzed based on the results of the IWS
(e.g., only those pollutants that are known or suspected to be discharged by
lUs). The POTW may recover some of the cost for these analyses by establish-
ing an industrial user charge system. Details on how to establish such a
system are given in Chapter 7 of this manual.
The IWS data, existing treatment plant and industrial data, and the POTW
treatment plant priority pollutant analysis will indicate which pollutants are
of potential concern and which industries discharge these pollutants. You
will then have the necessary data to determine the pollutants and industries
on which to concentrate your subsequent sampling and analysis efforts. To
further characterize the fate and effect of priority pollutants within the
treatment plant, your sampling program may include additional components, such
as:
Sampling of significant industries to quantify industrial pollutant
loading
Sampling of nonindustrial interceptors within the collection system to
determine the background concentration and loading from nonindustrial
sources
Sampling within the treatment plant itself to determine, via mass
balance calculation, the fate of the specific pollutants within the
treatment plant, and to determine the areas within the system which
are most heavily affected by the pollutants in question
Sampling and analysis of treatment plant sludge for priority pollu-
tants when your POTW uses landspreading, unsecured landfills, or ocean
dumping for disposal of sludge
Sampling and analysis of sludge leachate when the POTW uses a sanitary
landfill or landspreading
Sampling and analysis of ash resulting from incineration of treatment
plant sludge.
4-4
-------
The above components are not specifically required for your program
submission, but are suggested as a way to obtain the most complete infor-
mation on pollutants of concern in your treatment system.
4.4 LIMITATIONS ON POTW EFFLUENT AND SLUDGE
This section addresses the various limitations that may be placed on the
disposal of your POTWs effluent and sludge by Federal and State agencies. It
is best for you to gather as much of this information as possible in order to
develop local discharge limitations or standards to protect your treatment
plant and receiving water, and to prevent sludge contamination.
4.4.1 Water Quality Limitations
Your NPDES permit places limits on the amount of conventional pollutants
you may discharge to the receiving water. In a few cases, it may also include
limits for toxic pollutants. To ascertain whether your POTW is discharging
excessive amounts of toxic pollutants into the receiving stream, you may want
to obtain information on your receiving stream, such as:
Water quality standards
Water quality criteria
Background pollutant data.
A "water quality standard" represents an actual established limit or goal
that must be met at all times throughout a given receiving water segment. A
"water quality criterion" represents a recommended limit based on the best
toxicity data currently available. In general, water quality criteria do not
take local conditions into account, as do water quality standards. Therefore,
where water quality standards exist for a pollutant, they should be used in
lieu of water quality criteria (see Appendix L). Where no standards exist,
consult the Federal water quality criteria. Water quality standards are en-
forceable, while water quality criteria are not.
State water quality standards can be obtained by contacting the State
water quality control agency. In general, most States have established water
4-5
-------
quality standards for conventional pollutants only. Few water quality
standards have been developed for toxic pollutants. For pollutants where no
State water quality standards or criteria exist, the Federal water quality
criteria should be obtained. These water quality criteria are published in
the following documents:
Federal Register; EPA Water Quality Criteria Documents, November 28,
1980, Part V, Availability; this document is out of print but is
summarized in Appendix L.
Quality Criteria for Water: an EPA publication known as "The Redbook"
and available from: National Technical Information Service (NTIS),
5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161 (703-487-4650). The
publication may also be available from Regional EPA Offices or local
libraries.
The summary of the criteria from the Federal Register (November 28, 1980) in
Appendix L should be consulted first because it updates the criteria from "The
Redbook." For pollutants not addressed in this issue of the Federal Register,
the EPA "Redbook" should be consulted.
4.4.2 Sludge Limitation
Certain information should be collected to: (1) determine the need for
industrial discharge limits to prevent sludge contamination, and (2) establish
these local limits. Such information includes:
The method of sludge treatment and disposal for each plant. If the
sludge is or will be disposed of by more than one method, each method
should be described for each plant's sludge.
Any limitations on the pollutant content of the sludge for the dis-
posal methods reported above.
Sludge analysis data, such as EP toxicity tests, pollutants analysis
of wet or dry sludge, etc. If the sludge data are reported in liquid
form (mg/1, not mg/g), you should be sure to include the percent
solids content of the sludge sample so that the pollutant content of
dry sludge can be calculated, if necessary. This is particularly
important where sludge is to be spread on land.
4-6
-------
If your sludge is or will be disposed by land application or will be sold or
given away for use as fertilizer or soil conditioner, the following additional
information should be provided:
A description of the area that will receive the sludge, including type
of crops grown (if any), type of soil, soil analysis, cation exchange
capacity, total area available, and general location.
The current or expected sludge application rate and calculated rate of
application of regulated pollutants contained within the sludge.
Pollutant(s) which currently limit rate of sludge application should
also be identified.
4.5 METHODOLOGY FOR DETERMINING LOCAL DISCHARGE LIMITATIONS
After you have described your treatment system, the characteristics of
the pollutants associated with that system, and the restrictions placed on
these pollutants, the next step is to determine what local discharge limits
need to be established. Table 4.1 is an example worksheet designed to assist
you in this process by identifying those industrial discharges that:
Contain priority pollutants
Interfere with or inhibit the operation of treatment facilities
Pass through the treatment system and adversely affect the quality of
the receiving stream
Render POTW sludge unfit for land application or landfill disposal
Create a hazard for workers in the treatment facility.
Based on the results of the IWS, the data developed in the previous
sections, and the references listed, you can complete the worksheet as
instructed. List the significant IUs served by your treatment system in the
first column of the table. Check the characteristics of their discharged
waste against the items listed if their discharge is known or suspected to
have caused any of these problems at the POTW. If any of the columns are
marked "yes," then local discharge limitations will be needed.
4-7
-------
C/> ^s
Z JJ
0 0
Wfft
»V
H P
<; u
HA
2
M 3
S co
M. J
^x
>J
CTI ^r in
J en o % CM d
S rH CO -H
2 e cu JJ co
w o j2 e co
E-l JJ « CO O " UJ iH
CO iH U-l M
tb TJ cu cu JJ
CO i CO
rH CO JJ 'H O 9
cc P e co is
1-1 cu co " e
Ul CO JJ 0) « H
jj D 3 > co
w r-i o cu J-1
3 rH I-H e o e
O CO O CU iH CO
p IH a, S-i VM O
M M v-< U-I i-1
JJ 0 0 UH
14-1 CO CO JJ iH
o 3 jj - e
13 C -O CO 60
M e co cu »-i -H
4) M JJ C CU W3
.0 3 bO *J
g U-I r-l TH CO U-I
3 O i-H CO CU O
C O CU fl
S-; O.T3 JJ U
rH CU CU
CO 4= -D
O 3 3
HZ Z
CO
JJ
e
CO U-l
JJ 0 So.
3 co H co
r-l >> T) O (-1
rH C luj &( 0)
O < CO A!
CM N M u
CU CO O O
CU JJ S3 fa JS
j=; co
JJ 01
u
ii . r \
**H ^**
iH
S M
: CO 0
O CU 0) fa o-
e l-i S bO T3
: JJ H -O JJ C
CO O 3 ^ CO
M cu CM I-H u-i >j
o JJ co we
co e o
s CO CU
CO S rH
CU ,£
>» C3 O
: M p
CU
|J CU
CU J2 CU bO
^JJCO Ol 03 S C c-
CO CU CO JJ H -r< a
rj r* f* Lj CJ (^ ^ m
M M **- r-l w t^J ^ vu
< -H H CU u-i 0) >J
T3 U-i c o JJ
% cu
w o
iH Q 01
l-i jj C
O JJ CO -iH x-v
IH e co o) JJ
Ij CO S u W
CM jj e -H
3 01 0 »J
4J rH 42 O ^
tO rH JJ
JT O
rz CM
CO
rH >
C
CO CU
jr
jj CM
O)
>-.
co
CO JJ JJ
rl O CU
Q PM S
D
M
JJ
e
CO
U-l CJ
0 -H
U-l
0) iH
e c
CO bO
Z *H
w
S
0
CU
rH
rH
<
O
z
CO
cu
>-<
o
z
T3
CU
JJ
M
O
a
o>
u
cu
e
o
z
e
N
A
iH
Z
*
3
O
M
Z
u
M
M
O
»
3
CO
e
0
CO
<-£>
T3
>,
O
«
CO
CU
>*
CO
CU
>+
o
z
i-H
UH 00
o ^~.
vO
O
co co
O 0)
i-H T3
iH
tsO U-i
3 rH
rH 3
cr> en
M
o
A
D
CU
JJ
CO
cu
J CJ
e
Q rH
i CN ro
4-8
-------
If there are no IDs remaining after the subtractions at the top of Table
4.1, you may only need to establish minimum limits to protect the operating
integrity of your treatment plant. Stricter local limits will have to be
established for any industries that contribute to problems in the treatment
system or to water quality standards violations. In the event that a categor-
ical industry without a promulgated discharge standard contributes to a prob-
lem, local discharge limits should be established as needed to protect the
POTW. Upon promulgation of the respective categorical standard, the more
stringent of the two discharge limits (local or Federal) will apply. The text
of your pretreatrnent program submission should explain the basis for deciding
what local discharge limitations are required. The worksheet can be used as
part of this explanation. For example, the sample information presented in
Table 4.1 illustrates the potential need for a local discharge limitation on
chromium and sulfides.
4.5.1 Types of Standards
As discussed in Chapter 1, prohibited discharge standards and categorical
pretreatment standards must be established as part of the pretreatment pro-
gram. Prohibited discharge standards and categorical pretreatment standards
must be imposed on lUs by all POTWs. However, local effluent limits are also
necessary in several situations. They may be needed for industrial categories
where an interference or upset problem exists and categorical standards have
not been established or are not likely to be established. Local limits can
also be established to protect the operational integrity of the POTW, even if
an upset or interference problem does not exist. In addition, local limits
should be developed if existing categorical standards are not adequate to
protect POTW operations and facilities from any adverse impact associated with
industrial contributions.
Not all pollutants discharged to your treatment system can be controlled
or restricted. You will probably be able to control discharges from all lUs
and, to a limited extent, some commercial users. However, domestic users,
most commercial users, stormwater discharges to POTWs with combined sewer
systems, and any inflow/infiltration are, for all practical purposes, beyond
your control. Therefore, you may need to concentrate on controlling indus-
trial discharges when establishing local limits.
4-9
-------
4.5.2 General Procedure for Setting Local Limits
As stated above, local limits should be directed at correcting or
preventing problems at your POTW. In doing so, each toxic pollutant should be
considered separately since each pollutant can have a different impact on the
treatment system. The development of local discharge limits involves two
major steps: (1) the establishment of maximum allowable pollutant loads to
the treatment plant, and (2) the allocation of the maximum allowable load
among all existing and future IDs. The following sections provide a brief
overview of a general procedure for setting local effluent limits. A more
detailed explanation can be found in Appendix L.
4.5.2.1 Determining Allowable Loadings to the Plant
The following steps can be used to set a maximum allowable loading to
your plant:
Determine the influent mass loading (multiply concentration and flow
rate with an appropriate conversion factor)
Determine mass balance of each unit process including sludge handling
processes (follow the route of pollutant through the treatment pro-
cess)
Determine percent removal of the pollutant at each unit process and
the cumulative removal efficiencies at all previous treatment steps
combined
Establish the pollutant's critical or threshold concentration accept-
able to each unit process, the receiving stream, and sludge disposal
Back calculate the maximum acceptable influent loading in relation to
each unit process, using the in-plant back-calculating formula de-
scribed below:
Lp = Li
(1-Ep)
where: Lp = Desired Influent Concentration
Li = Criteria Concentration at Unit Operation
Ep = Reduction in Upstream Processes
Select the lowest limiting concentration as the acceptable maximum
influent concentration (maximum allowable mass loading).
4-10
-------
4.5.2.2 Allocation of Industrial Pollutant Loading
Before allocating the pollutant loading necessary to achieve the allow-
able influent concentration, a number of factors need to be considered. The
first group of factors relating to system or plant conditions includes the
amount of toxic pollutants already present in the water supply, the reduction
in the levels of certain pollutants in the collection system due to biodegra-
dation and volatilization, and the possibility of spills of raw materials at
certain industrial facilities. Allowances have to be made for all these
events when developing the exact pollutant reduction required.
Other allowances that also need to be considered during allocations are
service expansion and wastewater dilution. Service expansion can include
domestic contribution where future population growth could cause overloads of
compatible pollutants, and future industrial contribution. If land has been
zoned for industrial parks, POTWs must allocate a certain portion of the
allowable influent loading to this planned expansion. Dilution by domestic
wastewater, stormwater contribution in combined sewer systems, and infiltra-
tion/inflow contributions may cause pollutant concentrations to drop below the
allowable influent concentration. However, the amount or mass of pollutant in
the wastewater remains the same and will still affect sludge streams if
anaerobic digestion or sludge disposal is the controlling unit process for
local limitations development.
With full consideration of the above factors, allocation of discharge
limits to IDs can be calculated using categorical standards, proportion,
single concentration (or mass), or technology-based limitations. Generally,
the most stringent limit calculated from these methods is selected as the
discharge limit. Specific procedures for allocation of industrial discharge
limits are discussed in Appendix L.
4-11
-------
4.6 TECHNICAL INFORMATION FOR THE PROGRAM SUBMISSION
To assist the Approval Authority in reviewing your program, the technical
development aspects should be described by including the following information
in your submission:
Background information on your POTW and its service area
NPDES permit limitations
Description of prior instances of interference with POTW operations
attributable to industrial contributions, including:
- Lessening of treatment system's removal efficiency
- Degradation of the collection system
- Emergency conditions such as sewer plugging, unusual odors,
explosion hazards, fires, etc.
- Instances of POTW NPDES permit violations known or suspected to
have been caused by industrial waste interference.
Type of sludge disposal practices used at the treatment plant and
what effect, if any, industrial pollutants have on this sludge
disposal method, including:
- Description of current sludge disposal practices
- Description of anticipated sludge disposal practices
Sludge pollutant limits, other than conventionals, limited by
Federal, State, or local regulations.
Description of the nature and extent of your POTW sampling program,
including:
- Sampling of nonindustrial interceptors within the collection system
to determine background concentrations from nonindustrial sources
Sampling within the treatment plant itself of the influent, efflu-
ent, and sludge to determine, via mass balance calculation, the
fate of the specific pollutants within the treatment system
- Sampling of industrial users.
Data from this sampling program should be included in your submission.
A discussion of the methodology used for developing specific effluent
limitations for industries, and the actual local effluent limits
established.
4-12
-------
5. DESIGN OF MONITORING PROGRAM
The overall success of your pretreatment program depends on a compre-
hensive and properly designed local monitoring program. It is through your
monitoring activities that compliance with ordinance requirements is deter-
mined, user charges confirmed, and data generated for annual pretreatment pro-
gram reports and other reports required by EPA or the States. A monitoring
program also helps you to identify the IUs responsible for discharging pollu-
tants which are potentially harmful to the treatment plant and/or collection
system. In addition, the design and sophistication of a POTW monitoring pro-
gram is a major factor in determining the labor and resources needed to imple-
ment the local pretreatment program. For all of these reasons, it is very
important to structure this aspect of your program carefully.
5.1 TYPES OF MONITORING
Four types of monitoring can be used in your pretreatment program:
scheduled, unscheduled, demand, and industrial self-monitoring. An effective
POTW monitoring program incorporates all four types of monitoring. A discus-
sion of each type of monitoring follows.
5.1.1 Scheduled Monitoring
Scheduled monitoring involves the systematic sampling and comprehensive
inspection of significant industrial contributors to the POTW system in
accordance with a predetermined schedule. In determining a monitoring
schedule, the following considerations should be included:
A monitoring visit should be scheduled at least once per year for each
significant IU, or more often if resources allow.
Provisions should be made with the IU for on-site inspection of plant
operations to ensure that pretreatment facilities are being operated
properly and that no intentional dilution of wastewater is occurring.
Composite samples should be collected and flow rate measurements
performed during the sampling period. Grab samples may be used if
representativeness is ensured (i.e., the results can be used for
compliance purposes) .
5-1
-------
5.1.2 Unscheduled Monitoring
In addition to scheduled monitoring, the POTW should institute a less
formal type of compliance monitoring designed to provide an unannounced check
of industrial discharges to the POTW system. Unscheduled monitoring is used
to spotcheck randomly all sources within the collection system and is a
requirement of the Federal pretreatment regulations. Unannounced visits and
sampling are useful in verifying compliance, particularly for industries that
can easily and quickly alter their processes or operations to obtain more
favorable results. Essential elements of unscheduled monitoring include:
Monitoring performed on an unannounced basis, with the industry at
normal operation
One unscheduled monitoring event per year, at a minimum, for each
significant IU
A confidential schedule so that industry is not aware of when the
monitoring will occur; an IU should be notified immediately before a
monitoring event only when the sampling point is within the industry's
property
Use of grab samples and flow measurements, when possible
Inspection of plant operations and pretreatment activities may be
optional.
5.1.3 Demand Monitoring or Investigative Monitoring
Demand monitoring is conducted in response to a known or suspected vio-
lation discovered in a self-monitoring report, routine sampling trip, or by
public complaint. Additionally, any discharge of prohibited materials can
prompt demand monitoring. Demand monitoring means that when a violation is
found, sampling is initiated immediately. Specific occurrences which may
prompt demand monitoring at an industry are:
Contributions of explosive or corrosive materials or other prohibited
discharges to the sewer
Operating difficulties in the wastewater treatment system
Violation of the POTWs permit requirements
5-2
-------
Violation of pretreatment regulations by an IU as indicated by IU
self-monitoring or POTW monitoring of the IU.
5.1.4 Industrial Self-Monitoring
It may not be possible or advisable for your POTW to perform all of the
monitoring desired to ensure that the IU is complying with pretreatment re-
quirements. You have the option of requiring each significant IU to do its
own sampling and analysis, usually termed self-monitoring, and to have the
results of this self-monitoring sent to the POTW. Already under Federal pre-
treatment regulations, all categorical industries must self-monitor at least
twice per year. You should be aware that industrial self-monitoring alone
cannot be considered adequate to comply with pretreatment program require-
ments. It is most beneficial for the POTW to perform scheduled and unsched-
uled monitoring in order to verify monitoring data reported by lUs. However,
the incorporation of self-monitoring as an integral part of the overall moni-
toring program is encouraged, especially for small POTWs with limited
resources.
5.2 DETERMINATION OF MONITORING FREQUENCY
The most important questions to be answered in designing a monitoring
program are which lUs must be monitored, how often they should be monitored
and for what pollutants. It is suggested that all significant lUs affected by
Federal, State, and local pretreatment standards be visited and monitored by
the POTW at least two times each year: one scheduled visit and one unsched-
uled visit. You may decide, however, to conduct additional monitoring based
on such factors as:
Volume of the industrial discharge
Type and concentrations of pollutants in the discharge
Adequacy of treatment and expected variability of discharge levels
Industrial user has been known or suspected to cause POTW upsets or
operation and maintenance problems
Past history of noncompliance problems with the industry
5-3
-------
Type of resources (labor and equipment) available to the POTW.
However, when you determine a monitoring schedule, you should also consider
the self-monitoring requirements of industries regulated by categorical
standards.
The discharge volume from an industry can be used as one possible basis
for establishing minimum frequencies. An example of such a schedule is
presented below.
EXAMPLE MONITORING SCHEDULE
Industry Flow
(average gallons per day)
0 - 10,000
10,001 - 25,000
25,001 - 50,000
50,001 - 100,000
greater than 100,000
Monitoring Frequency
Once every six months
Once every three months
Once every two months
Once a month
Once every two weeks
These monitoring frequencies may be a combination of POTW scheduled and
unscheduled monitoring and industrial self-monitoring. Another monitoring
schedule is based on the expected variability in types and amounts of pollu-
tants discharged by industry.
The POTW may use either of these or similar schedules to determine
minimum monitoring frequency for its lUs. Where appropriate, more frequent
schedules may be required of significant IDs. Some factors that can play a
role in the scheduling of monitoring activities at industrial facilities are:
Seasonal production Often, industries may produce different
products at different times of the year, or may manufacture only
during a particular season of the year. All monitoring activities
should be scheduled during these times of production.
Daily production Some industries may run particular processes only
at certain times of the day or certain days of the week. POTWs should
5-4
-------
plan to monitor during those times of the day or on those days of the
week.
Once you have determined the frequency at which the POTW will conduct
monitoring, when it will monitor, and the requirements of its IUs for self-
monitoring, you should consider a management system for collecting, analyzing,
and maintaining all necessary results and information. Such a system will
involve a form or format for submitting and recording self-monitoring reports
which tracks both POTW monitoring and industrial self-monitoring frequencies
to ensure that all monitoring is done on schedule, and to identify instances
of noncompliance.
5.3 FIELD MONITORING STRATEGY
Field monitoring can be divided into two aspects: (1) the industrial
inspection and (2) the sample collection. The industrial site should be
inspected before samples are collected at the industry. Different personnel
are often involved in these two aspects of field monitoring. As a result,
sampling personnel may not always be very familiar with the IU. To remedy
this situation, the sampling team should review current inspection reports
in order to prepare appropriate sampling equipment, easily locate sampling
points, calibrate necessary instruments, and allot a reasonable amount of
time to perform the sampling.
5.3.1 Industrial Inspections
Before a POTW monitors an industry for the first time, the industry
should be notified and arrangements made for a tour of the facility to famil-
iarize POTW personnel with its operation. This tour will provide a better
understanding of specific industrial processes and their wastestreams. A
plant inspection report should be prepared during or immediately after the
initial visit. This report should encompass the following:
A sketch of the location of all wastewater effluent lines connecting
to the publicly-owned sewer system. The sketch should also include
the layout of major plant features. This sketch can be compared to
other sketches or plans submitted to the POTW as part of the IWS.
5-5
-------
A description of major product lines and processes within the plant.
A detailed description and appropriate sketches of existing pretreat-
ment facilities, including operating data, if available.
A list of pollutants which are or may be discharged into the IU
wastestream, with emphasis on materials limited or prohibited by the
POTW.
Identification of appropriate sampling location(s).
Identification of specific hazards, and the appropriate safety pro-
cedures to ensure POTW personnel safety during onsite monitoring
activities at the industry.
Besides producing information necessary for future sampling, periodic
industrial inspections offer an opportunity for POTW personnel to obtain addi-
tional data relevant to the pretreatment program. This information may
include:
Changes in industrial processes affecting the quality of the indus-
trial discharges and subsequent discharge permit limitations
Waste residuals handling/disposal practices
Spill control practices or plans
Inventory of raw materials/chemicals stored on-site.
To ensure that all necessary information will be collected during an
industrial inspection, it is a good idea for you to develop a report form or
checklist. This report form/checklist should include all of the information
mentioned above. The information collected during an industrial inspection
will serve to validate and update information collected in the IWS. At the
end of an industrial inspection, all information obtained should be entered
and properly documented on the report forms. It is important that these re-
ports be accurate and concise because they are the basis for future monitoring
programs, changes in discharge permit conditions, and possible litigation.
5-6
-------
5.3.2 Sample Collection and Handling
The most important on-site activities are, of course, measuring the flow
and collecting samples. To ensure a valid result, representative measurements
and samples should be taken. Flow measurements and sampling can be conducted
either manually or through the use of automatic devices. Three types of
sampling may be utilized:
Grab samples, in which a single volume of wastewater is obtained and
analyzed. This type of sample will not always provide an accurate
measure of wastewater characteristics, especially when the flow or
pollutants are heterogeneous or vary with time. However, it is easy
to perform and takes little time.
Simple composite samples are a timed sequential collection of equal
volume grab samples combined in a single reservoir. This type of
sample can give a partial evaluation of the variability of wastewater
composition with time. It does not provide any measure of the total
pounds of pollutant discharged, since pollutant loading is a flow-
related value.
Flow-proportioned composite samples are obtained by collecting incre-
mental samples with volumes proportional to flow. This type of
sample, when analyzed and compared to total flow, provides the most
accurate measure of wastewater quality and pollutant loading. Special
sampling equipment and/or significant manpower resources are required.
Because of the potential for significant errors associated with sampling,
it is essential that extreme care be exercised in selecting sampling devices
and procedures. A good reference for sampling procedures is the EPA document,
NPDES Compliance Sampling Inspection Manual (PB81-153215) , available through
the NTIS. The following are some general points to be considered in col-
lecting industrial samples:
Samples should be collected in a location that is easily accessible
and provides a well-mixed wastestream. Repetitive samples should
always be taken in the same location. Sampling points should be
located where no discharge other than the discharge from the IU (or
process) being monitored is present.
Composite samples should be collected during the industry's regular
working hours, if possible. Ideally, flow-proportioned samples should
be taken. At a minimum, the composites should consist of equal-volume
samples collected at two-hour intervals.
5-7
-------
All samples must be properly preserved from the time they are col-
lected until they are analyzed. It is important to use the right
container for sample storage (i.e., do not use a metal container to
collect or store a sample that will later be analyzed for metals).
Appendix M contains sample preservation protocols from EPA guidelines.
Accurate records should be maintained, indicating the time, date,
location, type of sample, method of collection and preservation, name
of person who collected the sample, and any pertinent comments. These
procedures are commonly called chain-of-custody procedures.
The industrial user should be encouraged to split samples with the
POTW and have the samples analyzed by a qualified laboratory of its
choice. This laboratory should use the same analytical procedures as
the POTWs laboratory. If the results of the two analyses differ, the
need for further sampling and analysis is indicated.
Once an accurate sample has been obtained, several steps should be taken
to assure that the validity and objectivity of the monitoring operations are
maintained. The sample should be properly preserved and promptly delivered to
the laboratory to prevent sample degradation. Sample preservation techniques
and holding times are included in Appendix M and are also outlined in various
analytical handbooks, such as the EPA Manual of Methods for Chemical Analysis
of Water and Wastes (PB259973), available through NTIS, and Standard Methods
for the Examination of Water and Wastewater (15th Edition, 1980), published by
the American Public Health Association.
A POTW will often monitor an industrial wastestream for several pollutant
parameters, sometimes requiring different preservatives and/or storage condi-
tions for each. Therefore, it may be necessary to take a relatively large
volume of sample so that adequate amounts are available for the various lab-
oratory analyses. The large sample should be divided for appropriate pollu-
tant preservation as soon as possible. In addition to ensuring an adequate
volume for laboratory analysis and sample preservation, sufficient sample size
should be maintained so that a portion of the sample can be offered to the IU,
as mentioned above. This option should be provided so that an independent
check of the POTW's analytical results can be conducted by the IU, if desired.
5-8
-------
5.4 LABORATORY CONSIDERATIONS IN MONITORING
Once the samples are collected, you need to analyze them accurately.
Analytical results should be accurate and reproducible to ensure that monitor-
ing activities will provide the quality of information necessary for a suc-
cessful industrial pollutant control program. Precise and well-recognized
techniques have been established for the analysis of conventional and heavy
metal parameters in wastewaters. Three often-referenced manuals that provide
methods for analysis of these parameters are the Chemical Methods Manual and
Standard Methods (both mentioned earlier) as well as Annual Book of Standards,
Part 31 (Water, Atmospheric Analysis), 1975, published by the American Society
for Testing and Materials. Each of these documents provides a synopsis of the
analytical method for a parameter, information on interfering substances, and
step-by-step instructions on how to carry out the analysis. Also included is
information on the calculation of results, the precision and accuracy of the
analytical method, and techniques for chemically stabilizing and preserving
samples.
EPA has recently proposed procedures for the analysis of toxic organic
chemicals. These procedures were developed specifically for compliance moni-
toring under the Clean Water Act and are detailed in "Guidelines Establishing
Test Procedures for the Analysis of Pollutants: Proposed Regulations" (40 CFR
136). Some of these methods can also be found in the Supplement to the 1981
edition of Standard Methods. Both sources include quality control techniques,
glassware requirements, and sample preservation procedures for toxic organic
pollutants. All analytical laboratories should have copies of the publica-
tions mentioned above. These publications supply the information that a
trained laboratory technician needs to perform nearly all analyses required
for a pretreatment monitoring program.
Although not as great as the error associated with poor sampling tech-
niques, the potential for error occurring during analysis of wastewater
samples can have a great impact on the acceptability of monitoring informa-
tion. Without the aid of independent checks and general quality control, your
laboratory technician may report erroneous results without being aware that a
5-9
-------
problem exists. Analytical quality control assistance is available in several
forms from EPA. A document entitled Handbook for Analytical Quality Control
in Water and Wastewater Laboratories (PB213884) has been published by the EPA
Technology Transfer Program and is available through NTIS. In this handbook,
specific information is provided that can guide the laboratory technician or
chemist toward sound and reliable techniques and procedures.
Many of the considerations discussed above are generally applicable to
large POTWs where laboratories exist to handle industrial wastewater analysis
or where such facilities can be developed. However, if your POTW is not
equipped with a laboratory capable of analysis of all IU pollutants, your
analytical work will probably be performed by commercial laboratories. To
ensure the quality of the commercial service, a POTW should periodically sub-
mit samples spiked with known amounts of pollutants to check the laboratory's
accuracy. Identical samples can also be sent to two or more commercial lab-
oratories and these analyses compared to determine the reliability and accu-
racy of laboratory results.
5.5 CHAIN-OF-CUSTODY PROCEDURES
Once the appropriate sample is obtained and stabilized, it is essential
that POTW sampling personnel properly document the methods used to collect the
sample, as well as the chain of possession of the sample from collection to
analysis. Chain-of-custody procedures are a critical aspect in monitoring
Ills. Since it is impossible to predict which violations will require legal
action, it should be assumed that all data generated from sampling will be
used in court. If a case ultimately goes to trial, the integrity of the data
must be established. The sampling results will only be admissible in court if
POTW personnel can prove that a sample has been properly collected, preserved,
and analyzed, and has not been tampered with or mishandled.
Some of the items that you will need to consider, at a minimum, to ad-
dress adequately chain-of-custody concerns are:
5-10
-------
Name of person collecting the sample
Date and time of sample collection
Location of sample collection
Type of sample collected (i.e., grab, composite)
Preservatives used for each sample type
Names and signatures of any persons handling the samples in the field
and laboratory.
It is often convenient and efficient for a POTW to develop a chain-of-
custody form that can be used by its sampling team. Table 5.1 is an example
of such a form. This form should accompany the sample at all times. You may
also find that it is in your best interest to document properly the protocols
followed during the sampling and analysis of industrial wastewaters. Adequate
documentation is particularly important in the case of priority pollutant
sampling where the sampling and analysis techniques are not as well recognized
as those for conventional pollutants.
5.6 ADMINISTRATION
Good recordkeeping is an important part of laboratory administration. To
ensure proper recording and handling of data, you can consider implementing
the following procedures:
Development of a standard form for collecting data in the field
Recording of data chronologically (for example, in a bound notebook
with numbered pages) to ensure continuity and proper sequence. An
example of a form to record monitoring results is found in Table 5.2.
Completion of forms in duplicate and separate storage of copies in
case a copy is lost or destroyed.
When interpreting data, any unusual circumstance at the IU or in the
laboratory should be considered so that extraneous results can be eliminated.
Proper recordkeeping will allow personnel responsible for technical review to
5-11
-------
TABLE 5.1
SAMPLING RECORD
Person Sampling: Peter Smith
Date: 5/3-4/83
Facility Sampled:
Facility Location:
Sampling Location:
Boyd & Sons
3 Boyd Place
Seatown
Time: 7:00 am - 1:00 am
am/pm
Process water discharge after treatment and before
mixing with domestic sewage.
Sample Type:
Observation/Comments:
Grab ( ) Composite (X)
Samples taken once per hour during hours of plant
operation 7:00 am through 1:00 am.
(19 samples flow composited) Visit unannounced.
Sample Bottle I.D. (Marking) Bottles 101 through 119
Samples split with facility? Yes (X) No ( )
Name of Facility Representative: Larry Jenkins
Title of Facility Representative: Plant Manager
TIME/DATE
1:00 am 5/4/83
1:00 am 5/4/83
1:00 am 5/4/83
SAMPLE
RECEIVED BY
Larry Jenkins
Peter Smith
Mike Brown
SIGNATURE
t&^UfrJ^a,
U^^^^Ju
fijJa$twlU
AFFILIATION/
TITLE
Boyd & Sons, Mgr.
Seatown DPW
Seatwon POTW Lab
COMMENTS
Split Sample
5-12
-------
TABLE 5.2
MONITORING RESULTS REPORT FORM
Facility Name:
Permit No.:
Sampling Code:
S = Scheduled
U = Unscheduled
FC = Flow Proportion
Composite (x = hours)
D = Demand
M = Self Monitoring
G = Grab Sample
C = Composite (x = hours)
Permit Limits*
Date
5/r/ts
6/10/12
Sample
Code
U
Kir
u
&
Parameter
Value mg/1
Parameter
Value
Parameter
Value
Parameter
Value
Parameter
Value
Parameter
Value
Parameter
Value
Parameter
Value
Parameter
Value
Parameter
Value
Parameter
Value
Parameter
Value
C A'
(i-fff)
/I
£*/^
fret)
.3
C»
4S
Cu
.a
it-,
4.1
fli;
.07
Cv
rr^-f)
7-0
.65
ft
.£>
ft
,t>5
ei
,z
.
C.J
/,2
CJ
V
Tss
/af
T55
4.5
733
^
* Permit limits for 24 hr. flow composite
5-13
-------
evaluate the significance of any data variations based on documented infor-
mation about sampling conditions.
5.7 COMPLIANCE MONITORING INFORMATION FOR THE PROGRAM SUBMISSION
In order for the POTW to demonstrate the adequacy of its compliance
monitoring program, your submission should include the following:
A description of your monitoring program, including a discussion of
procedures for scheduled, unscheduled, and demand monitoring as well
as:
- A list of all industries included in the monitoring program
- The minimum sampling frequency for each major industrial contribu-
tor, the pollutants to be sampled, and the type of sampling to be
performed.
A discussion of the chain-of-custody procedures that will be followed
during sampling and analysis.
5-14
-------
6. PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURES
Section 403.8(f)(2) of the General Pretreatment Regulations describes the
procedures needed for an effective ongoing pretreatment program. Specifi-
cally, your POTW must have procedures to:
Identify and locate all possible lUs that might be subject to the
pretreatment program
Obtain information describing the character and volume of wastes
discharged by lUs
Notify industrial dischargers of any applicable pretreatment
standards or other applicable State or Federal standards or
requirements
Review self-monitoring reports and other notices submitted by lUs
Randomly sample and analyze the effluent from IUs
Investigate instances of noncompliance with pretreatment standards and
requirements
Comply with public participation requirements.
The procedures adopted by your POTW should be well thought out and easy to
understand for all IUs, the public, and POTW staff members. Finally, the
procedures should be flexible enough to allow reaction to variable operating
situations.
The first two procedures listed above are discussed in detail in Chapter
2, Industrial Waste Survey. Sampling and analysis are discussed in Chapter 5,
Design of Monitoring Program. This chapter will focus on updating the IWS and
on the remaining four procedural requirements.
6.1 UPDATE INDUSTRIAL WASTE SURVEY
To adequately implement your pretreatment program, you should update in-
formation on a regular basis. Up-to-date information is essential not only
for determining the nature and quantity of the waste entering your system, but
also for scheduling pretreatment activities and allocating resources to meet
6-1
-------
changing program needs. The POTW needs to develop procedures for identifying
and gathering information on new industries moving into its service area and
for updating its existing user information base. There are various mecha-
nisms through which new lUs can be identified, including:
A requirement that new industries fill out applications for sewer use
when they apply for business licenses
Communication with other city departments (water, utilities, health,
and building departments) concerning new industries in the POTW
service area
Continual review of business license records and/or other standard
listings of industrial firms, such as Chamber of Commerce rosters or
the telephone directory.
In addition, the IWS should be updated on a continual basis. Several
updating procedures are available, such as:
A permit system which requires notification of changes in industrial
processes, wastewater discharges, or industry ownership
Ongoing POTW inspection and monitoring activities
Periodic expiration of permits and subsequent reapplication by permit
holders
Periodic mailing of an IWS questionnaire to the industry accompanied
by a request to update the information.
6.2 NOTIFY INDUSTRIAL USERS OF APPLICABLE STANDARDS AND REQUIREMENTS
Your POTW is responsible for being up-to-date on all Federal pretreatment
standards and applicable requirements under the Clean Water Act and Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act. Such standards and requirements include:
Federal categorical standards
State standards
Local standards and limitations
Other pertinent requirements (e.g., user charges).
6-2
-------
The POTW is also responsible for notifying any IU that may be affected by
existing or newly promulgated standards and requirements.
Various procedures are available to your POTW to obtain current infor-
mation on the status of national categorical standards and other applicable
standards and regulations. One procedure is to assign a staff member either
to review the Federal Register notices or to contact the POTW or city attorney
for this information. Also, the POTW may obtain the information from the
State Pretreatment Coordinator, if the State provides such a service.
Periodic requests or telephone calls to your State or Regional EPA officials
may be the most appropriate technique for your POTW.
Your POTW may use any of the following mechanisms to notify lUs of perti-
nent standards and regulatory requirements:
General mailing list
Individual letters to lUs
Permit/contract conditions
Permit/contract modification
Published notices in newspapers, circulars, etc.
If your POTW chooses to notify its lUs by mail, it is usually a good idea to
require a signed acknowledgement of receipt to ensure that the industry has
been notified. Newspaper notices are normally not a good approach, although
this procedure may be adequate if the notices appear in the same section on a
fixed schedule (e.g., once a week) and if lUs are informed of the location and
time of publication. Permit and contract amendments will also ensure IU noti-
fication, since acknowledgement is assured by a signature of a company offi-
cial.
6.3 REVIEW SELF-MONITORING REPORTS
Self-monitoring reports form the basis of the POTW's compliance program
by providing information on an industry's effluent and its compliance with
pretreatment standards, limitations, and other requirements. Your POTW needs
i-3
-------
to develop effective procedures for receiving, analyzing, and storing self-
monitoring reports, compliance schedule reports, and other reports/notices
submitted by lUs. These procedures are especially important if industries in
your pretreatment program are subject to reporting requirements imposed by
national categorical standards. It is also often a good idea to require
regular reports from your significant noncategorical industries.
The POTW may find the basic procedures listed below useful in reviewing
industrial reports.
A master list or log of reports expected during a specified time frame
(monthly is sufficient).
A procedure to enter date of receipt of each report (usually on the
master list or log).
A procedure to screen and compare reported values and compliance
information with discharge standards and compliance schedules.
A procedure (if the screening is done by a non-technical person) to
refer problem submissions to a technical specialist for more thorough
evaluation.
A filing system to ensure that the data are retrievable and maintained
for an appropriate period of time (three years or longer recommended).
A system to cross-reference permit, contract, and POTW monitoring
files, if applicable.
A process flow diagram of a typical review process is shown in Figure 6.1. It
indicates how both self-monitoring reports and compliance schedule reports are
received from lUs and entered into a master log, then compared with the user's
limits or schedule, and finally referred for noncompliance investigation when
necessary. If your IUs meet their effluent limits and compliance schedules,
their reports should be placed in the POTW1 s files for future reference.
An integral part of any report review system is the management of
industrial data. There are many ways to design your POTW's data management
program. A good management data system should ensure the ability to handle
properly the expected volume of reports received by the POTW. If a POTW has
6-4
-------
i.a.
SUBMITS
SELF-MONI-
TORING
REPORTS
COMPARE LAB
RESULTS WITH
POLLUTANT
LIMITATIONS
I.U.
SUBMITS
COMPLIANCE
REPORTS*
* Failure to submit may be cause for
penalty
** A negative determination may be
cause for penalty
FIGURE 6.1
REVIEW PROCESS FOR INDUSTRIAL SELF-MONITORING REPORTS
6-5
-------
many IDs and several treatment plants, a more formal system may be needed,
perhaps requiring a computerized data system. In this type of computerized
system, you would form a data base for each IU, building on the information
obtained from the IWS. The system should facilitate a comparison between
reported discharge values and discharge standards and limitations contained in
permits, ordinances, or contracts.
6.4 INVESTIGATE NONCOMPLIANCE INCIDENTS
It is likely that instances of III noncompliance with pretreatment
requirements will occur. You should be able to detect these violations
through various means including:
Review of industrial self-monitoring reports
Sampling and inspection activities at an industry
Sampling of POTW influent and/or effluent
Evaluation of treatment plant upsets.
Your program submission must document the procedures that the POTW will follow
to investigate noncompliance events. These procedures should be capable of
handling three types of situations:
An emergency situation when the POTW moves immediately to halt an
industrial discharge that reasonably appears to present imminent
endangerment to health or welfare of persons.
A non-emergency situation when the POTW desires, after the affected IU
is notified and given an opportunity to respond, to halt or prevent a
discharge that presents or may present an endangerment to the environ-
ment or threatens to interfere with the POTW's operation.
A situation in which an IU fails to comply with other pretreatment
requirements, such as timely submission of reports, achievement of
compliance schedule milestones, maintenance of sampling and pre-
treatment facilities, and maintenance of records.
Your POTW should perform the following procedures to investigate
instances of noncompliance:
Establish criteria for classifying situations as emergencies
6-6
-------
Notify Ills of noncompliance incidents
Provide an opportunity for industry to respond to violation
notification
Take action to correct violation
Verify that the violation has been corrected
Resort to legal recourse to obtain IU compliance and/or allow industry
to challenge POTW s violation determination
Perform quick-response sampling, analysis, and inspection in the event
of emergency conditions such as fire, explosion, corrosive action,
acute upset, and imminent danger to health and safety. For these
situations, your POTW will always want to keep an extra set of
sampling equipment clean and ready at all times.
Gather data so that it is admissible in court proceedings or other
enforcement actions.
Informal notice of IU noncompliance can be accomplished through telephone
calls, letters, telegrams, meetings, or onsite visits. It is advisable to
require the IU to acknowledge receipt of any notices. You can use more formal
methods, cease and desist orders, injunctions, citations, or subpoenas. lUs
can respond through such means as letters, telephone calls, meetings, or show-
cause hearings.
To correct the violation, an IU has several options. Process changes,
installation of new treatment or pretreatment technology, improved operating
practices, and repair of faulty equipment are some of the suggested corrective
actions industry may wish to use. The time frame for correcting such viola-
tions that your POTW establishes should be flexible enough to cover both
emergency and non-emergency situations. Under emergency conditions, the POTW
may need to terminate immediately the discharge until other corrective
measures are in place. Corrective action can be verified through increased
self-monitoring requirements, follow-up monitoring and inspection by the POTW,
and certification by the IU that the violation has been corrected. While only
a certification may be needed for less serious violations, your POTW should
verify corrective actions first-hand in serious cases.
6-7
-------
Chain-of-custody and quality assurance procedures are important aspects
of noncompliance investigation for the POTW. Because it is impossible to
predict which actions will require legal proceedings, and because the integ-
rity of the data must be established if the case ultimately goes to court, you
should assume that all data collected during an investigation will be used in
court. Section 5.5 details the necessary components of proper chain-of-
custody procedures.
Procedures for noncompliance investigations may be detailed in your sewer
ordinance. This is acceptable for your program submission as long as the
appropriate section of the ordinance is cited. However, it is clearer to the
reviewer if these noncompliance procedures are summarized in the procedures
section of the submission.
6.5 CONDUCT PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ACTIVITIES
Public participation is essential in maintaining the credibility of your
pretreatment program, in working effectively with industries, and in educating
the entire community on the objectives and benefits of the program. Although
not a requirement of the pretreatment regulations, it is a good idea for your
POTW to hold public meetings during the development and implementation of your
program. These meetings can provide a formal channel for public input on the
pretreatment program, help to establish a good relationship with local indus-
tries, and involve environmental groups in a constructive manner. You might
also consider a less formal outreach program to inform and involve local
citizens, consisting of, for example, flyers describing the program or pro-
motional spots highlighting the program's benefits on local radio or tele-
vision stations or in the local newspaper.
Your POTW is required by Federal regulation to keep the public informed
of all cases of significant violation. To accomplish this, the POTW must
publish, at least annually in the area's largest daily newspaper, the names
of lUs significantly violating pretreatment standards during the previous
12 months. A significant violation meets one of the following conditions:
Results in the exercise of emergency authority
6-8
-------
Remains uncorrected 45 days after notice of noncompliance is given
Involves failure to report accurately.
A POTW must also give public notice of the development and revision of local
limits through such means as a newspaper notice or letters sent to interested
parties. The POTW must also provide opportunity either for public comment
(including public hearings) or for letters addressed to the Public Works
Director (or equivalent official).
Public access to non-confidential information contained in the documents
and records developed in the course of the program is a requirement often
overlooked. Your subraittal should identify how public access to this infor-
mation will be provided. The location or office where interested people can
go to read or copy documents, permits (if a permit system is used), and
monitoring records or violations should be specified in the submission. Your
local library, city/town hall, public works office, or POTW are acceptable
locations. The hours of operation should include convenient times for the
public at large. These provisions should also allow the POTW to restrict
access to confidential information about lUs.
6.6 IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURES FOR THE PROGRAM SUBMISSION
The following procedures should be explained in the program submission
to demonstrate the POTW1s ability to administer properly the pretreatment
program:
How the IWS will be updated
How the POTW will keep abreast of all applicable pretreatment regula-
tions and notify lUs of the requirements they will have to meet as
participants in the pretreatment program
How self-monitoring reports will be received, reviewed, and managed
How the POTW will investigate violations of pretreatment regulations
or requirements
How the POTW will undertake public participation activities.
6-9
-------
7. PROGRAM ORGANIZATION, COSTS, AND REVENUE SOURCES
The ability to develop and implement a successful pretreatment program
depends on a number of factors. The importance of legal authority, sound
technical information, and proper procedures has already been discussed.
This chapter focuses on needed resources and the organization to apply them
efficiently and effectively. Section 403.8(f)(3) requires that your POTW has
"sufficient" resources and qualified personnel to implement program authori-
ties and procedures. To implement properly a pretreatment program, your POTW
must have:
A workable organization to integrate elements of the program
A staff of appropriate size and training to carry out program
requirements
The necessary equipment and supplies to fulfill monitoring and other
program needs
Adequate funds to support the program.
The above elements are closely interrelated and will be based primarily on
such considerations as the number and type of IUs to be monitored, the fre-
quency and type of monitoring, and compliance procedures to be followed. All
of the above elements should be present to enable your program to be success-
ful.
7.1 ORGANIZATION AND STAFFING
Organization and staffing requirements will vary according to the
complexity and comprehensiveness of your local program. Whether the staff is
large or small, it should be organized in a way that facilitates the success-
ful execution of program responsibilities. The adequacy of the program's
organization and staffing is based not only on whether essential functions are
covered, but also on whether the level-of-effort and type of staff proposed
are appropriate to implement the requirements of the program.
7-1
-------
7.1.1 Organization Chart
The organizational structure of your pretreatment program should be
designed to accomplish your goals. The key is to tailor the structure to your
specific situation so that it is practical and workable. In the submission,
you must include an organization chart which explains how the pretreatment
program is organized. The titles, brief job descriptions, and level-of-effort
for employees responsible for the following activities may be included on the
organization chart:
Sampling and inspection
Laboratory analysis
Technical assistance
Legal assistance
Program administration.
An example organization chart is shown in Figure 7.1. This type of chart can
be adapted for your pretreatment program submission.
7.1.2 Considerations in Staffing and Organizing the Pretreatment Program
You will need to consider the following items in staffing and organizing
your pretreatment program:
Clear and appropriate lines of authority
Coordination with other departments
Identification of staff responsibilities
Qualifications of staff
Staffing levels related to required work effort.
Each of these aspects is discussed below.
7.1.2.1 Lines of Authority
Your pretreatment program should be clearly and appropriately structured.
The following suggestions for designing your organization will contribute to
an effective pretreatment program:
Designate clearly all authorities and responsibilities
7-2
------- An error occurred while trying to OCR this image.
-------
Avoid unwieldy, fragmented structures
Ensure that supervisors do not have direct responsibility for too many
employees, usually no more than six or eight staff members
Ensure that the pretreatment program is effectively integrated with
other POTW activities.
7.1.2.2 Coordination with Other Departments
It is important to promote interaction between groups within the
pretreatment program and other POTW departments in order to facilitate the
program's smooth operation. You may find it useful as you prepare the program
to develop a flow chart for routine program operations. For example, the
chart would show who receives and reviews self-monitoring reports, what
happens when the reports are acceptable, and what happens when they indicate
violations. This chart could show the interaction between an engineer
reviewing the reports, the pretreatment program administrator notifying an
industry of noncompliance, and the POTW legal staff taking enforcement action
against a violating industry.
7.1.2.3 Identification of Staff Responsibilities
You should also explain the duties and responsibilities of each staff
member or department depicted in the organization chart in your submission.
The following functional areas should be addressed in your submission:
Technical assistance. A staff member or department should be assigned
the responsibility of evaluating data that IDs supply on their IWS
forms, self-monitoring reports, and compliance schedule reports. This
person or department also should have responsibility for reviewing
results of POTW monitoring and sample analyses and for industrial
inspections.
Industrial monitoring. The submission should designate a staff member
or department with responsibility for staffing and supervising field
monitoring personnel. It should also specify the number and qualifi-
cations of personnel who will be assigned to the field monitoring
crew( s) .
Laboratory analysis. As indicated earlier, a POTW may either perform
its own sample analyses or contract with a commercial laboratory for
analytical services. If the work is to be done in-house, laboratory
support staff must be identified.
7-4
-------
Legal assistance. The person(s) providing legal assistance to the
municipality will interpret regulations and other legal documents that
affect pretreatment program operations and prepare contracts or other
agreements. This person also will initiate formal legal actions
against violators, including injunctive relief when necessary.
Administration. The program administrator and administrative staff
should have responsibility for data management, communication with
lUs, program finances and accounting, personnel, and the public
participation program.
A small POTW may have the same person performing the duties associated
with one or more of these five general work areas, while a large POTW may have
several people assigned to each functional group. In addition, a large POTW
may wish to separate functions that are grouped together under administration.
Responsibility for some of the work areas may be assigned to contractors or
other local agencies, but all areas of work and corresponding staff should be
identified in the submission.
7.1.2.4 Staff Qualifications
Your program submission should also describe the qualifications of
persons that currently fill or will be hired to fill key positions in the
work areas identified above. Education and experience should be appropriate
for the tasks that the person will be expected to perform. The pretreatment
program is likely to require support from personnel with experience in
engineering (environmental, civil, sanitary, or chemical), chemistry, public
administration, accounting and finance, and law.
7.1.2.5 Staffing Levels
In general, the size of your treatment system and the number of IUs
regulated under your program will dictate the level of effort required to
operate the pretreatment program. Small POTWs with few IUs may be able to
implement a pretreatment program satisfactorily using only one or two
person-years of effort. Large POTWs with many IUs will need a much larger
pretreatment staff, depending on the number of samples and measurements to be
obtained, the frequency of monitoring, and the number and complexity of
analyses to be performed. POTW staff requirements will also depend on the
amount of work to be performed by outside personnel (e.g., contract support).
7-5
-------
You should develop and include in the submission a quantitative estimate
of the level of effort, including outside support, for each staff position
and/or function. Such estimates should be in the form of labor hours per
year, person-years, or percent involvement of a person in pretreatment program
activities. Table 7.1 indicates some of the factors affecting level-of-effort
requirements for your pretreatment program. Generalized estimates of person-
nel requirements as a function of POTW size and number of industrial users are
shown in Table 7.2. They are based on experience with successful programs.
More refined and detailed personnel estimates for program development and pro-
gram operation for a POTW with 10 industrial users and a flow of 5 mgd are
shown in Table 7.3. Although these figures should not be treated as rigid
requirements, they can be used to gauge the adequacy of staffing levels for
individual functions.
7.2 PROGRAM COSTS AND FUNDING MECHANISMS
Your submission must include an estimate of the operating costs of your
pretreatment program. It must then demonstrate that your POTW has sufficient
revenues to recover those costs. You can demonstrate that the POTW has de-
veloped a mechanism to fund the program either by describing the cost recovery
method proposed, or, if the program costs are to be covered by general reve-
nues, by including the budget request which specifically delineates the esti-
mated cost of pretreatment. Funding mechanisms are discussed in detail in
Section 7.2.2.
7.2.1 Estimating Program Costs
It is essential that your POTW accurately estimates program operating
costs in order to ensure proper implementation of the program. It is also
important that the local officials endorsing your pretreatment program be
aware of the costs required to operate the program. Costs should be estimated
for the following program elements:
Procurement, operation, and maintenance of necessary sampling and
analytical equipment
Sampling and monitoring of Ills and POTW system
7-6
-------
TABLE 7.1
FACTORS AFFECTING POTW LEVELS OF EFFORT FOR
PRETREATMENT PROGRAM OPERATING TASKS
Activities
Factors
Sampling and Inspection
-Total number of Ills
-Frequency of sampling
Laboratory Analysis
-Number of samples
-Type of analysis
-Pollutants analyzed (i.e., toxics,
conventionals, metals, etc.)
Technical Assistance
(including permitting
process and report
review)
-Treatment plant capabilities
-POTW influent and effluent characteristics
-Total number of lUs
-Number of lUs with pretreatment
Legal Assistance
-Number and seriousness of violations
-Availability of in-house counsel
-Burden of proof created by ordinance
Financial/
Administrative
-Total number of lUs
-Frequency of monitoring
-Size of service area
7-7
-------
TABLE 7.2
POTW PRETREATMENT PROGRAM
PERSONNEL REQUIREMENT RANGES
Ranges presented in this table are estimates based on anticipated
averages for typical programs. Individual program personnel requirements may
vary significantly from the ranges shown here.
POTW
Flow Range Relative Number of
(MGD) Indirect Dischargers
5 small
large
5-25 small
large
25-50 small
large
50 small
large
100 large
Range of Personnel
Requirements for
Pretreatment Program
1-3
2-5
2-4
4-8
4-6
8-10
6-8
10-15
15-50*
*Special cases, such as large metropolitan systems, require more in-depth
review.
Source: Local Pretreatment Program Requirements and Guidance.
Environmental Technology Consultants, Inc.: September 1979.
7-8
-------
TABLE 7.3
ESTIMATED POTW PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS FOR A POTW
PRETREATMENT PROGRAM BY PROGRAM ACTIVITY
Estimates presented in this table are based on anticipated averages for typi-
cal programs. Individual program personnel requirements may vary significant-
ly from the estimates shown here.
POTW AVERAGE DESIGN FLOW: 5 MGD
NUMBER OF INDUSTRIAL USERS IN PROGRAM: 10
Frequency of Workdays
Activity per Number of per Total
Program Activity POTW or IU Activities Activity Workdays
1.
2.
3.
4.
Program Development
Develop Pretreatment once
Program
Conduct Industrial once
Waste Survey
2
Determine POTW once
Removal Allowance
Review IU Pretreatment once
Facility Proposal
1 15-25 25
1 15-25 25
1 10-20 20
10 0.5-2 20
TOTAL WORKDAYS = 90
90 4 220 WORKDAYS/PERSON/YEAR = .41 Person-years
Program Operation
Review IU Compliance
Schedule Reports
3/year
Review IU Final Compli- once
ance Schedule Report
Review IU Self-
Monitoring Report
Sample IU
(spot-check)
Investigate IU
Non-compliance
2/year
I/year
30
10
20
10
0.5-1
30
0.5-2
0.1-0.5
2-4
20
10
40
1-5
25
7-9
-------
TABLE 7.3 (Continued)
ESTIMATED POTW PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS FOR A POTW
PRETREATMENT PROGRAM BY PROGRAM ACTIVITY
Program Activity
Frequency of Workdays
Activity per Number of per Total
POTW or IU Activities Activity Workdays
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Administrative
Enforcement Action
Legal Enforcement
Actions
Comply with Public I/year
Notice Requirements
Sample POTW Influent, I/year
Effluent, and Sludge
Prepare Self-Monitoring 2/year
Report for Approval
Authority
Laboratory Analysis I/ year
of Required Sampling
3 3-10
1 15-20
1 1-3
1 5-10
2 5-10
13 1-2
30
20
3
10
20
26
TOTAL WORKDAYS =234
234 4 220 WORKDAYS/PERSON/YEAR = 1.06 Person-years
IWS is periodically updated during program implementation procedures
2
Annual monitoring and reporting by the POTW is required during program
implementation to maintain any removal credit allowance.
Source: Local Pretreatment Program Requirements and Guidance. Environmental
Technology Consultants, Inc.: September 1979.
7-10
-------
Laboratory analysis (both in-house and contract services)
Technical assistance
Legal assistance
Program administration.
Costs for each element should reflect employee salaries, contractor services,
debt payments, supplies, and indirect costs.
7.2.1.1 Procurement, Operation, and Maintenance of Sampling and Analytical
Equipment
You should decide how you intend to procure the equipment needed to per-
form required sampling and analyses. Equipment may be purchased or leased, or
a contractor may be hired to perform sampling and analytical tasks. The most
cost-effective option will be determined by the size of your POTW, the number
of industries covered, and the frequency and type of monitoring necessary for
each. Smaller municipalities may choose to purchase equipment for sampling
and conventional pollutant analysis, and to rely on a commercial laboratory
for metals and toxic organics analyses. A larger municipality may choose to
purchase all the equipment necessary to have a complete in-house analytical
capability. Table 7.4 shows typical equipment needed to sample and analyze
toxic pollutants. Table 7.5 shows average fees charged for analysis by com-
mercial laboratories. Note that the figures in Table 7.5 are estimates and
are intended for guidance only. Actual costs may vary somewhat from these
estimates.
7.2.1.2 Sampling and Monitoring/Laboratory Analysis
If sampling is to be performed by the POTW, the level of effort required
will depend on the number and type of lUs in the pretreatment program, the
type of monitoring to be conducted (how much will be industrial self-
monitoring vs. POTW compliance monitoring), and the revenues available for the
POTW monitoring program. Some generalized estimates follow.
A POTW with few industries (up to 30 lUs) may need only one field
inspector and an assistant.
7-11
-------
TABLE 7.4
TYPICAL EQUIPMENT FOR A TWO-PERSON FIELD SAMPLING CREW
Van with two-way radio
Gas Detector
2 self-contained breathing units
4 portable samplers with bottles
Grab sample collection and storage containers
1 portable pH meter
2 flow meters
Flumes and weirs
Coolers and reagents for sample preservation
Safety equipment
Miscellaneous tools and equipment
LABORATORY EQUIPMENT FOR SAMPLE ANALYSIS
Atomic absorption
spectrometer (AA)
Supplies for AA
Gas chromatograph/
mass spectrometer (GC/MS)
Accessories and glassware
for GC/MS
Reagents and other chemicals
Source: Odeal, Erwin J. "Economics of Local Pretreatment Program
Administration." Proceedings; National Pretreatment Symposium.
Duluth, Minnesota: August 22-24, 1979.
7-12
-------
TABLE 7.5
TYPICAL COMMERCIAL LABORATORY COSTS1
Parameter Price per Analysis
Conventional Analysis
Acidity/alkalinity $ 9
BOD 20
COD 20
Chloride 15
Nitrogen (total) 20
Oil & grease 20
Suspended solids 8
Toxics Analysis
Metals (typical) $10 - 18/metal
Organics by GC 60/compound
NPDES Analysis (scans)
Base neutrals $350
Acid extracts 200
Pesticide/PCBs 225
13 metals 300
Total 126 Compounds 800-1200
Based on 1983 estimated costs from commercial laboratories
2
Includes $300 for asbestos
7-13
-------
A medium-sized POTW may require the full-time efforts of two two-
person sampling teams.
A large POTW (more than 150 IDs) may require the full-time commitment
of at least three two-person field teams.
If sample analysis will be performed in-house, you will also need laboratory
support staff. The level of laboratory staff effort and training required
will depend on the scope of your sampling and analysis program. Resources
will also be needed to maintain and operate the sampling equipment. Debt or
lease payments for equipment must also be included in program cost estimates.
7.2.1.3 Technical Assistance
Your pretreatment program also needs technical personnel. A small
municipality can meet this requirement if its plant or pretreatment program
manager has a strong engineering or wastewater background. Alternatively, an
outside consultant can be retained for technical support as needed. A medium-
sized municipality may require the part-time efforts of a senior technical
specialist and small support staff. Large municipalities are likely to need
one or more full-time senior technical specialists and support staff.
7.2.1.4 Legal Assistance
Legal assistance will be required to take legal (as opposed to admin-
istrative) enforcement actions, to interpret requirements of new or revised
local, State, and Federal regulations, and to prepare ordinances and
contracts. Small municipalities will usually be able to rely on the city
attorney or outside counsel on an as-needed basis. Medium-sized municipal-
ities can designate a portion of the city attorney's time for pretreatment
activities. Large municipalities may require the full-time efforts of one or
more attorneys to support their pretreatment programs.
7.2.1.5 Program Administration
Administration of a pretreatment program may require a significant amount
of time for data management and recordkeeping and for the preparation, review
and submission of pretreatment reports. Public participation activities are
7-14
-------
also part of program administration. In a small municipality, the POTW super-
intendent or other municipal employee, such as the Director of Public Works,
usually will be responsible for administering the program with part-time
clerical support. Larger municipalities are likely to require a full-time
program manager and clerical staff.
As is apparent from the above discussion, labor is the single largest
cost element in the continued operation of your program. Table 7.6 provides a
worksheet for computing total annual operating expenditures. The numbers used
in Table 7.6 are not estimates of actual program costs, but serve only to
illustrate the calculations involved in estimating annual operating expendi-
tures .
7.2.2 Financing Sources and Cost Recovery Systems
After you have estimated your pretreatment program operation costs, you
must design a financing plan to obtain funds to cover the program's develop-
ment costs (including additional equipment necessary for implementation) and
its annual operating costs. The financing plan should also ensure continued
support of the program. Financing options for program development and revenue
sources for program operation are outlined in the sections that follow.
7.2.2.1 Sources of Revenue For Program Development and For Obtaining
Necessary Program Equipment
The Federal Construction Grants Program, municipal bonds, surplus or
reserved funds, and leasing arrangements can be used to finance the develop-
ment of your pretreatment program or the purchase of equipment needed for the
program. Table 7.7 describes these four funding options and provides infor-
mation to help you determine which option is appropriate for your municipal-
ity. Each of these methods is summarized briefly below.
The Construction Grants Program can provide Federal funds for 75 percent
of eligible pretreatment program development costs; the remaining 25 percent
is funded by your municipality, either through-bonds, surplus funds, or user
charges (all of these financing options are described later in this chapter).
7-15
-------
TABLE 7.6
WORKSHEET FOR CALCULATING
ANNUAL OPERATING COSTS
Average
Hourly
Direct Labor: Labor hours Rate Annual Program Cost
Management »(3efO /aC.^O $.
Legal J6& /-££3 $
Engineering *r/£ W.*/^ $
Laboratory /p fS. //. 50 $
Field inspection/sampling &317& f, &^ $ *J$t£)0O
Clerical /^Vf 4,17 $ //
Subtotal
II. Other Direct Costs Amount
Vehicle operation
Laboratory equipment/supplies
Sampling and laboratory equipment
operating & maintenance
Miscellaneous
- commercial laboratory
- contractor services
- debt service repayment
III. Indirect Costs
(May include overhead and general
and administrative expenses)
Subtotal $
Subtotal $
TOTAL ANNUAL OPERATING EXPENDITURES $/79f
7-16
-------
TABLE 7.7
PRETREATMENT PROGRAM FINANCING OPTIONS
Funding
Mechanism
Description
Procedures
Required
Considerations
Affecting Use
I. Construction
Grants
Federal government
will pay up to 75
percent of program
development costs.
Prepare plan of
study and submit
to State and EPA.
II. Municipal Bonds
A.
General
Obligation
Bond
Payment guaranteed
by general taxing
power of community!
Voter referendum
and underwriting
procedures.
B.
Revenue
Bond
Payment guaranteed
by revenues gener-
ated from POTW.
Underwriting
and issuing
procedures.
C.
Small De-
nomination
Bond
Smaller face values
than traditional
bonds. Sold
directly to
public.
Municipality must;
Set interest
rate
Obtain rating
for bond
Design bond
(denomination,
method of
interest pay-
ments, form of
ownership, and
maturity).
Availability of
Federal funds
major factor.
Debt limitations
often restrict
repayment
through general
public funds.
Complicates
application of
user charges.
Independence of
issuance afforded
since voter ref-
erendum not
required. Appro-
priate for pay-
ment through user
charges.
Direct sale to
public may result
in lower interest
rates. Appro-
priate for modest
sized investments.
Smaller values
more accessible to
markets. Munici-
pality has greater
underwriting
responsibilities
since underwriter
not involved.
7-17
-------
TABLE 7.7 (Continued)
PRETREATMENT PROGRAM FINANCING OPTIONS
Funding Procedures Considerations
Mechanism Description Required Affecting Use
III. Surplus or Excess revenues Detailed finan- Avoids surge in
Reserve generated from cial analysis user fees. Appro-
Revenues operations; may required to plan priate for opera-
be planned or appropriate amount ting contingencies
incidental. of reserves to and equipment
generate. replacement.
IV. Leasing Rental of equipment Minimal proce- Financial obliga-
tor use. Lease- dures involved, tion on annual
purchase agreements will vary basis only. Less
possible. depending on influenced by
agreement. long-term leverage
budget restric-
tions . Suitable
for modest capital
requirements.
Possibility of
greater overall
expense.
7-18
-------
Pretreatment costs fundable under the Construction Grants Program include:
Industrial waste survey
Legal authority review
Evaluation and selection of appropriate revenue source
Technical information determination
Design of monitoring program
Public participation meetings.
The purchase of POTW monitoring and analysis equipment may also be eligi-
ble for Federal assistance; the determination of allowable costs is spelled
out in Appendix A of 40 CFR 35, Subpart I.
The first step in obtaining Federal funds for pretreatment program devel-
opment is to prepare a "plan of study." This plan consists of a general
description of the POTW and community, an explanation of planned development
activities, a schedule for conducting these activities, and an estimate of the
level of effort to accomplish these activities. The plan of study is sub-
mitted to both your state water pollution control agency and the Regional EPA
office for their review.
It must be emphasized that only program development costs are grant-
eligible. Once your program is operating, the actual costs of maintaining it
are your responsibility. If you receive a construction grant, the Clean Water
Act requires that you establish and maintain a user charge system. The next
section of this chapter discusses various user charge systems.
Municipal bonds are another possible revenue source. Three types of
municipal bonds are available: (1) general obligation bonds, (2) revenue
bonds, and (3) small denomination bonds. General obligation bonds generally
require a voter referendum and are secured by the taxing power of the commu-
nity. Revenue bonds are commonly used by municipalities to finance projects
such as the expansion of sewage treatment plants and are appropriate for
projects that have revenue-earning potential from user charges. Revenue bonds
may be preferred to general obligation bonds because an election is not
7-19
-------
required to issue revenue bonds. These bonds do pose disadvantages, however,
because they are typically issued in denominations of over $1 million for long
periods of time, and your pretreatment program financing needs may be signif-
icantly less. Therefore, it may not be appropriate to issue a revenue bond
solely for recovering pretreatment costs. Instead, you might consider
including pretreatment program costs within a bond designed to finance treat-
ment plant expansion or new sewer system development.
Another alternative to revenue bonds is a relatively new type of bond
the small denomination or mini-bond. This type of bond may be advantageous
for financing pretreatment since it can be issued in amounts less than
$1 million. It is sold to investors in small denominations and is accessible
to local citizens. In addition, there is no need for underwriting, which
often presents a complication. Mini-bonds are generally secured by the POTW1s
own revenues, not the municipality's revenues. Thus, the POTW can fund its
pretreatment program without being limited by the municipality's financial
situation. If your municipality is interested in issuing bonds to fund the
purchase of equipment, your municipal treasurer, department of finance, or
other appropriate office can provide more information, and will probably have
a key role in the decision-making process.
Surplus or reserved funds may also be used to finance the purchase or
replacement of needed equipment. Surplus revenues result from either a
planned activity, such as generating additional revenue from user fees, or
from an unexpected reduction in operating expenditures. These revenues are
important to your POTW because they serve as a buffer to cover a variety of
unanticipated or "non-routine" costs. Keep in mind that a revenue surplus may
be viewed by users of a facility as overcharging for services by the POTW.
However, it is good planning to accumulate some surplus to cover unforeseen
costs.
Equipment leasing is a third alternative for obtaining necessary equip-
ment. Equipment can be obtained through a straight-operating lease or through
a lease-purchase agreement under which your POTW will eventually own the
equipment. Leasing may be a suitable alternative for your POTW because leases
7-20
-------
are not subject to legally established debt limits. Leases are appropriate
for financing capital needs which are too small to be considered for bond
financing and yet too large to be funded from current revenues.
7.2.2.2 Sources of Revenue For Recovering Operating Costs
Several sources of revenue, including general municipal taxes (i.e., ad
valorem taxes), special assessments and fees, and user charges can be used to
recover the operating costs of your pretreatment program. In choosing the
cost recovery method most suitable for your municipality, it may be desirable
that the majority of the pretreatment program's cost be paid by the POTW1s
industrial users.
The ad valorem tax can be used to recover equitably the cost of pretreat-
ment by adjusting the tax rate with certain surcharges and rebates to ensure
that each industry's charge represents its respective share of the costs.
Special assessments, hook-up fees, and septic tank disposal fees can also be
applied to collect revenue from industrial users to offset the program's cost.
The most equitable method for recovering pretreatment costs is a user
charge system. User charge systems are widely used for recovering wastewater
treatment costs and providing a method for proportionally allocating and re-
covering a project's costs among the POTW system users. If your POTW already
has an established user charge system, the system may be modified to recover
the additional cost of program implementation. Such a system can also be
developed specifically to fund the pretreatment program.
Developing a user charge system for your pretreatment program requires
the following general steps:
Estimate program costs
Design a cost allocation scheme
Allocate the costs proportionately across the user groups designated
in the cost allocation scheme
Calculate the user charge.
7-21
-------
The cost allocation scheme you develop will be dependent on the situation
in your municipality. However, it is important to re-emphasize that before
you can accurately estimate program costs, you must develop a detailed moni-
toring schedule specifying industrial users to be monitored, parameters to be
monitored, and monitoring frequency. A projected monitoring schedule is
essential for estimating cost since monitoring expenses represent a very large
portion of total program operating costs. Several cost allocation schemes and
example user charge models with their advantages and disadvantages are dis-
cussed in the following sections.
In all cases, the function of the cost allocation scheme is to allocate
costs to appropriate categories of users of the POTW system based on specific
criteria. Criteria for cost allocation include such things as number and type
of sampling and analysis events performed, and amount and type of pollutant
discharged. In this way, users will be charged based on their relative impact
on pretreatment program costs.
The following examples explain a few of the allocation schemes employed
by municipalities, and illustrate the mechanics and design of particular user
charge systems. The descriptions of each system are general and serve only
to explain basic concepts. You must tailor the user charge system for your
municipality to your specific situation. The three user charge systems de-
scribed below (the service charge, industry surcharge, and pollutant strength
charge) are all particularly well suited to pretreatment cost recovery, al-
though there are numerous other systems which can also be considered. The
three models are summarized in Table 7.8.
Service Charge
In a service charge system, industries are charged based on the amount of
sampling and analysis performed by the POTW for the particular IU (or group of
Ills). It employs a cost allocation scheme in which industries are grouped by
the type of sampling and analysis required. The service charge provides an
equitable way to recover pretreatment costs because monitoring costs are a
significant portion of overall pretreatment program implementation costs.
7-22
-------
TABLE 7.8
COST RECOVERY OPTIONS
Funding
Mechanism
Description
Procedures Required
Consideration
Affecting Use
A. Service
Charge
Pretreatment
charges based on
service used
(i.e., monitoring
activities) .
B. Industry
Surcharge
Existing user
charge by pre-
treatment factor,
C. Pollutant
Strength
Charge
Pretreatment
charges based on
amount of pollu-
tant discharged.
Need to determine
monitoring sched-
ule in order to
decide charge
rate. End-of-year
accounting adjust-
ments required so
that charges
actually represent
expenditures.
Continuous record-
keeping of indivi-
dual industry
activities.
Must determine
pretreatment
factor based on
industry classes
and related moni-
toring activities.
Monitoring data
must be coordi-
nated with charge
system. Need to
determine total
amount of pollutants
discharged and which
pollutants are to be
used to assess charges.
Projections to
calculate charge
rate can be com-
plex. Probably
most equitable
method since
service charges
closely represent
program.
Ease of applying
existing charge
system. Inequi-
ties may result
because of
averaging effect.
Provides positive
incentive for
industries to
reduce pollutant
discharges.
7-23
-------
The service charge calculations are shown in Table 7.9 and are described
below. The industries are divided into groups based on those requiring high
cost (i.e., labor or equipment intensive), or low-cost (i.e., grab) sampling
procedures, and the types of analyses required (metals, organics, or conven-
tional pollutants). The total program costs are then distributed proportion-
ally to these groups, based on the number of industries which fall into each
group and their contribution to the total costs. The total costs for each
group is divided next by the frequency of sampling and analysis for that group
to obtain the service charge for each individual sampling and analysis event.
The total charge for each industry is calculated by multiplying the number of
events by the appropriate service charge. For example, using the information
from Table 7.9, the charge for an industry requiring two high-level sampling
events and metals analysis would be two times (916 + 280) or $2,392/year.
The basic service charge model is:
UCI = SCSI + Vl
where:
UC = Pretreatment monitoring charge for a particular industry
S = Cost per sampling activity
C
S = Number of sampling activities for a particular industry
A = Cost for laboratory analysis
(_»
A = Number of analyses required for a particular industry.
Note that these charges are applied in addition to existing user charges. You
may distribute the estimated annual service charge for each industry on a
monthly basis or may charge the industry for each site visit. The difference
between actual and estimated POTW costs should be corrected by charge adjust-
ments at the end of the year.
The service charge is easily implemented since monitoring is a major pre-
treatment cost and is conducted as a normal, routine implementation function.
In a city with few industries, the service charge can be very simple to
calculate. If monitoring is contracted out to a commercial firm, the costs
may be charged directly to the industry. Conversely, in a city with many
7-24
------- An error occurred while trying to OCR this image.
-------
industries, sampling and analysis equipment may be purchased and these costs,
along with labor and O&M, allocated and recovered as in the example service
charge model. In developing this type of charge system, you should give spe-
cial attention to monitoring projections and the sampling and analysis sched-
ules determined for each IU.
Industry Surcharge
With industry class surcharges, a pretreatment surcharge is incorporated
into the industry's sewer use charge. Each class (or group) of industries is
charged proportionally based on their relative impact on the pretreatment
program costs. This is accomplished by calculating a surcharge factor which
is applied to the IU's base sewer use charge. Table 7.10 illustrates the
process.
In the example, the total pretreatment costs attributable to metal
platers is divided by the total sewer use charge for metal-plating lUs to
generate a pretreatment surcharge factor. The base sewer use charge for
each metal-plating facility is then increased by this factor. Using the
information on Table 7.10 and assuming that the base sewer use charge for a
metal-plating facility is $1,000 per year and that there are 60 platers in the
service area, the pretreatment surcharge would be $529 per year. The total
annual sewer use charge would be $1,529. In most cases, the industry
surcharge system is easy to develop and implement because it is based on an
existing user charge system and is simply an increase in sewer charges.
The formula for calculating the industry surcharge for pretreatment is as
follows:
(1 +
where:
UC* = Sewer and pretreatment charge for a given industry
UCT = Sewer charge for a given industry
P = Pretreatment factor for industry class.
7-26
-------
cfl
o
3
0)
o
n)
s
1-1
CO
.fl
P-i
bO
w
o
S3
I
C/J
H
C/1
«* *
Y <* vr
Oo
to
Tte
H
W
§
^
CJ
W
T3
O
O
CO
0)
H
M
T3
C
co
CO
4-1
O
T3
O
0)
Pu
cfl
PM
o
H
CO
O
8
8
VD
w
I
CO
§
4-J
CO
a
d0
H
4J
CO
l-l
CU
p.
o
Id
o
,0
CO
C
o
H
4-1
CO
t ,
W
4->
CO
rH
d
H
0
"O
<
bo
d
H
Id
O
4-1
H
C
O
e
i-H
H
M
4J
CO
3
TJ
C
M
CO
rl
CO
>>
rH
cfl
a
CO
>,
I,
M
o
4-)
CO
M
O
Xl
Cfl
iJ
CO
4-1
O
O
O
«w^
i^
"i
>>
u
cfl
6
3
CO
CJ
OS
CM
in
CO
iH
£
iH
4J
CO
rH
a
rH
CO
4-1
CU
e
n
o
>4H
M
PH
*
C
CO
Id
O
<4H
CO
4J
CO
o
CJ
4-1
d
cu
e
4-1
cO
cu
Id
4-1
(U
l-l
ex
i-H
cfl
3
C
C
cfl
i-H
cO
4-1
O
H
i-H
cfl
3
C
a
CO
i-H
cfl
4J
O
4J
CU
4-1
4-1
CO
4J
CO
cu
e
3
CO
CO
cfl
C
o
rl
4-1
CO
rH
3
CJ
rH
Cfl
O
CO
H
f,
H
H
CU
»
cu
CO
rH
cO
3
c
d
CO
H
efl
4-1
O
H
1*
ex
3
O
r<
bO
rH
Cfl
H
Id
4-1
CO
3
T3
d
H
O
O
o
o
*£>
CO-
CO
H
CO
Id
cu
4J
CO
rH
a
_j
cfl
4-1
CU
&
O
4->
cu
bO
Id
(0
J2
O
CU
CO
3
Id
cu
U
cu
CO
ex
3
O
M
bO
rH
CO
H
Id
4J
CO
3
T3
C
H
4-1
CO
fi
4-J
X
XI
T3
CU
4-1
Cfl
Id
CU
d
cu
bo
cu
3
d
cu
>
cu
M
CO
CO
CO
i-H
O
>>
Id
4J
CO
3
-o
C
H
j=
ej
cfl
0)
Id
O
<4d
rJ
O
4J
U
Cfl
<4d
4-1
d
cu
e
4-1
CO
cu
M
4-1
CU
rl
PH
II
M
cfl
0)
^
r<
Ol
ex
T3
cu
t.
H
H
3
a-
OJ
1-4
CO
(U
H
4-1
H
>
H
4-1
O
CO
CO
H
CO
>>
i-H
cti
C
cS
00
C
H
i 1
d.
e
cfl
CO
14-1
o
Id
ai
,£1
13
3
c
rH
CO
4J
0
4_1
00
C
iH
4_l
Cfl
i-H
3
a
rH
CO
O
>,
Jo
13
cu
4J
CO
H
CO
CO
cfl
CO
H
c
o
H
4-1
cd
CJ
o
i-H
i-H
<
H
7-27
-------
It should be noted that the example sewer charge (UC ) is derived from an
averaging process and that inequitable charges may result. For example, if
within an industry group, costs are allocated based on a few industries and
their monitoring requirements vary widely, the resulting pretreatment factor
may overcharge small users and undercharge large users. To correct this
problem, POTW costs and pretreatment factors can be assigned to individual
firms, and charges levied on a per-firm basis.
Pollutant Strength Charge
Pollutant strength charges distribute pretreatment program costs based on
the types and/ or amounts of pollutants discharged (e.g., conventionals ,
metals, toxic organics) by an IU. Costs are assigned to pollutant groups by
determining the number of industries and the costs of monitoring activities
for each pollutant or pollutant group. While it is possible to develop and
implement this type of charge system for any pollutant type or group, it is
usually a realistic and meaningful charge system for conventional pollutants
only. Overall treatment costs for facilities are typically recovered using
this type of system based on conventional pollutants . The example calculation
will, therefore, address only conventional pollutants.
The pollutant strength charge for each group is calculated by dividing
the total costs associated with the conventional pollutants by the amount of
each pollutant group discharged. The pollutant strength charge model is:
uci VV + W
where :
UC = Pollutant strength charge for a given industry
Vp = Charge rate per gallon of wastewater discharged
l>
V = Amount of wastewater discharged
B = Charge rate per pound of BOD discharged
C
B = Amount of BOD discharged
S., = Charge rate per pound of TSS discharged
C
S = Amount of TSS discharged.
7-28
-------
Table 7.11 illustrates how the pollutant strength charge was calculated for a
particular industry.
Since individual charges are based on the amount of a given pollutant
discharged, industries are given a positive economic incentive to reduce their
waste discharges. This incentive is the system's major benefit. In addition,
if specific industrial wastes cause an increase in operational costs at a
treatment plant, pollutant charges enable the municipality to recover any
incremental costs that result. The drawback to this charge system is that
fairly accurate IU flow measurements must be obtained. In the absence of
accurate flow measurements, IU water usage data may be substituted. If the
pollutants discharged by industry or group of industries are contributing to
operational problems or NPDES violations, a maximum limit should be set for
the pollutants. The surcharge would then be applied to the portion of the
pollutant loading that exceeds typical domestic waste strength up to the
maximum allowable limit.
As the discussion of these charge models suggests, you can consider a
wide range of options before implementing a user charge to recover pretreat-
ment program costs. Issues of equity, ease of administration and implemen-
tation, and coordination with existing user charge systems will determine the
appropriate charge system to be used.
7.3 INFORMATION ON RESOURCES REQUIRED FOR THE PROGRAM SUBMISSION
To demonstrate adequate organization and staffing, your final program
submission must include the following:
A description of the POTW organization, including the most current
POTW organizational chart as well as an identification of the func-
tional departments that will carry out the program [403.9(b)(3)]
Identification of any agency, city, service district, or entity other
than the POTW involved in the pretreatment program (e.g., in a multi-
jurisdictional submission), along with its responsibilities and a
description of coordination of procedures with the POTW [403.9(b)(3)].
7-29
------- An error occurred while trying to OCR this image.
-------
To meet the financial and resource requirements, your final pretreatment
program submission must contain the following:
An itemization of pretreatment program implementation costs, either
projected for the first year of program operation or the actual costs
for the most recent operating year if the pretreatment program was
fully implemented in that year [403.9(b)(4)]. These costs should be
itemized in the following areas:
- Labor
- Operating and maintenance costs
- Overhead
- Debt service and/or other annual equipment payments
- Other applicable costs.
A demonstration that the POTW has sufficient funds to operate the
program, including an account of the revenue sources to be used to
cover annual program costs. This account may be descriptive or may be
an itemization of revenue source and amounts. It is a good idea to
discuss your system for continuous revenue generation (e.g., user
charges) [403.9(b)(4)J.
The following items may be included to describe more fully the required
elements of the program submission:
A description of the duties of each staff position (or functional
group) involved with the program, including an estimate of the level
of effort anticipated for each position (or group). Such an estimate
may be represented as labor hours per year or percent involvement in
pretreatment activities.
A list of the major equipment (e.g., vehicles, sampling/analysis
apparatus) to be used in the program, including any commercial
services or alternative capabilities required by the program.
7-31
-------
8. APPROVAL AND IMPLEMENTATION
After following the steps outlined in the preceding chapters, you should
have developed a workable pretreatment program for regulating industrial
dischargers in your municipality. At the same time, you will have prepared
all the documentation necessary for a final pretreatment program submission to
the Approval Authority.
8.1 APPROVAL
Your local pretreatment program submission must be submitted to and
approved by the Approval Authority, i.e., either the chief administrator of
your State water pollution control agency, if the State has an NPDES permit
program and an approved State pretreatment program, or the EPA Regional
Administrator. At least three (3) copies of your program should be submitted
to facilitate review, which is often done by several divisions of the agency.
The submission package should contain a letter requesting approval of the pro-
gram. Often, the Approval Authority will use the checklist shown in Appen-
dix G to review your submission. It may be helpful to read these questions
before submitting your program to make sure that all points are covered.
In cases where pretreatment programs are reviewed for approval by EPA,
the State water pollution control agency is often given the opportunity to
review and comment on the submission. In cases where programs are reviewed by
a State with an approved program, the State may have somewhat different or
more stringent requirements than EPA. You can determine who will review your
program submission and whether there are any special requirements by con-
tacting your State pretreatment office. A list of pretreatment contacts
appears in Appendix A.
The permit compliance schedule (shown in Appendix E) requires that
individual components of the program be developed and submitted on certain
dates. These interim submissions may be reviewed and approved individually as
discussed below. Public notices and hearings are required only for final
submissions.
8-1
-------
8.1.1 Approval Procedures for a Final Pretreatment Program
On receipt of your final pretreatment program submission, the Approval
Authority must determine whether the submission contains all the information
necessary for adequate review. If the submission does not meet the require-
ments identified in 40 CFR 403.9 and explained in this manual, then the
Approval Authority will notify the POTW in writing. This notification should
indicate what sections of your local program submission are inadequate, and
suggest ways to modify it to comply with Federal (and State) requirements.
You should make sure at this time that you are informed of all of the
deficiencies or omissions so that you can prepare a revised submission.
If the final submission is complete, the Approval Authority will notify
the POTW that the submission has been received and is under review. After
determining that the submission is complete, the Approval Authority will issue
a public notice regarding the request for approval. The public notice must be
published in the largest daily newspaper within the jurisdiction served by
your POTW. This notice is also circulated to 208 planning agencies, to
Federal and State fish, shellfish, and wildlife resource agencies, and to any
interested person or group.
With the public notice, the Approval Authority provides a period of
30 days or more during which interested persons may submit their written com-
ments on the pretreatment program. This period also provides an opportunity
for your POTW, any State or Federal agency, or any person or group to request
a public hearing. The Approval Authority will hold a public hearing if the
POTW requests one or if there is significant public interest. The Approval
Authority will publish a notice of the hearing in the same newspaper that
published the original notice. The pretreatment program submission must be
reviewed within 90 days unless the public comment period is extended or a
public hearing is held. The review period should not extend beyond 180 days
from the date of public notice.
After the review period, your request f-or approval may be denied or
approved based on the evaluation of the program and consideration of comments
8-2
-------
from other agencies or the public. The Approval Authority will notify the
POTW, and each person that requested notice, of the final determination.
Notification of denial will include suggestions for modifying the program and
may provide you with additional time to bring the program into compliance.
Most POTWs are required by their NPDES permit to develop an approvable
pretreatment program. If your program is not approved, it is important that
you understand exactly what is needed to improve it so that you can use your
resources effectively to revise the program and obtain approval.
If the program is approved, the Approval Authority will notify you at the
end of its review. This notice usually takes the form of a letter explaining
your obligations as Control Authority of the local pretreatment program.
Implementation of the approved pretreatment program then becomes a condition
of your NPDES permit. The Approval Authority will send a notice concerning
approval or disapproval of your pretreatment program to people who commented
on it or participated in a public hearing. Notice of this action will also be
published in the local newspaper that published the original notice.
8.1.2 Special Cases
The General Pretreatment Regulations provide "special case" approval
mechanisms other than the normal approval process for a POTW program submis-
sion. These cases are not described in detail, but are mentioned in case you
wish to obtain more complete information from your Approval Authority.
8.1.2.1 Conditional Approval
A POTW may apply for conditional approval of the pretreatment program
before you have obtained all of the funding and personnel needed to implement
certain parts of the program. The POTW still must meet all of the require-
ments for an approvable pretreatment program. However, implementation of some
program activities may be postponed, if the POTW1s submission demonstrates
that:
Some aspects of the program do not need to be implemented immediately
Adequate authorities and procedures are available for the activities
that will be implemented right away
8-3
-------
Additional funding and personnel for the postponed activities will be
available when needed.
The POTW s submission must describe how these resources will be acquired when
they are needed. After receiving a request for conditional approval, the
Approval Authority will set a date for the acquisition of needed funding and
personnel. If the necessary resources are not acquired by this date, the
conditional approval of the local pretreatment program may be modified or
withdrawn. This provision is described in Section 403.9(c) of the General
Pretreatment Regulations.
8.1.2.2 Removal Credits
POTWs may request authorization to revise discharge limitations specified
in categorical pretreatment standards for Ills if their treatment plants
achieve consistent removal of regulated pollutants. Removal, defined as
reduction in the amount or alteration of the nature of a pollutant, by a
treatment plant may be achieved because of design capabilities or may be
incidental to its operation. If the removal is "consistent," discharge limits
for categorical industries may be revised to reflect the plant's removal of
pollutants. The intent of this provision is to give the POTW the ability to
grant "credit" to lUs for removal achieved by the treatment plant.
The procedures and requirements that must be met to obtain this authori-
zation are described in 40 CFR 403.7. EPA will also be preparing guidance on
removal credits that will explain the subject further. An IU may request that
you attempt to obtain removal credit authority from the Approval Authority.
In addition, an IU may apply directly to the Approval Authority for other
variances, such as fundamentally different factors variances (40 CFR 403.13)
or net gross credits (403.15).
8.2 IMPLEMENTATION
When the program is approved, your POTW becomes the Control Authority for
the local pretreatment program with responsibility for implementing the proce-
dures described in the submission.
8-4
-------
8.2.1 Ongoing Activities
As you implement the program, you will be responsible for actually per-
forming the activities set up during program development. Many developmental
activities, such as conducting the IWS, setting local effluent limits, or
revising your ordinance, may not need to be repeated regularly. Other planned
program activities, however, will be conducted on a regular basis. Some of
these ongoing activities, described earlier in this manual, are summarized
below:
Monitoring lUs (Chapter 5). Your monitoring program includes
sampling, inspection, self-monitoring, and reportingin short, all
surveillance activities needed to ensure continuing compliance by lUs
with pretreatment standards and requirements.
Administering the Program (Chapters 6 and 7). Program management and
administration covers permitting industries, identifying new indus-
tries, evaluating self-monitoring reports, and planning staff and
equipment requirements.
Undertaking Compliance Activities (Chapter 6). Working with users,
answering questions, and providing guidance on pretreatment equipment
are important activities to achieve compliance by lUs. Sometimes,
legal action may also be necessary.
Reporting to the Approval Authority. As a condition of your pretreat-
ment program or NPDES permit, you may be asked to report regularly on
the program and to show the program's effect in cleaning up the
nation's waters.
The next section describes some records you may wish to keep for accurate
reporting to the Approval Authority as well as for your internal use.
8.2.2 Program Effectiveness
When implementing a local pretreatment program, it is important to keep
in mind the four objectives of the National Pretreatment Program:
To protect the treatment plant
To protect the receiving water
To improve sludge quality
To protect POTW workers.
8-5
-------
To determine if your local program is meeting these goals, you can mea-
sure its effectiveness. Such measurement is useful for the following reasons:
To ensure equitable generation of revenues. It is important to
identify where resources are used and where revenues are generated so
that you can compare what users are paying to the actual activities
you are performing for them. For example, if you bill users on the
basis of flow, a large food processor may pay substantially more than
a small metal finisher, even though you may spend more staff time and
resources on the smaller firm. To correct a situation like this, you
could charge your lUs by monitoring event to supplement flow rate
charges. In this way, you can make sure that each user pays its fair
share of the pretreatment services it receives.
To ensure efficient use of resources. Tracking progress made to
control pollutants and amounts spent on these efforts will be helpful
for internal planning, organizing personnel, and directing resources.
For example, if continued monitoring shows consistent compliance by a
particular firm, you may want to concentrate efforts on those firms
with poorer compliance records. Additionally, budget and personnel
requests can be justified more easily to the POTW Administration or to
the public if the positive effect of the pretreatment program (i.e.,
reduction in pollutant loading) can be demonstrated.
To support realistic planning. If you have been keeping up to date on
industrial discharger data, identifying trends, and looking ahead, you
will have a good basis to plan for industrial growth in your service
area, expansions to the treatment plant, or alternate methods of
sludge disposal.
To facilitate reporting and justifying variances. You may be asked to
report regularly to the Approval Authority. Accurate records and data
on the program's effectiveness will make it easy to do so. These
records will also be important if the Approval Authority ever audits
or inspects your program. In addition, if you want to justify a
variance request such as removal credits, you will need accurate data.
There are many parameters you may use to measure the effectiveness of
your program and plan for its future. You can evaluate the program's
effectiveness in terms of environmental benefits or revenues expended. These
are just a few suggestions:
Environmental Benefits
- Reduction in pollutant loading over time. This parameter will
show whether your pretreatment program is reducing the amount of
pollutants that enter the system. You must adjust for growth or
new dischargers to see a true effect through time.
8-6
-------
- Percent removal over time. Measuring this parameter will
demonstrate whether your treatment plant is consistently removing
pollutants or whether its efficiency is improving as toxic loads
are reduced. Removal rate may also be used to justify a removal
credit request.
- Sludge quality over time. One of the pretreatment program's objec-
tives is to improve opportunities to recycle and reclaim municipal
sludges. As sludge quality improves, new disposal options may
become available to you.
Revenues Expended
- Amount spent versus sources of revenue. An evaluation of costs
will show who is paying for the program and whether the proportion
of program costs paid by each industry is changing over time. This
budget evaluation, which also measures continuing program costs,
can be compared to the parameters above which measure environmental
benefits achieved by these program expenditures.
- Amount spent on sludge disposal. To determine whether improving
sludge quality is cost-effective and whether alternative disposal
methods are financially sound, measurement of sludge disposal costs
will be helpful.
Amount spent on emergencies or maintenance problems. As the
pretreatment program continues and environmental benefits results,
your budget for responding to emergencies or system maintenance
problems caused by industrial discharges should decrease.
8.2.3 Oversight
Although not involved in the day-to-day operation of your program, the
Approval Authority retains oversight responsibility. Ongoing administration
and implementation of your approved pretreatment program will become a
condition of your NPDES permit. To verify continued compliance, the Approval
Authority may inspect or audit your program (just as you check on your lUs)
some time after your program is operating. The Approval Authority may also
request reports on the progress of your program. An annual report may be
requested by the Authority as a condition of your NPDES permit. This routine
review is important to ensure the success of the National Pretreatment
Program.
8-7
-------
APPENDICES
-------
APPENDIX A
PRETREATF1ENT INFORMATION CONTACTS
-------
APPENDIX A
PRETREATMENT COORDINATORS
U.S. EPA Regional Contacts - August, 1983
Headquarters: Permits Division
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
Region
I
II
III
IV
VI
VII
Contact
Mr. Jerry Potamis
U.S. EPA
John F. Kennedy Federal Building
Room 2203
Boston, MA 02203
Mr. Paul Molonari
U.S. EPA
26 Federal Plaza
Room 1009
New York, NY 10007
Mr. Harry Harbold
U.S. EPA
Curtis Building - 3WA-13
6th & Walnut Streets
Philadelphia, PA 19106
Mr. Albert Herndon
U.S. EPA
347 Courtland Street, N.E.
Atlanta, GA 30365
Mrs. Valerie Jones
U.S. EPA
230 S. Dearborn Street
Chicago, IL 60604
Mr. Ken Huffman (Temporary)
U.S. EPA 6W-PM
First International Building
1201 Elm Street
Dallas, TX 75270
Mr. Lee Duvall
U.S. EPA
324 E. Eleventh Street
Kansas City, MO 64106
Phone Numbers
(617) 223-5470
(212) 264-9826
FTS 264-9826
(215) 597-9226
FTS 597-9226
(404) 881-2211
FTS 257-2328
(312) 353-2105
FTS 886-6097
Office (214) 767-9822
Recpt. (214) 767-4375
(816) 374-2281
FTS 758-2281
A-l
-------
PRETREATMENT COORDINATORS (Continued)
Region
VIII
IX
Contact
Mr. Marshall Fischer
U.S. EPA
1860 Lincoln Street
Denver, CO 80295
Ms. Linda D. Powell
U.S. EPA (W-5-2)
215 Fremont Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
Mr. Ken Mosbaugh
Mr. Robert Robichaud (temporary)
U.S. EPA
Permits Branch M/S 521
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101
Phone Numbers
(303) 837-4901
FTS 327-4901
(415) 974-8311
FTS 454-8311
(206) 442-1270
(206) 442-1088
FTS 399-2712
A-2
-------
NPDES STATE PRETREATMENT CONTACTS
REGION I
CT Mr. Dick Barlow
Assistant Director Water Compliance
Department of Environmental
Protection
State Office Building
Hartford, CT 06115
(203) 566-5760
VT Mr. Gary Shokes
Environmental Engineer
Water Resources Department
Agency for Environmental
Conservation
State Office Building
Montpelier, VT 05602
(802) 828-3345
REGION II
NJ Mr. Kenneth Goldstein
Environmental Engineer
Division of Water Resources
Office of Sludge Management and
Industrial Pretreatment
P.O. Box 2809
Trenton, NJ 08625
(609) 292-0407
NY Mr. Joseph F. Kelleher, P.E.
Chief Pretreatment Section
Bureau of Municipal Project
Management
N.Y. State Department of
Environmental Conservation
50 Wolf Road, Room 306
Albany, NY 12233-0001
(518) 457-4125
REGION III
DC Mr. Jean Levesque
Administrator
Water Resources Management Admin.
5010 Overlook Avenue, S.W.
Washington, DC 20032
(202) 767-7651
REGION III (Continued)
DE Mr. Jay Brahmbhatt
Environmental Engineer
Water Resources Section
Division of Environmental Control
Dept. of Natural Resources and
Environmental Control
Edward Tatnell Building
P.O. Box 1401
Dover, DE 19901
(302) 736-4761
MD Mr. Ken McElroy
Acting Chief, Municipal Discharge
Permit Section
Water Resources Administration
State of Maryland
Tower State Office Building
Annapolis, MD 21401
(301) 269-3875
PA Mr. Dwayne Womer
Division of Sewerage and Grants
Bureau of Water Quality
Management
Pennsylvania Department of
Environmental Resources
P.O. Box 2063
Harrisburg, PA 17120
(717) 787-3481
VA Mr. Lawrence Lawson
Bureau of Applied Technology
State Water Control Board
P.O. Box 11143
Richmond, VA 23200
(804) 257-6336
WVA Mr. Praven Sangani
West Virginia Dept. of Natural
Resources
1201 Greenbriar Street
Charleston, WV
(304) 345-8855/348-4086
A-3
-------
REGION IV
NPDES STATE PRETREATMENT CONTACTS (Continued)
REGION V
AL Mr. Charles Horn
Alabama Water Improvement
Commission
State Office Building
Montgomery, AL 36130
(205) 832-3370
*GA Mr. John Beall
Water Quality Control
Environmental Protection Division
Georgia Department of Natural
Resources
270 Washington Street, SW
Atlanta, GA 30334
(404) 656-7400
MS Mr. Bill Barnett
Mississippi Department of Natural
Resources
Bureau of Pollution Control
P.O. Box 10385
Jackson, MS 39209
(601) 961-5171
NC Salahdin Abdul-Haqq
Supervisor
Pretreatment Unit
North Carolina Dept. of Natural
Resources & Community Develop.
P.O. Box 27687
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27611-7687
(919) 733-2930
SC Mr. Robert W. King
Division Director
South Carolina Department of Health
and Environmental Control
2600 Ball Street
Columbia, SC 29201
(803) 758-5067
TN Mr. Paul Davis, Chief
Permits Section
Division of Water Quality Control
Tennessee Dept. of Health and
Environment
150 9th Avenue North
Terra Building, 2nd Floor
Nashville, TN 37203
(615) 741-7883
IL Ms. Angela Tin
Pretreatment Coordinator
Permits Section
Division of Water Pollution
Control
Illinois EPA
2200 Churchhill Road
Springfield, IL 62706
(217) 782-0610
IN Mr. Lonnie Brumfield
Pretreatment Coordinator
Indiana State Board of Health
Water Pollution Control Division
1330 West Michigan
Indianapolis, IN 46202
(317) 633-0751
MI Mr. Bruce C. Moore
Industrial Pretreatment Program
Dept. of Natural Resources
P.O. Box 30028
Lansing, MI 48909
(517) 373-8088
MN Mr. Ron Jacobson
Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency
1935 West County Road B-2
Roseville, MN 55113
(612) 296-7231
OH Mr. Ed Duffield
Special Project Coordinator
Ohio EPA
P.O. Box 1049
Columbus, OH 43216
(614) 466-7427
WI Mr. John Parrish
Environmental Specialist
Wisconsin Dept. of Natural
Resources
P.O. Box 7921
Madison, WI 53707
(608) 267-7635
A-4
-------
REGION VII
NPDES STATE PRETREATMENT CONTACTS (Continued)
REGION VIII (Continued)
IA Mr. Russel Soper, P.E.
Environmental Engineer
Wastewater Permits Branch
Iowa Department of Water, Waste
and Air Management
Henry A. Wallace Building
900 East Grand
Des Moines, IA 50319
(515) 281-4421
KS Mr. Don Carlson/Steve Casper
Chief, Industrial Unit
Water Pollution Control Section
Kansas Department of Health &
Environment
Building 740 - Forbes Field
Topeka, KS 66620
(913) 862-9360
MO Mr. Frank Dolan
Environmental Engineer
Missouri Dept. of Natural Resources
P.O. Box 1368
Jefferson City, MO 65102
(314) 751-3241
NE Mr. Kenneth Hassler
Environmental Specialist
Water Pollution Control Division
Nebraska Dept. of Environmental
Control
Box 94877, Statehouse Station
301 Centennial Mall, South
Lincoln, NE 68509
(402) 471-2186
REGION VIII
CO Mr. Jeb Love
Chief, Permits Section
Water Quality Control Division
Colorado Dept. of Health
4210 E. llth Avenue
Denver, CO 80220
(303) 320-8333 x 3361
MT Mr. Fred Shewman
Sanitary Engineer
Water Quality Bureau
Montana Department of Health
Capitol Station
Helena, MT 59601
(701) 224-2375
ND Ms. Sheila Kuhn - Permits
North Dakota State Department of
Health
1200 Missouri Avenue
Bismarck, ND 58505
(701) 224-4578
WY Mr. John Wagner
Technical Supervisor
Water Quality Division
Wyoming Dept. of Environmental
Quality
Hathaway Office Building
Cheyenne, WY 82002
(307) 777-7781
REGION IX
AZ Mr. Moe Wakefield
Bureau of Water Quality
Arizona Dept. of Health Services
1740 W. Adams, Room 203
Phoenix, AZ 85007
(602) 255-1277
CA Mr. Bruce Fujimoto
CA State Water Resource Control
Board
P.O. Box 100
Sacramento, CA 95801
FTS 465-0539
HI Mr. Mel Koizumi
Deputy Director of Environmental
Health
Hawaii State Department of Health
P.O. Box 3378
Honolulu, HI 96801
Attn: Dennis Lau
(808) 548-6410
NV Mr. W. Marvin Tebeau
Environmental Scientist
State of Nevada
Division of Environmental
Protection
201 S. Fall Street
Capitol Complex
Carson City, NV
(702) 885-4670
A-5
-------
NPDES STATE PRETREATMENT CONTACTS (Continued)
REGION X
OR Mr. Kent Ashbaker
Supervisor, Source Control
Oregon Department of Environmental
Quality
P.O. Box 1760
Portland, OR 97207
(503) 229-5325
WA Mr. Bob Monn
State Department of Ecology
Mail St. PV-11
Olympia, WA 98504
(206) 753-2825
A-6
-------
APPENDIX B
BIBLIOGRAPHY OF PRETREATMENT REFERENCES
-------
APPENDIX B
BIBLIOGRAPHY OF PRETREATMENT REFERENCES
Association of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies, Pretreatment Resource Reader.
Washington, DC: Association of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies, 1982. (NTIS
Order No. PB82-181629).
Dyer, J.} Feiler, H., and Bernick, A., Handbook of Industrial Waste
Pretreatment (Water Management Series). New York: Garland Publishing,
Inc., 1981.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Fate of Priority Pollutants in Publicly
Owned Treatment Works, Volumes I and II (EPA Publication No. 440/1-82-303).
Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, September 1982.
(NTIS Order No. PB83-122788).
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Handbook For Sampling and Sample
Preservation of Water and Wastewater. (EPA Publication No. 600/4-82-029).
Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, September 1982.
(NTIS Order No. PB83-124503).
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Industrial Residuals Manual, Volumes I,
II, and III. Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
November 1981. (Available from EPA Office of Water Enforcement and
Permits).
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water
and Wastes. (EPA Publication No. 600/4-79-020).Washington, DC:U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, March 1979. (NTIS Order No. PB-297686).
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Treatability Manual, Volumes I, II, III,
IV, and V. (EPA Publication No. 600/8-80-042c). Washington, DC: U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, July 1980. (NTIS Order Nos. PB80-223050,
PB80-223068, PB80-223076, PB80-223084, and PB80-223092).
Water Pollution Control Federation, Industrial Wastewater Control Program for
Municipal Agencies. Washington, DC: WPCF, 1982. (WPCF Order No. MOP
OM-4).
Water Pollution Control Federation, Joint Treatment of Industrial and
Municipal Wastewaters. Washington, DC: WPCF, 1976. (WPCF Order No.
M0021).
Water Pollution Control Federation, Pretreatment of Industrial Wastes.
Washington, DC: WPCF, 1981. (WPCF Order No. MOP FD-3).
Sources listed with an NTIS Order Number are available from:
National Technical Information Service
U.S. Department of Commerce
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield, VA 22161
B-l
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHY OF PRETREATMENT REFERENCES (Continued)
Sources listed with a WPCF Order Number are available from:
Water Pollution Control Federation
2626 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20037
B-2
-------
APPENDIX C
GENERAL PRETREATMENT REGULATIONS FOR
EXISTING AND NEW SOURCES AND
AMENDMENTS
In an effort to reduce the bulk of this Guidance Manual,
a complete copy of only the revised 40 CFR Part 403
regulations is included here. The actual January
28, 1981, Federal Register notice included an additional
thirty-five pages of Supplementary Information which
is not included in this Appendix.
-------
Wednesday
January 28, 1981
Part II
Environmental
Protection Agency
General Pretreatment Regulations for
Existing and New Sources
c-i
-------
Federal Register / VoL 46. No.'18 / Wednesday. January 28. 1981 / Rules and Regulations 9439
the date of issuance of the June 28,1978
regulations.
Douglas M. Co»tle,
Administrator.
January 13.1981.
40 CFR Part 403 is revised to read as
follows:
PART403GENERAL
PRETREATMENT REGULATIONS FOR
EXISTING AND NEW SOURCES OF
POLLUTION
Sec.
403.1 Purpose and applicability.
403.2 Objective of general pretreatment
regulation.
403.3 Definitions.
403.4 Slate or local law.
403.5 National pretreatment standards;
prohibited discharges.
403.6 National pretreatment standards:
categorical standards.
403.7 Revision of categorical pretreatment
standards to reflect POTW removal of
pollutants.
403.8 POTW pretreatment programs:
development by POTW.
403.9 POTW pretreatment programs aod/or
authorization to revise pretreatment
standards: submission for approval
403.10 Development and submission of
NPDES State pretreatment programs.
403.11 Approval procedures for POTW
programs and revisions of categorical
pretreatment standards.
403.12 Reporting requirements for POTWs
and industrial users.
403.13 Variances from categorical
pretreatment standards for
fundamentally different factors.
403.14 Confidentiality.
403.15 Net/Gross calculation.
403.16 Upset provision.
Appendix APRM 75-34.
Appendix B65 Toxic pollutants.
Appendix C34 Industrial categories.
Appendix DSelected industrial
subcategories exempted from regulated
pursuant to paragraph S of the NRDC v.
Castle consent decree.
Authority: Section 54(c)(2) of the dean
Water Act of 1977 (Pub. L. 95-217),
{{ 204(b)(lKq, 208(b)(2KCKiii),
301(b)(l)(A)(ii), 301(b)(2)(A)(ii). 301(bK2)(C).
301(h)(5), 301(i)[2), 304(e), 304(g), 307, 308. 309.
402(b), 405, and 501(a) of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act (Pub. L 92-500), as
amended by the Clean Water Act of 1977.
§ 403.1 Purpose and applicability.
(a) This part implements sections
204(b)(l)(C). 208(b)(2)(C)(iii).
301(b)(l)(A}(ii). 301(b)(2)(AHii). 301(h)(5)
and 301(i}(2). 304 (e) and (g), 307, 308,
309. 402(b), 405, and 501(3) of the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act as
amended by the Clean Water Act of
1977 (Pub. L 95-217) or "The Act." It
establishes responsibilities of Federal,
State, and local government industry
and the public to implement National
Pretreatment Standards to control
pollutants which pass through or
interfere with treatment processes in
Publicly Owned Treatment Works
(POTWs) or which may contaminate
sewage sludge.
(b) This regulation applies: (1) to
pollutants from non-domestic sources
covered by Pretreatment Standards
which are indirectly discharged into or
transported by truck or rail or otherwise
introduced into POTWs as defined
below in { 403.3; (2) to POTWs which
receive wastewater from sources subject
to National Pretreatment Standards; (3)
to States which have or are applying for
National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) programs
approved in accordance with section 402
of the Act and (4) to any new or
existing source subject to Pretreatment
Standards. National Pre treatment
Standards do not apply to sources which
Discharge to a sewer which is not
connected to a POTW Treatment Plant
J40&2 Objective* of general
prstreatnwnt regulations.
By establishing the responsibilities of
government and industry to implement
National Pretreatment Standards this
regulation fulfills three objectives: (a) to
prevent the introduction of pollutants
into POTWs which will interfere with
the operation of a POTW, including
interference with its use or disposal of
municipal sludge; (b) to prevent the
introduction of pollutants into POTWs
which will pass through the treatment
works or otherwise be incompatible
with such works; and (c) to improve
opportunities to recycle and reclaim
municipal and industrial wastewaters
and sludges.
§403.3, .Definitions.
For the purpose of this regulation:
(a) Except as discussed below, the
general definitions, abbreviations, and
methods of analysis set forth in 40 CFR
Part 401 shall apply to this regulation.
(b) The term "Act" means Federal
Water Pollution Control Act, also
known as the Clean Water Act as
amended, 33 U.S.C. 1251, et seq.'
(c) The term "Approval Authority"
means the Director in an NPDES State
with an approved State pretreatment
program and the appropriate Regional
Administrator in a non-NPDES State or
NPDES State without an approved State
pretreatment program.
(d) The term "Approved POTW
Pretreatment Program" or "Program" or
"POTW Pretreatment Program" means a
program administered by a POTW that
meets the criteria established in this
regulation (IS 403.3 and 403.9) and
which has been approved by a Regional
Administrator or State Director in
accordance with S 403.11 of this
regulation.
(e) The term "Director" means the
chief administrative officer of a State or
Interstate water pollution control agency
with an NPDES permit program
approved pursuant to section 402(b) of
the Act and an approved State
pretreatment program.
(f) The term "Enforcement Division
Director" means one of the Directors of
the Enforcement Divisions within the
Regional offices of the Environmental
Protection Agency or this person's
delegated representative.
(g) The term "Indirect Discharge" or
"Discharge" means the introduction of
pollutants into a POTW from any non-
domestic source regulated under section
307(b), (c) or (d) of the Act
(h) The term "Industrial User" or
"User" means a source of Indirect
Discharge.
(i) The term "Interference" means an
inhibition or disruption of the POTW, its
treatment processes or operations, or its
sludge processes, use or disposal which
is a cause of or significantly contributes
to either a violation of any requirement
of the POTWs NPDES permit (including
an increase in the magnitude or duration
of a violation) or to the prevention of
sewage sludge use or disposal by the
POTW hi accordance with the following
statutory provisions and regulations or
permits issued thereunder (or more
stringent State or local regulations):
Section 405 of the Clean Water Act the
Solid Waste Disposal Act (SWDA)
(including title n more commonly
referred to as the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
and including State regulations
contained in any State sludge
management plan prepared pursuant to
Subtitle D of the SWDA), the Clean Air
Act, and the Toxic Substances Control
Act An Industrial User significantly
contributes to such a permit violation or
prevention of sludge use or disposal in
accordance with above-cited authorities
whenever such User
(1) Discharges a daily pollutant
loading in excess of that allowed by
contract with the POTW or by Federal.
State or local law,
(2) Discharges wastewater which
substantially differs in nature or
constituents from the User's average
Discharge: or
(3) Knows or has reason to know that
its Discharge, alone or in conjunction
with Discharges from other sources,
would result in a POTW permit
violation or prevent sewage sludge use
or disposal in accordance with the
above-cited authorities as they apply to
the POTWs selected method of sludge
management
C-2
-------
9440 Federal Register / Vol. 46. No. 18 / Wednesday. January 28, 1981 / Rules and Regulations
(j) The term "National Pretreatment
Standard," "Pretreatment Standard," or
"Standard" means any regulation
containing pollutant discharge limits
promulgated by the EPA in accordance
with section 307 (b) and (c) of the Act
which applies to Industrial Users. This
term includes prohibitive discharge
limits established pursuant to 5 403.5.
(k) The term "New Source" means any
building, structure, facility, or
installation from which there is or may
be a Discharge, the construction of
which commenced:
(1) After promulgation of Pretreatment
Standards under section 307(c) of the
Act which are applicable to such source;
or
(2) After proposal of Pretreatment
Standards in accordance with section
307(c) of the Act which are applicable to
such source, but only if the Standards
are promulgated in accordance with
section 307(c) within 120 days of their
proposal.
(1) The terms "NPDES Permit" or
"Permit" means a permit issued to a
POTW pursuant to section 402 of the
Act
(m) The term "NPDES State" means a
State (as defined in 40 CFR § 122.3) or
Interstate water pollution control agency
with an NPDES permit program
approved pursuant to section 402(b] of
the Act
(n) The term "Pass Through" means
the Discharge of pollutants through the
POTW into navigable waters in
quantities or concentrations which are a
cause of or significantly contribute to a
violation of any requirement of the
POTW's NPDES permit (including an
increase in the magnitude or duration of
a violation). An Industrial User
significantly contributes to such permit
v iolation where it
(1) Discharges a daily pollutant
loading in excess of that allowed by
contract with the POTW or by Federal.
State, or local law;
(2) Discharges wastewater which
substantially differs in nature and
constituents from the User's average
Discharge;
(3) Knows or has reason to know that
its Discharge, alone or in conjunction
with Discharges from other sources,
would result in a permit violation; or
(4) Knows or has reason to know that
the POTW is, for any reason, violating
its final effluent limitations in its permit
and that such Industrial User's
Discharge either alone or in conjunction
with Discharges from other sources,
increases the magnitude or duration of
the POTWs violations.
(o) The term "Publicly Owned
Treatment Works" or "POTW" means a
treatment works as defined by section
212 of the Act which is owned by a
State or municipality (as defined by
section 502(4) of the Act). This definition
includes any devices and systems used
in the storage, treatment recycling and
reclamation of municipal sewage or
industrial wastes of a liquid nature. It
also includes sewers, pipes and other
conveyances only if they convey
wastewater to a POTW Treatment
Plant. The term also means the
municipality as defined in section 502(4)
of the Act which has jurisdiction over
the Indirect Discharges to and the
discharges from such a treatment works.
(p) The term "POTW Treatment
Plant" means that portion of the POTW
which is designed to provide treatment
(including recycling and reclamation) of
municipal sewage and industrial waste.
(q) The term "Pretreatment" means
the reduction of the amount of
pollutants, the elimination of pollutants,
or the alteration of the nature of
pollutant properties in wastewater prior
to or in lieu of discharging or otherwise
introducing such pollutants into a
POTW. The reduction or alteration may
be obtained by physical, chemical or
biological processes, process changes or
by other means, except as prohibited by
§ 403.B(d). Appropriate pretreatment
technology includes control equipment
such as equalization tanks or facilities,
for protection against surges or slug
loadings that might interfere with or
otherwise be incompatible with the
POTW. However, where wastewater
from a regulated process is mixed in aa
equalization facility with unregulated
wastewater or with wastewater from
another regulated process, the effluent
from the equalization facility must meet
an adjusted pretreatment limit
calculated in accordance with § 403.6(e).
(r) The term "Pretreatment
Requirements" means any substantive
or procedural requirement related to
Pretreatment other than a National
Pretreatment Standard, imposed on an
Industrial User.
(s) The term "Regional Administrator"
means the appropriate EPA Regional
Administrator.
(t) The term "Submission" means: (1)
a request by a POTW for approval of a
Pretreatment Program to the EPA or a
Director; (2) a request by a POTW to the
EPA or a Director for authority to revise
the discharge limits in categorical
Pretreatment Standards to reflect POTW
pollutant removals; or (3) a request to
the EPA by an NPDES State for approval
of its State pretreatment program.
{ 403.4 Stat* or local law.
Nothing in this regulation is intended
to affect any Pretreatment
Requirements, including any standards
or prohibitions, established by State or
local law as long as the State or local
requirements are not less stringent than
any set forth in National Pretreatment
Standards, or any other requirements or
prohibitions established under the Act
or this regulation. States with an NPDES
permit program approved in accordance
with section 402 (b) and (c) of the Act or
States requesting NPDES programs, are
responsible for developing a State
pretreatment program in accordance
with { 403.10 of this regulation.
§ 403.5 National pretrMtmmt standards:
prohibited discharge*.
(a) General prohibitions. Pollutants
introduced into POTWs by an non-
domestic source shall not Pass Through
the POTW or Interfere with the
operation or performance of the works.
These general prohibitions and the
specific prohibitions in paragraph (b) of
this section apply to all non-domestic
sources introducing pollutants into a
POTW whether or not the source is
subject to other National Pretreatment
Standards or any national. State, or
local Pretreatment Requirements.
(b) Specific prohibitions. In addition,
the following pollutants shall not be
introduced into a POTW:
(1) Pollutants which creat a fire or
explosion hazard in the POTW;
(2} Pollutants which will cause
corrosive structural damage to the
POTW, but in no case Discharges with
pH lower than 5.0, unless the works is
specifically designed to accommodate
such Discharges;
(3) Solid or viscous pollutants in
amounts which will cause obstruction to
the flow in the POTW resulting in
Interference;
(4) Any pollutant including oxygen
demanding pollutants (BOD, etc.)
released in a Discharge at a flow rate
and/or pollutant concentration which
will cause Interference with the POTW.
(5) Heat in amounts which will inhibit
biological activity in the POTW
resulting in Interference, but in no case
heat in such quantities that the
temperature at the POTW Treatment
Plant exceeds 40°C (104'F) unless the
Approval Authority, upon request of the
POTW, approves alternate temperature
limits.
(c) When Specific Limits Must be
Developed by POTW. (1) POTWs
developing POTW Pretreatment
Programs pursuant to § 403.8 shall
develop and enforce specific limits to
implement the prohibitions listed in
S 403.5 (a) and (b).
(2) All other POTW's shall, in cases
where pollutants contributed by User(s)
result in Interference or Pass-Through,
and such violation is likely to recur,
C-3
-------
Federal Register / VoL 40, No. 18 / Wednesday. January 28, 1981 / Rules and Regulations 9441
develop and enforce specific effluent
limits for Industrial User(s), and all
other users, as appropriate, which.
together with appropriate changes in the
POTW Treatment Plant's Facilities or
operation, are necessary to ensure
renewed and continued compliance with
the POTWs NPDES permit or sludge use
or disposal practices.
(3) Specific effluent limits shall not be
developed and enforced without
individual notice to persons or groups
who have requested such notice and an
opportunity to respond.
(d) Local Limits. Where specific
prohibitions or limits on pollutants or
pollutant parameters are developed by a
POTW hi accordance with paragraph fc)
above, such limits shall be deemed
Pretreatment Standards for the purposes
of section 307(d) of the Act
(e) 'EPA and State Enforcement
Actions. If, within 30 days after notice of
an Interference or Pass Through
violation has been sent by EPA or the
NPDES State to the POTW, and to
persons or groups who have requested
such notice, the POTW fails to
commence appropriate enforcement
action to correct the violation, EPA or
the NPDES State may take appropriate
enforcement action.
(f) Compliance Deadlines. Compliance
with the provisions of this section is
required beginning on [44 days after
publication in the Federal Register],
except for paragraph (b)(5) of this
section which must be complied with by
August 25,1981.
$403.6 National Pretreatment Standards:
Categorical Standard*.
National Pretreatment Standards
specifying quantities or concentrations
of pollutants or pollutant properties
which may be Discharged to a POTW by
existing or new Industrial Users in
specific industrial subcategories will be
established as separate regulations
under the appropriate subpart of 40 CFR
Chapter L Subchapter N. These
Standards, unless specifically noted
otherwise, shall be in addition to the
general prohibitions established in
$ 403.5 of this regulation.
(a) Category Determination Request
(1) Application Deadline. Within 00
days after the effective date of a
Pretreatment Standard for a subcategory
under which an Industrial User may be
included, or within 60 o>ys after the
Federal Register notice announcing the
availability of the technical
development document for that
subcategory, whichever is later, the
existing Industrial User or POTW may
request that the Enforcement Division
Director or Director, as appropriate,
provide written certification on whether
the Industrial User falls within that
particular subcategory. A new source
must request this certification prior to
commencing discharge. Where a request
for certification is submitted by a
POTW, the POTW shall notify any
affected Industrial User of such
submission. The Industrial User may
provide written comments on the POTW
submission to the Enforcement Division
Director or Director, as appropriate,
within 30 days of notification.
(2) Contents of application. Each
request shall contain a statement
(i) Describing which subcategories
might be applicable; and
(ii) Citing evidence and reasons why a
particular subcategory is applicable and
why others are not applicable. Each
such statement shall contain an oath
stating that the facts contained therein
are true on the basis of the applicant's
personal knowledge or to the best of his
information and belief. The oath shall be
that set forth in 5 403.7(b)(2)(ii], except
that the phrase "5 403.7(d)" shall be
replaced with "§ 403.6(a)."
(3) Deficient Requests. The
Enforcement Division Director or
Director will only act on written
requests for determinations that contain
all of the information required. Persons
who have made incomplete submissions
will be notified by the Enforcement
Division Director or Director that their
requests are deficient and, unless the
time period is extended, will be given 30
days to correct the deficiency. If the
deficiency is not corrected within 30
days or within an extended period
allowed by the Enforcement Division
Director or the Director, the request for
a determination shall^be denied.
(4) Final Decision.
(i) When the Enforcement Division
Director or Director receives a submittal
he or she will, after determining that it
contains all of the information required
by paragraph (2) of this section, consider
the submission, any additional evidence
that may have been requested, and any
other available information relevant to
the request The Enforcement Division
Director or Director will then make a
written determination of the applicable
subcategory and state the reasons for
the determination.
(ii) Where the request is submitted to
the Director, the Director shall forward
the determination described in this
paragraph to the Enforcement Division
Director who may make a final
determination. The Enforcement
Division Director may waive receipt of
these determinations. If the Enforcement
Division Director does not modify the
Director's decision within 60 days after
receipt thereof, or if the Enforcement
Division Director waives receipt of the
determination, the Director's decision is
final
(iii) Where the request is submitted by
the Industrial User or POTW to the
Enforcement Division Director or where
the Enforcement Division Director elects
to modify the Director's decision, the
Enforcement Division Director's
decision will be final.
(iv) The Enforcement Division
Director or Director, as appropriate,
shall send a copy of the determination
to the affected Industrial User and the
POTW. Where the final determination is
made by the Enforcement Division
Director, he or she shall send a copy of
the determination to the Director.
[5] Requests for Hearing and/or Legal
Decision. Within 30 days following the
date of receipt of notice of the final
determination as provided for by
paragraph (a)(4)(iv] of this section, the
Requester may submit a petition to
reconsider or contest the decision to the
Regional Administrator who shall act on
such petition expeditiously and state the
reasons for his or her determination in
writing.
(b) Deadline for Compliance With
Categorical Standards. Compliance by
existing sources with categorical
Pretreatment Standards shall be within
3 years of the date the Standard is
effective unless a shorter compliance
time is specified in the appropriate
subpart of 40 CFR Chapter I, Subchapter
N but in any case no later than July 1,
1984. Direct Discharges with NPDES
permits modified or reissued to provide
a variance pursuant to section 301 (i](2)
of the Act shall be required to meet
compliance dates set forth in any
applicable categorical Pretreatment
Standard. Existing sources which
become Industrial Users subsequent to
promulgation of an applicable
categorical Pretreatment Standard shall
be considered existing Industrial Users
except where such sources meet the
definition of a New Source as defined in
5 403.3(k). Compliance with categorical
Pretreatment Standards for New
Sources will be required upon
promulgation.
(c) Concentration and Mass Limits.
Pollutant discharge limits in categorical
Pretreatment Standards will be
expressed either as concentration or
mass limits. Wherever possible, where
concentration limits are specified hi
standards, equivalent mass limits will
be provided so that local. State or
Federal authorities responsible for
enforcement may use either
concentration or mass limits. Limits in
categorical Pretreatment Standards shall
apply to the effluent of the process
regulated by the Standard, or as
otherwise specified by the Standard.
C-4
-------
9442 . Federal Register / Vol. 46, No. 18 / Wednesday, January 28. 1981 / Rules and Regulations
(d) Dilution Prohibited as Substitute
for Treatment Except where expressly
authorized to do so by an applicable
categorical Pretreatment Standard, no
Industrial User shall ever increase the
use of process water or, in any other
way, attempt to dilute a Discharge as a
partial or complete substitute for
adequate treatment to achieve
compliance with a categorical
Pretreatment Standard The Control
Authority (as defined in { 403.12(a)) may
impose mass limitations on Industrial
Users which are using dilation to meet
applicable Pretreatment Standards or in
other cases where the imposition of
mass limitations is appropriate.
(e) Combined Wastestream Formula.
Where process effluent is mixed prior to
treatment with wastewaters other than
those generated by the regulated
process, fixed alternative discharge
limits may be derived by the Control
Authority, as defined in { 403.12(a), or
by the Industrial User with the written
concurrence of the Control Authority.
These alternative limits shall be applied
to the mixed effluent When deriving
alternative categorical limits, the
Control Authority or Industrial User
shall calculate both an alternative daily
maximum value using the daily
maximum value(s) specified in the
appropriate categorical Pretreatment
Standard(s) and an alternative
consecutive sampling day average value
using the long-term average value(s)
specified in the appropriate categorical
Pretreatment Standard(s). The Industrial
User shall comply with the alternative
daily maximum and long-term average
limits fixed by the Control Authority
until the Control Authority modifies the
limits or approves an Industrial User
modification request. Modification is
authorized whenever there is a material
or significant change in the values used
in the calculation to fix alternative limits
for the regulated pollutant An Industrial
User must immediately report any such
material or significant change to the
Control Authority. Where appropriate
new alternative categorical limits shall
be calculated within 30 days.
(1) Alternative limit calculation. For
purposes of these formulas, the "average
daily flow" means a reasonable measure
of the average daily flow for a 30-day
period. For new sources, flows shall be
estimated using projected values. The
alternative limit for a specified pollutant
will be derived by the use of either of
the following formulas:
(i) Alternative Concentration Limit-
where
Cr*»the alternative concentration limit for
the combined waateatream.
Q = the categorical Pretreatment Standard
concentration limit for a pollutant in the
regulated stream i.
F,-the average daily flow (at least a 30-
day average) of stream i to the extent
that it is regulated for such pollutant
FD=the average daily flow (at least a 30-
day average) from boiler blowdown
streams, non-contact cooling streams,
sanitary wastestreanu (where such
streams are not regulated by a
categorical Pretreatment Standard) and
from any process wastectreams which
wen or could have been entirely
exempted from categorical Pretreatment
Standards pursuant to paragraph 8 of the
NRDC v. Cattle Consent Decree (12 ERC
1833) for one or more of the following
reasons (see Appendix D):
(1) the pollutants of concern are not
detectable in the effluent from the
Industrial User (paragraph (8)(a)(iii));
(2) the pollutants of concern are present
only in trace amounts and are neither
causing nor likely to cause toxic effects
{paragraph (8)(a){iii)J;
(3) the pollutants of concern are present in
amounts too small to be effectively
reduced by technologies known to the
Administrator (paragraph (8j(a)(iii)); or
(4) the wastestream contains only
pollutants which are compatible with the
POTW (paragraph (8)(b)(i)).
FTthe average daily flow (at least a 30-
day average) through the combined
treatment facility (includes F,, FD and
unregulated streams).
N"the total number of regulated streams.
(ii) Alternative Mass Limit-
K
FT-
N
where
MT=the alternative mass limit for a
pollutant in the combined wastestream.
Mt«the categorical Pretreatment Standard
mass limit for a pollutant in the regulated
stream i (the categorical pretreatment
mass limit.multiplied by the appropriate
measure of production).
Fi=the average flow (at least a 30-day
average) of stream i to the extent that it
is regulated for such pollutant.
FD(he average flow (at least a 30-day
average) from boiler blowdown streams,
non-contact cooling streams, sanitary
wastestreams (where such streams are
not regulated by a categorical
Pretreatment Standard) and from any
process wastestreams which were or
could have been entirely exempted from
categorical Pretreatment Standards
pursuant ta paragraph 8 of the NRDC v.
Costle Consent Decree (12 ERC 1833) for
one or more of the following reasons (see
Appendix D):
(1) the pollutants of concern are not
detectable in the effluent from the
Industrial User (paragraph (8)(a)(iii)J;
(2) the pollutants of concern are present
only in trace amounts and are neither
causing nor likely to cause toxic effects
(paragraph (8)(a)(iii));
(3) the pollutants of concern are present in
amounts too small to be effectively
reduced by technologies known to the
Administrator (paragraph (8)(a)(iii)); or
(4) the wastestream contains only
pollutants which are compatible with the
.POTW (paragraph (8)(b)(i)).
FT=the average flow (at least a 30-day
average) through the combined treatment
facility (includes F(, FD and unregulated
streams).
N=the total number of regulated streams.
(2) Alternate Limits Below Detection
Limit An alternative pretreatment limit
may not be used if the alternative limit
is below the analytical detection limit
for any of the regulated pollutants.
(3) Self-monitoring. Self-monitoring
required to insure compliance with the
alternative categorical limit shall be as
follows:
(i) The type and frequency of
sampling, analysis and flow
measurement shall be determined by
reference to the self-monitoring
requirements of the appropriate
categorical Pretreatment Standard(s);
(ii) Where the self-monitoring
schedules for the appropriate Standards
differ, monitoring shall be done
according to the most frequent schedule;
(iii) Where flow determines the
frequency of self-monitoring in a
categorical Pretreatment Standard, the
sum of all regulated flows (FJ is the flow
which shall be used to determine self-
monitoring frequency.
C-5
-------
Federal Register / VoL 46, No. 18 / Wednesday. January 28, 1981 / Rules and Regulations 9443
5 403.7 ftevtaton of categoric*
pr*tr*atnwnt standards to reflect POTW
removal of pollutants.
This section provides the criteria and
procedures to be used by a POTW in
revising the pollutant discharge limits
specified in categorical Pretreatment
Standards to reflect Removal of
pollutants by the POTW.
(a) Definitions. For the purpose of this
section: (1) "Removal" shall mean a
reduction in the amount of a pollutant in
the POTWs effluent or alteration of the
nature of a pollutant during treatment at
the POTW. The reduction or alteration
can be obtained by physical, chemical
or biological means and may be the
result of specifically designed POTW
capabilities or it may be incidental to
the operation of the treatment system.
Removal as used in this subpart shall
not mean dilution of a pollutant in the
POTW. The demonstration of Removal
shall consist of data which reflect the
Removal achieved "by the POTW for
those specific pollutants of concern
included on the list developed pursuant
to section 307(a) of the Act Each
categorical Pretreatment Standard will
specify whether or not a Removal
Allowance may be granted for indicator
or surrogate pollutants regulated in.that
Standard.
(2} "Consistent Removal" shall mean
the average of the lowest 50 percent of
the removals measured according to
paragraph (d)(2) of this section. All
sample data obtained for the measured
pollutant during the time period
prescribed in paragraph (d){2) of this
section must be reported and used in
computing Consistent Removal. If a
substance is measurable in the influent
but not in the effluent, the effluent level
may be assumed to be the limit of
measurement and those data may be
used by the POTW at its discretion and
subject to approval by the Approval
Authority. If the substance is not
measurable in the influent the data may
not be used Where the number of
samples with concentrations equal to or
above the limit of measurement is
between 8 and 12, the average of the
lowest 6 removals shall be used. If there
are less than 8 samples with
concentrations equal to or above the
limit of measurement the Approval
Authority may approve alternate means
for demonstrating Consistent Removal.
The term "measurement!; refers to the
ability of the analytical method or
protocol to quantify as well as identify
the presence of the substance in
question.
(3) "Overflow" means the intentional
or unintentional diversion of flow from
the POTW before the POTW Treatment
Plant
(b) Revision of Categorical
Pretreatment Standards to Reflect
POTW Pollutant Removal. Any POTW
receiving wastes from an Industrial User
to which a categorical Pretreatment
Standard applies may, subject to the
conditions of this section, revise the
discharge limits for a specific
pollutant(s) covered in the categorical
Pretreatment Standard applicable to
that User. Revisions will only be made
where the POTW demonstrates
Consistent Removal of each pollutant
for which the discharge limit in a
categorical Pretreatment Standard is to
be revised at a level which justifies the
amount of revision to the discharge
limit In addition, revision of pollutant
discharge limits in categorical
Pretreatment Standards by a POTW
may only be made provided that:
(1) Application. The POTW applies
for, and receives, authorization from the
Regional Administrator and/or Director
to revise the discharge limits in
Pretreatment Standards, for specific
pollutants, in accordance with the
requirements and procedures set out in
this section and §§ 403.9 and 403.11; and
(2) POTW Pretreatment Programs.
The POTW has a Pretreatment Program
approved in accordance with § J 403.8,
403.9, and 403.11; provided, however, a
POTW may conditionally revise the
discharge limits for specific pollutants,
even though a Pretreatment Program has
not been approved, in accordance with
the following terms and conditions.
These provision also govern the
issuance of provisional authorizations
under { 403.7(d)(2)(vii);
(i) All Industrial Users who wish to
receive a conditional or provisional
revision of categorical Pretreatment
Standards must submit to the POTW the
information required in § 403.12(b](l)-(7)
pertaining to the categorical
Pretreatment Standard as modified by
the conditional or provisional removal
allowance, except that the compliance
schedule required by { 403.12(b){7) is
not required where a provisional
allowance is requested. The submission
shall indicate what additional
technology, if any, will be needed to
comply with the categorical
Pretreatment Standards as revised by
the POTW;
(ii) The POTW must compile and
submit data demonstrating removal in
accordance with the requirements of
paragraphs (d)(lH7) of this section. The
POTW shall submit to the Approval
Authority a removal report which
comports with the signatory and
certification requirements of { 403.12 (1]
and (m). This report shall contain a
certification by any of the persons
specified in § 403.12(1) or by an
independent engineer containing the
following statement "I have personally
examined and am familiar with the
information submitted in the attached
document and I hereby certify under
penalty of law that this information was
obtained in accordance with the
requirements of $ 403.7(d). Moreover,
based upon my inquiry of those
individuals immediately responsible for
obtaining the information reported
herein, I believe that the submitted_
information is true, accurate and
complete. I am aware that there are
significant penalties for submitting false
information, including the possibility of
fine and imprisonment";
(iii) The POTW must submit to the
Approval Authority an application for
pretreatment program approval meeting
the requirements of f § 403.8 and 403.9(a)
or (b) in a timely manner, not to exceed
the time limitation set forth in a
compliance schedule for development of
a pretreatment program included in the
POTWs NPDES permit;
(iv) If a POTW grants conditional or
provisional revision(s) and the Approval
Authority subsequently makes a final
determination, after notice and an
opportunity for a hearing, that the
POTW failed to comply with the
conditions in paragraphs (b)(2)(ii) or (iii)
of this section, or that its sludge use or
disposal practices are not in'compliance
with the provisions of paragraph (b](4)
of this section, the revision shall be
terminated by the Approval Authority
and all Industrial Users to whom the
revised discharge limits had been
applied shall achieve compliance with
the applicable categorical Pretreatment
Standard(s) within a reasonable time
(not to exceed the period of time
prescribed in the applicable categorical
Pretreatment Standard(s)) as specified
by the Approval Authority. However,
the revision(s) shall not be terminated
where the POTW has not made a timely
application for program approval if the
POTW has made demonstrable progress
towards and has demonstrated and
continues to demonstrate an intention to
submit an approvable pretreatment
program as expeditiously as possible
within an additional period of time, not
to exceed one year, established by the
Approval Authority,
(v) If a POTW grants conditional or
provisional revision(s) and the POTW or
Approval Authority subsequently makes
a final determination, after notice and
an opportunity for a hearing, that the
Industrial User(s) failed to comply with
conditions in paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this
section, including in the case of a
conditional revision, the dates specified
in the compliance schedule required by
C-6
-------
g444 Federal Register / Vol. 46, No. 18 / Wednesday, January 28, 1981 / Rules and Regulations
S 4O3-12{b)PT. the revision shall be
terminated by the POTW or the
Approval Authority for the non-
complying Industrial Users and all non-
complying Industrial Users to whom the
revised discharge limits had been
applied shall achieve compliance with
the applicable categorical Pretreatment
Standard^) within the time period
specified in snch Standard/*). The
revision^) shall not be terminated -
where a violation of the provisions of
this subparagrapfa results from causes
entirely oatside of the control of the
Industrial User or the Industrial User
has demonstrated substantial
compliance: and
(vi) The POTW shall submit to the
Approval Authority by December 31 of
each year the name and address of each
Industrial User that has received a
conditionally or provisionally revised
discharge limit If the revised discharge
limit is revoked, the POTW must submit
the information in paragraph (b)'2)(i)
-above to the Approval Authority;
[3) Compensation for overflow.
POTWs which at least once annually
Overflow untreated wastewater to
receiving waters may claim Consistent
Removal of a pollutant only by
complying with either paragraphs
(b)(3)(i) or (ul below. However. this_
subsection shall not apply where
Industrial Userfs) can demonstrate that
Overflow dees not occur between the
Industrial User(s) and the POTW
Treatment Plant;
(i) The Industrial User provides
containment or otherwise ceases or
reduces Discharges from the regulated
processes which contain the pollutant
for which an allowance is requested
during all circumstances in which an
Overflow event can reasonably be
expected to occur at the POTW or at a
sewer to which the Industrial User is
connected. Discharges must cease or be
reduced, or pretreatment must be
increased, to the extent .necessary to
compensate for the removal not being
provided by the POTW. Allowances
under this provision will only be granted
where the POTW submits to the
Approval Authority evidence'that
(A) All Industrial Users to which the
POTW proposes to apply this provision
have demonstrated the ability to contain
or otherwise cease or reduce, during
circumstances in which an Overflow
event can reasonably be expected to
occur. Discharges from me regulated
processes which contain pollutants for
which an allowance is requested;
(B) The POTW has identified
circumstances in which an Overflow
event can reasonably be expected to
occur, and has a notifies don or other
viable plan to insure that Industrial
Users will learn of an impending
Overflow in sufficient time to contain,
cease or reduce Discharging to prevent
untreated Overflows from occurring.
The POTW must also demonstrate that
it wiH monitor and verify the data
required in paragraph (b)(3KO(C) herein
to insure that Industrial Users are
containing, ceasing or reducing
operations during POTW System
Overflow; and
(C] All Industrial Users to which the
POTW proposes to apply this provision
have demonstrated the ability and
commitment to collect and make
available upon request by the POTW,
State Director or EPA Regional
Administrator daily flow reports or
other data sufficient to demonstrate that
all Discharges from regulated processes
containing the pollutant for which, the
allowance is requested were contained,
reduced or otherwise ceased, as
appropriate, during all circumstances in
which an Overflow event was
reasonably expected to occur or
fliRA) The Consistent Removal
claimed is reduced pursuant to the
following equation:
HI
8760-Z
8760
Where:
rM» POTWs Consistent Removal rate for
that pollutant established under
paragraphs (aXl) and (d}(2) of this
section
r«removal corrected by the Overflow
factor
Z=hours per year that Overflow occurred
between the Industrial Userfs) and the
POTW Treatment Plant, the hours either
to be shown in the POTWs current
NPDES permit application or the hours.
as demonstrated by verifiable
techniques, that a particular Industrial
User's Discharge Overflows between the
Industrial User and the POTW Treatment
Plant; and
(Byij After July L 1983, Consistent
Removal may be claimed only where
efforts to correct the conditions resulting
in untreated Discharges by the POTW
are underway in accordance with the
policy and procedures set forth in "PRM
75-34" or "Program Guidance
Memorandum-61" (same document)
published on December 16,1975 by EPA
Office of Water Program Operations
(WH-S46). (See Appendix A.) Revisions
to discharge limits in categorical
Pretreatment Standards may not be
made where efforts have not been
committed to by the POTW to minimize
pollution from Overflows. At minimum.
by July 1,1983, the POTW must have
completed the analysis required by PRM
75-34 and be making an effort to
implement the plan.
(2) If. by July 1.1883, a POTW has
begun the PRM 75-34 analysis but due to
circumstances beyond its control tins
not completed it, Consistent Removal,
subject to the approval of the Approval
Authority, may continue to be claimed
according to the formula in paragraph
(b)(3)(ii)(A) above so long as the POTW
acts in a timely fashion to complete the
analysis and makes an effort to
Implement the non-structural cost-
effective measures identified by the
analysis; and so long as the POTW has
expressed its willingness to apply, after
completing the analysis, for a
construction grant necessary to
implement any other cost-effective
Overflow controls identified in the
analysis should federal funds become
available, so applies for such funds, and
proceeds with the required construction
in an expeditions manner. In addition.
Consistent Removal may, subject to the
approval of the Approval Authority,
continue to be claimed according to the
formula in paragraph (b}(3)(ii){A) above
where the POTW has completed and the
Approval Authority has accepted the
analysis required by PRM 75-34 and the
POTW has requested inclusion in its
NPDES permit of an acceptable
compliance schedule providing for
timely implementation of cost-effective
measures identified in the analysis. (In
considering what is timely
implementation, the Approval Authority
shall consider the availability of funds,
cost of control measures, and
seriousness of the water quality
problem.}; and
(4) Compliance with applicable sludge
requirements. Such revision will not
contribute to the POTW's inability to
comply with its NPDES permit or with
the following statutory provisions and
regulations or permits issued thereunder
(or more stringent State or local
regulations) as they apply to the sludge
management methods being used:
section 405 of the Clean Water Act; the
Solid Waste Disposal Act (SWDA)
(including Title H, more commonly
referred to as the Resource
Conservation Recovery Act (RCRA) and
including State regulations contained in
any State sludge management plan
prepared pursuant to Subtitle D of
SWDA}], the Clean Air Act and the
Toxic Substances Control Act. The
POTW will be authorized to revise
discharge limits only for those pollutants
that do not contribute to the violation of
C-7
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 46, No. 18 / Wednesday. January 28, 1981 / Rules and Regulations 9445
its NPDES permit or any of the above
statutes.
(c) POTW application for
authorization to revise discharge limits,
(1) Application for authorization to
revise discharge limits for Industrial
Users who are or in the future may be
subject to categorical Pretreatment
Standards, or approval of discharge
limits conditionally or provisionally
revised for Industrial Users by the
POTW pursuant to paragraphs (b)(2)
and (d)(2)(vii) shall be submitted by the
POTW to the Approval Authority.
(2) Each POTW may submit such an
application no more than once per year
with respect to either
(i) any categorical Pretreatment
Standard promulgated in the prior 18
months;
(ii) any new or modified facilities or
production changes resulting in the
Discharge of pollutants which were not
previously discharged and which are
subject to promulgated categorical
Standards; or
(iii) any significant increase in
Removal efficiency attributable to
specific identifiable circumstances or
corrective measures {such as
improvements in operation and
maintenance practices, new treatment
or treatment capacity, or a significant
change in the influent to the POTW
Treatment Plant).
(3) The Approval Authority may,
however, elect not to review such
application(s) upon receipt, in which
case (he POTWs conditionally or
provisionally revised discharge limits
will remain in effect until reviewed by
the Approval Authority. This review
may occur at any time hi accordance
with the procedures of ! 403.11. but in
no event later than the time of any
pretreatment program approval or any
NPDES permit reissuance thereafter.
(4) If the Consistent Removal claimed
is based on an analytical technique
other than the technique specified for
the applicable categorical Pretreatment
Standard, the Approval Authority may
require the POTW perform additional
analyses.
(d) Contents of application to revise
discharge limits. Requests for
authorization to revise discharge limits
in categorical Pretreatment Standards
must be supported by the following
information:
(1) List of Pollutants.^, list of
pollutants for which discharge limit
revisions are proposed.
(2) Consistent Removal Data. Influent
and effluent operational data
demonstrating Consistent Removal or
other information, as provided for in
paragraph (a)(2) of this section, which
demonstrates Consistent Removal of the
pollutants for which discharge limit
revisions are proposed. This data shall
meet the following requirements:
(i) Representative Data: Seasonal
The data shall be representative of
yearly and seasonal conditions to which
the POTW is subjected for each
pollutant for which a discharge limit
revision is proposed.
(ii) Representative Data: Quality and
Quantity. The data shall be
representative of the quality and
quantity of normal effluent and influent
flow if such data can be obtained. If
such data are unobtainable, alternate
data or information may be presented
for approval to demonstrate Consistent
Removal as provided for in paragraph
(a)(2) of this section.
(iii) Sampling Procedures: Composite.
(A) The influent and effluent operational
data shall be obtained through 24-hour
flow-proportional composite samples.
Sampling may be done manually or
automatically, and discretely or
continuously. For discrete sampling, at
least 12 aliquots shall be composited.
Discrete sampling may be flow-
proportioned either by varying the time
interval between each aliquot or the
volume of each aliquot All composites
must be flow-proportional to either
stream flow at time of collection of
influent aliquot or to -the total influent
flow since the previous influent aliquot
Volatile pollutant aliquots must be
combined in the laboratory immediately
before analysis.
(Byi; Twelve samples shall be taken
at approximately equal intervals
throughout one full year. Sampling must
be evenly distributed over the days of
the week so as to include non-workdays
as well as workdays. If the Approval
Authority determines that this schedule
will not be most representative of the
actual operation of the POTW
Treatment Plant an alternative
sampling schedule will be approved.
(2) In addition, upon the Approval
Authority's concurrence, a POTW may
utilize an historical data base amassed
prior to the effective date of this section
provided that such data otherwise meet
the requirements of this paragraph. In
order for the historical data base to be
approved it must present a statistically
valid description of daily, weekly and
seasonal sewage treatment plant
loadings and performance for at least
one year.
(C) Effluent sample collection need
not be delayed to compensate for
hydraulic detention unless the POTW
elects to include detention time
compensation or unless the Approval
Authority requires detention time
compensation. The Approval Authority
may require that each effluent sample
be taken approximately one detention
time later than the corresponding
influent sample when failure to do so
would result in an unrepresentative
portrayal of actual POTW operation.
The detention period is to be based on a
24-hour average daily flow value. The
average daily flow used will be based
upon the average of the daily flows
during the same month of the previous
year.
(iv) Sampling Procedures: Crab.
Where composite sampling is not an
appropriate sampling technique, a grab
sample(s) shall be taken to obtain
influent and effluent operational data.
Collection of influent grab samples
should preceed collection of effluent
samples by approximately one detention
period. The detention period is to be
based on a 24-hour average daily flow
value. The average daily flow used will
be based upon the average of the daily
flows during the same month of the
previous year. Grab samples will be
required, for example, where the
parameters being evaluated are those,
such as cyanide and phenol, which may
not be held for any extended period
because of biological chemical or
physical interactions which take place
after sample collection and affect the
results. A grab sample is an individual
sample collected over a period of time
not exceeding IS minutes.
(v) Analytical methods. The sampling
referred to in paragraphs (d)(2)(i)-(iv)
and (d)(5) of this section and an analysis
of these samples shall be performed in
accordance with the techniques
prescribed in 40 CFR Part 136 and
amendments thereto. Where 40 CFR Part
136 does not contain sampling or
analytical techniques for the pollutant in
question, or where the Administrator
determines that the Part 136 sampling
and analytical techniques are
Inappropriate for the pollutant in
question, sampling and analysis shall be
performed using validated analytical
methods or any other applicable
sampling and analytical procedures.
including procedures suggested by the
POTW or other parties, approved by the
Administrator.
(vi) Calculation of removal. All data
acquired under the provisions of this
section must be submitted to the
Approval Authority. Removal for a
specific pollutant shall be determined
either, for each sample, by measuring
the difference between the
concentrations of the pollutant in the
influent and effluent of the POTW and
expressing the difference as a percent of
the influent concentration, or, where
such data cannot be obtained. Removal
may be demonstrated using other data
C-i
-------
9446 Federal Register / Vol. 48, No. 18 / Wednesday, jannary 28. 1981 / Rules and Regulations
or procedures subject to concurrence by
the Approval Authority as provided for
in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(vii) Exception to sampling data
requirement provisional removal
demonstration. For pollutants which an
not currently being discharged (new or
modified facilities, or production
changes) application may be made by
the POTW for provisional authorization
to revise the applicable categorical
Pretreatment Standard prior to initial
discharge of the pollutant. Consistent
Removal may be based provisionally on
data from treatability studies or
demonstrated removal at other
treatment facilities where the quality
and quantity of influent are similar. In
calculating and applying for provisional
removal allowances, the POTW must
comply with the provisions of
paragraphs (b)(lH4) °f t*"8 section.
Within 18 months after the
commencement of Discharge of the
pollutants in question, Consistent
Removal must be demonstrated
pursuant to the requirements of
paragraphs (a){2) and {d)(2)(JHvi} of
this section.
(3) List of industrial subcategories. A
list of the industrial subcategories for
which discharge limit* in categorical
Pretreatment Standards will be revised,
including the number of Industrial Users
in each such subcategory and an
identification of which of the pollutants
on the list prepared under paragraph
(d)(l) of this section are Discharged by
each subcategory.
(4) Calculation of revised discharge
limits. Proposed revised discharge limits
for each of the subcategories of
Industrial Users identified in paragraph
(d)(3) of this section calculated in the
following manner
(i) The proposed revised discharge
limit for a specified pollutant shall be
derived by use of the following formula:
where
x=pollutant discharge limit specified in the
applicable categorical Pretreatment
Standard
r=POTW'» Consistent Removal rate for
that pollutant as established under
paragraphs (a)(2). (d)(2) and, if
appropriate, (b)(3)(ii)(A) of this section.
(percentage expressed as a decimal)
Y=re vised discharged limit for the
specified pollutant (expressed in same
mriUux)
(if) In calculating revised discharge
limits, such revision for POTW Removal
of a specified pollutant shall be applied
equally to all existing and new
Industrial Users in an industrial
subcategory subject to categorical
Pretreatment Standards which '
Discharge that pollutant to the POTW.
(5) Data on sludge characteristics.
Data showing the concentrations and
amounts in the POTWs sludge of the
pollutants for which discharge limit
revisions are proposed and for which
EPA, the State or locality have
published sludge disposal or use criteria
applicable to the POTWs current
method of sludge use or disposal These
data shall meet the following
requirement*.
(i) The data shall be obtained through
a composite sample taken during the
same sampling periods selected to
measure Consistent POTW Removals in
accordance with the requirements of
paragraph (dX2) of this section. Each
composite sample will contain a
minimum of 12 discrete samples taken at
equal time intervals over a 24 hour
period. Where a composite sample it not
an appropriate sampling technique, grab
samples shall be taken.
(ii) Sampling and analysis of the
samples referred to in paragraph (d)(5)(i)
of this section shall be performed hi
accordance with the sampling and
analytical techniques described
previously in paragraph (d)(2)(v) of this
section.
(6) Description of sludge management.
A specific description of the POTWs
current methods of use or disposal of its
sludge and data demonstrating that the
current sludge use or disposal methods
comply and will continue to comply with
the requirements of paragraph (b)(4) of
this section.
(7) Certification statement The
certification statement required by
paragraph fb)(2)(ii) of this section
stating that the pollutant Removals and
associated revised discharged limits
have been or will be calculated in
accordance with this regulation and any
guidelines issued by "EPA under Section
304(g) of the Act
(e) Procedure for authorizing, modifi-
cation of standards. (!) Application for
authorization to revise National
Pretreatment Standards shall comply
with | 403.9(d) and paragraphs (c) and
(d) of this section. Notice, public
comment, and review by the Approval
Authority shall comply with ! 403.11.
(2) POTWs which have received a
construction grant from funds
authorized for any fiscal year beginning
after September 30,1978, will only be
considered for authorization to modify
National Standards after they have
completed the analysis required by
section 201(g)(5) of the Act and
demonstrated that modification of the
discharge limits in National Standards
will not preclude the use of innovative
or alternative technology. In addition.
where sludge disposal or treatment
technology u or will be acquired or
constructed with construction grant
funds. POTWs should refer to
S 3S.917(d)(6) and Appendix A of Part 35
of Title 40 of the Code of Federal
Regulations to determine the funding
eligibility of sludge disposal or
treatment facilities.
(3) The Approval Authority shall at
such time as it elects to review the
Submission under paragraph (c) of this
section, or at the time of POTW
pretreatment program approval or
NPDES permit reissuance thereafter,
authorize the POTW to revise Industrial
User discharge limits, as submitted
pursuant to paragraph (d)(4) of this
section, which comply with the
provisions of this section,
(4) Nothing in these regulations
precludes an Industrial User or other
interested party'from assisting the
POTW in preparing and presenting the
information necessary to apply for
authorization to revise categorical
Pretreatment Standards.
(f) Continuation and withdrawal of
authorization. (1) Monitoring and
reporting of consistent removal.
Following authorization to revise the
discharge limits in Pretreatment
Standards, the POTW shall continue to
monitor and report on (at such
frequencies and over such intervals as
may be specified by the Regional
Administrator, but in no case less than
two times per year) the POTWs
Removal capabilities for all pollutants
for which authority to revise the
Standards was granted. Such monitoring
and reporting shall be in accordance
with ! 403.12 (i) and Q) pertaining to
pollutant removal capability reports.
(2) Re-evaluation of revisions.
Approval of authority to revise
Pretreatment Standards will be re-
examined whenever the POTWs NPDES
Permit is reissued, unless the Regional
Administrator determines the need to
re-evaluate the authority pursuant to
paragraph (f)(5) of this section. In order
C-9
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 46. No. 18 / Wednesday. January 28. 1981 / Rules and Regulations 9447
to maintain a removal allowance, the
POTW must comply with all federal.
State and local Statutes, regulations and
permits applicable to the POTWs
selected method of sludge use or
disposal. In addition, where Overflows
of untreated waste by the POTW
continue to occur the Regional
Administrator may condition continued
authorization to revise discharge limits
upon the POTW performing additional
analysis and/or implementing
additional control measures as is
consistent with EPA policy on POTW
Overflows.
(3) Inclusion in POTW permit. Once
authority to revise discharge limits for a
specified pollutant is granted, the
revised discharge limits for Industrial
Users of the system as well as the
Consistent Removal documented by the
POTW for that pollutant and the other
requirements of paragraph (b) of this
section, shall be included in the POTWs
NPDES Permit upon the earliest
reissuance or modification (at or
following Program approval) and shall
become enforceable requirements of the
POTW's NPDES Permit
(4) EPA review of state removal
allowance approvals. Where the NPDES
State has an approved pretreatment
program, the Regional Administrator
may agree, in the Memorandum of
Agreement under 40 CFR 123.7, to waive
the right to review and object to
Submissions for authority to revise
discharge limits under this section. Such
an agreement shall not restrict the
Regional Administrator's right to
comment upon or object to permits
issued to POTW's except to the extent
permitted under 40 CFR 123.7(b)(3)(i)fD).
(5) Modification or withdrawal of
revised limits.(i) Notice to POTW.
The Approval Authority shall notify the
POTW if. on the basis of pollutant
removal capability reports received
pursuant to paragraph (Dfl) of this
section or other information available to
it. the Approval Authority determines:
(A) that one or more of the discharge
limit revisions made by the POTW, or
the POTW itself, no longer meets the
requirements of this section, or
(B) that such discharge limit revisions
are causing or significantly contributing
to a violation of any conditions or limits
contained in the POTW's NPDES Permit
A revised discharge limit is significantly
contributing to a violation of the
POTW's permit if it satisfies the
definition set forth in 5 40.33 (i) or (n).
(ii) Corrective action. If appropriate
corrective action is not taken within a
reasonable time, not to exceed 60 days
unless the POTW or the affected
Industrial Users demonstrate that a
longer time period is reasonably
necessary to undertake the appropriate
corrective action, the Approval
Authority shall either withdraw such
discharge limits or require modifications
in the revised discharge limits.
(iii) Public notice of withdrawal or
modification. The Approval Authority
shall not withdraw or modify revised
discharge limits unless it shall first have
notified the POTW and all Industrial
Users to whom revised discharge limits
have been applied, and made public, in
writing, the reasons for such withdrawal
or modification, and an opportunity is
provided for a hearing. Following such
notice and withdrawal or modification,
all Industrial Users to whom revised
discharge limits had been applied, shall
be subject to the modified discharge
limits or the discharge limits prescribed
in the applicable categorical
Pretreatment Standards, as appropriate,
and shall achieve compliance with such
limits within a reasonable time (not to
exceed the period of time prescribed in
the applicable categorical Pretreatment
Standard(s) as may be specified by the
Approval Authority.
(g) Removal allowances in State-run
pretreatment programs ander
{ 403.10(e). Where an NPDES State with
an approved pretreatment program
elects to implement a local pretreatment
program in lieu of requiring the POTW
to develop such a program (see
I 403.10(e)) the POTW shall
nevertheless be responsible for
demonstrating Consistent Removal as
provided for in this section. The POTW
will not however, be required to
develop a pretreatment program as a
precondition to obtaining approval of
the allowance as required by paragraph
(b)(2) of this section. Instead, before a
removal allowance is approved, the
State will be required to demonstrate
that sufficient technical personnel and
resources are available to ensure that
modified discharge limits are'correctly
applied to affected Users and that
Consistent Removal is maintained.
$ 403.8 POTW pretreatmcnt programs:
development by POTW. .
(a) POTW's required to develop a
pretreatment program. Any POTW (of
combination of POTW's operated by the
same authority) with a total design flow
greater than 5 million gallons per day
(mgd) and receiving from Industrial
Users pollutants which Pass Through or
Interfere with the operation of the
POTW or are otherwise subject to
Pretreatment Standards will be required
to establish a POTW Pretreatment
Program unless the NPDES State
exercises its option to assume local
responsibilities as provided for in
5 403.10(e). The Regional Administrator
or Director may require that a POTW
with a design flow of 5 mgd or less
develop a POTW Pretreatment Program
if he or she finds that the nature or
volume of the industrial influent
treatment process upsets, violations of
POTW effluent limitations,
contamination of municipal sludge, or
other circumstances warrant in order to
prevent Interference with the POTW or
Pass Through. In addition, any POTW
desiring to modify categorical
Pretreatment Standards for pollutants
Removed by the POTW (as provided for
by { 403.7) must have an approved
POTW Pretreatment Program prior to
obtaining final approval of a removal
allowance. POTW's may receive
conditional approval of a removal
allowance, as provided for by
$ 403.7(b)(2), prior to obtaining POTW
Pretreatment Program Approval. A
POTW may receive $ 403.7(g) authority
to revise Pretreatment Standards
without being required to develop a
POTW Pretreatment Program where the
NPDES State has assumed responsibility
for running a local program in lieu of the
POTW in accordance with $ 403.10(e).
(b) Deadline for Program Approval. A
POTW which meets the criteria of
paragraph (a) of this section must
receive approval of a POTW
Pretreatment Program no later than 3
years after the reissuance or
modification of its existing NPDES
permit but in no case later than July 1,
1983. POTWs whose NPDES permits are
modified under section 301 (h) of the Act/
shall have a Pretreatment Program
within less than 3 years as provided for
hi 40 CFR Part 125. Subpart G (44 FR
34783 (1979). The POTW Pretreatment
Program shall meet the criteria set forth
in paragraph (f) of this section and will
be administered by the POTW to ensure
compliance by Industrial Users with
applicable Pretreatment Standards and
Requirements.
(c) Incorporation of approved
programs in permits. A POTW may
develop an approvable POTW
Pretreatment Program any time before
the time limit set forth in paragraph (b)
of this section. If (1) the POTW is
located in a State which has an
approved State permit program under
section 402 of the Act and an approved
State pretreatment program in
accordance with § 403.10; or (2) the
POTW is located in a State which does
not have an approved permit program
under section 402 of the Act; the
POTW's NPDES Permit will be reissued
or modified by the NPDEs State or EPA.
respectively, to incorporate the
approved Program conditions as
enforceable conditions of the Permit. If
C-10
-------
9448 Federal Register / Vol. 46, No. 18 / Wednesday, January 28. 1981 / Rules and Regulations
the POTW is located in an NPDES State
which does not have an approved State
pre treatment program, the approved
POTW Pretreatment Program shall be
incorporated into the POTW* NPDES
Penm't as provided for in i 403.10(d).
(d) Incorporation of compliance
schedules in permits. If the POTW doe*
not have an approved Pretreatment
Program at the time the POTW s
existing Permit is reissued or modified,
the reissued or modified Permit will
contain me shortest reasonable
compliance schedule, not to exceed
three years or July 1,1983, whichever is
sooner, for the approval of the legal
authority, procedures and funding
required by paragraph (f) of mis section.
Where the POTW is located in an
NPDES State currently without authority
to require a POTW Pretreatment
Program, the Permit shall incorporate a
modification or termination clause as
provided for in J 403.10(0*) and the
compliance schedule shall be
incorporated when me PermitJs
modified or reissued pursuant'to such
clause.
(e) Cause for Reissuance or
Modification of Permits. Under the
authority of section 4Q2(b](l)(C) of the
Act. the Approval Authority may
modify, or alternatively, revoke and
reissue a POTWs Permit in order Ux
(1) put the POTW on a compliance
schedule for the development of a
POTW Pretreatment Program where the
addition of pollutants into a POTW by
an Industrial User or combination of
Industrial Users presents a substantial
hazard to the functioning of the
treatment works, quality of the receiving
waters, human health, or the
environment;
(2) coordinate the issuance of a
section 201 construction grant with the
incorporation into a permit of a
compliance schedule for POTW
Pretreatment Program;
. (3) incorporate a modification of the
permit approved under sections 301(h)
or 301(i) of the Act
(4) incorporate an approved POTW
Pretreatment Program-in the POTW
permit or
(5) incorporate a compliance schedule
for the development of a POTW
pretreatment program in the POTW
permit
(f) POTWpretreatment program
requirements. A POTW Pretreatment
Program shall meet the following
requirements:
(1) Legal Authority. The POTW shall
operate pursuant to legal authority
enforceable in Federal. State or local
courts, which authorizes or enables the
POTW to apply and to enforce the
requirements of sections 307 (b) and (c).
and 402fb}{8) of the Act and any
regulations implementing those sections.
Such authority may be contained in a
statute, ordinance, or series of contracts
or joint powers agreements which the
POTW is authorized to enact enter into
or implement and which are authorized
by State law. At a minimum, this legal
authority shall enable the POTW to:
(i) Deny or condition new or increased
contributions of pollutants, or changes
in the nature of pollutants, to the POTW
by Industrial Users where such
contributions do not meet applicable
Pretreatment Standards and
Requirements or where such
contributions would cause the POTW to
violate its NPDES permit;
(ii) Require compliance with
applicable Pretreatment Standards and
Requirements by Industrial Users;
Oii) Control, through permit contract
order, or similar means, the contribution
to the POTW by each Industrial User to
ensure compliance with applicable
Pretreatment Standard* and
Requirements;
(iv) Require (A) the development of a
compliance schedule by each Industrial
User for the installation of technology
required to meet applicable
Pretreatment Standards and
Requirements and (B) the submission of
all notices and self-monitoring reports
from Industrial Users as are necessary
to assess and assure compliance by
Industrial Users with Pretreatment
Standards and Requirements, including
but not limited to the reports required in
! 403.12
(v) Carry out all inspection,
surveillance and monitoring procedures
necessary to determine, independent of
information supplied by Industrial
Users, compliance or noncompliance
with applicable Pretreatment Standards
and Requirements by Industrial Users.
Representatives of the POTW shall be
authorized to enter any premises of any
Industrial User in which a Discharge
source or treatment system is located or
in which records are required to be kept
under { 403.12(m) to assure compliance
with Pretreatment Standards. Such
authority shall be at least as extensive
as the authority provided under section
308 of the Act;
(vi) (A) Obtain remedies for
noncompliance by any Industrial User
with any Pretreatment Standard and
Requirement. All POTW» shall be able
to seek injuctive relief for
noncompliance by Industrial Users with
Pretreatment Standards and
Requirements. In cases where State law
has authorized the municipality or
POTW to pass ordinances or other local
legislation, the POTW shall exercise
such authorities in passing legislation to
seek and assess civil or criminal
penalties for noncompliance by
Industrial Users with Pretreatment
Standards and Requirements. POTWs
without such authorities shall enter into
contracts with Industrial Users to assure
compliance by Industrial Users with
Pretreatment Standards and
Requirements. An adequate contract
will provide for liquidated damages for
violation of Pretreatment Standards and
Requirements and will include an
agreement by the Industrial User to
submit to the remedy of specific
performance for breach of contract
(B) Pretreatment Requirements which
will be enforced through the remedies
set forth in paragraph (f)(l)(vi)(A) will
include but not be limited to, the duty to
allow or carry out inspections, entry, or
monitoring activities; any rules,
regulations, or orders issued by the
POTW; or any reporting requirements
imposed by the POTW or these
regulations. The POTW shall have
authority and procedures (after informal
notice to the discharger) immediately
and effectively to halt or prevent any
Discharge of pollutants to the POTW
which reasonably appears to present an
imminent endangerment to the health or
welfare of persons. The POTW shall
also have authority and procedures
(which shall include notice to the
affected Industrial Users and an
opportunity to respond} to halt or
prevent any Discharge to the POTW
which presents or may present an
endangerment to the environment or
which threatens to interfere with the
operation of the POTW. The Approval
Authority shall have authority to seek
Judicial relief for noncompliance by
Industrial Users when the POTW has
acted to seek such relief bat has sought
a penalty which the Approval Authority
finds to be insufficient The procedures
for notice to dischargers where the
POTW is seeking ex parte temporary
judicial injunctive relief will be
governed by applicable state or federal
law and not by this provision; and
(vii) Comply with the confidentiality
requirements set forth in § 403.14.
(2) Procedures. The POTW shall
develop and implement procedures to
.ensure compliance with the
requirements of a Pretreatment Program.
At a minimum, these procedures shall
enable the POTW to:
(i] Identify and locate all possible
Industrial Users which might be subject
to the POTW Pretreatment Program.
Any compilation, index or inventory of
Industrial Users m ide under this
paragraph shall be made available to
the Regional Administrator or Director
upon request;
Oil
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 46, No. 18 / Wednesday, January 28. 1981 / Rules and Regulations 9449
(ii) Identify the character and volume
of pollutants contributed to the POTW
by the Industrial Users identified under
S 403.8(f)(2)(i). This information shall be
made available to the Regional
Administrator or Director upon request;
(iii) Notify Industrial Users identified
under J 403.8(f)(2)(i] of applicable
Pretreatment Standards and any
applicable requirements under section
2M(b) and 405 of the Act and Subtitles C
and D of the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act
(iv) Receive and analyze self-
monitoring reports and other notices
submitted by Industrial Users in
accordance with the self-monitoring
requirements in § 403.12;
(v) Randomly sample and analyze the
effluent from Industrial Users and
conduct surveillance and inspection
activities in order to identify,
independent of information supplied by
Industrial Users, occasional and
continuing noncompliance with
Pretreatment Standards. The results of
these activities shall be made available
to the Regional Administrator or
Director upon request
(vi) Investigate instances of
noncompliance with Pretreatment
Standards and Requirements, as
indicated in the reports and notices
required under $ 403.12, or indicated by
analysis, inspection, and surveillance
activities described in paragraph
(f)(2)(v) of this section. Sample taking
and analysis and the collection of other
information shall be performed with
sufficient care to produce evidence
admissible in enforcement proceedings
or in judicial actions; and
(vii) Comply with the public
participation requirement* of 40 CFR
Part 25 in the enforcement of National
Pretreatment Standards. These
procedures shall include provision for at
least annually providing public
notification, in the largest daily
newspaper published in the municipality
in which the POTW is located, of
Industrial Users which, during the
previous 12 months, were significantly
violating applicable Pretreatment
Standards or other Pretreatment
Requirements. For the purposes of this
provision, a significant violation is a
violation which remains uncorrected 45
days after notification of
noncompliance; which is part of a
pattern of noncompliance over a twelve
month period; which involves a failure
to accurately report noncompliance; or
which resulted in the POTW exercising
its emergency authority under
5 403.8(f)(l)(iv)(B).
(3) Funding. The POTW shall have
sufficient resources and qualified
personnel to carry out the authorities
and procedures described in paragraphs
(f) (1) and (2) of this section. In some
limited circumstances, funding and
personnel may be delayed where (i) the
POTW has adequate legal authority and
procedures to carry out the Pretreatment
Program requirements described in this
section, and (ii) a limited aspect of the
Program does not need to be
implemented immediately (see
$ 403.9(b)).
§ 403.9 POTW pfrtrwrtment programs
and/or authorization to revls* pretreatmcttt
standards: submission for approval
(a) Who Approves Program. A POTW
requesting approval of a POTW
Pretreatment Program shall develop a
program description which includes the
information set forth in paragraphs
(b)(lH4) of this section. This
description shall be submitted to the
Approval Authority which will make a
determination on the request for
program approval in accordance with
the procedures described in i 403.11.
(b) Contents of POTW program
submission. The program description
must contain the following information:
(1) A statement from the City Solicitor
or a city official acting in a comparable
capacity (or the attorney for those
POTWs which have independent legal
counsel] that the POTW has authority
adequate to carry out the programs
described in \ 403.8. This statement
shall;
(i) Identify the provision of the legal
authority under $ 403.8(f)(l) which
provides the basis for each procedure
under § 403.8(f)(2);
(ii) Identify the manner in which the
POTW will implement the program
requirements set forth in \ 403.8,
including the means by which
Pretreatment Standards will be applied
to individual Industrial Users (e.g., by
order, permit ordinance, contract etc.);
and,
(iii) Identify how the POTW intends to
ensure compliance with Pretreatment
Standards and Requirements, and to
enforce them in the event of
noncompliance by Industrial Users;
(2) A copy of any statutes, ordinances,
regulations, contracts, agreements, or
other authorities relied upon by the
POTW for its administration of the
Program. This Submission shall include
a statement reflecting the endorsement
or approval of the local boards or bodies
responsible for supervising and/or
funding the POTW Pretreatment
Program if approved;
(3) A brief description (including
organization charts) of the POTW
organization which will administer the
Pretreatment Program. If more than one
agency is responsible for administration
of the Program the responsible agencies
should be identified, their respective
responsibilities delineated, and their
procedures for coordination set forth;
and
(4) A description of the funding levels
and full- and part-time manpower
available to implement the Program;
(c) Conditional POTW program
approval. The POTW may request
conditional approval of the Pretreatment
Program pending the acquisition of
funding and personnel for certain
elements of the Program. The request for
conditional approval must meet the
requirements set forth in paragraph (b)
of this section except that the
requirements of paragraph (b) may be
relaxed if the Submission demonstrates
that:
(1) A limited aspect of the Program
does not need to be implemented
immediately;
(2) The POTW had adequate legal
authority and procedures to carry out
those aspects of the Program which will
not be implemented immediately; and
(3) Funding and personnel for the
Program aspects to be implemented at a
later date will be available when
needed. The POTW will describe in the
Submission the mechanism by which
this funding will be acquired. Upon
receipt of a request for conditional
approval, the Approval Authority will
establish a fixed date for the acquisition
of the needed funding and personnel. If
funding is not acquired by this date, the
conditional approval of the POTW
Pretreatment Program and any removal
allowances granted to the POTW, may
be modified or withdrawn.
(d) Content of removal allowance
submission. The request for authority to
revise categorical Pretreatment
Standards must contain the information
required in § 403.7(d).
(e) Approval authority action. Any
POTW requesting POTW Pretreatment
Program approval shall submit to the
Approval Authority three copies of the
Submission described in paragraph (b),
and, if appropriate, (d) of this section.
Upon a preliminary determination that
the Submission meets the requirements
of paragraph (b) and, if appropriate, (d),
of this section, the Approval Authority
shall:
(1) Notify the POTW that the
Submission has been received and is
under review; and
(2) Commence the public notice and
evaluation activities set forth in i 403.11.
(f) Notification where submission is
defective. If, after review of the
Submission as provided for in paragraph
(e) of this section, the Approval
Authority determines that the
Submission does not comply with the
C-12
-------
9450
Federal Register / Vol 46. No. IB / Wednesday. January 28, 1981 / Rules and Regulations
requirements of paragraphs (b) or {c),
and. if appropriate, (d), of this section.
the Approval Authority shall provide
notice in writing to the applying POTW
and each person who has requested
individual notice. This notification shall
identify any defects in the Submission
and advise the POTW and each person
who-has requested individual notice of
the means by which the POTW can
comply with the applicable
requirements of paragraphs (b), (c), and.
if appropriate, (d) of this section.
(g) Consistency with water quality
management plans. (1] In order to be
approved the POTW Pretreatment
Program shall be consistent with any
approved water quality management
plan developed in accordance with 40
CFR Parts 130,131, as revised, where
such 208 plan includes Management
Agency designations and addresses
pretreatment in a manner consistent
with 40 CFR Part 403. In order to assure
such consistency the Approval
Authority shall solicit the review and
comment of the appropriate 208
Planning Agency during the public
comment period provided for in
S 403.11(b)(l)(ii) prior to approval or
disapproval of the Program.
(2) Where no 208 plan has been
approved or where a plan has been
approved but lacks Management
Agency designations and/or does not
address pretreatment in a manner
consistent with this regulation, the
Approval Authority shall nevertheless
solicit the review and comment of the
appropriate 206 planning agency.
§ 403.10 Development and submission of
NPDES State pi«tieatn>«nt program.
(a) Approval of State Programs. No
State NPDES program shall be approved
under section 402 of the Act after the
effective date of these regulations unless
it is determined to meet the
requirements of paragraph (f) of this
section. Notwithstanding any other
provision of this regulation, a State will
be required to act upon those authorities
which it currently possesses before the
approval of a State Pretreatment
Program.
(b) Deadline for requesting approval.
Any NPDES State with a permit program
approved under section 402 of the Act
prior to December 27,1977, which
requires modification t
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 46. No. 18 / Wednesday. January 28. 1981 / Rules and Regulations "9451
has acted to seek such relief (e.g..'if the
POTW.has sought a penalty which the
Director finds to be insufficient);
(v) Approve and deny requests for
approval of POTW Pretreatment
Programs submitted by a POTW to the
Director;
(vi) Deny and recommend approval of
(but not approve) requests for
Fundamentally Different Factors
variances submitted by Industrial Users
in accordance with the criteria and
procedures set forth in § 403.13; and
(vii) Approve and deny requests for
authority to modify categorical
Pretreatment Standards to reflect
removals achieved by the POTW in
accordance with the criteria and
procedures set forth in Ji 403.7.403.9
and 403.11.
(2) Procedures. The Director shall
have developed procedures to carry out
the requirements of sections 307 (b) and
(c), and 402(b)(l). 402(b)(2). 402(b)(8).
and 402(b)(9) of the Act At a minimum,
these procedures shall enable the
Director to:
(i) Identify POTWs required to
develop Pretreatment Programs in
accordance with 5 403.8(a) and notify
these POTW B of the need to develop a
POTW Pretreatment Program. In the
absence of a POTW Pretreatment
Program, the State shall have
procedures to carry out the activities set
forth in $ 403.8(f)(2);
(ii) Provide technical and legal
assistance to POTWs in developing
Pretreatment Programs;
(in) Develop compliance schedules for
inclusion in POTW Permits which set
forth the shortest reasonable time
schedule for the completion of tasks
needed to implement a POTW
Pretreatment Program. The final-
compliance date in these schedules shall
be no later than July 1,1983;
(iv) Sample and analyze:
(A) Influent and effluent of the POTW
to identify, independent of information
supplied by the POTW, compliance or
noncompliance with pollutant removal
levels set forth in the POTW permit (see
§ 403.7); and
(B) The contents of sludge from the
POTW and methods of sludge disposal
and use to identify, independent of
information supplied by the POTW,
compliance or noncompliance with
requirements applicable to the selected
method of sludge management;
(v) Investigate evidence of violations
of pretreatment conditions set forth in
the POTW Permit by taking samples and
acquiring other information as needed.
This data acquisition shall be performed
with sufficient care as to produce
evidence admissible in an enforcement
proceeding or in court;
(vi) Review and approve requests for
approval of POTW Pretreatment
Programs and authority to modify
categorical Pretreatment Standards
submitted by a POTW to the Director;
and
(vii) Consider requests for
Fundamentally Different Factors
variances submitted by Industrial Users
in accordance with the criteria and
procedures set forth in { 403.13.
(3) Funding. The Director shall assure
that funding and qualified personnel are
available to carry out the authorities
and procedures described in paragraphs
(0(1) and (2) of this section.
(g) Content of State Pretreatment
Program Submission. The request for
State Pretreatment Program approval
will consist ofc
(1) (i) A statement from the State
Attorney General (or the Attorney for
those State agencies which have
independent legal counsel) that the laws
of the State provide adequate authority
to implement the requirements of this
Part. The authorities cited by the
Attorney General in this statement shall
be in the form of lawfully adopted State
statutes or regulations which shall be
effective by the time of approval of the
State Pretreatment Program; and
(ii) Copies of all State statutes and
regulations cited in the above statement;
(iii) Notwithstanding paragraphs
(g)(l)(i) and (ii) of this section; if the
State has the statutory authority to
implement the requirements of this Part,
and if the State at the time of
submission of this request has an
approved NPDES Program, then
regulations setting forth the
requirements of this section need not be
promulgated by the State if the
Administrator finds that the State has
submitted a complete description of
procedures to administer its program in
conformance with the requirements of
this section. States without an approved
NPDES program will be required to
comply with the requirements of
paragraphs (g)(l)(i) and (ii) of this
section.
(2) A description of the funding levels
and full- and part-time personnel
available to implement the program; and
(3) Any modifications or additions to
the Memorandum of Agreement
(required by 40 CFR 123.6) which may be
necessary for EPA and the State to
implement the requirements of this Part
(h) EPA Action. Any approved NPDES
State requesting State Pretreatment
Program approval shall submit to the
Regional Administrator three copies of
the Submission described in paragraph
(g) of this section. Upon a preliminary
defermination that the Submission
meets the requirements of paragraph (g)
the Regional Administrator shall:
(1) Notify the Director that the
Submission has been received and is
under review, and
(2) Commence the program revision
process set out in 40 CFR § 123.13. For
purposes of that section all requests for
approval of State Pretreatment Programs
shall be deemed substantial program
modifications. A comment period of at
least 30 days and the opportunity for a
hearing shall be afforded the public on
all such proposed program revisions.
(i) Notification where submission is
defective. If, after review of the
Submission as provided for in paragraph
(h) of this section. EPA determines that
the Submission does not comply with
the requirements of paragraphs (f) or (g)
of this section EPA shall so notify the
applying NPDES State in writing. This
notification shall identify any defects in
the Submission and advise the NPDES
State of the means by which it can
comply with the requirements of this
Part
S 403.11 Approval Proc*durM for POTW
Pretraatnwnt Programs and POTW Revision
of Categorical Pretrwrtment Standards.
The following procedures shall be
adopted in approving or denying
requests for approval of POTW
Pretreatment Programs and revising
Categorical Pretreatment Standards,
including requests for authorization to
grant conditional revised discharge
limitations and provisional limitations:
(a) Deadline for review of submission.
The Approval Authority shall have 90
days from the date of public notice of
any Submission complying with the
requirements of $ 403.9(b) and, where
removal allowance approval is sought,
with §§ 403.7(d) and 403.9(d), to review
the Submission. The Approval Authority
shall review the Submission to
determine compliance with the
requirements of 5 403.8(b) and (f), and,
where removal allowance approval is
sought, with § 403.7(aHe) and (g). The
Approval Authority may have up to an
additional 90 days to complete the
evaluation of the Submission if the
public comment period provided for in
paragraph (b)(l)(ii) of this section is
extended beyond 30 days or if a public
hearing is held as provided for in
paragraph (b)[2) of this section. In no
event however, shall the time for
evaluation of the Submission exceed a
total of 180 days from the date of public
notice of a Submission meeting the
requirements of j 403.9(b) and, in the
case of removal allowance application,
Jj403.7(d)and403.9(d).
(b) Public notice and opportunity for
hearing. Upon receipt of a Submission
C-14
-------
£452 Federal Register / Vol. «, No. 18 / Wednesday, January 28. 1981 / Rules and Regulations
the Approval Authority shall commence
its review. Within 5 .days after making a
determination that a Submission meeta
the requirements of 5 403.9(b), and.
where removal allowance approval is
sought 15 403.7(d) and 403.9(d). or at
such later time under $ 403.7(cj that the
Approval Authority elects to-review the
removal allowance Submission, the
Approval Authority shall:
(1) Issue a public notice of request for
approval of the Submission;
(i) This public notice shall be
circulated in a manner designed to
inform interested and potentially
interested persons of the Submission.
Procedures for the circulation of public
notice shall include:
(A) Mailing notices of the request for
approval of the Submission to
designated 208 planning agencies.
Federal and State fish, shellfish, and
wildlife resource agencies; and to any
other person or group who has
requested individual notice, including
those on appropriate mailing lists; and
(B) Publication of a notice of request
for approval of the Submission in the
largest daily newspaper within the
jurisdiction(s) served by the POTW.
(ii) The public notice shall provide a
period of not less than 30 days following
the date of the public notice during
which time interested persons may
submit their written views on the
Submission.
(iii) All written comments submitted
during the 30 day comment period shall
be retained by the Approval Authority
and considered in the decision on
whether or not to approve the
Submission. The period for comment
may be extended at the discretion of the
Approval Authority, and
(2) Provide an opportunity for the
applicant any affected State, any
interested State or Federal agency,
person or group of persons to request a
public hearing with respect to the
Submission.
(i) This request for public hearing
shall be filed within the 30 day (or
extended) comment period described in
paragraph (b)(l)(ii) of this section and
shall indicate the interest of the person
filing such request and the reasons why
a hearing is warranted.
(ii) The Approval Authority shall hold
a hearing if the POTW so requests. In
addition, a hearing will be held if there
is a significant public interest in issues
relating to whether or not the
Submission should be approved.
Instances of doubt should be resolved in
favor of holding the hearing.
(iii) Public notice of a hearing to
consider a Submission and sufficient to
inform interested parties of the nature of
the hearing and the right to participate
shall be published in the same
newspaper as the notice of the original
request for approval of the Submission
under paragraph (b)(l)(i)(6) of this
section. In addition, notice of the
hearing shall be sent to those persons
requesting individual notice.
(3) Whenever the approval authority
elects to defer review of a submission
which authorizes the POTW to grant
conditional revised discharge limits
under i 403.7(b)(2) and 403.7(c), the
Approval Authority shall publish public
notice of its election in accordance with
paragraph (b)(l) of this section.
(c) Approval authority decision. At
the end of the 30 day (or extended)
comment period and within the 90 day
(or extended) period provided for in
paragraph (a) of this section, the
Approval Authority shall approve or
deny the Submission based upon the
evaluation in paragraph (a) of this
section and taking into consideration
comments submitted during the
comment period and the record of the
public hearing, if held. Where the
Approval Authority makes a
determination to deny the request the
Approval Authority shall so notify the
POTW and each person who has
requested individual notice. This
notification shall include suggested
modifications and the Approval
Authority may allow the requestor
additional time to bring the Submission
into compliance with applicable
requirements.
(d) EPA objection to Director's
decision. No POTW pretreatment
program or authorization to grant
removal allowances shall be approved
by the Director if following the 30 day
(or extended) evaluation period
provided for in paragraph (b)(l)(ii) of
this section and any hearing held
pursuant to paragraph (b)(2) of this
section the Regional Administrator sets
forth in writing objections to the
approval of such Submission and the
reasons for such objections. A copy of
the Regional Administrator's objections
shall be provided to the applicant and
each person who has requested
individual notice. The Regional
Administrator shall provide an
opportunity for written comments and
may convene a public hearing on his or
her objections. Unless retracted, the
Regional Administrator's objections
shall constitute a final ruling to deny
approval of a POTW pretreatment
program or authorization to grant
removal allowances 90 days after the
date the objections are issued.
(e) Notice of decision. The Approval
Authority shall notify those persons who
submitted comments and participated in
the public hearing, if held, of the
approval or disapproval of the
Submission. In addition, the Approval
Authority shall cause to be published a
notice of approval or disapproval in the
same newspapers as the original notice
of request for approval of the
Submission was published The
Approval Authority shall identify in any
notice of POTW Pretreatment Program
approval any authorization to modify
categorical Pretreatment Standards
which the POTW may make, in
accordance with § 403.7, for removal of
pollutants subject to Pretreatment
Standards.
(f) Public access to submission. The
Approval Authority shall ensure that the
Submission and any comments upon
such Submission are available to the
public for inspection and copying.
§ 403.12 Reporting requirements for
POTWs and Industrial users.
(a) Definition. The term "Control
Authority" as it is used in this section
refers to: (1) The POTW if the POTW's
Submission for its pretreatment program
(J 403.3(t)(l)) has been approved in
accordance with the requirements of
§ 403.11; or (2) the Approval Authority if
the Submission has not been approved.
(b) Reporting requirement for
industrial users upon effective date of
categorical pretreatment standard
baseline report. Within ISO days after
the effective date of a categorical
Pretreatment Standard, or 180 days after
the final administrative decision made
upon a category determination
submission under § 403.6(a)(4),
whichever is later, existing Industrial
Users subject to such categorical
Pretreatment Standards and currently
discharging to or scheduled to discharge
to a POTW shall be required to submit
to the Control Authority a report which
contains the information listed in
paragraph (b)(lH7) of this section.
Where reports containing this
information already have been
submitted to the Director or Regional
Administrator in compliance with the
requirements of 40 CFR 128.140(b), the
Industrial user will not be required to
submit this information again. New
sources shall be required to submit to
the Control Authority a report which
contains the information listed in
paragraphs (b)(lH5) of this section:
(1) Identifying information. The User
shall submit the name and address of
the facility including the name of the
operator and owners;
(2) Permits. The User shall submit a
list of any environmental control permits
held by or for the facility;
(3) Description of operations. The
User shall submit a brief description of
the nature, average rate of production.
C-I5
-------
Federal Register / VoL 46. No. 18 / Wednesday. January 28. 1881 / Rules and Regulations 9453
and Standard Industrial Classification of
the operation^) carded out by such
Industrial User. This description should
include a schematic process diagram
which indicates points of Discharge to
the POTW from the regulated processes.
(4) Flow measurement The User shall
submit information showing the
measured average daily and nmxinmm
daily flow, in gallons per day, to the
POTW from each of the following:
(i) regulated process streams; and
(ii) other streams as necessary to
allow use of the combined wastestream
formula of { 403.6(e). (See paragraph
(b)(5}(v) of this section.)
The Control Authority may allow for
verifiable estimates of these flows
where justified by cost or feasibility
considerations.
(5) Measurement of Pollutants, (i) The
user shall identify the Pretreatment
Standards applicable to each regulated
process;
(ii) In addition, the User shall submit
the results of sampling and analysis
identifying the nature and concentration
(or mass, where required by the
Standard or Control Authority) of
regulated pollutants in the Discharge
from each regulated process. Both daily
maximum and average concentration (or
mass, where required] shall be reported.
The sample shall be representative of
daily operations;
(iii) Where feasible, samples must be
obtained through the flow-proportional
composite sampling techniques specified
in the applicable categorical
Pretreatment Standard. Where
composite sampling is not feasible, a
grab sample is acceptable;
(iv) Where the flow of the stream
being sampled is less than or equal to
950,000 liters/day (approximately
250,000 gpd), the User must take three
samples within a two-week period.
Where the flow of the stream being
sampled is greater than 950,000 liters
day (approximately 250,000 gpd), the
User must take six samples within a
two-week period;
(v) Samples should be taken
immediately downstream from
pretreatment facilities if such exist or
immediately downstream from the
regulated process if no pretreatment
exists. If other wastewaters are mixed
with the regulated wastewater prior to
pretreatment the User should measure
the flows and concentrations necessary
to allow use of the combined
wastestream formula of § 403.8(e) in
order to evaluate compliance with the
Pretreatment Standards. Where an
alternate concentration or mass limit
has been calculated in accordance with
§ 403.6(e) this adjusted limit along with
supporting data shall be submitted to
the Control Authority,
(vi) Sampling and analysis shall be
performed in accordance with the
techniques prescribed in 40 CFR Part 136
and amendments thereto. Where 40 CFR
Part 136 does not contain sampling or
analytical techniques for the pollutant in
question, or where the Administrator
determines that the Part 136 sampling
and analytical techniques are
inappropriate for the pollutant in
question, sampling and analysis shall be
performed by using validated analytical
methods or any other applicable
sampling and analytical procedures,
including procedures suggested by the
POTW or other parties, approved by the
Administrator;
(vii) The Control Authority may allow
the submission of a baseline report
which utilizes only historical data so
long as the data provides information
sufficient to determine the need for
industrial pretreatment measures;
(viii) The baseline report shall
indicate the time, date and place, of
sampling, and methods of analysis, and
shall certify that such sampling and
analysis is representative of normal
work cycles and expected pollutant
Discharges to the POTW;
(6) Certification. A statement
reviewed by an authorized
representative of the Industrial User (aa
defined in subparagraph (k) of this
section) and certified to by a qualified
professional, indicating whether
Pretreatment Standards are being met
on a consistent basis, and, if not,
whether additional operation and
maintenance (0 and M) and/or
additional pretreatment is required for
the Industrial User to meet the
Pretreatment Standards and
Requirements; and
(7) Compliance Schedule. If additional
pretreatment and/or O and M will be
required to meet the Pretreatment
Standards; the shortest schedule by
which the Industrial User will provide
such additional pretreatment and/or O
and M. The completion date in this
schedule shall not be later than the
compliance date established for the
applicable Pretreatment Standard.
(i) Where the Industrial User's
categorical Pretreatment Standard has
been modified by a removal allowance
(§ 403.7), the combined wastestream
formula (§ 403.6(e)), and/or a
Fundamentally Different Factors
variance (i 403.13) at the time the User
submits the report required by
paragraph (b) of this section, the
information required by paragraphs
(b){6) and (7) of this section shall pertain
to the modified limits.
(ii) If the categorical Pretreatment
Standard is modified by a removal
allowance ({ 403.7), the combined
wastestream formula (§ 403.6(e)), and/or
a Fundamentally Different Factors
variance (§ 403.13} after the User
submits the report required by
paragraph (b) of this section, any
necessary amendments to the
information requested by paragraphs
(b)(6) and (7) of this section shall be
submitted by the User to the Control
Authority within 60 days after the
modified limit is approved.
(c) Compliance Schedule for Meeting
Categorical Pretreatment Standards.
The following conditions shall apply to
the schedule required by paragraph
(b)(7) of this section:
(1) The schedule shall contain
increments of progress in the form of
dates for the commencement and
completion of major events leading to
the construction and operation of
additional pretreatment required for the
Industrial User to meet the applicable
categorical Pretreatment Standards (e.g.,
hiring an engineer, completing
preliminary plans, completing final
plans, executing contract for major
components, commencing construction,
completing construction, etc.).
(2) No increment referred to in
paragraph (c)(l) of this section shall
exceed 9 months.
(3) Not later than 14 days following
each date in the schedule and the final
date for compliance, the Industrial User
shall submit a progress report to the
Control Authority including, at a
minimum, whether or not it complied
with the increment of progress to be met
on such date and, if not, the date on
which it expects to comply with this
increment of progress, the reason for
delay, and the steps being taken by the
Industrial User to return the
construction to the schedule established.
In no event shall more than 9 months
elapse between such progress reports to
the Control Authority.
(d) Report on compliance with
categorical pretreatment standard
deadline. Within 90 days following the
date for final compliance with
applicable categorical Pretreatment
Standards or in the case of a New
Source following commencement of the
introduction of wastewater into the
POTW, any Industrial User subject to
Pretreatment Standards and
Requirements shall submit to the
Control Authority a report indicating the
nature and concentration of all
pollutants in the Discharge from the
regulated process which are limited by
Pretreatment Standards and
Requirements and the average and
maximum daily flow for these process
C-16
-------
9454 Federal Register / Vol. 46, No. 18 / Wednesday. January 28. 1981 / Rules and Regulations
units in the Industrial User which are
limited by such Pretreatment Standards
and Requirements. The report shall state
whether the applicable Pretreatment
Standards or Requirements are being
met on a consistent basis and, if not
what additional O and M and/or
pretreatment is necessary to bring the
Industrial User into compliance with the
applicable Pretreatment Standards or
Requirements. This statement shall be
signed by an authorized representative
of the Industrial User, as defined in
paragraph [k) of this section, and
certified to by a qualified professional
(e) Periodic reports on continued
compliance. (1) Any Industrial User
subject to a categorical Pretreatment
Standard, after the compliance date of
such Pretreatment Standard, or, in the
case of a New Source, after
commencement of the discharge into the
POTW, shall submit to the Control
Authority during the months of June and
December, unless required more
frequently in the Pretreatment Standard
or by the Control Authority or the
Approval Authority, a report indicating
the nature and concentration of
pollutants in the effluent which are
limited by such categorical Pretreatment
Standards. In addition, this report shall
include a record of measured or
estimated average and maximum daily
flows for the reporting period for the
Discharge reported in paragraph (b)(4)
of this section except mat the Control
Authority may require more detailed
reporting of flows. At the discretion of
the Control Authority and in
consideraton of such factors as local
high or low flow rates, holidays, budget
cycles, etc., the Control Authority may
agree to alter the months during which
the above reports are to be submitted.
(2) Where the Control Authority has
imposed mass limitations on Industrial
Users as provided for by § 403.8(d), the
report required by paragraph (e)(l) of
this section shall indicate the mass of
pollutants regulated by Pretreatment
Standards in the Discharge from the
Industrial User.
(f) Notice of slug loading. The
Industrial User shall notify the POTW
immediately of any slug loading, as
defined by § 403.5(b)(4], by the
Industrial User.
(g) Monitoring and analysis to
demonstrate continued compliance. The
reports required in patagraphs (b)(5),
(d), and (e) of this section shall contain
the results of sampling and analysis of
the Discharge, including the flow and
the nature and concentration, or
production and mass where requested
by the Control Authority, of pollutants
contained therein which are limited by
the applicable Pretreatment Standards.
The frequency of monitoring shall be
prescribed in the applicable
Pretreatment Standard. All analyses
shall be performed in accordance with
procedures established by the
Administrator pursuant to section 304(g)
of the Act and contained in 40 CFR Part
136 and amendments thereto or with any
other test procedures approved by the
Administrator. Sampling shall be
performed in accordance with the
techniques approved by the
Administrator. Where 40 CFR Part 138
does not include .sampling or analytical
techniques for the pollutants in question.
or where the Administrator determines
that the Part 136 sampling and analytical
techniques are inappropriate for the
pollutant in question, sampling and
analyses shall be performed using
validated analytical methods or any
other sampling and analytical
procedures, including procedures
suggested by the POTW or other parties,
approved by the Administrator.
(h) Compliance schedule for POTW'a.
The following conditions and reporting
requirements shall apply to the
compliance schedule for development of
an approvable POTW Pretreatment
Program required by \ 403.8.
(1) The schedule shall contain
increments of progress in the form of
dates for the commencement and
completion of major events leading to
the development and implementation of
a POTW Pretreatment Program (e.g.,
acquiring required authorities,
developing funding mechanisms,
acquiring equipment};
(2) No increment referred to in
paragraph (h](l) of this section shall
exceed nine months;
(3) Not later than 14 days following
each date in the schedule and the final
date for compliance, the POTW shall
submit a progress report to the Approval
Authority including, as a minimum,
whether or not it complied with the
increment of progress to be met on such
date and, if not, the date on which it
expects to comply with this increment of
progress, the reason for delay, and the
steps taken by the POTW to return to
.the schedule established. In no event
shall more than nine months elapse
between such progress reports to the
Approval Authority.
(i) Initial POTW report on compliance
with approved removal'allowance. A
POTW which has received authorization
to modify categorical Pretreatment
Standards for pollutants removed by the
POTW in accordance with the
requirements of § 403.7 must submit to
the Approval Authority within 60 days
after the effective date of a Pretreatment
Standard for which authorization to
modify has been approved, a report
which contains the information required
by }§403.7(d)(2), 403.7(d)(5) and
403.7(d)(6}. A minimum, of one sample
per month during the reporting period is
required.
(j) Periodic reports by POTW to
demonstrate continued compliance with
removal allowance. The reports referred
to in paragraph (i) of this section will be
submitted to the Approval Authority at
8-month intervals beginning with the
submission of the initial report referred
to in paragraph (i) of this section unless
required more frequently by the
Approval Authority.
(k) Signatory requirements for
industrial user reports. The reports
required by paragraphs (b), (d), and (e),
of this section must be signed by an
authorized representative of the
Industrial User. An authorized
representative may be:
(1) A principal executive officer of at
least the level of vice president, if the
Industrial User submitting the reports
required by paragraphs (b), (d) and (e) of
this section is a corporation.
(2) A general partner or proprietor if
the Industrial User submitting the report
required by paragraphs (b). (d) and (e) of
this section is a partnership or sole
proprietorship respectively.
(3) A duly authorized representative
of the individual designated in
subparagraph (1) or (2) of this paragraph
if such representative is responsible for
the overall operation of the facility from
which the Indirect Discharge originates.
(1) Signatory requirements for POTW
reports. Reports submitted to the
Approval Authority by the POTW in
accordance with paragraphs (h), (i) and
(j] of this section must be signed by a
principal executive officer, ranking
elected official or other duly authorized
employee if such employee is
responsible for overall operation of the
POTW.
(m) Provisions governing fraud and
false statements. The reports required
by paragraphs (b), (d), (e). (h), (i) and (j)
of this section shall be subject to the
provisions of 18 U.S.C. section 1001
relating to fraud and false statements
and the provisions of section 309(c)(2) of
the Act governing false statements,
representations or certifications in
reports required under the Act.
(n) Record-keeping requirements.
(1) Any Industrial User and POTW
subject to the reporting requirements
established in this section shall
maintain records of all information
resulting from any monitoring activities
required by this section. Such records
shall include for all samples:
(i) The date, exact place, method, and
time of sampling and the names of the
person or persons taking the samples;
C-17
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 46. No. 18 / Wednesday. January 28, 1981 / Rules and Regulations 9455
(ii) The dates analyses were
performed;
(iii) Who performed the analyses;
(iv) The analytical techniques/
methods use; and
(v) The results of such analyses.
(2) Any Industrial User or POTW
subject to -the reporting requirements
established in this seation shall be
required to retain for a minimum of 3
years any records of monitoring
activities and results (whether or not
such monitoring activities are required
by this section) and shall make such
records available for inspection and
copying by the Director and the
Regional Administrator (and POTW in
the case of an Industrial User). This
period of retention shall be extended
during the course of any unresolved
litigation regarding the Industrial User
or POTW or when requested by the
Director or the Regional Administrator.
[3) Any POTW to which reports are
submitted by an Industrial User
pursuant to paragraphs fb), (d), and (e)
of this section shall retain such reports
for a minimum of 3 years and shall make
such reports available for inspection
and copying by the Director and the
Regional Administrator. This period of
retention shall be extended during the
course of any unresolved litigation
regarding the discharge of pollutants by
the Industrial User or the operation of
the POTW Pretieatment Program or
when requested by the Director or the
Regional Administrator.
§ 403.13 Variance* from categorical
pretreatment standard* for fundamentally
different factor*.
(a) Definition. The term "Requester"
means an Industrial User or a POTW or
other interested person seeking a
variance from the limits specified in a
categorical Pretreatment Standard.
(b) Purpose and scope. In establishing
categorical Pretreatment Standards for
existing sources, the EPA will take into
account all the information it can
collect, develop and solicit regarding the
factors relevant to pretreatment
standards under section 307(b). In some
cases, information which may affect
these Pretreatment Standards will not
be available or, for other reasons, will
not be considered during their
development As a result, it may be
necessary on a case-by-case basis to
adjust the limits in categorical
Pretreatment Standards, making them
either more or less stringent, as they
apply to a certain Industrial User within
an industrial category or subcategory.
This will only be done if data specific to
that Industrial User indicates it presents
factors fundamentally different from
those considered by EPA in developing
the limit at issue. Any interested person
believing that factors relating to an
Industrial User are fundamentally
different from the factors considered
during development of a categorical
Pretreatment Standard applicable to
that User and further, that the existence
of those factors justifies a different
discharge limit from that specified in the
applicable categorical Pretreatment
Standard, may request a fundamentally
different factors variance under this
section or such a variance request may
be initiated by the EPA.
(c) Criteria.(1) General criteria. A
request for a variance based upon
fundamentally different factors shall be
approved only if:
(i) There is an applicable categorical
Pretreatment Standard which
specifically controls the pollutant for
which alternative limits have been
requested; and
(ii) Factors relating to the discharge
controlled by the categorical
Pretreatment Standard are
fundamentally different from the factors
considered by EPA in establishing the
Standards; and
(iii) The request for a variance is
made in accordance with the procedural
requirements in paragraphs (g) and (h)
of this section.
(2) Criteria applicable to less
stringent limits. A variance request for
the establishment of limits less stringent
than required by the Standard shall be
approved only if:
(i) The alternative limit requested is
no less stringent than justified by the
fundamental difference;
(ii) The alternative limit will not result
in a violation of prohibitive discharge
standards prescribed by or established
under § 403.5:
(iii) The alternative limit will not
result in a non-water quality
environmental impactXincluding energy
requirements) fundamentally more
adverse than the impact considered
during development of the Pretreatment
Standards; and
(iv) Compliance with the Standards
(either by using the technologies upon
which the Standards are based or by
using other control alternatives) would
result in either
(A) A removal cost (adjusted for
inflation) wholly out of proportion to the
removal cost considered during
development of the Standards; or
(B) A non-water quality
environmental impact (including energy
requirements) fundamentally more
adverse than the impact considered
during development of the Standards.
(3) Criteria applicable to more
stringent limits. A variance request for
the establishment of limits more
stringent than required by the Standards
shall be approved only if:
(i) The alternative limit request is no
more stringent than justified by the
fundamental difference; and
(ii) Compliance with the alternative
limit would not result in either:
(A) A removal cost (adjusted for
inflation] wholly out of proportion to the
removal cost considered during
development of the Standards; or
(B) A non-water quality
environmental impact (including energy
requirements) fundamentally more
adverse than the impact considered
during development of the Standards.
(d) Factors considered fundamentally
different. Factors which may be
considered fundamentally different are:
(1) The nature or quality of pollutants
contained in the raw waste load of the
User's process wastewaten
(2) The volume of the User's process
wastewater and effluent discharged;
(3) Non-water quality environmental
impact of control and treatment of the
User's raw waste load;
(4) Energy requirements of the
application of control and treatment
technology;
(5) Age, size, land availability, and
configuration as they relate to the User's
equipment or facilities; processes
employed; process changes; and
engineering aspects of the application of
control technology;
(6) Cost of compliance with required
control technology.
(e) Factors which will not be
considered fundamentally different. A
variance request or portion of such a
request under this section may not be
granted on any of the following grounds:
(1) The feasibility of installing the
required waste treatment equipment
within the time the Act allows;
(2) The assertion that the Standards
cannot be achieved with the appropriate
waste treatment facilities installed, if
such assertion is not based on factors
listed in paragraph (d) of this section:
(3) The User's ability to pay for the
required waste treatment: or
(4) The impact of a Discharge on the
quality of the POTW's receiving waters.
(f) State or local law. Nothing in this
section shall be construed to impair the
right of any state or locality under
section 510 of the Act to impose more
stringent limitations than required by
Federal law.
(g) Application deadline.
(1) Requests for a variance and
supporting information must be
submitted in writing to the Director or to
the Enforcement Division Director, as
appropriate.
(2) In order to be considered, request
for variances must be submitted within
C-18
-------
9456 Federal Register / Vol. 48, No. 18 / Wednesday, January 28. 1981 / Rules and Regulations
180 days after the effective date of the
categorical Pretreatment Standard
unless the User has requested a
categorical determination pursuant to
5 403.8(a).
(3) Where the User has requested a
catergorical determination pursuant to
S 403.6(a), the User may elect to await
the'results of the category determination
before submitting a variance request
under this section. Where the User so
elects, he or she must submit the
variance request within 30 days after a
final decision has been made on the
categorical determination pursuant to
S 403.6(a)(4).
(h) Contents of submission. Written
Submissions for variance request,
whether made to the Enforcement
Division Director or to the Director must
include:
(1] The name and address of the
person making the request;
(2) Identification of the interest of the
Requester which is affected by the
categorical Pretreatment Standard for
which the variance is requested; '
(3) Identification of the POTW
currently receiving the waste from the
Industrial User for which alternative
discharge limits are requested;
(4) Identification of the categorical
Pretreatment Standards which are
applicable to the Industrial User.
(5} A list of each pollutant or pollutant
parameter for which an alternative
discharge limit is sought
(6) The alternative discharge limits
proposed by the Requester for each
pollutant or pollutant parameter
identified in item (5) of this paragraph;
(7) A description of the Industrial
User's existing water pollution control
facilities;
(8) A schematic flow representation of
the Industrial User's water system
Including water supply, process
wastewater systems, and points of
Discharge; and
(9) A Statement af facts dearly
establishing why the variance request
should be approved, including detailed
support data, documentation, and
evidence necessary to fully evaluate the
merits of the request e.g., technical and
economic data collected by the EPA and
used in developing each pollutant
discharge limit in the Pretreatment
Standard.
(i) Deficient requests. The
Enforcement Divisiofi Director or
Director will only act on written
requests for variances that contain all of
the information required. Persons who
have made incomplete Submissions will
be notified by the Enforcement Division
Director or Director that their requests
are deficient and unless the time period
is extended, will be given up to 30 days
to correct the deficiency. If the
deficiency is not corrected within the
time period allowed by the Enforcement
Division Director or the Director, the
request for a variance shall be denied.
(j) Public notice. Upon receipt of a
complete request, the Director or
Enforcement Division Director will
provide notice of receipt, opportunity to
review the submission, and opportunity
to comment.
(1) The public notice shall be
circulated in a manner designed to
inform interested and potentially
interested persons of the request
Procedures for the circulation of public
notice shall include mailing notices to:
(i) The POTW into which the
Industrial User requesting the variance
discharges;
(ii) Adjoining States whose waters
may be affected; and
(iii) Designated 208 planning agencies.
Federal and State fish, shellfish and
wildlife resource agencies; and to any
other person or group who has
requested individual notice, including
those on appropriate mailing lists.
(2) The public notice shall provide for
a period not less than 30 days following
the date of the public notice during
which time interested persons may
review the request and submit their
written views on the request
(3) Following the comment period, the
Director or Enforcement Division
Director will make a determination on
the request taking into consideration
any comments received. Notice of this
final decision shall be provided to the
requestor (and the Industrial User for
which the variance is requested if
different), the POTW into which the
Industrial User discharges and all
persons who submitted comments on the
request
(k) Review of requests by state. (1)~
Where the Director finds that
fundamentally different factors do not
exist he may deny the request and
notify the requester (and Industrial User
where they are not the same) and the
POTW of the denial.
(2) Where the director finds that
fundamentally different factors do exist,
he shall forward the request, and a
recommendation that the request be
approved, to the Enforcement Division
Director.
(1) Review of requests by EPA. (1)
Where the Enforcement Division
Director finds that fundamentally
different factors do not exist, he shall
deny the request for a variance and
send u copy of his determination to the
Director, to the POTW, and,to the
Requester (and to the Industrial User,
where they are not the same).
(2) Where the Enforcement Division
Director finds that fundamentally
different factors do exist, and that a
partial or full variance is justified, he
will approve the variance. In approving
the variance, the Enforcement Division
Director will:
(i) Prepare recommended alternative
discharge limits for Ihe Industrial User
either more or less stringent than those
prescribed by the applicable categorical
Pretreatment Standard to the extent
warranted by the demonstrated
fundamentally different factors;
(ii] Provide the following information
in his written determination:
(A) the recommended alternative
discharge limits for the Industrial User
concerned;
(B) the rationale for the adjustment of
the Pretreatment Standard (including the
Enforcement Division Director's reasons
for recommending that a fundamentally
different factor variance be granted) and
an explanation, of how the Enforcement
Division Director's recommended
alternative discharge limits were
derived;
(C) the supporting evidence submitted
to the Enforcement Division Director,
and
(D) other information considered by
the Enforcement Division Director in
developing the recommended
alternative discharge limits;
{iii) Notify the Director and the POTW
of his or her determination; and
(iv) Send the information described in
paragraphs (1](2) (i) and (ii) above to tlje
Requestor (and to the Industrial User
where they are not the same).
(m) Request for hearing. (1) Within 30
days following the date of receipt of
notice of the Enforcement Division
Director's decision on a variance
request the Requester or any other
interested person may submit a petition
to the Regional Administrator for a
hearing to reconsider or contest the
decision. If such a request is submitted
by a person other than the Industrial
User the person shall simultaneously
serve a copy of the request on the
Industrial User.
(2) If the Regional Administrator
declines to hold a hearing and the
Regional Administrator affirms the
Enforcement Division Director's
findings, the Requester may submit a
petition for a hearing to the
Administrator within 30 days of the
Regional Administrator's decision.
{403.14 Confidentiality.
(a) EPA authorities. In accordance
with 40 CFR Part 2, any information
submitted to EPA pursuant to these
regulations may be claimed as
confidential by the submitter. Any such
C-19
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 46, No. 18 / Wednesday, January 28, 1981 / Rules and Regulations 9457
claim must be asserted at the time of
submission in the manner prescribed on
the application form or instructions, or,
in the case of other submissions, by
stamping the words "confidential
business information" on each page
containing such information. If no claim
is made at the time of submission, EPA
may make the information available to
the public without further notice. If a
claim is asserted, the information will be
treated in accordance with the
procedures in 40 CFR Part 2 (Public
Information).
(b) Effluent data. Information and
data provided to the Control Authority
pursuant to this part which is effluent
data shall be available to the public
without restriction.
(c) State or POTW. All other
information which is submitted to the
State or POTW shall be available to the
public at least to the extent provided by
40 CFR § 2.302.
5403.15 Net/Gross calculation.
Categorical Pretreatment Standards
may be adjusted to reflect the presence
of pollutants in the Industrial Users'
intake water in accordance with the
provisions of paragraph (a)-(d) below:
(a) Application deadline and contents.
Any Industrial User wishing to obtain a
credit for intake pollutants must make
application therefore within 60 days
after the effective date of the applicable
categorical Pretreatment Standard.
Application shall be made to the
jppropriate Enforcement Division
Director. Upon request of the Industrial
User, the applicable Standard will be
calculated on a "net" basis, i.e., adjusted
to reflect credit for pollutants in the
intake water, if the User demonstrates
that:
(1} Its intake water is drawn from the
same body of water into which the
discharge from its publicity owned
treatment works is made;
(2) The pollutants present in the"
intake water will not be entirely
removed by the treatment system
operated by the User;
(3) The pollutants in the intake water
do not vary chemically or biologically
from the pollutants limited by the
applicable Standards; and
(4) The User does not significantly
increase concentrations of pollutants in
the intake water, even if the total
amount of pollutants remains the same.
(b) Criteria. Standards*adjusted under
this paragraph shall be calculated on the
basis of the amount of pollutants
present after any treatment steps have
been performed on the intake water by
or for the Industrial User. Adjustments
under this section shall be given only to
the extent that pollutants in the intake
water which are limited by the Standard
are not removed by the treatment
technology employed by the User.
(c) Notice. The User shall notify the
Regional Enforcement Officer if there
are any significant changes in the
quantity of the pollutants in the intake
water or in the level of treatment
provided.
(d) EPA decision. The Enforcement
Division Director shall require the User
to conduct additional monitoring (i.e.,
for flow and concentration of pollutants)
as necessary to determine continued
eligibility for and compliance with any
adjustments. The Enforcement Division
Director shall consider all timely
applications for credits for intake
pollutants plus any additional evidence
that may have been submitted hi
response to the EPA's request The
Enforcement Division Director shall then
make a written determination of the
applicable credit(s), if any, state the
reasons for its determination, state what
additional monitoring is necessary, and
send a copy of said determination to the
applicant and the applicant's POTW.
The decision of the Enforcement
Division Director shall be final.
{403.16 Upttt provision.
(a) Definition. For the purposes of this
section, "Upset" means an exceptional
incident in which there is unintentional
and temporary noncompliance with
categorical Pretreatment Standards
because of factors beyond the
reasonable control of the Industrial
User. An Upset does not include
noncompliance to the extent caused by
operational error, improperly designed
treatment facilities, inadequate
treatment facilities, lack of preventive
maintenance, or careless or improper
operation.
(b) Effect of an upset. An Upset shall
constitute an affirmative defense to an
action brought for noncompliance with
categorical Pretreatment Standards if
the requirements of paragraph (c) are
met.
(c) Conditions necessary for a
demonstration of upset. An Industrial
User who wishes to establish the
affirmative defense of Upset shall
demonstrate, through properly signed,
contemporaneous operating logs, or
other relevant evidence that:
(1) An Upset occurred and the
Industrial User can identify the specific
cause(s) of the Upset
(2) The facility was at the time being
operated in a prudent and workman-like
manner and in compliance with
applicable operation and maintenance
procedures;
(3) The Industrial User has submitted
the following information to the POTW
and Control Authority within 24 hours of
becoming aware of the Upset (if this
information is provided orally, a written
submission must be provided within five
days):
(i) A description of the Indirect
Discharge and cause of noncompliance;
(ii) The period of noncompliance,
including exact dates and times or. if not
corrected, the anticipated time the
noncompliance is expected to continue;
(iii) Steps being taken and/or planned
to reduce, eliminate and prevent
recurrence of the noncompliance.
(d) Burden of proof. In any
enforcement proceeding the Industrial
User seeking to establish the occurrence
of an Upset shall have the burden of
proof.
(e) Reviewability of agency
consideration of claims of upset. In the
usual exercise of prosecutorial
discretion. Agency enforcement
personnel should review any claims that
non-compliance was caused by an
Upset. No determinations made in the
course of the review constitute final
Agency action subject to judicial review.
Industrial Users will have the
Opportunity for a judicial determination
on any claim of Upset only in an
enforcement action brought for
noncompliance with categorical
Pretreatment Standards.
(f) User responsibility in case of
upset. The Industrial User shall control
production or all Discharges to the
extent necessary to maintain
compliance with categorical
Pretreatment Standards upon reduction,
loss, or failure of its treatment facility
until the facility is restored or an
alternative method of treatment is
provided. This requirement applies in
the situation where, among other things,
the primary source of power of the
treatment facility is reduced, lost or
fails.
Appendix A.United State* Environmental
Protection Agency
December 18,1975.
Program Guidance Memorandum81
Subject: Grants for Treatment and Control of
Combined Sewer Overflows and
Stormwater Discharges.
From: John T. Rhett, Deputy Assistant
Administrator for Water Program
Operations (WH-546).
To: Regional Administrators, Regions I-X.
This memorandum summarizes the
Agency's policy on the use of construction
grants for treatment and control of combined
sewer overflows and Stormwater discharges
during wet-weather conditions. The purpose
is to assure that projects are funded only .
when careful planning has demonstrated they
are cost-effective.
C-20
-------
9458 Federal Register / Vol. 46, No. 18 / Wednesday, January 28, 1981 / Rules and Regulations
L Combined S*war Overflow*
A. Background
The costs and benefits of control of various
portion* of pollution due to combined sewer
overflows and by-passe* vary greatly with
the characteristic* of the sewer and
treatment system, the duration. Intensity,
frequency and arear extent of precipitation,
the type and extent of development in the
service area, and the characteristics, uses
and water quality standards of the receiving
waters. Decisions on grants for control of
combined sewer overflows, therefore, must
be made on a case-by-case basis after
detailed planning at the local level
Where detailed planning has been
completed, treatment or control of pollution
from wet-weather overflows and bypasses
may be given priority for construction grant
funds only after provision has been made for
secondary treatment of dry-weather flows in
the area. The detailed planning requirements
and criteria for project approval follow.
B. Planning Requirements
Construction grants may be approved for
control of pollution from combined sewer
overflows only if planning for the project was
thoroughly analysed for the 20 year planning
period:
1. Alternative control techniques which
might be utilized to attain various levels of
pollution control (related to alternative
beneficial uses, if appropriate), including at
least initial consideration of all the
alternatives described in the section on
combined sewer and stormwater control in
"Alternative Waste Management Techniques
and Best Practicable Waste Treatment"
(Section C of Chapter ffl of the information
proposed for comment in March 1974}.
2. The costs of achieving the various levels
of pollution control by each of the technique*
appearing to be the most feasible and cost-
effective after the preliminary analysis.
3. The benefits to the receiving waters of a
range of levels of pollution control during
wet-weather conditions. This analysis will
normally be conducted as part of State water
quality management planning, 208 areawide
management planning, or other State.
regional or local planning effort
4. The costs and benefits of addition of
advanced waste'treatment processes to dry-
weather flows in the area.
C Criteria for Project Approval
The final alternative selected shall meet
the following criteria:
1. The analysis required above has
demonstrated that the level of pollution
control provided will be necessary to protect
a beneficial use of the receiving water even
after technology based standards required by
Section 301 of P.L. 92-500 are achieved by
industrial point sources and at least
secondary treatment is achieved for dry-
weather municipal flows in the area.
2. Provision has already been made for
funding of secondary treatment of dry-
weather flows in the area.
3. The pollution control technique proposed
for combined sewer overflow is a more co«t-
effective means of protecting the beneficial
use of the receiving waters than other
combined sewer pollution control techniques
and the addition of treatment higher than
secondary treatment for dry-weather
municipal flows in the area.
4. The marginal costs are not substantial
compared to marginal benefits.
Marginal costs and benefits for each
alternative may be displayed graphically to
assist with determining a project'*
acceptability under this criterion. Dollar costs
should be compared with quantified pollution
reduction and water quality improvements. A
descriptive narrative should also be included
analyzing monetary, social and
environmental costs compared to benefits,
particularly the significance of the beneficial
uses to be protected by the project
Q. Stormwater Discharge*
Approaches for reducing pollution from
separate stormwater discharges are now in
the early stages of development and
evaluation. We anticipate, however, that in
many cases the benefits obtained by
construction of treatment works for this
purpose will be small compared with the
costs, and other techniques of control and
prevention will be more cost-effective. The
policy of the Agency is, therefore, that
construction grants shall not be used for
construction of treatment works to control
pollution from separate discharges of
stormwater except under unusual conditions
where the project clearly has been
demonstrated to meet the planning
requirements and criteria described above for
combined sewer overflows,
m. Multi-purpose Project*
Projects with multiple purposes, such as
flood control and recreation in addition to
pollution control, may be eligible for an
amount not to exceed the cost of the most
cost-effective tingle purpose pollution
abatement system. Normally the Separable
Costs-Remaining Benefits (SCRB) method
should be used to allocate costs between
pollution control and other purposes.
although in unusual cases another method
may be appropriate. For such cost allocation.
the cost of the least cost pollution abatement
alternative may be used as a substitute
measure of the benefits for that piirpose. The
method is described in "Proposed Practices
for Economic Analysis of River Basin
Projects," GPO. Washington. D.C, 1958, and
"Efficiency in Government through Systems
Analysis," by Roland N. McKean, John Wiley
ft Sons, Inc, 1958.
Enlargement of or otherwise adding to
combined sewer conveyance systems is one
means of reducing or eliminating flooding
caused by wet-weather conditions. These
additions may be designed so as to produce
some benefits in terms of reduced discharge
of pollutants to surrounding waterways. The
pollution control benefits of such flood
control measures, however, are likely to be
small compared with the costs, and the
measures therefore would normally be
ineligible for funding under the construction
grants program.
All multi-purpose projects where less than
100% of the costs are eligible for construction
grants under this policy shall contain a
special grant condition precluding EPA
funding of non-pollution control elements.
This condition should, a* a minimum, contain
a provision similar to the following:
'The grantee explicitly acknowledges and
agrees that costs are allowable only to the
extent they are incurred for the water
pollution control elements of this project"
Additional special conditions should be
Included as appropriate to assure that the
grantee clearly understands which elements
of the project are eligible for construction
grants under Public Law 92-500.
Appendix B65 Toxic Pollutants
Acenaphthene
Acrolein
Acrylonitrile
Aldrin/Dieldrin
Antimony and compounds'
Arsenic and compounds
Asbestos
Benzene
Benzidine
Beryllium and compounds
Cadmium and compounds
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlordane (technical mixture and
metabolites)
Chlorinated benzenes (other than
dichlorobenzenes)
Chlorinated ethanes (including 1,2-
dichloroethane, 1.1,1-trichloroethane, and
hexachloroethane)
Chloralkyl ethers (chloromethyl, chloroethyl,
and mixed ethers)
Chlorinated naphthalene
Chlorinated phenols (other than those listed
elsewhere; includes trichlorophenois and
chlorinated cresols)
Chloroform
2-chlorophenol
Chromium and compounds
Copper and compounds
Cyanides
DDT and metabolites
Dichlorobenzenes (1.2-, 1,3-, and 1,4-
dichloro benzenes)
Dichlorobenzidine
Dichloroethylenes (1,1- and 1.2-
dichloroethylene)
2.4-dichlorophenol
Dichloropropane and dichloropropene
Z4-dime thy 1 phenol
Dinitrotoluene
Diphenylhydrazine
Endosulfan and metabolites
Endrin and metabolites
Ethylbenzene
Fluoroanthene
Haloethers (other than those listed
elsewhere; includes chlorophenylphenyl
ethers, bromophenylphenyl ether,
bis(dischloroisopropyl) ether, bis-
(chloroethoxy) methane and
polychlorinated diphenyl ethers)
Halomethanes (other than those listed
elsewhere: includes methylene
chloromethyl-chloride, methylbromide,
bromoform. dichlorobromomethane,
trichlorofluoromethane.
dichlorodifiuoromethane)
Heptachlor and metabolites
Hexachlorobutadiene
1 A» u«ed throughout this Appendix B the term
"compounds" shall include organic and inorganic
compounds.
C-21
-------
Federal Register / VoL 48, No. 18 / Wednesday, January 28, 1981 / Rules and Regulations 9459
Hexachlorocyclohexane (all isomers)
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Uophorone
Lead and compounds
Mercury and compounds
Naphthalene
Nickel and compounds
Nitrobenzene
Nitrophenols (Including 2.4-dinitrophenol.
dinitrocresol)
Nitrosamines
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
Phthalate esters
Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs)
Polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons
(including benzanthracenes.
benzopyrenes.benzofluroranthene,
chrysenes, dibenzanthracenes, and
indenopyrenes)
Selenium and compounds
Silver and compounds
2.3,7.8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD)
Tetrachloroethylene
Thallium and compounds
Toluene
Toxaphene
Trichloroethylene
Vinyl chloride
Zinc and compounds
Appendix C34 Industrial Categories
Adhesive* and Sealants
Aluminum Forming
Auto and Other Laundries
Battery Manufacturing
Coal Mining
Coil Coating
Copper Forming
Electrical and Electronic Components
Electroplating
Explosives Manufacturing
Foundries
Gum and Wood Chemicals
Inorganic Chemicals Manufacturing
Iron and Steel Manufacturing
Leather Tanning and Finishing
Mechanical Products Manufacturing
Nonferrous Metals Manufacturing
Ore Mining
Organic Chemicals Manufacturing
Paint and Ink Formulation
Pesticides
Petroleum Refining
Pharmaceutical Preparations
Photographic Equipment and Supplies
Plastics Processing
Plastic and Synthetic Materials
Manufacturing
Porcelain Enameling
Printing and Publishing
Pulp and Paper Mills
Rubber Processing
Soap and Detergent Manufacturing
Steam Electric Power Plants
Textile Mills
Timber Products Processing"
Appendix DSelected Industrial
Subcategories Exempted From Regulation
Pursuant of Paragraph 8 of the NRDC v.
Costle Consent Decree
The following industrial subcategories
have been excluded from further rulemaking
pursuant to paragraph 8 of the Natural
Resources Defense Couna'l v. Costle Consent
Decree for one or more of the following
reasons: (1) the pollutants of concern are not
detectable in the effluent from the Industrial
User (paragraph 8(aKiii)); (2) the pollutants of
concern an present only in trace amounts
and are neither causing nor likely to cause
toxic effects (paragrpah &Upi)): (3) the
pollutants of concern are present in amounts
too small to be effectively reduced by
technologies known to the Administrator
(paragraph 8(a)(iii)); or (4) the wastestream
contains only pollutants which are
compatible with the POTW (paragraph
8(b)(0). In some instances, different rationale
were given for exclusion under paragraph 8.
However, EPA has reviewed these
subcategories and has determined that
exclusion could have occurred due to-one of
the four reasons listed above.
This Hst includes all subcategories that
have been excluded for the above-listed
reasons as of [date of publication in the
Federal Register]. This list will be updated
periodically for the convenience of the
reader.
Auto and Other Laundries Industry
Carpet Cleaners
Coin Operated Laundries
Diaper Services
Dry Cleaners
Power Laundries
Battery Manufacturing Industry
Carbon Zinc Air Cell Batteries
Lithium Batteries
Magnesium Carbon Batteries
Magnesium Cell Batteries
Miniature Alkaline Batteries
Nickel Zinc Batteries
Electrical and Electronic Components
Carbon and Graphite Products
Fixed Capacitors
Fluorescent Lamps
Incandescent Lamps
Magnetic Coatings
Mica Paper
Electroplating
Alkaline Cleaning
Bright Dipping
Chemical Machining
Galvanizing
Immersion Plating
Indite Dipping
Pickling
Explosives Industry
Military Explosive Manufacturing
Foundries Industry
Nickel Casting
Tin Casting
Titanium Casting
Caw and Wood Chemicals
Char and Charcoal Briquets
Gum Resin. Turpentine and Essential Oils
Iron and Steel Industry
* Basic Oxygen Furnace (Semiwet)
Beehive Coke Process
Electric Arc Furnace (Semiwet)
Inorganic Chemicals Manufacturing Industry
Aluminum Sulfate
Ammonium Chloride
Ammonium Hydroxide
Barium Carbonate
Borax
Boric Acid
Bromine
Calcium Carbide
Calcium Carbonate
Calcium Chloride
Calcium Hydroxide
« Calcium Oxide
Carbon Dioxide
Carbon Monoxide
Chromic Acid
Cuprous Oxide
Ferric Chloride
Ferrous Sulfate
Fluorine
Hydrogen
Hydrochloric Acid
Hydrogen Peroxide
Iodine
Lead Monoxide
Lithium Carbonate
Manganese Sulfate
Nitric Acid
Oxygen and Nitrogen
Potassium Chloride
Potassium Dichromate
Potassium Iodide
Potassium Metal
Potassium Permanganate
Potassium Sulfate
SodiumBicarbonate
Sodium Carbonate
Sodium Chloride
Sodium Fluoride
Sodium Hydrosulfide
Sodium Metal
Sodium Silicate
Sodium Sulfite
Sodium Thiosulfate
Stannic Oxide
Sulfur Dioxide
SulfuricAcid
Zinc Oxide
Zinc Sulfate
Leather Industries
Gloves
Luggage
Shoes and Related Footwear
Personal Goods
Non Ferrous Metals Industry
Primary Arsenic
Primary Antimony
Secondary Babbitt
Primary Barium
Secondary Beryllium
Primary Bismuth
Primary Boron
Secondary Boron
-Bauxite
Secondary Cadmium
Primary Calcium
Primary Cesium
Primary Chromium
Primary Cobalt
Secondary Cobalt
Secondary Columbium
Primary Gallium
Primary Germanium
Primary Gold
Secondary Precious Metals
Primary Hafnium
C-22
-------
9460 Federal Register / Vol. 46. No. 18 / Wednesday, January 28. 1981 / Rules and Regulations
Primary and Secondary Indium
Primary Lithium
Primary Manganese
Primary Magnesium
Secondary Magnesium
Primary Mercury
Secondary Mercury
Primary Molybdenum
Secondary Molybdenum
Primary Nickel
Secondary Nickel
Secondary Plutonium
Primary Potassium
Primary Rare Earths
Primary Rhenium
Secondary Rhenium
Primary Rubidium
Primary Platinum Group
Primary Silicon
Primary Sodium
Secondary Tantalum
Primary Tin
Secondary Tin
Primary Titanium
Secondary Titanium
Secondary Tungsten
Primary Uranium
Secondary Uranium
Secondary Zinc
Primary Zirconium
Paint and Ink Industry
Solvent Base Process
Solvent Wash Process
Paving and Roofing Industry
Asphalt Concrete
Asphalt Emulsion
Linoleum
Printed Asphalt Felt
Roofing
Pulp, Paper, Paperboard, and Converted
Paper Industry
Converted Paper Industry
Rubber Processing Industry
Latex-Dipped, Latex-Extruded, and Latex
Molded Goods
Latex Foam
Small-sized General Molded, Extruded and
Fabricated Rubber Plants
Medium-sized General Molded, Extruded
and Fabricated Rubber Plants
Large-sized General Molded, Extruded and
Fabricated Rubber Plants
Synthetic Crumb Rubber Production-
Emulsion Polymerization
Synthetic Crumb Rubber Production
Solution Polymerization
Synthetic Latex Rubber Production
Tire & Inner Tube Production
Textile Industry
' Apparel Manufacturing
Cordage and Twine
Low Water Use Processing (Greige Mills)
Padding and UphoKtery.Filling
Timber Products Processing
Barking Process
Finishing Processes
HardboardDry Proci at
* Log Washing
Particleboard
Planing Mills
Sawmills
Veneer
Wet Storage
Wood Preserving [Inorganics > Process
PART 125CRITERIA AND
STANDARDS FOR THE NATIONAL
POLLUTANT DISCHARGE
ELIMINATION SYSTEM
Subpart DCriteria and Standards for
Determining Fundamentally Different
Factors Under Sections 301(bX1XA),
301(bX2) (A) and (EXAND JOT(B)] OF
THE ACT
2. 40 CFR Part .125 subpart D is
amended by deleting "and 307[b)" from
the title of the subpart
3.40 CFR { 125 JO is amended to read
as follows:
I125JO Purpose and scop*.
(a) This subpart establishes the
criteria and standards to be used in
determining whether effluent limitations
alternative to those required by
promulgated EPA effluent limitations
guidelines under sections 301 and 304 of
the Act (hereinafter referred to as
"national limits"} should be imposed on
a discharger because factors relating to
the discharger's facilities, equipment,
processes of other factors related to the
discharger are fundamentally different
from the factors considered by EPA in
development of the national limits.. This
subpart applies to all national limits
promulgated under sections 301 and 304
of the Act except for those contained in
40 CFR Part 423 (steam electric
generating point source category).
(b) In establishing national limits, EPA
takes into account all the information it
can collect develop and solicit
regarding the factors listed in sections
304(b) and 304(g) of the Act
* « *
[FR Doc. S1-Z121 Filed 1-Z7-J1; 445 iffl|
BtUJNO COO£
C-23
-------
FINAL AMENDMENTS TO THE
GENERAL PRETREATMENT REGULATIONS
The following amendments to the General Pretreatment
Regulations reflect the most recent and final status
regarding applicability and effective data of the
Regulations. Additional Federal Register notices
that provided notification of changes, suspensions,
postponements, etc. which are no longer valid have
not been included.
C-24
-------
72944 Federal Register / Vol. 45, No. 214 / Monday, November 3, 1980 / Rules and Regulations
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 403
[EN-FRL-1629-4]
General Pretreatment Regulations for
Existing and New Sources
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Final Rule.
SUMMARY: On June 26,1978, the
Environmental Protection Agency
promulgated the final General
Pretreatment Regulations at 43 FR 27738.
Amendments to these regulations were
proposed on October 29,1979, at 44 FR
62260. The October 29 proposal included
an amendment to § 403.10(g) specifying
the information to be included in a
request for State pretreatment program
approval. This notice amends the
requirements for approval of State
pretreatment programs to give EPA clear
authority to approve State pretreatment
programs submitted by National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
("NPDES") States in the absence of
implementing state regulations if certain
requirements are met.
DATE: The effective date of 403.10(g)(l)
UHiii) is November 18,1980.
In accordance with 40 CFR 100.01 (45
FR 26048). these regulations shall be
issued for purposes of judicial review at
1:00 p.m. eastern time on November 18,
1980.
FOR FURTHER* INFORMATION CONTACT:
Nancy Hutzel, Environmental Protection
Agency, Permits Division (EN-336),-401
M St., S.W., Washington, D.C. 20460.
(202) 755-0750.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Under Section 402(b) of the Clean Water
Act ("the Act"), States desiring to
administer their own permit programs
for discharges into navigable waters
may submit such programs to the
Administrator for approval. States
approved by EPA become part of the
National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System ("NPDES"). Section
402(b) of the Act also requires that
NPDES States have a program to ensure
compliance by publicly owned
treatment works ("POTW's") with
various requirements now prescribed in
the General Pretreatment Regulations
(40 CFR Part 403, June 26,1978). States
with approved NPDES programs must
seek modifications of their programs, if
necessary, to incorporate pretreatment
authorities. States which have not yet
received NPDES authority must develop
the requisite pretreatment program
elements before their application to
assume NPDES authority can be
approved.
This amendment would modify the
requirements set forth in Section
403.10(g) of the General Pretreatment
Regulations for approval of pretreatment
programs submitted by NPDES States.
(Elsewhere in today's Federal Register,
EPA is proposing an amendment to the
General Pretreatment Regulations which
would allow NPDES States requesting
approval of pretreatment programs a
grace period in which to revise statutes
or regulations as necessary to comply
with the final Consolidated Permit
Regulations, 40 CFR 122-124, 45 FR at
33290.)
Amendments to the General
Pretreatment Regulations (43 FR 27736,
June 26,1978), were proposed on
October 29,1979, at 44 FR 62280. The
October 29 proposal included an
amendment to § 403.10(g) clarifying the
information to be included in a request
for State pretreatment program
approval. The proposed § 403.10{g)
required that all "statutes and
regulations" upon which a State relied
in attesting to its authority to implement
a pretreatment program be in "full force
and effect" at the time the program was
approved. The quoted phrases appear in
similar form in the NPDES program
regulations pertaining to State
application requirements which have
been interpreted to require the
submission of complete State
implementing regulations before
program approval..(40 CFR Part 123).
The Agency believes, however, that
State regulations pertaining to
pretreatment authorities are not a
necessary prerequisite to pretreatment
program approval for existing NPDES
States. Accordingly, we are amending
§ 403.10(g) to allow existing NPDES
States to submit pretreatment programs
which may be approved in the absence
of State pretreatment regulations if: (1)
the State has sufficient statutory
authority, and (2) the State has
submitted a detailed description of the
procedures by which it proposes to
implement the program.
There are several reasons for
approval of these State pretreatment
programs without regulations. First,
NPDES States have already
demonstrated their ability to carry out a
complex NPDES permit program on a
statewide level. Thus, specific
regulations detailing the manner in
which a State must exercise its
authorities are not essential to ensure
implementation of the program.
Moreover, substantial environmental
benefit will result from early approval of
Plate pretreatment programs which
would otherwise be delayed while State
regulations are being promulgated. The
application of State resources to the,
pretreatment program implementation is
likely to improve compliance with the
program and thereby decrease the
introduction of pollutants into POTW's
and the navigable waters. Second, many
of the authorities that are necessary to
carry out the pretreatment program are
part of the NPDES program and are
encompassed by the State's existing
NPDES regulations. Existing authorities
encompass the ability to levy civil and
criminal penalties, to enter and inspect,
and to carry out other requirements of
the Clean Water Act. Thus, many of the
requirements for a pretreatment program
will already'be satisfied by the
previously approved NPDES program.
For those matters that are unique to the
pretreatment program, the Agency
believes that a statement describing
how the State intends to carry out this
portion of the program and to
promulgate regulations in the future, if
necessary, will provide sufficient public
notice and assurance of the State's
authority and intention to carry out the
program.
These factors are also the basis for
distinguishing between requirements
imposed on NPDES States and rion-
NPDES States. While NPDES States will
be permitted to submit programs
without final and complete regulations.
non-NPDES States must submit either
detailed statutory authority or broad
statutory authority with detailed
implementing regulations.
The remaining amendments to the
General Pretreatment Regulations which
were proposed on October 29.1979, will
be promulgated in final form shortly.
Effective Date
These regulations shall take effect oh
November 18,1980. In accordance with I
U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Administrator finds
good cause that the effective date not be
postponed until 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register
because several State applications have
Been pending before EPA which require
immediate action. One State advised
EPA that if the Agency does not approve
the State program immediately, it will
have to reallocate the pretreatment
program funds to other programs. This
would delay the pretreatment program
until the next fiscal year. Another State
cannot take any action with respect to
planning, budgeting, or implementation
until EPA approves its program. Other
States will have similar problems if
program approval is not immediately
forthcoming. In addition, the Agency's
regulations require that EPA approve or
disapprove State programs
C-25
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 45, No. 214 / Monday. November 3. 1980 / Rules and Reeulations
72945
expeditiously. 40 CFR Part 123. Thus,
EPA must decide rapidly whether to
approve or disapprove programs that
have been awaiting decision for some
time. The public interest will be served
by early action on these program
submissions. The Administrator also
believes, that the public has received
adequate notice of the changes in these
regulations to justify an early effective
date.
Executive Order 12O44
Under Executive Order 12044 EPA is
required to judge whether a regulation is
"significant" and therefore subject to the
procedural requirements ofthe Order or
whether it may follow other specialized
development procedures. EPA labels
these regulations "specialized". I have
reviewed this regulation and determine
that it is a specialized regulation not
subject to the procedural requirements
of Executive Order 12044.
Dated: October 28, 1980.
Douglas M. Costle.
Administrator.
Part 403 of Title 40 of the Code of
Federal Regulations is amended by
revising § 403.10(g)(l) to read as follows:
PART 403GENERAL
PRETREATMENT REGULATIONS FOR
EXISTING AND NEW SOURCES
§ 403.10 Development and Submission of
NPDES State Pretreatment Programs.
* , * * * *
(g) The request for State Pretreatment
Program approval will consist of:
(l)(i) A statement from the State
Attorney General {or the Attorney for
those State agencies which have
independent legal counsel) that the laws
of the State provide adequate authority
to implement the requirements of this
Part. The authorities cited by the
Attorney General in this statement shall
be in the form of lawfully-adopted State
statutes or regulations which shall be
effective by the time of approval of the
State Pretreatment Program.
(ii) Copies of all State statutes and
regulations cited in the above statement.
(iii) Notwithstanding paragraphs
(g)(l)(i) and (ii) of this section, if the
State has the statutory authority to
implement the requirements of this Part,
and if the State at the time of
submission of this request has an
approved NPDES program, then
regulations setting forth the
requirements of this Section need not be
promulgated by the State if the
Administrator finds that the State has
submitted a complete description of
procedures to administer its program in
conformance with the requirements of
this Section. States without an approved
NPDES program will be required to
comply with the requirements of
paragraphs (g)(l)(i) and (ii) of this
section.
(Federal Water Pollution Control Act
Amendments of 1972, as amended by the
Clean Water Act of 1977 (Pub. L. 95.217) (33
U.S.C. 1251, etseq.}, Sections 204{b), 208(b),
301(b), 301(h), 301(i), 304(e), 304(g), 307, 308,
309,402(b), 405, and 501(a))
[FR Doc. 80-34233 Filed 10-31-«0. 8-45 am]
BILLING CODE S560-33-M
C-26
-------
50502
Federal Register / Vol. 48, No. 197 / Tuesday. October 13. 1981 / Rules and Regulations
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 125 and 403
[WH-FRL 1943-3a]
General Pretreatment Regulations for
Existing and New Sources
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: On January 28,1981, the
Environmental Protection Agency
promulgated amendments to the General
Pretreatment Regulations for Existing
and New Sources (46 FR 9404-9460). On
March 27,1981, the effective date of
these amendments was indefinitely
postponed, in order-to enable the
Agency to conduct a Regulatory Impact
Analysis under Executive Order 12291
(46 FR 19936. April 2,1981).
EPA has decided to terminate the
indefinite postponement of the general
pretreatment amendments and make
them effective January 31,1982. This is
being done to allow public comment on
the question of whether the amendments
should be postponed indefinitely and in
response to various, groups' suggestions
that portions of the general pretreatment
amendments be put immediately into
effect. By separate notice published this
day, EPA is initiating a rulemaking on
whether the amendments should be
further postponed.
DATES: The effective date of the
amendments to the general pretreatment
regulations will be January 31,1982.
ADDRESSES: The record supporting this -
rulemaking will be. made available for
inspection through contacting the
following person at the following
address: Bill Diamond, Environmental
Protection Agency, Permits Division
(EN-336), 401 M Street SW.,
Washington. D.C. 20460, (202) 428-4793.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Bill Diamond, Environmental Protection
Agency, Permits. Division (EN-336), 401
M Street SW., Washington, D.C. 20460,
(202) 426-4793.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June
26,1978, the Environmental^ Protection
Agency ("EPA") promulgated general
pretreatment regulations establishing
mechanisms and procedures for
controlling the introduction of wastes
from industry and other non-domestic
sources into publicly-owned treatment
works. (43 FR 27736-27773). Following
promulgation, several parties brought
actions in Federal court challenging
these regulations. On January 28,1981,
pursuant to the terms of a settlement
agreement entered into by some of the
parties, EPA promulgated amendments
to the 1978 regulations. (46 FR 9404-
9460). These amendments were
originally scheduled to take effect on
March 13,1981. Their effective date was
temporarily deferred until March 30,
1981. however, under the President's
Memorandum of January 29,1981 (46 FR
11972, February 12,1981). On March 27,
1981, EPA indefinitely postponed the
amendments' effective date in order to
enable it to conduct a Regulatory Impact
Analysis of the general pretreatment
program under Executive Order 12291.
On April 2,1981, EPA published a notice
in the Federal Register to this effect (46
FR 19936). As a result of the deferral of
the January 1981 amendments, the. June
1979 general pretreatment regulations
remain in effect.
Since EPA's indefinite deferral of the
effective date of the general
pretreatment'amendments, a suit has
been brought by the Natural Resources
Defense Cmiyinil challenging, among
other things EPA's deferral of the
general pretreatment amendments
without notice and comment.
Additionally, two groups who are
directly and intimately affected by the
general pretreatment program have
recommended that portions of the
general pretreatment amendments go
into effect. Accordingly, hi order to
allow public comment on the deferral
and address public suggestions that the
amendments be put into effect EPA is
today establishing January 31,1982. as
the effective date of the amendments to
the general pretreatment regulations.
By separate notice published this day,
EPA is conducting a rulemaking on
whether the amendments to the general
pretreatment regulations should be
further deferred. Such a rulemaking will
allow for a general public airing of the
desirability and appropriate scope of the
deferral. EPA considered terminating the
current suspension and putting the
amendments into effect immediately
and then conducting a ralemaking on
whether the amendments should be
further suspended. This solution,
however, would have risked a new
suspension following very soon after the
amendments had gone back into effect.
In order to avoid such confusion, EPA
has chosen an effective date which gives
it time to complete a rulemaking on the
question of further suspension.
Because notice and comment on the
amendments' effective date is hi effect
being provided through the concurrent
rulemaking on the question of further
suspension, the Agency has determined
that there is good cause to promulgate
this rule without notice and comment
Regulatory Impact Analysis
Under Executive Order 12291, EPA must
judge whether a regulation is "major" and
therefore subject to the requirement of a
Regulatory Impact Analysis. EPA is presently
conducting a Regulatory Impact Analysis on
the amendments to the general pretreatment
regulations. Consequently, this rule, which
puts those amendments into effect may
possibly be considered major. For the
reasons previously outlined in this notice,
EPA has nevertheless concluded that the
amendments to the general pretreatment
regulations should go into effect while they
are under reconsideration.
This rule was submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget for review as
required by Executive Order 12291. Any
comments from OMB to EPA and any EPA
response to those comments are available for
public inspection at the address in the
beginning of this notice.
Dated: October 5,1981.
Anne M. Gorauch,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 81-29605 Filed 10-0-81; 8:45 am]
BILUNQ CODE «560-2»-M
C-27
-------
42688 Federal Register / Vol. 47. No. 188 / Tuesday. September 28, 1982 / Rules and Regulations
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 403
[OGC-FRL 2181-2]
General Pretreatment Regulations for
Existing and New Sources
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION; Final rule.
SUMMARY: On January 28,1981, the
Environmental Protection Agency
promulgated amendments to the General
Pretreatment Regulations for Existing
and New Sources (46 FR 9404-9460). On
March 27,1981, the effective date of
these amendments was indefinitely
postponed, in order to enable thev
Agency to conduct a Regulatory Impact
Analysis under Executive Order 12291
(48 FR 19936, April 2,1981). On January
31.1982, pursuant to a rulemaking
commenced by the Agency on October
13.1981 (46 FR 50502-50503), all but four
of the amendments were put into effect
(47 FR 451& February 1.1982). On July 8,
1982, the United States Court of Appeals
for the Third Circuit issued an opinion
finding that the Agency's original
indefinite deferral of the amendments to
the general pretreatment regulations
conrtavened the notice and comment
provisions of the Administrative
Procedure Act TCT remedy this violation.
the Court directed the Agency to
retroactively reinstate all of the
amendments, effective March 30,1981.
By today's notice, the Agency is
complying with the Court's order and
reinstating all of the amendments as of
March 30,1981.
DATESrThe effective date of the
amendments to the general pretreatment
regulations originally promulgated on
January 28,1981, is March 31.1981.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Bill Diamond. Environmental Protection
Agency, Permits Division (EN-336), 401
M Street, S.W., Washington. D.C. 20460.
(202) 426-4793.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
/. Background
On June 26.1978. the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) promulgated
the General Pretreatment Regulations
establishing mechanisms and
procedures for controlling the
introduction of wastes from industry
and other non-domestic sources into
publicly-owned treatment works
(POTWs) (43 FR 27736-27773). Following
promulgation, several parties brought
actions in Federal court challenging
these regulations. On January 28,1981.
pursuant to the terms of a settlement
agreement entered into by some of the
parties, EPA promulgated amendments
to the 1978 regulations (46 FR 9404-
9460). These amendments were
originally scheduled to take effect on
March 13,1981. Their effective date was
temporarily deferred until March 30,
1981 under the President's Memorandum
of January 29,1981,(46 FR 11972.
February 12.1981). On March 27,1981.
EPA indefinitely postponed the
amendments', effective date to enable it
to conduct a Regulatory Impact Analysis
of the general pretreatment program
under Executive Order 12291. EPA
published a notice in the Federal
Register to this effect on April 2,1981 (46
FR 19936).
Subsequent to EPA's indefinite deferral
ot the effective date of the general
pretreatment amendments, a suit was
brought by the Natural Resources
Defense Council (NRDC) in the United
States Court of Appeals for the Third
Circuit challenging EPA's deferral of the
general pretreatment amendments
without notice and comment (NRDC v.
EPA, No. 81-2068). On October 13,1981,
while this suit was pending, EPA
announced that it was terminating the
indefinite deferral of the amendments,
making them effective January 31,1982
(46 FR 50502). In a separate action also
taken on October 13, the Agency
initiated a rulemaking and invited public
comment on the issue of whether the
effective date of all or specific portions
of the amendments should be further
postponed (46 FR 50503). After
evaluating the comments received in
response to the October 13 proposal,
EPA, on February 1,1982. announced
that it was deferring the effective date of
four of the amendments pending further
analysis but that the remaining
amendments would go into effect (47 FR
4518). The four amendments which
continued to be deferred were the
combined watestream formula
(§ 403.6(e)), the removal credits section
J[§ 403.7) and the definitions of "pass
through" (§ 403(n)) and "interference"
(§403.3(i)).
On July 8,1982, the United States
Court of Appeals issued its opinion in
the NRDC suit finding that EPA's March
27,1981 deferral of the amendments to
the general pretreatment regulations
violated the notice and comment
provisions of the Administrative
Procedure Act To remedy this
procedural violation, the Court directed
.EPA to retroactively reinstate all of the
amendments as of March 30,1981,
including the four amendments which
EPA further deferred on February 1,
1982. At the same time, the court noted
that its decision did not "forestall future
agency action with regard to the four
amendments, provided such action is
taken in compliance with the
Administrative Procedure Act"
Pursuant to the Court's direction, EPA
is hereby reinstating all of the
amendments to the general pre treatment
regulations, effective March 30,1981.
The Agency is continuing, however, to
deliberate on what future steps might be
appropriate with respect to these
amendments.
One of the amendments which EPA
continued to defer on February 1,1982,
but which is being put into effect by
today's action is the combined
wastestream formula. This formula
triggers the three year compliance
deadline for integrated facilities under
the electroplating pretreatment
standards (see, 40 CFR 413.01). A» a
result of today' action, these facilities
will have three years from the combined
wastestream formula's March 30,1981
effective date, or until March 30. i384, to
comply with the electroplating
pretreatment standards. Also as a result
of today's action, the time allotted for
integrated facilities to submit baseline
reports (§ 403.12(b)), fundamentally
different factors variance requests
(§ 403.13) and category determination
requests (§403.6) will begin to run. These
facilities will have six months from
today's date to submit baseline reports
and fundamentally different factors
variance requests and sixty days from
today's date to submit category
determination requests.
Today's reinstatement of the
amendments to the general pretreatment
regulations is being done to rectify past
failure to provide notice and comment
and is dictated by court order. Thus,
there is "good cause" to dispense with
notice and comment prior to the
reinstatement See American Federation
of Government Employees, AFL-CIO, v.
Block, 655 F.2d 1153 (D.C. Cir. 1981).
This notice was submitted to the
Office of Management and Budget for
review as required by Executive Order
12291. Any comments from OMB to EPA
and any EPA response to those
comments are available for public
inspection through contacting the person
listed in the front of this notice. EPA is
presently in the process of completing a
regulatory impact analysis of the general
pretreatment program, of which these
amendments are part
OMB has approved the following
information collection requirements
under the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1980,44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq. These requirements have been
assigned the following control numbers.
C-28
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 47, No. 188 / Tuesday, September 28, 1982 / Rules and Regulations 42689
Citation
40 CFH 122.61 .
40 CFH 403.7
40 CFH 403.7
40 CFH 403.9.
40 CFR 403.10 .._.
40 CFH 403.12 ... .
40 CFR 403.12 ._.
40 CFH 403.12 .__
40 CFH 40312
40 CFH 403.12. ._
40 CFH 403.12 ....
40 CFR 403. 12.....
40 CFH 403.13 ....
40 CFH 403. 15....
Title
Report by Pubfcoty Owned
Treatment Works of New or
Increased Pollutant Introduc-
ton.
Removal Credit Approval Re-
quest
Removal Credit Sell-Monitoring
Report
PuTW PrvtrefttiTwrrt ProQfwn
Approval Request
StnA Pr9tr0fltnwnt PTOQWD
Approval Request
Report
POTW Compliance Schedule
Work Plan.
Industrial Pretreatera Complt-
ance Schedule Reports.
Basehne MmiiluiBiti Report
Industrial Prwreatars Sug Load
NoMictfon.
PCTW Maintenance ot Monitor-
ing Records.
Industrial PnMraalen Comp«-
Fundamentally afferent Fac-
Net/Gross Request Credit tor
Intake Water Pollution.
OMB
No.
2040-
0010
0015
0020
0025
0016
0019
0024
0013
OOM
0012
0023
0022
0011
0017
0018
List of Subjects in 40 CFR 403
Confidential business information,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirement, Waste treatment and
disposal, Water pollution control.
Dated: September 21,1982.
Anne M. Gorsoch,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 82-28586 Filed 9-27-82; 8:45 am)
BILUNO CODE SWMO-M
C-29
-------
2774 Federal Register / Vol. 48. No. 15 / Friday. January 21. 1983 / Rules and Regulations
40 CFR Parts 403 and 413
[OW-FRL 2276-7]
General Pretreatment Regulations .. r
Existing and New Sources and Effluent
Guidelines and Standards;
Electroplating Point Source Category
Pretreatment Standards for Existing
Sources
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Final rule; change in
compliance, application, and reporting
deadlines.
SUMMARY: On October 4.1982, the
United States Court of Appeals for the
Third Circuit issued an order staying for
ninety days certain deadlines in the
Environmental Protection Agency's
Pretreatment standards for the
Electroplating Point Source Category (40
CFR Part 413) and General Pretreatment
Regulations for Existing and New
Sources (40 CFR Part 403). The purpose
of thisTulemaking is to implement the
stay and explain its effects.
DATES: The compliance deadline for the
non-integrated segment of the
electroplating industry is now April 27,
1984. The compliance deadline for the
integrated segment of the electroplating
industry, is now June 30,1984. The
deadline for submission of category
determination requests (49 CFR
403.6(a)), baseline monitoring reports (40
CFR 413-12), fundamentally different
factors variance-requests (40 CER
403.13) and net/gross adjustments
requests {40 CFR 403.15) is extended
ninety days for facilities subject 1o these
submission deadlines as of October 4,
1982.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Bill Diampnd, Environmental Protection
Agency, Permits Division (EN-336),401
M St.. SW.. Washington. D.C. 20460,
(202) 428-4793.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This
notice addresses two interrelated
regulations: (l)The Environmental
Protection Agency's Electroplating
Pretreatment Standards lor existing
sources (40 CFR Part 413) and (2) EPA's
General Pretreatment Regulations for
Existing and New Sources (40 CFR Part
403). The Electroplating Pretreatment
Standards were initially-promulgated on
September 7,1979 and amended on
January 28,1981, (see, 44 FR 52590 and
46 FR0462). The General Pretreatment
Regulations for Existing and New
Sources (40 CFR Part 403) were
originally promulgated on June 26,1978
and amended on January 28,1981 (see,
43 FR 77736 and 46 FR 9404). A number
of cases challenging these two
regulations are currently lodged in the
United States Court of Appeals for the
Third Circuit.
On September 24,1982 the Third
Circuit conducted a preheating
conference in these cases in an attempt
to resolve various threshold issues
concerning consolidation of the cases,
establishment of a briefing schedule am
other matters. At this conference, the
Court recommended entry of an order
staying certain compliance, application
and reporting deadlines in the
Electroplating Pretreatment regulations
and General Pretreatment regulations to
"accommodate the unique management
problems imposed upon the Court by
these complex cases."
Out of deference to-the Court and in
the interest-ef helping to relieve the
Court's management problem, EPA
informed the Court several days after
the prehearing conference that it would
not object to entry of-the mder. In this
communication, EPA noted that it had
elected not to oppose the order "solely
to accommodate the 'unique burdens
imposed on the Court by tins complex
litigation." EPA added that it did not
believe the Agency itself tad the
authority to stay the Btatutorily-
mandated compliance deadlines
contained in the electroplating
regulations nor did it concede that the
narrowly defined circumstances
warranting a judicial stay of-regulations
were present. The Agency concluded:
In short, EPA's action is not intended to
compromise in any way the generally
accepted principle that those who challenge
its regulations must 'litigate on their own
time' and are not ordinarily entitled to a stay
of regulations pending judicial review.
Consistent with this intention. EPA can not
generally be expected to agree to entry of a
stay order in other cases invoMpg judicial
review of other regulations. Moreover, EPA a
all likelihood would vigorously oppose «iy
further stay-of the electroplating or general
pretreatment regulations in *he«e -cases. EPA
believes it proper to expect industry
petitioners to treat the «tay «B an opportunity
for additional ttma in which to effectuate
compliance with EPA's regulations, and not
as a basis for halting or deferring their
compliance efforts.
After receiving word from .EPA that
the Agency would not oppose entry of
the order, the Court, on October 4,1982
entered an order staying for .nine ty-day
the compliance deadlines containedin
the Electroplating regulations and all
deadlines applicable to industrial users
contained in the General Pretreatment
regulations.
The practical effects of the Third
Circuit's order are essentially threefold.
First, it extends the compliance deadline
for the non-integrated segment of the
electroplating industry from January 28,
1984 to April 27,1984.
Second, it extends the compliance
deadline for the integrated segment of
the electroplating industry from March
30,1984 to June 30,1984. As we
explained in a September 28,1982
Federal Register notice, the March 30,
1984 deadline was brought into being by
the Third Circuit's decision ordering
EPA to retroactively reinstate the
amendments to the General
Pretreatment regulations in Natural
Resources Defense Council, Jnc, v. EPA,
No. 81-2068 {47 FR 42888).
Third, the order extends for-ninety
days various application and reporting
deadlines in the General Pretreatment
regulations currently applicable to
industrial users. These deadlines are the
application deadline for category
determination requests (40 CFR
403.6(a)); the deadline for submission of
xbaseline monitoring reports (40 CFR
403.12); the deadline for submission of
fundamentally different factors variance
requests (40. CFR 403.13); and the
application deadline for net/gross
adjustments (40 CFR 403.15). The Court's
order requires alteration of these
application and reporting deadlines only
for industrial users subject to these
deadlines as of the date of the Court's
order. It thus does not apply to faculties
which have became snbject to these
deadlines since the October 4,1982
order or which, at some time in the
future, will become subject to these
deadlines. By the same token, since the
order only .extends the deadlines for
ninety days, it does cot apply to
facilities whose deadlines expired
ninety days prior to October 4. Given
this and the fact that the deadlines are
all keyed to the effective date of
categorical pretreatment standards, it is
possible to accurately identify the
facilities who benefit from the ninety
day extension of application and
reporting deadlines. The .beneficiaries
are integrated electroplating plants, iron
and steel facilities, and inorganic
chemical facilities subject to the
pretreatment standards promulgated on
June 29.1982. (47 FR 28280). All these
facilities are subject to recently effective
categorical pretreatment standards. The
following chart identifies the new
application and reporting deadlines for
these iacili ties.
C-30
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 48, No. 15 / Friday, January 21, 1983 / Rules and Regulations 2775
Industry
Integrated electroplating
Category determination requests,
Old deadline
Nov 27, 1982
Sept 8,1982
Ocl 11, 1982
New deadline
Feb. 25, 1983
Dec. 7. 1982
Jan. 9. 1983
Baseline monitoring report
Old deadline
Mar 27 1963 .
Jan 6, 1983 . .
Feb 8. 1983
New deadline
June 25, 1983
Apr 6, 1983
May 9, 1983
Fundamentally different factors
variance requests
Old deadline
Mar. 27, 1983
Jan. 6, 1983
Feb. 8, 19S3
New deadline
June 25, 1983
Apr 6, 1983
May 9. 1983
Net gross adjustments
Old deadline
Nov. 27 1982
Sept 6, 1982
Oct 11, 1982
New deadline
Feb. 25, 1983.
Dec. 7, 1982.
Jan. 9, 1983.
C-31
-------
APPENDIX D
PRIORITY POLLUTANTS
AND
CATEGORICAL INDUSTRY
INFORMATION
-------
TABLE D.I
MATRIX OF PRIORITY POLLUTANTS POTENTIALLY
DISCHARGED FROM INDUSTRIAL CATEGORIES
Table D.I lists the 25 categorical industries and the potential
priority pollutants that can occur in significant amounts in the
wastewater discharged from each group. This does not mean that every
facility within a specific group discharges that pollutant; it does
mean that there is a high probability that it will be discharged,
based on a national survey of the industries conducted by USEPA. In
addition, it does not mean that other priority pollutants will not be
found in significant quantities, but that, in general, the manufacturing
process and raw materials involved do not lead to the discharge of these
pollutants.
NOTE; The information in the table was developed from Industry
Summaries prepared by the USEPA, dated March, 1979 from the published
development documents for effluent limitations from industrial point
source categories. This information is subject to change, and, as
shown in Tables D.I and D.2, some industry groups may not be regulated.
D-l
------- An error occurred while trying to OCR this image.
------- An error occurred while trying to OCR this image.
------- An error occurred while trying to OCR this image.
------- An error occurred while trying to OCR this image.
------- An error occurred while trying to OCR this image.
------- An error occurred while trying to OCR this image.
-------
TABLE D.2
STATUS REPORT OF CATEGORIES TOTALLY OR PARTIALLY
EXCLUDED FROM PRETREATMENT REGULATION
CATEGORY/SUBCATEGORY AFFECTED
40 CFR Industrial Category as listed in PARAGRAPH 8 EXCLUSION PROJECT DEFERRED
Part the EGD / NRDC Settlement Agreement Total Partial Total Partial
Adhesive and Sealants
Aluminum Forming
Honferrous Metals Manufacturing
Nonferrous Metals Forming
Ore Mining and Dressing
Organic Chemicals
Paint Formulation
Paving and Roofing Materials
455 Pesticides
Petroleum Refining
Pharmaceutical Mfg.
Auto and Other Laundries
Battery Mfg.
Carbon Black
Coal Mining
Coil Coating
Copper Forming
Electrical and Electronic Products
Electroplating
Explosives Mfg.
Foundry
Gun and Wood Chemicals x
Ink Formulation x
Inorganic Chemicals x_
Iron and Steel Mfg. _^____ x
Leather Tanning and Finishing x
Mechanical Products
2Metal Finishing
Photographic Equipment and Supplies
Plastics and Synthetics
Plastics Molding and Forming
Porcelain Enameling
Printing and Publishing
Pulp, Paper, and Paper-board
Rubber Mfg.
Shipbuilding X_
Soap and Detergent Mfg. X_
423 Steam Electric Powerplants
410 Textile X_
429 Timber X_
The Organic Chemicals and the Plastics and Synthetics Categories have been combined
for BAT rulenaltlng under the Organic/Plastic Category.
2The Electroplating and the Mechanical Products Categories have been combined Eor BAT
ruleraaking under the Metal Finishing Category.
Source: This table is an update of the July 1981 Summary o£ Paragraph 8 Exclusions prepared by Che Office of Quality
the Effluent Guidelines Division, Office of Water Regulations and Standards, Office of Water, EPA. It was at
memorandum from Jeffrey Denit, dated August 18, 1981. This information is subject to change.
D-8
-------
TABLE D.3
REGULATED INDUSTRIAL SUBCATEGORIES WITH ASSOCIATED SIC CODES
Industry Category
SIC Code
2891
Adhesives and Sealants
Aluminum Forming
Rolling with Emulsions
Rolling with Neat Oils
Extrusion
Drawing with Neat Oils
Forging
Drawing with Emulsions or Soaps
Coal Mining
Coal Preparation
Acid/Ferrugenous Mine Drainage
Alkaline Mine Drainage
Areas under Reclamation
Western Coal Mines
Coil Coating
Steel Basis Material Coating
Galvanized Basis Material Coating
Aluminum Basis Material Coating
Copper Forming
Hot Rolling
Cold Rolling
Extrusion
Drawing
Pickling
Alkaline Cleaning
Forging
Copper Foil Production
Electroplating (Metal Finishing)
Electroplating of Common Metals
Electroplating of Precious Metals
Electroplating of Speciality Metals
Anodizing
Coatings
Chemical Etching & Milling
Electroless Plating
Printed Circuit Board
Chemical Matching
Immersion Plating
Pickling
Bright Dipping
Alkaline Cleaning
Source: Summarized from (1) "Summary of Paragraph 8 Exclusions," EGD, OWRS,
EPA, July, 1981; (2) Standard Industrial Classification Manual,
Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget,
1972.
D-9
3353, 3355
3353, 3355
3354
3353, 3355
3463
3353, 3355
1111, 1112, 1211, 1213
1111, 1112, 1211, 1213
1111, 1112, 1211, 1213
1111, 1112, 1211, 1213
1211, 1213
3479
3479
3479
3351
3351
3351
3351
3351
3351
3351
3497, 3351
3471 & 3479
(Some industries within
these subcategories may
not be subject to regu-
lations)
-------
TABLE D.3 (Continued)
REGULATED INDUSTRIAL SUBCATEGORIES WITH ASSOCIATED SIC CODES
Industry Category
SIC Code
Foundries
Iron and Steel
Copper
Aluminum
Zinc
Lead
Magnesium
Inorganic Chemicals
Chlorine & Na or K Hydroxide
Hydrofluoric Acid Production
Na Dichromate & Sulfate Production
Titanium Dioxide
Aluminum Fluoride Production
Chrome Pigment
Copper Sulfate Production
Hydrogen Cyanide Production
Nickel Sulfate Production
Sodium Bisulfite Production
Sodium Silicofluoride Production
Iron and Steel Manufacturing
(BAT subcategorization scheme)
Cokemaking
Sintering
Ironmaking
Steelmaking
Vacuum Degassing
Continuous Casting
Hot Forming
Scale Removal
Acid Pickling
Cold Forming
Alkaline Cleaning
Hot Coating
Leather Tanning and Finishing
Hair Pulp Unhairing with Chrome
Tanning and Finishing
Hair Save Unhairing with Chrome
Tanning or Finishing
Unhairing with Vegetable or
Alum. Tanning and Finishing
Finishing of Tanned Hides
Vegetable or Chrome Tanning of
Unhaired Hides
Unhairing with Chrome Tanning and
No Finishing
Shearing
3322, 3324, 3325
3362
3361
3369
3369
3369
2812
2819
2819
2816
2819
2816
2819
2819
2819
2819
2819
3312
3312
3312
3312
3312
3312
3312, 3315, 33171
3312, 3315, 33171
3312, 3315, 33171
3316
3312, 3315, 3316, 33171
3312, 3315, 3317
3111
3111
3111
3111
3111
3111
3111
i
D-10
-------
TABLE D.3 (Continued)
REGULATED INDUSTRIES SUBCATEGORIES WITH ASSOCIATED SIC CODES
Industry Category
SIC Code
Metal Finishing/Mechanical Products
Nonferrous Metals Manufacturing
Bauxite Refining
Primary Aluminum Smelting
Secondary Aluminum Smelting
Primary Copper Smelting
Primary Copper Refining
Secondary Copper
Primary Lead
Primary Zinc
Metallurgical Acid Plants
Primary Columbium Tantalum
Secondary Silver - Photographic
Secondary Silver - Nonphotographic
Primary Tungsten
Secondary Lead
Ore Mining and Dressing
Base and Precious Metals
(Cu, Pb, Zn, Ag, Au, Pt, Mo)
Ferroalloy Ores
Uranium, Radium, Vanadium Ores
Tungsten Ore.
Nickel Ores
Vanadium Ore (non-radioactive)
Antimony Ore
Organic Chemicals, Plastics and
Synthetic Materials
Processes with Process Water,
Contact as Steam Diluent
Quench or Vent Gas Absorbent
Pesticides Chemicals
Organic Pesticide Mfg.
Metallo-Organic Pesticides
Pesticide Chemicals Formulating
Petroleum Refining
Topping
Cracking
Petrochemicals
Lube
Integrated
Large number of subcate-
gories including: 3411-29;
3432-66; 3482-3599; 3613-
23; 3629-39
2819
3334
3341
3331
3331
3341
3332
3333
3331, 3332, 3333
3339
3341
3341
3339
3341
1021, 1031, 1041, 1044,
1061
1061
1094
1061
1061
1094
1099
2865, 2869
2869, 28792
2869, 2879
2869, 2879
2911
2911
2911
2911
2911
D-ll
-------
TABLE D.3 (Continued)
REGULATED INDUSTRIES SUBCATEGORIES WITH ASSOCIATED SIC CODES
Industry Category SIC Code
Pharmaceutical Manufacturing
Fermentation Products 2833, 2831
Extractions 2831, 2833
Chemical Synthesis Products 2833
Mixing/Compounding - Formulation 2834
Research 2831, 2833, 2834
Plastics and Synthetics (Organic
Chemicals, Plastics, Synthetic
Materials)
Polyvinyl Chloride 2821
Polyvinyl Acetate 2821
Polystyrene 2821
Polypropylene 2821
Polyethylene 2821
Cellophane 2821
Rayon 2823
ABS and SAN Resin - Copolymers 2821
Polyester 2821
Nylon 6 2821
Cellulose Acetate 2823
Acrylics 2821
Ethylene - Vinyl Acetate 2821
Polytetrafluoroethylene 2821
Polypropylene Fiber 2823
Alkyds & Unsaturated Polyester Resins 2821
Cellulose Nitrate 2821
Polyamide (Nylon 6/12) 2821
Polyester Resins (Thermoplastics) 2821
Silicones 2821
Porcelain Enameling
Steel 3631, 3632, 3633, 3639,
3469, 3479, 3431
Cast Iron Mainly 3631, 3431
Aluminum Mainly 3469, 3479, 3631
Copper Mainly 3479, Limited use
in 3469 and 3631
Pulp, Paper and Paperboard
Unbleached Kraft 2611
Sodium Based neutral Sulfite
Semi-Chemicals 2611
Ammonia Based Neutral Sulfite
Semi-Chemical 2611
Unbleached Kraft-Neutral Sulfite
Semi-Chemical 2611
Paperboard from Wastepaper 2631
Dissolving Kraft 2611
D-12
-------
TABLE D.3 (Continued)
REGULATED INDUSTRIAL SUBCATEGORIES WITH ASSOCIATED SIC CODES
Industry Category SIC Code
Pulp, Paper and Paperboard (Continued)
Market Bleached Kraft 2611
OCT Bleached Kraft 2611
Fine Bleached Kraft 2611
Papergrade Sulfite 2611, 2621
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp 2611
Groundwood - Thermo - Mechanical 2611, 2621
Groundwood - CMN Papers 2611, 2621
Groundwood - Fine Papers 2611, 2621
Soda 2611, 2621
Unbleached Kraft & Semi-Chemical 2611
Semi-Chemical 2611
Wastepaper - Molded Products 2646
Nonintegrated - Lightweight Paper 2621
Nonintegrated - Filter and Nonwoven
Papers 2621
Nonintegrated - Paperboard 2631
Deink 2611, 2621
Nonintegrated Fine Paper 2621
Nonintegrated Tissue Papers 2631
Tissue from Wastepaper 2647
Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) 2611, 2621
Steam Electric Power Generating
Generating Unit 4911, 4931
Small Unit 4911, 4931
Old Unit 4911, 4931
Area Runoff 4911, 4931
Textile Industry
Wool Scouring 2299
Wool Finishing 2231
Woven Fabric Finishing 2261, 2262, 2269
Knit Fabric Finishing 2251-59
Carpet Mills 2271, 2272, 2279
Stock and Yarn Dyeing & Finishing 2269
Nonwoven Manufacturing 2297
Felted Fabric Processing 2291
Timber Products
Wood Preserving - Boultonizing 2491
Wood Fuming and Fixtures (with 2511, 2512, 2517, 2521
and Without Water Wash Spray 2531, 2541
Booths or Laundry Facilities)
^Mainly Zero Dischargers
2Low Flow or Zero Discharge
D-13
-------
TABLE D.4
DETECTION LEVELS FOR PRIORITY POLLUTANTS
Detection EPA
PRIORITY POLLUTANT3 Level (ug/L) Method
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
acenaphthene
acrolein
acrylonitrile
benzene
benzidine
carbon tetrachloride
chlorobenzene
1 ,2 ,4-trichlorobenzene
hexachlorobenzene
1 ,2-dichloroethane
1 ,1 ,1-trichloroethane
hexachloroe thane
1 ,1-dichloroethane
1 ,1 ,2-trichloroethane
1,1,2 ,2-tetrachloroethane
chloroethane
bis (2-chloroethyl) ether
2-chloroethyl vinyl ether (mixed)
2-chloronaphthalene
2 ,4 ,6-trichlorophenol
parachlorometa cresol
chloroform (trichlorome thane)
2-chlorophenol
1 ,2-dichlorobenzene
1 ,3-dichlorobenzene
1 ,4-dichlorobenzene
3 ,3-dichlorobenzidine
1 ,1-dichloroethylene
1 ,2-trans-dichloroethylene
2 ,4-dichlorophenol
1 ,2-dichloropropane
1 ,2-dichloropropylene (trans 1 ,3-dichloropropene)
2 ,4-diraethylphenol
2 ,4-dinitrotoluene
2 ,6-dinitrotoluene
1 ,2-diphenylhydrazine
ethylbenzene
f luoranthene
4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether
4-bromophenyl phenyl ether
1.8
0.6
0.5
0.2
0.08
0.12
0.25
0.05
0.05
0.03
0.03
1.6
0.07
0.02
0.03
0.52
0.3
0.13
1.9
0.64
0.36
0.05
0.31
0.15
0.32
0.24
0.13
0.13
0.1
0.39
0.04
0.34
0.32
0.02
0.01
b
0.2
0.21
3.9
2.3
610
603
603
602
605
601
601
612
612
601
601
625
601
601
601
601
611
601
625
604
604
601
604
601
601
601
605
601
601
604
601
601
604
609
609
b
602
610
611
611
D-14
-------
DETECTION LEVELS FOR PRIORITY POLLUTANTS (Continued)
PRIORITY POLLUTANT'
Detection EPA
Level (ug/L) Method
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
65.
66.
67.
68.
69.
70.
71.
72.
73.
74.
75.
76.
77.
78.
79.
80.
81.
82.
bis (2-chlorisopropyl) ether
bis (2-chloroethoxy) methane
raethylene chloride (dichloromethane)
methyl chloride ( chloromethane)
methyl bromide (bromomethane)
bromof orm ( tribromomethane)
dichlorobromome thane
chlorodibromomethane
hexachlorobutadiene
hexachlorocyclopentadiene
isophorone
naphthalene
nitrobenzene
nitrophenol
4-nitrophenol
2 ,4-dinitrophenol
4 ,6-dinitro-o-cresol
N-nitrosodimethylamine
N-nitrosodiphenylamine
N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine
pentachlorophenol
phenol
bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
butyl benzyl phthalate
di-n-butyl phthalate
di-n-octyl phthalate
diethyl phthalate
dimethyl phthalate
benzo (a) anthracene (1 ,2-benzanthracene)
benzo (a) pyrene (3 ,4-benzopyrene)
3 ,4-benzof luoranthene
benzo (k) fluoranthane (11, 12-benzofluoranthene)
chrysene
acenaphthylene
anthracene
benzo (ghi) perylene (1, 12-benzoperylene)
fluorene
phenanthrene
dibenzo (a,h) anthracene (1 ,2,5,6-dibenzanthracene)
indeno (1,2,3-cd) pyrene (2 ,3-o-phenylenepyrene)
pyrene
tetrachloroethylene
0.8
0.5
0.25
0.08
1.18
0.2
0.1
b
0.34
-
5.7
1.8
3.6
0.45
2.8
13.0
16.0
0.15
0.81
0.46
7.4
0.14
2.0
0.34
0.36
3.0
0.49
0.29
0.013
0.023
0.018
0.017
0.15
2.3
0.66
0.076
0.21
0.64
0.03
0.043
0.27
0.03
611
611
601
601
601
601
601
601
612
f*
609 FID
610
609 FID
604
604
604
604
607
607
607
604
604
606
606
606
606
606
606
610 HPLC
610 HPLC
610 HPLC
610 HPLC
610 HPLC
610 HPLC
610 HPLC
610 HPLC
610 HPLC
610 HPLC
610 HPLC
610 HPLC
610 HPLC
601
D-15
-------
DETECTION LEVELS FOR PRIORITY POLLUTANTS (Continued)
PRIORITY POLLUTANT
Detection EPA
Level (ug/L) Method
83.
84.
85.
86.
87.
88.
89.
90.
91.
92.
93.
94.
95.
96.
97.
98.
99.
100.
101.
102.
103.
104.
105.
106.
107.
108.
109.
110.
111.
112.
113.
114.
115.
116.
117.
118.
119.
120.
121.
122.
123.
toluene
trichloroethylene
vinyl chloride ( chloroethylene)
aldrin
dieldrin
chlordane (technical mixture & metabolites)
4, 4 '-DDT
4, 4'-DDE (p, p'-DDX)
4, 4 '-ODD (p, p'-TDE)
Alpha-endosulfan
Beta-endosulfan
endosulfan sulfate
end r in
endrin aldehyde
heptachlor
heptachlor epoxide
Alpha-BHC
Beta-BHC
Gamma-BHC (lindane)
Delta-BHC
PCB-1242 (Arochlor 1242)
PCB-1254 (Arochlor 1254)
PCB-1221 (Arochlor 1221)
PCB-1232 (Arochlor 1232)
PCB-1248 (Arochlor 1248)
PCB-1260 (Arochlor 1260)
PCB-1016 (Arochlor 1016)
toxaphene
antimony (total)
arsenic (total)
asbestos (fibrous)
beryllium (total)
cadmium (total)
chromium (total)
copper (total)
cyanide (total)
lead (total)
mercury (total)
nickel (total)
selenium (total)
silver (total)
0.2
0.12
0.18
0.004
0.002
0.014
0.012
0.004
0.011
0.014
0.004
0.066
0.006
0.023
0.003
0.083
0.003
0.006
0.004
0.009
0.065
b
b
b
b
b
b
0.24
10
10
b
1
1
5
1
20
10
0.2
10
5
1
602
601
601
608
608
608
608
608
608
608
608
608
608
608
608
608
608
608
608
608
608
608
608
608
608
608
608
608
FUR6
FUR
f
FLAME
FUR
FUR
FUR
DIST8
FURh
cvn
FUR
FUR
FUR
D-16
-------
DETECTION LEVELS FOR PRIORITY POLLUTANTS (Continued)
Detection EPA
PRIORITY POLLUTANT9 Level (ug/L) Method
124. thallium (total) 10 FUR
125. zinc (total) 1 FUR
126. 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) 0.003
This numbering does not correspond with numbers on EPA1s list of pri-
ority pollutants.
No detection limit determined.
f\
Flame ionization detection (FID).
High pressure liquid chromatography (HPLC).
f
e Furnace (FUR).
Flame (FLAME).
g Distillation (DIST).
Cold vapor (CV).
Source: "Methods for Organic Chemical Analysis of Municipal and Industrial
Wastewater," Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory,
Cincinnati, OH 45268. EPA-600/4-82-057. July 1982.
Table D.4 lists the analytical methods and appropriate detection
limits for the EPA priority pollutants. The information contained in
"Methods for Organic Chemical Analysis of Municipal and Industrial
Wastewater" represents an effort to provide procedures that are as
uniform and cost effective as practical for a wide cross-section of
chemical compound classes. Due to the variable chemical and physical
properties of the parameters, some compromises had to be made.
Therefore, in some of the methods, the extraction procedures, cleanup
procedures and determinative steps are not optimum for all param-
eters.
D-17
-------
APPENDIX E
SAMPLE PRETREATMENT COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE
-------
APPENDIX E
EXAMPLE PRETREATMENT COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE
Under the authority of section 307(b) and 402(b)(8) of the Clean Water
Act, and implementing regulations (40 CFR 403), the permittee is required to
develop a pretreatment program. This program shall enable the permittee to
detect and enforce against violations of categorical pretreatment standards
promulgated under section 307(b) and (c) of the Clean Water Act and prohib-
itive discharge standards as set forth in 40 CFR 403.5.
The schedule of compliance for the development of this pretreatment
program is as follows. The permittee shall:
ACTIVITY NO. ACTIVITY DATE
1 Submit the results of an industrial waste
survey as required by 40 CFR 403.8(f)(2)
(i-iii), including identification of
industrial users and the character and
volume of pollutants contributed to the
POTW by the industrial users.
2 Submit an evaluation of the legal authori-
ties to be used by the permittee to apply
and enforce the requirements of sections
307(b) and (c) and 402(b)(8) of the Clean
Water Act, including those requirements
outlined in 40 CFR 403.8(f)(l).
3 Submit a determination of technical infor-
mation (including specific requirements
to specify violations of the discharge
prohibitions in 403.5) necessary to
develop an industrial waste ordinance or
other means of enforcing pretreatment
standards.
4 Submit an evaluation of the financial
programs and revenue sources, as required
by 40 CFR 403.8(f)(3), that will be
employed to implement the pretreatment
program.
5 Submit design of a monitoring program
which will implement the requirements
of 40 CFR 403.8 and 403.12, and in
particular those requirements referenced
in 40 CFR 403 .8(f)(l)(iv-v), 403.8(f)(2)
(iv-vi) and 403.12(n-j), (1-n).
E-l
-------
Appendix E (continued)
ACTIVITY NO. ACTIVITY DATE
6 Submit list of monitoring equipment
required by the POTW to implement the
pretreatment program and a description of
municipal facilities to be constructed
for monitoring or analysis of industrial
wastes.
7 Submit specific POTW effluent limitations
for prohibited pollutants (as defined by
40 CFR 403.5) contributed to the POTW by
industrial users.
8 Submit a request for pretreatment program
approval (and removal credit approval, if
desired) as required by 40 CFR 403.9.
The terms and conditions of the POTW pretreatment program, when approved,
shall be enforceable through the permittee's NPDES permit.
Quarterly Reporting
The permittee shall report to the permit-issuing authority on a quarterly
basis the status of work completed on the POTW pretreatment program. Report-
ing periods shall end on the last day of the months of March, June, September
and December. The report shall be submitted to the permit-issuance authority
no later than the 28th day of the month following each reporting period.
Removal Allowances
Any applications for authority to revise categorical pretreatment stan-
dards to reflect POTW removal of pollutants in accordance with the require-
ments of 40 CFR 403.7 must be submitted to the permit-issuing authority at the
time of application for POTW pretreatment program approval, or at the time of
permit expiration and reissuance thereafter.
E-2
-------
APPENDIX F
BLANK WORKSHEETS
-------
4J T3
O C
SB O,
&J
"O CO
H 0)
n os
Ol 4-1
±> C
>-t -H H)
0) ,O 4J
4J TH 3
CO 42 rH
S O rH
01 (-1 O
C 4J PM O,
I-H CO
tfl
CO S
4J >.
C O 4-1
CO -H T-l CO
4J 4-1 S-l 4-1
3 CO O C
rH CO -H CO
C VD rH
O CM O
55 rH CM
W
r4
PQ
crt
H
r4
to
en
w
I
en
W
H
I
<*;
H
en
0)03
iJ O O
g°-g
<1) 4-1 O
4-> O i-H
CO CO «
O H
03 SB \
-. rH
O i-H -H
C O
O «
0)
bO
f-i
CO
42 S
O H
co O
rH Pu,
O
O
o -u
5B
CO
13
O
u
cj
M
en
Cfl
CO
CD
u
"O
I
CO
as
il
u
F-l
-------
01
c
o
Q,
0)
H
CO
£
o
PH
fa
Cd
>"
w
u
cc
4-1
c
o
c
0)
p.
e
o
CJ
M
0)
en
W
EC
e
o
Vi
o> o>
M -U
o) co
CN
w
I-J
PQ
I
CO
w
H
00
§
CO
to
CO 01
CD
O>
(5
3 M-1 4J
ID
C 4-1 -
-I O CO
C
O> CO O .
CO ft CO C
Q) 3 to 0)
U-l
o
o
M
bO
CU
i-i 1-1
bO
co c
H O
a
CO
01
H Cfl
co c
CO
bO O S-< i-l
d 43 o &
co X
01 01
e
4-1
Cfl CU
cO 0)
H 03 iH
6 4-> M
H CO 0) d
i-l 3 45 -H
a) e 4-i co
(-1 CO VJ cfl
O 4J O
C «-i 13 cfl
0)
4-> vj
cfl at
O U-i
co a)
tO
01 >,
>j e
43 3 i-l O
H CO 01 4J
a>
4J
o
F-2
-------
CJ
H
T3
CO
f-l
M
3
cu
e
4-1 4-J
« C
a)
co o
CO ^ tO H
M o 3 PJ
t
CO
c
4J 0
c -H e
ai n) 4-i 3
bo y * °
to s n c
M ^ 4J J4
cu »-j c
> O CU <4-l
< ^ O -H
c
cS
o
H
1 4-1
a co
S M CU
o * e
C O
|2 ^. T3
CU c B
CO ^ O CO
4-1 W 3 CU
C cu u,
tO O. c 4J
4_l CO ^ CO
3 3 CU
r-l C" 4J 4J
i~l . C CO
O 2 CU 10
OH O CO S
to s
M o
21 -H
^^
iH
"^- cfl
CU vH
"S ^ "i
3§ §J
a-g
CO M I
0)
B
CO
(0
a
o
F-3
-------
I
-a-
w
I
CO
o
M
S3
H
rH
£
ii
rJ
|
O
06
£
W
2
H
W
Q
^v
4J
O
CO
.0
3
to
»_<
I
I
*
s~+^
09
0) (U
1 1 1-1
.0 p
H 4J
4J 03 03 03
CO CO i-l 3
CX S C
>,£ « ef
i-l CO -H
C 0) 4J 03
O X! d CO
4-1 Cfl "O
CO XI P O rH
M O l-i O (0
CO CO O " M-l iH
(0 -H iw M
£3 "O CO CO 4->
CO 0 CO
,_( 03 4-1 -H O 3
CO l-l C CO T3
H co to > e
l-l CO 4J 4) M
4J !=> 3 > CO
CO rH O CU 4-1
3 .H ,-H 6 CJ C
a co o cu TH co
£ 3 bO -P
§>4-l tH -H CO <4-l
O i-l CO CU O
C 0
*J S 3
o 3 5
HZ Z
CO
c
CO .
3 co H co
i-l >i T3 O l-i
t-t C l-i OM I3J
O < CO J
^> o o
: M M
PH
l-i CU
CU XI co
n-i cu n
4-l
CM M
cu
4-1
c
M
CO
>, cu
4J O
H O CU
to u C
O 4J CO -H /-N
H C Cfl Cfl 4-1
l-l Cfl ^ 4J CO
CM 4-1 C T-l
3 0) 0 ,J
4J iH XI U v_^
Cfl rH 4-1
£ °
C3
M
4-1
c3
cfl
v»-i O
O i-l
14-1
CU i-l
CO bO
w
F-4
-------
TABLE 5.1
SAMPLING RECORD
Person Sampling:
Date:
Facility Sampled:
Facility Location:
Sampling Location:
Sample Type:
Observation/Comments:
Time:
am/pm
Grab ( )
Composite ( )
Sample Bottle I.D. (Marking)
Samples split with facility?
Name of Facility Representative:
Yes ( ) No ( )
Title of Facility Representative:
TIME /DATE
SAMPLE
RECEIVED BY
SIGNATURE
AFFILIATION/
TITLE
COMMENTS
F-5
-------
TABLE 5.2
MONITORING RESULTS REPORT FORM
Facility Name:
Permit No.:
Sampling Code:
S = Scheduled
U = Unscheduled
FC = Flow Proportion
Composite (x = hours)
D = Demand
M = Self Monitoring
G = Grab Sample
C = Composite (x = hours)
X
Permit Limits*
Date
Sample
Code
Parameter
Value mg/1
Parameter
Value
Parameter
Value
Parameter
Value
Parameter
Value
Parameter
Value
Parameter
Value
Parameter
Value
Parameter
Value
Parameter
Value
Parameter
Value
Parameter
Value
* Permit limits for 24 hrs. flow composite
F-6
------- An error occurred while trying to OCR this image.
-------
TABLE 7.6
WORKSHEET FOR CALCULATING
ANNUAL OPERATING COSTS
Average
Hourly
Direct Labor: Labor hours Rate Annual Program Cost
Management $
Legal $
Engineering $
Laboratory $
Field inspection/sampling $
Clerical $
Subtotal
II. Other Direct Costs Amount
Vehicle operation
Laboratory equipment/supplies
Sampling and laboratory equipment
operating & maintenance
Miscellaneous
- commercial laboratory
- contractor services
- debt service repayment
Subtotal $
III. Indirect Costs $
(May include overhead and general
and administrative expenses)
Subtotal $
TOTAL ANNUAL OPERATING EXPENDITURES $_
F-8
-------
,J
Q
O
W
M
W
o
H
W
33
en
e^
O
»
^
0
M
H
|
CJ
u
w
s
P5
°i
["«,
w
pg
H
CO
H
CO
^
Cfl
C
bO
H
r-l
O.
8
CO
CO
co
4-1
^^ -H i-l CO
co d C cfl o
4-1 0 0 C 0
CO -H 6 CO
O 4J 4-1
O Cfl rH >, O
U CO p CU
60 4J -H O M
C CO M 4-1 i-t 73
H -H 4-1 CO Q cfl
4.) BMP j 4-> >
O ,J 00
i i (vl ro
4J
CO
o
r-l
CO
3
C
r-l
CO
O
H
.
PQ
O
W)
C
H
II iH
! O.
U cfl cfl
CO CU CO 4J
0 >H -~. CJ
u cu cu
P bo >
i 1 CU P W
co a. cd
3 J2 CO
C >» O -H
B U CO
>~> < ff 0) >i
P CU L) i-t
CO r-l 3 -i-l CO
e cfl cr > e
B 4-)
-------
w
Q
g
>
M
H
O
od
H
C/3
tfl
CJ
H
4-1
3
CU
o
tfl
Cfl
4-1
cfl
CO
0)
e
cd
H
w
w
SJ
en
i
O
£
o
3
PL,
t-i
0
a
rt
M
0)
^1
o
43
CO
C
c
1-t
4J
cfl
p
4J
CO
^
C
H
g3
f^
^1
bO
C
H
O
4-1
C
o
e
^
cfl
H
^,
4J
CO
3
T)
C
M
05
H
CO
>\
Cfl
C
CO
>,
t-l
o
4-1
Cfl
O
43
Cfl
tJ
CO
cS
4J
CJ
cu
cu
43
4-1
O
CN
t-l
O
S-S
CNJ
M
CU
O
4-1
CO
O
CO
C
O
H
cfl
1
C/3
c
cfl
LJ
O
IM
CO
4-1
CO
O
O
4-1
C
cu
e
4-1
Cfl
CU
t-l
4-1
0)
^|
cx
1-1
cfl
3
C
C
CO
! I
cfl
4-1
O
H
(_,
cu
CD
CO
1 1
3
C
C
<0
i-H
cfl
u
O
H
)
Cu
3
O
bO
r-l
H
J-,
4J
CO
3
o
C
H
a
3
0
t-i
bO
i-l
cfl
*i-t
t-i
CO
3
T3
C
r-l
4-1
CO
rf
4J
^
J^
*rj
CU
4-1
CO
t-l
cu
c
cu
bo
0)
3
e
cu
^
cu
t-i
CO
CO
CO
iH
O
>.
l^
4-1
CO
3
*O
C
'
f!
O
cfl
cu
t-l
o
14-1
t-l
o
u
O
cfl
14-1
4-1
C
cu
e
4J
Cfl
CU
t-l
4-1
CU
tJ
PL,
II
F-10
-------
_J
w
Q
O
s
33
H
0
Z
W
erf
H
Crt
H
2
5
H
&
j
»
i i
0
CX
ad
o
fc
H
w
u
as
en
i..*
^
g
ss
o
t I
s
^lj
J
^^
u
J
<
u
W
£
2
f I
~-4
1-^
W
_3
CO
01
§ ^
<-1
O
t>
u
cu
i j
<0
3
cu
u
CO
£ ^
u
co
o
o
>>
I t-<
C d cfl
O O C
^ g CO
j_i
CO CO iH >~.
j~) VJ CO l-i
03 4J i-i O
o w M jj
U fl 4-1 CO
e co P
bO M -H 3 O
C 0 B "O ^3
t-< jD T) d CO
W « «=B M >J
« >J
S-i
CU
ex
o ^
9
iJ
H
Q
U
CU
jr
u
O
CN
"S
CU
X
l-J
CU
o
m
CO
jj
CO
o
0
u
C
Cli
e
4J
CO
cu
i-i
u
cu
u
CX,
iH
CO
4J
o
H
CO
'' «
CX
CX 3 tJ
3 O O
O VJ LM
J bO II
bO u CX
W (-1 -H 3
4-) d to c o
d cfl CU 3 SJ
CO AJ >-, bO
W 3 l-i
3 i-l I-I CU 4J
.H t-i cu cx d
H O CX CO
o cx cu w
CX T3 4J 3
U-i CU CO i-i
>> O bo *- i-i
Xi ^i O
iJ CO CU CX
co C ^ bo
4-> 3 O U J3
>» CO O CO CO O
P o e -H jr cfl
cfl U cfl -o O 0)
c!
g
£j
W3
u
F-ll
-------
APPENDIX G
CHECKLIST FOR PRETREATMENT
PROGRAM SUBMISSION
-------
Legal Authority Checklist
Name of POTW
Date
Yes
No
Section
of POTW's
Submission
PART T. Submission Completeness Checklist (Legal Aspects)
A. 40 CFR 403.9(b) requirements for submission:
(1) Does the submission contain a statement from
the city solicitor, POTW attorney, or other
official?
(2) Does the submission contain a copy of every
legal authority source cited in the attorney's
statement or necessary for program implemen-
tation? (e.g., ordinances, contracts, statutes,
joint agreements, permits, regulations, etc.)
(3) Does the submission contain endorsements from
all local boards/bodies responsible for super-
vising/funding the pretreatment program?
*(4) If any of the legal authorities cited are vested
in a particular official's discretion, is there
a statement of endorsement from such official?
B.
40 CFR 403.9(b)(l) requirements for attorney's
statement:
(1) Does the statement identify the provision of
legal authority for each requirement under
403.8(f)(2)?
(2) Does the statement identify the manner in which
403.8 program requirements will be implemented?
(3) Does the statement identify how the POTW intends
to ensure compliance?
C.
If the POTW service area includes more than one
agency, jurisdiction, government, or body, does the
submission include all ordinances, resolutions,
regulations, service agreements and other legal
documents relevant to the analysis of multijuris-
dictional issues? (Use separate Part II forms
for each jurisdiction.)
PART II. Legal Adequacy [403 .8(f)(l)]
Does the POTW have the authority to:
A. Deny or condition new or increased contributions of
pollutants? [403.8(f)(l)(i)]
Require compliance with applicable pretreatment
standards? [403 .8(
B.
(1)
General prohibitions:
ference [403. 5(a)]
pass-through, inter-
G-l
-------
Legal Authority Checklist (Continued)
Name of POTW
Date
D.
(2) Specific prohibitions [403. 5(b)]:
Fire/explosive hazard?
pH/corrosion?
Solid or viscous - obstruction/ interference?
Flow rate or concentration to cause inter-
ference?
Heat - treatment plant influent 40°C (104°F)?
(3) Locally developed limits? [403. 5(c) and (d)}
(4) National categorical standards?
Control through permit, contract, etc., to ensure
compliance? [403 .8(f )
Yes
No
Section
of POTW's
Submission
Require development of compliance schedules and
submission of reports? [403. 8(f )(l)(iv)]
(1) Development of compliance schedules for
installation of technology?
(2) Submission of notices and self-monitoring
reports including 403.12 requirements (baseline
report, compliance schedule progress report,
report on final compliance with categorical
pretreatment standards, periodic reports on
continued compliance, notice of slug loading)?
Carry out inspection, surveillance, and monitoring
procedures: [403. 8( f)(l)(v)]
(1) Right to enter premises at any reasonable time?
(2) Right to inspect generally for compliance?
(3) Right to sample?
(4) Right to require installation of monitoring
equipment?
(5) Right to inspect and copy records [403.12(n)]?
Remedies for non-compliance by industrial users?
[403.8(f)(l)(vi)J
(1) Obtain remedies for noncompliance:
Injunctive relief?
Are the civil or criminal penalties sufficient
to bring about compliance, or act as a
deterrent?
(2) Halt immediately and effectively any actual or
threatened discharge?
Comply with confidentiality requirements (protection
of public access to effluent data)? [403 .8(f )(l)(vii)]
[403.14]
G-2
-------
Name of POTW
Legal Authority Checklist (Continued) Date
Section
of POTW's
Yes flo Submission
H. Form special agreements (waivers):
(1) Does the ordinance contain a special agreement
clause?
(2) If yes, does this special agreement clause
specifically exclude the waiver of Federal
categorical pretreatment standards?
I. Control extra-jurisdictional agencies, and industries
which contribute industrial wastewaters to the POTW?
*Indicates item is recommended, but not mandatory.
I have reviewed this submission in detail and have determined the legal authority
to be:
( ) Adequate ( ) Inadequate
Date: Reviewed by:
(Name)
G-3
-------
Technical Information Checklist
Name of POTW
Date
Yes
No
Section
of POTW's
Submission
PART I. Industrial Waste Survey [403.8(f)(2)(i) and (ii)]
A. Were the sources used sufficient to assure that all
major industrial users were identified and located?
B. Were the criteria used to eliminate industries
from the inventory appropriate?
C. Survey Questionnaire
(1) Did the POTW obtain the following information
(either through the survey or other means):
Name?
Address?
SIC code(s) or expected classification?
Wastewater flow rate or water consumption
rate?
Loads and/or concentrations of pollutants
in discharge?
Major products manufactured or services
supplied?
* Residuals generated by Ill's disposal methods?
* Locations of discharge points?
Description of existing pretreatment
facilities and practices?
(2) Is the information current within the last
3 years?
*(3) Does the questionnaire require the signature
of an authorized company representative?
D. Follow-Up Procedures
(1) Did the POTW follow up the questionnaire (with
additional written requests, telephone calls
or site visits) to obtain a complete and
accurate response?
E. Summary Information
(1) Were the users classified by industrial category
and/or SIC code?
(2) Has the POTW correctly characterized the waste
discharged from each industrial user or
industrial type?
(3) Does the information obtained demonstrate
sufficient characterization of the Ill's waste
discharges to the POTW?
G-4
-------
Technical Information Checklist (Continued)
Name of POTW
Date
Yes No
PART II. Methodology for Establishing Discharge Limitations [403.5(c)J
A. POTW Operating Problems and Plant History
(1) Did the POTW adequately document instances of:
Inhibition/upset?
Pass-through?
Sludge contamination?
B. Developmental Sampling Program
(1) Has the POTW recently sampled and analyzed:
Treatment plant influent?
Treatment plant unit operations?
Plant effluent? ^^ '~
Sludge?
Industrial effluents?
(2) Did this analysis include pollutants of
concern identified in the survey?
(3) Were appropriate sampling locations chosen?
In the treatment system?
In the collection system?
At the industries?
(4) Was the appropriate type of sampling performed
for each pollutant type (composite or grab)?
*(5) Was the sampling frequency sufficient to
give an accurate characterization?
C. Need for Locally Developed Discharge Limitations
(1) Did the POTW assess whether or not pollutants are
present in the influent in amounts that inhibit
treatment processes used by the POTW?
(2) Did the POTW assess whether or not toxic pollu-
tants are present in the POTW effluent in
amounts known to exceed water quality criteria?
(3) Are sludge disposal methods acceptable in view
of pollutant load?
D. Methodology for Setting Local Discharge Limits
(refer to Appendix L)
(1) Is the methodology appropriate?
(2) Were relevant numbers used for:
Inhibition/upset concentrations?
Background concentrations?
Removal efficiencies?
Water quality criteria/standards?
Land application criteria?
Section
of POTW's
Submission
G-5
-------
Name of POTW
Technical Information Checklist (Continued) Date
Section
of POTW's
Yes No Submission
Non-secured landfill disposal (including ash
disposal)?
E. Appropriateness of Locally Developed
Discharge Limitations
(1) Are local limitations at least as stringent as
national pretreatment standards for the
appropriate categories?
(2) Do local limitations enable the POTW to meet
NPDES permit limits?
(3) Will State water quality standards be met once
local discharge limits are complied with?
(4) Will State sludge disposal guidelines/
regulations be complied with?
F. Multijurisdictional Submissions
Were data from lUs and treatment plants in all
jurisdictions considered in developing this
technical information?
*Indicates item is recommended, but not mandatory.
I have reviewed this submission in detail and have determined the technical
information to be:
( ) Adequate ( ) Inadequate
Date: Reviewed by:
(Name)
G-6
-------
Name of POTW
Program Implementation Procedures Checklist Date
Section
of POTW's
Yes No Submission
PART I. Updating the Industrial Waste Survey [403.8(f)(2)(i)
and (ii)]
A. Are procedures identified for updating (periodically)
the waste survey information for existing users?
B. Do procedures require new industries to supply
discharge information or otherwise ensure that it
will be collected?
PART II. Notification of Appropriate Federal, State, and/or Local
Standards or Limitations [403.8(f)(2)(iii)J
A. Are there procedures for keeping abreast of existing
and newly promulgated standards and requirements?
B. Is there a mechanism to identify and notify
industrial users of standards, limitations, or
other requirements?
PART III. Receipt and Analysis of Self-Monitoring Reports and
Other Notices [403.8(f)(2)(iv)]
A. Are there procedures for determining what self-
monitoring and other reports are due?
B. Are values reported by industries compared to
discharge standards or compliance schedules?
C. Are problems referred to appropriate authorities
for technical evaluation and follow-up?
PART IV. POTW Compliance Sampling and Analysis [403.8(f)(2)(v)]
A. Does the description of the monitoring program
include procedures for periodic random sampling
* of significant industrial dischargers?
B. Are sampling and monitoring parameters identified
for each firm or group of industries?
C. Is the POTW sampling for the significant pollutants
identified by the Industrial Waste Survey or by the
priority pollutant/industry matrix? (Appendix D)
D. Do the sampling and monitoring procedures conform to
EPA requirements? (40 CFR 136 ,-"Standard Methods")
E. Is the frequency adequate to determine compliance
independent of information supplied by lUs
(at least annually)?
G-7
-------
Program Implementation Procedures Checklist (Continued)
Name of POTW
Date
Yes
No
Section
of POTW's
Submission
PART V. Noncompliance Investigations and Enforcement
[403.8(f)(2)(vi)]
A. Are follow-up activities described that include
provisions to:
(1) Cover emergency situations?
(2) Notify industrial users of violations?
(3) Allow for response by industrial users?
(4) Abate and control problem discharges?
(5) Verify that corrective actions have worked?
(6) Obtain compliance through legal means if
necessary?
(7) Assess penalties for noncompliance?
B. Are procedures for quick response sampling and
analysis included (demand sampling)?
C. Are chain-of-custody and quality control provisions
specified?
PART VI. Public Participation
A. Do procedures include at least annual notice of
violations published in local newspapers?
[403.8(f)(2)(vii)]
B. Is notice and opportunity to respond provided, both
to the industrial users and the general public, on
the process of developing local industrial
effluent limitations? [403.5(c)(3)J
*C. Are program records available to the public?
PART VII. Multijurisdictional Submissions
A. Are there procedures to coordinate monitoring,
enforcement, and implementation activities
between the jurisdictions involved?
B. Has the NPDES permit holder assumed lead
responsibility in program implementation?
*Indicates item is recommended, but not mandatory.
I have reviewed this submission in detail and have determined the implementation
procedures to be:
) Adequate
Date:
( ) Inadequate
Reviewed by:
(Name)
G-8
-------
Resources Checklist
Name of POTW
Date
Yes
No
Section
of POTW's
Submission
PART I. Organization and Staffing [403.8(f)(3) and 403.9(b)(3)]
A. Is the description of the POTW organization clear
and appropriate?
B. Are mechanisms identified for delegating pretreatment
tasks to other local government agencies?
C. Are personnel or positions identified that are
responsible for:
(1) Technical review?
(2) Monitoring?
(3) Laboratory analysis?
(4) Legal assistance and enforcement?
(5) Administration?
D. Have appropriate staffing levels been determined
based on the program description?
PART II. Equipment
A. Does the POTW have adequate sampling equipment or
other provisions to conduct necessary sampling?
B. Does the POTW have adequate analytical capabilities
to perform analyses for:
(1) Nutrients and other non-conventionals?
(2) Metals? '_
(3) Toxic organics?
C. If not, are other arrangements made to do so
(e.g., contract with private laboratory,
other agency)?
PART III. Funding Estimates and Sources
A. Does the POTW present an itemized estimate of pre-
treatment implementation costs?
B. Is there an account of revenue sources that will
cover the annual costs of the pretreatment program?
G-9
-------
Name of POTW
Resources Checklist Date
Section
of POTW's
Yes No Submission
PART IV. Multijurisdictional Submissions
A. Does each jurisdiction participate in funding the
pretreatraent program?
B. Are the relationships between the staff (personnel)
of the participating jurisdictions adequately
described and documented?
I have reviewed this submission in detail and have determined the
resources to be:
( ) Adequate ( ) Inadequate
Date: Reviewed by:
G-10
-------
APPENDIX H
SAMPLE INDUSTRIAL WASTE SURVEY
QUESTIONNAIRE
-------
WASTEWATER SURVEY FOR NONRESIDENTIAL ESTABLISHMENTS:
APPLICATION FOR WASTEWATER DISCHARGE PERMIT
SECTION A - GENERAL INFORMATION
A.I. Company name, mailing address, and telephone number:
Zip CodeTelephone No.( )
A.2. Address of production or manufacturing facility. (If same as above, check[].)
Zip Code Telephone No.( )
A.3. Name, title, and telephone number of person authorized to represent this firm
in official dealings with the Sewer Authority and/or City:
A.4. Alternate person to contact concerning Information provided herein
Name Title Tel. No.
A.5. Identify the type of business conducted (auto repair, machine shop, electro-
plating, warehousing, painting, printing, meat packing, food processing, etc.).
Note to Signing Official: In accordance with Title 40 of the Code of Federal
Regulations Part 403 Section 403.14, information and data provided in this ques-
tionnaire which identifies the nature and frequency of discharge shall be avail-
able to the public without restriction. Requests for confidential treatment of
other information shall be governed by procedures specified in 40 CFR Part 2.
Should a discharge permit be required for your facility, the information in this
questionnaire will be used to issue the permit.
i i
This is to be signed by an authorized official of your firm after adequate
completion of this form and review of the information by the signing official,
I have personally examined and am familiar with the information sub-
mitted in this document and attachments. Based upon my inquiry of
those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the informa-
tion reported herein, I believe that the submitted information is
true, accurate and complete. I am aware that there are significant
penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility
of fine and/or imprisonment.
Date Signature of Official
(Seal if applicable)
H-l
-------
A.6, Provide a brief narrative description of the manufacturing, production, or
service activities your firm conducts.
A.8.
A.7. Standard Industrial Classification Number(s) (SIC Code) for your facilities:
This facility generates the following types of wastes (check all that apply):
Average gallons
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
per day
[ ] Domestic wastes
(restrooms, employee showers, etc.)
[ ] Cooling water, non-contact
[ ] Boiler/Tower blowdown
[ ] Cooling water, contact
[ ] Process
[ ] Equipment /Facility Washdown
[ ] Air Pollution Control Unit
[ ] Storm water runoff to sewer
[ j Other (describe)
[ ] estimated [
[ j estimated [
[ ] estimated [
[ ] estimated [
[ ] estimated [
[ ] estimated [
[ ] estimated [
[ ] estimated [
[ ] estimated [
] measured
] measured
] measured
] measured
] measured
j measured
] measured
] measured
] measured
Total A.8.1 - A.8.9
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
estimated
estimated
estimated
estimated
estimated
estimated
estimated
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
] measured
] measured
J measured
] measured
] measured
] measured
] measured
A.9. Wastes are discharged to (check all that apply):
Average Gallons
per day
[ ] Sanitary sewer
[ ] Storm sewer _____________
[ ] Surface water
[ ] Ground water
[ ] Waste haulers
[ ] Evaporation _________________
[ ] Other (describe)
Provide name and address of waste hauler(s), if used.
A.10. Is a Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure Plan prepared for the facility?
[] yes [] no
Note: If your fa.ci.lity did not check one or more of the items
listed in A.8.4 through A.8.9 above, then you do not need to
complete any further sections in this survey/application.
If any items A.8.4 through A.8.9 were checked, complete the
remainder of this survey/application.
H-2
-------
SECTION B - FACILITY OPERATION CHARACTERISTICS
5.1 Number of employee shifts worked per 24-hour day is .
Average number of employees per shift is .
5.2 Starting times of each shift: 1st am 2nd am 3rd am
pm pm pm
Note: The following information in this section must be completed
for each product line.
J.3 Principal product produced:
5.4 Raw materials and process additives used:
5.5 Production process is:
[ ] Batch [ ] Continuous [ ] Both %batch %continuous
Average number of batches per 24-hour day
5.6 Hours of operation: a.m. to p.m. [ ] continuous
5.7 Is production subject to seasonal variation? [ ] yes [ ] no
If yes, briefly describe seasonal production cycle.
5.8 Are any process changes or expansions planned during the next three years?
[ ] yes [ ] no
If yes, attach a separate sheet to this form describing the nature of planned
changes or expansions.
H-3
-------
SECTION C - WASTEWATER INFORMATION
C.I If your facility employs processes in any of the 34 industrial categories or busi-
ness activities listed below and any of these processes generate wastewater or waste
sludge, place a check beside the category or business activity (check all that apply)
A. 34 Industrial Categories
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
[ ]
[ ]
[ 1
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ j
[ ]
[ 1
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
t ]
[ ]
[ 3
[ ]
[ ]
[ 1
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ J
[ ]
[ 1
[ ]
[ ]
[ 1
[ J
[ ]
[ 1
Adhesives
Aluminum Forming
Auto & Other Laundries
Battery Manufacturing
Coal Mining
Coil Coating
Copper Forming
Electric & Electronic Components
Elecroplating
Explosives Manufacturing
Foundries
Gum & Wood Chemicals
Inorganic Chemicals
Iron & Steel
Leather Tanning & Finishing
Mechanical Products
Nonferrous Metals
Ore Mining
Organic Chemicals
Paint & Ink
Pesticides
Petroleum Refining
Pharmaceuticals
Photographic Supplies
Plastic & Synthetic Materials
Plastics Processing
Porcelain Enamel
Printing & Publishing
Pump & Paper
Rubber
Soaps & Detergents
Steam Electric
Textile Mills
Timber
B. Other Business Activity
[ ] Dairy Products
[ ] Slaughter/Meat Packing/Rendering
[ ] Food/Edible Products Processor
[ ] Beverage Bottler
H-4
-------
Pretreatment devices or processes used for treating wastewater or sludge
(check as many as appropriate)
[ ] Air flotation
[ ] Centrifuge
[ ] Chemical precipitation
[ ] Chlorination
[ ] Cyclone
[ ] Filtration
[ ] Flow Equalization
[ ] Grease or oil separation, type
[ ] Grease trap
[ ] Grit Removal
[ ] Ion Exchange
[ ] Neutralization, pH correction
[ ] Ozonation
[ ] Reverse Osmosis
[ ] Screen
[ ] Sedimentation
[ ] Septic tank
[ 1 Solvent separation
[ ] Spill protection
[ ] Sump
[ ] Biological treatment, type
[ ] Rainwater diversion or storage
[ ] Other chemical treatment, type
[ ] Other physical treatment, type
[ ] Other, type "
[ ] No pretreatment provided
If any wastewater analyses have been performed on the wastewater discharge(s)
from your facilities, attach a copy of the most recent data to this question-
naire. Be sure to include the date of the analysis, name of laboratory perform-
ing the analysis, and location(s) from which sample(s) were taken (attach sketches,
plans, etc., as necessary).
H-5
------- An error occurred while trying to OCR this image.
------- An error occurred while trying to OCR this image.
-------
SECTION D - OTHER WASTES
D.1 Are any liquid wastes or sludges from this firm disposed of by means other than
discharge to the sewer system?
[ ] yes [ ] no
If "no," skip remainder of Section D.
If "yes," complete items 2 and 3.
D.2 These wastes may best be described as:
Estimated Gallons or Pounds/Year
[J Acids and Alkalies
[] Heavy Metal Sludges
[] Inks/Dyes
[] Oil and/or Grease
[] Organic Compounds
[] Paints
[] Pesticides
[] Plating Wastes
[] Pretreatment Sludges
[] Solvents/Thinners
[] Other Hazardous Wastes (specify)
[] Other wastes(specify)
D.3 For the above checked wastes, does your company practice:
[] on-site storage
[] off-site storage
[] on-site disposal
[] off-site disposal
Briefly describe the method(s) of storage or disposal checked above.
H-8
-------
APPENDIX I
EPA MODEL ORDINANCE
-------
EPA MODEL ORDINANCE
ORDINANCE NO.
SECTION 1 GENERAL PROVISIONS
1.1 Purpose and Pol icy
This ordinance sets forth uniform requirements for direct
and indirect contributors into the wastewater collection
and treatment system for the City of
and enables the City to comply with all applicable State
and Federal laws required by the Clean Water Act of 1977
and the General Pretreatment Regulations (40 CFR, Part
403).
The objectives of this ordinance are:
(a) To prevent the introduction of pollutants into the
municipality wastewater system which will interfere
with the operation of the system or contaminate the
resulting siudge ;
(b) To prevent the introduction of pollutants into the
municipal wastewater system which will pass through
the system, inadequately treated, into receiving
waters or the atmosphere or otherwise be incompatible
with the system;
(c) To improve the opportunity to recycle and reclaim
wastewaters and sludges from the system; and
(d) To provide for equitable distribution of the cost of
the municipal wastewater system.
This ordinance provides for the regulation of direct and
indirect contributors to "the municipal wastewater system
through the issuance of permits to certain non-domestic
users and through enforcement of general requirements for
the other users, authorizes monitoring and enforcement ac-
tivities, requires user reporting, assumes that existing
customer's capacity will not be preempted, and provides
for the setting of fees for the equitable distribution of
costs resulting from the program established herein.
This ordinance shall apply to the (City of ) and to
persons outside the (City) who are, by contract or agree-
ment with the (City), Users of the (City) POTW. This
ordinance is a supplement to Ordinance No. __^_ as
amended. Except as otherwise provided herein, the(Super-
intendent) of the (City) POTW shall administer, implement,
and enforce the provisions of this ordinance.
l-l
-------
1.2 Definitions
Unless the context specifically indicates otherwise, the
following terms and phrases, as used in this ordinance,
shall have the meanings hereinafter designated:
(1) Act or "the Act". The Federal Water Pollution
Control Act, also known as the Clean Water Act, as
amended, 33 U.S.C. 1251, et. seq.
(2) Approval Authority. The Director in an NPDES state
with an approved State Pretreatment Program and the
Administrator of the EPA in a non-NPDES state or
NPDES state without an Approved State Pretreatment
Program.
(3) Authorized Representative of Industrial User. An au-
thorized representative of an Industrial User may be:
(1) A principal executive officer of at least the
level of vice-president, if the Industrial User is a
corporation; (2) A general partner or proprietor if
the industrial user is a partnership or proprietor-
ship, respectively; (3) A duly authorized represent-
ative of the individual designated above if such
representative is responsible for the overall opera-
tion of the facilities from which the indirect
discharge originates.
(4) Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD). The quantity of
oxygen utilized in the biochemical oxidation of
organic matter under standard laboratory, procedure,
five (5) days at 20° centigrade expressed in terms of
weight and concentration (milligrams per liter
(mg/1)).
(5) Building Sewer. A sewer conveying wastewater from
the premises of a User to the POTW.
(6) Categorical Standards. National Categorical Pre-
treatment Standards or Pretreatment Standard.
(7) City. The City of or the City
Council of .
(8) Cooling Water. The water discharged from any use
such as air conditioning, cooling or refrigeration,
or to which the only pollutant added is heat.
(9) Control Authority. The term "control authority"
shall refer to the "Approval Authority", defined
hereinabove; or the Superintendent if the City has an
approved Pretreatment Program under the provisions of
40 CFR, 403.11.
1-2
-------
(10) Direct Discharge. The discharge of treated or
untreated was tewater directly to the waters of the
State of .
(11) Erwironmental Protection Agency, or EPA. The U.S.
Erwi ronmentalProtection Agency, or where appropriate
the term may also be used as a designation for the
Administrator or other duly authorized official of
said agency.
(12) Grab Sample. A sample which is taken from a waste
stream on a one-time basis with no regard to the flow
in the waste stream and without consideration of
time.
(13) Holding tank waste. Any waste from holding tanks
such as vessels, chemical toilets, campers, trailers,
septic tanks, and vacuum-pump tank trucks.
(14) Indirect Discharge. The discharge or the introduc-
tion of nondomestic pollutants from any source
regulated under section 307(b) or (c) of the Act, (33
U.S.C. 1317), into the POTW (including holding tank
waste discharged into the system).
(15) Industrial User. A source of Indirect Discharge
which does not constitute a "discharge of pollutants"
under regulations issued pursuant to section 402, of
the Act. (33 U.S.C. 1342).
(16) Interference. The inhibition or disruption of the
POTW treatment processes or operations which con-
tributes to a violation of. any requirement of the
City's NPDES Permit. The term includes prevention of
sewage sludge use or disposal by the POTW in accord-
ance with 405 of the Act, (33 U.S.C. 1345) or any
criteria, guidelines, or regulations developed pur-
suant to the Solid Waste Disposal Act (SWDA), the
Clean Air Act, the Toxic Substances Control Act, or
more stringent state criteria (including those con-
tained in any State sludge management plan prepared
pursuant to Title IV of SWDA) applicable to the
method of disposal or use employed by the POTW.
(17) National Categorical Pretreatment Standard or Pre-
treatment Standard. Any regulation containing
pollutant discharge limits promulgated by the EPA in
accordance with section 307(b) and (c) of the Act (33
U.S.C. 1347) which applies to a specific category of
Industrial Users.
1-3
-------
(18) National Prohibitive Discharge Standard or Prohibi-
tive Discharge Standard. .Anyregulationdeveloped
under the authority of 307(b) of the Act and 40 CFR,
Section 403.5.
(19) New Source. Any source, the construction of which is
commenced after the publication of proposed regula-
tions prescribing a section 307(c) (33 U.S.C. 1317)
Categorical Pretreatment Standard which will be
applicable to such source, if such standard is there-
after promulgated within 120 days of proposal in the
Federal Register. Where the standard is promulgated
later than 120 days after proposal, a new source
means any source, the construction of which is
commenced after the date of promulgation of the
standard.
(20) National Pollution Discharge Elimination System or
NPDES Permit. A permit issued pursuant to section
402 of the Act (33 U.S.C. 1342).
(21) Person. Any individual, partnership, copartnership,
firm, company, corporation, association, joint stock
company, trust, estate, governmental entity or any
other legal entity, or their legal representatives,
agents or assigns. The masculine gender shall in-
clude the feminine, the singular shall include the
plural where indicated by the context.
(22) pH. The logarithm (base 10) of the reciprocal of the
concentration of hydrogen ions expressed in grams per
liter of solution.
(23) Polluti on. The man-made or man-induced alteration of
thechemical, physical, biological, and radiological
integrity of water.
(24) Pollutant. Any dredged spoil, solid waste, inciner-
ator residue, sewage, garbage, sewage sludge,
munitions, chemical wastes, biological materials,
radioactive materials, heat, wrecked or discharged
equipment, rock, sand, cellar dirt and industrial,
municipal, and agricultrual waste discharged into
water.
(25) Pretreatment or Treatment. The reduction of the
amount of pollutants, the elimination of pollutants,
or the alteration of the nature of pollutant
properties in wastewater to a less harmful state
prior to or in lieu of discharging or otherwise
introducing such pollutants into a POTW. The reduc-
tion or alteration can be obtained by physical,
1-4
-------
chemical or biological processes, or process changes
other means, except as prohibited by 40 CFR Section
403.6(d).
(26) Pretreatment Requirements. Any substantive or proce-
dural requirement related to pretreatment, other than
a National Pretreament Standard imposed on an
industrial user.
(27) Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW). A treatment
works as defined by section 212 of the Act, (33
U.S.C. 1292) which is owned in this instance by the
City. This definition includes any sewers that
convey wastewater to the POTW treatment plant, but
does not include pipes, sewers or other conveyances
not connected to a facility providing treatment. For
the purposes of this ordinance, "POTW" shall also
include any sewers that convey wastewaters to the
POTW from persons outside the (city) who are, by
contract or agreement with the (city), users of the
(city's) POTW.
(28) POTW Treatment Plant. That portion of the POTW
designed to provide treatment to wastewater.
(29) Shal 1 is mandatory: May is permissive.
(30) Significant Industrial User. Any Industrial User of
The Ci ty ' s was tewa ter/. di sposal system who (i) has a
discharge flow of 25,000 gallons or more per average
work day, or (ii) has a flow greater than 5% of the
flow in the City's wastewater treatment system, or
(iii) has in his wastes toxic pollutants as defined
pursuant to Section 307 of the Act of (State)
Statutes and rules or (iv) is found by the City,
(State Control Agency) or the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) to have significant impact,
either singly or in combination with other contribut-
ing industries, on the wastewater treatment system,
the quality of sludge, the system's effluent quality,
or air emissions generated by the system.
(31) State. State of .
(32) Standard Industrial Classification (SIC). A classif-
ication pursuant to the Standard Industrial
Classification Manual issued by the Executive Office
of the President, Office of Management and Budget,
1972.
(33) Storm Water. Any flow occurring during or following
any form of natural precipitation and resulting
therefrom.
1-5
-------
(34) Suspended Solids. The total suspended matter that
floats on the surface of, or is suspended in, water,
wastewater or other liquids, and which is removable
by laboratory filtering.
(35) Superintendent. The person designated by the City to
supervisethe operation of the publicly owned treat-
ment works and who is charged with certain duties and
responsibilities by this article, or his duly
authorized representative.
(36) Toxic Pol 1utant. Any pollutant or combination of
pollutants listed as toxic in regulations promulgated
by the Administrator of the Environmental Protection
Agency under the provision of CWA 307(a) or other
Acts.
(37) User. Any person who contributes, causes or permits
the contribution of wastewater into the City's POTW.
(38) Wastewater. The liquid and water-carried industrial
or domestic wastes from dwellings, commercial build-
ings, industrial faciltities, and institutions,
together with may be present, whether treated or
untreated, which is contributed into or permitted to
enter the POTW.
(39) Waters of the State. All streams, lakes, ponds,
marshes, watercourses-* waterways, wells, springs,
reservoirs, aquifers, irrigation systems, drainage
systems and all other bodies or accumulations of
water, surface or underground, natural or artificial,
public or private, which are contained within, flow
through, or border upon the State or any portion
thereof.
(40) Wastewater Contribution Permit. As set forth in sec-
tion 4.2 of this ordinance.
1.3 Abbreviations
The following abbreviations shall have the designated
meanings:
BOD - Biochemical Oxygen Demand.
CFR - Code of Federal Regulations.
COD - Chemical Oxygen Demand.
EPA - Environmental Protection Agency
1 - Liter.
mg - Mil 1igrams.
mg/1 - Milligrams per liter.
1-6
-------
NPDES - National Pollutant Discharge Elimina-
tion System.
POTW - Publicly Owned Treatment Works.
SIC - Standard Industrial Classification.
SWDA - Solid Waste Disposal Act, 42 U.S.C. 6901,
et. seq.
USC - United States Code.
TSS - Total Suspended Solids.
SECTION 2 - REGULATIONS
2.1 General Discharge Prohibitions
No User shall contribute or cause to be contributed,
directly or indirectly, any pollutant or wastewater which
will interfere with the operation or performance of the
POTW. These general prohibitions apply to all such Users
of a POTW whether or not the User is subject to National
Categorical Pretreatment Standards or any other National,
State, or local Pretreatment Standards or Requirements. A
user may not contribute the following substances to any
POTW:
a) Any liquids, solids or gases which by reason of
their nature or quantity are, or may be, suffi-
cient either alone or by interaction with other
substances to cause fire or explosion or be in-
jurious in any other way to the POTW or to the
operation of the POTW. At no time, shall two
successive readings on an explosion hazard
meter, at the point of discharge into the system
(or at any point in the system) be more than
five percent (5%) nor any single reading over
ten percent (10%) of the Lower Explosive Limit
(LEL) of the meter. Prohibited materials
include, but are not limited to, gasoline,
kerosene, naphtha, benzene, toluene, xylene,
ethers, alcohols, ketones, aldehydes, peroxides,
chlorates, perch!orates, bromates, carbides, hy-
drides and sulfides and any other substances
which the City, the State or EPA has notified
the User is a fire hazard or a hazard to the
system.
b) Solid or viscous substances which may cause ob-
struction to the flow in a sewer or other inter-
ference with the operation of the wastewater
treatment facilities such as, but not limited
to: grease, garbage with particles greater than
one-half inch (V) in any dimension, animal guts
or tissues, paunch manure, bones, hair, hides or
1-7
-------
fleshings, entrails, whole blood, feathers,
ashes, cinders, sand, spent lime, stone or
marble dust, metal, glass, staw, shavings, grass
clippings, rags, spent grains, spent hops, waste
paper, wood, plastics, gas, tar, asphalt
residues, residues from refining, or processing
of fuel or lubricating oil, mud, or glass
grinding or polishing wastes.
c) Any wastewater having a pH less than 5.0, unless
the POTW is specifically designed to accommodate
such wastewater, or wastewater having any other
corrosive property capable of causing damage or
hazard to structures, equipment, and/or person-
nel of the POTW.
d) Any wastewater containing toxic pollutants in
sufficient quantity, either singly or by inter-
action with other pollutants, to injure or
interfere with any wastewater treatment process,
constitute a hazard to humans or animals, create
a toxic effect in the receiving waters of the
POTW, or to exceed the limitation set forth in a
Categorical Pretreatment Standard. A toxic
pollutant shall include but not be limited to
any pollutant identified pursuant to Section
307(a) of the Act.
e) Any noxious or malodorous liquids, gases, or
solids which either singly or by interaction
with other wastes are sufficient to create a
public nuisance or hazard to life or are suffi- \
cient to prevent entry into the sewers for
maintenance and repair.
f) Any substance which may cause the POTW's
effluent or any other product of the POTW such
as residues, sludges, or scums, to be unsuitable
for reclamation and reuse or to interfere with
the reclamation process. In no case, shall a
substance discharged to the POTW cause the POTW
to be in non-compliance with sludge use or dis-
posal criteria, guidelines or regulations devel-
oped under Section 405 of the Act; any criteria,
guidelines, or regulations affecting sludge use
or disposal developed pursuant to the Solid
Waste Disposal Act, the Clean Air Act, the Toxic
Substances Control Act, or State criteria
applicable to the sludge management method being
used.
-------
g) Any substance which will cause the POTW to
violate its NPDES and/or State Disposal System
Permit or the receiving water quality standards.
h) Any wastewater with objectionable color not re-
moved in the treatment process, such as, but not
limited to, dye wastes and vegetable tanning
solutions.
i) Any wastewater having a temperature which will
inhibit biological activity in the POTW treat-
ment plant resulting in Interference, but in no
case wastewater with a temperature at the
introduction into the POTW which exceeds 40°C
(104°F) unless the POTW treatment plant is
designed to accommodate such temperature.
j) Any pollutants, including oxygen demanding
pollutants (BOD, etc.) released at a flow rate
and/or pollutant concentration which a user
knows or has reason to know will cause Interfer-
ence to the POTW. In no case shall a slug load
have a flow rate or contain concentration or
qualities of pollutants that exceed for any time
period longer than fifteen (15) minutes more
than five (5) times the average twenty-four (24)
hour concentration, quantities, or flow during
normal operation.
k) Any wastewater containing any radioactive wastes
or isotopes of such halflife or concentration as
may exceed limits established by the Superinten-
dent in compliance with applicable State or
Federal regulations.
1) Any wastewater which causes a hazard to human
life or creates a public nuissance.
When the Superintendent determines that a User(s) is
contributing to the POTW, any of the above enumerated
subtances in such amounts as to Interfere with the
operation of the POTW, the Superintendent shall: 1)
Advise the User(s) of the impact of the contribution on
the POTW; and 2) Develop effluent 1imitation(s) for such
User to correct the Interference with the POTW.
2.2 Federal Categorical Pretreatment Standards
Upon the promulgation of the Federal Categorical Pretreat-
ment Standards for a particular industrial subcategory,
the Federal Standard, if more stringent than limitations
imposed under this Ordinance for sources in that sub-
1-9
-------
category, shall immediately supersede the limitations
imposed under this Ordinance. The Superintendent shall
notify all affected Users of the applicable reporting
requirements under 40 CFR, Section 403.12.
2.3 Modification of Federal Categorical Pretreatment
Standards
Where the City's wastewater treatment system achieves con-
sistent removal of pollutants limited by Federal Pretreat-
ment Standards, the City may apply to the Approval
Authority for modification of specific limits in the
Federal Pretreatment Standards. "Consistent Removal"
shall mean reduction in the amount of a pollutant or
alteration of the nature of the pollutant by the waste-
water treatment system to a less toxic or harmless state
in the effluent which is achieved by the system 95 percent
of the samples taken when measured according to the pro-
cedures set forth in Section 403.7(c)(2) of (Title 40 of
the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 403) - "General
Pretreatment Regulations for Existing and New Sources of
Pollution" promulgated pursuant to the Act. The City may
then modify pollutant discharge limits in the Federal
Pretreatment Standards if the requirements contained in
40 CFR, Part 403, Section 403.7, are fulfilled and prior
approval from the Approval Authority is obtained.
2.4 Specific Pollutant Limitations (optional)
No person shall discharge wastewater containing in excess
of:
mg/1 arsenic
mg/1 cadmium
mg/1 copper
mg/1 cyanide
mg/1 lead
mg/1 mercury
mg/1 nickel
mg/1 silver
mg/1 total chromium
mg/1 zinc
mg/1 total identifiable chlorinated hydro-
carbons
mg/1 phenolic compounds which cannot be removed
by the City's wastewater treatment processes.
2.5 State Requirements
State requirements and limitations on discharges shall
apply in any case where they are more stringent than
Federal requirements and limitations or those in this
ordinance.
1-10
-------
2.6 City's Right of Revision
The City reserves the right to establish by ordinance more
stringent limitations or requirements on discharges to the
wastewater disposal system if deemed necessary to comply
with the objectives presented in Section 1.1 of this
Ordinance.
2.7 Excessive Discharge
No User shall ever increase the use of process water or,
in any way, attempt to dilute a discharge as a partial or
complete substitute for adequate treatment to achieve
compliance with the limitations contained in the Federal
Categorical Pretreatment Standards, or in any other
pollutant-specific limitation developed by the City or
State. (Comment: Dilution may be an acceptable means of
complying with some of the prohibitions set forth in
Section 2.1, e.g. the pH prohibition.)
2.8 Accidental Discharges
Each User shall provide protection from accidental dis-
charge of prohibited materials or other substances regu-
lated by this Ordinance. Facilities to prevent accidental
discharge of prohibited materials shall be provided and
maintained at the owner or user's own cost and expense.
Detailed plans showing facilities and operating procedures
to provide this protection shall be submitted to the City
for review, and shall be approved by the City before
construction of the facility. All existing Users shall
complete such a plan by January 1, 1983. No user who
commences contribution to the POTW after the effective
date of this ordinance shall be permitted to introduce
pollutants into the system until accidental discharge
procedures have been approved by the City. Review and
approval of such plans and operating procedures shall not
relieve the industrial user from the responsibility to
modify the user's facility as necessary to meet the
requirements of this Ordinance. In the case of an
accidental discharge, it is the responsibility of the user
to immediately telephone and notify the POTW of the
incident. The notification shall include location of
discharge, type of waste, concentration and volume, and
corrective actions.
Written Notice Within five (5) days following an
accidental discharge; the User shall submit to the Super-
intendent a detailed written report describing the cause
of the discharge and the measures to be taken by the User
to prevent similar future occurrences. Such notification
shall not relieve the user of any expense, loss, damage,
i-ll
-------
or other liability which may be incurred as a result of
damage to the POTW, fish kills, or any other damage to
person or property; nor shall such notification relieve
the user of any fines, civil penalties, or other liability
which may be imposed by this article or other applicable
1 aw.
Notice to Employees: A notice shall be permanently posted
"on Fffe User's bulletin board or other prominent place
advising employees whom to call in the event of a
dangerous discharge. Employers .shall insure that all
employees who may cause or suffer such a dangerous
discharge to occur are advised of the emergency notifica-
tion procedure.
SECTION 3 - FEES
3.1 Purpose
It is the purpose of this chapter to provide for the recov-
ery of costs from Users of the City's wastewater disposal
system for the implementation of the program established
herein. The applicable charges or fees shall be set forth
the City's Schedule of Charges and Fees.
3.2 Charges and Fees
The City may adopt charges and fees which may include:
a) fees for reimbursement of costs of setting up
and operating the City's Pretreatment Program;
b) fees for monitoring, inspections and surveil-
lance procedures;
c) fees for reviewing accidental discharge pro-
cedures and construction;
d) fees for permit applications;
e) fees for filing appeals;
f) fees for consistent removal (by the City) of
pollutants otherwise subject to Federal Pre-
treatment Standards;
g) other fees as the City may deem necessary to
carry out the requirements contained herein.
These fees relate solely to the matters covered by this
Ordinance and are separate from all other fees chargeable
by the City.
1-12
-------
SECTION 4 - ADMINISTRATION
4.1 Wastewater Dischargers
It shall be unlawful to discharge without a (city) permit
to any natural outlet within the (City of ), or in
any area under the jurisdiction of said (city),and/or to
the POTW any wastewater except as authorized by the Super-
intendent in accordance with the provisions of this
Ordinance.
4.2 Wastewater Contribution Permits
4.2.1 General Permits
All significant users proposing to connect to or to
contribute to the POTW shall obtain a Wastewater Dis-
charge Permit before connecting to or contributing to
the POTW. All existing significant users connected to
or contributing to the POTW shall obtain a Wastewater
Contribution Permit within 180 (optional) days after
the effective date of this Ordinance.
4.2.2 Permit Application
Users required to obtain a Wastewater Contribution
Permit shall complete and file with the City, an
application in the form prescribed by the City, and
accompanied by a fee of . Existing users shall
apply for a Wastewater Contribution Permit within 30
(optional), days after the effective date of this
Ordinance, and proposed new users shall apply at
least 90 (optional) days prior to connecting to or
contributing to the POTW. In support of the applica-
tion, the user shall submit, in units and terms
appropriate for evaluation, the following informa-
tion:
a) Name, address, and location, (if different from
the address);
b) SIC number according to the Standard Industrial
Classification Manual, Bureau of the Budget,
1972, as amended;
c) Wastewater constituents and characteristics in-
cluding but not limited to those mentioned in
Section 2 of this Ordinance as determined by a
reliable analytical laboratory; sampling and an-
alysis shall be performed in accordance with
procedures established by the EPA pursuant to
Section 304(g) of the Act and contained in 40
CFR, Part 136, as amended;
1-13
-------
d) Time and duration of contribution;
e) Average daily and 30 minute peak wastewater flow
rates, including daily, monthly and seasonal
variations if any;
f) Site plans, floor plans, mechanical and plumbing
plans and details to show all sewers, sewer con-
nections, and appurtenances by the size,
location and elevation;
g) Description of activities, facilities and plant
processes on the premises including all
materials which are or could be discharged;
h) Where known, the nature and concentration of any
pollutants in the discharge which are limited by
any City, State, or Federal Pretreatment
Standards, and a statement regarding whether or
not the pretreatment standards are being met on
a consistent basis and if not, whether
additional Operation and Maintenance (O&M)
and/or additional pretreatment is required for
the User to meet applicable Pretreatment
Standards;
i) If additional pretreatment and/or O&M will be
required to meet the Pretreatment Standards;
the shortest schedule by which the User will
provide such additional pretreatment. The
completion date in this schedule shall not be
later than the compliance date established for
the applicable Pretreatment Standard:
The following conditions shall apply to this
schedule:
(1) The schedule shall contain increments of
progress in the form of dates for the commence-
ment and completion of major events leading to
the construction and operation of additional
pretreatment required for the User to meet the
applicable Pretreatment Standards (e.g., hiring
an engineer, completing preliminary plans, com-
pleting final plans, executing contract for
major components, commencing construction, com-
pleting construction, etc.).
(2) No increment referred to in paragraph (1)
shall exceed 9 months.
1-14
-------
(3) Not later than 14 days following each date
in the schedule and the final date for
compliance, the User shall submit a progress
report to the Superintendent including, as a
minimum, whether or not it complied with the
increment of progress to be met on such date
and, if not, the date on which it expects to
comply with this increment of progress, the
reason for delay, and the steps being taken by
the User to return the construction to the
schedule established. In no event shall more
than 9 months elapse between such progress
reports to the Superintendent.
j) Each product produced by type, amount, process
or processes and rate of production;
k) Type and amount of raw materials processed
(average and maximum per day);
1) Number and type of employees, and hours of
operation of plant and proposed or actual hours
of operation of pretreatment system;
m) Any other information as may be deemed by the
City to be necessary to evaluate the permit
application.
The City will evaluate! the data furnished by the user
and may require additional information. After
evaluation and acceptance of the data furnished, the
City may issue a Wastewater Contribution Permit
subject to terms and conditions provided herein.
4.2.3 Permit Modifications
Within 9 months of the promulgation of a National
Categorical Pretreatment Standard, the Wastewater
Contribution Permit of Users subject to such
standards shall be revised to require compliance with
such standard within the time frame prescribed by
such standard. Where a User, subject to a National
Categorical Pretreatment Standard, has not previously
submitted an application for a Wastewater Contribu-
tion Permit as required by 4.2.2, the User shall
apply for a Wastewater Contribution Permit within 180
days after the promulgation of the Applicable
National Categorical Pretreatment Standard. In
addition, the User with an existing Wastewater
Contribution Permit shall submit to the Superin-
tendent within 180 days after the promulgation of an
1-15
-------
applicable Federal Categorical Pretreatment Standard
the information required by paragraph (h) and (i) of
Section 4.2.2.
4.2.4 Permit Conditions
Wastewater Discharge Permits shall be expressly
subject to all provisions of this Ordinance and all
other applicable regulations, user charges and fees
established by the City. Permits may contain the
fol1owi ng:
a) The unit charge or schedule of user charges and
fees for the wastewater to be discharged to a
community sewer;
b) Limits on the average and maximum wastewater
constituents and characteristics;
c) Limits on average and maximum rate and time of
discharge or requirements for flow regulations
and equalization.
d) Requirements for installation and maintenance of
inspection and sampling facilities;
e) Specifications for monitoring programs which may
include sampling locations, frequency of
sampling, number, types and standards for tests
and reporting schedule;
f) Compliance schedules;
g) Requirements for submission of technical reports
or discharge reports (see 4.3);
h) Requirements for maintaining and retaining plant
records relating to wastewater discharge as
specified by the City, and affording City access
thereto;
i) Requirements for notification of the City or any
new introduction of wastewater constitutents or
any substantial change in the volume or
character of the wastewater constitutents being
introduced into the wastewater treatment system.
j) Requirements for notification of slug discharges
as per 5.2;
1) Other conditions as deemed appropriate by the
City to ensure compliance with this Ordinance.
1-16
-------
4.2.5 Permi ts Duration
Permits shall be issued for a specified time period,
not to exceed five (5) (optional) years. A permit
may be issued for a period less than a year or may be
stated to expire on a specific date. The user shall
apply for permit reissuance a minimum of 180 days
prior to the expiration of the user's existing
permit. The terms and conditions of the permit may
be subject to modification by the City during the
term of the permit as limitations or requirements as
identified in Section 2 are modified or other just
cause exists. The User shall be informed of any
proposed changes in his permit at least 30 days prior
to the effective date of change. Any changes or new
conditions in the permit shall include a reasonable
time schedule for compliance.
4.2.6 Permit Transfer
Wastewater Discharge Permits are issued to a specific
User for a specific operation. A wastewater
discharge permit shall not be reassigned or trans-
ferred or sold to a new owner, new User, different
premises, or a new or changed operation without the
approval of the City. Any succeeding owner or User
shall also comply with the terms and conditions of
the existing permit.
4.3 Reporting Requirements for Permittee
4.3.1 Compliance Date Report
Within 90 days following the date for final
compliance with applicable Pretreatment Standards or,
in the case of a New Source, following commencement
of the introduction of wastewater into the POTW, any
User subject to Pretreatment Standards and Require-
ments shall submit to the Superintendent a report
indicating the nature and concentration %of all
pollutants in the discharge from the regulated
process which are limited by Pretreatment Standards
and Requirements and the average and maximum daily
flow for these process units in the User facility
which are limited by such Pretreatment Standards or
Requirements. The report shall state whether the
applicable Pretreatment Standards or Requirements are
being met on a consistent basis and, if not, what
additional O&M and/or pretreatment is necessary to
bring the User into compliance with the applicable
Pretreatment Standards or Requirements. This state-
ment shall be signed by an authorized representative
1-17
-------
of the Industrial User, and certified to by a
qualified professional.
4.3.2 Periodic Compliance Reports
(1) Any User subject to a Pretreatment Standard,
after the compliance date of such Pretreatment
Standard, or, in the case of a New Source, after
commencement of the discharge into the POTW,
shall submit to the Superintendent during the
months of June and December, unless required
more frequently in the Pretreatment Standard or
by the superintendent, a report indicating the
nature and concentration, of pollutants in the
effluent which are limited by such Pretreatment
Standards. In addition, this report shall
include a record of all daily flows which during
the reporting period exceeded the average daily
flow reported in paragraph (b)(4) of this
section. At the discretion of the superin-
tendent and in consideration of such factors as
local high or low flow rates, holidays, budget
cycles, etc., the superintendent may agree to
alter the months during which the above reports
are to be submitted.
(2) The Superintendent may impose mass limitations
on Users which are using dilution to meet
applicable Pretreatment Standards or Require-
ments, or in other cases where the imposition of
mass limitations are appropriate. In such
cases, the report required by subparagraph (1)
of this paragraph shall indicate the mass of
pollutants regulated by Pretreatment Standards
in the effluent of the User. These reports
shall contain the results of sampling and
analysis of the discharge, including the flow
and the nature and concentration, or production
and mass where requested by the Superintendent,
of pollutants contained therein which are
limited by the applicable Pretreatment Stan-
dards. The frequency of monitoring shall be
prescribed in the applicable Pretreatment
Standard. All analysis shall be performed in
accordance with procedures established by the
Administrator pursuant to section 304(g) of the
Act and contained in 40 CFR, Part 136 and
amendments thereto or with any other test
procedures approved by the Administrator.
Sampling shall be performed in accordance with
the techniques approved by the Administrator.
1-18
-------
(Comment: Where 40 CFR, Part 136 does not
include a sampling or analytical technique for
the pollutant in question sampling and analysis
shall be performed in accordance with the pro-
cedures set forth in the EPA publication,
Sampling and Analysis Procedures for Screening
of Industrial Effluents for Priority Pollutants,
April, 1977, and amendments therto, or with any
other sampling and analytical procedures
approved by the Administrator.)
4.4 Monitoring Facilities
The City shall require to be provided and operated at the
User's own expense, monitoring facilities to allow inspec-
tion, sampling, and flow measurement of the building sewer
and/or internal drainage systems. The monitoring facility
should normally be situated on the User's premises, but
the City may, when such a location would be impractical or
cause undue hardship on the User, allow the facility to be
constructed in the public street or sidewalk area and
located so that it will not be obstructed by landscaping
or parked vehicles.
There shall be ample room in or near such sampling manhole
or facility to allow accurate sampling and preparation of
samples for analysis. The facility, sampling, and measur-
ing equipment shall be maintained at all times in a safe
and proper operating condition at the expense of the user.
Whether constructed on public or private property, the
sampling and monitoring facilities shall be provided in
accordance with the City's requirements and all applicable
local construction standards and specifications. Con-
struction shall be completed within 90 days following
written notification by the City.
4.5 inspection and Sampling
The City shall inspect the facilities of any User to
ascertain whether the purpose of this Ordinance is being
met and all requirements are being complied with. Persons
or occupants of premises where wastewater is created or
discharged shall allow the City or their representative
ready access at all reasonable times to all parts of the
premises for the purposes of inspection, sampling, records
examination or in the performance of any of their duties.
The City, Approval Authority and (where the NPDES State is
the Approval Authority). EPA shall have the right to set
up on the User's property such devices as are necessary to
conduct sampling inspection, compliance monitoring and/or
1-19
-------
metering operations. Where a User has security measures in
force which would require proper identification and
clearance before entry into their premises, the User shall
make necessary arrangements with their security guards so
that upon presentation of suitable identification,
personnel from the City, Approval Authority and EPA will
be permitted to enter, without delay, for the purposes of
performing their specific responsibilities.
4.6 Pretreatment
Users shall provide necessary wastewater treatment as re-
quired to comply with this Ordinance and shall achieve
compliance with all Federal Categorical Pretreatment
Standards within the time limitations as specified by the
Federal Pretreatment Regulations. Any facilities required
to pretreat wastewater to a level acceptable to the City
shall be provided, operated, and maintained at the User's
expense. Detailed plans showing the pretreatment facili-
ties and operating procedures shall be submitted to the
City for review, and shall be acceptable to the City
before construction of the facility. The review of such
plans and operating procedures will in no way relieve the
user from the responsibility of modifying the facility as
necessary to produce an effluent acceptable to the City
under the provisions of this Ordinance. Any subsequent
changes in the pretreatment facilities or method of
operation shall be reported to and be acceptable to the
City prior to the user's initiation of the changes.
The City shall annually publish in the news-
paper a list of the Users which were not in compliance
with any Pretreatment Requirements or Standards at least
once during the 12 previous months. The notification
shall also summarize any enforcement actions taken against
the user(s) during the same 12 months.
All records relating to compliance with Pretreatment
Standards shall be made available to officials of the EPA
or Approval Authority upon request.
4.7 Confidential Information
Information and data on a User obtained from reports, ques-
tionnaires, permit applications, permits and monitoring
programs and from inspections shall be available to the
public or other governmental agency without restriction
unless the User specifically requests and is able to
demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City that the
release of such information would divulge information,
processes or methods of production entitled to protection
as trade secrets of the User.
1-20
-------
When requested by the person furnishing a report, the por-
tions of a report which might disclose trade secrets or
secret processes shall not be made available for inspec-
tion by the public but shall be made available upon
written request to governmental agencies for uses related
to this Ordinance, the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) Permit, State Disposal System
permit and/or the Pretreatment Programs; provided,
however, that such portions of a report shall be available
for use by the State or any state agency in judicial
review or enforcement proceedings involving the person
furnishing the report. Wastewater constituents and
characteristics will not be recognized as confidential
i nformati on.
Information accepted by the City as confidential, shall
not be transmitted to any governmental agency or to the
general public by the City until and unless a ten-day
notification is given to the User.
SECTION 5 - ENFORCEMENT
5.1 Harmful Contributions
The City may suspend the wastewater treatment service
and/or a Wastewater Contribution Permit when such suspen-
sion is necessary, in the opinion of the City, in order to
stop an actual or threatened discharge which presents or
may present an imminent or substantial endangerment to the
health or welfare of persons, to the environment, causes
Interference to the POTW or causes the City to violate any
condition of its NPDES Permit.
Any person notified of a suspension of the wastewater
treatment service and/or the Wastewater Contribution
Permit shall immediately stop or eliminate the contribu-
tion. In the event of a failure of the person to comply
voluntarily with the suspension order, the City shall take
such steps as deemed necessary including immediate
severance of the sewer connection, to prevent or minimize
damage to the POTW system or endangerment to any
individuals. The City shall reinstate the Wastewater
Contribution Permit and/or the wastewater treatment
service upon proof of the elimination of the non-complying
discharge. A detailed written statement submitted by the
user describing the causes of the harmful contribution and
the measures taken to prevent any future occurrence shall
be submitted to the City within 15 days of the date of
occurrence.
1-21
-------
5.2 Revocation of Permit
Any User who violates the following conditions of this Or-
dinance, or applicable state and federal regulations, is
subject to having his permit revoked in accordance with
the procedures of Section 5 of this Ordinance:
a) Failure of a User to factually report the wastewater
constituents and characteristics of his discharge;
b) Failure of the User to report significant changes in
operations, or wastewater constituents and charac-
teristics;
c) Refusal of reasonable access to the User's premises
for the purpose of inspection or monitoring; or,
d) Violation of conditions of the permit.
5.3 Notification of Violation
Whenever the City finds that any User has violated or is
violating this Ordinance, wastewater contribution permit,
or any prohibition, limitation of requirements contained
herein, the City may serve upon such person a written
notice stating the nature of the violation. Within 30
days of the date of the notice, a plan for the satis-
factory correction thereof shall be submitted to the City
by the User.
5.4 Show Cause Hearing
5.4.1
The City may order any User who causes or allows an
unauthorized discharge to enter the POTW to show
cause before the City Council why the proposed
enforcement action should not be taken. A notice
shall be served on the User specifying the time and
place of a hearing to be held by the City Council
regarding the violation, the reasons why the action
is to be taken, the proposed enforcement action, and
directing the User to show cause before the City
Council why the proposed enforcement action should
not be taken. The notice of the hearing shall be
served "personally or by registered or certified mail
(return receipt requested) at least (ten) days before
the hearing. Service may be made on any agent or
officer of a corporation.
1-22
-------
5.4.2
The City Council may itself conduct the hearing and
take the evidence, or may designate any of its
members or any officer or employee of the (assigned
department) to:
a) Issue in the name of the City Council notices of
hearings requesting the attendance and testimony
of witnesses and the production of evidence
relevant to any matter involved in such hear-
ings;
b) Take the evidence;
c) Transmit a report of the evidence and hearing,
including transcripts and other evidence, to-
gether with recommendations to the City Council
for action thereon.
5.4.3
At any hearing held pursuant to this Ordinance,
testimony taken must be under oath and recorded
stenographically. The transcript, so recorded, will
be made available to any member of the public or any
party to the hearing upon payment of the usual
charges thereof.
5.4.4
After the City Council has reviewed the evidence, it
may issue an order to the User responsible for the
discharge directing that, following a specified time
period, the sewer service be discontinued unless ade-
quate treatment facilities, devices or other related
appurtenances shall have been installed on existing
treatment facilities, devices or other related appur-
tenances are properly operated. Further orders and
directives as are necessary and appropriate may be
issued.
5.5 Legal Action
If any person discharges sewage, industrial wastes or
other wastes into the city's wastewater disposal system
contrary to the provisions of this Ordinance, Federal or
State Pretreatment Requirements, or any order of the City,
the City Attorney may commence an action for appropriate
legal and/or equitable relief in the (Circuit) Court of
this county.
1-23
-------
SECTION 6 - PENALTY: COSTS
6.1 Civil Penalties
Any User who is found to have violated an Order of the
City Council or who willfully or negligently failed to
comply with any provision of this Ordinance, and the
orders, rules, regulations and permits issued hereunder,
shall be fined not less than (One Hundred Dollars)
(optional) nor more than (One Thousand Dollars) (optional)
for each offense. Each day on which a violation shall
occur or continue shall be deemed a separate and distinct
offense. In addition to the penalties provided herein,
the City may recover reasonable attorneys' fees, court
costs, court reporters' fees and other expenses of
litigation by appropriate suit at law against the person
found to have violated this Ordinance or the orders,
rules, regulations, and permits issued hereunder.
6.2 Falsifying Information
Any person who knowingly makes any false statements,
representation or certification in any application,
record, report, plan or other document filed or required
to be maintained pursuant to this Ordinance, or Wastewater
Contribution Permit, or who falsifies, tampers with, or
knowingly renders inaccurate any monitoring device or
method required under this Ordinance, shall, upon con-
viction, be punished by a fine of not more than $1,000 or
by imprisonment for not more than six (6) months, or by
both.
SECTION 7 - SEVERABILITY
If any provision, paragraph, word, section or article of
this Ordinance is invalidated by any court of competent
jurisdiction, the remaining provisions, paragraphs, words,
sections, and chapters shall not be affected and shall
continue in full force and effect.
SECTION 8 - CONFLICT
All other Ordinances and parts of other Ordinances incon-
sistent or conflicting with any part of this Ordinance are
hereby repealed to the extent of such inconsistency or
conflict.
1-24
-------
SECTION 9 - EFFECTIVE DATE
This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect (Option
A) from and after its passage, approval and publication,
as provided by law. (Option B) on the day of ,
19 .
INTRODUCED the day of , 19
FIRST READING: , 19 .
SECOND READING: , 19 .
PASSED this day of , 19 .
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
NOT VOTING:
APPROVED by me this day of , 19_
MAYOR, CITY OF
ATTEST: (Seal) City Clerk
Published the day of , 19 .
SECTION 10 - INDUSTRIAL SEWER CONNECTION APPLICATION
To the (city or town) of :
The undersigned being the of the
property located at
does hereby request a permit to an industrial
sewer connection serving , which
company is engaged in
at said location.
1. A plan to the property showing accurately all
sewers and drains now existing is attached here-
unto as Exhibit "A".
1-25
-------
2. Plans and specifications covering any work pro-
posed to be performed under this permit is
attached hereunto as Exhibit "B".
3. A complete schedule of all process waters and
industrial wastes produced or expected to be
produced at said property, including a descrip-
tion of the character of each waste, the daily
volume and maximum rates of discharge, repre-
sentative analyses, and compliance with any
applicable Pretreatment Standard or Require-
ments, is attached hereunto as Exhibit "C".
4. The name and address of the person or firm who
will perform the work covered by this permit is
In consideration of the granting of this permit the under-
signed agrees:
1. To furnish any additional information relating
to the installation or use of the industrial
sewer for which this permit is sought as may be
requested by the City.
2. To accept and abide by all provisions of Ordi-
nance No. of the City of ,
and of all other pertinent Ordinances or
regulations that may be adopted in the future.
3. To operate and maintain any waste pretreatment
facilities, as may be required as a condition of
the acceptance into the wastewater treatment
system of the industrial wastes involved, in an
efficient manner at all times, and at no expense
to the City.
4. To cooperate at all times with the City and his
representatives in their inspecting, sampling,
and study of the industrial wastes, and any
facilities provided for pretreatment.
5. To notify the City immediately in the event of
any accident, or other occurrence that occasions
contributor to the wastewater treatment system
of any wastewater or substances prohibited or
not covered by this permit.
1-26
-------
Date: Signed_
$ inspection fee paid
Application approved and permit granted
Date: Signed
1-27
-------
APPENDIX J
SAMPLE SEWER USE PERMIT
-------
City of
Department of Public Works
WASTEWATER DISCHARGE PERMIT
Permit No.
In accordance with all terms and conditions of the City Code,
Part , Article _, , Section , et. seq., and also
with any applicable provisions of Fede.ral or state law or regulation;
Permission Is Hereby Granted To
Classified by SIC No.
For the contribution of
into the City of se,wer lines at
This permit Is granted in accordance with the application filed on
, 19 in the office of the
_( ]_ and In conformity with plans, specifications and
other data submitted to the ^ _) in support of the above application, all of
which are filed with and considered as part of this permit, together with the
following named conditions and requirements.
Effective this day of _, 19
To Expire day of , 19
Super!ntendent
J-l
------- An error occurred while trying to OCR this image.
-------
Permit No,
ADDENDUM I
Monitoring Schedule
J-3
-------
Permit No.
ADDENDUM II
Compliance Schedule
J-4
-------
APPENDIX K
SAMPLE ATTORNEY'S STATEMENT
-------
APPENDIX K
SAMPLE ATTORNEY'S STATEMENT
(Date)
(Name and Address)
Re: Legal Authority
Dear :
We are attorneys for the (Name of POTW), and the following statement is
submitted pursuant to the requirements contained in the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) Section 403.9(b)(l) regarding legal authority for the (Name
of POTW) to implement the (Name of POTW) Pretreatment Program.
It is our opinion that the (Name of POTW) has adequate authority to
carry out the program described in 40 CFR Section 403.8, based on authority
granted to it by: (List all documents, such as State enabling statute, local
Sewer Use Ordinance, Rules and Regulations, Codes, Regional or interagency
agreements and any other documents that give the POTW the authority to
implement the pretreatment program).
The following references to the legal authority requirements of 40 CFR
403.8(f)(l) are correlated with appropriate sections of the (Name of POTW)
Ordinance which provide the required authority. Where the authority is not
apparent from a reading of the Ordinance provision, an explanation is
provided.
General Section of the (POTW Ordinance) provides, that all
connections of lateral or other sewerlines to the sewerage system of the
POTW service area, whether within or without any city, shall be made subject
to such terms and conditions as the (POTW Authority) may prescribe. Pursuant
to this authority the (Name of POTW) Board of Directors has adopted its
Ordinance No. setting forth the terms and conditions upon which
industrial users may connect to the system.
403.8(f)(l)(i) New contributions to the public sewerage system may
not be made without an industrial user first obtaining a Sewer Use Permit
(Section ) which may contain various conditions and prohibitions
(Section ). Existing industrial users (those connected to the system
prior to (Date) shall be required by the Engineer to obtain a Sewer Use
Permit (Section ). If there has been an increase or change in an
industrial user's contribution to the system, the discharger is required to
reapply for a permit to cover those changes (Section ), and the Engineer
may change the conditions of any Sewer Use Permit as circumstances may
require (Section ).
403.8(f)(l)(ii) In order to require compliance with applicable
K-l
-------
Pretreatment Standards, (Name of POTW) must be able to require compliance
with EPA's listed general prohibitions (403.5(a)), specific prohibitions
(403.5(b)), local limits developed to implement the general and specific
standards (403.6). Section of the Ordinance prohibits any discharge to
a sewer which will result in a nuisance, or contamination or pollution of
receiving waters. Section prohibits conditions which violate any
statute, rule, regulation or ordinance of any public agency (including EPA).
Section prohibits those discharges prohibited by EPA regulations.
These three sections empower (Name of POTW) to enforce the general and
specific prohibitions contained in 40 CFR 403.5(a) and (b). When local
discharge limits are developed pursuant to 403.5(c) and (d), they may be
imposed by the Engineer as a permit condition pursuant to Ordinance Section
. National categorical pretreatment standards may also be imposed as a
permit condition per Ordinance Section , which empowers the Engineer to
regulate discharges regulated by EPA.
403.8(f)(l)(iii) (Name of POTW) has control via a permit system
authorized by Ordinance Section (a permit application form appears in
Appendix of the (Name of POTW) Pretreatment Program).
403.8(f)(l)(iv)(A) The (Name of POTW) Engineer may, to remedy or
avoid a violation of the ordinance or sewer use permit, require a user to
develop a compliance schedule for installation of control technology under
Ordinance Section . Additionally, the Engineer may require a compliance
schedule as part of the required information under Ordinance Section ,
as a condition of obtaining a Sewer Use Permit.
403.8(f)(l)(iv)(B) The (Name of POTW) Engineer may require a user to
submit all notices and self-monitoring reports required by EPA regulations
through authority granted in Ordinance Section and Section .
403.8(f)(l)(v) The (Name of POTW) Engineer may carry out inspection,
surveillance and monitoring procedures under authority granted in Ordinance
Section and Section , subsection .
403.8(f)(l)(vi)(A) (Name of POTW) may seek remedies for noncompliance
with pretreatment standards and requirements. As a matter of general law,
(Name of POTW) may seek injunctive relief for noncompliance since any such
noncompliance might result in irreparable harm to the treatment plant, to the
health and safety of plant workers, and to the environment; and since damages
at law would not be an adequate remedy. The Ordinance Section provides
that intentional violation of the ordinance is a misdemeanor which is
punishable by a fine not to exceed $ , imprisonment not to exceed
days, or both. Additionally, a civil liability is imposed by Ordinance
Section for intentional or negligent violation of (Name of POTW)
requirements relating to (1) pretreatment of industrial wste which would
otherwise be detrimental to the treatment works or its operation, and (2) the
prevention of entry of such waste into the collection system or treatment
works. The civil liability may equal a sum not to exceed $ per day per
violation.
403.8(f)(l)(vi)(B) The (Name of POTW) Engineer may, under Ordinance
Section , temporarily suspend a Sewer Use Permit or impose temporary
K-2
-------
restrictions on discharges where continued discharges would jeopardize the
ability of the treatment system to meet water quality standards, threaten
damage to the sewerage system, or cause a nuisance or an unsafe condition to
occur. Usually, a 48-hour period must pass before a suspension or restric-
tion is effective. The waiting period may be dispensed with in emergency
situations relating to public health and safety or a significant impairment
of the treatment process. Ordinance Section requires compliance with
restrictions or cessation of discharges at the effective time of such action.
403.8(f)(l)(vii) Confidentiality requirements are provided for in
Ordinance Section , "Confidentiality of Information".
As stated above, (Name of POTW) will implement the requirements of its
pretreatment program and apply pretreatment standards to individual indus-
trial users through use of a sewer use permit system, and by direct en-
forcement of its sewer use ordinance. A description of the exact procedures
to be used in implementing the pretreatment program is provided in the
Program Procedures portion of the (Name of POTW) Pretreatment Program.
(Name of POTW) intends to ensure compliance with pretreatment standards
and requirements through an inspection and sampling program authorized under
Section of the Ordinance, which would allow for the determination of
noncompliance with discharge limitations and requirements independent of
information supplied by the industrial user. The inspection and sampling
program is described in the Program Procedures portion of this submission.
Those violating permit conditions will be ordered to "Cease and Desist"
(Ordinance Section , Subsection ), and are subject to having service
terminated (Section , Subsection ) and their permit revoked (Section
). (Name of POTW) is prepared to take court action where necessary to
enforce compliance with its ordinance, permits or orders.
Very truly yours,
(Signed by Legal Counselor)
K-3
-------
-------
APPENDIX L
DEVELOPMENT OF DISCHARGE LIMITS
TO CONTROL INCOMPATIBLE POLLUTANTS
-------
APPENDIX L
DEVELOPMENT OF DISCHARGE LIMITATIONS
TO CONTROL INCOMPATIBLE POLLUTANTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION
A critical part of a municipality's task in developing a local pretreat-
ment program is the development of defensible numerical effluent limitations
for the discharge of incompatible pollutants. These limitations are often
incorporated directly into a municipal ordinance or are applied through indi-
vidual permits issued to nondomestic users of the sewerage system. Such lim-
its are needed to enforce the prohibited discharge standards of the General
Pretreatment Regulations and to implement the three fundamental objectives of
the National Pretreatment Program:
To prevent the introduction of pollutants into the POTW which could
interfere with its operation
To prevent the pass-through of untreated pollutants which could vio-
late a POTW s NPDES permit limitations and applicable water quality
standards
To prevent the contamination of a POTW's sludge which would limit
selected sludge uses or disposal practices.
Locally developed limits are also necessary in cases where categorical stan-
dards have not yet been promulgated for an industry, the industry is not
covered by categorical standards, or categorical standards are not adequate to
protect the municipal treatment plant, receiving stream, or sludge.
This Appendix is intended to assist POTWs in calculating limits to imple-
ment these three objectives. The first section of the Appendix outlines the
general methodology for determining allowable pollutant loadings, choosing the
appropriate level of protection, and allocating these loadings to dischargers.
Sections 2, 3, and 4 present equations and guideline data that can be used to
calculate the limiting pollutant concentrations at the influent of the munici-
pal treatment plant which will protect the wastewater treatment processes, the
receiving water, and sludge disposal options. Section 5 discusses
L-l
-------
considerations for allocation of pollutant loadings to individual industrial
users. Section 6 demonstrates the calculation of a discharge limit for one
pollutant, copper, using a hypothetical example.
The methodology described here for determining allowable influent concen-
trations and setting industrial effluent limits is widely known and accepted.
The basis for some of the material that appears in this Appendix is a document
originally prepared by the State of Indiana and the EPA Region V Office. The
original document has been reorganized and expanded to facilitate a better
understanding of the material.
1.1 GENERAL METHODOLOGY
An incompatible pollutant's effect on a POTW must be evaluated simul-
taneously from three perspectives impact on the treatment plant, impact on
the receiving water, and impact on sludge described above. The limit for that
pollutant can then be set to ensure that all pretreatment program objectives
are met. It should be pointed out that the limiting factor which meets the
most restrictive of the three objectives may vary from pollutant to pollutant.
For example, at a particular POTW, constraints on the land application of
sludge may limit the allowable influent concentration of cadmium, while the
effects on the receiving water may limit the influent concentration of copper.
The hypothetical example provided at the end of this document will demonstrate
the effect of these limiting factors on the influent pollutant limit for
copper.
As a general procedure, influent concentration limits should be calcu-
lated for a particular pollutant based on each of the three factors (i.e.,
treatment processes, water quality, and sludge). The most stringent of the
three will determine the influent limit to be used for that pollutant. The
POTW will then have to translate that influent limit into discharge limits for
its industrial users that discharge the pollutant into its sewage system.
Although this document provides some specific data on only cyanide and
nine metallic pollutants, a POTW may receive other industrial pollutants with
L-2
-------
toxic characteristics. Industrial waste surveys and/or POTW sampling, if done
properly, should identify the existence of such pollutants. Calculation of
limits for such pollutants would follow the same general methodology discussed
in this Appendix, although inhibition and removal data would have to be devel-
oped from other sources. It should be noted that this methodology does not
account for any cumulative, synergistic, or antagonistic effects that may
occur when several toxic pollutants are present simultaneously. Figure 1
shows an overview of the steps used in developing pollutant discharge limita-
tions. Table 1 presents the two basic formulae used to determine local dis-
charge limitations. The back calculation formula is used to calculate allow-
able POTW influent concentrations based on threshold concentrations from
various in-plant criteria. The mass conversion formula allows for the deter-
mination of a mass loading (in Ibs/day) if the flow and concentration of the
wastewater are known.
L-3
-------
FIGURE 1
BASIC STEPS IN DEVELOPING
POLLUTANT DISCHARGE LIMITATIONS
Influent to POTW
NPDES
Activated Anaerobic Limitations or Sludge
Sludge Digestion Water Quality Standards Disposal
Determine
Inhibitory
Concentration
Value
Calculate
Influent
Concentration
that is not
Inhibitory
to this Process
1. Determine
Inhibitory
Concentration
Value
2. Calculate
Influent
Concentration
that is not
Inhibitory
to this Process
Calculate 1.
Influent
Concentration
which will
allow POTW to
comply with 2.
its NPDES
permit and/or
protect water
quality
Determine
Sludge Disposal
Method
Calculate
Influent
Concentration that
will allow Disposal
Option
t
;t ]
ent
t
Select Most
Stringent Value
Calculate Load
Available for Industrial
Dischargers
t
Allocate Load to
Industries By
Permit or Order
L-4
-------
TABLE 1
BACK CALCULATION FORMULA
Li
LP= =
Where: Lp = Allowable POTW influent concentration (in mg/1)
Li = Threshold concentration for the appropriate unit operation or
appropriate permit limitation (in mg/1)
Ep = Reduction in upstream unit processes (expressed as a decimal)
MASS CONVERSION FORMULA
L = Q x C x 8.34
Where: L = Mass loading (in Ibs/day)
Q = Wastewater flow (in MGD)
C = Concentration (in mg/1)
Ibs/day
8.34 = Conversion factor
,(mg/1)(MGD)J
L-5
-------
2.0 PREVENTION OF INHIBITION OF TREATMENT PROCESSES
One of the primary objectives of the National Pretreatment Program is to
prevent the discharge to a POTW of incompatible pollutants that would inter-
fere with or inhibit the POTWs operation. In the case of cyanides, "heavy"
metals, and other toxic pollutants, treatment plant upsets could result if the
pollutant's toxicity is great enough to inhibit the microbial activity of the
biological treatment system and cause a decrease in the pollution removal
efficiency of the municipal treatment facility. Pollutant discharge limits
should be set to maintain the concentration of each toxic pollutant below the
inhibition threshold of the treatment unit.
2.1 ACTIVATED SLUDGE PROCESS
To calculate a discharge limit that will prevent inhibition of an acti-
vated sludge process, it is necessary to determine if an inhibition or upset
condition exists. This determination can be made by examining POTW operating
records for disruptions or changes (e.g., settling characteristics of second-
ary sludge, bacterial species populations in the mixed liquor of the aeration
basin, etc.). If, after examining various operating parameters, no inhibition
or upset conditions can be found, but a POTW protection criteria is desired,
current levels of pollutants of concern should be used as threshold concentra-
tions to determine maximum allowable influent loadings based on prevention of
activated sludge inhibition. If, however, inhibition or upset conditions are
found, the POTW must first determine the concentration of each pollutant of
concern entering the activated sludge process. Care should be taken to
include all recycle and return lines which may be sources of these pollutants,
e.g., return activated sludge (RAS).
After this concentration has been determined, it should be compared with
various inhibitory concentration values that can be found in the technical
literature. Table 2 lists threshold concentrations for inhibitory effects of
several metallic pollutants and cyanide on activated sludge processes, nitri-
fication processes, and anaerobic sludge digestion. These inhibitory values
are taken from technical literature and the experience of States and munici-
palities .
L-6
-------
TABLE 2
THRESHOLD CONCENTRATIONS* OF TOXIC POLLUTANTS
THAT COULD INHIBIT BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT PROCESSES
Toxic
Pollutant
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium ( total)
Chromium (hex)
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Zinc
Threshold of
Inhibitory Effect
on Activated Sludge
0.05 mg/1
1.0 mg/1
10.0 mg/1
1.0 mg/1
1.0 mg/1
0.1 mg/1
0.1 mg/1
0.1 mg/1
1.0 mg/1
1.0 mg/1
Threshold of
Inhibitory Effect
on Nitrification
0.1 mg/1
0.5 mg/1
0.5 mg/1
0.5 mg/1
0.1 mg/1
Threshold of
Inhibitory Effect
on Anaerobic
Sludge Digestion
1.5 mg/1
0.02 mg/1
100.0 mg/1
50.0 mg/1
10.0 mg/1
4.0 mg/1
10.0 mg/1
20.0 mg/1
*Concentrations are specified at influent of the unit process in dissolved
form.
References: (1), (3), and (5)
L-7
-------
Some qualifications to the data in Table 2 should be noted. The concen-
trations reported in Table 2 are for the dissolved form of each metal and
should be used only for comparison purposes and preliminary calculations if
the actual proportion of dissolved to total metal is unknown. In addition,
concentrations reported in this table reflect the minimum concentration which
showed an inhibitory effect for all bench-scale and full-scale studies regard-
less of test conditions. The result is that many of the values are contra-
dictory, with the same concentration having no inhibitory effects, some
inhibitory effects, or total upset effects. Thus, in using the data in Table
2, it should be noted that these inhibitory concentrations are not absolute
and all other possibilities should be examined prior to adopting a value from
this table as a threshold concentration.
Using an established threshold concentration, a maximum allowable influ-
ent concentration to the POTW (Lp) is calculated for each pollutant of concern
using the back calculation formula from Table 1, as follows:
Li
Lp=
Where: Lp = Maximum allowable influent concentration to the POTW (in
mg/1)
Li = Established threshold concentration for the pollutant of
concern (in mg/1)
Ep = Reduction of the pollutant of concern through the primary
treatment processes (expressed as a decimal)
Table 3 presents typical removal rates through primary and secondary
treatment processes for several metals, but should only be used for comparison
purposes and preliminary calculations. Plant-specific data are more valid and
should always be used by the POTW for final calculations.
If, after maximum allowable influent concentrations have been calculated
for all possible in- plant criteria, the activated sludge is selected as a
controlling in-plant criteria (i.e., having the lowest maximum allowable
influent concentration) , the maximum allowable influent concentration for
L-8
-------
TABLE 3
TYPICAL POTW REMOVAL RATES
FOR INCOMPATIBLE POLLUTANTS
Toxic
Pollutant
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Zinc
Percent Removal
Through Primary Treatment
Median Value1
7
16
18
20
22
6
26
Percent Removal Through
Primary and Secondary Units
Median Value2
50
71
82
56
57
51
32
76
Reference: (1)
o
Reference: (2)
L-9
-------
sludge is converted to a mass loading (L) prior to the allocation procedure
(see Section 5.0), using the mass conversion formula from Table 1 as follows:
L = Qx C x 8.34
Where: L = Maximum allowable mass loading to the POTW (in Ibs/day)
Q = Design flow (in MGD) of the POTW
C = Maximum allowable influent concentration (in mg/1)
8.34 = Conversion factor
2.2 ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
To calculate a discharge limit that will prevent inhibition of anaerobic
sludge digestion, the same basic procedure utilized for the activated sludge
process is followed. First, it must be determined if an inhibition or upset
condition exists by examining POTW operation records for disruption or changes
in such operating parameters as digester supernatant volume and methane gas
production. If no inhibition or upset conditions are found, a POTW can adopt
current concentration levels of pollutants of concern entering the digestor as
threshold concentrations, if a POTW protection criteria is desired. If an
inhibition condition does exist, the POTW must determine the concentration of
the pollutant of concern entering the digester, and only then compare the
actual value to the data contained in Table 2, being sure to take into account
all limitations of these literature data.
After establishing a threshold concentration, the POTW must determine the
maximum allowable mass loading to the digester, using the mass conversion
formula, as follows:
L = Q x GX x 8.34
Where: L = Maximum mass loading to the digestor (in Ibs/day)
Q = Sludge flow to the digester (in MGD)
Cy = Established threshold concentration for the anaerobic
digestion process (in mg/1)
8.34 = Conversion factor
L-10
-------
After a maximum allowable loading to the digester is determined, the max-
imum allowable influent concentration to the POTW (C) is calculated, using
another form of the mass conversion formula, as follows:
C =
Q x 8.34
Where: C = Maximum allowable influent concentration (in mg/1)
L = Maximum allowable mass loading to digester (in Ibs/day)
Q = Design wastewater flow of the POTW (in MGD)
8.34 = Conversion factor
However, the amount of a pollutant of concern in the sludge is limited by
the amount of pollutant removed from the wastewater. In the case of metals,
all metals removed from the wastewater are generally deposited in the sludge.
Therefore, the maximum allowable influent concentration for metals must be
adjusted for the amount of metals which remain in the final effluent as
follows:
C*= C
Ep
Where: C* = Adjusted maximum allowable influent concentration (in mg/1)
C = Unadjusted maximum allowable influent concentration (in
mg/D
Ep = Reduction of pollutant of concern through the entire POTW
(expressed as a decimal)
The final result is that the POTW maximum allowable influent concentra-
tion is allowed to increase by a factor of (1-Ep) to account for the pollutant
of concern (metal) in the final effluent. For other types of pollutants,
other removal mechanisms such as air stripping of volatile pollutants (which
would reduce the amount of pollutant in the sludge) must be similarly con-
sidered. Assuming that anaerobic digestion is selected as the controlling
in-plant criteria, the adjusted maximum allowable influent concentration to
the POTW is converted to a mass loading prior to the allocation procedure.
L-ll
-------
This is performed using the mass conversion formula found in Table 1 as
follows:
L - Q x C* X 8.34
Where: L - Maximum allowable influent mass loading (in Ibs/day)
Q » Design wastewater flow of POTW (in MGD)
C* Adjusted maximum allowable influent concentration (in mg/1)
8.34 = Conversion factor
L-12
-------
3.0 PREVENTION OF POLLUTANT PASS-THROUGH
The second objective of the National Pretreatment Program is to prevent
the pass-through of incompatible pollutants, which could violate a POTW' s
NPDES permit requirements and applicable water quality standards. Two proce-
dures are presented below. The first assists the POTW in developing pollutant
discharge limits to ensure that NPDES permit limitations or any applicable
State or local discharge limits are not violated. The second provides the
POTW with a methodology for developing pollutant discharge limits to protect
water quality criteria if desired, in the absence of specific national, State,
or local discharge limitations.
3.1 COMPLIANCE WITH THE POTW NPDES PERMIT
There is only a single step involved in determining the maximum allow-
able influent concentration to the POTW required for that POTW to comply with
its NPDES permit requirement for a particular pollutant of concern. Using the
back calculation formula, the maximum allowable influent concentration is
determined as follows:
Li
Where: Lp = Maximum allowable influent concentration (in mg/1)
Li = NPDES permit limitation for the pollutant of concern
(in mg/1)
Ep = Reduction of pollutant of concern through the entire
POTW (expressed as a decimal)
If the NPDES compliance in-plant criteria controls, the maximum allowable
influent concentration is converted to a mass loading prior to the allocation
procedure, as shown in previous sections.
3.2 PROTECTION OF RECEIVING STREAM'S WATER QUALITY
EPA and State publications contain information on the effects of toxic
pollutants on receiving water quality. The main problems caused by toxic
pollutants are the restriction of domestic and industrial uses of surface
L-13
-------
water, toxicity to aquatic organisms, and the accumulation of toxics in the
food chain. Also, there has been recent concern about trace organics that are
carcinogenic to humans. For these reasons, a POTW can, in the absence of spe-
cific toxic pollutant effluent discharge limitations, develop specific local
discharge limitations to protect the receiving stream's quality by using
established national water quality criteria. However, it should be noted that
the establishment of water quality standards for a particular receiving stream
is the responsibility of the NPDES authority and the POTW is under no obliga-
tion to develop these standards. In addition, any effluent discharge limita-
tions based on water quality criteria that are developed by a POTW would still
be subject to revision by the NPDES authority and would require corresponding
revisions to a POTW's local discharge limitations.
Exhibit A summarizes water quality criteria for 21 priority pollutants
contained in EPA's Ambient Water Quality Criteria, Series (1), as published in
the November 28, 1980, Federal Register. These new criteria have replaced
those formerly established in the 1976 edition of Quality Criteria for Water
(the "Red Book"). The criteria were derived by using "guidelines," which,
theoretically, would ensure protection of aquatic health and human health.
Officially, the criteria are only recommended values; they are not enforceable
as water quality standards. However, they do provide useful documentation in
the interpretation of State water quality standards.
To calculate the maximum allowable pollutant loading to the POTW's treat-
ment plants that will protect the receiving water quality from degradation,
the POTW has to determine the in-stream water quality standard (C ) for the
pollutant of interest. This may be available from the State water quality
agency. Otherwise, data from Exhibit A may need to be used even though they
are not specific and may be too stringent. The maximum allowable pollutant
concentration in the POTW's effluent (C ce) can then be calculated, taking
ef f
into account the dilution factor of the receiving stream, as follows:
C ££ = (C )(Dilution factor)
err wq
Where: C -f = Maximum allowable pollutant concentration (in mg/1) at the
e POTW effluent to protect receiving stream's water quality
C = In-stream water quality standard (in mg/1)
L-14
-------
Qeff
Dilution Factor = -~ -
Where: Q = Critical low flow of receiving stream (in mgd)
SUIT
Q ff * POTW actual effluent flow (in mgd)
Calculation of the dilution factor involves determining the total volume
of effluent discharged by the POTW into the receiving stream, either by actual
flow measurement or by estimation, using the actual POTW influent flow and
subtracting other sources of wastewater leaving the POTW, such as sludge flow.
Once the maximum allowable pollutant effluent concentration (C ff) is deter-
mined, the maximum allowable influent concentration to the POTW based on
protection of water quality is calculated using another version of the back
calculation formula, as follows:
T Ceff
LP= l^E?
Where: Lp = Maximum allowable influent concentration to the POTW (in
mg/1)
C ff = Maximum allowable pollutant concentration at the POTW
e effluent (in mg/1)
Ep = Reduction of pollutant of concern through the entire POTW
(expressed as a decimal)
If water quality is selected as a controlling in-plant criteria, the maximum
allowable influent concentration is converted to a mass loading prior to the
allocation procedure, as shown in previous sections.
L-15
-------
4,0 PROTECTION OF SLUDGE QUALITY
The last major objective of the National Pretreatment Program is the gen-
eration of sludge that is compatible with the overall sludge management pro-
gram and consistent with the selected disposal option of the POTW. Pollutant
discharge limits should be calculated so that the POTW sludge remains compat-
ible with the selected disposal option. There are three basic methods which
POTWs utilize for sludge disposal at the present time:
Incineration
Landfilling
Land application.
Each of these methods has different costs and benefits associated with its
use. For this reason, the required sludge quality and degree of pretreatment
needed will also vary.
4.1 INCINERATION
Incineration of sludges with high concentrations of priority pollutants
can volatilize organics and metals. Little information exists on the release
of these pollutants into the air during incineration. What is known about
incineration is that it is very expensive to operate and requires an air pol-
lution control permit. If incineration is the disposal option used, the POTW
should sample and analyze the resulting ash to determine if the ash quality is
compatible with its disposal method.
4.2 LANDFILL DISPOSAL
The determining factor for landfill disposal is whether the sludge is
classified as a hazardous waste. To ensure that a particular sludge is not a
hazardous waste, the EP (extraction procedure) toxicity test must be per-
formed. When landfill disposal is used by the POTW, the sludge leachate
should be sampled and analyzed when there is a possibility that the leachate
may contaminate or degrade groundwater or surface water resources.
L-16
-------
4.3 LAND APPLICATION
To predict the sludge quality needed for land application, plant opera-
tional data should be analyzed, and land quality and quantity should be deter-
mined. The POTW should know the general soil type and Cation Exchange
Capacity (CEC) of the land application site. Table 4 provides Federal guide-
lines on loading limitations for land application of metal-bearing sludges.
In addition, each State may have its own land application limitations. Both
Federal and State rules should be evaluated to determine necessary sludge
quality and allowable pollutant loads to the municipal treatment plant. These
limitations should be utilized by the POTW to find the maximum cumulative pol-
lutant loading (L) for a specific contaminant. Two procedures are described
below. The first procedure is designed to assist the POTW in assessing sludge
disposal impacts while the second will help in establishing local discharge
limitations which will allow the POTW to dispose of its sludge properly and
economically.
4.3.1 Procedure to Assess Sludge Disposal Impacts
In order to evaluate the impacts of possible sludge contamination, a POTW
must first analyze its final sludge product for each pollutant of concern.
Units of this analysis are generally in terms of milligrams of pollutant per
kilogram of sludge on a dry weight basis. (If data are provided on a wet
weight basis, be sure to convert to dry weight using the sludge percent
solids.) After converting from mg/kg dry to Ibs/dry ton (by multiplying by
0.002), a maximum cumulative loading (L) for the appropriate pollutant of con-
cern is chosen based on the particular characteristics of the soil (Table 4 or
applicable State or local loading limitations). Using these two values, the
maximum amount of sludge which can be applied per acre is determined, as
follows:
AR
Where: AR = Maximum allowable amount of sludge applied per acre (in dry
tons/acre)
L-17
-------
TABLE 4
REQUIREMENTS FOR SLUDGE APPLICATION TO AGRICULTURAL LAND
PRIMARY REQUIRMENT - NITROGEN
1. Sludge application rates should provide total plant available nitro-
gen fertilizer requirement of the crop growth, and the requirement to
prevent nitrate pollution of groundwater.
ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS - TRACE METAL ELEMENTS
1. Maximum annual Cd loading:
Jan. 1, 1981 to Dec. 31, 1985 1.25 kg/ha
Beginning Jan. 1, 1986 0.50 kg/ha
2. Soil/sludge pH control
pH of sludge amended soil should be maintained at 6.5 or greater
3. Total cumulative metal loadings (kg/ha)
Cation Exchange Capacity (meq/100 gm)
Element 0-5 5-15 >15
Pb
Zn
Cu
Ni
Cd
500
250
125
50
5
1000
500
250
100
10
2000
1000
500
200
20
A. Cd/Zn ratio of sludge applied should be less than 0.015 in naturally
acidic soils.
Derived from Reference (7).
L-18
-------
L = Maximum cumulative loading (in Ibs/acre)
C = Pollutant concentration in sludge (in Ibs/dry ton)
Using the maximum amount of sludge which can be applied per acre and the
available acreage for sludge application, the total amount of sludge that can
be applied is calculated as follows:
TA = AR x A
Where: TA = Total amount of sludge allowable for disposal on available
acreage (in dry tons)
AR = Maximum allowable amount of sludge applied per acre (in dry
tons/acre)
A = Available acreage for sludge disposal (in acres)
This total amount of sludge allowable for disposal on available acreage
is next divided by the POTW1s current sludge generation rate to determine the
lifetime of the available acreage based on the amount of pollutant in the
sludge, as follows:
X* =__
SG
Where: T* = Adjusted site lifetime (in years)
TA = Total amount of sludge allowable for disposal on available
acreage (in dry tons)
SG = POTW's current sludge generation rate (in dry tons/yr)
This adjusted site lifetime can then be compared to the original lifetime
of the available acreage. If the site lifetime is not reduced significantly,
the POTW may decide to set a threshold concentration at current pollutant
levels as a POTW protection criteria. However, if the site lifetime is re-
duced significantly, the POTW must establish a local discharge limitation
which will allow an acceptable disposal site lifetime.
L-19
-------
4.3.2 Procedure to Establish Local Discharge Limitations to Protect POTW
Sludge Disposal Options
The maximum cumulative pollutant loading per acre (L, previously deter-
mined using the soil characteristics of the sludge disposal site) , the amount
of available site acreage (A), and the original site lifetime (T) are used to
calculate the maximum allowable pollutant mass loading in the sludge to comply
with the maximum cumulative pollutant loading per acre and still maintain the
original site lifetime, as follows:
T x 365
Where: ML = Maximum allowable pollutant mass loading (in Ibs/day)
L = Maximum cumulative pollutant loading per acre (in Ibs/acre)
A = Available acreage (in acres)
T = Original site lifetime (in years)
365 = Conversion factor (in days per year)
Next, the maximum allowable pollutant mass loading (ML ) to the influent
of the treatment plant, to ensure appropriate sludge quality for land applica-
tion, can be calculated by adjusting ML for removal through the entire plant,
as follows:
Where: ML* = Adjusted maximum allowable pollutant mass loading (in
Ibs/day)
ML = Unadjusted maximum allowable pollutant mass loading (in
Ibs/day)
Ep = Pollutant reduction through the entire POTW treatment system
The maximum allowable pollutant concentration at the influent of the
plant (C) can be found by converting the adjusted maximum allowable influent
pollutant mass loading using the mass conversion formula, as follows:
L-20
-------
r = ML*
Q x 8.34
Where: L = Maximum allowable pollutant concentration (in mg/1)
ML* = Adjusted maximum allowable influent mass loading (in
Ibs/day)
Q = POTW design flow (in MGD)
8.34 = Conversion factor
This concentration is used as the sludge disposal in-plant criteria in
determining which in-plant criteria controls. If the sludge disposal criteria
controls, the adjusted maximum allowable influent mass loading (ML*) is used
to begin the allocation procedure.
L-21
-------
5.0 ALLOCATION OF THE POLLUTANT LOAD TO INDUSTRY
The final step in the process of setting effluent limitations is to
allocate the maximum pollutant loading to the treatment plant to the individ-
ual industrial dischargers. This may be accomplished in several ways, as dis-
cussed below.
5.1 ALTERNATIVE METHODS
Single concentration or mass limit; A single concentration or mass
limitation can be established, which no industrial user (IU) can
exceed, and, when domestic contribution is taken into account, will
not exceed the allowable influent loading. This method corresponds to
the example calculation shown in Section 6 of the Appendix. A single
limit for all users may be easier to regulate and enforce.
Proportionate; Allocation can be accomplished proportionately, using
various IU characteristics such as mass loading or flow rate to divide
up the allowable pollutant discharge. The preferred method of alloca-
tion is the one based on mass loadings. However, if concentration
data is not available for each IU, the mass loading ratio may not be
used, and proportionality will have to be based on another character-
istic such as IU flow. However, if the flow is based on water usage,
this method penalizes the industrial user that recycles or reuses some
portion of its wastewater. This method may be desirable when there
are only a few dischargers of a given pollutant in the entire indus-
trial community.
Technology-based; Technology-based limitations are developed by con-
sidering wastewater treatment systems for each particular industrial
user that are best suited to that IU's wastewater. Information on
state-of-the-art treatment system performance can be obtained from EPA
Development Documents supporting effluent limitations guidelines and
standards.
5.2 OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
Growth; Expansion should also be considered in the POTW service area
when allocating pollutant loading. Expansion can include domestic
contributions where future population growth can cause overloads of
compatible pollutants, as well as future industrial contribution. If
land has been zoned for industrial parks or other developments, POTWs
must allocate a certain portion of the allowable influent loading to
this planned expansion.
Design; Proposed or planned design changes in the municipal treatment
plant should be taken into account when developing and setting indus-
trial effluent limitations. For example, nitrification is a more
L-22
-------
sensitive process than activated sludge for some pollutants. A POTW
planning to upgrade would need to develop protection criteria for this
process if it is the limiting factor for some pollutants. Industrial
discharge limits might then have to be made more stringent to protect
the new design. Industrial users should be kept informed of such
plans and developments so that pretreatment technologies are appro-
priate over time.
5.3 PROCEDURE FOR ALLOCATION OF POLLUTANT LOADINGS TO INDUSTRY
After determining the controlling in-plant criteria and converting the
maximum allowable influent concentration to mass (Ibs/day), the uncontrollable
fraction of the maximum allowable influent loading should be subtracted prior
to allocation. For most POTWs, the uncontrollable fraction will be the pollu-
tants contributed by domestic wastewaters , and is determined by sampling a
typical domestic sewer interceptor where no industry exists. Table 5 presents
data on typical background concentrations of various pollutants found in raw
sewage and other nonindustrial sources , but should only be used for comparison
purposes and preliminary calculations.
Once the uncontrollable fraction of a pollutant is subtracted from the
maximum allowable influent loading, the controllable or allocatable fraction
remains. After considerations such as expansion have been considered, allo-
cation of the controllable fraction is performed using one of the three
methods specified. Procedures for single concentration and proportionate
allocation method follow.
Single concentration allocation is performed by adding together the flows
of all current and future IUs contributing a specified pollutant of concern
and then applying the mass conversion formula, as follows:
Single Concentration . , , Allocatable Fraction (Ibs/day)
Limitation C U»g/-U - (QX + Q2 +Q .. .) X 8.34
Where: (Q + Q~ + 0~) = Sum °f all IUs' flows which discharge the
specific pollutant of concern
L-23
-------
TABLE 5
TYPICAL BACKGROUND CONCENTRATIONS OF
TOXIC POLLUTANTS IN NONINDUSTRIAL SEWAGE
(INCLUDES DOMESTIC AND COMMERCIAL SEWAGE)*
Toxic Pollutant "Background" Concentration
Arsenic 0.003 mg/1
Cadmium 0.003 mg/1
Chromium (total) 0.05 mg/1
Copper 0.061 mg/1
Cyanide 0.041 mg/1
Lead 0.050 mg/1
Nickel 0.021 mg/1
Zinc 0.175 mg/1
Concentrations are total pollutants except where otherwise indicated.
References: (9)
L-24
-------
Proportionate allocation is based on a particular characteristic of each
industrial user. For example, using each lU's mass loading or wastewater flow
to establish the appropriate proportion, the allocation is performed as
follows:
Proportionate Allocation Method 1 (Mass) ;
Proportionate Concentration Ain , ... , n, ,, * 1
Limitation For IU fl = Allocatable Fraction (Ibs/day) X ^-y
qi x 8. 34
Where: L = Current mass loading from IU #1 for a
specific pollutant (Ibs/day)
L = Total mass loading from all industrial
users for a specific pollutant (Ibs/day)
Q = Wastewater flow of IU #1 (MGD)
8.34 = Conversion factor
This is the preferred method of proportionate allocation, if industrial user's
pollutant concentrations are known. If they are not, the next method may be
used.
Proportionate Allocation Method 2 (Flow):
Proportionate Concentration A11 ,n , 1U ,, , u
T n « vti = Allocatable Fraction (Ibs/day) X ., - v
Limitation For IU #1 } (Q )
x 8.34
Where: Q = Wastewater flow of IU #1 (MGD)
Q = Sum of wastewater flows for all lUs which discharge
a specific pollutant of concern
8.34 = Conversion factor
The above procedures would be repeated for all industrial users discharging
that particular pollutant of concern.
L-25
-------
6.0 A HYPOTHETICAL POTW EXAMPLE
For reasons of brevity and simplicity, this example calculation of allow-
able influent loading to a POTW addresses only one pollutant, copper. The
methodology presented here, however, will be equally applicable for calculat-
ing limits for other pollutants discharged by electroplaters or other indus-
tries. Our hypothetical POTW utilizes an activated sludge unit for secondary
treatment and anaerobic digestion of sludge. POTW sludge is applied on nearby
farmland.
The treatment plant has a design flow of 10.0 MGD (9.9 MGD average). The
POTW is required to develop a pretreatment program because it has an electro-
plating facility manufacturing printed circuit boards contributing copper to
its system. The POTW pumps 0.2 MGD of raw sludge, thickens it from 1 percent
to 5 percent solids, and then pumps to anaerobic digesters.
For the purpose of this example calculation, we will assume that the
electroplating facility discharges only copper. The POTW has determined,
through its sampling program, that the average removal of copper through the
activated sludge portion of the treatment system is 83 percent with primary
treatment achieving an average of 25 percent removal. The POTW has an NPDES
effluent limitation for copper of 1.0 mg/1.
The POTW has documented upset and inhibition conditions at its treatment
plant caused by high copper concentrations. The threshold copper concentra-
tions at the influent to each appropriate unit operation for this example are
as follow:
Activated sludge - 1.0 mg/1
Anaerobic digestion - 10.0 mg/1
L-26
-------
6.1 CALCULATING MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE POLLUTANT LOAD TO THE POTW FOR COPPER
6.1.1 Preventing Inhibition of Treatment Plant Processes
To determine the influent concentration of copper that will not inhibit
treatment plant process, the POTW must calculate in-plant criteria for both
the activated sludge process and the anaerobic digestion process to find the
controlling in-plant criteria concentration.
(1) Activated Sludge
Using the back caluclation formula presented in Table 1, the in-
plant criteria for the activated sludge process can be determined,
as shown below:
Where: Activated sludge copper threshold concentration =1.0 mg/1
POTW % removal through primary treatment = 25% (or 0.25)
(2) Anaerobic Digestion
Determining the allowable influent copper concentration for proper
anaerobic digestion is slightly more complicated. The allowable
amount of copper, in Ibs/day, in the anaerobic digester is deter-
mined by first calculating the flow of sludge to the anaerobic
digester, and then applying the mass conversion formula shown in
Table 1, using the anaerobic digestion copper threshhold concentra-
tion and the calculated flow rate, as follows:
0.04 MGD (concentrated by extracting water from 1% to 5%)
Allowable Cu mass loading to digester = (0.04 MGD)(10 mg/l)(8.34)
= 3.34 Ibs/day
L-27
-------
Using the allowable amount of copper to the digester, an allowable
influent concentration can be calculated, using another form of the
mass conversion formula and the POTW design flow, as follows:
Allowable influent Cu concentration = /i^wo - 0.04 mg/1
(.10
However, only 83 percent removal of copper is achieved through the
entire treatment system and, therefore, only this portion of the
influent copper reaches the digester. Consequently, the allowable
influent concentration is adjusted using another form of the back
calculation formula as follows:
Allowable influent Cu concentration = ':: 0°g = 0.048 mg/1
0 .oj
6.1.2 NPDES Permit Compliance
Using the back calculation formula presented in Table 1, the in-plant
criteria to meet the POTW NPDES permit requirement is calculated as follows
5-88
Where: NPDES permit limitation =1.0 mg/1
Reduction of copper through the entire POTW = 83% (or 0.83)
6.1.3 Determination of Possible Sludge Disposal Impacts
In addition to the possible impacts mentioned above, sludge disposal
options may be limited for this hypothetical POTW because of the amount of
copper in its digested sludge, which it intends to apply to surrounding farm-
land. In order to evaluate this possibility, the POTW has analyzed its
digested sludge and found it to contain 525 rag/kg (dry weight) of copper.
Converting to pounds per ton:
Copper content of = 525 mg/kg (dry weight) x 0.002 = 1.05 Ibs/dry ton
digested sludge
L-28
-------
Using the most stringent total cumulative metal loading option from
Table 4 (125 kg/ha), and converting to Ibs/acre:
Total cumulative metal loading 111 Ibs/acre ,-, , ,
^r; 5r^ = , --, = 106 dry tons/acre
Copper content of digested sludge 105 Ibs/ton J
yields the maximum amount of sludge which can be applied in dry tons/acre.
The hypothetical POTW applies approximately 45 dry tons/month of de-
watered digester sludge to about 410 acres of surrounding pasture and farm-
land. Using the maximum amount of sludge which can be applied per acre and
the land available for application, the total amount of sludge which can be
applied for the lifetime of the sites can be calculated:
Total sludge allowable 106 dry tons x 410 acres ... lfn ,
° - i = 43.460 dry tons
for disposal on available acre ' J
acreage
Using this total site lifetime application and the current sludge dis-
posal rate (45 dry tons/month), the lifetime of the sites available for appli-
cation is calculated:
Lifetime of available 43,460 dry tons _,, . an
r n , = ;- -; * 4 = 966 months or 80 years
acreage for sludge 45 dry tons/months
disposal
Therefore, unless the original lifetime expectancy of the sludge disposal
sites is well over 80 years, this POTWs sludge disposal options will not be
affected by the current amount of copper in its sludge. In addition, any
reduction of the POTW plant influent copper concentration due to other local
limitations will further lower the amount of copper in the sludge and extend
the useable lifetime of the sludge disposal sites.
L-29
-------
6.1.4 Determination of Controlling In-Plant Criteria
Reviewing the in-plant criteria for each condition:
Activated sludge - 1.3 mg/1
Permit conditions - 5.88 mg/1
Anaerobic digestion - 0.048 mg/1
It can be seen that anaerobic digestion is the controlling in-plant criteria.
Therefore, it is possible that a POTW can be substantially below its permit
condition for a toxic pollutant and still experience inhibition and inter-
ference severe enough to prevent proper plant operation from that same pol-
lutant.
6.2 ALLOCATION OF LOCAL LIMITS FOR COPPER
After calculating an allowable influent concentration of 0.048 mg/1 of
copper as an in-plant criteria for proper anaerobic digestion, the POTW must
allocate the required reduction to attain this concentration among its indus-
trial users. The POTW has identified an electroplating facility as the only
major industrial user discharging copper to its system. This facility has a
flow of 0.050 MGD and currently averages 7.0 mg/1 copper in its effluent.
Using the allowable influent concentration, the allowable pollutant mass
loading is calculated:
Allowable Ibs/day = (10.0 MGI>)(0.048 mg/l)(8.34) = 4.0 Ibs/day
After sampling at a number of domestic interceptors, the POTW has determined
the copper concentration in domestic wastewater to be 0.025 mg/1. Calculating
the current domestic copper mass loading:
Domestic Ibs/day - (9.85 MGD)(0.025 mg/1)(8.34) =2.1 Ibs/day
The allowable copper which can be allocated to industry is then calcu-
lated by subtracting the domestic background loading:
L-30
-------
Allowable Ibs/day = 4.0 Ibs/day - 2.1 Ibs/day = 1.9 Ibs/day
The current electroplating mass discharge is:
Electroplating Ibs/day = (0.050 MGD)(7.0 mg/l)(8.34) = 2.92 Ibs/day
This particular electroplating facility is subject to a categorical stan-
dard of 4.8 mg/1 for copper. When compliance with this categorical standard
is achieved, the electroplating mass discharge will be:
Electroplating Ibs/day = (0.050 MGD)(4.8 mg/l)(8.34) = 2.00 Ibs/day
The POTW has two future contributions to its system planned. One is a
housing project which will house approximately 500 people. At an estimate of
150 gallons per person daily, the total wastewater flow increase is 0.075 MGD.
However, because of the high cost of copper, builders are planning to use PVC
pipe instead of copper pipe, which the POTW believes is the major source of
domestic copper contribution. Therefore, the POTW is assuming a negligible
amount of copper in this additional flow. The second future addition is a
brass plating operation, which will be a major discharger of copper. This
facility will have a design flow of 0.025 MGD and is also subject to a cate-
gorical standard for copper of 4.8 mg/1. Knowing that the existing facility
already exceeds the allocatable loading using the categorical standard, a more
stringent single concentration local limitation is established:
Allowable electroplating 1.90 Ibs/day .
concentration ~ (0.050 + 0.025 MGD)(8.34) mg
Therefore, a single concentration local limitation of 3.0 mg/1 for both the
existing and future electroplating facilities will allow the POTW to meet its
allowable influent concentration and will not violate the controlling in-plant
criteria.
L-31
-------
REFERENCES
1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Federal Guidelines - State and
Local Pretreatment Programs. Vols. I, II, and III. EPA-430/9-76-017a, b,
and c. January 1977.
2. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Fate of Priority Pollutants in
Publicly Owned Treatment Works. EPA-440/1-82-303. September 1982.
3. Anthony, Richard M., and Breimhurst, Lawrence H. "Determining Maximum
Influent Concentrations of Priority Pollutants for Treatment Plants."
Journal of the Water Pollution Control Federation, Vol. 53. October 1981.
4. Dyer, Jon; Feiler, Howard; and Bernick, Arnold. Handbook of Industrial
Waste Pretreatment, Water Management Series. New York: Garland
Publishing Inc. 1981.
5. Eick, Richard W. "History of Priority Pollutants at the District and
Determination of Prohibitive Discharge Limits (PDL)." 2nd Edition.
Sanitary District of Rockford, Illinois. March 1982.
6. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Ambient Water Quality Criteria.
EPA-440/5-80. October 1980.
7. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. "Municipal Sludge Management-
Environmental Factors." Federal Register, 41, No. 108, pp. 22531, 22543.
June 1976.
8. JRB Associates. "How to Set Local Limits." Handout prepared for
Pretreatment Seminars, sponsored by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
under Contract No. 68-01-5052. May 1982.
9. JRB Associates. "Assessment of the Impacts of Industrial Discharges on
Publically Owned Treatment Works." Prepared for U.S. Environmental Pro-
tection Agency under Contract No. 68-01-5052. November 1981.
L-32
-------
EXHIBIT A
This Exhibit presents a summary of national water quality criteria that
have been generated by EPA. These numbers do not have any regulatory status;
they are intended to serve as general guidelines for the preservation of the
intended uses of water. The criteria numbers on this table are organized
under two major headings: aquatic life and human health. The first heading
is further subdivided into acute and chronic criteria. These two numbers
represent pollutant concentrations which, if not exceeded, should protect
most, but not necessarily all, aquatic life and its uses. The aquatic life
criteria specify both acute (maximum) and chronic (24 hour average) concen-
trations. The combination of the two numbers is designed to provide adequate
protection of aquatic life and its uses from acute and chronic toxicity and
bioconcentration while being more flexible than a one number criterion.
The human health criteria are divided into two categories. The first
group of numbers under water and organisms was generated assuming consumption
of both drinking water and aquatic organisms (e.g., fish) by humans. The
second group of criteria was derived assuming the consumption of aquatic
organisms only. The criteria for human health are based on the carcinogenic,
toxic or organoleptic (taste and odor) properties of the pollutants. The
meanings and practical uses of these criteria values vary accordingly.
For carcinogenic substances, no scientific basis exists for estimating
"safe" levels. Therefore, the criteria are expressed as ranges of values
corresponding to incremental cancer risks of 10 to 10 (one additional case
of cancer in a population ranging from ten million to 100,000, respectively).
A detailed discussion of these criteria, how they were developed and
qualifications regarding their use can be found in Reference 6.
L-33
------- An error occurred while trying to OCR this image.
------- An error occurred while trying to OCR this image.
------- An error occurred while trying to OCR this image.
------- An error occurred while trying to OCR this image.
------- An error occurred while trying to OCR this image.
-------
1°
9
9
o
00
U £
rH JJ
a IH
oi «
oo bo
os oo
CM «<
DO
B
9 Z
DO
B
60
3
o
00
00
00
in
S
3 J=
a 3
a
I?
OS
O
00
00
00
SO
CM
in
o
a
o
o
%
O 4J
Ol O
U 01
O w
H O
B, 1J
ex
lj
o b
K-l O
*.
B3
bO
B
O
01
3
j: »-.
X vo
u
9
9
?
as
O
e
oi
o in
I-M en
00
o
CM *H
M
B
S?
00
01
.£
g.
,
3=0
%c
c«i in
r-l «
re x: TO x
tH *J X J=
u -H n x
a u n u
O C < 4J O
r-f 0> U (0 O
j: x s e M
o o. B o -a
^S^isi?
£ £
O k>
I 01
O B
H 01
O -!
i-H X
JC £
O U
H 01
M 01
O B
rH 41 g
£ rH S
u
a £
4J 01
01
B
Ol
rH 3
a IH
.c o
P H
S
01
§.
a
x
01
o
L-39
-------
APPENDIX M
SAMPLE COLLECTION AND
PRESERVATION PROCEDURES
-------
SAMPLE PRESERVATION
Various manuals and handbooks exist that outline procedures for the pre-
servation of industrial wastewater samples. The intent of these procedures is
to delay any changes (either chemical or biological) that may occur once the
sample is taken from the wastestream. Preservation insures a sample repre-
sentative of the wastestream at the time of collection. For example, heavy
metal cations may absorb onto the sample container surface and some organic
pollutants are easily oxidized by free chlorine. Correct preservation
techniques would keep metal ions in a sample.
On December 3, 1979, EPA proposed to amend AO CFR Part 136 with the
addition of sample preservation procedures and maximum holding times as
requirements for all pollutant parameters (including toxic organics). Thus
the use of these preservation techniques would be mandatory whenever the
analysis of wastewater is required under the Clean Water Act (i.e., pretreat-
ment program compliance monitoring). These sample preservation procedures and
holding times were selected because (1) they would retard significant sample
degradation, and (2) the procedures would minimize monitoring costs by
extending the holding times when possible. Table I shows the recommended
preservatives and holding times, as stated in the regulations. It is recom-
mended that POTW personnel adopt these procedures in their monitoring program.
The EPA also recommends that the preservation procedures "be used at the
start of sample collection in the field and not after sample compositing is
complete or when samples are received in the laboratory for analysis.
Aliquots of composite samples, which would require multiple preservatives,
should be preserved only by maintaining at 4°C until compositing and sample
splitting are completed."
Guidelines Establishing Test Procedures for the Analysis of Pollutants;
Proposed Regulations. 40 CFR Part 136, December 3, 1979.
M-l
-------
CO
22
i t
H
O
Z
M
O
J
o
X
o
*
2S
o
^
^
Cg
CO
2
a-
CO
u
z
a!
0
o
0
01
e
H
S 00
H C
X -H
12
o
X
CJ
01
H
iJ
10
t
0>
to
01
__£)
u
e
10
c
8
10
u
e
01
0>
Ll
3
to
to
£
co to to
to to td
a -o -a
9 -9 eo
t i CM
CM
V
a
o.
o o o
o o o o
-a- » - Z 0 Z
»-e x
t -00 - 00
i-l O i-l O
00 0 O
M O O
O 0 O 0
o o
&T oT
1-t
o
o
i-i O
id o
o o
01 4J
ra
< £ to 4J
M Ll 4J tO
B: o o
£3 UJ 4J i t
N 1-4 10
O "H -O CJ
< O C 0)
CO 0 10 IK
1
-ff oo
to ffi
3 3
& S
00 00
o u
o o
ft -»
O O
8 8
0 °.
oT oT
o
e
to
E
o>
"O
to
e c s
o) co o
bo oo oi
>> >> o
x x to
o o e
o
r-4 i-4 £
id « LI
o o to
1-4 i-l U
£ JS C
o on
o o e
P3 pa *c
o
m ~<
't?
0
H
CJ
10
4J
X
0>
U
J
CO CO CR
XX X CO
to td to X
a -a -o «
o
00 OO 00
CM CM CM r-
£
O CN tJ
01 V 0)
L4 X U
H D. -1
3 O SO
tr o o tr o
01 *9 4J 0) r-4 r-4
U J= £ J=
no o o
"H CM cn <
C
0
JJ
id
LI
X
01
p
01
4J
^
to
to
a
o
o
CO
CM
10
Z
00
0
o
o
o.
10
o
CO
c
3
1
O
u
CO
Ll
3
O
CM
01
4J
H
to
C
o
01
c
T-4
E
(U
4J
&
o
n
3
T3
H
to
01
Ll
f (
10
u
0
4J
01
c
H
o
r-4
J=
O
in
to
Ll CO
3 X
0 to
oo sr
r"
(Tl
CM O
rH CM
/\ to
pd CM
o a. to
o O Z
01 r-4
O O C
CO Lt iH
to n- is
Q
2
M-2
-------
V)
s
H
5
a
o
o
a o
3 Z
C <
H
C Z
o o
O i-l
'*"' £
>
l-l Od
td
w en
So g
< OH
H
W
Z
H-l
H
Z
8
01
e H
3
E 00
H a
X i
o
se
CJ
01
-H
4-1
CO
t.
01
01
kJ
a.
JO
01
c
«H
CO
4J
C
0
CO
4J
e
V
e
01
3
CO
CO
£
~
"c1 o
O w
4J CJ
O CO
CO l-l
4-1 X
X 0)
« at
H JJ
c «
3 s ,
co CD a to co \-/
to J= to w i-i w jc P as P co w co
X w I* X 3 X JJ 3 X 2 X X w X
(Q C 3 tO O »oo
eouoca o o o o oocnoocoocn oo
OZCUQCN QZ* SC QQCMQQCNOCN O*
szaowa: o£o £ 003=00=03; oo
o
0)
c
^H
f 1
o o o
BM (X. CX, DM
C
01
00
o
4J
^1
c
H
c
<-v CO
Z 00
a k.
--^ o
C -0
o c
^ eg
Q> CO C f-l
-U CO 01 ff
H 01 60 «
u e o TJ
O T3 t< rH
3 U 13 (U
*-H CO X ^^i
fc BB = X
IN
ON
O -* CM ("1
CN CN CN CN
0 C5 rj
oT oT oT
0>
o
cd
o.
M Q)
> o
X
§01
!>%
W ^H Kt CO
J 6 3 r-l
< O O CO
gel 1
-< O 1^
1 t 1
O 00 Vf
Sf iO (sj
05 O O O
ft- d, Oi 0 0-
0>
U 0) C
^ mo
*- ffl jO
U 0> Li
H M 09
c u> o
(
-l CJ 0! tO
@C fc* CL S X tO t^
H 4J O iH X TJ
S w-' «H QJ l-i O >^
O C C CO CL .c
O-( CO -r4 O CO
O i i co o u CD o a>
U XlCUr-li-IC^AJ
«3 jj J3 C O ^ (0
U JJ n) (J lj tO C
*H Or- (O "OCJ*H
z
-------
s
rH
f-1
O
z
Q
o
o
3 §
e <
H
C Z
50
rH
^
^
rH (g
U C/J
pa cxz
«C cu
H
U
Z
rH
H
O
O
0
OJ
e H
5
e so
H C
CO T)
aS rH
o
re
y
OJ
^H
CO
OJ
V
a,
J3
aj
c
H
n
c
o
CJ
CO
4H
C
CD
E
01
3
CO
CO
01
>-^ c
c o
0 vH
u U
y co
co ki
u X
X OJ
01
IH
rH U
*H 4H
C CO
3 '
CO CO
\ >\ co
>* co to >,
o -»
f^ PO _< pr)
J= .C J=
CN O O O
N/ CM CN CN
EC cn cn en
O. CM CN CM
o O Z CJ Z CJ Z
-» 00 00 00
O CO o O O O O
cS sT1 o cS o c
c o
O -rt
U U
y a
co tw
u X
X OJ
01
IH
rH OJ
JH UH
C CO
3 v^
CO ^^ CO
M CO CO IH CO
3 CO >> X 3V.
O >, CO CO O «
J= CO 'W -O JC 13
00 O 00 CO 00
^ r^ PH CN ^ CM
OJ O CM CM
*-> CM V V
n tn -B X
CQ CN o. a.
C O cj n cj o CJ
Oo oZ °O ° OO
« . .So .-,. -vr
rHo oo ocn o oc/i
HO O« OCMO OCN
&.O cjo CJ3! U O-C
0>
c
H
rH
1
e
o
rH
UH
OJ
cj " a. cj cj
. CO .
a. cj y Cu o OH
,~l
rH
CO
c
1 -3
OJ U
01 rH O
JJ 01 4J
CO ^/
J=
CU CO (0 W
co cy 33
J= iH CO O O
a y rH f c
o i o a a
X 4H C CO CO
4H CO OJ O O
^ t2 £ * £
r- co ON o .
O O O rH '
CM CM CM CM CM
CO
.c
c
o
e
MO
CN
V
o
4J
o
s
CJ
eT
H
T3
re
*o
c
re
< re
O JJ
M 0)
g .0
rJ *>
o re
M X
a a
-, x to to w >-,
re re >\ >% ^ re
*o *o re re re *o
^ -3" 00
CJ CJ O U U U
U-l C CO >
HI GJ flJ QJ QJ
3 3 3 3 3 «
H -H 1-1 i-( i-< T-l
M CO CO CO CO f-H
-------
$
rH
H
O
M
Q
o
CU O
H
4J --
C Z
s s
>
Cti
M tn
-J U
CO Di
< PM
H
GO
U
Z
M
H
Z
o
0
(U
E
H
1H
6 bC
H C
X -rf
nj -o
X rH
O
01
H
J_)
to
^J
OJ
CO
I
^
M
cu
c
H
JJ
C
s
CO
jj
C
cu
E
cu
(-1
3
CO
CO
s
X
t (
cu
10 CO 4J U)
CO CO CO M Li CO M
>*i >i X 3 3 TH 3
"U *t3 T3 -C J-2 0) J
00 00 00 OO 00 1 CO
CN CN CN CO
> rH CO rH M JJ
. l_i COCU JD CL O CJ C
^Q ecu cu ^ to^Et(~|*r^ co
fOOCO BTJ-U AJOCO UH JJ
r-t-HCy*He MHtOCUvH 3
AJ CJ CL -H -H CU ^C CU C *H O> i>
TOiJOOC^inX-UCU CL TO CO CO Cu
(3u rH JJ3 HCOrH E CE-U >
OCU XC-U*H-H«CLitJ U-J
OEQJU rHOCO*J tO-HCUO O
CJrH-H OCfl'UCU>J3 LiUl ^
CX 0) CD 4-J -H O S bO -H 4-" O CX S CO
O BXtortJJcy-HOC bo-u -^ >,
W O-bO CUOCUCOi-t TJrH^ C U CO
H CWiH-H rHCU OCU -H ^ tO "O L< 0> <3
O C OJSLiJJ^: Li tOt3 O C
co ex *o AJ fi oajojcuocow -H cu
p > AJ Li i-H C i-H Ui O 0) O O J-l
3 >*,LiCOC CU CD O -H O CU*OCU LI iJ rH
U -UQJCOg TO QJ t-i C 01 iJCOCO 0) U n-i
O CO L> B ^OOrH, aO-HfCC5 rH
CX 'O^Li^'OrHX^to'co §r^CD CU X 3 OJ
CU CU 0) (U *Q CO *C AJ AJ E ,£ «H AJ *O *^ (-<
cuEO.cucuoDCU'O XJ-ico*a co t?
> -HT3Ef>'-IEOCGJZ QJ C003 C gj CU OJ
O rH TO LI CL O CJ COL> E T-< U O N 1-" O
Li "V 3 CO CU E CX.rH CU CO CO O >^ O
CX DO COO CL,C,C Q) * -C >-> rH M-i J-t
<3 LiCO-HP OjCOX * *D 4-> LI CU C rH
O JJP.CO WtD>i3 OO *-» CO QJ AJ
U-l U-IJJCO -rH C E Ll AJ Ll AJ AJ CO CUCJ* CO
O LiOECU O*J OCO OCO -H CU i-HC\£> 0)
JJ CXCT'JJcS.CCUrOLi OJJ QJ COW'' '
C0» HSJ^T-' jJi-HLiCU CUjOW E O HCU bO
^ / v CUt-HCOCOJJCO CXO*d rHCO"H £ *-> LtJJ C
i_3OJ2cC 6 AJ rd w E J3 C ArHX -H CCXL< *H
O *O jn (0 Cfl rH *O ECflrH JJljO "O CU CUCM CO
JJWt-iO OCXCU-^ 01 COCCU CU »-H TJjT v-l
CUrHf S O* rH E ^ -H CL JD O CU 4J CO CC C t*-< CO
J-i fcj C rH 3 SfOiHfljA-'CO OCO u^ O TJO W
ooo, c« X>-H coc u.ucu-cr
CO TH E C CU W CU TO CU-i 6 -^ CU COOU CO
CUCUCOCO.CJJT3 CUE C(Jp 5 Ct3CULi CO EO-H TJCO-H3L-CU M
3 OJ 0> AJ JJ 3 4J TJ O CL W » QJ 3CUCXO.4J rH CU
CUCUCOC3CJ3CUCO*JJ »HOJ-^»-C CflOErHCC -H
L»rHLiOOC7'*rHCOl-'CCU CX.JJJJ^tOTJ CJCOC.-! 3
CU>>CXCX-H-HJJ COOCUU EJJ JJ QJ OJ LiOvl U
AJ JT EJJrH-HCO CjjJ*H CO*rJLi-HCO>CJCJCO CO
QJJJCUOCJcOCOCU'O JJMH COSCUrHCUi ' C -H CL "O >
EUrHCJCU OrHCUrH-H-H PAJ-HrHOTOC rHCO
LirHgLirHOEEcO-HLiCU ECLOcOECO'HbO'r-(O4J U
COOCQOOCCOCO-HJJQJQ, O J^JJtO-r43l-(Jr;XO Li
o
I
2
CO
CO
jTJ
E
------- |